Ir 
 
 
M 
 
 j^.M 
 
 /mr 
 
 i/..r.r../y </ ><-♦'"' 
 
 
THE HISTORY 
 
 JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS, 
 
THE HISTORY 
 
 JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS; 
 
 A REVIEW OF THE CONTROVERSY 
 
 RFSPECTING 
 
 THE IDENTITY OF JUNIUS 
 
 WITH 
 
 AN APPENDIX, 
 
 CONTAINING 
 
 PORTRAITS AND SKETCHES BY JUNIUS. 
 
 BY JOHN JAQUES. 
 
 NOTHING 13 30 SECRET BUT TIME AND TRUTH WILL REVEAL IT. 
 
 PROVERB. 
 
 LONDON : 
 BELL AND WOOD, 18C, FLEET STREET. 
 
 1843, 
 
95 T3 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 Printed by Manning and Mason, Ivy Lane, Paternoster Row. 
 
 HENRY MORSE STEPHENS 
 
PREFACE, 
 
 The inquiries respecting the Identity of the Author 
 of the Letters of Junius having terminated without 
 the expectations of discovery so repeatedly held out 
 to the Public being realized,— Sir Philip Francis 
 having died and made no sign, — and the three seals 
 which secure the mysterious Box at Stowe still 
 remaining unbroken, — the proper period seems to 
 have arrived for reviewing the whole controversy, 
 and treating the subject historically. This has been 
 attempted in the present work; which will be found 
 to contain aU the information that could be collected 
 respecting Junius and his Works, with some 
 account of the False Juniuses, and a more minute 
 and critical examination of the claims of three 
 individuals, whose pretensions have been the sub- 
 ject of much serious discussion. 
 
 In executing this design, the statements and argu- 
 ments of the advocates of the different suspected 
 persons have generally been given in their own 
 
 5C9642 ,-'■;'',''''.■„:,;., 
 
VI PREFACE. 
 
 language, to obviate any suspicion of mis-represen- 
 tation; but in commenting upon their lucubrations, 
 the Reviewer has assumed the privilege of stating his 
 own views, and expressing his sentiments, freely and 
 without reserve. 
 
 Whether the conclusions at which he has arrived 
 from a careful investigation of the whole case, be cor- 
 rect or not, must be left to the decision of a tribunal 
 that seldom pronounces an erroneous judgment; but 
 from whose decision, whether right or wrong, he 
 is aware there can be no appeal ; namely — Public 
 Opinion. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 P A O E 
 
 The Investigators of Junius 1 
 
 II. 
 Junius and his Works 23 
 
 III. 
 
 The Conflicts and Perils of Junius G9 
 
 IV. 
 
 On the Spirit and Style of Junius 97 
 
 V. 
 The False Juniuses 113 
 
 VI. 
 Mr. Charles Lloyd's Claim examined 147 
 
 VII. 
 Sir Philip Francis 171 
 
 VIII. 
 Lord George Sackville 223 
 
 IX. 
 
 The Battle of Minden, and its consequences to Lord George 
 
 Sackville 245 
 
 X. 
 
 Lord George Sackville's Life continued, from his Trial to his 
 being appointed Secretary of State. — Changes his Name to 
 Germain ^ 273 
 
CONTENTS. 
 CHAPTER XI. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Lord George Germain, as Secretary of State for the American 
 Department, and his mode of conducting the American 
 War — is created Viscount Sackville 297 
 
 XII. 
 Viscount Sackville's connexion with Mr. Richard Cumberland 
 examined, with Anecdotes of his Lordship, and an Account 
 of his last Illness and Death 319 
 
 XIIL 
 
 The Claims of Sir Philip Francis and Lord George Sackville 
 
 compared 359 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 Portraits and Sketches by Junius 387 
 
THE INVESTIGATORS OF JUNIUS. 
 
 The question respecting the Author of Junius's Letters is thought, 
 we believe, by philosophers, to be one of more curiosity than 
 importance. We are very far from pretending that the happiness 
 of mankind is materially interested in its determination. But it 
 must be viewed as a point of literary history ; and among dis- 
 cussions of this description it ranks very high. That the com- 
 munity has long taken an extraordinary interest in this question, 
 that a great and universal curiosity has been felt to know who 
 wrote the letters, seems quite sufficient to justify a good deal of 
 pains in the research, and satisfaction in the discovery. 
 
 Edinburgh Review, vol. xxix. p. 94. 
 
 Surely the question about Junius is in itself far more important 
 
 than the question about the Epistles of Phalaris ; and who ever 
 
 blamed Bentley, for wasting over it oil and ink, labour and time. 
 
 Mr. E. H. Barker's Preface, p. 43. 
 
 The chances of discoveries being made are multiplied in pro- 
 portion to the number of those who become Investigators. 
 
 Printing Machine. 
 
CHAPTER I. 
 
 Inquiry whether Junius was the " sole depository of his own 
 secret." — Remarks on the Correspondence between Junius 
 and Wilkes. — Mr. Cumberland's opinion of Junius. — The 
 consequences of the numerous unsuccessful attempts to 
 discover Junius on public opinion. — Ample materials for 
 making the discovery, now before the public. — Reasons why 
 Junius's descendants cannot be expected to divulge the secret. 
 — An account of Woodfall's complete Edition of Junius's 
 Letters; and of the Publications advocating the claims of 
 the various candidates for the A.uthorship of the Letters. — 
 Particulars of the investigations instituted by Messrs. Wilkes 
 and Butler, and by Dr. Good, and their conclusions respect- 
 ing the Characteristics of Junius. — The relative merits of 
 these investigators examined. — Observations on the connexion 
 between Junius and Woodfall. 
 
THE INVESTIGATORS OF JUNIUS. 
 
 " I would pursue him through life, and try the last exertion of 
 my abilities, to preserve the perishable infamy of his name, and 
 make it Immortal." 
 
 Such are the terms of desperate revenge, in which the 
 stem and vindictive Junius threatened to hunt down and 
 devote to eternal infamy the chief object of his inveterate 
 hatred — the Duke of Grafton, while he fancied himself 
 securely veiled in clouds and darkness. For in the 
 dedication of his great work to the English nation, 
 with affected humility, but real arrogance, Junius thus 
 speaks of himself: "If I am a vain man, my gratification 
 lies within a narrow circle — I am the sole depository of 
 my own secret, and it shall perish with me." At his 
 appointed hour, this proud boaster doubtless departed 
 hence, and was no more seen ; and the mortal frame 
 which once contained that lofty spirit, before whose 
 withering sarcasms and fierce invectives, nobles and 
 princes had crouched and trembled, mouldered in the 
 grave — but whether his " secret perished with him," as 
 he had predicted, will form the subject of our present 
 inquiry. 
 
 In a private letter to Mr. Wilkes, Junius says, " I am 
 willing to accept so much of your friendship as you can 
 impart to a man whom you will assuredly never know — 
 besides every personal consideration, if I were known, I 
 
 b2 
 
4 THE INVESTIGATORS 
 
 could no longer be a useful servant to the public. At 
 present, there is something oracular in the delivery of 
 my opinions. I speak from a recess which no human 
 curiosity can penetrate, and darkness we are told, is one 
 source of the sublime. The mystery of Junius increases 
 his importance." 
 
 The above oracular response was evidently thrown out 
 to overawe and deter the frail mortal with whom this 
 demigod condescended to hold converse, from prying into 
 the mystery of his identity; and the language used by the 
 bold and able demagogue to whom this awful declaration 
 was made, when addressing the unknown god of his 
 political idolatry, is not a little remarkable. 
 
 It will be observed, and probably not without sur- 
 prise, that the man who had braved all the terrors of 
 the House of Commons, and always presented a front 
 of brass when assailed by the whole force of government, 
 no sooner comes within the magic circle of this invisible 
 and mysterious being, than by the most abject expressions 
 of humility and inferiority, he acknowledges the uncon- 
 trollable influence of a superior power, and seems con- 
 scious that, if he failed to fulfil the behest of the Master 
 Magician, he might expect to be menaced, like Caliban — 
 
 " If thou neglect'st or dost unwillingly 
 What I command, I'll rack thee with old cramps, 
 Fill all thy bones with aches;" 
 
 for Wilkes replies in this abject strain : " I do not mean 
 to indulge the impertinent curiosity of finding out the 
 most important secret of our times, the author of Junius. 
 I will not attempt with profane hands to tear the sacred 
 veil of the sanctuary; I am disposed, with the inhabitants 
 of Attica, to erect an altar to the unknown god of our 
 
OF JUNIUS. O 
 
 political idolatry, and will be content to worship him in 
 clouds and darkness. After the first Letter of Junius to 
 me, I did not go to Woodfall, to pry into a secret I had 
 no right to know. The letter itself bore the stamp of 
 Jove. I was neither doubting nor impertinent. I wish 
 to comply with every direction of Junius, to profit by 
 his hints, and to have the permission of writing to him 
 on any important occasion.** 
 
 Mr. Richard Cumberland, in his interesting Memoirs, 
 says, " I consider Tristam Shandy as the rtost eccentric 
 work of my time, and Junius the most acrimonious. We 
 have heard much of his style; I have just been reading 
 him over with attention, and I confess I can see but little 
 to admire. The thing to wonder at is, that a secret to 
 which several must have been privy has been so strictly 
 kept. If Sir William Draper, who baffled him in some 
 of his assertions, had kept his name out of sight, I am 
 inclined to think he might have held up the cause of 
 candour with success. The publisher of Junius, I am 
 told, was deeply guaranteed ; of course, although he might 
 not know his author, he must have known whereabouts 
 to look for him. The man who wrote it had a savage" 
 heart, for some of his attacks are execrable; he was a 
 hyprocrite, for he disavows private motives, and makes 
 pretensions to a patriotic spirit. I can perfectly call to 
 mind the general effect of his letters, and am of opinion 
 that his malice overshot its mark. Let the anonymous 
 defamer be as successful as he may, it is but an unenviable 
 triumph, a mean and cowardly gratification, which his 
 dread of a discovery forbids him to avow.'* Since this 
 judgment was passed upon Junius by his contemporary, 
 at the commencement of the present century, Mr. Wood- 
 
THE INVESTIGATORS 
 
 fall's publication has disclosed to us the nature of the 
 guarantee alluded to by Cumberland, and furnished us 
 with many additional clues to know whereabouts to look 
 for him, who, under the shadow of a name, wielded such 
 substantial power. 
 
 Many years ago, a noble lord, now filling one of the 
 most exalted judicial stations in the kingdom, was heard 
 to remark, that "Junius must have been placed in a 
 peculiar situation; and was, no doubt, deterred* from 
 claiming the honours justly due to his unrivalled com- 
 positions, from a conviction that the disclosure of his 
 name would have overwhelmed him with infamy, on 
 account of the baseness of his motives, and the treachery 
 of his conduct." The observation struck the writer at 
 the time, and subsequent investigation and reflection have 
 convinced him that it was founded in truth. 
 
 The laurels of Junius have, at different times, been 
 claimed for so many persons, whose pretensions have been 
 unable to withstand the slightest scrutiny, that a recent 
 writer has not scrupled to class the inquiry after *^ Junius" 
 among "worn out ideas;" and repeated disappointments 
 have at last made the public incredulous or indifferent 
 on the subject. A careful review of the controversy 
 has, however, satisfied the present writer, that sufficient 
 evidence is already before the public to render the identity 
 sought for a question of little doubt: but, as the various 
 facts on which the argument is grounded lie disjointed 
 and scattered throughout a multiplicity of publications, 
 there is still much to be done towards arranging the 
 evidence, so as to bring the whole to bear with full 
 and cumulative force on the point in issue: for there 
 are many scraps of information dispersed here and there 
 
OF JUNIUS. 7 
 
 in various books, which in their isolated states seem 
 very immaterial to the question, and yet upon being 
 introduced into their proper places in the chain of evi- 
 dence, are found materially to advance and strengthen 
 the argument. "In books designed for amusement," 
 observes Montesquieu, "three or four pages may give 
 an idea of the style and the perfection of the work ; in 
 books of argumentation we see nothing if we do not see 
 the whole chain." 
 
 Mr. Chambers, in his biographical sketch of M. Hauy, 
 remarks, that " there is a class of philosophers who, by 
 collecting together a mass of materials which they are 
 unable to put together themselves, leave them to be 
 wrought into forms of harmonious beauty by other more 
 fortunate and gifted individuals. In casting our eye 
 over the bright pages of modem discovery, we cannot 
 fail to be struck by this result — facts and experiments 
 are accumulated through long years of quiet study by 
 the industry of numerous observers, and old theories, 
 unable to embrace them, must be abandoned, and a more 
 extensive chain employed to connect them so as to form 
 a whole. For a time, no plan appears practicable, when 
 suddenly, and often from the bosom of the people, a 
 great genius springs forth, and by raising himself to a 
 higher vantage ground than that occupied by his fellow- 
 labourers, sees at once how the whole may be arranged 
 and combined so as to form a perfect whole. In proof 
 of this statement, reference is made to the discoveries of 
 Newton, Watt, Davy, Cuvier, and Hauy." Now, with- 
 out placing the subject of our present inquiry in com- 
 petition with the important discoveries in science made 
 by those illustrious individuals, we think there is suffi- 
 
8 THE INVESTIGATORS 
 
 cient analogy between the state in which they found the 
 respective sciences that were the subjects of their success- 
 ful investigation and the object of our present inquiry, 
 to justify our making, at very humble distance, and 
 on a subject of minor importance, a somewhat similar 
 attempt. 
 
 We are aware there are persons who think, that as 
 Junius and all his contemporaries have now passed off the 
 stage of existence, and the tomb has closed upon their 
 contests and enmities, the period is not far distant when 
 his descendants may be expected to come forward and 
 produce the author's famous vellum-bound and gilt set 
 of his works, and claim the honours unanimously awarded 
 to the genius of their ancestor: but in this opinion we 
 cannot concur j such a disclosure would be inconsistent 
 with the ordinary feelings of human nature. It certainly 
 could not be expected from his immediate descendants; 
 and the highest literary fame of an ancestor so remote as 
 to be personally unknown to his more distant relatives, 
 would probably be regarded as a " trifle light as air," 
 when poised in the balance against even the imaginary 
 disgrace of being allied to a man who is considered to 
 have violated the most sacred ties of private friendship 
 and public honour. 
 
 If, therefore, the secret be ever penetrated, it should 
 seem that it is only to be effected by the persevering 
 labours and sagacity of numerous investigators; and 
 perhaps it may be found that we already possess suffi- 
 cient means (if judiciously applied) of yet dragging this 
 defamer of character — this moral assassin — even at the 
 eleventh hour, from that obscurity, which he vainly 
 imagined to be impenetrable, into the full glare of day; 
 
OF JUNIUS. 9 
 
 and by a complete chain of circumstantial evidence to 
 transfix the soaring Junius to the earth, as the giant 
 Gulliver was by the minute but innumerable cords of the 
 Lilliputians, there to bear the obloquy due to his demerits 
 so long as his own brilliant compositions and the English 
 language shall endure. 
 
 Indeed, the ardour with which the subject has been 
 pursued, shews that there is a mental gratification and 
 pleasure attending such investigations, which afford an 
 ample recompense for the labour and trouble bestowed 
 upon them, independently of any expectation of fame, 
 which the most fortunate inquirer is by no means certain 
 of obtaining. 
 
 Before the publication of the edition of Junius by 
 Mr. G. Woodfall, the son of the original publisher of 
 the Letters, the public were not in possession of sufficient 
 data to form a correct judgment on this interesting topic; 
 the whole matter was involved in obscurity, and nothing 
 but vague and uncertain conjectures could be formed on 
 the subject. That publication, however, poured a clear 
 stream of light into the palpable obscure, by disclosing 
 to the world, from a source of unquestionable authen- 
 ticity, a vast mass of direct and incidental facts and 
 circumstances relating to Junius and his writings. 
 
 This work contains in three volumes, not only the 
 whole of the letters written by the author of Junius, and 
 originally printed in the newspaper called the " Public 
 Advertiser," under various signatures, but also the 
 writer's private and confidential correspondence with Mr. 
 Wilkes and Mr. H. S. Woodfall, with eight fac-similes 
 of his handwriting taken from his private letters to 
 Woodfall, and five seals used by the author of Junius. 
 
10 THE INVESTIGATORS 
 
 It also gives (with one remarkable exception, which 
 will be noticed in its proper place) fac- similes of the 
 handwriting of all the principal persons to whom the 
 letters had then been attributed. And there is prefixed 
 to the work a valuable preliminary essay, written by the 
 late Dr. John Mason Good, discussing the political and 
 literary merits of the Letters, and canvassing the pre- 
 tensions of the various suspected authors.* 
 
 The private letters of Junius to Mr. Woodfall, and 
 his confidential correspondence with Mr. Wilkes, are of 
 the first importance, as regard the present inquiry ; for, 
 not being intended to meet the eye of the public, they 
 contain, as might be expected, many allusions to the 
 pursuits and personal habits of the writer, with his off- 
 hand opinions on various subjects, and many little inci- 
 dental traits of character, which afford useful hints and 
 clues to lead us to the discovery of the real author of 
 these celebrated compositions. 
 
 Previously to the publication of Mr. Woodfall's valu- 
 able work, the only persons who appear to have seriously 
 
 * In Mr. Woodfall's complete edition of Junius the Letters 
 are classed in the following order: — 
 
 1. Junius' Private Letters to Mr. H. S. Woodfall, consisting of 
 sixty-four letters and notes. 
 
 2. His Confidential Correspondence with Mr. Wilkes, contain- 
 ing altogether eighteen letters, of which ten are written by 
 Junius, and eight by Wilkes. The above are all comprised in 
 the first volume. 
 
 3. The Letters of Junius which are usually printed in the 
 common editions, containing sixty-nine letters. 
 
 4. The Miscellaneous Letters of Junius written under various 
 other signatures, consisting in the whole of 113 letters and papers, 
 which occupy part of the second and the whole of the third 
 volumes. 
 
OF JUNIUS. 11 
 
 investigated the subject of the authorship of the Letters 
 of Junius, were Mr. Wilkes and Mr. Charles Butler, 
 and the result of their joint inquiries was first published 
 by the latter in a letter dated July 1799, and after- 
 wai-ds with some additions in his Reminiscences in 1822. 
 But the appearance of Mr. Woodfall's work stimulated 
 the exertions of many other investigators, and the fol- 
 lowing works have since been published in support of 
 the claims of various individuals. In 1816, Mr. John 
 Taylor published " The Identity of Junius with a dis- 
 tinguished living character [Sir Philip Francis] esta- 
 blished." This work created considerable sensation 
 in the literary world, which was not diminished by a 
 very able critique appearing upon it in the Edinburgh 
 Review for November 1817, said to have been written 
 by Mr. Brougham, wherein the Reviewer confessed 
 himself almost a convert to the views of Mr. Taylor. 
 The editor also of an edition of Junius, published 
 at Edinburgh in 1822, who styles himself ^' Atticus 
 Secundus/* likewise acquiesces in the reasoning of Mr. 
 Taylor, in some able preliminary dissertations prefixed 
 to the work. 
 
 In the year 1825, there appeared " A Critical Inquiry 
 regarding the real Author of the Letters of Junius, 
 proving them to have been written by Lord Viscount 
 Sackville, by George Coventry." This work was printed 
 by Mr. G. Woodfall, having been previously announced 
 for publication by Mr. Murray. Mr. Coventry's state- 
 ment seems to have made a serious impression on some 
 ingenious writer on the other side of the Atlantic, for 
 there was published anonymously, at Boston, North 
 America, in 1828, a work entitled — '^Junius Unmasked, 
 
12 THE INVESTIGATORS 
 
 or Lord George Sackville proved to be Junius." This 
 book contains some able arguments in corroboration 
 of Mr. Coventry's views, but the facts and materials 
 on which they are founded appear to have been taken 
 almost exclusively from Mr. Coventry's book. This 
 American publication was reviewed in No. 65, of the 
 North American Review, and a decision given in favour 
 of the claims of Lord George Sackville: and thus the 
 authorities on behalf of these two rival candidates appear 
 nearly balanced. In the year 1828, Mr. E. H. Barker 
 published his Five Letters on the Author of Junius, en- 
 titled— -I. The claims of Sir Philip Francis, K.B., to 
 the Authorship of Junius' Letters disproved. II. Some 
 inquiries into the claims of the late Charles Lloyd, Esq. 
 to the composition of them. This is an exceedingly 
 curious and interesting work, containing letters from 
 several intelligent correspondents to Mr. Barker, which 
 detail many particulars respecting the Letters of Junius, 
 and their supposed author, among the most valuable of 
 which are several communications from Mr. Coventry 
 and Mr. Butler, of so late a date as 1828. Indeed, the 
 author appears to have been indefatigable in his endea- 
 vours to obtain all possible information on the subject of 
 his investigation. 
 
 In 1831, another work was published at Boston, in 
 America, entitled ** An Essay on Junius and his Letters, 
 embracing a sketch of the life and character of William 
 Pitt, Earl of Chatham, and memoirs of certain other dis- 
 tinguished individuals, by Benjamin Waterhouse, M.D. ;" 
 in which the author gives the following account of the 
 commencement and result of his labours. " After reco- 
 very from a slight infection caught from Thomas Paine, 
 
OF JUNIUS. 13 
 
 which disorder never rose to delirium, I was marvel- 
 lously struck by the Letters of Junius, and my rapture 
 increased at every review of the brilliant and weighty 
 volumes. The high and noble bearing of that writer 
 seemed akin to that daring spirit which impelled the 
 Americans to declare not only resistance but defiance to 
 the gigantic power of Britain — an inspiration we believed 
 like that which emboldened young David to combat 
 and prostrate Goliah. After a thoughtful series of years 
 spent on the subject of our inquiry, and reiterated exami- 
 nation of facts as they rose; and after disciplining specu- 
 lation by internal as well as external evidence, I had 
 concluded and settled down many years since in the 
 opinion that William Pitt, Earl of Chatham, was the 
 author of the celebrated letters under the signature of 
 Junius." 
 
 But notwithstanding all the new lights afforded by 
 " WoodfaWs Junius/* and with every possible respect for 
 the industry, ingenuity, and abilties of the more recent 
 investigators, it may be doubted whether, among the 
 numerous persons who have engaged in this inquiry, any 
 of them possessed qualifications for the task, equal to 
 Mr. Wilkes and Mr. Charles Butler, who jointly inves- 
 tigated the subject with great diligence and acumen. 
 Mr. Wilkes, as before observed, had been honoured with 
 the confidential correspondence of Junius himself And 
 Mr. Butler was one of the most eminent conveyancers 
 of his time, and accustomed in his daily professional 
 avocations to weigh and decide on the most subtle and 
 refined points of evidence. 
 
 In his reminiscences, Mr. Butler has given the 
 following account of their proceedings : " One of the 
 
14 THE INVESTIGATORS 
 
 amusements of Mr. Wilkes and the reminiscent was an 
 attempt to discover the author of Junius's letters. With 
 this view they considered them with great attention, 
 examined many of the originals, collected and sifted all 
 the anecdotes which they could learn, and weighed all 
 the opinions and conjectures they could hear of." 
 
 These conversations took place from the years 1776 
 to about 1784, during which time Mr. Butler lived 
 on terms of great intimacy with Mr. Wilkes; and Mr. 
 Butler adds, "our conversations on Junius's Letters 
 began from a whimsical circumstance. Business having 
 carried me to Ireland in 1776, I wrote to Mr. Wilkes 
 from Holyhead. On my return, he informed me that 
 my letter had been stopped at the post-office, from the 
 similarity in the handwriting to that of Junius.* This 
 made me wish to see the original of Junius's letters, and 
 he produced them to me." By this investigation, these 
 gentlemen did not so far satisfy their own minds as to 
 pronounce with any degree of certainty who was the 
 author of the letters of Junius; but, Mr. Butler has left 
 on record in his reminiscences the following conclusions, 
 as the result of their inquiry, which we cannot but regard 
 
 * It has been suggested that this must have been a hoax of 
 that arch wag, John Wilkes; and it has been asked, how should 
 a Post-office clerk become acquainted with Junius's mode of 
 writing, unless the authorities of the Post Office had first opened 
 all Letters addressed to Mr. Woodfall, until they happened to 
 meet with that rarity, a letter of Junius, sent by the post? 
 Mr. Barker's supposition, " that a clerk, or some other person, 
 accidentally acquainted with Junius' handwriting, saw the letter 
 of Mr. Butler, and thought he discovered a similitude," is by no 
 means satisfactory, as it still leaves the main question unanswered, 
 viz., how could a Post-office clerk accidentally discover what 
 Junius and Woodfall took such pains to conceal ? 
 
OF JUNIUS. 15 
 
 as a memorial highly honourable to the acuteness and 
 sagacity of these two able investigators, and we therefore 
 present them to the reader, as affording data of the 
 utmost value in pursuing the proposed inquiry. 
 
 "Arguing synthetically," says Mr. Butler, " we deter- 
 mined that Junius must be a resident in London, or its 
 environs, from the immediate answers which he generally 
 gave his adversaries; that he was not an author hy pro- 
 fession, from the visible improvement which from time 
 to time was discernible in his style ; that he was a man of 
 high rank, from the tone of equality which he seemed to 
 use quite naturally in his addresses to persons of rank, 
 and in his expressions respecting them; that he was not a 
 profound lawyer, from the gross inaccuracy of some of 
 his legal expressions; that he had a personal animosity 
 against the King, the Duke of Bedford, and Lord Mansfield, 
 from the bitterness of his expressions respecting them; 
 that he had lived with military men, from the propriety of 
 his language on military subjects; and that he was a 
 great reader of novels, from his frequent allusions to them. 
 The general idea that the letters were the composition of 
 more than one person we always rejected." 
 
 We also find that Dr. Good, the author of the 
 Preliminary Essay, prefixed to Mr. Woodfall's edition of 
 Junius, arrives at nearly the same conclusions on the 
 subject, as will appear by the following extract from the 
 Essay: "From the observations contained in this Essay, 
 it should seem to follow unquestionably that the author 
 of the letters of Junius was an Englishman of highly 
 cultivated education, deeply versed in the language, the 
 laws, the constitution, and history of his native country; 
 that he was a man of easy if not affluent circumstances, of 
 
16 THE INVESTIGATORS 
 
 unsullied honour and generosity, who had it equally in 
 his heart and in his power to contribute to the necessities 
 of other persons, and especially of those who were 
 exposed to troubles of any kind on his own account. That 
 he was in habits of confidential intercourse, if not with 
 different members of the Cabinet, with politicians who 
 were most intimately familiar with the court, and entrusted 
 with all its secrets; that he had attained an age which 
 would allow him to boast, without vanity, of ample know- 
 ledge and experience of the world; that during 1767, 68, 
 69, 70, 71, and part of 72, he resided almost constantly 
 in London, or its vicinity, devoting a very large portion 
 of his time to political affairs, and publishing his political 
 lucubrations under different signatures in the Public 
 Advertiser; that in his natural temper he was quick, 
 irritable, and impetuous ; subject to political prejudices and 
 strong personal animosities, but possessed of a high inde- 
 pendent spirit, honestly attached to the principles of the 
 constitution, and fearless and indefatigable in maintaining 
 them; that he was strict in his moral conduct, and in his 
 attention to public decorum; an avowed member of the 
 established church; and though acquainted with English 
 judicature, not a lawyer by profession. What other 
 characteristics he may have possessed we know not, but 
 these are sufficient; and the claimant who cannot produce 
 them conjointly is in vain brought forwards as the author 
 of the Letters of Junius." 
 
 Whatever may be thought of the correctness of Dr. 
 Waterhouse's hypothesis, that the Earl of Chatham was 
 Junius, certain it is that he coincides in a remarkable 
 manner with Mr. Butler and Dr. Good, as to the cha- 
 racteristics of Junius; for he says — "It appears to our 
 
OF JUNIUS. 17 
 
 view that the writings of Junius emanated from one 
 mind, and yet not without assistance; p. 97. The 
 whole series of letters indicate the author of them to 
 have been a great man, a rich man, and an indignant 
 one; for here resentment and even wrath supplied the 
 ordinary stimulus of fame, which the great man was con- 
 tented to forego, sharpening to a keen edge the weapon 
 of personal indignation, as well as public avengement; 
 p. 98. It appears that the author of the Letters must be 
 sought among the very few great men of his day and 
 country, — the Burleighs and the Sullys of the" king- 
 dom; such men alone could give lessons of wisdom 
 to a discontented nation, and its troubled king; p. 100. 
 He seems to have been in the first rank of subjects, like 
 one who had retired from high office in disgust; p. 103. 
 A haughty spirit pervades the writings of Junius, and 
 sometimes an imperious, domineering cast of mind, even 
 when he must have discovered that he was wrong, as in 
 his hasty attack on Parson Home; p. 102. There is 
 internal evidence that the writer of the Letters was a 
 personage settled down in the steadfastness of advanced 
 life and confirmed principles, under a satiety of worldly 
 grandeur, familiarized with royalty, acquainted with 
 privy councils, parliaments, and diplomatic affairs, and 
 thoroughly versed in the architecture of the English 
 constitution ; p. 101.'* 
 
 Thus it appears that the results of three separate and 
 independent inquiries respecting the character and quali- 
 fications of the author of the Letters of Junius, made by 
 persons unquestionably the most competent to form correct 
 judgments on the subject, are not only consistent with 
 each other, but coincide in all material particulars. 
 
 c 
 
38 THE INVESTIGATORS 
 
 It is remarkable that both Mr. Butler and Dr. Good 
 ultimately abandoned the pursuit of Junius in despair;* 
 but it is clear, that while they were engaged in their 
 interesting search, each proceeded in his course con amorey 
 and in the spirit described by Cowley — 
 
 "Although I think thou never found wilt be, 
 Yet I'm resolved to search for thee: 
 The search itself rewards the pain." 
 
 When we examine the relative degree of authority to 
 which these investigators are entitled, we are inclined 
 on the whole to give the preference to Mr. Wilkes and 
 Mr. Butler; for these gentlemen seem to have been 
 actuated by no other motives than laudable curiosity, 
 and a sincere desire to discover the real author of the 
 Letters; and if Mr. Wilkes's connexion with Junius were 
 not quite so close and intimate as that of Mr. S. W. 
 Woodfall, this circumstance is more than counterbalanced 
 by leaving him free from that bias in favour of Junius 
 which appears in some degree to have warped and 
 influenced the judgment of Mr. George Woodfall, whose 
 father was so completely mixed up, and as it were, 
 identified, with Junius and his secret. This bias is 
 
 • Dr. Good, in a letter addressed to Mr. E. H. Barker, a few 
 weeks before his death, observes, "The question is one of great 
 interest, as well on the score of national history as of literary 
 curiosity, yet, like many other desiderata, / am afraid it is likely 
 to lie beyond the fathoming of any line and plummet that will be 
 applied to it in our day." And Mr. Butler concludes a letter to 
 tlie same gentleman, dated June 14, 1828, in these words: "I 
 am sorry I cannot communicate to you any information of impor- 
 tance on the subject in which you take so great an interest. I 
 have only to add, that it appears to me to be involved in as great 
 obscurity as ever." 
 
OF JUNIUS. 19 
 
 plainly discernible in Mr. Woodfall's publication; and 
 shews itself by an anxious endeavour on all occasions 
 to exalt the character of Junius; whose patriotism, 
 honour, and other excellent moral qualities, are held 
 up to admiration in a way which is not warranted by 
 a fair and candid interpretation of his letters and 
 conduct. 
 
 Although we admit that no suspicion can be entertained 
 of the accuracy of any of Mr. G. Woodfall's statements 
 respecting his father's transactions with Junius, we must 
 confess, that considerable misgivings have at times come 
 over us, as to whether his publication discloses the whole 
 truth relating to his father's mysterious correspondent. 
 The late Dr. Parr also entertained a similar suspi- 
 cion, for in a letter written by him and published in 
 Mr. Barker's book (p. 243), the Doctor observes that 
 " the supposed author of Junius would venture upon 
 falsehood, and Woodfall, knowing the importance of 
 such disavowal, would record, although he disbelieved 
 it. Woodfall stated a fact, and left his readers to their 
 own conclusion ; and it was the wish, if not the duty of 
 Woodfall, to keep us in the dark,'* 
 
 Mr. Cumberland heard that Mr. Woodfall was deeply 
 guaranteed, from which circumstance he fairly inferred 
 that, "although he might not know his author, he 
 must have known whereabouts to look for him." The 
 truth of the guarantee seems now admitted; and we may 
 be certain that Junius faithfully performed the promise 
 made to Mr. S. H. Woodfall, "that in point of money, 
 be assured you shall never suffer," from the very high 
 testimony borne in the " Preliminary Essay" to the 
 honour and liberality of Junius; for sucTi an acknow- 
 
 c2 
 
20 THE INVESTIGATORS 
 
 ledgment would not have been made, unless the son 
 had been perfectly satisfied with the conduct of Junius 
 towards his father. On this subject, Dr. Good thus 
 expresses himself: " Of his (Junius) personal and 
 private honour, however, we can only judge from his 
 connexion with Mr. Woodfall, yet this connexion is 
 perhaps sufficient; through the whole of it, he appears in 
 a light truly ingenuous and liberal.*' We must however 
 beg leave to demur to this summary mode of proving 
 the honour and liberality of such a character; for the 
 instance given, may more properly be regarded as a soli- 
 tary exception to a general rule. Indeed, much consi- 
 deration of the subject is not necessary, to convince any 
 disinterested and impartial individual that little merit 
 can be conceded to Junius for his liberality to his printer, 
 who was placed in the front of the battle, to answer and 
 suffer for the licentious effusions of his author. Besides, 
 there can be little doubt, that the fate of this celebrated 
 writer was in Mr. Woodfall's hands, who might on various 
 occasions during the correspondence, have traced and' 
 delivered up Junius to his enraged enemies; and it was 
 to his honourable forbearance alone that Junius owed 
 his safety. Mr. Woodfall may therefore be considered 
 the armour-bearer of the mysterious Knight, whose 
 office it was to cover him in the day of battle with the 
 shield of invisibility, while his own person was left 
 exposed to all the darts of the enemy; and Junius must 
 have been a recreant Knight indeed, if he had not re- 
 quited such valuable services by pouring balm into the 
 wounds of his champion, and supplying him liberally 
 with the sinews of war. 
 
 From all these circumstances, it seems hardly credible 
 
OF JUNIUS. 21 
 
 that Mr. G. Woodfall should not have been able to 
 point out more precisely than he has done, "where- 
 abouts to look for his author/' Perhaps he considered 
 himself bound in honour not to disclose the secret of a 
 man, from whom his family had experienced nothing 
 but liberal and honourable treatment, and therefore, 
 while he published most of the privute letters, and 
 related many particulars highly curious and interesting 
 respecting Junius, he might not deem it prudent to 
 furnish the public with a test, which, if applied to his 
 hero, would have been attended with consequences similar 
 to those experienced by another celebrated personage, 
 whom 
 
 Ithuriel with his spear 
 
 Touched lightly — for no falsehood can indure 
 Touch of celestial temper, but returns, 
 Of force to its own likeness. Up he starts, 
 Discovered and surprised. 
 
JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 
 
 Nameless the libeller lived, and shot his arrows in darkness ; 
 Undetected he passed to the grave ; and leaving behind him 
 Noxious works on earth, and the pest of an evil example, 
 Went to the world beyond, where no offences are hidden. 
 
 Southey, 
 
 Without meaning an indecent comparison, I may venture to 
 fortel that the Bible and Junius will be read, when the Commen- 
 taries of th^ Jesuits are forgotten. j . 
 
 I shall now be told " Sir, what you say is plausible enough ; 
 but still you must allow that it is shamefully impudent in Junius 
 to tell us that his works will live as long as the Bible." My 
 answer is agreed; but first prove that he has said so. Look at 
 his words, and you will find that the utmost he expects is, that 
 the Bible and Junius will survive the Commentaries of the Jesuits, 
 which may prove true in a fortnight. The most malignant 
 sagacity cannot shew that his works are, in bis opinion, to live as 
 long as the Bible. Suppose I were to fortel that Jack and Tom 
 would survive Harry, does it follow that Jack must live as long 
 
 Philo Junius. 
 
CHAPTER II. 
 
 Proofs that Junius was neither a Lawyer, a Divine, nor an 
 Author, by profession. — Mr. Woodfall's account of the 
 Letters written by Junius, under the signatures of Mnemon, 
 Atticus, Lucius, Junius, and Brutus. — The author's first 
 Letter under the signature of Junius. — Woodfall's account 
 of the mode of his Correspondence with Junius. — Two 
 spurious editions of the Letters published. — Woodfall's 
 proposal to publish a genuine edition. — Assented to by the 
 author. — Curious private Correspondence between Junius 
 and Woodfall, about bringing out the genuine edition. — 
 Wilkes revises the dedication and preface. — Junius orders 
 the famous vellum-bound and gilt copy of the Letters. — 
 His alarm at the price of the book. — Assigns his copyright 
 to Woodfall. — Proof that the Letters were composed by only 
 one person. — Junius's mode of composing and finishing his 
 Letters. — His own opinion of his labours. — His farewell 
 Letter to Woodfall. — The number of his communications 
 with Woodfall. — Junius's confidential Correspondence with 
 Wilkes. — Various opinions respecting the handwriting of the 
 Letters of Junius, and whether he employed an amanuensis 
 or not. — Discussion as to what has become of the autographs 
 of Junius's public letters. — Proofs that Junius resided con- 
 stantly in London, or its vicinity. — That he was an English- 
 man. — Argument to prove that he must have been a tall man. 
 — Proofs that he was a man of high rank and independent 
 fortune, and a Member of the House of Commons. — That he 
 was a Christian, and a member of the Church of England. — 
 That he was of mature age. — Mr. Jackson's account of the 
 person of Junius. — Lord Byron's description of the Shade of 
 Junius. 
 
25 
 
 JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 
 
 I was not born to be a commentator, even of my own works. 
 1 speak to facts, with which all of us are conversant. — I speak to 
 men and to their experience, and will not descend to answer the 
 little sneering sophistries of a Collegian. j 
 
 In order to clear the way for investigating the identity of 
 the author of the Letters of Junius, we purpose in the first 
 instance to prove, that he could not have been either a 
 lawyer, a divine, or an author, by profession ; for although 
 it is seldom requisite in h gal proceedings to adduce evi- 
 dence to establish a negative, this course may sometimes 
 be expedient in such disquisitions as the present, as we 
 thereby exclude whole classes, and render unnecessary the 
 trouble of examining the claims of a host of pretenders 
 belonging to those professions. The last head of the 
 inquiry will also afford an opportunity of presenting the 
 reader with a succinct, but we trust a clear and satis- 
 factory account of all that is known respecting Junius 
 AND HIS Works. 
 
 Having now entered on that part of the inquiry when 
 it becomes necessary to consider and decide on the degree 
 of credit due to the assertions of Junius respecting him- 
 self, we have to remark, that whatever judgment may 
 be formed about his moral character, there can be no 
 doubt that his intellect was of too high an order to permit 
 
^^ , < rcc.c JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 
 
 liim to descend to the meanness of advancing unnecessary 
 and gratuitous falsehoods; and consequently, that the in- 
 formation incidentally furnished by his letters respecting 
 himself, may generally be regarded as true, except only 
 where his secret is concerned. 
 
 Mr. Butler, who was himself a very eminent lawyer, 
 came to the conclusion that Junius could not have been 
 a profound lawyer, from the gross inaccuracy of some of 
 his legal expressions, and instances that passage in his 
 Dedication, where he says, " the power of king, lords, 
 and commons, is not an arbitrary power; they are the 
 trustees, not the owners of the estate ; the fee-simple is in 
 us." Now, says Mr. Butler, in all trusts of inheritance, 
 the fee-simple is in the trustees. The fact however of his 
 not being a lawyer is placed beyond all doubt by the express 
 disclaimers of Junius himself, and the way in which he 
 speaks of lawyers in general. In the preface to his 
 Letters, he says : " I am no lawyer by profession, nor do 
 I pretend to be more deeply read than every English 
 gentleman should be, in the laws of his country. If 
 therefore the principles I maintain are truly constitu- 
 tional, I shall not think myself answered, though I should 
 be convicted of a mistake in terms, or of misapplying the 
 language of the law." 
 
 Again, " As to lawyers, their profession is supported 
 by the indiscriminate defence of right and wrong, and I 
 confess I have not that opinion of their knowledge or 
 integrity, to think it necessary that they should decide 
 for me, upon a plain constitutional question." 
 
 In one of his private letters to Mr. Wilkes, he says, 
 "Though I use the terms of art, do not injure me so 
 much as to suspect I am a lawyer. / had as lief be a 
 
JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 27 
 
 Scotchman." These extracts, and particularly the last, 
 will surely satisfy the most sceptical mind, that Junius 
 was no lawyer. 
 
 It is equally clear that no divine would ever speak 
 of the priesthood in the terms applied by Junius to 
 Mr. Home, or indulge in such allusions to the Scriptures 
 and religious rites as are to be found in his Letters; 
 which cannot always be successfully defended against the 
 imputation of levity, if they be not open to the more 
 grave charge of profaneness. Take the following in- 
 stances, — speaking of the Rev. J. Home, in a letter to 
 the Duke of Grafton, Junius says: "Now let him go back 
 to his cloister. The church is a proper retreat for him; 
 in his principles he is already a bishop." — Letter dated 
 9th July 1771. 
 
 And in a letter to Mr. Home himself, " The resentment 
 of a priest is implacable; no sufferings can soften, no 
 penitence can appease him." — 15th August 1771. 
 
 In a private letter to Mr. Wilkes, he again alludes to 
 Mr. Home in these terms, — " I too am no enemy to good 
 fellowship, and have often cursed that canting parson for 
 wishing to deny you your claret. It is for him, and men 
 like him, to beware of intoxication." — 18th Sept. 1771. 
 
 Ample evidence we think has now been produced, to 
 prove that no clergyman could possibly have had any 
 hand in the composition of the Letters of Junius. 
 
 That Junius was not an author hy profession^ was the 
 opinion of Mr. Wilkes and Mr. Butler, from the visible 
 improvement which from time to time was discernible 
 in his style, and the numerous errors of grammar and 
 construction which may be discovered in the Letters, 
 and which would not have appeared in the works of a 
 
28 JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 
 
 person of Junius's exquisite taste and discernment, if he 
 had been accustomed to literary composition. On this 
 subject, Mr. E. H. Barker remarks, that "Mr. Butler 
 must be allowed to be a most competent judge as to the 
 facts whether Junius was or was not ^ an author by pro- 
 fession,' and whether his style did or did not from time 
 to time manifest symptoms of improvement. I admit 
 both the facts on his authority," p. 120. 
 
 Mr. Barker offers the following additional reasons in 
 corroboration of Mr. Butler's views: — "A writer in the 
 habit of publishing pamphlets or books, either with his 
 name or without it, though accompanied by intimations 
 which made the addition of the name unnecessary, either 
 is not likely to have been the author of Junius, or would 
 long ago have been discovered as the author; because 
 every pamphlet or book would furnish an additional clue 
 to a discovery in one way or other, and the author would 
 feel conscious that the dangerous discovery might be 
 made. Hence the great probability is that the real Junius 
 was not an author by profession," p. 35. 
 
 Atticus Secundus also remarks, that "Junius has 
 been frequently reproached with inaccuracy in the use 
 of moods; and notices the following as one of the most 
 remarkable of his mistakes: 'I will not assert that 
 government would have recovered its dignity, but at 
 least our gracious sovereign must have spared his subjects 
 this last insult.' Those who delight in discovering spots 
 on the sun, and in detecting the little slips and blemishes 
 of genius, may further consult " Chambers' Supplemental 
 Apology for the Believers in the Shakspeare Papers," 
 where they will find other inaccuracies of this great 
 writer pointed out, and commented on in no friendly 
 
JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 29 
 
 spirit; but taking no pleasure in such expositions, we 
 rather feel disposed to apply to Junius Dr. Johnson's 
 eulogy on Milton: — "As in displaying the excellence of 
 Junius, we have not made long quotations, because of 
 selecting beauties there had been no end; I shall in 
 the same general manner mention that which seems to 
 deserve censure ; for what Englishman can take delight 
 in transcribing passages, which, if they lessen the repu- 
 tation of Junius, diminish in some degree the honour 
 of our country." "Junius," observes Mr. Barker, p. 96, 
 "gives us the notion of a writer not early trained to 
 habits of composition, nor much accustomed to deliver 
 his opinions in public through the press. The under- 
 standing of Junius belonged to the highest order of 
 intellect, but it had not been well and constantly exercised 
 by free discussions, in the intimacy of social life, with 
 kindred spirits, and therefore it was not capable of 
 exerting its fullest powers." Hence it is highly probable 
 that the principal, if not the whole of the literary labours 
 of Junius are comprised in Mr. Woodfall's three volumes; 
 for in one of his private letters to Mr. H. S. Woodfall, 
 he says, "my own Works you shall constantly have;" 
 and in another, " I believe I need not assure you that I 
 have never written in any other paper since I began with 
 yours;" again, " I sometimes change my signature, but 
 could have no reason to change the paper, especially 
 for one that does not circulate half so much as yours." 
 And in a letter to the printer of D. A. (August 15th, 1771) 
 Junius says, " Mr. Home asserts that he has traced me 
 through a variety of signatures. To make the discovery 
 of any importance to his purpose, he should have proved 
 either that the fictitious character of Junius has not been 
 
30 JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 
 
 consistently supported, or that the author has maintained 
 different opinions and principles under different signa- 
 tures. I cannot recall to my memory the numberless 
 trifles I have written ; but I rely upon the consciousness 
 of my own integrity, and defy him to fix any colourable 
 charge of inconsistency upon me." 
 
 " It was on the 28th of April in the year 1767," says 
 Mr. Woodfall's Editor, «Uhat the late Mr. H. S. Woodfall 
 received, amongst other letters from a great number of 
 correspondents for the use of the Public Advertiser, of 
 which he w^as a proprietor, the first public address of 
 this celebrated writer. He had not then assumed the 
 name, or rather written under the signature of Junius, 
 nor did he always, indeed, assume a signature of any 
 kind. When he did so, his signatures were diversified, 
 and the chief of them are Mnemon, Atticus, Lucius, 
 Junius, and Brutus; under the first he sarcastically 
 opposed the ministry upon the subject of the Nullum 
 Tempus Bill." 
 
 The letters signed Atticus and Brutus relate chiefly to 
 the growing disputes with the American Colonies; and 
 those subscribed Lucius exclusively to the dismission of Sir 
 Jeffery Amherst from hispostofGovernor of Virginia, for 
 the sole purpose, as it should seem, of creating a post for the 
 Earl of Hillsborough's intimate friend. Lord Botetourt, 
 who had completely ruined himself by gambling and 
 extravagance. From the ardour with which Junius en- 
 tered the lists in defence of Sir Jeffery, and the intimate 
 knowledge he displayed of his services and character, 
 there can be little doubt that he entertained a strong 
 personal friendship for the veteran hero. His first letter 
 on the subject addressed to Lord Hillsborough, minister 
 
JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 31 
 
 for the American department, is dated August 10, 1768. 
 A vindication, or rather an apology, was entered into by 
 three or four correspondents under different signatures, 
 who were regarded by Junius, and indeed by the public 
 at large, as the Earl of Hillsborough himself, or some 
 writer under his immediate control. Lucius followed up 
 the contest with spirit, the minister became ashamed of 
 his conduct, and Sir Jeffery, within a few weeks after his 
 dismissal and the resignation of two regiments which he 
 commanded, was restored to the command of one of 
 them, and appointed to that of another, and thus in a 
 remarkable manner fulfilled the prophecy of Lucius in 
 his last letter to Lord Hillsborough (20th Sept. 1768); 
 " You have sent Sir Jeffery Amherst to the plough, you 
 have left him poor in every article of which a false 
 fawning minister could deprive him; but you have left 
 him rich in the esteem, the love, and veneration of his 
 country. You cannot now recal him by any offer of 
 wealth or honours; yet I fortel that a time will come 
 when you yourself will be the cause of his return; pro- 
 ceed my Lord as you have begun, and you will soon 
 reduce this country to an extremity in which the wisest 
 and best subjects must be called upon and must be 
 employed; till then, enjoy your triumph." 
 
 In a letter of Atticus, dated 14th November 1768, the 
 reinstatement of Sir Jeffery is alluded to in the follow- 
 ing terms : — " When an ungracious act was to be done, 
 the Earl of Hillsborough was chosen for the instrument 
 of it. He deserved since he submitted, to bear the whole 
 reproach of Sir Jeffery Amherst's dismission. The 
 gallant Knight obtained his price; and the noble Earl, 
 with whatever appetite, must meet hiin, with a smile 
 
32 JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 
 
 of congratulation, and dear Sir Jeffery I most cordially wish 
 you joy! After all it must be confessed, there are some 
 mortifications which might touch even the callous spirit 
 of a courtier." 
 
 As further proof of Junius's friendship for Sir Jeffery, 
 and the great interest he took in his concerns, it may be 
 noticed that in his letter of 7th February, 1769, to Sir 
 William Draper, he makes the following charge against 
 Lord Granby, the Commander in Chief: — "As to his 
 servile submission to the reigning ministry, let me ask 
 whether he did not desert the cause of the whole army 
 when he suffered Sir Jeffery Amherst to be sacrificed, 
 and what share he had in recalling that officer to the 
 
 service : 
 
 ?" 
 
 The attention paid to the philippics against Lord 
 Hillsborough, and the celebrity they had acquired, stimu- 
 lated the author to new and additional exertions; and 
 having in the beginning of the ensuing year (1769), com- 
 pleted another letter, with more than usual elaboration 
 and polish, which he seemed to have intended as a kind 
 of introductory address to the nation at large, he sent it 
 forth under the name of Junius (a name he had hitherto 
 assumed but once) to the office of the Public Advertiser, 
 in which journal it appeared on Saturday, January 21st, 
 1769. The popularity expected by the author from this 
 performance was more than accomplished; and what in 
 some measure added to his fame, was a reply (for the 
 Public Advertiser was equally open to all parties) from a 
 real character of no small celebrity. Sir William Draper — 
 principally because the attack upon his Majesty's minis- 
 ters had extended itself to Lord Granby, at that time 
 Commander in Chief, for whom Sir William Draper 
 
JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 33 
 
 professed the most cordial esteem and friendship. From 
 the extraordinary effect produced by the author's first 
 letter under the signature of Junius, he resolved to 
 adhere to it exclusively in all his subsequent letters with 
 which he took more than ordinary pains, and which 
 alone he was desirous of having attributed to himself; 
 while to other letters, composed with less care and 
 merely explanatory of passages in his more finished 
 addresses, or introduced for some collateral purpose, he 
 subscribed some random name that occurred to him at 
 the moment. The letters of Philo Junius are alone an 
 exception to this remark. *' The auxiliary part of Philo 
 Junius," Junius tells us in his preface, " was indispensably 
 necessary to defend or explain particular passages in 
 Junius, in answer to plausible objections, but the sub- 
 ordinate character is never guilty of the indecorum of 
 praising his principal. The fraud was innocent, and I 
 always intended to explain it." 
 
 The following is Mr. Woodfall's account of the manner 
 in which the correspondence was conducted. 
 
 A common name, such as was by no means likely to 
 excite any peculiar attention, was first chosen by Junius, 
 and a common place of deposit indicated. The parcels 
 from Junius himself were sent direct to the printing 
 office ; and whenever a parcel, or a letter in return, was 
 waitino- for him, it was announced in the Notices to Cor- 
 respondents, by such signals as " N. E. C; a letter;*' 
 " Vindex shall be considered;" "C. in the usual place;" 
 " an Old Correspondent shall be attended to." The in- 
 troductory C. being a little varied from that commonly 
 used, or by a line of Latin poetry. " Don't always use," 
 says our author, "the same signal; any absurd Latin verse, 
 
 D 
 
34 JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 
 
 •will answer the purpose. And when the answer implied 
 a mere negative or affirmative, it was communicated in 
 the newspaper, by a simple **yes" or "no." The names 
 of address more commonly assumed, were Mr. William 
 Middleton, or Mr. John Fretly; and the more common 
 places of address were the bar of the Somerset Coffee- 
 house of the New Exchange, or Munday's in Maiden 
 Lane, the waiters of which were occasionally fee'd for 
 their punctuality. But these were varied for other names 
 and places, as circumstances might dictate. 
 
 By what conveyance Junius obtained his letters and 
 parcels from the places at which they were left for him, 
 is not very clearly ascertained. It is said that nothing 
 could be more various than the delivery of the letters 
 from Junius; sometimes they came hy the post, hut in a 
 general way hy porters. 
 
 In consequence of two spurious editions of the Letters 
 having been published by printers, named Wheble and 
 Newberry, Mr. Woodfall made application to Junius 
 for leave to reprint his Letters collectively, and subject 
 to his own revisal. It was these spurious republications 
 that induced Sir William Draper to renew his contest 
 with Junius, and the latter in answer tells Sir William 
 (September 25, 1769), " You cannot but know that the 
 republication of my Letters was no more than a catch- 
 penny contrivance of a printer, in which it was impos- 
 sible I should be concerned, and for which I am in no way 
 answerable. At the same time I wish you to understand, 
 that if I do not take the trouble of reprinting these 
 papers, it is not from any fear of giving offence to Sir 
 William Draper." 
 
 Woodfall's proposal was not only readily assented to 
 
JUNIUS AND IITS WORKS. 35 
 
 by Junius, but he shewed much anxiety to have the 
 genuine edition printed with care and accuracy; and his 
 directions on this head to Mr. Woodfall will be found 
 very minute and particular, and furnish us with much 
 curious information respecting the composition of the 
 Letters and the literary habits of their author. The first 
 two sheets of the work only were revised by the author, 
 the rest of the Letters were from the difficulty of convey- 
 ance entrusted to the correction of Mr. Woodfall, and 
 the dedication and preface were confided to the care of 
 Mr. Wilkes. In preparing this edition for the press, 
 instead of closing the regular series of letters possessing 
 the signature of Junius with that dated October 5, 1771, 
 upon the subject of "the unhappy differences," as he 
 calls them, *' which had arisen among the friends of the 
 people, and divided them from each other;" he added 
 five others, which the events of the day had impelled 
 him to write, during the reprinting of the Letters, not- 
 withstanding the intention he had expressed of offering 
 nothhig further under this signature. And instead of 
 introducing the explanatory letters Avritten under other 
 signatures, he confined himself, in order that the work 
 might be published before the ensuing session of Par- 
 liament, to three justificatory papers: the first, under the 
 title of '* A Friend of Junius," containing an answer to 
 *^ A Barrister at Law;" the second, an anonymous decla- 
 ration upon certain points on which his opinion had been 
 mistaken or misrepresented; and the third, an extract 
 from a letter to Mr. Wilkes, drawn up for the purpose 
 of being laid before the Bill of Rights Society, and 
 vindicating himself from the charge of having written in 
 ^vour of long parliaments and rotten boroughs. 
 
 d2 
 
36 JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 
 
 Junius's answer to Mr. Woodfall's proposal is in the 
 following words: — "I can have no manner of objection 
 to your reprinting my Letters, if you think it will answer, 
 which I believe it might, before Newberry appeared. If 
 you determine to do it, give me a hint, and I will send 
 you more errata (indeed they are innumerable), and 
 perhaps a preface." (July 21, 1769). In reply to Wood- 
 fall's next letter on the subject of the publication, he says : 
 " Do with my Letters exactly what you please. I should 
 think that to make a better figure than Newberry, some 
 others of my letters may be added, and so throw out a 
 hint, that you have reason to suspect that they are by the 
 same author. If you adopt this plan, I shall point out 
 those which I would recommend; for you know I do 
 not, nor indeed have I time, to give equal care to them 
 all." (August 16, 1769). 
 
 In another letter, dated November 8, 1771, Junius 
 thus announces the termination of his labours: — "At 
 last I have concluded my great work, and I assure you 
 with no small labour. I would have you begin to 
 advertise immediately, and publish before the meeting of 
 Parliament. Let all my papers in defence of Junius be 
 inserted. I shall now supply you very fast with copy 
 and notes. The paper and type should at least be as 
 good as Wheble's. You must correct the press yourselfy 
 but I should be glad to see corrected proofs of the two first 
 sheets. Shew the dedication and 'preface to Mr. Wilkes, 
 and if he has any material objection let me know: I say 
 material, because of the difficulty of getting your letter." 
 Again on the 10th of the same month he writes : '* I 
 think the second page, with the widest lines, looks best; 
 what is your essential reason for tiie change? I send 
 
JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 37 
 
 you some more sheets. I think the paper is not so 
 good as Wheble*s, but I may be mistaken: the type is 
 good. Prevail upon Mr. Wilkes to let you have extracts 
 of my second and third letters to him ; it will make 
 the book still more new. I would see them before 
 they are printed, but keep this last to yourself." On 
 the 5th December following, he gives these directions: 
 "These papers are all in their exact order; take great 
 care to keep them so. In a few days more I shall have 
 sent you all the copy; you must then take care of it 
 yourself, except that I must see proof-sheets of the dedi- 
 cation and preface, and these, if at all, I must see before 
 the end of the week. You shall have the extract to go 
 into the second volume; it will be a short one. When 
 you send the above mentioned proof-sheets, return my own 
 copy with them.''* On the 10th December he writes thus: 
 "The inclosed completes all the materials that I can give 
 you. I have done my part, take care you do yours. 
 There are still two letters wanting, which / expect you 
 will not fail to insert in their places. One is from Philo 
 Junius to Scoevola, about Lord Camden; the other to a 
 Friend of the People, about pressing. They must be 
 in the course of October. I have no view but to serve 
 you, and consequently have only to desire that the dedi- 
 cation and preface may be correct. Look to it. If you 
 take it upon yourself, I will not forgive you suffering it 
 to be spoiled. / weigh every word; and every alteration, in 
 my eyes at least, is a blemish.'^ The following passage, 
 in a letter of the 17th December, contains Junius's 
 directions for the splendid set of the work, bound in 
 vellum and gilt, that has excited so much speculation; 
 and the production of which has been anxiously looked 
 
38 JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 
 
 for, to decide and set at rest for ever the much-agitated 
 question of the authorship of the Letters. "When the 
 book is finished let me have a set, bound in vellum, gilt 
 and lettered, ^Junius I. 11/ as handsomely as you can, 
 the edges gilt; let the sheets be well dried before binding. 
 I must have two sets in blue paper covers. This is all 
 the fee I shall ever desire of you. I think you ought 
 not to publish before the second week in January." 
 
 The ensuing private letters of Junius to Mr. Woodfall, 
 exhibit considerable uneasiness and surprise at the delay 
 in the publication, and he sometimes expresses himself in 
 rather peevish and querulous terms towards his worthy 
 publisher. In a letter of the 18th January, 1772, he 
 says: "I am truly concerned to see that the publication 
 of the book is so long delayed. It ought to have appeared 
 before the meeting of Parliament. By no means would 
 I have you insert this long letter, if it made more than 
 the difference of two days in the publication. Believe 
 me, the delay is a real injury to the cause." And in 
 another letter of the 3rd February he writes: "I confess 
 I do not see the use of the table of contents. I think 
 it will be endless, and answer no purpose. An index 
 of proper names and materials would in my opinion be 
 sufficient. You may safely defy the malice of Wheble; 
 whoever buys such a book, will naturally prefer the 
 author's edition, and I think it will always be a book for 
 sale. I really am in no hurry about that set." But on 
 * Monday night, February 17, 1772,' he seems to have 
 lost all patience, and sends this scolding epistle to Mr. 
 Woodfall: ** Surely you have misjudged it very much, 
 about the book. I could not have conceived it possible 
 that you could protract the publication so long. At this 
 
JUNIUS ASD HIS WORKS. 39 
 
 time particularly, before Mr. Sawbridge's motion, it 
 would have been of singular use. You have trifled too 
 long with the public expectation. At a certain point of 
 time the appetite palls. I fear you have already lost the 
 season. The book, I am sure, will lose the greatest part 
 of the effect I expected from it. But I have done." 
 Mr. Woodfall however appears to have satisfied his testy 
 correspondent that the fault was not with him; for on the 
 22d February Junius sends him the following handsome 
 apology: — "I do you the justice to believe that the delay 
 has been unavoidable. The expedient you propose of 
 printing the dedication and preface in the Public Adver- 
 tiser, is unadvisable; the attention of the public would 
 then be quite lost to the book itself. I think your rivals 
 will be disappointed. Nobody will apply to them, when 
 they can be supplied at the fountain head." In his next 
 letter, of the 29th February, Junius desires Mr. Wood- 
 fall to return his thanks to Mr. Wilkes, for the trouble 
 he had taken in perusing and revising the dedication and 
 preface, and expresses a wish that he had taken more. 
 But again becoming impatient at the still protracted 
 period of publication, he writes to Mr. Woodfall, on the 
 3rd March, in these words: "Your letter was twice 
 refused last night, and the waiter as often attempted to 
 see the person who sent for it. I am impatient to see 
 the book, and think I had a right to that attention a 
 little before the general publication. When I desired to 
 have two sets sewed, and one bound in vellum, it was 
 not from a principle of economy; I despise such little 
 savings, and shall still be a purchaser. If I was to buy 
 as many sets as I want, it would be remarked. Pray let the 
 two sets be well parcelled up, and left at the bar of 
 
40 JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 
 
 Munday's CoiFee-house, Maiden Lane, with the same 
 direction, and with orders to be delivered to a chairman 
 who will ask for them in the course of to-morrow evening. 
 Farewell." 
 
 At last his ardent desires were gratified; for on the 5th 
 March he thus acknowledges the receipt of the books : 
 ** Your letters, with the books, are come safe to hand. 
 The difficulty of corresponding arises from situation and 
 necessity, to which we must submit. Be assured I will 
 not give you more trouble than is unavoidable. If the 
 vellum books are not yet bound, I would wait for the 
 index. If they are, let me know by a line in the P. A. 
 When they are ready, they may safely be left at the 
 same place as last night. On your account I am alarmed 
 at the price of the book. I am no judge, and can only 
 pray for your success. What you say about the profit 
 is very handsome. I like to deal with such men. As 
 for myself, be assured that / am far above all pecuniary 
 views; and no other person I think has any claim to 
 share with you; make the most of it, therefore, and let 
 all your views in life be directed to a solid, however 
 moderate, independence. Without it no man can be 
 happy, nor even honest." 
 
 The latter part of the letter alludes to an offer of half 
 the profits of the book, which Mr. Woodfall had made 
 to Junius; and from the manner in which the latter 
 declined any participation in the profits of the work, it 
 is clear that he must at least have been a person in easy, 
 if not in affluent, circumstances. 
 
 The surprise expressed by Junius at the price of the 
 book is another strong proof of his not being an author 
 by profession, affording as it does decisive evidence that 
 
JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 41 
 
 he was a complete novice in the mystery of book-making, 
 and that he could not have had any previous dealings 
 with the trade. 
 
 The motives of the author for publishing this edition 
 of his Letters, and the assignment of the copyright to 
 Mr. Woodfall, are stated in the preface in these words : 
 " The encouragement given to a multitude of spurious 
 mangled publications of the Letters of Junius, persuades 
 me that a complete edition, corrected and improved by 
 the author, will be favourably received. The printer will 
 readily acquit me of any view to my own profit. I 
 undertake this troublesome task merely to serve a man 
 who has deserved well of me and of the public, and who, 
 on my account, has been exposed to an expensive tyran- 
 nical prosecution. For these reasons I give to Mr. Henry 
 Sampson Woodfall, and to him alone, my right, interest 
 and property in these Letters, as fully and completely, to 
 all intents and purposes, as an author can possibly convey 
 his property in his own works to another." 
 
 We have seen that Mr. Wilkes and Mr. Butler 
 thought the Letters were composed by one person only; 
 and this opinion appears to be borne out by the follow- 
 ing extracts from the private letters of Junius to Mr. 
 Wilkes, in which he details, in a manner so character- 
 istic and natural as to bear decisive marks of truth and 
 sincerity, how he groped about for information — 
 " And through the palpable obscure found out 
 His uncouth way." 
 
 (18th September 1771.) *'The constitutional argument is 
 obvious. I wish you to point out to me where you think 
 the force of the formal legal argument lies. In pursuing 
 such inquiries, I lie under a singular disadvantage. Not 
 
42 JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 
 
 venturing to consult those who are qualified to inform 
 me, I am forced to collect everything from books or 
 common conversation. The pains I took with that paper 
 upon Privilege, were greater than I can express to you. 
 Yet after I had blinded myself with poring over journals, 
 debates, and parliamentary history, I was at last obliged 
 to hazard a bold assertion, which I am now convinced is 
 true, as 1 really then thought it, because it has not been 
 disproved or disputed." And in another letter, of the 
 6th November 1771, he expresses himself thus: "Besides 
 the fallibility natural to us all, no man writes under 
 so many disadvantages as I do. I cannot consult the 
 learned; I cannot directly ask the opinion of my acquaint- 
 ances; and in the newspapers I never am assisted. Those 
 who are conversant with books well know how often they 
 mislead us, when we have not a living monitor at hand to 
 assist us in comparing practice with theory." 
 
 In the anonymous declaration (2d November 1771), 
 first published by Junius in the genuine edition, he says: 
 " It has been urged as a reproach to Junius, that he has not 
 delivered an opinion upon the Game Laws, and particu- 
 larly the late Dog Act. But Junius thinks he has much 
 greater reason to complain, that he is never assisted by 
 those who are able to assist him, and that almost the 
 whole labour of the press is thrown upon a single hand, 
 from which a discussion of every public question what- 
 soever is unreasonably expected. He is not paid for 
 his labour, and certainly has a right to choose his 
 employment." 
 
 Junius appears to have compared and finished his 
 Letters with the most assiduous labour and care. " I 
 weigh," says he, " every word; and every alteration, in 
 
JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 43 
 
 my eyes at least, is a blemish." His own opinion of 
 some of his letters may be collected from the following 
 extracts. Of the letter of the 8th October 1769, to the 
 Printer of the P. A., he says: "I wish the inclosed to 
 be announced to-morrow conspicuously, for Tuesday; 
 I am not capable of writing anything more finished." 
 And of the letter to Lord Mansfield, dated the 14th 
 November 1770, he remarks: "The inclosed, though 
 begun within these few days, has been greatly laboured. 
 It is very correctly copied;* and I beg you will take care 
 that it be literally printed as it stands." Of the letter to 
 the Duke of Grafton (22d January 1771), he says : " I 
 am strangely partial to the inclosed. It is finished with 
 the utmost care. If I find myself mistaken in my judg- 
 ment of this purpose, I positively will never write again." 
 The letter of the 30th September 1771, addressed to the 
 Livery of London, he declares— "Is of such importance 
 — so very material — that it must be given to the public 
 immediately." 
 
 Junius seems to have been quite shocked at the 
 numerous blunders by which the spurious editions of his 
 Letters were deformed ; for upon receiving a copy of New- 
 berry's book, he addressed a note to Woodfall, begging 
 him to hint to Newberry, that as he had thought proper to 
 reprint his Letters, he ought at least to have taken care 
 to have corrected the errata; adding at the same time, 
 "I did not expect more than the life of a newspaper; but 
 if this man will keep me alive, let me live without being 
 offensive." 
 
 During the whole period that Junius wrote in the 
 Public Advertiser he was exceedingly anxious to repu- 
 • This seems to imply that he employed an amanuensis. 
 
44 JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 
 
 diate and disclaim all such letters as he had not actually 
 written, but which might possibly be mistaken by the 
 public for his compositions. Thus in a letter to Mr. 
 Woodfall, of the 16th November 1769, he says: "As I 
 do not choose to answer for anybody's sins but my own, 
 I must desire you to say to-morrow, we can assure the 
 public that the letter signed A. B., relative to the Duke 
 of Rutland, is not written by the author of Junius." 
 Again, on the 19th October 1770, he observes: "By 
 your affected silence you encourage an idle opinion that 
 I am the author of ^The Whig,' though you very well 
 know the contrary. I neither admire the writer nor his 
 idol. I hope you will set this matter right." This idol 
 was the Earl of Chatham; and Junius himself shortly 
 afterwards became one of his worshippers. 
 
 So early as July 12, 1769, Mr. Woodfall tells us that 
 Junius began to entertain thoughts of dropping a cha- 
 racter and signature which must have cost him great 
 labour, and not unfreqnently exposed him to peril: "I 
 really doubt," says he, " whether I shall write any more 
 under this signature. I am weary of attacking a set of 
 brutes, whose writings are too dull to furnish me with 
 even the materials of contention, and whose measures 
 are too gross and direct to be the subject of argument, or 
 to require illustration." 
 
 The last political letter issued under the signature of 
 Junius was addressed to Lord Camden, and possessed 
 the peculiarity of being the only encomiastic letter that 
 ever fell from the pen of Junius. It followed the pub- 
 lication of his long letter addressed to Lord Mansfield 
 upon the illegal bailing of Eyre,^and both letters were 
 published on the 21st January 1772. It appears from 
 
JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 45 
 
 the correspondence of the Earl of Chatham, recently 
 published (iv. 190), that Junius forwarded proof sheets* 
 of these two letters to his Lordship, accompanied by the 
 following remarkable letter: 
 
 (Most secret. J 
 
 My Loud, London, I4th Jan. 1772. 
 
 Confiding implicitly on your Lordship's honour, I take 
 the liberty of submitting to you the inclosed paper, before it be 
 given to the public. It is to appear on the morning of the meet- 
 ing of ParUament. Lord Mansfield flatters himself, that I have 
 dropped all thoughts of attacking him; and I would give him as 
 little time as possible to concert his measures with the Ministry. 
 The address to Lord Camden will be accounted for, when I say, 
 that the nation in general are not quite so secure of his firmness 
 as they are of Lord Chatham's. 
 
 I am so clearly satisfied that Lord Mansfield has done an act 
 not warranted by law, and that the inclosed argument is not to 
 be answered (besides that I find the lawyers concur with me), 
 that I am inclined to expect he may himself acknowledge it as 
 an oversight, and endeavour to whittle it away to nothing. For 
 this possible event, I would wish your Lordship and the Duke of 
 Richmond, to be prepared to take down his words, and thereupon 
 to move for committing him to the Tower. I hope that proper 
 steps will also be taken in the House of Commons. If he makes 
 no confession of his guilt, but attempts to defend himself by any 
 legal argument, I then submit it to your Lordship, whether it 
 might not be proper to put the following questions to the Judges. 
 In fact they answer themselves ; but it will embarrass the Ministry, 
 
 * This explains the following enigmatical passage in Junius's 
 private letter to Woodfall (January 11, 1772): "Your failing to 
 send me the proofs, as you engaged to do, disappoints and dis- 
 tresses me extremely. It is not merely to correct the press 
 (though even that is of consequence), but for another most material 
 purpose. This will be entirely defeated if you do not let me have 
 the two proofs on Monday morning." 
 
46 JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 
 
 and ruin the character which Mansfield pretends to, if the House 
 should put a direct negative upon the motion. 
 
 Ist. Whether, according to the true meaning and intendment 
 of the laws of England relative to bail for criminal offences, a 
 person positively charged with felony — taken in flagranti delicto 
 — with the mainoeuvre, and not making any defence, nor offering 
 any evidence to induce a doubt whether he be guilty or innocent, 
 — is hailalle or not bailable ? 
 
 2d. Whether the power, exercised by the Judges of the Court 
 of King's Bench, of bailing for offences, not bailable by a justice 
 of peace, be an absolute power of mere will and pleasure in the 
 Judge, or a discretionary power, regulated and governed, in the 
 application of it, by the true meaning and intendment of the law 
 relative to bail? 
 
 Lord Mansfield's constant endeavour to misinterpret the laws 
 of England is a sufficient general ground of impeachment. The 
 specific instances may be taken from his doctrine concerning 
 libels; — the Grosvenor cause ; — his pleading Mr.De Grey's defence 
 upon the Bench, when he said, " Idem fecerunt alii, et multi et 
 honi;" — his suffering an affidavit to be read, in " The King against 
 Blair," tending to inflame the Court against the defendant when 
 he was brought up to receive sentence; — his direction to the jury 
 in the cause of Ansell, by which he admitted parol evidence 
 against a written agreement, and in consequence of which the 
 Court of Common Pleas granted a new trial; and lastly, his 
 partial and wicked motives for bailing Eyre. There are some 
 material circumstances relating to this last, which I thought it 
 right to reserve for your Lordship alone. 
 
 It will appear by the evidence of the Gaoler and the City Soli- 
 citor's clerk, that Lord Mansfield refused to hear the return read, 
 and at first ordered Eyre to be bound only in 200/., with two 
 sureties, until his clerk, Mr. Piatt, proposed 300/., with three 
 sureties. Mr. King, clerk to the City Solicitor, was never asked 
 for his consent, nor did he ever give any. From these facts 
 I conclude, either that he bailed without knowing the cause of 
 commitment, or, which is highly probable, that he knew it extra- 
 
JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 47 
 
 judicially from the Scotchmen, and was ashamed to have the 
 return read. 
 
 I will not presume to trouble your Lordship with any assurances, 
 however sincere, of my respect and esteem for your character, 
 and admiration of your abilities. Retired and unknown, I live in 
 the shade, and have only a speculative ambition. In the warmth 
 of my imagination, I sometimes conceive, that, when Junius exerts 
 his utmost faculties in the service of his country, he approaches 
 in theory to that exalted character which Lord Chatham alone 
 fills up, and uniformly supports in action. , 
 
 Another letter, under the signature of Nemesis, appeared 
 on the 12th May 1772, which was the last of all the 
 public letters written by Junius. 
 
 The farewell letter of Junius to !^Ir. Woodfall bears 
 date 19th January 1773, and is in the following words : 
 
 " I have seen the signals thrown out for your old friend and 
 correspondent : be assured that I have had good reason for not 
 complying with them. In the present state of things, if I were to 
 write again, I must be as silly as any of the horned cattle, that 
 run mad through the city, or as any of your wise aldermen. I 
 meant, the cause and the public. Both are given up. I feel for the 
 honour of this country, when I see that there are not ten men in 
 it, who will unite and stand together upon any one question. But 
 it is all alike, vile and contemptible. You have never flinched, that 
 I know of, and I shall always rejoice to hear of your prosperity. 
 If you have anything to communicate (of moment to yourself), 
 you may use the last address, and give a hint." 
 
 " The private and confidential letters addressed to the 
 late Mr. Woodfall (says Dr. Good), are now for the first 
 time made public by his son, who is in the possession 
 of the author's autographs; and from the various facts 
 and anecdotes they disclose, not only in relation to this 
 extraordinary character, but to other characters as well, 
 
48 JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 
 
 they cannot fail of being highly interesting to the political 
 world. To have published these Letters at an earlier 
 period, would have been a gross breach of trust and 
 decorum. It is no objection to their being genuine, that 
 they were omitted by Junius in his own edition, pub- 
 lished by Mr. Woodfall; there is a material difference 
 between publishing a complete edition of the Letters of 
 Junius, and a complete edition of the Letters of the 
 Writer of that name. The first was the main object of 
 Junius himself." 
 
 Between January 21st, and May 12th, 1772, it appears 
 that Junius wrote eleven private letters to Mr. Woodfall. 
 After that date, it is not known that he ever wrote to him 
 more than once, viz. January 19th, 1773, after a silence 
 of more than eight months. If any letters passed between 
 them afterwards, all traces of the correspondence are lost. 
 His letters signed Junius, took up exactly a period of 
 three years. All his public letters, under this and other 
 signatures, somewhat more than five years. During the 
 whole of this period he kept up with his printer a corres- 
 pondence so " frequent and full," as to prove the greatest 
 stumbling-block to every conjecture that has hitherto 
 been formed of the author. The table given in the Pre- 
 liminary Essay shews that in the course of the year 1769, 
 the author maintained not less than fifty-four communi- 
 cations with Mr. Woodfall; that not a single month 
 passed without one or more acts of intercourse; that some 
 of them had not less than seven, many of them not less 
 than six — at times directed to events that had occurred 
 only a few days antecedently; that the two most distant 
 communications were not more than three weeks apart ; 
 that several of them were daily, and the greater part of 
 them not more than a week from each other. 
 
JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 49 
 
 When we consider the rapidity with which Junius 
 produced his Letters, and the marks of elaboration and 
 high finish which they bear; it may be doubted whether 
 his carefully drawn portraits, and brilliant metaphors, 
 were really composed within the short periods that in- 
 tervened between the publication of his respective letters. 
 Every man engaged in literary pursuits will admit the 
 difficulty, if not the impossibility, of attaining by any 
 continuous mental effort that high degree of condensation 
 and polish which the writings of Junius exhibit. It is 
 only by retouching at long intervals, when the subject is 
 in a manner forgotten and presents itself in a new aspect, 
 that the eye of taste detects those minute inaccuracies 
 and blemishes, which escape observation in the first 
 glow of composition. 
 
 It is therefore not improbable that Junius resorted to 
 some such method as that used by Butler, of whom Dr. 
 Johnson says, " I am informed by Mr. Thyer, of Man- 
 chester, that he could shew something like Hudibras in 
 prose. He has in his possession the common-place book 
 in which Butler deposited, not such events and precepts 
 as are gathered by reading, but such remarks, similitudes, 
 allusions, assemblages or inferences, as occasion prompted 
 or meditation produced; those thoughts that were gene- 
 rated in his own mind, and might be usefully applied to 
 some future purpose. Such is the labour of those who 
 write for immortality !" 
 
 Both Mr. Butler and Dr. Good, we have seen, came 
 to the conclusion that Junius must have resided almost 
 constantly in London during the time the Letters were 
 written, from January 1769 to January 1772. "Junius," 
 observes Dr. Good, " had no time for remote excursions. 
 
50 JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 
 
 nor often for relaxation, even in the vicinity of the Metro- 
 polis itself. Yet from his private letters, we could almost 
 collect a journal of his absences, if not an itinerary of his 
 little tours : for he does not appear to have left London 
 at any time without some notice to the printer, either of 
 his intention, or of the fact itself upon his return home; 
 independently of which, the frequency and regularity of 
 his correspondence seldom allowed of distant travel — 
 'I have been out of town,' says he, in his letter of 
 November 8th, 1769, ^ for three weeks, and though I got 
 your last, could not conveniently answer it ;' on another 
 occasion, ' I have been some days in the country, and 
 could not conveniently send for your letter until this 
 night.* And again, ' I want rest severely, and am going 
 to find it in the country for a few days.' *' 
 
 In the year 1771, Junius opened his private and con- 
 fidential correspondence with Mr. Wilkes, who was then 
 one of the sheriffs of London, and at the height of his 
 popularity. 
 
 Wilkes records the receipt of Junius's first letter by the 
 following indorsement: — '* August 21st, 1771 — Received 
 on Wednesday noon by a chairman, who said he brought 
 it from a gentleman whom he saw in Lancaster Court in 
 the Strand." 
 
 This letter is wholly on the subject of appointing 
 Alderman Sawbridge, Lord Mayor, out of the regular 
 succession, and Wilkes's influence being at that time 
 paramount in the city, Junius wished him to support 
 Sawbridge's election. In reply, Wilkes explains his 
 reasons for not acceding to Junius's wishes, and candidly 
 states that he thought Junius entertained too favourable an 
 opinion of the Alderman. It has been remarked, that 
 
JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 51 
 
 Junius must have had some private motive for taking 
 such an extraordinary interest in the success of Alderman 
 Sawbridge, and that his friendship for this gentleman is 
 apparent in many other instances. Junius was by no 
 means pleased with Wilkes's answer, and evinced symp- 
 toms of extreme mortification when he found that 
 Mr. Nash had triumphed over Sawbridge. "What an 
 abandoned, prostituted idiot," he writes to Woodfall, 
 "is your Lord Mayor. The shameful mismanagement which 
 brought him into ofiice, gave me the first, and an uncon- 
 querable, disgust." 
 
 We should however mention, that before Wilkes 
 answered Junius's first communication, he received 
 another long epistle from the prolific pen of his invisible 
 correspondent, dated 7th September 1771, respecting 
 the proceedings of the Bill of Rights Society. Wilkes 
 acknowledged the receipt of both letters by the following 
 advertisement in the Public Advertiser: — 
 
 Prince's Court, Monday, September 9th. 
 
 Mr. Wilkes has the honour of receiving from the same gentleman 
 two excellent letters on important subjects; one dated August 21, 
 the other September 7. 
 
 He begs the favour of the author to prescribe the mode of 
 Mr. Wilkes's communicating his answer. 
 
 To this advertisement Wilkes received the following 
 answer by the penny post: — 
 
 10 September, 1771. 
 You may entrust Woodfall with a letter for me. Leave the 
 rest to his management. 
 
 I expect that you will not enter into any explanations with 
 him whatever. 
 
 e2 
 
52 JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 
 
 Several other letters afterwards passed between the 
 parties, principally on the events and politics of the 
 day, in which the most exalted characters, and even that 
 of Majesty itself, are canvassed with the utmost freedom. 
 The letters of Wilkes display much vivacity and spirit, 
 while Junius seldom descends from the dignity of his 
 assumed character; and he often takes the liberty of 
 lecturing Wilkes pretty freely on his conduct. In one 
 of his letters, which Wilkes has marked as received 
 September 23, 1771, Junius says, — " In my opinion, 
 you should not wish to decline the appearance of being 
 particularly addressed in that letter [alluding to one of 
 his former letters]. It is calculated to give you dignity 
 with the public. There is more in it than perhaps you 
 are aware of. Depend upon it, the perpetual union of 
 Wilkes and Moh does you no service: not but that I 
 love and esteem the mob. It is your interest to keep up 
 dignity and gravity besides. I would not make myself 
 cheap, by walking the streets so much as you do. Ver- 
 bum sat." 
 
 After a while, Wilkes appears to have become some- 
 what alarmed at carrying on this dangerous correspond- 
 ence with a character so provokingly mysterious; for in 
 a letter addressed to Junius, on the 6th November, he 
 says, — *' You shall have every communication you wish 
 from me. Yet I beg Junius to reflect a moment. To 
 whom am 1 now writing ? I am all doubt and uncertainty, 
 though not mistrust or suspicion. I should be glad to 
 canvass freely every part of a great plan. I dare not 
 write it to a man I do not know; of whose connexions I 
 am totally ignorant. I differ with Junius in one point : I 
 think by being concealed he has infinite advantages which 
 
JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 53 
 
 I want. I am on the Indian coast, where, from the fire 
 kindled round me, I am marked out to every hostile arrow 
 which knows its way to me. Those who are in the dark 
 are safe, from the want of direction of the pointless shaft. 
 I followed Junius's advice about the card, on the anni- 
 versary of the king's accession. I dropped the idea. I 
 wish to know his sentiments about certain projects against 
 the usurped powers of the House of Lords. The business 
 is too vast to write, too hazardous to communicate, to 
 an unknown person. Junius will forgive me. What can 
 be done? Alas! where is the man, after all Wilkes has 
 experienced, in whose friendly bosom he can repose his 
 secret thoughts, his noble but dangerous designs? The 
 person most capable he can have no access to, and all 
 others he will not trust. I stand alone; isole, as the 
 French call it; a single column, unpropped, and perhaps 
 nodding to its fall." 
 
 Junius wrote another short letter afterwards, which 
 Wilkes answered; and the correspondence then ceased. 
 Junius's first letter to Wilkes is dated 21st August 1771; 
 and his last, 9th November 1771 ; during this period 
 Wilkes received ten letters and notes, several of which 
 are of considerable length. 
 
 At Wilkes's death this correspondence came into the 
 possession of his daughter. Miss Mary Wilkes, from 
 whose executors the letters appear to have passed into 
 the hands of Mr. Woodfall, and were first published in 
 his complete edition of Junius, in 1812. 
 
 Mr. Butler tells us that ** all the letters, except the letter 
 to the king, are, if I remember rightly, in the same hand- 
 writing. It is like that which well-educated ladies 
 wrote about the beginning of the century, a large open 
 
54 JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 
 
 hand, regular, approaching to the Italian. The letter to 
 the king was in a handwriting perfectly different, a 
 very regular staid hand, no difference between the fair 
 stroke and the body of the letters. The letters generally, 
 if not always, were sent in an envelope (which was then 
 by no means so general as it now is), and in the folding 
 up and the direction of the letter we thought we could 
 see marJcs of the writer's habit of folding and directing 
 official letters. The lines were very even ; very few blots, 
 erasures, or marks of hurry." — Reminis. i. 79. 
 
 Mr. Jackson, who was one of Mr. WoodfalFs shop- 
 men when the Letters of Junius appeared, mentions in a 
 letter inserted by him in the Gentleman's Magazine for 
 June 1813, that the superscription was invariably written in 
 the same handwriting ^ but that the contents were not always so. 
 
 The various fac-similes of the handwriting of Junius 
 given in Mr. Woodfall's edition, his editor assures us, have 
 been executed with peculiar fidelity, and selected from 
 those parts of his manuscripts which present the greatest 
 diversity of penmanship; though the differences, except in 
 that numbered eight, are so trifling, that a hard or a soft, 
 a good or a bad, pen, is sufficient to account for them. 
 The seals used by Junius have also been delineated with 
 equal accuracy. 
 
 Mr. Wilkes remarked that the manner in which 
 Junius corrected the printed sheets shewed that he was 
 accustomed to such an employment, and had a familiar 
 use of the marks of printers in correcting proof sheets; 
 but we do not find this opinion corroborated by Mr. 
 Woodfall, who would be a much better authority. 
 
 There is much diversity of opinion among the Investi- 
 gators, as to whether the Letters of Junius were the com- 
 
JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 55 
 
 position of one or more persons; whether the author wrote 
 them with his own hand or employed an amanuensis; 
 and as to what has become of the autographs of Junius*s 
 public Letters, for it seems that Mr. G. Woodfall only 
 possessed the private Notes written to his father. These 
 inquiries are interesting, inasmuch as they tend to throw 
 light on the important question, whether Junius was in 
 fact — ^ the sole depository of his own secret/ On these 
 points his assertions and the internal evidence afforded 
 by the Letters are contradictory and inconsistent ; but 
 this is nothing more than might be expected, because 
 the concealment of the author mainly depended on his 
 success in misleading the world on the subject. "The 
 general idea," says Mr. Butler, "that the letters were the 
 composition of more than one person, we always rejected." 
 " In the instance of handwriting," observes Mr. E. H. 
 Barker (p. 138), "it is by many persons admitted that 
 Junius sometimes, or always, employed an amanuensis, and 
 hence arises a difficulty which proves the uncertainty of 
 all arguments connected with this branch of the question: 
 who can decide — 1. Whether Junius did (as Mr. Butler 
 in his Reminiscences, i. 100, thinks), Or did not (as 
 Mr. Taylor, p. 370, imagines) employ an amanuensis? 
 2. Whether he did or did not uniformly employ the same 
 amanuensis? 3. Whether that amanuensis did or did 
 not convey the letters to Woodfall? 4. Whether we 
 have clear and positive and certain evidence that the 
 private letters to Woodfall signed Junius, were in the 
 handwriting of the real Junius, i.e, of him who com- 
 posed them? 5. Whether, supposing the handwriting 
 of the real Junius to have been alone employed, it was 
 on all occasions his natural, or on all occasions his dis- 
 
56 JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 
 
 guised hand, or sometimes the natural, and sometimes 
 the disguised hand ?" 
 
 In a letter written by Mr. Butler to Mr. E. H. Barker, 
 the 14th June 1828, it is said: — " 1 know from Mr. 
 Woodfall himself, that he thinks the originals of Junius's 
 Letters were destroyed by his father; but I believe he has 
 no reason for thinking it, except that it was the custom 
 of his father to burn all his letters at a certain period of 
 the year. As Junius^ s letters had so much real, and so much 
 possible importance, I cannot believe the fact, Mr. Woodfall, 
 however, is persuaded of it, and is convinced that some 
 how or other I am mistaken in thinking I saw the 
 original letters in the custody of Mr. Wilkes. As the 
 circumstance, if it took place at all, took place about 
 half a century ago, I should readily admit the mistake, 
 if the fact now came into my memory for the first time. 
 But the circumstance that I saw the letters in Mr. Wilkes's 
 custody ; that the letter to the king is in a handwriting 
 different from the others; and the conversations which 
 took place at the time between Mr. Wilkes and myself, 
 have occurred to my mind more than once in every 
 year since the time I have mentioned, and my recollec- 
 tion of the fact is so distinct, that I have no doubt of it,'* 
 
 Mr. Thomas Coventry, likewise, in a letter addressed 
 to the same gentleman, dated January 5th, 1828, says — 
 " In reply to your queries, I believe I can now strictly 
 answer them. 1. Mr. Woodfall declares that every year 
 it was his father's custom to destroy all the papers of the 
 preceding year; but with respect to Junius's correspondence, 
 2. There is every reason to believe, that after such letters 
 were printed, it was the invariable custom to return them to 
 Junius through the medium of the coffee-houses. Without 
 
JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 57 
 
 any private opinion, we have sufficient evidence from 
 the correspondence between him and Mr. Woodfall, that 
 such packets were regularly sealed and delivered, — what 
 else could they contain? 3. We have also evidence that 
 the private letters to Mr. Wilkes were forwarded through 
 Mr. Woodfall. You may recollect he says in one of his 
 notes — Shew the dedication and preface to Mr. Wilkes." 
 There is, Mr. Barker thinks, some reason to doubt 
 whether any of the letters addressed by Junius to Mr. 
 Wilkes were in the handwriting which we consider to 
 be the handwriting of Junius. It is pretty evident that 
 Junius corresponded with Mr. Wilkes through Mr. 
 Woodfall ; and there is fair ground for supposing, from 
 the habitual and unavoidable caution of Junius, that he 
 would require copies to be taken in Mr. Woodfall's 
 office, and forwarded to Mr. Wilkes by a porter, by a 
 private hand, or by the penny post. It is certain that 
 Mr. Wilkes was in the habit of endorsing the letters and 
 stating when he received each, and (where he knew the 
 fact) from whom. Thus one communication was received 
 "from a chairman;" another "by the penny post.'* Mr. 
 Butler states the letter to the king, which he saw in 
 Mr. Wilkes's possession, to have been in a different 
 hand from the others ; and this is a strong confirmation 
 that Mr. Wilkes had not any originals, but only copies. 
 In another letter, Mr. Coventry says, — " there is a lady 
 now living, who when she was a girl used to be locked 
 up by old Woodfall till she had executed her allotted 
 tasks of transcription ; he kept possession of the letters, 
 and dictated the matter to her from them. Moreover, 
 the letter sent to Garrick by Woodfall in the name of 
 Junius, was not an original, but a copy. It was Mr. 
 
58 JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 
 
 Woodfall's lawyer, who resided in Paternoster-row, that 
 copied the letter to Garrick, in Mr. Upcott's possession." 
 Upon these communications, Mr. E. H. Barker makes 
 the following remarks: — 
 
 *'The only specimens of Junius^s writing, whether in a 
 real or feigned hand, whether in his own hand or in the 
 hand of an amanuensis, on which reliance can be placed, 
 are the private letters of Junius to Mr. H. S. Wood- 
 fall, in the possession of the present Mr. Woodfall. The 
 latter states that it was the practice of his father, to 
 destroy all correspondence at the end of the year. We 
 will admit that it was his general practice ; but if such 
 had been his universal and invariable practice, even the 
 private letters of Junius, addressed to himself, would 
 have been sacrificed in the holocaust. The preservation 
 of the private letters proves, beyond all doubt, that 
 Woodfall would have preserved every original communi- 
 cation of Junius, if each and all had been in his power. 
 The supposition of Mr. Coventry is well warranted — 
 that Junius's letters, at least the public letters, were 
 returned to himself, through the Coffee-houses men- 
 tioned in the private letters to Woodfall." 
 
 " It appears to our view (says Dr. Waterhouse), that 
 the writings of Junius emanated from one mind, and yet 
 not without assistance* Some person must have been 
 privy to them ; but this aid must have been confined to 
 the writer's own household, to his nearest family con- 
 nexions, subordinate to one great overruling mind. 
 Otherwise the transcription and the immediate trans- 
 mission of those letters to one, and the same printer, 
 could not have been accomplished; a service that could 
 not be purchased with money, or enforced by autliority. 
 
JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 59 
 
 It must have been done by kindred aid alone, it being 
 that kind of concern in which the stranger doth not 
 intermeddle. Without such domestic aid, and affec- 
 tionate conspiration, we cannot conceive that such an 
 extraordinary and dangerous correspondence could pos- 
 sibly have been carried on three years undetected, and 
 have remained undivulged to this time. None of the 
 searchers after Junius have considered this point with 
 due attention." — Essay, p. 97. 
 
 " It may appear strange/' observes Mr. Butler, "that 
 government could not discover Junius through the 
 medium of the Post-office. Upon this I must observe, 
 that I knew a lady, who for a long period of time received 
 by the post, anonymous letters, some of them written in 
 blood, accusing her of the most atrocious crimes. She 
 was nearly related to a nobleman very high in office, and 
 by his desire all the powers of government were exerted 
 to discover the writer of the letters, but without effect. 
 
 " It was also mentioned to us from very good authority, 
 that Lord North had declared, that government had 
 traced the porterage of the letters to an obscure person 
 in Staples Inn, but could never trace them further." And 
 in a note, Mr. Butler adds: "This expression has been 
 confirmed to the reminiscent within these few weeks, by a 
 person present when it was spoken, with the additional 
 circumstance that the gentleman in Staples Inn to whom 
 it referred, was afterwards said to be the celebrated Isaac 
 Reed, famed for his literary acquaintance among all ranks 
 of persons." 
 
 That Junius was an Englishman, we have his own 
 express declaration, in the dedication of his Letters to the 
 English nation, which commences with the following 
 
60 
 
 JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 
 
 sentence: — '^I dedicate to you a collection of Letters 
 written by one of yourselves, for the common benefit of 
 US all." And in the preface he speaks of himself as an 
 *' English gentleman.'' This is further confirmed by his 
 discriminate delineation of the English character. *' The 
 people of England are by nature somewhat phlegmatic; 
 this complexional character is extremely striking, when 
 contrasted with the suddenness and vivacity of many of 
 our neighbours on the Continent; it even appears remark- 
 able among the several kindred tribes which compose 
 the great mass of the British empire. The heat of the 
 Welch, the impetuosity of the Irish, the acrimony of the 
 Scotch, and the headlong violence of the Creolians, are 
 national temperaments very different from that of the 
 native genuine English. 
 
 " This slowness of feeling is in some respects incon- 
 venient; but on the whole view of life it has, I think, the 
 advantage clearly on its side ; our countrymen derive from 
 thence a firmness, and uniformity, and a perseverance 
 in their designs, which enable them to conquer the 
 greatest difficulties, and to arrive at the ultimate point of 
 perfection in almost every thing they undertake." — 
 Misc. Letters, 24th February 1768. 
 
 The following ingenious argument has been adduced 
 by Mr. Taylor (p. 166), to prove that Junius must have 
 been a tall man. 
 
 "It is the custom only of tall men, to attach very 
 commonly the epithet * little,' to those whom they are 
 inclined to treat with disrespectful freedom. We seldom 
 find one of a middle size guilty of this; it too nearly 
 concerns himself. If he employs the term, it either loses 
 its force, or recoils upon him with an unpleasant effect. 
 
JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 61 
 
 The slightest observation will confirm this remark. If 
 then in Junius, we see the word little^ assigned to many 
 different individuals, we may conclude that the person 
 of the writer was of an opposite description. Should it 
 appear that this is a habit in which he frequently indulges, 
 and that some individuals not much, if anything, below 
 the common standard are thus distinguished; we may 
 judge, by the same rule, the denominator was himself 
 a taller man than ordinary. To this class Junius most 
 certainly belongs; his liberal sprinkling of the inglorious 
 attribute, among those who had the honour of his notice, 
 may be collected from the following examples. 
 
 "I don't so much question Mr. Harvey's being able 
 to give good advice, as that other little mans being either 
 willing or able to follow it;" alluding to Lord Barrington, 
 who is again styled ' my little lord.' 
 
 "Mr. Chamier is scarcely ever mentioned, but as ' little 
 Shammy — a tight active little fellow — a little gambling 
 broker — little waddle well — little three per cents, reduced 
 — a little whiffling broker,' etc. 
 
 " Mr. Ellis is a little piece of machinery — little Ellis — 
 little minikin Ellis " 
 
 That Junius was a man of high rank and independent 
 fortune, are points on which the best authorities are equally 
 unanimous and decisive. Mr. Woodfall's editor declares 
 that "the proofs are clear that he was a man of independent 
 fortune; that he moved in the immediate circle of the 
 court, and was intimately acquainted, from its first con- 
 ception, with almost every public measure, every minis- 
 terial intrigue, and every domestic incident." — Prelim. 
 Essay, 32. 
 
 And Mr. Butler inferred that Junius was a man of 
 
62 JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 
 
 high rank, from the tone of equality which he seemed to 
 use quite naturally in his addresses to persons of rank, 
 and in his expressions respecting them; and observes, 
 " We have taken notice of the tone of equality in which 
 Junius mentions and addresses the very highest personages 
 of his times. How difficult it is for a person of an 
 inferior rank to do this, appears from Swift's letters, and 
 the anecdotes of him that have been transmitted to us, 
 in which his consciousness of inferiority, notwithstanding 
 his assumption of equality, pierces through every dis- 
 guise." A further circumstance noticed by Mr. Wilkes 
 and Mr. Butler respecting Junius, was, his early intelli- 
 gence of the measures of government. "Those," observes 
 Mr. Butler, " who recollect the controversy which took 
 place between the Count de Guignes, the French ambas- 
 sador in this country, and Salvador, the Portuguese Jew, 
 in consequence of certain stock-jobbing transactions, 
 during the dispute between Spain and this country re- 
 specting Falkland Island, and the manner in which the 
 British Cabinet changed on a sudden from words of war 
 to words of peace, must be surprised at the early intelli- 
 gence which Junius gave of this change to Woodfall." — 
 Reminis. i. 85. 
 
 On this subject, Dr. Good also remarks, " that Junius 
 iiioved in the immediate circle of the court, and was 
 intimately and confidentially connected either directly 
 or indirectly with all the public offices of government j 
 is if possible still clearer than that he was a man of 
 independent property; for the feature that particularly 
 characterised him at the time of his writing, and that 
 cannot even now be contemplated without surprise, was 
 the facility with which he became acquainted with every 
 
JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 63 
 
 ministerial measure, whether public or private, from almost 
 the very instant of its conception." — Prelim. Essay y 35. 
 
 In one of his private letters to Woodfall, Junius re- 
 marks, " As for myself, be assured that / am far above all 
 pecuniary views;" and in another, he says, "And you, I 
 think. Sir, may be satisfied that my ranlc and fortune place 
 me above a common bribe." On one occasion he appears 
 to hint at some prospect of taking a part in the govern- 
 ment of the country. '* I doubt much whether I shall 
 ever have the pleasure of knowing you, hut if things take 
 the turn I expect, you shall know me by my works.'' 
 
 It seems also evident from the Letters, that Junius was 
 a member of the House of Commons. For in a letter of the 
 28th May 1770, he says, " The speaker [Sir Fletcher 
 Norton] being young in office, began with pretended 
 ignorance, and ended with deciding for the ministry. We 
 were not surprised at the decision, but he hesitated and 
 blushed at his own baseness^ and every man was astonished.^' 
 Again in a letter of 22d April 1771, " We have seen 
 him [Mr. Wedderburne] in the House of Commons, over- 
 whelmed with confusion, and almost bereft of his facul- 
 ties." In another letter of loth August 1771, he says, 
 " My vote will hardly recommend him [Lord Chatham] 
 to an increase of his pension, or to a seat in the cabinet." 
 Again, Oct. 5th, 1771, "I willingly accept of a sarcasm 
 from Colonel Barr^, or a simile from Mr. Burke, even 
 the silent vote of Mr. Calcraft is worth reckoning in a 
 division." This seems to be the language in which a 
 member of the House, and not a mere hearer of the debates, 
 would express himself; and there are many such passages 
 in the Letters. He also exhibits so intimate, so peculiar a 
 knowledge of the customs and duties of the House, and 
 
64 JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 
 
 the bearing of every measure which is agitated within its 
 walls, and of the character, manners, and sentiments of 
 its members, and the distinct nature of their individual 
 eloquence, as could not well be possessed by any but one 
 of their own number. 
 
 From the declaration contained in a letter of Philo 
 Junius (August 26th, 1771), we learn that Junius was a 
 christian^ and professed an attachment to the established 
 church. " As a man, I am satisfied that he (Junius) is 
 a christian upon the most sincere conviction. As a writer 
 he would be grossly inconsistent with his political prin- 
 ciples, if he dared to attack a religion established by those 
 laws which it seems to be the purpose of his life to defend." 
 
 That Junius was of mature age, as supposed by Dr. 
 Good, is evident from various passages in his Letters. 
 In one of the miscellaneous letters, dated 10th June 1769, 
 he says, '* I am an old reader of political controversy, I 
 remember the great Walpolian battles,*' etc.; now as 
 Sir Robert Walpole quitted office in 1741, Junius, at the 
 time this was written, could scarcely be less than fifty 
 years old. In a private letter to Woodfall (27th Nov. 
 1771) he observes, " After a long experience of the world, 
 I affirm before God, I never knew a rogue who was not 
 unhappy." We have likewise Junius's own acknowledg- 
 ment that in the year 1771 his dancing days were over: 
 this confession comes out in answer to a jovial invitation 
 from Wilkes, to the Lord Mayor's feast. At that time 
 Wilkes was Sheriff of London, and the artful civic func- 
 tionaiy tried hard to inveigle his mysterious friend to the 
 Lord Mayor's ball, and secure him as a partner (perhaps 
 for life) for his amiable daughter. The invitation is 
 couched in the following terms : 
 
JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 65 
 
 " Does Junius wish for any dinner or ball tickets for 
 the Lord Mayor's day for himself or friends, or a favourite, 
 or Junta. The day will be worth observation, whether 
 Cretd an carbone noiandusy I do not know ; but the people, 
 sir, the people are the sight ! How happy should I be to 
 see my Portia here dance a graceful minuet with Junius 
 Brutus. But Junius is inexorable, and I submit. I would 
 send your tickets to Woodfall." 
 
 To Wilkes's polite invitation, Junius returned the fol- 
 lowing grave and dignified answer: "Many thanks for 
 your obliging oifer, but, alas! my age and figure would do 
 but little credit to my partner. I acknowledge the rela- 
 tion between Cato and Portia, but in truth / see no 
 connexion between Junius and a minuet.*^ 
 
 "The whole general style of Junius," observes the 
 author of * Junius Unmasked,* " is that of a man whose 
 age and experience^ not less than his rank and abilities, 
 entitle him to speak with authority, and to claim for his 
 opinions a more than common deference and respect. 
 Whatever he writes wears the air of easy, dignified, 
 habitual superiority and confidence, which are altogether 
 different from the hasty, petulant, presumptuous assurance 
 of youth. No one can rise from the perusal of these 
 Letters with the belief that they were the work of a 
 youthful mind. In our opinion, this feeling amounts to 
 a decided conviction. Junius speaks directly, in many 
 instances, of the youth of those persons whom he scourges 
 with his satire, and he habitually does it with a manner 
 full of superiority and deep-felt contempt. Whenever 
 he charges upon any member of the administration the 
 atrocious crime of being * a young man,' the charge is 
 conveyed in the most sarcastic, reproachful language, 
 
 F 
 
66 JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 
 
 and in a style which none but a man of years would have 
 adopted. Some of his remarks on the errors which young 
 men are apt to fall into, and the feelings which they com- 
 monly cherish, exhibit a knowledge that could have been 
 only obtained from much reflection and experience." 
 
 The following is a striking instance. Junius says, of 
 the Duke of Grafton : '* An obstinate, ungovernable, self- 
 sufficiency, plainly points out to us that state of imper- 
 fect maturity at which the graceful levity of youth is 
 lost, and the solidity of experience not yet acquired. It 
 is possible the young man may in time grow wiser, and 
 reform, etc. :" this, with what immediately follows, is one 
 of those original and masterly remarks on human nature, 
 which no one but a man of long experience and pene- 
 trating sagacity could have struck out. 
 
 The only person to whom the mysterious Junius ever 
 appeared in a tangible shape or bodily form, was a Mr. 
 Jackson, who, while he was in the employ of Mr. Wood- 
 fall, once saw a tall gentleman dressed in a light coat 
 with bag and sword throw into the office door opening in 
 Ivy-lane, a letter of Junius, which Mr. Jackson picked 
 up, and immediately followed the bearer of it into St. 
 Paul's Churchyard, where he saw him get into a hackney 
 coach and drive off. Here we must confess our inability 
 to track any further the corporeal footsteps of Junius; 
 but it appears that, when he had " shuffled off this mortal 
 coil," he was, like the "majesty of buried Denmark," 
 
 " Doom'd for a certain term to walk the night." 
 
 And we shall conclude by introducing the reader to his 
 " perturbed spirit," as described by the glowing pen of a 
 noble poet — 
 
JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 67 
 
 The Shadow came ! a tall, thin, gray-haired figure, 
 That looked as it had been a shade on earth; 
 
 Quick in its motions, with an air of vigour. 
 But nought to mark its breeding or its birth ; 
 
 Now it wax'd little, then again grew bigger. 
 With now an air of gloom or savage mirth; 
 
 But as you gazed upon its features, they 
 
 Changed every instant — to what, none could say. 
 
 The more intently the ghost gazed, the less 
 Could they distinguish whose the features were; 
 
 The Devil himself seemed puzzled even to guess; 
 They varied like a dream — now here, now there; 
 
 And several people swore from out the press, 
 They knew him perfectly; and one could swear 
 
 He was his father; upon which another 
 
 Was sure he was his mother's cousin's brother. 
 
 Another, that he was a duke, or knight, 
 
 An orator, a lawyer, or a priest, 
 A nabob, a man-midwife ; but the wight 
 
 Mysterious changed his countenance at least 
 As oft as they their minds; though in full sight 
 
 He stood, the puzzle only was increased; 
 The man was a phantasmagoria in 
 Himself — he was so volatile and thin! 
 
 The moment that you had pronounced him one, 
 Presto! his face changed, and he was another; 
 
 And when that change was hardly well put on, 
 It varied; tUl I don't think his own mother 
 
 (If that he had a mother) would her son 
 
 Have known; he shifted so from one to t'other. 
 
 Till guessing from a pleasure grew a task, 
 
 At tliis epistolary "iron mask." 
 
 t2 
 
68 JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS. 
 
 For sometimes he like Cerberus would seem — 
 " Three gentlemen at once" (as sagely says 
 
 Good Mrs. Malaprop) ; then you might deem 
 That he was not even one; now many rays 
 
 Were flashing round him; and now a thick steam 
 Hid him from sight — like fogs on London days : 
 
 Now Burke, now Tooke, he grew to people's fancies, 
 
 And certes often like Sir Philip Francis. 
 
 Lord Byron s " Vision of Judgment.''* 
 
THE CONFLICTS AND PERILS OF JUNIUS. 
 
 I did but prompt the age to quit their clogs 
 By the known rules of ancient liberty, 
 When straight a barbarous noise environs me 
 
 Of owls and cuckoos, asses, apes, and dogs. 
 
 Milton. 
 
 1 've read of men beyond man's daring brave. 
 Who yet have trembled at the strokes he gave ; 
 Whose souls have felt more terrible alarms 
 From his one line, than from a world in arms. 
 
 Churchill. 
 
 In truth I have left no room for accommodation with the piety 
 
 of St. James, my offences are not to be redeemed by recantation 
 
 or repentance. 
 
 Junius. 
 
CHAPTER III. 
 
 Attacks of numerous Ministerial writers on Junius. — Junius 's 
 opinion of the nature of the contests in which he was engaged. 
 — His first controversy with Sir William Draper. — Is chal- 
 lenged by Sir William ; proofs afforded by this controversy 
 and other passages in the Letters of Junius that their author 
 was a Soldier. — Contradictory passages noticed. — Account of 
 Junius's contest with Mr. Home. — Keen search after Junius. 
 — His advice to Woodfall how to conduct himself in case 
 of danger. — Prosecution against Woodfall for publishing 
 Junius's Letter to the King. — Result of the trial. — Serjeant 
 Glynn's motion in the House of Commons to inquire into 
 the administration of Criminal Justice. — Lord Camden's 
 attack on Lord Mansfield for his conduct on Woodfall's trial. 
 — Junius's remarks on the transaction. — Various schemes to 
 detect Junius. — His art and vigilance to guard his secret 
 and prevent discovery. — His furious attack on Garrick for 
 communicating to the King the intention to discontinue his 
 Letters. — Junius's anxiety and dread of discovery. — His 
 contradictory accounts of himself to mystify Woodfall. — The 
 success of his devices. — The Duke of Grafton unacquainted 
 with the Author. — Mr. Butler's conjecture respecting him. — 
 The mysterious box at Stowe. 
 
THE CONFLICTS AND PERILS OF JUNIUS. 
 
 The foe is merciless, and will not pity, 
 For at their hands I have deserved no pity. 
 
 Shakspeare. 
 
 '*No man," observes Dr. Good, "but he, who with a 
 thorough knowledge of our Author's style, undertakes to 
 examine all the numbers of the Public Advertiser from 
 January 1769 to January 1772, can have any idea of the 
 immense fatigue and trouble he submitted to, by the com- 
 position of other letters, under other signatures, in order 
 to support the preeminent pretensions and character of 
 Junius, attacked as it was by a multiplicity of writers in 
 favour of the administration, to whom, as Junius, he did 
 not choose to make any reply whatever. And instead of 
 wondering that he should have disappeared at the dis- 
 tance of about five years, we ought much rather to be 
 surprised that he should have persevered through half 
 this period with a spirit at once so indefatigable and 
 invincible.'* — Prelim. Essay, p. 47. 
 
 The opinion entertained by Junius of the contests in 
 which he was engaged, may be collected from the way 
 he speaks of them in his letter of the 13th of August 
 1771. — " As to myself, it is no longer a question whether 
 I shall mix with the throng and take a single share in the 
 danger. Wherever Junius appears, lie must encounter 
 
72 THE CONFLICTS AND 
 
 a host of enemies. But is there no honourable way to 
 serve the public without engaging in personal quarrels 
 with insignificant individuals, or submitting to the 
 drudgery of canvassing votes for an election ? Is there 
 no merit in dedicating my life to the information of my 
 fellow-subjects? — What public question have I declined? 
 What villain have I spared? — Is there no labour in the 
 composition of these letters? Mr. Home, I fear, is 
 partial to me, and measures the facility of my writings 
 by the fluency of his own." And again, April 22, 1771, 
 he says: "To write for profit without taxing the press; — 
 to write for fame and to be unknown ; — to support the 
 intrigues of faction, and to be disowned, as a dangerous 
 auxiliary, by every party in the kingdom, — are contra- 
 dictions, which the Minister must reconcile before I 
 forfeit my credit with the public. I may quit the service, 
 but it would be absurd to suspect me of desertion. The 
 leputation of these papers is an honourable pledge for 
 my attachment to the people." 
 
 And in the P. S. to a private letter to Mr. Wilkes he 
 observes — "As you will probably never hear from me 
 again, I will not omit this opportunity of observing to 
 you that I am not properly supported in the newspapers. 
 One would think that all the fools were of the other side 
 of the question. As to myself it is of little moment. 
 / can brush away the swarming insects whenever I think 
 proper; but it is bad policy to let it appear in any instance 
 that we have not numbers as well as justice on our side." 
 
 The first serious contest in which Junius was involved 
 was with Sir William Draper, who, as Sir Nathaniel 
 Wraxall observes,* " was doubtless impelled by the desire 
 * Wraxall's Posthumous Memoirs, vol. ii. 186. 
 
PERILS OF JUNIUS. 73 
 
 of displaying his intimacy with the Marquis of Granby 
 to take up his pen in that nobleman's defence. Junius's 
 obligation to his officious friendship was indelible; for 
 however admirably written may be his letter of the 
 '2lst of January 1769,' which opened the series of those 
 celebrated compositions, it was Draper's answer, with his 
 signature annexed to it, that drew all eyes towards the 
 two literary combatants. Sir William was so injudicious 
 as to renew the correspondence six months after its first 
 termination. But he derived no advantage from it. 
 Junius treated him as the Marchioness de Chaves' secre- 
 tary treated Gil Bias — disarmed and dismissed him. 
 Yet Draper's letters, if they could be considered sepa- 
 rately from those of his antagonist, are classical and 
 elegant productions. When perused, as Sir William's 
 must ever be, in conjunction with the answers made by 
 Junius, they shrink into comparative inferiority." 
 
 Such is the judgment of an intelligent contemporary 
 on this famous controversy; and perhaps it would be 
 difficult to select from any of Junius's writings more 
 favourable specimens of his style than the letters he 
 wrote on this Occasion. They display, in an eminent 
 degree, all the acuteness and tact for which their author 
 was so celebrated, and contain passages of the most 
 refined and polished irony, with less of that savage and 
 ferocious sarcasm in which he afterwards indulged, when 
 the voice of an admiring nation had awarded him the 
 palm due to the first political writer of his age. In this 
 contest the towering Junius was only trying his pinions 
 — pluming his wings for loftier flights. The result 
 having given him implicit confidence in his own powers, 
 he soon began to treat with vindictive and rancorous 
 
74 THE CONFLICTS AND 
 
 vituperation the most exalted characters in the nation. 
 But even at the commencement of his career, such was 
 the atrocity of his insinuations against the character 
 and honour of Sir William Draper, that the latter, writh- 
 ing in agony under the inflictions of his invisible tor- 
 mentor, was compelled to exclaim — " If I must perish^ 
 Junius, let me perish in the face of day; — be for once a 
 generous and open enemy. I allow that gothic appeals 
 to cold iron are no better proofs of a man's honesty and 
 veracity than hot iron and burning ploughshares are of 
 female chastity; but a soldier's honour is as delicate as a 
 woman's — it must not be suspected. You have dared to 
 throw more than a suspicion upon mine : you cannot but 
 know the consequences, which even the meekness of 
 Christianity would pardon me for, after the injury you 
 have done me." 
 
 Junius declined Sir William's polite invitation, for the 
 following, among other reasons: "As to me, it is by 
 no means necessary that I should be exposed to the 
 resentment of the worst and the most powerful men in 
 this country, though I may be indifferent about yours. 
 Though you would fight, there are others who would 
 assassinate." And concludes thus: "I believe, Sir, you 
 will never know me. A considerable time must certainly 
 elapse before we are personally acquainted. You need 
 not, however, regret the delay, or suffer an apprehension 
 that any length of time can restore you to the Christian 
 meekness of your temper, and disappoint your present 
 indignation. If I understand your character, there is in 
 your own breast a repository, in which your resentments 
 may be safely laid up for future occasions, and preserved 
 witliout the hazard of diminution. The odia in longum 
 
PERILS OF JUNIUS. 75 
 
 jaciens, quce reconderet, auciaque promeretj I thought, had 
 only belonged to the worst character of antiquity. The 
 text is in Tacitus; — you know best where to look for the 
 commentary." (25th September 1769). 
 
 We think it impossible for any person to peruse atten- 
 tively this controversy without being convinced, that the 
 profound and accurate knowledge displayed by Junius 
 of military affairs could only have been possessed by an 
 old and experienced soldier; that it was by no means of 
 such a superficial and amateur character as might have 
 been gleaned by a clerk in the War Ofiice; but bears 
 indubitable marks of being the result of that knowledge 
 which is only to be acquired in the tented field, and 
 amidst the actual turmoil and din of war. Indeed, it is 
 obvious, that martial subjects are those, on which Junius 
 chiefly delighted to expatiate : and, as evidence of the fact, 
 the reader is referred to the series of letters addressed to 
 Lord Harborough, in vindication of the character of Sir 
 Jeffery Amherst; and the numerous letters to Lord Bar- 
 rington, the Secretary at War, principally respecting the 
 dismission of Mr. D'Oyley and Mr. Francis, two of his 
 clerks; likewise to the importance attached by Junius to 
 the paltry affair of General Gansel, about effecting his 
 escape from a sheriff*'s officer; and several other military 
 subjects of minor importance, which are discussed by 
 Junius with equal warmth and accuracy. In a note to a 
 letter of the 22d August 1770, he says : — **This infamous 
 transaction ought to be explained to the public. Colonel 
 Gisborne was quarter-master-general in Ireland. Lord 
 Townshend persuades him to resign to a Scotch officer, 
 one Fraser, and gives him the government of Kinsale. 
 Colonel Cunningham was adjutant- general in Ireland. 
 
76 THE CONFLICTS AND 
 
 Lord Townshend offers him a pension, to induce him to 
 resign to Luttrell. Cunningham treats the offer with 
 contempt. What's to be done? Poor Gisborne must 
 move once more. He accepts a pension of 5001. a-year, 
 until a government of greater value shall become vacant. 
 Colonel Cunningham is made Governor of Kinsale; and 
 Luttrell, at last, for whom the whole machinery is put in 
 motion, becomes adjutant-general, and in effect takes the 
 command of the army in Ireland." Now it may be 
 asked, who, except a military man, would take any interest 
 in this complicated minor military transaction ; or of what 
 importance was it to the public which of the colonels, 
 Gisborne, Cunningham, or Luttrell, became adjutant- 
 general ? 
 
 It may be further remarked, that on whatever subject 
 Junius is writing, he displays a mind saturated with 
 military ideas, and an imagination teeming with martial 
 imagery. His allusions to the circumstances and pomp 
 of war are incessant, and almost innumerable. We select 
 the following passages from his letters, of various dates, 
 out of many other instances that might be given: 
 
 September 19, 1769. His palace is besieged; the lines of cir- 
 cumvallation are drawn round him. 
 
 February 14, 1770. Neither the abject submission of desert- 
 ing his post in the hour of danger, nor even the sacred shield of 
 cowardice, should protect him. 
 
 February 6, 1771. Not daring to attack the main body of 
 Junius's last letter, he triumphs in having, as he thinks, surprised 
 an outpostf and cut off a detached argument — a mere straggling 
 proposition ; but even in this petty warfare he shall find himself 
 defeated. 
 
 August 15, 1771. Thanks are undoubtedly due to every man 
 
PERILS OF JUNIUS. 77 
 
 who does his duty in the engagement; but it is the wounded soldier 
 who deserves the reward. 
 
 September 28, 1771. Corruption glitters in the van, collects 
 and maintains a standing army of mercenaries, and at the same 
 moment impoverishes and enslaves the country. 
 
 October 5, 1771. The favour of his country constitutes the 
 shield which defends him against a thousand daggers. Desertion 
 would disarm him. 
 
 October 12, 1767. This is a kind of combat usually fought on, 
 and indeed the only one adapted to the field of a public paper. 
 
 Again : — Thus circumstanced, I will not take either part, but 
 oiTer myself as a friend to both, to measure the ground, give the 
 word, and carry off the body of whichever falls in the field of honour. 
 
 March 4, 1768. It remained like an old piece of cannon I have 
 lieard of somewhere, of an enormous size, which stood upon a 
 ruinous bastion, and which was seldom or never fired, for fear of 
 bringing down the fortification for whose defence it was intended. 
 
 October 19, 1768. His Grace had honourably ^esA^ his maiden 
 sword in the field of opposition, and had gone through all the 
 discipline of the minority with credit. 
 
 March 10, 1772. Was he winged like a messenger, or station- 
 ary like a centinel? 
 
 " From the minute military observations introduced in 
 tlie controversy with Sir William Draper," observes Mr. 
 Taylor; "from the narrative of General Gansel's rescue 
 in sight of the Horse Guards ; from the notice of Colonel 
 Burgoyne's appointment to the government of Fort St. 
 George immediately after it took place; and from the 
 premature announcement of that of Colonel Luttrell to be 
 adjutant-general in Ireland, — it has been long suspected 
 that Junius was in some degree connected with the Horse 
 Guards. But the Private and Miscellaneous Letters lately 
 published place it beyond a doubt. The War Office is 
 the scene of several dramatic representations; and there 
 
78 THE CONFLICTS AND 
 
 is such precision in the secret intelligence from that 
 quarter conveyed to Woodfall or to the public, as occurs 
 in no other department of the state, and could not be 
 acquired from this, except by one who had access to the 
 fountain-head for information." 
 
 Dr. Johnson, in commenting on the controversy 
 between Salmasius and Milton, says: " Milton's supreme 
 pleasure is to tax his adversary, so renowned for criticism, 
 with vicious Latin;" and then sagaciously remarks: ^^ no 
 man forgets his original trade; the rights of nations and of 
 kings sink into questions of grammar, if grammarians 
 discuss them." And it appears that the remark is equally 
 applicable to a soldier, when he exchanges the sword for 
 the pen. 
 
 The circumstance of Junius being a military man seems 
 placed beyond all doubt by this remarkable passage in 
 one of his letters to Lord Barrington : " My Lord, the 
 rest of the world laugh at your choice, but we soldiers 
 feel it as an indignity to the whole army, and be assured 
 WE shall resent it." 
 
 It must, however, in candour be acknowledged, that 
 in another letter, dated 20th September 1768, Junius 
 says: " I am not a soldier^ my Lord, nor will I pretend 
 to determine what share of honour a General is entitled 
 to for success, who must have borne the whole blame and 
 disgrace if he had failed." And thus we find that Junius, 
 like the Weird Sisters, "palters with us in a double sense." 
 But whether Junius was, at the time of writing his Letters, 
 or had previouslg been, a soldier, it seems clear, from the 
 many excellent reasons which he gave for declining Sir 
 William Draper's gothic appeal to cold iron, that his 
 valour was tempered by discretion; and perhaps we may 
 
PERILS OF JUNIUS. 79 
 
 find reason to conclude, before the termination of this 
 inquiry, that if Junius did not resemble FalstafF (inas- 
 much as he could fight on compulsion), yet that like 
 "the wary Wedderburne and pompous Suffolk, he never 
 threw away the scabbard, nor ever went upon a forlorn 
 hope J* 
 
 Jtmius's next contest was with the Rev. John Home 
 (who afterwards quitted the church, and took the name 
 of John Home Tooke), which did not terminate quite so 
 brilliantly as his former combat with Sir William Draper. 
 The admirers of Junius are very unwilling to admit that 
 he ever sustained a defeat, or retired from any contest 
 in which he engaged otherwise than " covered with 
 glory ;" but an impartial examination of his controversy 
 with Mr. Home will at least leave this a doubtful ques- 
 tion. The contest originated in Junius having made an 
 unprovoked attack on Mr. Home in a letter addressed to 
 the Duke of Grafton, by charging him with endeavour- 
 ing to support the ministerial nomination of sheriffs. 
 This charge Mr. Home positively denied, and called for 
 proofs; and the ability displayed in his first letter seems 
 to have convinced Junius that he had imprudently drawn 
 on himself no ordinary antagonist. He therefore attempted 
 to smother all further discussion by sending Mr. Home 
 a hasty, and inconsiderate private letter, at the same 
 time telling him, that he might print it if he thought 
 proper. Junius had, however, this time mistaken his 
 man. Home's acuteness detected at a glance the weak 
 points of his adversary, and enabled him to take up a 
 position from which he might safely defy his assailant. 
 Junius's letter was immediately returned to Woodfall for 
 insertion in his paper, and in a few days afterwards there 
 
80 THE CONFLICTS AND 
 
 appeared such an answer from Home as completely 
 stripped the question at issue of all the false glitter and 
 sophistry, with which Junius had attempted to invest it, 
 and placed the controversy in so clear a light, that Junius 
 was quite unable to frame any satisfactory reply. This 
 first tended to convince the public, that if Junius were 
 terrible as Achilles in his rage — ^^ Impiger, iracundus, 
 inexorahilis, acer" — he was also, like his prototype, not 
 wholly invulnerable. 
 
 The reply of Junius, which is addressed, not to Mr. 
 Home, but to the printer of the P. A., did not exhibit his 
 accustomed confidence of manner, or coolness of temper. 
 He seemed to feel that his adversary's position could not 
 be carried by a coup de main, and he lost his coUectedness 
 and displayed much irritability. His assault was fierce, 
 but irregular; he fought gallantly, but not firmly; and 
 though he inflicted some severe wounds on his adversary, 
 his main attack utterly failed. Junius appeared to be 
 conscious that in this unfortunate contest all things con- 
 spired against him. He had unjustly and wantonly 
 assailed a comparatively ignoble antagonist, who proved 
 himself a consummate master of his weapons. He could 
 reap little glory from victory, and had everything to 
 apprehend from defeat; and the apostrophe of Marmion 
 to his faithless falchion, might have been applied by 
 Junius to his pen: 
 
 Curse on yon base marauder's lance, 
 And doubly cursed my failing brand, 
 A smful heart makes feeble hand. 
 
 In a critique on Reid's Memoirs of Home Tooke, in 
 the Quarterly Review (No. xiv. p. 319), it is observed 
 of this celebrated controversy:— ** Mr. Home's style is 
 
PERILS OF JUNIUS. 81 
 
 strongly impressed with the character of his mind — neat, 
 clear, precise, and forcible; free from affectation, void of 
 ornament. We do not think he was ever vulgar, but he 
 is full of that genuine Anglicism of which the course 
 of his studies rendered him at once an admirer and a 
 master — that native idiom, which the brilliant success of 
 some of those who have written English as a foreign 
 language, has within the last fifty years brought into 
 disuse and almost into oblivion. The most finished 
 specimen of his composition is probably to be found in 
 the two or three letters written in answer to the attacks 
 of Junius, and he had the honour, which in those days 
 was deemed no inconsiderable one, of being the only 
 knight that returned with his lance unbroken from a 
 combat with that unknown, but terrible champion. If 
 he wants the requisite and the brilliant invective of his 
 adversary, that dexterous malignity which comes in with 
 such effect to blacken a character by insinuation after 
 invective has exhausted its powers, and above all, that 
 well-sustained tone of austere dignity which gives to Junius 
 the air and authority of a great personage in disguise; he is 
 superior to him in vivacity, facility, and that assurance 
 of plainness and sincerity, which is of such importance 
 in controversial writings. The great fault of Junius is a 
 sort of stiffness and appearance of labour— his compo- 
 sitions smell too much of the lamp — he wanted nothing to 
 be a perfect master of his art but the power of concealing 
 it. Mr. Tooke's letters have the flow of unity and 
 simplicity which belong to writings struck off" at a heat, 
 and which depend for their effect rather upon the general 
 powers of the writer, than upon the great nicety and 
 labour in the particular instance. In justice to Junius 
 
82 THE CONFLICTS AND 
 
 as a writer, we must add that he was labouring under the 
 disadvantages of a weak case. It is evident that he was 
 early and deeply sensible of his own mistake, and he 
 was therefore glad to put an end to the contest as soon as 
 possible, even at the price of leaving his adversary in 
 possession of the field, — a humiliation to which he would 
 not have submitted, but from the consciousness of his 
 having originally selected an unfavourable ground." 
 
 Junius afterwards admitted, in a private letter to Mr. 
 Woodfall, of the 27th of November 1771, that he was 
 mistaken in the conjecture that Home had misrepre- 
 sented the sentiments conveyed in his Letters to the Bill 
 of Rights Society, and seems more than half to suspect 
 Wilkes. This is one of the very few instances in which 
 Junius acknowledges his fallibility. 
 
 *' Enveloped in the cloud of a fictitious name," says 
 Dr. Good, " Junius, unseen himself, beheld with secret 
 satisfaction the vast influence of his labours, and enjoyed 
 the universal hunt that was made to detect him in his dis- 
 guise, and ministers, and more than ministers, trembling 
 beneath the lash of his invisible hand." But that he was 
 not without his fears and apprehensions, may be inferred 
 from tlie following advice, which he gives Woodfall in a 
 letter of the ]6th August 1769: — "Avoid prosecutions if 
 you can, but above all things avoid the Houses of Parlia- 
 ment — there is no contending with them: at present you 
 are safe, for this House of Commons has lost all dignity, 
 and dare not do anything." — And when the printer was 
 apprehensive that the Duke of Bedford would not pass 
 over the attack upon him, Junius thus consoles him: — 
 "As to you, it is clearly my opinion that you have 
 nothing to fear from the Duke of Bedford. I reserve 
 
PERILS OF JUNIUS. 83 
 
 something expressly to awe him, in case he should think 
 of bringing you before the House of Lords. I am sure I 
 can threaten him privately with such a storm as would 
 make him tremble even in his grave." 
 
 The printer having been menaced with a prosecution 
 on the part of the Duke of Grafton, for the publication of 
 the letter to him of the 12th December 1769, Junius thus 
 writes to Woodfall: — "As to yourself, I am convinced 
 the ministry will not venture to attack you; they dare not 
 submit to such an inquiry. If they do, shew no fear, 
 but tell them plainly you will justify, and subpoena Mr. 
 Hine, Burgoyne, and Bradshaw, of the Treasury: that 
 will silence them at once. As to the House of Commons 
 there may be more danger. But even there I am fully 
 satisfied the ministry will exert themselves to quash such 
 an inquiry, and on the other side you will have friends; 
 but they have been so grossly abused on all sides, that 
 they will hardly begin with you." — Mr. Woodfall it 
 appears was still apprehensive, and could not avoid 
 expressing his fears to his invisible friend, and, indeed, 
 the Court of King's Bench Avas actually moved against 
 him, but the matter was not further proceeded with ; and 
 on this occasion Junius, , in his private letter of the 
 26th December 1769, makes the following observations: 
 ** I enter sincerely into the anxiety of your situation, at 
 the same time I am strongly inclined to think that you 
 will not be called upon. They cannot do it without 
 subjecting Hine's affair to an inquiry, which would 
 be worse than death to the minister. As it is, they 
 are more seriously stabbed with this last stroke, than 
 all the rest. At any rate stand firm^ (I mean with all 
 the humble appearances of contrition) ; if you trim or 
 
 g2 
 
84 THE CONFLICTS AND 
 
 falter you will lose friends, without gaining others." 
 The shrewd advice given by Junius was punctually 
 followed, and his prediction verified, for the minister did 
 not dare to enforce his threats. 
 
 Upon the publication of Junius's celebrated Letter to 
 the King, Woodfall was not quite so fortunate, for an 
 information was filed against him by the Attorney General, 
 Mr. De Grey, in Hilary Term, 1770; but his invisible 
 friend still followed him with assistance: — he offered him 
 a reimbursement of whatever might be his pecuniary 
 expenses, and aided him with the soundest, prudential, 
 and legal advice. On this occasion he says, — ''As to 
 yourself, I really think you are in no danger. You are 
 not the object, and punishing you could be no gratifica- 
 tion to the king." *' But upon this subject (observes 
 Mr. Woodfall's editor), the following is one of the most 
 important notes, as although he expressly denies all pro- 
 fessional knowledge of the law, it sufficiently proves that 
 he was better acquainted with it than many who are 
 actual practitioners : — 
 
 "I have carefully perused the information; it is so 
 loose and ill-drawn, that I am persuaded Mr. De Grey 
 could not have had a hand in it. Their inserting the 
 whole, proves they had no strong passages to fix on. I 
 still think it will not be tried. If it should, it will not 
 be possible for a jury to find you guilty." — Feb. 14, 1770. 
 
 In his first opinion he was mistaken, in his second he 
 was correct. The cause was tried at Guildhall on the 13th 
 June 1770, before Lord Mansfield; when his lordship in 
 his charge to the jury informed them that they had 
 nothing to do with the intentioUf for that the words in the 
 indictment, malicious, seditious, etc., were merely words of 
 
PERILS OF JUNIUS. 85 
 
 course, and that they were only to consider the fact of 
 publishinff, and whether a proper construction were put 
 on the blanks in the paper, their truth or falsehood being 
 wholly immaterial The jury, however, after being out 
 nine hours, found a verdict of " Guilty of printing and 
 publishing only," which was in effect an acquittal. It is 
 to this cause that we are chiefly indebted for an acknow- 
 ledged, and unequivocal right in the jury to return a 
 general verdict; that is, a verdict that shall embrace 
 matter of law as well as matter of fact. Upon the 
 ambiguity of the verdict, however, in Woodfall's case, a 
 motion was made by the defendant's counsel in arrest of 
 judgment; at the same time an opposite motion was made 
 by the counsel for the crown, for a rule calling upon the 
 defendant to shew cause why the verdict should not be 
 entered up according to the legal import of the words. 
 On both sides, a rule to shew cause was granted, and the 
 matter being argued before the Court of King's Bench, 
 Lord Mansfield, whose opinion was strongly in favour 
 of the verdict being entered up, was supported by the 
 opinion of Mr. Justice Smyth alone; the rest of the 
 Judges opposing his Lordship. 
 
 The result was, that the Court ordered a new trial, 
 which however was not proceeded in, for want of proof 
 of the publication of the paper in question. 
 
 The costs of the printer for defending himself amounted 
 to about 120/.; a somewhat heavy fine, observes Mr. 
 Woodfall, for a person not found guilty. In a private 
 letter of the 21st February 1771, Junius says, " You 
 may rely upon it the Ministry are sick of prosecutions. 
 Those against Junius cost the Treasury above 6000Z., 
 and after all they got nothing but disgrace." 
 
86 THE CONFLICTS AND 
 
 In a letter to the Duke of Grafton of the 9th of July 
 1771, Junius thus ironically alludes to his Letter to the 
 King: "The only letter I ever addressed to the king 
 was so unkindly received that I believe I shall never 
 presume to trouble his majesty in that way again. But 
 my zeal for his service is superior to neglect, and like 
 Mr. Wilkes's patriotism, thrives by persecution." 
 
 Serjeant Glynn having made a motion in the House 
 of Commons for an inquiry into the administration of 
 Criminal Justice, the conduct of Lord Mansfield on 
 Woodfall's trial was severely commented on in the course 
 of the discussion ; and though the motion was lost, his 
 Lordship on the following day desired that the House 
 of Lords might be summoned, stating that he had some 
 matters to communicate to them. 
 
 The Lords accordingly met on the 10th December, but 
 instead of entering into any explanations, Lord Mansfield 
 contented himself with informing the House that he had 
 left with the clerk of the house a copy of the Judgment 
 of the Court of King's Bench, in the case of The King v. 
 Woodfallf and that their lordships might read it, and 
 take copies of it if they pleased. 
 
 On an inquiry from Lord Camden whether his Lord- 
 ship meant to have the paper entered on the Journals, he 
 replied, " No, only to leave it with the Clerk." On the 
 following day Lord Camden said, " My Lords, I consider 
 the paper delivered in by the noble lord on the woolsack, 
 as a challenge directed personally to me, and I accept of 
 it. He has thrown down the glove, and I take it up. In 
 direct contradiction to him, I maintain that his doctrine 
 is not the law of England ; I am ready to enter into tlie 
 debate whenever the noble lord will fix a day for it, I 
 
PERILS OF JUNIUS. 87 
 
 desire and insist that it may be an early one." He then 
 delivered in six questions founded on the paper deposited 
 by Lord Mansfield with the clerk, desiring to have his 
 lordship's answers thereto. Lord Mansfield replied, that 
 this method of proposing questions w^as taking him by 
 surprise, and that it was unfair, and that he would not 
 answer interrogatories. Lord Camden then pressed him 
 to appoint a day for giving in his answers; and Lord 
 Mansfield after some hesitation, pledged himself to the 
 House that the matter should be discussed, but ultimately 
 refused to fix any day. In this manner terminated the 
 discussion in the Lords on this subject, in which Lord 
 Mansfield betrayed his constitutional timidity, and suf- 
 fered his opponents to assume a tone of superiority over 
 him. 
 
 In one of the miscellaneous letters under the signature 
 of Phalaris, dated 17th December 1770, Junius makes 
 the following remarks on the transaction : " For what 
 reason Lord Mansfield laid his paper upon the table he 
 best knows. He gave none to the House of Lords, 
 except that he thought calling them together was the 
 most compendious way of informing them where each 
 lord might, if he pleased, procure a copy of his charge to 
 the jury in Woodfall's cause. This was the whole ; for 
 he made no motion whatsoever, nor did he pretend to 
 say, that in their corporate capacity as a House of Peers, 
 they could take the least notice of the paper. Now, Sir, 
 it remains with Lord Mansfield to give us an example, if 
 he can, of any respectable peer having ever moved for 
 a call of the House for so trifling, so nugatory, so ridicu- 
 lous a purpose. I think it strongly deserves these epithets ; 
 and after much consideration, I can find but one possible 
 
88 THE CONFLICTS AND 
 
 way of reconciling the fact with the cunning under- 
 standing of the man. When he summoned the House he 
 never meant to do what he afterwards did ; some qualm, 
 some terror, interfered, and forced him hastily to alter 
 his design and to substitute a silly, absurd measure, in 
 the place of a dangerous one. As for his having dared 
 Lord Chatham to a trial of his doctrines, I should be 
 glad to know by whom the combat was refused. Lord 
 Chatham attacked him directly upon the spot, and on 
 the very next day it is known to the whole world that 
 the great Lord Camden addressed him in the following 
 words. Junius here states the substance of Lord Cam- 
 den's speech, and concludes thus: "the d — Fs in it if this 
 be declining the trial; but what was the consequence? 
 Lord Mansfield, after an hour's shuffling and evasion, 
 finding himself pushed to the last extremity, cried out in 
 an agony of torture and despair: *No, I will not fix a 
 day — I will not pledge myself.' " 
 
 That a variety of schemes were invented, and actually 
 in motion to detect Junius, Dr. Good assures us there can 
 be no doubt ; but the extreme vigilance he at all times 
 evinced, and the honourable forbearance of Mr. Wood- 
 fall, enabled him to baffle every effort, and to persevere 
 in his concealment to the last. 
 
 "Your letter," says Junius, in one of his private notes, 
 " was twice refused last night, and the waiter as often 
 attempted to see the person who sent it.'* 
 
 On another occasion, his alarm was excited in conse- 
 quence of various letters being addressed to him at the 
 printing-office, with a view, as he suspected, of leading 
 to a disclosure either of his person or abode. " I return 
 you," says he in reply, " the letters you sent me yester- 
 
PERILS OF JUNIUS. 
 
 day. A man who can write neither common English, nor 
 spell, is hardly worth attending to. It is probably a trap 
 for me: I should be glad, however, to know what the fool 
 means. If he writes again, open his letter, and if it 
 contain anything worth my knowing, send it, otherwise 
 not. Instead of 'C. in the usual place,' say only ^a 
 letter' when you have occasion to write again. I shall 
 understand you." 
 
 Indeed, Junius's private letters afford abundant evidence 
 of the truth of Dr. Good's remark, and shew that in 
 order to preserve his momentous secret, and prevent 
 detection, he displayed the most consummate art, and 
 resorted to every stratagem that the fertile genius of an 
 accomplished general could devise. Innumerable were 
 his devices to deceive by false signals the conjectures of 
 sagacity, and by delusive scents place at fault the harpies 
 of the law, who would have rejoiced in tracking the great 
 Boar of the forest to his lair. 
 
 Lord North, in a speech delivered in the House of 
 Commons, observed, *'When factious and discontented 
 men have brought things to this pass, why should we be 
 surprised at the difficulty of bringing libellers to justice? 
 Why should we wonder that the great hoar of the wood, 
 this mighty Junius, has broke through the toils and foiled 
 the hunters ? Though there may be at present no spear 
 that will reach him, yet he may be some time or other 
 caught. At any rate, he will be exhausted with fruitless 
 efforts : those tusks which he has been whetting to wound 
 and gnaw the constitution will be worn out. Truth will 
 at last prevail. The public will see and feel that he has 
 either advanced false facts, or reasoned falsely from true 
 principles ; and that he has owed his escape to the spirit 
 of the times, not to the justice of his cause." 
 
90 THE CONFLICTS AND 
 
 Such was the extreme vigilance used by Junius to 
 guard his secret, that every effort of impertinent curiosity 
 to penetrate the great mystery was repressed by some 
 terrible though indefinite threat of vengeance, which 
 appears in most instances to have struck the hearts of those 
 to whom it was addressed with a sort of supernatural 
 terror, and had generally the effect of paralizing all fur- 
 ther attempts at investigation. The furious attack made 
 by Junius on Garrick, for having officiously communi- 
 cated to the King his intention to discontinue writing, 
 will exemplify what we have stated, and shew the sort 
 of intimidation he resorted to on such occasions, and 
 also his extreme sensitiveness respecting any interference 
 with his concerns, or any attempt to tear off his mask. 
 It likewise proves the astonishing quickness with which 
 intelligence of what passed in the interior of the Palace 
 came to his knowledge. 
 
 Garrick, it appears, had received a letter from Mr. 
 Woodfall, in which it was mentioned in confidence, that 
 there was some doubt whether Junius would continue to 
 write much longer. The intelligence was directly com- 
 municated by Garrick to Mr. Ramus, one of the King's 
 pages, who immediately conveyed it to his majesty, at 
 that time residing at Richmond, and from the peculiar 
 sources of information that were open to Junius, he was 
 apprised of the whole transaction on the ensuing morning, 
 and in consequence added the following P. S. to a note 
 dated 8th November 1771, which he had previously 
 written to Woodfall : 
 
 " (Secret). Beware of David Garrick : he was sent to 
 pump you, and went directly to Richmond to tell the King 
 I should write no more.*' A note was at the same time 
 
PERILS OF JUNIUS. 91 
 
 sent, addressed to ' Mr. David Garrick,' in the following 
 terms : " I am very exactly informed of your impertinent 
 inquiries, and of the information you so busily sent to 
 Richmond, and with what triumph and exultation it was 
 received. I knew every particular of it the next day. 
 Now mark me, vagabond! — Keep to your pantomimes, or 
 be assured you shall hear of it. — Meddle no more, thou 
 busy informer ! — It is in my power to make you curse 
 the hour in which you dared to interfere with — Junius." 
 
 Junius tells Woodfall — '* I would send the above to 
 Garrick directly, but that I would avoid having this 
 hand too commonly seen. Oblige me, then, so much as 
 to have it copied in any hand, and sent by the penny 
 post, that is, if you dislike sending it in your own writing. 
 I must be more cautious than ever, I am sure I should 
 not survive a discovery three days; or, if I did, they 
 would attaint me by bill. Change to the Somerset Coffee- 
 house, and let no mortal know the alteration." 
 
 Junius knew that Garrick had learned from Woodfall 
 that he would write no more ; but he did not know in 
 what manner this information was obtained. He imagined 
 that Garrick had drawn it from Woodfall by his ingenuity, 
 and under this impression he wrote the above notes. 
 
 Woodfall explained to Junius, that Garrick had been 
 apprised of the intended discontinuance of the Letters by 
 his having named it confidentially in a letter he was 
 writing to Garrick, and therefore dissuaded Junius from 
 sending the note — with this he at first seems satisfied, 
 and says — " I have no doubt of what you say about 
 David Garrick, so drop the notej' But so necessary was 
 it that Garrick should not endeavour to trace him, that 
 he adds — *^ As it is important to deter him from meddling. 
 
92 THE CONFLICTS AND 
 
 I desire you will tell him, that I am aware of his practices, 
 and will certainly be revenged if he does not desist. An 
 appeal to the public from Junius would destroy him." 
 Not satisfied with this security, he says at the end of the 
 same letter — " Upon refiection, I think it absolutely necessary 
 to send that note to D. G., only say practices, instead of 
 impertinent inquiries. I think you have no measures to 
 keep with a man who could betray a confidential letter for 
 
 so base a purpose as pleasing ." And in his letter of the 
 
 27th November 1771, Junius again refers to the subject in 
 the following manner: — "Though we may not be deficient 
 in point of capacity, it is very possible that neither of us 
 may be cunning enough for Mr, Garrick." And at the 
 end of the note, observes — " David Garrick has literally 
 forced me to break my resolution of writing no more." 
 
 Mr. Woodfall's editor states, that Garrick, from his 
 own account, and from other intelligence on which full 
 reliance could be placed, had been pertinacious in his 
 attempts to discover Junius ; and that the latter, for three 
 weeks or a month afterwards, could scarcely ever write to 
 Woodfall without cautioning him to be specially on his 
 guard against Garrick, and under this impression alone 
 he once changed his address. 
 
 In one of Junius's private letters to Woodfall, he pays 
 him the compliment of observing, "you have never 
 flinched that I know of." This we think is more than 
 can be affirmed of Junius himself; for he manifests at 
 various times an excessive dread of discovery, and a 
 trembling alarm at its probable consequences, little in 
 accordance with the high tone and lofty spirit in which 
 he was wont to rebuke powerful nobles, and even kings. 
 In one letter to Woodfall, he says — " I am persuaded you 
 
PERILS OF JUNIUS. 93 
 
 are too honest a man to contribute in any way to my 
 destruction; act honestly by me, and at a proper time you 
 shall know me." In another: — "When you consider to 
 what excessive enmities I may be exposed, you will not 
 wonder at my caution. I really have not known how 
 to procure your last." Again he writes: — "I have re- 
 ceived your mysterious epistle ; I dare say a letter may 
 safely be left at the same place ; but you may change the 
 direction to Mr. John Fretley." The able editor of Mr, 
 Woodfall's 'Junius' seems to have been quite puzzled and 
 bewildered by the various^ contradictory accounts which 
 Junius gives of himself and his proceedings, with the 
 view of preventing detection, and mystifying that honest 
 man Mr. W. S. Woodfall. On one occasion, havinof 
 sent a letter which he wished to disclaim, he writes thus : 
 ''The last letter you printed was idle and improper; and 
 I assure you printed against my own opinion — the truth 
 is, there are people about me whom I would wish not to 
 contradict, who had rather see Junius in the papers, ever 
 so improperly, than not at all." — But when the work is 
 finished, and all risque is pretty well at an end, he 
 assumes a bolder tone, and declares in his dedication — 
 " I am the sole depository of my own secret, and it shall 
 perish with me." In one letter he tells Woodfall — "Act 
 honestly by me, and at a proper time you shall know me.'* 
 We then find him declaring, " I doubt much whether 
 I shall ever have the pleasure of knowing you; but if 
 things take the turn I expect, you shall know me hy my 
 works." In one letter he makes this inquiry — " I beg you 
 will tell me candidly, whether you know or suspect who 
 I am." And then again he says — "As to me, be assured 
 that it is not in the nature of things that they [the house 
 
94 THE CONFLICTS AND 
 
 of Cavendish] or you, or anybody else, should ever know 
 me, unless I make myself known. All arts, or in- 
 quiries, or rewards, would be equally ineffectual." At 
 one time he speaks of " the gentleman who transacts the 
 conveyancing part of our correspondence," and from 
 other parts of the correspondence we learn that the letters 
 were usually sent by a common porter. Dr. Good, not 
 being able to reconcile these contradictions, supposes 
 there was a narrow circle to whom Junius unbosomed 
 himself— may not all these apparent contradictions and 
 discrepancies be accounted for by concluding, that this 
 narrow circle was confined to a single confidant, who oc- 
 casionally acted as Junius's amanuensis and perhaps mes- 
 senger? In short, he seems to have felt himself constrained, 
 for the preservation of his secret, and perhaps of his exist- 
 ence, to tamper with that which a man of his haughty spirit 
 and commanding intellect would never sacrifice but with 
 the greatest reluctance, and in a case only of the most 
 absolute necessity — hts Veracity and Honour. 
 
 " The general, particular, circumstantial, minute caution 
 always employed by Junius on all occasions (observes 
 Mr. Barker— preface, p. 19), is employed in respect to 
 Garrick; this viligant circumspection would be exerted 
 by Junius, whether it related to his personal appearance, 
 his epistolary habits, his choice of coffee-houses, chairmen, 
 porters, or messengers, and his handwriting, whether the 
 writing were feigned or real, — it was one uniform, con- 
 tinual, perpetual, eternal, sempiternal system of caution, 
 on which he acted — he was the hundred-eyed Argus, the 
 watchful Cerberus, the fiend-like Monster who guarded 
 his own treasure, his existence depended on his vigilance, 
 and therefore his vigilance never relaxed for a moment" 
 
PERILS OF JUNIUS. 95 
 
 What success attended these various devices adopted 
 for the purpose of concealment, is best attested by the 
 fact, that the identity of the author of these celebrated 
 Letters remains, even now, after a lapse of nearly seventy 
 years, a problem to be solved. 
 
 Mr. R. Fellowes, in a letter dated February 1st, 1827, 
 and addressed to Mr. Barker, says, "I have several 
 times talked with the late Duke of Grafton about the 
 Letters of Junius, but if those Letters ever inflamed any 
 resentment in his breast, he had outlived that feeling. 
 He even seemed to have been indifferent to the question 
 of the authorship. I am convinced that he did not 
 attach it to any particular individual. As far as he 
 considered it at all, he considered it problematical." 
 
 Mr. Butler remarks, " who is the fortunate possessor 
 of the two Vellum volumes, the Reminiscent knows as 
 little as the rest of the world — but he thinks it was not 
 unknown to the founder of a noble house, to whom the 
 public owes an edition of Homer which does the nation 
 honour." 
 
 Of him Junius thus expresses himself: " It is impos- 
 sible to conceal from ourselves that we are at this moment 
 on the brink of a dreadful precipice; the question is, 
 whether we shall submit to be guided by the hand that 
 hath driven us to it (General Conway), or whether we 
 shall follow the patriot voice (George Grenville's) which 
 would still declare the way to safety and to honour." 
 Thus far Mr. Butler. — Now, who was the editor of this 
 highly extolled edition of Homer? He was Robert Wood, 
 Lord Chatham's private secretary. Who was the founder 
 of a noble house to whom the public is indebted for 
 that learned work? It was the grand-nephew of Lady 
 
96 THE PERILS OF JUNIUS. 
 
 Chatham ; and places the vellum volumes about where 
 we had long since conjectured they might be found — in 
 the Grenville family." — Dr. Waterhouse's Essay, p. 379. 
 
 On this subject, Mr. Barker says, — " Mr. Taylor can- 
 not in the absence of proof be permitted to define Junius's 
 motive for ordering the two books to be bound in vellum. 
 Suppose that we could ascertain the fact, that Sir P. 
 Francis's library contained no such books at the time of 
 his decease ? Is Mr. Taylor in that case willing to 
 take the fair inference from his own reasoning, viz. that 
 Sir Philip was not the author of Junius ? — But can we not 
 more reasonably imagine that the real motive of Junius 
 for ordering the books was to present them to his patron, 
 to the person by whose desire and under whose coun- 
 tenance he was induced to publish the Letters ? And who 
 can say that the books are not now in the possession of 
 Lord Grenville?" 
 
 The latest information given to the public on this 
 interesting subject, is contained in the following para- 
 graph, which appeared in the Morning Chronicle of the 
 7th March 1836.— "In the library of the Duke of 
 Buckingham, at Stowe, is deposited a box, containing 
 papers, which are secured with three seals, said to be 
 those of the late Marquis of Buckingham, the late Lord 
 Grenville, and the Right Hon. Thomas Grenville. The 
 contents of the box are understood to be manuscript 
 letters of, and documents relating to, Junius." 
 
ON THE SPIRIT AND STYLE OF JUNIUS. 
 
 I could enlarge with a particular satisfaction upon the many fine 
 things which Satan, rummaging his inexhaustihle storehouse of 
 Slander, could set down to blacken the character of good men, 
 and load the best princes of the world with infamy and reproach. 
 
 De Foe's History of the Devil. 
 
 The writings of Junius afford a singular illustration of the 
 excellence and force of the original English language. He 
 employs no latinized words, and has exhibited a full and most 
 forcible style, composed almost entirely of words of Saxon deri- 
 
 ^^*^^"- Rev. Robert Hall. 
 
CHAPTER IV. 
 
 Remarks on the extraordinary spirit of malignity and revenge 
 displayed by Jimiiis against many exalted individuals. — 
 Noticed by Mr. Belsham in his History of England. — 
 Acknowledged by Mr. Woodfall's Editor. — Censured by 
 Atticus Secundus. — Dr. Johnson's character of Junius. — 
 Critiques on the style of Junius: by Dr. Good — Atticus 
 Secundus. — Opinions of Coleridge, Biu-ke, and Bums, on 
 the style of Junius. — Burke's description of the effects 
 produced by the publication of Junius's Letters. 
 
ON THE SPIRIT AND STYLE OF JUNIUS. 
 
 His breast with raging passions boiled; 
 
 Hatred, revenge, and blasphemous despight. 
 
 Cumberland. 
 
 I quote Junius in English, as I would Tacitus or Livy in 
 Latin. I consider him as a legitimate English classic. 
 
 2%e Author of" Pursuits of Literature." 
 
 The spirit and temper displayed in the Letters of Junius 
 unquestionably present the most formidable obstacle to 
 the discovery of their author, from the difficulty of fixing 
 upon any individual who could be actuated by motives 
 sufficiently powerful to induce him to pursue with such 
 persevering malignity, and almost superhuman energy, 
 the many exalted personages whom Junius has devoted to 
 infamy, or contempt. To contend that such unparalleled 
 rancour exhibits nothing more than the ordinary and legi- 
 timate hostility of political warfare, or, that it was merely 
 designed to write down the party then in power, would 
 be to offer an insult to the reader's understanding. Some 
 other reason must therefore be found to account for the 
 phenomenon; for, as Montesquieu justly observes, "In 
 the eyes of men, actions are more sincere than motives; and 
 it is more easy for them to believe that the act of uttering 
 the most cruel invectives is evil, than to.persuade them that 
 the motive which made them utter them is good.'' In the 
 
 h2 
 
100 ON THE SPIRIT AND 
 
 writings of Junius, the lofty contempt, the bitter irony, 
 the withering sarcasm, the fierce and overwhelming 
 invective of the author, stand out too prominently, and 
 evince too clearly the spirit of revenge which influenced 
 his pen, to be veiled by the polished style, the refined 
 taste, or the ostentatious professions of patriotism with 
 which his Letters are embellished. To prove the cor- 
 rectness of Mr. Butler's conclusion, that Junius '* had 
 a personal animosity against the King, the Duke of 
 Bedford, and Lord Mansfield, from the bitterness of his 
 expressions respecting them;" and, that he was "subject 
 to political prejudices and strong personal animosities," as 
 asserted by Dr. Good, it is only necessary to refer to the 
 series of portraits contained in his Letters, in which will 
 be found depicted at full length, the Sovereign and most 
 of his ministers, with spirited sketches of many well- 
 known political, and military characters of the age;* 
 exhibiting all the force and vigour of a master, whose 
 power consisted in " darkening the gloom, and aggra- 
 vating the dreadful;" and who admirably succeeded in 
 combining the most hideous forms of Fuseli, with the 
 deepest shades of Rembrandt. If Junius ever aimed at 
 any thing like truth of character in his portraits, he has 
 almost realized the legend of the painter Giotto, who 
 having been commissioned by a mysterious stranger to 
 paint a picture according to certain rules by him pre- 
 scribed, which were to produce a form of perfect beauty, 
 the result of the process presented to the eye of the 
 astonished artist, instead of a face of ideal perfection, 
 the gorgon countenance of— the spouse of Satan. Indeed, 
 any one whose poetical imagination spurned the dull 
 * See Appendix. 
 
STYLE OF JUNIUS. 101 
 
 realities of time and place, might assimilate the cabinet 
 ministers of George the Third, as Junius depicts them, 
 with the privy counsellors of another mighty monarch, 
 who, according to Milton, met for deliberation, not in 
 the dingy brick-built palace of St. James, but in a 
 certain gorgeous "fabric huge," which has recently been 
 rendered familiar to mortal ken, by the magic pencil of 
 Martin, 
 
 from whose arched roof 
 
 Pendent by subtle magic many a row 
 Of starry lamps and blazing cressets fed 
 With naphtha and asphaltus, yielded light 
 As from a sky. 
 
 That such a misconception was entertained by some 
 sagacious barrister respecting one, at least, of these 
 portraits, is evident from the answer of "A Friend" of 
 Junius, who corrected the mistake of the learned gentle- 
 man, in the following terms : — "We say that Lord Mans- 
 field is a bad man, and a worse Judge — but we did not 
 say that he was a mere devil.'* 
 
 It was, however, on the devoted head of the Duke of 
 Grafton that Junius poured forth the principal vials of 
 his indignation and wrath. In a letter, dated August 15, 
 1771, he gives the following ostensible reasons for his 
 hatred : — " My detestation of the Duke of Grafton is not 
 founded upon his treachery to any individual, though 
 I am willing enough to suppose that in public affairs it 
 would be impossible to desert or betray Lord Chatham 
 without doing an essential injury to the country; my 
 abhorrence of the Duke arises from an intimate knowledge 
 of his character^ and from a thorough conviction that his 
 baseness has been the cause of greater mischief to England 
 
102 ON THE SPIRIT AND 
 
 than even the unfortunate ambition of Lord Bute." In 
 numerous letters, the Duke is represented as being the most 
 flagitious and degraded of human beings — something not 
 far short of a demon incarnate. So bitter is this display 
 of malignity, that Atticus Secundus makes the following 
 singular remarks on the letter of the 8th July 1769: 
 "In the present letter the sentences flow with more 
 rapidity, as indicating the feelings of one who is in a rage ; 
 and, as in the former letter, we seem to see the author 
 grinning horribly a ghastly smile — in this, he appears to our 
 imagination in the attitude of a man who is ready to 
 crush, by his uplifted arm, an enemy who is at once the 
 object of his indignation and his spite," 
 
 According to Junius's description of his Grace's 
 qualifications, he must have been the identical minister 
 whom our Henry IV. predicted on his death-bed should 
 arise to govern merry England — 
 
 " Have you a ruffian that will swear, drink, dance, 
 Revel the night, rob, murder, and commit 
 The oldest sins the newest kind of ways ; 
 England shall double-gilt his treble guilt, 
 England shall give him office, honour, might." 
 
 The royal seer, it is true, was somewhat mistaken in 
 his chronology ; but that was of little consequence, as 
 the nation could well afford to wait a few centuries for 
 the appearance of so perfect a character. 
 
 The marked malignity shewn by Junius to the Duke 
 of Grafton induced Dr. Watson, afterwards Bishop of 
 Llandaff", to address a letter to his Grace in the Public 
 Advertiser, on his abandoning the administration in 1775^ 
 which contains the following passage :* "If the heart of 
 * Anecdotes of the Life of Bishop Watson, vol. i. 73. . 
 
STYLE OF JUNIUS. 103 
 
 Junius be not obstructed by private pique, if malignant 
 habitudes have not rendered him callous to the honour- 
 able feelings of a man, he will blush with shame and 
 remorse for having mistaken and traduced your character ; 
 he will embrace with eagerness this fair opportunity of 
 retracting his abuse, and candidly portray your Grace to 
 the world in such striking colours of truth and honour 
 as may obliterate from the memory of every ingenuous 
 man the base aspersions of his calumny." 
 
 To shew that our views on these points are neither 
 singular nor novel, the reader is here presented with the 
 sentiments of the most eminent critics on the subject. 
 
 Mr. Belsham, whose general principles of politics 
 differed little from those professed by Junius, mentions 
 in his History of England the first appearance of the 
 Letters in these words: — '* Amidst the innumerable mul- 
 titude of political publications, in which the conduct of 
 the present administration was arraigned in the bitterest 
 terms of severity, the national attention was particularly 
 attracted by a series of letters appearing under the signa- 
 ture of Junius, and written in a style so masterly as to 
 be generally deemed, in point of composition, equal to 
 any literary production in the English language. They 
 consisted, however, of little else than splendid declama- 
 tion and poignant invective, and discovered a cool, de- 
 liberate malignity of disposition which, now the passions 
 and follies of the day have vanished, and given place to 
 other passions and other follies, must excite disgust at 
 least proportionate to our admiration." 
 
 Dr. Johnson, in his thoughts respecting "Falkland 
 Islands," thus characterizes this writer: — "Of Junius, it 
 cannot be said, as of Ulysses, that he scatters ambiguous 
 
104 ON THE SPIRIT AND 
 
 expressions among the vulgar, for he cries havoc without 
 reserve, and endeavours to let slip the dogs of foreign or 
 of civil war, ignorant whither they are going, and careless 
 what may be their prey. Junius has sometimes made his 
 satire felt; but let not injudicious admiration mistake the 
 venom of the shaft for the vigour of the bow. He has 
 sometimes sported with lucky malice; but to him who 
 knows his company, it is not hard to be sarcastic in a 
 mask. While he walks like Jack-the-Giant-killer in a 
 coat of darkness, he may do much mischief with little 
 strength. Novelty captivates the superficial, and thought- 
 less; vehemence delights the discontented and turbulent. 
 He that contradicts acknowledged truth, will always 
 have an audience; — he that vilifies established authority, 
 will always find abettors. Junius burst into notice with 
 a blaze of impudence which has rarely glared upon the 
 world before ; and drew the rabble after him, as a monster 
 makes a show: when he had once provided for his safety 
 by inpenetrable secresy, he had nothing to combat but 
 truth and justice, enemies whom he knows to be feeble in 
 the dark. Being then at liberty to indulge himself in all 
 the immunities of invisibility ; out of the reach of danger, 
 he has been bold ; out of the reach of shame, he has been 
 confident. As a rhetorician, he has had the art of per- 
 suading when he seconded desire ; as a reasoner, he has 
 convinced those who had no doubt before ; as a moralist, 
 he has taught that virtue may disgrace ; and as a patriot, 
 he has gratified the mean by insults on the high. Finding 
 sedition ascendant, he has been able to advance it; finding 
 the nation combustible, he has been able to inflame it. 
 Let us abstract from his wit the vivacity of insolence, 
 and withdraw from his efficacy the sympathetic favoui- of 
 
STYLE OF JUNIUS. 105 
 
 plebeian malignity, — I do not say that we shall leave him 
 nothing; the cause that I defend scorns the help of false- 
 hood; but if we leave him only his merit, what will be his 
 praise ? It is not by his liveliness of imagery, his pun- 
 gency of periods, or his fertility of allusion, that he 
 detains the cits of London, and the boors of Middlesex. 
 Of style and sense they take no cognizance. They 
 admire him for virtues like their own — for contempt of 
 order and violence of outrage, for rage of defamation 
 and audacity of falsehood. The supporters of the Bill 
 of Rights feel no niceties of composition, nor dexterities 
 of sophistry — their faculties are better proportioned to the 
 bawl of Bellas, or barbarity of Beckford ; but they are 
 told that Junius is on their side, and they are therefore 
 sure that Junius is infallible. Those who know not 
 whither he would lead them, resolve to follow him; and 
 those who cannot find his meaning, hope he means 
 rebellion. 
 
 ''Junius is an unusual phenomenon, on which some 
 have gazed with wonder and some with terror; but 
 wonder and terror are transitory passions. He will 
 soon be more closely viewed, or more attentively ex- 
 amined; and what folly has taken for a comet, that from 
 its flaming hair shook pestilence and war, inquiry will 
 find to be only a meteor formed by the vapours of putre- 
 fying democracy, and kindled into flame by the efferves- 
 cence of interest struggling with conviction, which, after 
 having plunged its followers in a bog, will leave us 
 inquiring why we regarded it. 
 
 *' Yet, though I cannot think the style of Junius secure 
 from criticism, though his expressions^are often trite, and 
 his periods feeble, I should never have stationed him 
 
106 ON THE SPIRIT AND 
 
 where he has placed himself, had I not rated him by his 
 morals rather than his faculties. What, says Pope, must 
 be the priest, where a monkey is the god ? What must 
 be the drudge of a party, of which the heads are Wilkes 
 and Crosby, Sawbridge and Townsend ?" 
 
 Speaking of the style of Junius, Mr. Woodfall's 
 Editor says (p. 89) — " The distinguishing features of his 
 style are ardour, spirit, perspicuity, classical correctness, 
 sententious, epigrammatic compression; his charateristic 
 ornaments, keen, indignant invective ; audacious interro- 
 gation ; shrewd, severe, antithetic retort ; proud, pre- 
 sumptuous disdain of the powers of his adversary ; pointed 
 and appropriate allusions, that can never be mistaken, 
 but are often overcharged, and at times perhaps totally 
 unfounded; similes introduced, not for the purpose of deco- 
 ration, but of illustration and energy — brilliant, burning, 
 admirably selected, and irresistible in their application. 
 In his similes, however, he is once or twice too recondite; 
 and in his grammatical construction still more frequently 
 incorrect. 
 
 "His metaphors are peculiarly brilliant, and so numerous, 
 though seldom unnecessarily introduced, as to render it 
 difficult to know^ where to fix in selecting a few examples. 
 The following are ably managed, and require no expla- 
 nation : — 'The ministry, it seems, are labouring to draw 
 a line of distinction between the honour of the crown and 
 the rights of the people. This new idea has yet been 
 only started in discourse, for, in effect, both objects have 
 been equally sacrifice^. I neither understand the dis- 
 tinction, nor what use the ministry purpose to make of 
 it. The king's honour is that of his people. Their real 
 lionour and real interest are the same. I am not con- 
 
STYLE OF JUNIUS. 107 
 
 tending for a vain punctilio — private credit is wealth; 
 public honour is security. The feather that adorns the 
 royal bird, supports its flight. Strip hira of his plumage, 
 and you fix him to the earth.' Again : * Above all 
 things, let me guard my countrymen against the mean- 
 ness and folly of accepting of a trifling or moderate 
 compensation for extraordinary and essential injuries. 
 Concessions, such as these, are of little moment to the 
 sum of things, unless it be to prove, that the worst of 
 men are sensible of the injuries they have done us, and 
 perhaps to demonstrate to us the imminent danger of our 
 situation. In the shipwreck of the state, trifles float and 
 are preserved, while everything solid and valuable sinks 
 to the bottom, and is lost for ever.' Once more: 'The 
 very sunshine you live in, is a prelude to your dissolu- 
 tion. When you are ripe, you shall be plucked.' The 
 commencement of his letter to Lord Camden shall furnish 
 another instance: ' I turn with pleasure from that barren 
 waste, in which no salutary plant takes root, no verdure 
 quickens, to a character fertile, as I willingly believe, in 
 every great and good qualification." 
 
 We now present the reader with the more elaborate 
 critique of Atticus Secundus on the style of Junius: 
 — "The studied energy and great compression of his 
 language are the first qualities that will strike the reader 
 who has just entered on the perusal of Junius. There is 
 not only no superfluous sentence, but there is no super- 
 fluous word in any of his sentences. He seems, in fact, to 
 have aimed at this quality with the greatest care; and as 
 it was suited to the style and character of his mode of 
 thinking, it was also most happily aQcommodated to the 
 high attitude which he assumed, as the satirist and judge 
 
108 ON THE SPIRIT AND 
 
 not of ordinary men or common authors, but of the most 
 elevated and distinguished personages and institutions of 
 his country; of a person who seemed to feel himself 
 called on to treat majesty itself with perfect freedom, 
 and before whom the supreme wisdom and might of the 
 great councils of the state stood rebuked and in fear. 
 
 "We should form an erroneous idea of Junius, however, 
 if, from this energy and simplicity of the style imputed to 
 him, we should imagine that he is therefore an argumen- 
 tative writer. The slow processes of reason would have 
 been as unsuitable to the grandeur of his office, as the 
 tedious march of ordinary language. As it was beauti- 
 fully remarked of another mind of the same order, ' he 
 lightens rather than reasons on his subject;' he throws 
 out flashes from his mind that enable others to see to a 
 greater extent and with a purer vision than they had 
 ever seen before; instead of condescending to offer a 
 reason for his opinions, he trusts for their reception to the 
 evidence with which his masterly words surround them; 
 and when he has fixed the attention of his reader on 
 some distinction that has been overlooked, or some con- 
 stitutional principle that was neglected, he seems to take 
 it for granted that, when stated in the language which 
 he has employed, and urged with the vigour which he 
 has put forth, there is no mind which must not see their 
 importance, and no heart that must not assent to their 
 value. 
 
 "The power of Junius, however, in stating general 
 truths, is extremely different from that of Burke. The 
 writings of this last author are replete with maxims, in 
 which the substance of volumes is frequently compressed 
 within a very narrow space ; but these maxims have, on 
 
STYLE OF JUNIUS. 109 
 
 this very account, a generality and comprehension which 
 enable them to be applied to many different things; they 
 are expressions of results, which the mind of the author 
 bad derived from a wide survey of all human knowledge 
 and human occupations; and resemble those general 
 laws, according to which the infinite variety of Nature's 
 operations is conducted. Junius has no such compre- 
 hensive range of view, but he darts his eye upon a single 
 point, and light and evidence seem to proceed from his 
 glance; he carries illumination as far as within that space 
 it can be carried; or, if he sometimes gives a false or 
 distorted view of the objects which it embraces, it is 
 always, however, such a view as shews his object in vivid 
 colours, and gives a high idea of the power that hath 
 enlightened it. 
 
 " We apprehend, however, that there is none of all the 
 powers which Junius has displayed, that is so peculiarly 
 and entirely his own as his power of sarcasm. Other 
 authors deal occasionally in this article; but, whenever 
 Junius rises to his highest sphere, he assumes the air of 
 a being who delights to taunt and to mock his adversary ; 
 he refuses to treat him as a person who should be seri- 
 ously dealt with, and pours out his contempt or indig- 
 nation under an imposing affectation of deference and 
 respect. His talent for sarcasm too, is of the finest kind, it 
 is so carefully but so poignantly exerted, that it is neces- 
 sary to watch his words to perceive all the satire which 
 they contain; we have thus an impression that the author 
 is only speaking in his natural style when he is employ- 
 ing a mode of annoyance which it requires the utmost 
 address and skill to manage, but when his irony is per- 
 ceived, it strikes like a poniard, and the wound which it 
 
110 ON THE SPIRIT AND 
 
 makes is such as cannot be closed. There is, indeed, no 
 author with whom we are acquainted who possesses this 
 quality in the same perfection, or who has exerted it 
 with the same effect; and we are of opinion, that as it was 
 this peculiarity which originally gave to his writings their 
 astonishing influence, it still continues to be the quality 
 by which they are most remarkably distinguished from 
 all other compositions." 
 
 The following are the brief sentiments of several 
 eminent men on the same subject. Mr. Coleridge was of 
 opinion, that " The style of Junius is a sort of metre, the 
 law of which is a balance of thesis and antithesis. When 
 he gets out of this aphorismic metre into a sentence of 
 five or six lines long, nothing can exceed the slovenliness of 
 the English. Home Tooke and a long sentence seem 
 the only two antagonists that were too much for him. 
 Still the antithesis of Junius is a real antithesis of images 
 or thought; but the antithesis of Johnson is rarely more 
 than verbal."— TaiZe Talhy vol. ii. 213. 
 
 Mr. Butler says, that on one occasion he remarked 
 to Edmund Burke, " a very strong expression in one of 
 Junius's Letters, and intimated that it might bring him 
 under the fangs of the law. Mr. Burke said, * Junius 
 was an impertinent fellow.' Mr. Burke appeared to use 
 the expression in the tone of one who disapproved of 
 Junius's writings, and did not greatly value them. Mr. 
 Gibbon appeared to me not to admire his style as much 
 as it was admired by the public in general, and he told 
 me that Mr. Fox thought slightingly of it." 
 
 From a letter written by Dugald Stewart respecting 
 Burns, we may collect the sentiments of these two emi- 
 nent men, on the style of Junius. 
 
STYLE OF JUNIUS. Ill 
 
 " In judging of prose, I do not think," says Dugald 
 Stewart, " that Bums' taste was equally sound. I once 
 read to him a passage or two in Franklin's works, which 
 I thought very happily executed upon the model of 
 Addison, but he did not appear to relish or to perceive 
 the beauty which they derived from their exquisite sim- 
 plicity, and spoke of them with indifference when com- 
 pared with the point, and antithesis, and quaintness of 
 Junius." 
 
 Some notion may be formed of the effect produced on 
 the public mind by the Letters of Junius, from a speech 
 delivered by Mr. Burke in the House of Commons, in 
 which he says, '• How comes this Junius to have broke 
 through the cobwebs of the law, and to range uncontrolled, 
 unpunished, through the land ? The myrmidons of the 
 Court have been long, and are still, pursuing him in vain. 
 They will not spend their time upon me, or you, or you. 
 No, they disdain such vermin, when the mighty boar of 
 the forest, that has broke through all their toils, is before 
 them. But, what will all their efforts avail? No sooner 
 has he wounded one than he lays down another dead at 
 his feet. For my own part, when I saw his attack upon 
 the king, I own my blood ran cold. I thought he had 
 ventured too far, and there was an end of his triumphs. 
 Not that he had not asserted many truths. Yes, sir, there 
 are in that composition many bold truths, by which a 
 wise prince might profit. It was the rancour and venomy 
 with which I was struck. In these respects, the North 
 Briton is as much inferior to him, as in strength, wit, and 
 judgment. But while I expected in this daring flight 
 his final ruin and fall, behold him rising still higher, and 
 coming down souse upon both Houses of Parliament. 
 
112 SPIRIT AND STYLE OF JUNIUS. 
 
 Yes, he did make you his quarry, and you still bleed 
 from the wounds of his talons. You crouch, and still 
 crouch, beneath his rage. Nor has he dreaded the terrors 
 of your brow, sir; he has attacked even you — he has — 
 and I believe you have no reason to triumph in the 
 encounter. In short, after carrying away our royal eagle 
 In his pounces, and dashing him against a rock, he has 
 laid you prostrate. King, Lords, and Commons, are 
 but the sport of his fury. Were he a member of this 
 House, what might not be expected from his knowledge, 
 his firmness, and integrity ? He would be easily known 
 by his contempt of all danger, by his penetration, by his 
 vigour. Nothing would escape his vigilance and activity. 
 Bad ministers could conceal nothing from his sagacity, 
 nor could promises, nor threats, induce him to conceal 
 anything from the public." 
 
 The Speaker of the House of Commons, thus apos- 
 trophised by Burke, was Sir Fletcher Norton, afterwards 
 Lord Grantley, whose amiable qualities have been pre- 
 served to future ages (like insects embalmed in amber) in 
 the pages of Junius, who characterises him as the very 
 lawyer described by Ben Jonson in the following lines — 
 
 Gives forked counsel, takes provoking gold 
 On either hand, and puts it up. 
 So wise, so grave, of so perplex'd a tongue, 
 And loud withal, that would not wag, nor scarce 
 Lie still, without a fee. 
 
THE FALSE JUNIUSES. 
 
 " Who and what art thou?" a nation said. 
 
 " For THAT you may consult my title-page," 
 Replied this mighty* shadow of a shade;' 
 
 " If I have kept my secret half an age, 
 
 I scarce shall tell it now." 
 
 Lord Byron. 
 
 But, after all, who or what was Junius? This shadow of a 
 namej who thus shot his unerring arrows from an impenetrable 
 concealment, and punished without being perceived ? The ques- 
 tion is natural ; and it has been repeated almost without inter- 
 mission, from the appearance of his first letter. It is not unnatural, 
 moreover, from the pertinacity with which he has at all times 
 eluded discovery, that the vanity of many political writers of 
 inferior talents should have induced them to lay an indirect 
 claim to his Letters, and especially after the danger of respon- 
 sibility had considerably ceased. Yet, while the Editor does not 
 undertake to communicate the real name of Junius, he pledges 
 himself to prove from incontrovertible evidence, afforded by the 
 private letters of Junius himself, during the period in question, 
 in connexion with other documents, that not one of these pretenders 
 has ever had the smallest right to the distinction which some of 
 them have ardently coveted. 
 
 Dr. Good's Prelim. Essay, p. 9. 
 
CHAPTER V. 
 
 Names of the principal Persons to whom the Letters of Junius 
 have been attributed. — Reason given by the Critics for con- 
 cluding that Junius must have been an Irishman. — Some 
 account of the false Juniuses. — Edmund Burke. — William 
 Gerard Hamilton. — Hugh Macaulay Boyd. — Richard Glover. 
 — General Charles Lee. — The Earl of Chesterfield. — William 
 Greatrakes. — Lachlan Macleane. — Earl of Chatham. — 
 Curious theory of a Reviewer respecting Junius. — Jeu 
 d'espritf entitled Junius with his Vizor up. — Lord Byron's 
 h3rpothesis. — Anxiety of the friends of the different preten- 
 ders to disclaim the malignant spirit shewn by Junius. — 
 The competitors reduced to three individuals; viz. Lord 
 George Sackville, Sir Philip Francis, and Mr. Charles 
 Lloyd. 
 
THE FALSE JUNIUSES. 
 
 I think there be six Richmonds in the field, 
 Five have I slain to day instead of him. 
 
 Shakspeare. 
 
 Having satisfactorily shewn that Junius could not have 
 been an author by profession, a lawyer, or a divine, it 
 becomes unnecessary to notice the pretensions of such of 
 the claimants as belong to any of these professions, — we 
 shall therefore proceed to consider the claims of the other 
 principal candidates. 
 
 It may, however, in the first place, be proper to mention, 
 that the Letters of Junius have at various times been 
 attributed to Lord George Sackville, Edmund Burke, 
 William Gerard Hamilton, the Duke of Portland, Lord 
 Chesterfield, Lord Chatham, Dr. Butler, bishop of 
 Hereford, Dunning, afterwards Lord Ashburton, Charles 
 Lloyd, secretary to Mr. George Grenville, John Roberts, 
 a clerk in the Treasury, the Rev. Philip Rosenhagen, 
 the American General Lee, John Wilkes, Henry Flood, 
 Richard Glover, the author of Leonidas, Hugh Macaulay 
 Boyd, Samuel Dyer, Dr. Wilmot, and lastly Sir Philip 
 Francis, with many others of less note. 
 
 On perusing the above list, it will be observed, that 
 several of the aspirants are natives of the Emerald Isle, 
 and the pertinacity with which their claims in particular 
 
 i2 
 
116 THE FALSE JUNIUSES. 
 
 have beeifadvocated, is rather remarkable. This appears 
 somewhat singular when we find Junius has expressly, 
 and repeatedly declared that he was an Englishman. 
 Without some consideration, one might be inclined to 
 suspect, that such ardent aspirations after laurels so 
 hopeless, could only proceed from a certain confusion of 
 ideas, which has been considered peculiar to the natives 
 of that country. The apparent anomaly may, however, 
 be thus accounted for : a vague, but very general suspi- 
 cion has been rife from the first appearance of the Letters, 
 that their author would ultimately prove to be a native 
 of Ireland, — this suspicion is founded on the minute, and 
 extensive knowledge displayed by Junius, of Irish fami- 
 lies and affairs, combined with certain peculiarities in the 
 diction, and phraseology of the Letters themselves, which 
 seem to indicate that the author was an Irishman, or at 
 least, had been educated in the University of Dublin. 
 For instance, in one of his letters in reply to Mr. Home, 
 Junius uses the word collegian for an academic or 
 gownsman, which is the term used in the University of 
 Dublin, but not at either Oxford or Cambridge; and 
 from this it has been inferred, that he could not have 
 been a member of either of the English universities. 
 
 On this point Dr. Good remarks (Preliminary Essay, 
 p. 88) : " Of those who have critically analysed the style 
 of Junius's compositions, some have pretended to prove 
 that he must necessarily have been of Irish descent, or 
 Irish education, from the peculiarity of his idioms: while 
 to shew how little dependence is to be placed upon any 
 such observations, others have equally pretended to prove, 
 from a similar investigation, that he could not have been 
 a native either of Scotland or Ireland, nor have studied 
 
THE FALSE JUNIUSES. 117 
 
 in any university of either of these countries. The fact 
 is, that there are a few phraseologies in his Letters peculiar 
 to himself^ such as occur in the compositions of all original 
 writers of great force and genius, but which are neither 
 indicative of any particular race, nor referable to any 
 provincial dialect." 
 
 Mr. Barker, on the contrary, says (p. 06), "Junius 
 was so universally suspected to be an Irishman, or of Irish 
 descent, that any attempt to prove it from his writings 
 would be unnecessary for our present purpose." 
 
 A writer, who signs himself Oxoniensis, mentions some 
 of Junius's Hihernicisms. We shall quote one paragraph 
 from his letter, chiefly for the sake of the proof it brings 
 that Junius, whoever he might be, was a member of the 
 University of Dublin: — "Edmund Burke received his 
 education amongst the Irish Jesuits at St. Omer's, and 
 finished his studies in Ireland. If any one will take the 
 trouble of reading over the Letters of Junius, he will 
 find that Edmund, notwithstanding all his care and 
 pains, sometimes falls into Hihernicisms. In one place, 
 he says, ' make common cause.' This is not English, 
 though to be sure the phrase is common enough in 
 Dublin. In Junius's letter of the 13th of August, he 
 talks ofUhe sophistries of a collegian.* This expression is 
 not English 5 and the word collegian is never used in this 
 sense, except in the College of Dublin and (perhaps) of 
 St. Omer's. We say, indeed^ fellow-collegian ; but at the 
 great schools here, those of the college are called collegers; 
 and at our two universities, the members of a college are 
 called gownsmen; at Dublin they are called collegians.'^ 
 Though Oxoniensis was wrong in hi& suspicion of Mr. 
 Burke, his arguments to prove that Junius was, in his 
 sense of the word, a collegian^ are worthy of attention. 
 
118 THE FALSE JUNIUSES. 
 
 " The use of the term collegiauy for academic or gowns- 
 man," further observes Mr. Barker (p. 53), '^ places the 
 fact of Irish birth, or Irish education beyond a doubt. 
 I consider the argument to be most unsuspicious, and I 
 therefore expect the decided assent of the reader to its 
 truth. The use of a term peculiar to the University of 
 Dublin is not to be explained away as a ' phraseology 
 in his letters peculiar to Junius himself ^ because it is not 
 peculiar to himself, but common to all who have been 
 educated in the Irish university. It is not 'referable to 
 any provincial dialect' of England it is true, but it is 
 * referable to the' national * dialect of Ireland, which is 
 a province of the United Kingdom; and it is 'indicative 
 of a particular race' of men, viz. the children of St. 
 Patrick. This is not to be classed among ' phraseologies 
 such as occur in the compositions of all original writers 
 of great force and genius;' for it is either properly used 
 by Junius, if an Irishman, or educated at the University 
 of Dublin (and it then ceases to be 'a peculiar phrase- 
 ology' of Junius), or else, improperly used by Junius if 
 he was not an Irishman, or not educated in Trinity 
 College Dublin ; and so glaring and ridiculous a blunder 
 cannot be assigned to the pen of an English 'original 
 writer of great force and genius.* 'Phraseologies which 
 occur in such compositions' are to be distinguished from 
 blunders and improprieties: they are novel, but not 
 incorrect modes of expression; indicating in their mean- 
 ing the peculiar feelings, sentiments, thoughts, circum- 
 stances, or situation of the writer, and displaying in their 
 structure a striking peculiarity of language, formed for 
 the very purpose of either communicating new ideas in 
 new terms, or clothing old notions in new terms, because 
 
THE FALSE JUNIUSES. 119 
 
 those new terms please the writer in his love of variety, 
 or more clearly define what he wishes to convey to the 
 mind of the reader." 
 
 Mr. Roche also remarks, "That Junius, writing to 
 Lord North of Colonel Luttrell, says: — *I protest, my 
 Lord, there is in this young man's conduct a strain of 
 prostitution, which for its singularity I cannot but admire. 
 He has discovered a new line in the human character — 
 he has degraded even the name of Luttrell, and gratified his 
 father's most sanguine expectations.' In the w^ords, * he 
 has degraded even the name of Luttrell,' there is an 
 allusion which no Englishman understands, and a severity 
 therefore which he cannot perceive. The name of Luttrell 
 in several parts of Ireland is synonymous with the words 
 traitor or betrayer, owing to a tradition which prevails 
 there among the people, that it was on account of the 
 treachery of an officer of the name of Luttrell, and of the 
 same family, that King James lost the battle of the 
 Boyne. Without such an explanation as this, the words 
 of Junius are unintelligible; and as it was not possible 
 for him to become acquainted with this traditional fact, 
 or with the proverbial use of the word Luttrell — in some 
 parts of Ireland to signify a traitor — from any written or 
 printed publication, it is clear that he must have been an 
 Irishman." "I think," says Mr. Barker, **that Mr. 
 Roche is, for the reason assigned, right in his conclusion ; 
 and I have already assigned other reasons for the same 
 opinion." 
 
 Among the "false Juniuses," one of the most illustrious 
 names is unquestionably that of Edmund Burke, on whom 
 (with only one exception) the earliest suspicion rested, 
 but it is difficult to say for what reason, except his being 
 
120 THE FALSE JUNIUSES. 
 
 an Irishman, and the general eminence of his literary 
 and political character; and Mr. Butler urges the follow- 
 ing reasons against his claim : — " Those who knew the 
 very lofty notions which Mr. Burke entertained of him- 
 self, and his own ministerial powers and qualifications, 
 must think it impossible that he should have written the 
 line, 'I accept a simile from Burke — a sarcasm from 
 Barre.' Those, too, who knew the labour which any 
 literary exertions cost Mr. Burke, his endless blots, 
 emendations, and transcriptions, and ultimately his pri- 
 vate impressions, still blotted, and still amended, must be 
 sensible how irreconcileable all this is with the fecundity 
 and rapidity of Junius. Add to this, that on several 
 most important points Burke and Junius were in direct 
 opposition to each other. Burke was a partizan of Lord 
 Rockingham, Junius of George Grenville. On the 
 Stamp Act, on Triennial Parliaments, they were com- 
 pletely at variance. Junius attached much importance 
 to city politics ; in these Burke never appeared." — 
 Butler s Reminis. i. 90. 
 
 To these strong arguments is to be added the fact, that 
 in 1784 Burke instituted a prosecution against Woodfall, 
 the printer of Junius's Letters, for a libellous article which 
 had appeared against him in the Public Advertiser, and 
 pursued it to a verdict with the utmost acrimony. 
 
 It is also to be observed, that the believers in the claim 
 put forth for Burke had not even the ignis fatuus of a 
 supposed similarity of style between his writings, and the 
 compositions of Junius, to light them to their conclusion. 
 On this point we shall present the reader with no mean 
 authority — that of the late Rev. Robert Hall, with whom 
 Professor Gregory had the following conversation on the 
 
/ 
 
 THE FALSE JUNIUSES. 121 
 
 subject: "Junius's Letters," says Mr. Gregory, "were 
 mentioned. After much speculation as to the author 
 from various persons, some one cited Dr. Johnson's 
 remark, that none except Edmund Burke could have 
 written them. Mr. Hall remarked: 'Burke certainly 
 could not have written them. The style of the two 
 authors is too opposite for any one to believe them iden- 
 tical. The talent of Junius shews itself in condensation 
 and brevity; Burke's forte is amplification. Junius is 
 cool and deliberate; Burke was impassioned and ener- 
 getic. Junius is remarkable for his caustic satire; Burke 
 for rampant and vehement abuse. The diction of Burke 
 is modern and latinized, while the writings of Junius 
 afford a singular illustration of the excellence and force 
 of the original English language. The man who could 
 write as Burke did, could not so disguise his style as to 
 bring it to any continued similarity to that of Junius. 
 The character of the men, too, was essentially different. 
 There is no generosity in Junius. His caustic satire 
 was in character like that of Home Tooke, whose very 
 calmness was irresistible, yet no thinking man identifies 
 Junius with Tooke.' " — Dr. Gregory s Life of Robert Hall, 
 p. 237. 
 
 '^ But there is an argument," says Mr. Barker, (p. 132) 
 '' against Burke's claim which has never yet been brought 
 forward I believe, and which is of so decisive a character 
 that I would hang by this solitary rock, and bid defiance 
 to every assailant. There was in the mind of Mr. Burke 
 a radical principle of philanthropy, a pervading prin- 
 ciple of benevolence; it was conspicuous alike in his 
 actions and in his speeches; his heart was full of generous 
 affections, he breathed peace on earth and good-will 
 
122 THE FALSE JUNIUSES. 
 
 towards man. I do not deny, that in indulging this god- 
 like propensity of his nature he was sometimes hurried 
 into intemperate language, and borne away by the tide 
 of passion; this merely demonstrated the infirmity of 
 human virtue, but it proved the sincerity and the zeal 
 with which he contended for the rights of outraged nations, 
 and pleaded the cause of suffering man. Nature soon 
 recovered her possession, and reason soon resumed her 
 seat, and goodness soon regained her throne. The 
 uncharitable feeling existed but for the moment — a light- 
 ning too transient to disturb the general serenity of his 
 breast; the bolt might terrify, but did not strike its 
 object; the flame burnt around, but did not consume its 
 victim; it was displayed and was gone; it sparkled and 
 was exhaled. As an accuser, his power was truly terrific, 
 he has exhausted the whole compass of the English 
 language in the fierceness of his invective, and the bitter- 
 ness of his censure; for even Junius, with all the advan- 
 tages of indiscriminate personality, private scandal, and 
 the mask under which he fought, has not exceeded him 
 in severity, while he falls infinitely short of him in reach 
 of thought, command of language, energy of expression, 
 and variety of reproach. Junius is more pungent in his 
 assaults; Mr. Burke more powerful. Junius imparts the 
 idea of keenness; Mr. Burke of force. Junius of pos- 
 sessing powers to a certain degree circumscribed; Mr. 
 Burke of a magnitude nearly boundless. Junius hews 
 down his victim with a double-edged sabre; Mr. Burke 
 fells him with a sledge hammer, and repeats his blows 
 so often, and in so many different modes, that few can 
 again recognize the carcass he has once taken in hand to 
 mangle." 
 
THE FALSE JUNIUSES. 123 
 
 It is, however, now known with certainty that the 
 suspicions with regard to Burke were unfounded, for 
 upon his being questioned by Sir William Draper, he 
 positively denied the imputated authorship; and it appears 
 that he made a similar confession to his friend Dr. 
 Johnson; for Boswell informs us, that talking with 
 Johnson of the wonderful concealment of the author of 
 the celebrated Letters signed Junius, the Doctor said, 
 " I should have believed Burke to be Junius, because I 
 know no man but Burke who is capable of writing these 
 Letters; but Burke spontaneously denied it to me. The 
 case would have been different had I asked him if he 
 was the author; a man so questioned as to an anonymous 
 publication may think he has a right to deny it." On 
 this subject, Boswell on another occasion says, '' We 
 talked of the casuistical question, whether it was allowable 
 at any time to depart from truth ? Johnson : The general 
 rule is, that truth should never be violated, because it is 
 of the utmost importance to the conduct of life that we 
 should have a full security by mutual faith, and occa- 
 sional inconvenience should be willingly suffered, that 
 we may preserve it. There must, however, be some 
 exceptions. Boswell : Supposing the person who wrote 
 Junius were asked whether he was the author, might he 
 deny it? Johnson: I don't know what to say to this. 
 If you were sure that he wrote Junius, would you, if he 
 denied it, think as well of him afterwards ? Yet it may 
 be urged that what a man has no right to ask, you may 
 refuse to communicate; and there is no other effectual 
 mode of preserving a secret, and an important secret, 
 the discovery of which may be very hurtful to you, but 
 3. flat denial; for if you are silent, or hesitate, or evade, it 
 
124 THE FALSE JUNIUSES. 
 
 "will be held equivalent to a confession. But stay, Sir, 
 here is another case. Supposing the author had told 
 me confidentially that he had written Junius, and I were 
 asked if he had, I should hold myself at liberty to deny 
 it, as being under a previous promise, express or implied, 
 to conceal it. Now, what I ought to do for the author, 
 may I not do for myself.'' — BoswelVs Johnson, iv. 296. 
 
 The next claimant in point of literary and political 
 reputation is William Gerard Hamilton, who was 
 also a distinguished member of parliament for many 
 years, and wrote a book, which was published after his 
 decease, called "Parliamentary Logic," the design of 
 which seems to have been to teach unfledged senators 
 the most approved tactics of the House of Commons, 
 and how any independent member of the legislature 
 might conscientiously speak, or vote, on either side of 
 every question brought before the House. 
 
 The principal reason for the Letters having been attri- 
 buted to Hamilton was, that on a certain morning he 
 told the Duke of Richmond the substance of a letter of 
 Junius, which he pretended to have just read in the 
 Public Advertiser, but which, on consulting the paper 
 was not found there, an apology for its postponement till 
 the next day being inserted in its stead, when the letter 
 thus previously adverted to by Hamilton, actually made 
 its appearance. That Hamilton, therefore, had a previous 
 knowledge of the existence and purport of this letter is 
 unquestionable; but these facts may be accounted for, by 
 supposing him to have had it read to him by his friend 
 Mr. Woodfall, antecedently to its being printed. 
 
 Another ground of suspicion seems to have been 
 founded on the fallacious test of a supposed similarity of 
 
THE FALSE JUNIUSES. 1*25 
 
 style between his acknowledged writings, and those of 
 Junius. Hamilton accompanied Lord Halifax as chief 
 secretary, when his lordship was Lord Lieutenant of Ire- 
 land, while Mr. Richard Cumberland held the secondary 
 post of Ulster secretary; and the two secretaries were 
 called in to consider, and settle the draft of the Lord 
 Lieutenant's first speech to the Irish parliament, which 
 his lordship had himself prepared. The scribes, as might 
 be expected, disagreed about this delicate operation, and 
 his lordship with two secretaries at his command, was 
 under the necessity of taking that office upon himself, 
 and obliged not only to compose, but to polish and 
 settle, his own speech. The scene is thus described 
 by Cumberland : — " When I was called in jointly with 
 Secretary Hamilton to take the project and rough copy 
 of this speech into consideration, I could not help remark- 
 ing the extraordinary efforts which that gentleman made 
 to engraft his own very peculiar style upon the sketch 
 before him; in this I sometimes agreed with him, but 
 more commonly opposed him, till Lord Halifax, whose 
 patience began to be exhausted, no longer submitted his 
 copy to be dissected, but took it to himself with such 
 alterations as he saw fit to adopt, and those but few. I 
 must candidly acknowledge that at times, when I have 
 heard people searching for internal evidence in the style 
 of Junius, as to the author of those famous Letters, I 
 have called to recollection this circumstance which I 
 have now related, and occasionally said, that the style of 
 Junius bore a strong resemblance to what I had observed 
 of the style of Secretary Hamilton ; beyond this I never 
 had the least grounds for conjecture, nor any clue to lead 
 me to the discovery of that anonymous writer beyond 
 what I have alluded to." — Cumberland's Memoirs, i. 17. 
 
126 THE FALSE JUNIUSES. 
 
 Mr. Hamilton obtained the cognomen of Single Speech 
 Hamilton, from the circumstance of his having delivered 
 one brilliant speech in the English parliament, and ever 
 afterwards remaining silent: but most uncertain is the 
 breath of fame, and hard is the lot of orators and literary- 
 adventurers, for if they display a fertile and prolific 
 genius, the good-natured world declares it absurd to 
 expect distinguished excellence where quantity is so 
 abundant ; and should they belong to the same class as 
 Hamilton, who concentrate all their energies, and exhaust 
 half a life in bringing to perfection one chef d'ouvre, and 
 then rest from their labours, the public, after a while, is 
 generally seized with an unaccountable fit of scepticism. 
 It was said that " Garth did not write his own Dispen- 
 sary," and so it fared with Single Speech Hamilton — 
 his whole glory rested on a single speech, which the 
 incredulous world would not believe to be his own, but 
 like the insidious Imp in Hogarth's print of Paul before 
 Felix, endeavoured to cut away the only prop that upheld 
 his fame: this gave rise to the following scene, which is 
 related by Major Head in his Life of Bruce the traveller. 
 
 " Single Speech Hamilton was first cousin to Bruce, 
 and one evening, at Kinnard, he said: 'Bruce! to con- 
 vince the world of your power of drawing, you need 
 only draw us now something in as good a style as those 
 drawings of yours, which they say have been done for 
 you by Bulugani, your Italian artist.' 'Gerard!' re- 
 plied Bruce very gravely, 'you made one fine speech, 
 and the world doubted its being your own composition, 
 but if you will stand up now here, and make another 
 speech as good, we will believe it to be your own.' " 
 
 The air of Dublin, however, seems to have been more 
 
THE FALSE JUNIUSEg. 127 
 
 favourable to Hamilton's powers, than that of West- 
 minster, for it is reported, that he made not less than 
 five speeches in the Irish Parliament in the single session 
 of 1761-2 ; but all his speeches were not only prepared, 
 but studied with a minuteness and exactitude, of which 
 those who are accustomed only to the carelessness of 
 modern debating can scarcely form an idea. Lord 
 Charlemont, who had been long and intimately acquainted 
 with him, used to mention, that he was the only speaker 
 of whom he could say with certainty, that all his speeches, 
 however long, were written and got by heart. A gentle- 
 man well known to his Lordship and Hamilton, assured 
 him that he heard Hamilton repeat no less than three 
 times an oration which he afterwards spoke in the House 
 of Commons, and which lasted almost three hours. As 
 a debater, therefore, he became as useless to his political 
 patrons as Addison was to Lord Sunderland, and if pos- 
 sible he was more scrupulous in composition than even 
 that eminent man. Addison would stop the press to 
 correct the most trifling error in a large publication, and 
 Hamilton would recal the footman, if on recollection any 
 word was in his opinion misplaced or improper, in the 
 slightest note to a familiar acquaintance. Yet this 
 weigher of words and balancer of sentences was most 
 easy and agreeable in conversation. He passed his time 
 (except with unnecessary anxiety as to his literary fame) 
 unembarrassed and cheerful among a few select friends. 
 Dr. Johnson highly valued him, and was never slow or 
 reluctant to acknowledge his superior talents, and the 
 generosity of his disposition. Lord Charlemont was the 
 person who first introduced Edmund Burke to Hamilton, 
 which led to Burke's subsequent fortune. 
 
128 THE FALSE JUNIUSES. 
 
 Mr. Malone states that when a friend of Hamilton's, 
 for the purpose of drawing him out, affected to think him 
 the author of Junius's Letters, and bantering him on the 
 subject, taxed him with the passage in which the Duke 
 of Grafton is said to have " travelled through every sign 
 in the political zodiac, from the scorpion in which he stung 
 Lord Chatham, to the hopes of a virgin of the house of 
 Bedford, etc." Hamilton, with great vehemence, ex- 
 claimed, " Had I written such a sentence as that, I should 
 have thought I had forfeited all pretensions to good taste 
 in composition for ever." And in a conversation on the 
 same subject, he once said to an intimate friend in a tone 
 between seriousness and pleasantry, " You know I could 
 have written better papers than those of Junius." Mr. 
 Malone also argues that Hamilton could not be the author, 
 as " he had none of that minute and commissariat knowledge 
 of petty military matters which is displayed in some of the 
 letters. Near the time of his death, Hamilton is said to 
 have made a solemn declaration that he was not Junius. 
 
 Another pretender, whose claim at one time was urged 
 with great confidence, and made much noise in the 
 literary circles, was Hugh Macaulay Boyd; and up- 
 wards of twenty pages of Dr. Good's " Preliminary 
 Essay," are devoted to the demolition of his pretensions; 
 but, as we think this has been most effectually accom- 
 plished, it appears unnecessary to say more about him, 
 especially as Mr. Butler also declares that, "As to 
 Macaulay Boyd's being the author of Junius's Letters, 
 it is a perfect jokcj no two characters can be more per- 
 fectly unlike than Boyd and Junius. Boyd was a 
 good-natured lively man, famous for repeating Lord 
 Chatham and Burke's speeches, and always bustling 
 
THE FALSE JUNIUSES. 129 
 
 about something or another, I remember very well, the 
 infinite pains he took to persuade the world that the 
 Perreaus were innocent. He must have been very young 
 when Junius's Letters were written; all who knew him, 
 must think the notion of his being the author of Junius's 
 Letters too absurd for discussion." — Reminis. i. 84. 
 
 "To support the pretensions of Richard Glover," 
 Mr. Butler remarks, " no evidence is adduced, except 
 that something of the high Whig principles of Junius is 
 discoverable in the volume which has been published of 
 * Glover's Memoirs,' and that Glover is known to have 
 lived in an elevated line of society, in which these 
 principles were professed. This evidence amounts to 
 little, and the style of his Memoirs is very unlike that 
 of Junius." 
 
 The American General Charles Lee has also found 
 advocates to urge his claim to the authorship of the 
 Letters, founded on a statement made by a Mr. Rodney 
 in an American periodical work, called ' The Wilming- 
 ton Mirror.' According to this account, General Lee 
 communicated in confidence to a friend, the important 
 secret of his being the author of the Letters, and Dr. 
 Girdlestone of Yarmouth, Norfolk, has endeavoured to 
 establish the General's pretensions, by a comparison of 
 Rodney's statement with Mr. Longworthy's Memoirs of 
 the General's life, in a pamphlet published anonymously, 
 under the title of ' Reasons for rejecting the presumptive 
 evidence of Mr. Almon, that Hugh Boyd was the writer 
 of Junius, with passages selected to prove the real author 
 of the Letters of Junius.' 
 
 " General Lee," observes Mr. Barker, (p. 43), " had 
 the requisite ardour of mind and the leisure, but wanted 
 
 K 
 
130 THB FALSE JUNIUSES. 
 
 the spirit of industry, admitted to have been indispens- 
 ably necessary for Junius." Dr. Good, in his * Preli- 
 minary Essay/ seems most satisfactorily to have proved, 
 that General Lee was rambling over the North of Europe 
 during the period that the Letters of Junius were written, 
 and, consequently, could not possibly have been their 
 author. He also shews that the line of politics professed 
 by the two characters was very different. 
 
 The polite Earl of Chesterfield has likewise been 
 pointed out as the author of the Letters; but on no other 
 authority, that we can discover, than the internal evidence 
 afforded by the following elegant compliment passed by 
 the gallant Junius on the fair sex, in his letter to Lord 
 Mansfield : — " Women, and men like women, are timid, 
 vindictive, and irresolute. Their passions counteract 
 each other, and make the same creature at one moment 
 hateful, at another contemptible." 
 
 The Gentleman's Magazine for December 1813, con- 
 tains the following letter, starting a new and before un- 
 known candidate : — " Mr. Urban, have the seekers after 
 Junius ever heard of Mr. William Greatrakes, born 
 in the barony of Imokilly, in the county of Cork, in 
 Ireland, about the year 1725 ? One who was his friend, 
 and who states his conviction, in common with others who 
 knew him well, that this Greatrakes was the author of 
 the Letters of Junius, has permitted me to note down the 
 following particulars relating to him : — Mr. Greatrakes 
 was bred to the law, and called at the usual period to the 
 Irish bar. After practising a few years, he quitted that 
 profession; and afler becoming an officer, signalized him- 
 self again as a barrister, by undertaking the defence of a 
 friendless soldier upon a trial for a capital offence. This 
 
THE FALSE JUNIUSES. 131 
 
 circumstance led to an acquaintance with the judge, that 
 to an introduction to the then lord lieutenant, and soon 
 finally to an intimacy with Lord Shelbourne, in whose 
 house he was an inmate during the publication of the 
 Letters of Junius. He then became an half-pay officer, 
 and about 1779 retired to a small property of his own in 
 the neighbourhood of Youghall. Here he was engaged 
 in continual writing, and much correspondence with his 
 friend Lord Shelbourne. He died at some place in 
 Wiltshire, on his way to London. During his illness, 
 he sent for his executor, a Captain Stopford, who had 
 been in the 63rd regiinent of foot, and deposited many 
 papers in his hands. Enclosed you have his autograph, 
 cut from a book in his possession. It certainly appears 
 to bear a strong resemblance to most of the specimens in 
 Woodfall's new edition ; and if the preceding narration 
 turns out to be in substance materially correct, it may 
 induce those who believe that Junius employed an amanu- 
 ensis to confer that honour on William Greatrakes, Esq. 
 By the description of his figure, I am sorry to find that 
 he would not answer for the tall gentleman with the bag- 
 wig and white coat, who, by the account of Mr. Jackson, 
 managed the conveyancing branch of the department — 
 * one of the pack.' " 
 
 In a note to this letter,^ the editor of the Gentleman's 
 Magazine informs us, that he has been assured Mr. 
 Greatrakes died at the Bear Inn, Hungerford, and that 
 a flat stone in the churchyard is thus inscribed : — 
 
 " Here are deposited the remains of William Greatrakes, Esq. 
 
 a Native of Ireland, who, on his way from Bristol, 
 
 died in this town, in the 52nd year of his age, 
 
 on the 2nd day of August 17^1. 
 
 Stat Nominis Umbra." 
 
 k2 
 
132 THE FALSE JUNIUSES. 
 
 The same number of the Magazine has in its second 
 plate an engraving of the autograph, to which the prece- 
 ding letter refers, and a specimen of the handwriting of the 
 real Junius from Mr. Woodfall's edition ; but Mr. Butler 
 could not discover much resemblance between them. — 
 The same Magazine, for July 1813, contains a letter 
 detailing a conversation which Sir Richard Phillips had 
 with Lord Shelbourne, then Lord Lansdowne, on the 
 subject of Junius. He represents his Lordship as scout- 
 ing the notion that Boyd was the author of the Letters, 
 and makes his Lordship say — ** I knew Junius, and I 
 know all about the writing and production of those letters. 
 If I live over the summer, which however I do not 
 expect, I promise you a very interesting pamphlet about 
 Junius : I will set the question at rest for ever." — The 
 perusal of these letters induced Mr. Butler to make 
 some inquiries respecting the gentleman to whom the 
 first letter relates ; and he ascertained that a gentleman 
 of the name, family, and occupation, mentioned in that 
 letter, did exist; that he died on a journey from Bristol 
 to London ; that he was known both to the late Lord 
 Chatham and Mr. Charles Fox; that his name was 
 mentioned among those who were first surmised to be 
 authors of the Letters of Junius ; that his family ascribed 
 those Letters to him ; and that ^ne of his surviving nieces 
 on being shewn the fac-simile of Junius's handwriting, 
 expressed herself by letter in these words — " As to the 
 fac-simile, the hand struck me at once as being my 
 uncle's; but that is more studied, as my uncle's was 
 more sloping, which I suppose is owing to this being 
 stamped" (engraven). 
 
 Although Ireland has made many strenuous efforts to 
 
THE FALSE JUNIUSES. 133 
 
 appropriate Junius to herself, no such attempt was made 
 by Scotland until very recently. This will excite little 
 surprise, when it is considered, that Junius was clearly 
 entitled to the compliment which Dr. Johnson intended 
 to pay his friend Bathurst when he called him "a good 
 hater;" and if Junius hated one person more than an- 
 other, or had any special and innate antipathy to any 
 individual, it certainly was — a Scotsman; for, in alluding 
 to Mr. Wedderburn, he says — " I speak tenderly of this 
 gentleman, for when treachery is in question, I think we 
 should make allowances for a Scotchman." 
 
 The crimes of disowning his country and calumniating 
 the most illustrious of his countrymen are (to his honour 
 he it spoken) unknown to a North Briton ; on the con- 
 trary, gentlemen of that nation are generally supposed 
 to be always ready to make up any little differences 
 among themselves, whenever the honour of their country 
 is at stake, and to act on the principle of the unsophis- 
 ticated Highlander, who, upon hearing a person declare 
 that he would stand by his friend when he was in the 
 right, expressed his indignation at the lukewarm senti- 
 ment, and declared his resolution to stand by a friend at 
 all times, right or wrong. With such patriotic feelings 
 it would be preposterous to suppose that Junius could 
 possibly have been a Scotsman; and yet the following 
 paragraphs appeared, during the year 1837, in the In- 
 verness Courier: — '^A gentleman has obligingly pointed 
 out to us a passage in Gait's Life of Mr. West, the 
 distinguished painter, which supplies another link in 
 the chain of evidence connecting Junius*s Letters with 
 Lachlan Macleane : it will materially^assist the inquiry 
 now in progress by Sir David Brewster, who was led 
 
134 THE FALSE JUNIUSE,S. 
 
 to adopt the opinion of Macleane being Junius, from a 
 series of private letters written by that gentleman, which 
 fell under his notice as formerly described by us, and 
 when Sir David was unconscious of Macleane having ever 
 been suspected to be Junius — the passage is as follows : — 
 '•An incident of a curious nature has brought him 
 (Mr. West) to be a party in some degree to the singular 
 question respecting the mysterious author of the cele- 
 brated Letters of Junius. On the morning that the first 
 of these famous invectives appeared, his friend Governor 
 Hamilton happened to call, and inquiring the news, Mr. 
 West informed him of that bold and daring epistle; 
 ringing for his servant at the same time, he desired the 
 newspaper to be brought in. Hamilton read it over with 
 great attention ; and when he had done, laid it on his 
 knees in a manner that particularly attracted the notice 
 of the painter, who was standing at his easel: — *This 
 letter,' said Hamilton in a tone of vehement feeling, 'is 
 by that d — d scoundrel Macleane.' 'What Macleane?' 
 inquired Mr. West: — 'The surgeon of Otway's regi- 
 ment — the fellow who attacked me so virulently in the 
 Philadelphia newspaper, on account of the part I felt it 
 my duty to take against one of the officers ; this letter is 
 by him ; I know these very words ; I may well remember 
 them:' and he read over several phrases and sentences 
 which Macleane had employed against him. Mr. West 
 then informed the Governor, that Macleane was in this 
 country, and that he was personally acquainted with him. 
 'He came over,' said Mr. West, 'with Colonel Barry, 
 by whom he was introduced to Lord Shelbourne (after- 
 wards Marquis of Lansdowne), and is at present private 
 secretary to his Lordship.' " 
 
THE FALSE JUNIUSES. 135 
 
 Mr. Gait adds, "Macleane," owing to an impediment 
 in his utterance, " never made any figure in conversation, 
 and passed with most people as a person of no particular 
 attainments. But when Lord Shelbourne came into 
 office, he was appointed Under Secretary of State, and 
 subsequently nominated to a Governorship in India — 
 a rapidity of promotion to a man without family or 
 parliamentary interest, that can only be explained by a 
 profound conviction on the part of his patron of his 
 superior talents, and perhaps also from a strong sense of 
 some peculiar obligation.'* 
 
 In a subsequent number of the same paper, there also 
 appeared the following paragraph: — 
 
 "Sir D. Brewster proceeds in his inquiry; and how- 
 ever odd it may seem to have an announcement of the 
 Letters of Junius by Lachlan Macleane, we have no 
 doubt that such a juxtaposition will appear on the title 
 page of future editions of this admirable English classic. 
 We have received a long and interesting letter from 
 Sir D., relating the progress of his investigation, and the 
 discovery of some new facts. Two articles have appeared 
 in the Chester Gazette, in consequence of our former 
 statement respecting Junius. In these, we are informed 
 that Macleane was a short time in parliament, and 
 accepted the Chiltern Hundreds in 1771. The writer 
 says, it is an indispensable condition that Macleane must 
 have served under Lord Townshend, as in a letter pub- 
 lished by Junius, and inserted in WoodfalFs edition, 
 he says, of that nobleman and his brother, the Honour- 
 able Charles Townshend — * I am not a stranger to this 
 par nobile fratrum — I have served under the one, and 
 have been forty times promised to be served by the other.' 
 
136 THE FALSE JUMUSES. 
 
 Now, the fact is, that Macleane served at Quebec under 
 Lord Townshend, and was in the very situation to 
 receive promises from Charles Townshend, as Chancellor 
 of the Exchequer in 1767. There is no candidate for 
 Junius to whom this last is applicable, but to Macleane; 
 and it is an important step in the discovery. Sir D. 
 Brewster has a curious letter from a lady (written in her 
 96th year) of the family of the Macleanes of Coll; and 
 she states, that while Junius's Letters were in the course 
 of publication, Secretary Macleane (the name he went by) 
 was believed by his friends to be the author of them. 
 Sir David has also had a communication with Sir D. 
 Octerlony, who was Commander-in-Chief in India, and 
 who got his Ensigncy by the interest of Macleane. 
 Mr. Gait, the novelist, promises also to contribute some 
 additional evidence in support of the inquiry. Thus 
 new proofs are gradually accumulating, — new light is 
 pouring in from various sources, — and little appears to 
 be wanting to complete the chain which will unite in- 
 separably the names of Junius and Lachlan Macleane.*' 
 Here we beg leave to remark, that the ingenious writer 
 in the Inverness Courier seems to have mistaken the mean- 
 ing of the passage cited from Junius, about the par nohile 
 fratrum. Junius is here evidently writing in his usual 
 antithetical style, and contrasting the opposite relative 
 situations in which he had stood towards the two brothers : 
 " I have served under the one (that is, as a soldier), and 
 have been forty times promised to be served by the other" — 
 meaning, that the other brother had promised to serve 
 under Junius in some subordinate and inferior ministerial 
 or political office j — and not that Junius had ever ex- 
 pected to receive any favour from Charles Townshend. — 
 
THE FALSE JUNIUSES. 137 
 
 Taken in the latter sense, the sentence is not wholly 
 devoid of that point which is one of the chief charac- 
 teristics of Junius's style — but in any other sense it is quite 
 derogatory to the lofty and dignified character, which he 
 uniformly, and most naturally, sustains throughout his 
 Letters. 
 
 It is much to be regretted that Sir D. Brewster and 
 Mr. Gait should have wasted their valuable time in so 
 hopeless an investigation ; for we verily believe, that Scot- 
 land never produced such a parricidal monster as Junius 
 must have been, if he were a native of that country. 
 
 One of the most recent publications respecting Junius 
 that has fallen under the notice of the reviewer, is a 
 pamphlet which appeared in the latter end of the year 
 1837, entitled, "Who was Junius?" in which the writer, 
 by "notes and observations upon the Letters of Junius," 
 endeavours to shew that they were written by Lord 
 Chatham. After pointing out several instances of agree- 
 ment in the political sentiments of Junius and his Lord- 
 ship, and drawing an inference in favour of his hypothesis 
 from the way in which Junius treats Sir William Draper, 
 whose friend and patron Lord Chatham was, and shewing 
 that Home almost directly charges Chatham with being 
 Junius, the author states — "Though in his zeal to serve 
 his country. Lord Chatham, if he be Junius, might feel 
 justified in writing these Letters, it was necessary to veil 
 his name in impenetrable secresy, when we recollect that 
 he owed all his honours, his title, and the splendour of 
 his family to that king whom he felt obliged to address 
 in such painful language. And though the king ex- 
 claimed with Caesar *et tu Brute!' we can but venerate the 
 patriot Junius." — George III. his Court and Family j i. 415. 
 
138 THE FALSE JUNIUS ES. 
 
 "Dr. Adding'ton asserted, 'that Lord Bute and Lord 
 Chatham were the two men the King hated most;' — 
 this hatred, if Junius be Lord Chatham, may account 
 for the disloyal and rancorous hostility shewn in these 
 Letters towards his majesty George III." 
 
 "Though it seems ungenerous to bring down that 
 obloquy upon the immortal Chatham, which must attach 
 to him when he is thought to be the author of this Letter 
 to his sovereign, in the sunshine of whose favours he 
 was then reposing ; yet might not such a letter have been 
 extorted from him through the zeal and sincerity of his 
 patriotism, seeing England so governed? Soon after 
 this Letter to the King, the Duke of Grafton, Lord 
 Chatham's political enemy, resigned." At p. 18, it is 
 observed — "It is worthy of remark how few references 
 are made in the index to the name of Lord Chatham — 
 there being only four. After the reference to him (Letter 
 LIII.) Lord Chatham is mentioned nearly twenty times, 
 but only once referred to in the index, viz. (Letter LIV.) 
 Thus, if Junius be Lord Chatham, such an omission 
 helps evidently to conceal him, since the less that is said 
 of him the better. This innocent deception in the ar- 
 rangement of the index may be attributed to the houour 
 of the publisher, who might know or suspect Lord 
 Chatham to be the author, and was unwilling to betray 
 him by too many references." 
 
 From the concluding paragraph of this pamphlet, it 
 may justly be suspected, that it was composed rather to 
 serve the interest of a political party, than with any hope 
 of convincing the public that the Earl of Chatham was 
 the author of the Letters of Junius. 
 
 " Here then," says the author, " let us ask the friends 
 
THE FALSE JUNIUSES. 139 
 
 of the illustrious Chatham, if they would reject this 
 combination of circumstantial evidence, and deny to his 
 memory the proudest of its adornments ? We are at 
 a crisis when the very elements of our Government are 
 threatened with dissolution. The constitutional doctrine 
 of so great a statesman might tranquillize the spirits 
 of misguided men, to whom the presumptuous bearing 
 of these soi-disant patriots is as the dust in the lion's 
 eyes ; but who would soon see through this veil of dark- 
 ness if they once believed Junius to have been the 
 immortal Chatham. Then would they strenuously exert 
 themselves in defence of our ancient institutions, safe 
 under the shield of one who they knew of all men to 
 be the closest ally of liberty — her best friend, and ever 
 most ready to be the guide and guardian of her votaries." 
 
 The reader will probably think that no small degree 
 of credulity is required to believe that "the immortal 
 Chatham'* ever drew the following portrait of himself, 
 which will be found in a letter written by Junius, under 
 the signature of Lucius, and addressed to the Earl of 
 Hillsborough, on the 29th August 1 768 : — 
 
 " I think I have now named all the Cabinet, but the 
 Earl of Chatham. His infirmities have forced him into 
 a retirement, where I presume he is ready to suffer, with 
 a sullen submission, every insult and disgrace that can 
 be heaped upon a miserable, decrepit, worn-out old man. 
 But it is impossible he should be so far active in his 
 own dishonour, as to advise the taking away an employ- 
 ment, given as a reward for the first military success 
 that distinguished his entrance into administration. He 
 is, indeed, a compound of contradictions; but his Letter 
 to Sir Jeffery Amherst stands upon record, and is not 
 
140 THE FALSE .TUNIUSES, 
 
 to be explained away. You know, my Lord, that Mr. 
 Pitt therein assured Sir JefFery Amherst, that the Go- 
 vernment of Virginia was given him merely as a reward, 
 and solemnly pledged the royal faith that his residence 
 should never be required. Lost as he is, he would not 
 dare to contradict this letter. If he did, it would be 
 something more than madness. The disorder must have 
 quitted his head, and fixed itself in his heart." 
 
 And in a previous letter, 28th April 1767, under the 
 signature of Poplicola, Junius stigmatizes Lord Chatham, 
 then Mr. Pitt, as a traitor, for having opposed Mr. 
 George Grenville's Stamp Act; and denied the right of 
 the Parliament of Great Britain to legislate for America ; 
 and concludes his letter in the following words : "though 
 we have no Tarpeian Rock for the immediate punish- 
 ment of treason, yet we have impeachments ; and a gibbet 
 is not too honourable a situation for the carcass of a 
 traitor." 
 
 That Lord Chatham was not Junius is now certain: 
 for in the correspondence of his lordship, lately pub- 
 lished, will be found two letters addressed to him by 
 Junius — one of which we have given at length in the 
 second chapter. 
 
 We shall now present the reader with the theory of an 
 ingenious reviewer, as a specimen of the strange specu- 
 lations which have been broached on the subject. 
 
 *' But if it be asked whether we have no guess who 
 Junius was, we answer — he was the hand, moved, in- 
 structed, and guided by three heads. One of these was a 
 nobleman then extremely desirous of office, and strongly 
 •intriguing to obtain it; the second, was a counsel of high 
 celebrity, in progress towards nobility; the third, was a 
 
THE FALSE JUNIUSES. 141 
 
 military man by profession, of notorious senatorial elo- 
 quence and impetuosity. Either of these singly could 
 readily deny that lie was Junius ; and each of them, we 
 believe, has been known to do so. Their combination, 
 if suspected, was incapable of proof; and in fact, as the 
 trio merely furnished themes, but did not compose the 
 letters, they would have found little difficulty in declining 
 the honour, had it been charged on them conjointly. 
 The soul of Junius is, as we conjecture, commemorated 
 in the picture exhibited in Sir Joshua Reynolds's Gallery, 
 representing Lord Shelhourne of Junius's day, Mr. Dun- 
 ning (Lord Ashburton), and Colonel Barre of parlia- 
 mentary fame, in conference. 
 
 " The actual amanuensis was unquestionably a man of 
 expectations, in which he was disappointed; and if the 
 reader will look back to the lists of characters assumed 
 by Junius, as stated by the writer of the pamphlet before 
 us, he will readily discover that profession which was 
 not supplied by either of the three personages we have 
 mentioned. In short, as Scrub very wittily and not less 
 truly observes, 'there cannot be a plot without a priest 
 and a woman in it,' so we believe that the penman of 
 Junius was of the clerical order (Dr. Wilmot) ; and as 
 to the interference of a woman (Mrs. Wilmot Serres, the 
 Doctor's niece), we are old enough to remember facts 
 that are traceable, if our judgment be correct, almost 
 from end to end of the correspondence." 
 
 The many ridiculous surmises which had appeared in 
 print, respecting the author of the Letters of Junius, at 
 last gave rise to a publication entitled — Junius, with his 
 Vizor up J which is thus noticed in the Monthly Magazine 
 for May 1819 : - 
 
142 THE FALSE JUNIUSES. 
 
 "Among the lighter effusions of the press, a clever 
 jeu d'esprit has appeared under the title of — Junius, with 
 his Vizor up, by JEdipus Oronoho, Tobacconist and Snuff- 
 seller ; the object of which is to hold up to ridicule some 
 recent publications on the supposed discovery of the 
 writer of Junius's Letters. It was printed at Oxford, 
 and is evidently the production of some juvenile Oxonian, 
 who has seized a very fair opportunity for the exercise of 
 satire, and established some pretension to the title of a 
 satirist. It is not quite fair to promulgate a discovery 
 which has cost Mr. Oronoko so much pains and labour; 
 but we cannot resist the temptation of affording such a 
 treat to our readers as the unveiling and revealing to them 
 the unknown Junius, who, according to this author, 
 was no other than Suett, the Comedian." 
 
 Perhaps, after this, ' my gentle reader' may be inclined 
 to adopt the opinion of Lord Byron, who declares — 
 
 I ' ve an hypothesis — 't is quite my own ; 
 
 I never let it out till now, for fear 
 Of doing people harm about the throne, 
 
 And injuring some minister or peer, 
 On whom the stigma might perhaps be blown ; 
 
 It is — my gentle public lend thine ear ! 
 'T is, that what Junius we are wont to call, 
 
 Was REALLY, TRULY, uohody at all. 
 
 Although the advocates of the different pretenders 
 shew the utmost eagerness to clutch the literary laurels 
 of Junius, yet it is amusing to observe with what sensi- 
 tiveness all parties shrink from the infamy, which must 
 necessarily attach to any man found to possess such a 
 diabolical spirit of malignity as the author of Junius has 
 exhibited, — thus, a friend of Dr. Butler, the bishop of 
 Hereford, in a letter to an official gentleman, says — 
 
THE FALSE JUNIUSES. 143 
 
 " From all I was ever able to learn of the Bishop's 
 personal character, he was incapable of discovering or 
 feeling those rancorous sentiments^ so unbecoming his 
 character as a christian, and his station as a prelate, 
 expressed towards the Duke of Grafton, Lord North, 
 Sir William Draper, and others, — more especially the 
 King." 
 
 Speaking of the claim of Mr. Burke, Mr. Butler 
 observes — "Can any reason be assigned for attributing 
 to Mr. Burke the personal hatred which Junius evidently 
 had for his late Majesty? for the Duke of Bedford? 
 or for Lord Mansfield?" And when alluding to the 
 suspicion with regard to Mr. Wilkes being the author of 
 the Letters, Mr. Butler also remarks — " Far from giving 
 the least hint that he was the author of Junius's Letters, 
 he always explicitly disclaimed it, and treated it as a 
 ridiculous supposition. No one acquainted with his 
 style can suspect for a moment that he was the author of 
 them : the merit of his style, was simplicity : he had 
 both gaiety and strength ; but to the rancorous sarcasm, 
 the lofty contempt, with which Junius's Letters abound, no 
 one was a greater stranger than Mr. Wilkes : to this may 
 be added, the very slighting manner in which Junius 
 expresses himself of Mr. Wilkes. I am willing to admit 
 that if Mr. Wilkes had written Junius's Letters, he 
 would have treated Mr. Wilkes uncivilly for the sake of 
 disguising himself; but sneer, and particularly that kind 
 of sneer, which Mr. Wilkes occasionally receives from 
 Junius, you may be assured Mr. Wilkes could never 
 have used in speaking of himself." 
 
 In perusing the foregoing account of ^;he false Juniuses, 
 the reader cannot fail to be struck with the mass of hear- 
 
144 THE FALSE JUNIUSES. 
 
 say evidence, vague conjecture, and illogical arguments, 
 which have been collected and brought forward by the 
 advocates of the different candidates, in support of their 
 favourite hypotheses. It will also be observed, that the 
 only solid foundation on which any of their pretensions 
 rest, is the accidental circumstance of each claimant 
 possessing a few only of the characteristics of Junius, 
 the imagination of their sanguine advocates having sup- 
 plied all the rest, whilst the ardour of their enthusiasm has 
 rendered them blind to the insuperable objections which 
 the internal evidence of the Letters present to the success 
 of every one of the foregoing pretenders ; otherwise, we 
 should not have had a host of lawyers, divines, eminent 
 authors, and even Scotsmen, thrust forward as can- 
 didates for the laurels of Junius. At the same time it 
 may be remarked, that from the circumstances of these 
 claims having been brought before the public at different 
 times, and many of the writers not being aware of what 
 had been previously advanced by others on the subject, 
 it has happened, that the same species of insufficient 
 evidence and flimsy reasoning, have been repeatedly 
 brought forward to support the claims of different can- 
 didates. From the whole, therefore, it appears evident, 
 that the only way to arrive at a correct conclusion on 
 this interesting subject, is to lay the whole case before 
 the reader, commencing with an account of all the 
 information that can be collected respecting Junius and 
 his works, and then to give the substance of what has 
 been adduced, either in the way of fact, or argument, in 
 favour of the various candidates. Having done this 
 with respect to the claims of some of the candidates for 
 the honours of Junius, and after weighing their pretensions 
 
THE FALSE JUNIUSES. 145 
 
 in the balance and finding them wanting, the com- 
 petitors for the prize are now reduced to three : namely, 
 Lord George Sackville, and Sir Philip Francis (the alpha 
 and omega of the suspected), and Mr. Charles Lloyd ; 
 whose conflicting claims we deem worthy of a more 
 minute investigation : — 
 
 O'er all the rest, an undistinguished crew, 
 Her wings of deepest shade oblivion drew. 
 
MR. CHARLES LLOYD. 
 
 Is he only the Punch of the •puppet show, to speak as he is 
 prompted by the Chief Juggler behind the curtain? 
 
 Juniui. 
 
 tH 
 
CHAPTER VI. 
 
 Mr. E. H. Barker's inquiry into the claim of Charles Lloyd to 
 the Authorship of the Letters of Junius. — Observations on 
 the Publications of Mr. Taylor, Mr. Coventry, Mr. Barker, 
 and others, in support of the claims of particular individuals. — 
 Various accounts of Charles Lloyd. — Mr. Almon's description 
 of his Political Pamphlets. — Mr. R. Fellowes's remarks on 
 Lloyd's claim. — The earliest notice of Lloyd's pretensions. — 
 Dr. Parr, the great champion for Lloyd. — His letters to 
 Mr. Butler on the subject. — Mr. Butler's opinion of the 
 Doctor's evidence and arguments — Mr. R. Fellowes's remarks 
 on Dr. Parr's hypothesis. — Different accounts of the dis- 
 coveries at Stowe — Observations thereon — Remarks on Mr. 
 Barker's mode of conducting his inquiry, and on his doctrine 
 of * the neutralization' of evidence. — Mr. R. Fellowes's final 
 judgment on Lloyd's claim. 
 
MR. C]tARLES LLOYD. 
 
 To laugh were want of decency or grace, 
 But to be grave exceeds all power of face. 
 
 Pape. 
 
 The claim of Mr. Charles Lloyd has been advocated, 
 and the general question respecting the authorship of the 
 Letters of Junius discussed, with much critical acumen 
 and diligent research, by Mr, E. H. Barker, in his Five 
 Letters on the Author of Junius. 
 
 It is, however, to be observed, that this work, as well 
 as the previous publications of Mr. Taylor and Mr. 
 Coventry, have all been written with the express design 
 of advocating the claims of particular individuals, and 
 therefore require to be read with much caution. An 
 able advocate can, with surprising dexterity, make facts 
 and circumstances bend to his own peculiar view of a 
 case. As the mountain would not come to Mahomet, 
 the prophet very condescendingly went to the mountain; 
 so in controversies, if the theory does not square with 
 the facts, the latter must even conform themselves to the 
 theory. With such ample materials as the controversy 
 respecting the author of the Letters of Junius affords, 
 a clever advocate may construct an argument to prove 
 almost anything, and even surpass the legal sage men- 
 tioned by the Spectator, who assured Will Honeycomb 
 that a certain lady who had robbed him of his heart by 
 
150 MR. CHARLES LLOYD. 
 
 painting her face white, might be indicted under the 
 black act. 
 
 On the other hand, Mr. Butler and Dr. Good may be 
 considered the text writers on the subject, for they not 
 only possessed peculiar advantages by having access to 
 the original Letters of Junius, and other superior sources 
 of information, but what is of more consequence, as 
 regards the correctness and value of their conclusions, 
 they had no preconceived hypothesis to support, and have 
 not committed themselves by declaring in favour of any 
 particular claimant; and therefore, the corollaries drawn 
 by these gentlemen, may safely be used as tests, for trying 
 the pretensions of the numerous claimants for the honours 
 of Junius. The views of Mr. Butler, in particular, on 
 many important points are admitted to be correct by 
 Mr. Barker. 
 
 Of Charles Lloyd little appears to be known at the 
 present day. He is said to have been a native of Ireland, 
 and received his education at Westminster School. Mr. 
 Barker having applied for information respecting him to 
 Mr. Moysey, of Hayes in Kent, one of Lloyd's school- 
 fellows, received from that gentleman a note, dated Nov. 
 5th, 1827, in the following words: — *' Mr. Moysey is 
 very sorry he has it not in his power to satisfy Mr. 
 Barker's inquiries. Mr. Charles Lloyd was his senior 
 [at Westminster School] many years; their acquaintance 
 was not one of intimacy or of long duration. Since 1766, 
 or thereabouts, Mr. M. knows nothing of Mr. Lloyd, 
 either alive or dead. He can only say that his temper 
 was very cheerful, far removed from reserved or morose 
 habits; and as to faculties, he was a man of very lively 
 parts and a great deal of wit. He was called by his 
 
MR. CHARLES LLOYD. 151 
 
 schoolfellows, Dolly Lloyd, for reasons which do not 
 appear. He was younger brother of the Dean of Nor- 
 wich, an eminent character. But Mr. M. cannot recollect 
 any of his contemporaries now surviving, and grieves he 
 can be of no further use." 
 
 The late Mr. Jeremy Bentham was also applied to ; 
 but all he could tell of Mr. Lloyd was, that " he remem- 
 bers Charles Lloyd as a writer of political pamphlets, but 
 can give no opinion on his claims to the authorship of 
 Junius, because he has never turned his attention to the 
 subject." 
 
 Another of Mr. Barker's correspondents (the Rev. 
 Thomas Kidd) says, in a letter dated Wymondham, June 
 29th, 1827: — "You are, I think, right in ascribing the 
 Letters of Junius to Mr. Charles Lloyd, private secretary 
 to Mr. George Grenville, and afterwards in the same capa- 
 city to Lord North. I have more than once conversed 
 with a gentleman who was in the same office with Lloyd, 
 and knew him personally and well. He had a great pre- 
 dilection for chemistry, from which science Junius has 
 borrowed expressions which enrich his style. He was 
 a great oddity in his wardrobe ; fond of walking in the 
 streets unveiled, and generally with a pen behind hisr 
 ear; his gait was usually hurried and rapid." 
 
 From Almon's "Anecdotes of Eminent Persons," we 
 learn that Charles Lloyd was private secretary to Mr. 
 George Grenville, during the time that gentleman was 
 First Lord of the Treasury, and the author of many 
 political tracts, chiefly written in vindication of that 
 minister's conduct. The principal of which were " The 
 Anatomy of a late Negotiation:" this related to the 
 negotiation which Lord Bute brought on between the 
 
162 MR. CHARLES LLOYD. 
 
 King and Mr. Pitt, in the autumn of the year 1763. 
 " A Vindication of the Conduct of the Ministry in the 
 Case of Mr. Wilkes." " A Defence of the Majority in 
 the House of Commons, on the Question relating to 
 General Warrants." " An Honest Man's Reasons for 
 declining to take a part in the New Administration," 
 [this was the Admistration of 1765, commonly called the 
 Rockingham Administration]. " A Critical Review of 
 the New Administration." '' The Conduct of the late 
 Administration examined, relative to the Repeal of the 
 American Stamp Act." It is said that the greatest part, 
 if not the whole, of this tract was dictated by Mr. Gren- 
 ville himself. Mr. Burke having written a little tract, 
 called " A Short Account of a late Short Administra- 
 tion," Mr. Lloyd wrote an answer to it, which was 
 called '* A True History of a late Short Administration." 
 Mr. Lloyd also wrote " An Examination of the Prin- 
 ciples and boasted Disinterestedness of a late Right 
 Honourable Gentleman [Mr. Pitt], in a Letter from an 
 Old Man of Business to a Noble Lord:" this was written 
 on the change of ministry in 1766. His last work, men- 
 tioned by Mr. Almon, is " A Word at Parting to His 
 Grace the Duke of Bedford;" which was occasioned by 
 His Grace's friends joining the ministry at the end of 
 the year 1767, and abandoning Mr. Grenville: besides 
 these, he wrote many Essays and Letters in the public 
 papers, on political temporary subjects, which are now 
 lost. According to Mr. Almon's account, he was in an 
 ill state of health during the whole period when the 
 Letters of Junius appeared, and died, after a lingering 
 illness, on the 22d January 1773. 
 
 The above appears to be the substance of all that is 
 
MK. CHARLES LLOYD. 153 
 
 now known respecting Charles Lloyd; and his claim to 
 the authorship of Junius's Letters seems to rest entirely 
 upon the circumstances of his intimate connexion with 
 Mr. George Grenville, and that he died about the time 
 when Junius ceased to write, which Mr. Barker contends 
 is a presumption in favour of his being tlieir author — 
 while Dr. Good considers this circumstance as decisive 
 against Lloyd's claim — his words are (Preliminary Essay, 
 p. 100), "Lloyd was on his death-bed at the date of the 
 last of Junius's private letters ; an essay which has suffi- 
 cient proof of having been written in the possession of 
 full health and spirits, and which, together with the rest 
 of our author's private letters to the printer of the Public 
 Advertiser, is in the possession of the proprietor of this 
 edition, and bears date January 19th, 1773." Lloyd 
 died three days after the date of this letter. 
 
 One of Mr. Barker's correspondents (Mr. R. Fellowes), 
 whom he styles a " most eloquent, sagacious, and intelli- 
 gent friend," says, in a letter dated February 1st, 1827, 
 " I think you will find your hypothesis that Lloyd was 
 Junius, encumbered with many embarrassing considera- 
 tions, if not some insurmountable obstacles. Almon 
 might be a very incompetent judge of Lloyd's literary 
 abilities; but as he knew him personally, and was ac- 
 quainted with several of his friends and connexions, com- 
 panions, he could not well err in the account which he 
 has given of the state of his health, — now, if we may credit 
 Almon, Lloyd's health was in a declining state at the 
 first appearance of the Letters under the signature of 
 Junius. But did not the Letters of Junius, during the 
 considerable interval in which they followed each other 
 in rapid succession, require the constant exercise of a 
 
154 MR. CHARLES LLOYD. 
 
 degree of intellectual vigour and activity, which is seldom 
 found in conjunction with a decay of the corporal func- 
 tions, and a depression of the vital powers." 
 
 It does not appear that Mr. Barker has succeeded in 
 obtaining any autographs of Lloyd, to compare with the 
 specimens of Junius's writing given by Mr. Woodfall ; 
 and as to any similarity of style between Lloyd's acknow- 
 ledged compositions, and the Letters of Junius, we will 
 present the reader with the sentiments of Mr. Barker's 
 " sagacious and intelligent friend," Mr. R. Fellowes, on 
 the subject, which are contained in another letter of the 
 9th July 1827 : — " I have glanced over all the pamphlets, 
 and have read the two that were written by Lloyd. They 
 appear to me to furnish very cogent proof that he was 
 not the author of the Letters under the name of Junius. 
 
 "In Lloyd's ' Anatomy of a late Negotiation,' printed 
 in 1763, there are no indications of a superior mind, 
 either in the thoughts or diction. It is the mere common- 
 place of an ordinary intellect. The pamphlet entitled 
 ' An Examinationj etc' which was written three years 
 after the former, does not exhibit any proof of a mind in 
 progress, gradually enlarging its powers, multiplying its 
 stock of ideas, invigorating its sentiments, and improv- 
 ing its style. If Lloyd had been a young man at the 
 time these two pamphlets were written, the perusal could 
 never have induced a critic to presage that he would 
 ever attain to any of that force and brilliancy of style, 
 that is so visible in the composition of Junius. The 
 pamphlets are flat and jejune, sterile in sentiment, and 
 feeble in diction. I cannot discern the workings of a 
 strong, or the richness of a full mind. There is no 
 luxuriance that might be pruned into beauty, no expan- 
 sion that might be compressed into force.** 
 
MR. CFIARLES LLOYD. 155 
 
 '* You must, moreover, reflect, that at the period when 
 those pamphlets were written, Lloyd was no longer a 
 young man, and he was besides ^ in an infirm state of 
 health,' as he himself tells us at p. 5, and which, accord- 
 ing to the testimony of Almon, continued till his death." 
 
 " The earliest mention in print," says Mr. Barker, " of 
 Lloyd's name, in connexion with Junius, occurs in the 
 Rev. Sir Herbert Croft's Love and Madness, a story too 
 true, in a series of letters, which was first published in 
 1780 — it occurs in letter thirty, and is simply this, — 
 * Another slice of politics — assert boldly that Junius was 
 written by Grenville's secretary. This is fact, notwith- 
 standing what Wilkes relates of Lord Germaine's bishop 
 [Dr. Butler, bishop of Hereford] : here we have asser- 
 tion, without any clue to support it.' " 
 
 But the principal champion in defending the claim of 
 Charles Lloyd, was the late Dr. Parr, whose great name 
 and authority on all literary questions, rather than any 
 weight of evidence, seem to have beguiled Mr. Barker 
 and many others. That the learned Doctor firmly believed 
 what he so positively and peremptorily asserted, there 
 can be no doubt; but when we come to examine the 
 proofs which he adduced, in support of his hypothesis, 
 they appear to be extremely slight. 
 
 In a letter written by Dr. Parr to Mr. Charles Butler, 
 in the early part of the year 1822, he says : *' You have 
 written very sensibly about the author of Junius, and we 
 must allow that the pamphlet which ascribes the book 
 to Sir Philip Francis, and Brougham's critique upon it, 
 contain very striking probabilities; but they made little 
 impression on my mind, — for I, for these forty years, have 
 had the firmest conviction that Junius was Mr. Lloyd, 
 
156 MR. CHARLES LLOYD. 
 
 brother to Philip Lloyd (dean of Norwich), and secretary 
 to George Grenville. My information came from two most 
 sagacious observers; and when I spoke to the second, I did 
 not tell him what I had previously heard from the first. 
 One of my witnesses was Dr. Farmer, a most curious, 
 indefatigable, acute searcher in literary anecdote, and 
 he spoke with confidence unbounded: the other was a 
 witness of a yet higher order, and who opposed, and I 
 think confuted, Junius upon the Middlesex election. He 
 was a most wary observer, and a most incredulous man 
 indeed. He had access, not to great statesmen, but to 
 the officers who were about the House of Commons and 
 House of Lords, He rested neither day nor night till 
 he had made his discovery, and there lives not the human 
 being upon whose judgment I could rely more firmly for 
 a fact. When you and I meet, I will tell you the whole 
 story. Let us pursue this subject when we meet, for all 
 I shall now add upon it is, that a very sagacious gentle- 
 man of Ireland, who died last year, had from other pre- 
 mises worked out the same conclusions." 
 
 In another letter from Dr. Parr to Mr. Butler, dated 
 April 9th, 1822, he remarks : *• Your account of Junius is 
 very entertaining; but I tell you, and peremptorily I tell 
 you, that the real Junius was secretary to George Grenville^ 
 of whom you cannot forget, that having ceased to be 
 prime minister, he was so provoked as to attend an 
 angry county meeting in Buckinghamshire. The name 
 of Junius was Lloyd. Lord Grenville knows the late 
 Marquis of Buckingham once dropped three or four 
 significant words, but I will tell you more when we meet 
 in London. I go thither next week, and we must con- 
 trive to meet at the house of our friend Mr. Denman." 
 
MR. CHARLES LLOYD. 157 
 
 In a letter addressed to Mr. Barker by Mr. Butler, 
 September loth, 1826, he says: "The last time Dr. Parr 
 was in town, he communicated to me the evidence and 
 arguments by which he supported his hypothesis, that 
 Mr. Lloyd was the author of the Letters signed Junius. 
 They appeared to me very inconclusive ; a literary gentle- 
 man of the highest eminence, to whom also he commu- 
 nicated them, thought the same. / have quite forgotten 
 them" 
 
 Mr. R. Fellowes well sustains the character which 
 Mr. Barker has given him, of being "a most sagacious and 
 intelligent friend," by the following observations on Dr. 
 Parr's hypothesis (in his letter of the 1st February 1827) : 
 " I have often heard Dr. Parr speak with great confidence 
 of Charles Lloyd as the author of the Letters. Temerity 
 was not usually a characteristic of the Doctor's judg- 
 ment in such matters; but in adjudicating the Letters to 
 Lloyd, he never appeared to me to have examined the 
 subject with his usual caution, or to have estimated its 
 probabilities, or different sides, with his accustomed im- 
 partiality and discrimination. I never heard him adduce 
 a more satisfactory reason for his opinion, that Charles 
 Lloyd was the author of the Letters, than the change 
 which he remarked in the countenance of his brother, the 
 Dean of Norwich, when the Doctor distinctly avowed his 
 belief, that that brother had the merit of these contested 
 compositions. There was a sudden transition in the 
 Dean's countenance, from that of much complacency in 
 the supposition, to that of what the Doctor supposed, very 
 sensitive alarm about the consequences. If Charles 
 Lloyd were the author, the Grenvillea must be the depo- 
 sitories of the secret. I could say something upon that 
 
158 MR. CHARLES LLOYD. 
 
 subject, if I did not feel that I am treading on ground 
 where I am not permitted to throw any light into the 
 depths of the obscuring shade." 
 
 "During my long residence at Hatton," says Mr. 
 Barker (p. 281), " I often conversed with Dr. Parr 
 about Junius; but the conversation was very desultory, 
 frequently interrupted, and seldom brought sufficiently to 
 a point. He invariably held forth Charles Lloyd as the 
 author of the Letters. In this opinion he was guided 
 more by private circumstances than by public reasons. 
 He appeared not to have taken any large view of the 
 question, or to have examined with any great attention 
 what was either written or said about the matter. He 
 had not continually revolved his own reasons in his 
 capacious mind, as was usual with him in respect to 
 controverted points; and yet he had a variety of little 
 facts and circumstances, which he was at all times ready 
 to produce, and by which he had satisfied his own mind, 
 and thus peremptorily precluded the exercise of that 
 great understanding and those powers of discrimination 
 which he so triumphantly employed on many other occa- 
 sions. He had read Mr. Taylor's book, Mr. Brougham's 
 critique on it, and the observations in Mr. Butler's 
 Reminiscences ; but I doubt whether he had seen any of 
 the numerous pamphlets on the question. He had not 
 met with any of Lloyd's compositions, and therefore he 
 drew no arguments favourable to his hypothesis from a 
 comparison of style. If he had read any of his com- 
 positions, he would have found good reason to change 
 his opinion. Dr. Parr was personally acquainted with 
 Charles Lloyd. He described him to be a most unhappy, 
 fretful man, accustomed to look on the dark side of 
 
MR. CHARLES LLOYD. 159 
 
 every thing. This account was probably correct, but does 
 not agree with the testimony of Mr. Moysey, though 
 the latter speaks only of Lloyd as a youth, when his 
 disposition might have been very different." 
 
 Having thus examined all that can be collected respect- 
 ing Dr. Parr's communications on the subject of Lloyd 
 being Junius, the result appears to be, that we must 
 either subscribe to Mr. Fellowes's inference, "that the 
 Doctor had never examined the subject with his usual 
 caution," or else come to the conclusion, that he was not 
 a very competent judge of the rules of circumstantial 
 evidence, by which the question of " who was the author 
 of the Letters of Junius," must (if ever) be decided. 
 Had this been a question respecting the literary merits 
 of the Letters only, the world might have been satisfied 
 with the Doctor's mere dictum, without inquiring about, 
 or scrutinizing his reasons; but as the real question 
 depends upon the sufficiency and value of evidence, there 
 can be no doubt that the Doctor's opinion on such a 
 subject is entitled to much less consideration, and is 
 vastly inferior in authority to that of Mr. Butler, by 
 whom the Doctor's " evidence and arguments" were 
 considered so utterly worthless, as to be soon " quite 
 forgotten." 
 
 We shall now proceed to notice the wonderful dis- 
 coveries which are said to have been made at Stowe, and 
 supposed to favour the claims of Charles Lloyd. 
 
 The earliest notice of this discovery appeared in a 
 magazine for October 1827, entitled, ^* The Inspector." 
 In an article beginning, "August 27 — the murder's out, 
 Junius is at last discovered, and strange to say, never 
 once scented. The simple history of the discovery is. 
 
160 MR. CHARLES LLOYD. 
 
 that some six weeks ago, as Lord Nugent and His Grace 
 of Buckingham were private paper hunting in the Stowe 
 library, they lit upon a parcel studiously concealed in a 
 to them unknown recess. The parcel contained three 
 letters: one from Junius, under his fictitious signature, 
 another to George Grenville, asking for legal advice as 
 to the risk of publishing the Letter to the King with the 
 real name, and a third inclosing Junius's letter to Lord 
 Mansfield, with the author's initials. References are 
 made in the last to a letter from George Grenville to the 
 author. The Duke went off* post-haste to Dropmore 
 with the parcel. Lord Grenville at once recognised it^ and 
 declared his intention of providing for the publicity of the 
 documents after his deathj but not till then. At his request, 
 the Duke and Lord Nugent have pledged themselves to 
 silence till that event shall have taken place; and thus I, 
 and all others interested in the matter, are forced to stifle 
 our curiosity as well as we can." 
 
 "This information," says Mr. Barker (p. 313), "so 
 positively given, and professedly derived from the autho- 
 rity of Lord Nugent, is by no means correct, as the reader 
 will see by referring to a statement, which the kindness 
 of a friend will enable me to employ in the preface to this 
 volume. The statement referred to is as follows: — 
 'London, March 22d, 1828. Allow me to make the 
 following assertions, that your readers may not be misled 
 by a document which has evidently been fabricated to 
 gain the magazine some notoriety. 1. I can assure you, 
 from the best authority, and I have every reason to 
 believe it, that Lord Nugent and the Duke of Bucking- 
 ham never lit upon a parcel concealed in an unknown 
 recess. 2. That they found no letter to George Gren- 
 
MR. CHARLES LLOYD. 161 
 
 ville from Junius, asking for legal advice as to the risk 
 of publishing the Letter to the King with the real name. 
 3. That there was no letter inclosing Junius's letter to 
 Lord Mansfield, with the author's initials. 4. That the 
 Duke of Buckingham never went to Dropmore with any 
 such parcel. 5. That Lord Grenville never declared his 
 intention of providing for the publicity of such documents 
 after his decease. 6. That the Duke of Buckingham 
 and Lord Nugent never pledged themselves to silence 
 until Lord Grenville's decease. 7. That Lord Grenville, 
 at his advanced age, is totally uninterested in the subject, 
 and never makes it the theme of conversation or research. 
 8. That Lord Nugent never considered himself justified 
 in conversing with his uncle on the subject, knowing 
 that it was one which afforded him no interest. 9. That 
 the claims of Charles Lloyd (independently of his going 
 abroad after the decease of George Grenville) are too 
 vague to justify even a suspicion that he was in any manner 
 concerned in the publication of the Letters. 10. That most 
 men entertain opinions of their own upon this mysterious 
 subject, and it is highly probable that Lord Nugent may 
 suspect some individual, whose name has hitherto been 
 withheld from the public, but of such suspicion he has 
 no positive evidence. 
 
 " I have now given a full reply to the paragraph in 
 the Inspector, and I pledge my word that I have advanced 
 nothing but what I have it in my power fully to substan- 
 tiate. You are at liberty, therefore, to prefix it to your 
 forthcoming publication." 
 
 On the subject of the supposed discovery at Stowe, 
 Mr. Barker gives the two following extracts from letters 
 addressed to him by friends. 
 
 M 
 
162 MR. CHARLES LLOYD. 
 
 " London, January 25th, 1828. This very day a friend, 
 who is very intimate with the Duke of Buckingham, 
 informed me, that a short time before the Duke went 
 abroad, he wrote to him thus: — 'What will you give me 
 if I tell you who was the author of Junius ? I know it, 
 but the secret must be kept some time longer,* I understand 
 the Duke found some family papers, by which he is no 
 doubt in full possession of the secret." 
 
 " January 16th, 1828. I have, however, some infor- 
 mation for you relative to the Grenvilles, to which family 
 Junius and Lloyd seem to have leaned in their political 
 attachment and writings. I was informed some time ago, 
 that the Duke of Buckingham had, from certain docu- 
 ments found in his archives, discovered who really was 
 the author of the Letters of Junius. Not having the 
 honour of his Grace's acquaintance, I wrote to a friend, 
 who had been in the habit of spending a considerable por- 
 tion of his time at Stowe, to let me know whether he had 
 heard anything upon the subject during his stay there, 
 and whether the Duke was inclined to make public the 
 documents. In answer, he informed me that he had 
 heard his Grace express himself to the effect of knowing 
 who Junius was, and that his name was not among those 
 who had ever been suspected. My friend was not inclined 
 to trespass further upon his Grace's communicativeness. 
 He was privileged to eat his mutton, drink his claret, 
 and ride his horses; but, although a man of respectable 
 rank, not authorised to question his noble host upon such 
 matters. What his Grace's documents or suppositions 
 are, I therefore know not, whether worth anything or 
 nothing." 
 
 Mr. Barker has not favoured us with the names of his 
 
MR. CHARLES LLOYD. 163 
 
 correspondents, and therefore we have no means of judg- 
 ing of the value of their testimony. 
 
 " From these authentic statements," says Mr. Barker, 
 " it is evident, that though the Stowe discovery is not so 
 important as the writer in the Inspector represents, it is 
 of so much importance, that the Duke of Buckingham con- 
 siders himself to have detected the name of the writer; and 
 the reader will remark, that in the statement which com- 
 ments on the article extracted from the Inspector, there 
 is no attempt to deny the fact of the discovery, or even 
 its real importance, but the denial goes no farther than to 
 contradict the reported extent of the discovery." 
 
 It will be observed, that this boasted discovery neither 
 advances the claim of Lloyd, nor any of the other sus- 
 pected persons, but rather tends to mystify the matter 
 more than ever, as it is pretended that the name of the 
 real author was not among those who had ever been suspected* 
 
 The various accounts of the Stowe discovery, if 
 critically examined, will be found so vague and contra- 
 dictory, and based on such suspicious and dubious autho- 
 rity, as to render it very questionable whether there be 
 any truth in the story ; or admitting it to be not altogether 
 fictitious, the reader finds himself placed in the same 
 dilemma as Dr. Johnson, when he was told that he 
 might conscientiously believe half of some marvellous 
 narrative which was related to him : '^ Perhaps so," 
 replied the Doctor, " but how am I to know which half 
 to believe?" Not one of the anonymous reporters pretend 
 to adduce more than hearsay evidence in support of their 
 different tales. Some of them would have it believed, 
 that their information was derived from conversations 
 held with His Grace of Buckingham or Lord Nugent; 
 
 m2 
 
164 MR. CHARLES LLOYD. 
 
 while others, for aught that appears, may have picked up 
 their intelligence in his Grace's stables, or his Lordship's 
 kitchen; and thus the real foundation , so far as evidence is 
 concerned, on which the pretended discovery rests, seems 
 to be little more substantial than the shadow of a shade : 
 besides, if there be any one particular in which the 
 diflPerent accounts agree, it is in the assurance that the 
 secret would be divulged at the decease of Lord Grenville 
 and the Duke of Buckingham, yet both these noblemen, 
 like Sir Philip Francis, have since died without making 
 the expected sign. 
 
 All the investigators of this subject, except Mr. Barker, 
 appear to have taken it for granted, that the incidental 
 asseverations of Junius respecting himself, which are to 
 be found in his Letters, constituted evidence of consider- 
 able value, and afforded important clues in tracing the 
 author. This opinion seems founded on human nature; 
 for as falsehood is the distinguishing vice of little and 
 mean minds, and Junius is admitted to have been a man 
 of haughty spirit and elevated sentiments, it was con- 
 cluded that he would not be guilty of advancing voluntary 
 and unnecessary falsehoods. "The pride of genius," 
 says Dr. Gregory, in his Life of Chatterton, "will 
 seldom descend to the most contemptible of vices — false- 
 hood." 
 
 It was also generally thought to be morally impossible 
 for any person to have carried on such an extensive and 
 protracted correspondence as that of Junius, and not to 
 have let out incidentally and unconsciously (especially in 
 the private and confidential letters and notes to Woodfall 
 and Wilkes) many little particulars indicative of the 
 writer's personal habits and station in society; and it was 
 
MR. CHARLES LLOYD. 165 
 
 from these minute and refined clues, that Mr. Butler and 
 Dr. Good drew their valuable, and we believe just con- 
 clusions respecting the characteristics of Junius. 
 
 In addition to the objections already urged against the 
 claim of Lloyd, Mr. Butler observes: *' His advocates 
 have, however, to encounter the explicit declaration of 
 Junius — 'I have not the honour of being personally 
 known to Mr. Grenville.'" This, and other declarations 
 contained in the Letters of Junius, being fatal to the 
 claim of Lloyd, Mr. Barker is driven to the necessity of 
 contending, that little or no dependence is to be placed 
 on what Junius relates about himself; and answers Mr. 
 Butler's objection by saying: "Now Lloyd was private 
 secretary of George Grenville, and must be supposed to 
 have the private attachment to him which was so evidently 
 felt by Junius; and I have already shewn that Junius's 
 denial of a personal knowledge of George Grenville is 
 entitled to no more credit than Peter's denial of Christ." 
 
 Again, it cannot be shewn that the handwriting of 
 Lloyd bears any resemblance to any of the autographs 
 of Junius, published by Mr. Woodfall, and therefore 
 Mr. Barker depreciates the value of evidence tending to 
 establish this point. At p. 138, he says—" In the same 
 way the argument about the identity of Junius and Sir 
 Philip Francis, in respect to handwriting^ is valueless, 
 because the handwriting of Lord George Sackville has 
 been brought forward as identified with the handwriting 
 of Junius. Thus the one argument neutralises the other; 
 and the reasoning would have weight in respect to either 
 Sir Philip or his Lordship, only in case that no other 
 handwriting were set up as the writing of Junius. — 
 Hence I regard the criterion as false or insecure, and 
 
166 MR. CHARLES LLOYD. 
 
 therefore I have avoided making any use of the argu- 
 ment," 
 
 Mr. Barker no doubt considered this a very logical 
 mode of killing two birds, of very ill omen to the claim 
 of Lloyd, by one shot ; but to shew the fallacy of his 
 reasoning, we beg leave to put the following case : — Let 
 us suppose a discharge of fire-arms is heard in a preserve 
 at midnight, and the keepers sallying forth, apprehend 
 two poachers with recently discharged fowling-pieces, as 
 they issued from opposite parts of the preserve, in which 
 another keeper is discovered slain by a single gun-shot 
 wound. Upon the two men being brought before a 
 magistrate, on suspicion of the murder; if Mr. Barker 
 were allowed to be their advocate, he would probably 
 address his Worship in the following terms : — " As it is 
 evident the deceased received the fatal wound from the 
 contents of a single guuj I submit that the prisoners must 
 be discharged ; for although I admit that if only one man 
 had been apprehended under the same circumstances, 
 there would have been strong grounds of suspicion 
 against him, yet, inasmuch as there are two individuals 
 against whom the grounds of suspicion are equally strong, 
 I contend that the evidence is neutralized, and they must 
 both be presumed innocent,'* To such an address, we ap- 
 prehend that even Squire Weston would have shaken his 
 head with all the gravity of Lord Burleigh, and replied, 
 " I think the presumption is the other way, and it may 
 probably turn out that both the accused are equally 
 guilty — one by firing the fatal shot, and the other by 
 aiding and abetting his companion." 
 
 The true doctrine of the neutralization of evidence is 
 stated by Mr. Butler, when he says, with respect to th€ 
 
MR. CHARLES LLOYD. 167 
 
 claim of Sir Philip Francis, ''Such, in our opinion, is 
 the state of the question: all external evidence is in 
 favour of Sir Philip ; all internal evidence is against him. 
 Thus the argument on each side neutralizes the argu- 
 ment on the other ; and the pretension of Sir Philip 
 vanishes;" — this is an intelligible statement, and agrees 
 with the rules of circumstantial evidence, which require 
 the external and internal evidence to be consistent and 
 complete, otherwise the proof is defective. But how the 
 circumstance of proving that two individuals possessed 
 one or more of the characteristics of Junius, should dis- 
 qualify both from claiming the authorship, and at the 
 same time advance the claim of another person, who is 
 totally destitute of such characteristics, appears incom- 
 prehensible. 
 
 Dr. Parr, and his followers, were unquestionably men 
 of great classical learning; but Mr. Butler was, more- 
 over, a profound lawyer, which is sufficient to account for 
 his decided superiority in discussing questions of evidence. 
 
 All the writers on the authorship of Junius seem to 
 have been struck with astonishment at the malignity 
 displayed in the Letters towards certain exalted indi- 
 viduals; and few of them have expressed their sentiments 
 on the subject with more force or eloquence than Mr. 
 Barker. In alluding to the suspicion against Burke, he 
 remarks (p. 134) — "Even in what Burke himself says 
 about Junius, there is a most unsuspicious testimony to 
 confirm the opinion which I have been delivering, that 
 Burke was too generous spirited to write the Letters. 
 ' It was the rancour and venom with which I was struck,' 
 says he. This rancour and venom, ^urke never had ; 
 and no man who possessed them not, could have written 
 
168 MR. CHARLES LLOYD. 
 
 Junius. Burke had not the deliberate, resolute, desperate, 
 merciless, and ceaseless malignity of that formidable 
 writer; he was not the wild boar of the forest — he 
 was not the bloodthirsty bird of prey — he was not the 
 public executioner, whose day was spent in leisurely 
 marking the victims for the night — he was not the evil 
 demon, secretly invading the repose of greatness, and 
 shaking the throne of power; and, like reckless death, 
 * triumphing, not only in the extent of his conquests, 
 but in the richness of his spoils' — he had not the pro- 
 perty of the tiger, to crouch peaceably in the covert, and 
 yet spring with deadly aim on all who came within reach 
 of his paw — he was not accustomed *to employ the 
 secresy of a Venetian tribunal, or to strike with the 
 certainty of the Holy Inquisition.' — I therefore contend, 
 that till it can be proved that Burke was not in private 
 life the benevolent character which I have described, and 
 that he was the malignant being in private life which we 
 trace in the Letters of Junius, we cannot, with any pro- 
 priety, consider Burke to be the writer of them." 
 
 After this, we should naturally conclude that Mr. 
 Barker would endeavour to prove that Lloyd was the 
 malignant being whom we trace in the Letters of Junius, 
 or that he had, at least, some probable cause of enmity 
 against the numerous exalted personages maligned by 
 Jimius; but he makes no such attempt. 
 
 When Mr. R. Fellowes first heard of Mr. Barker's 
 intention to advocate the claim of Lloyd, he congratu- 
 lated him, in a letter dated March 7th, 1827, in the 
 following terms: " I hope you will prove the true CEdipus, 
 and solve the riddle that has puzzled so many men of 
 brains and no brains, so many wits and witlings, for more 
 
MR. CHARLES LLOYD. 169 
 
 than half a century." But after having heard all that 
 Mr. Barker could urge in Lloyd's favour, he closed the 
 correspondence with the following letter: 
 
 My dear Sir, August 16th, 1827. 
 
 I return the four volumes of tracts you so obligingly sent for 
 my perusal. I am now more than ever perplexed about the 
 authorship of Junius. I cannot even hazard a guess upon the 
 subject. I am indeed perplexed in what seems an inextricable 
 labyrinth. / am convinced that neither Lloyd nor Whately were 
 the authors of these far-famed compositions. If the Letters were 
 concocted in the cabinet of the Grenvilles, they might have been 
 in a greater or less degree auxiliaries ; but two or three subordi- 
 nate understandings cannot make one master mind. In intel- 
 lectual operations, numbers do not constitute strength. There 
 may be numerous forces in the field, but it is one presiding mind 
 that marshals the host and gains the victory. Junius might have 
 subalterns to assist, but he was alone and unrivalled in the execution. 
 He is, however, still like the Man in the Iron Mask, a problem 
 that has employed the wits of more than half a century in the 
 solution. If Lloyd alone, or Lloyd and Whately, were in any 
 degree accessories to the work, it must be remembered that they 
 both died too early to make it prudent or safe for them to disclose 
 what they knew. If the Grenvilles were in the secret, they had 
 very momentous reasons to prevent them from divulging it during 
 the last reign. Even at present they may feel a repugnance in 
 having it known that they, in the person of their ancestor, if I 
 may so speak, were accomplices in laying bare to the vulgar 
 scorn the hypocritical interior of sceptred majesty, and in teach- 
 ing the multitude to think and to speak contemptuously of kings. 
 
 I am, etc. 
 
 R. Fellowes. 
 
 Such being the final sentence passed on the claim of 
 Charles Lloyd, by Mr. Barker's " eloquent, sagacious, 
 
170 MR. CHARLES LLOYD. 
 
 and intelligent friend" Mr. R. Fellowes, we have only to 
 express our admiration of that gentleman's discriminating 
 judgment in the words of Gratiano : 
 
 A Daniel, still say I ; a second Daniel ! 
 
 I thank thee, Jew, for teaching me that word. 
 
 Shakspeare, 
 
SIR PHILTP FRANCIS. 
 
 Sir Nathaniel Wraxall is convinced that Sir Philip Francis was 
 the author of Junius. I do not yet believe it. He was too vain a 
 man to let the secret die with him. 
 
 Sir Egerton Brydges' Notes on WraxalVs Memoirs. 
 
 I persist in thinking that neither Mr. Burke, nor Sir Philip 
 Francis, was the author of the Letters under the signature of 
 Junius. I think the mind of the first so superior, and the mind 
 of the latter so inferior, to that of Junius, as to put the supposition 
 that either of them was Junius, wholly out of the question. 
 
 Mr. Charles Butler's Letter to Mr. E.H. Barker, Uth June 1828. 
 
 We must all grant that a strong case has been made out for 
 Francis ; but I could set up very stout objections to those claims. 
 It was not in his nature to keep a secret. He would have told it 
 from vanity, or from his courage, or from his patriotism. His 
 bitterness, his vivacity, his acuteness, are stamped in characters 
 very peculiar upon many publications that bear his name ; and 
 very faint indeed is their resemblance to the spirit, and in an 
 extended sense of the word, to the style, of Junius. 
 
 Dr. Parr. 
 
CHAPTER VII. 
 
 Mr. John Taylor's Publications in support of Sir Philip Francis's 
 claim. — Sir Philip's Letter to the Editor of the Monthly 
 Magazine on the subject. — The justness of Sir Philip's claim 
 admitted by Atticus Secundus. — Mr. Butler's remarks on 
 Mr. Taylor's Publications. — Different opinion expressed in 
 the Edinburgh Review.— Sketch of the Life of Sir Philip 
 Francis. — His deficiencies in the most important Character- 
 istics of Junius pointed out. — The Edinburgh Reviewer's 
 Statement of the Case on behalf of Sir Philip. — The simi- 
 larity of style between the Letters of Junius, and the Writings 
 of Sir Philip, shewn only to prove that Sir Philip was a 
 successful imitator of the style of Junius. — Many remarkable 
 instances of successful imitation given. — Ireland's Shak- 
 speare Papers. — Rowley's Poems. — The Poems of Ossian. — 
 George Psalmanazar's Impostures. — Several other parti- 
 culars and coincidents stated by the Reviewer to prove that 
 Sir Philip was the author of the Letters of Junius. — Answered 
 by Mr. Barker. — Sir Philip Francis dies and " makes no 
 sign " of his being Junius. — The opinions of Dr. Parr and 
 Mr, Charles Butler on his claim, and on the Review in his 
 favour. — The sentiments of a Writer in the North American 
 Review on the subject stated. — Concluding remarks by 
 Mr. E. H. Barker, and the opinion of Sir Walter Scott on 
 Sir Philip's claim. 
 
SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 
 
 I fear, thou art another counterfeit ; 
 
 And yet, in faith, thou bear'st thee like a king. 
 
 ShaJcspeare. 
 
 Sir Philip Francis was one of those fortunate indivi- 
 duals who have had " honour thrust upon them," for not 
 the slightest suspicion seems to have been entertained 
 of his identity with Junius, or of his having had any 
 connexion with that writer, previously to the year 1813: 
 when his pretensions were placed before the world, with 
 much plausibility of statement and force of argument, in 
 a clever pamphlet written by Mr. John Taylor, entitled, 
 " A Discovery of the Author of the Letters of J uniuSi founded 
 on such Evidence and Illustrations, as explain all the myste- 
 rious circumstances and apparent contradictions which have 
 contributed to the concealment of this most important secret 
 of our times.'* And in 1816, he put forth an improved 
 statement, entitled, " The Identity of Junius with a Distin- 
 guished Living Character established; with a Supplement, 
 consisting of facsimiles of Handwriting, and other Illusira" 
 tions.'^ 
 
 In an article on the first pamphlet, inserted in the 
 " Monthly Magazine," for July 1813, the Editor says :— 
 " We confess we were at first startled by this hypothesis, 
 from its temerity; because if not true,~Sir Philip Francis 
 would be able by a word to disprove it, and it could not 
 
174 SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 
 
 be supposed that so much labour and expense would be 
 hazarded, except on indubitable grounds. To be able, 
 therefore, to render this article as conclusive as possible, 
 we addressed Sir Philip Francis on the subject, in the 
 way the least likely to render the inquiry offensive; and 
 in reply, received the following epistle, which we insert 
 at length, in justice to Sir Philip and the public : 
 
 "Sir, 
 
 "The great civility of your letter, induces me to answer it, 
 which with reference merely to its subject matter, I should have 
 declined. Whether you will assist in giving currency to a silly 
 malignant falsehood, is a question for your own discretion. To me, 
 it is a matter of perfect indifference. 
 
 " I am, Sir, yours, etc. 
 
 " P. Francis." 
 " To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine." 
 
 On receiving the above letter from Sir Philip, in 
 which the report is treated as a silly malignant falsehood, 
 Sir Richard Phillips, the editor of the magazine, imme- 
 diately abandoned any further inquiry on the subject, 
 perceiving the theory to be built upon an erroneous 
 foundation; "and it would have been well," observes 
 Mr. Coventry, " for the reputation of other literary 
 critics, had they followed so wise an example." 
 
 This, however, was not the case; for notwithstanding 
 the tenor of Sir Philip's letter, there are still persons who 
 insist that he was the true Simon Pure — the veritable 
 Junius — his letter, they say, is unsatisfactory and evasive, 
 and signifies anything or nothing. This may be all very 
 true, for we pretend not to fathom the meaning of so 
 profound a writer as Sir Philip ; though we cannot help 
 entertaining our own suspicions, that it signifies any- 
 
SIR PiriLlP FRANCIS. 175 
 
 thing but a recognition, or adoption, of the imputed 
 authorship. 
 
 That respectable commentator Atticus Secundus seems 
 quite positive that Sir Philip, and no one else, was 
 Junius, for he declares expressly: — *Uhough Sir Philip 
 Francis has since died without 'maJcing any sign ' as to 
 his being the author, and even amidst some indirect 
 attempts on his part to decline the honour, the suspicion 
 which has been awakened has lost nothing of its force, 
 and we may even venture to assert, has been every day 
 advancing towards complete conviction. The author of 
 this dissertation has no hesitation whatever in expressing 
 his own belief, because it is perfect, and because he thinks 
 himself to possess advantages for the decision of the 
 question, which can have belonged in the same degree 
 to but a few. In the course of preparing this new edition 
 of the Letters, he has been led to analyze the style of 
 Junius with a care which only such a task would lead 
 any individual to bestow. The manner of Junius has 
 thus become to him like the voice of an intimate friend; 
 he has become acquainted, not merely with his peculiar 
 tone, but with his very mode of thinking and of arranging 
 his thoughts; and having, with these advantages, com- 
 pared the style of the late Sir Philip Francis with that 
 of the Letters, he ventures to announce his perfect con- 
 fidence in the identity of these two characters; and would 
 maintain that confidence, upon this similarity of style alone; 
 although there were not that host of corroborating cir- 
 cumstances which renders the evidence upon this point, 
 perhaps the most complete that ever was advanced on 
 any subject of the same kind." 
 
 If after this it should be found that the sagacity of 
 
176 SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 
 
 Atticus Secundus has been at fault, surely it may be said 
 from henceforth, *Let not the wise man glory in his 
 wisdom/ 
 
 Mr. Taylor's publications are spoken of by Mr. Charles 
 Butler in the following terms: — 
 
 '*The external evidence produced in the pamphlets in 
 favour of Sir Philip Francis, is very strong; — so strong, 
 perhaps, that if he had been tried upon it for a libel; and 
 the case had rested upon the facts, from which this 
 evidence is formed, the judge would have directed the 
 jury to find him guilty. But the internal evidence against 
 him, from the inequality of his acknowledged writings, 
 is also very strong: if the able author of the Article 
 " Junius" in the Edinburgh Review, had not professed 
 a different opinion, the present writer would have pro- 
 nounced it decisive." — Remin. i. 93. 
 
 The " different opinion" given by the able author in the 
 Edinburgh Review, who is said to be Mr. Brougham, is 
 as follows: — "Sir Philip Francis had never, as far as 
 we know, been suspected. The book is written in a way 
 abundantly creditable to the author. It contains every 
 thing necessary for determining the question, and is 
 written without affectation. That it proves Sir Philip 
 Francis to be Junius, we will not affirm; but this we 
 can safely assert, that it accumulates such a mass of cir- 
 cumstantial evidence, as renders it extremely difficult to 
 believe he is not; and that, if so many coincidences shall 
 be found to have misled us in this case, our faith in all 
 conclusions drawn from the proofs of a similar kind may 
 henceforth be shaken." 
 
 In order fully to understand the claim of Sir Philip 
 Francis, it may be proper to give here a short sketch of 
 his life. 
 
SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 177 
 
 Philip Francis was born in Dublin, on the 22d of 
 October 1740. His father, the Rev. Philip Francis, was 
 the well-known translator of Hor^rce and Demosthenes, 
 Young Philip received the first elements of his education 
 in Dublin. At the age of ten y he came to England, and 
 was placed at St. Paul's School, under the care of Mr. 
 George Thicknesse, of whose learning and attention to 
 himself he all his life spoke with respect. , When he had 
 reached his sixteenth year, he was placed by Mr. Henry 
 Fox, afterwards Lord Holland, in whose family his 
 father had been tutor, in a small office in the Secretary 
 of State's chambers. Mr. Pitt, who succeeded Mr. Fox, 
 patronized and encouraged him; and it has even been 
 asserted, that young Francis frequently officiated as 
 amanuensis to Mr. Pitt. 
 
 Through the patronage of this great statesman he was 
 made secretary to General Bligh in 1758, was present 
 at the capture and demolition of Cherburgh, and at the 
 attack on the rear-guard of our army at St. Gas. In 
 1760, he was appointed secretary to the Earl of Kinnoul, 
 when that nobleman went as ambassador to Lisbon. In 
 1763, Welbore Ellis, secretary at war, appointed him 
 to a considerable post in the War Office, which he 
 continued to hold from that period till the year 1772, 
 that is to say, during the time in which the Letters of 
 Junius appeared, and from which he was discharged by 
 Lord Barrington. He spent most of the year 1772 
 in travelling through Flanders, part of Germany, the 
 Tyrol, Italy, and France, with his intimate friend 
 David Godfrey. During his residence at Rome, he was 
 honoured with a conference of two hours by the Pope. 
 In about half-a-year after his return to England, the 
 
 N 
 
178 SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 
 
 same Lord Barrington, who had occasioned his retreat 
 from the War Office, warmly recommended him to Lord 
 North, by whom his name was inserted in an Act of 
 Parliament, passed in June 1773, to be a member of the 
 council appointed for the government of Bengal: the 
 other commissioners being— Warren Hastings, governor- 
 general; John Clavering, commander-in-chief; George 
 Monson, and Richard Barwell. During most of the 
 time he spent in India, he was engaged, to use his own 
 words, "in perpetual contest with Mr. Hastings;" and 
 in consequence of some severe charges made against him 
 by that gentleman, Mr. Francis challenged him, and 
 was himself shot through the body. He left Bengal in 
 December 1780, about four months after the duel, passed 
 five months in St. Helena, and arrived in England in 
 October 1781. On the dissolution of parliament in 1784, 
 he was elected for Yarmouth in the Isle of Wight, and 
 took an active part in the proceedings preparatory to the 
 impeachment of Mr. Hastings. There was, however, a 
 strong impression, that this conduct towards a person with 
 whom he had so long lived in enmity, and against whom 
 he had an avowed ill-will, was not becoming; and accord- 
 ingly, when Mr. Francis was proposed, first as a member 
 of a committee for considering the charges against Mr. 
 Hastings, and afterwards as one of the managers of the 
 impeachment, his nomination was negatived by great 
 majorities. 
 
 When the French revolution occurred, he founded 
 the society which then made so much noise, called "The 
 Friends of the People;" and had as his associates, 
 Mr. Fox, Mr. Tierney, Mr. Grey, and many other dis- 
 tinguished members of the opposition. In 1792, he 
 
SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 179 
 
 supported Mr. Fox in all his attempts to prevent the 
 interference of this country in the affairs of France; and 
 was universally considered as one of the warmest friends 
 of the views of opposition. He was throughout his 
 whole life a most zealous and disinterested supporter of 
 the abolition of the slave trade, and distinguished himself 
 by many powerful and brilliant displays of eloquence in 
 favour of that measure. In 1796, he stood for Tewkes- 
 bury, but lost his election, and from that time he con- 
 tinued during six years without a seat in parliament. In 
 1802, he was nominated for Appleby, and sat for that 
 place during several subsequent parliaments. 
 
 On the death of Earl Cornwallis, some thoughts were 
 entertained of sending Mr. Francis to India, as governor- 
 general. That appointment, however, never took place. 
 But as something seemed due to him, he was invested, 
 at the recommendation of Lord Grenville, with the 
 insignia of the Bath, in October 1806. 
 
 In June 1817, he unexpectedly appeared at a meeting 
 of the freeholders of Middlesex, and moved a petition 
 to the House of Commons against the suspension of 
 the Habeas Corpus, prefacing his motion by a brilliant 
 speech. Soon after this, he experienced a long and 
 severe illness. His malady was a disease in the prostate 
 gland, which occasioned him great pain, — and as his 
 constitution had always been irritable, his latter days 
 were full of trouble. He expired at his house in St. 
 James's Square, on the 22d December 1818, in the 
 seventy-ninth year of his age. 
 
 Sir Philip was twice married. By his first wife he 
 left a son, Philip Francis, Esq., who was called to the 
 bar, and two daughters, both of whom were married. 
 
 n2 
 
180 SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 
 
 He himself married a second time after he had become 
 a septuagenerian. The name of the lady was Miss 
 Watkins, the daughter of a clergyman. 
 
 The foregoing narrative contains an account of the 
 principal incidents in the life of a man, whose identity 
 with Junius was at one time considered by many persons 
 to have been satisfactorily established ; although we find 
 it expressly declared, by the highest authorities, that it is 
 in vain to bring forward any claimant for the honours of 
 Junius, who cannot produce conjointly certain character- 
 istics, the principal of which are, that he must be — "An 
 Englishman of high rank; in confidential intercourse, if 
 not with different members of the cabinet, with politicians 
 who were intimately familiar with the court, and entrusted 
 with ALL its secrets. That he must also be of mature 
 age, and independent fortune, and have a personal hatred 
 against the King, the Dukes of Bedford and Grafton, 
 Lord Mansfield, etc." Now it does appear somewhat 
 startling to find an individual put forward as answering 
 this description, whom we discover to be, an Irish clerk 
 in the War Office, under twenty-seven years of age, with 
 an income not exceeding 4001. per annum, and whose 
 hatred is not pretended to extend higher than to Lord 
 Harrington, and such small deer as Tony Shammy, a 
 little gambling broker, who had supplanted his friend 
 Mr. D'Oyly in his clerkship, and Tommy Bradshaw the 
 cream-coloured Mercury ! 
 
 It will undoubtedly require strong evidence to rebut 
 this simple statement; — let us therefore see what one of 
 the ablest of Sir Philip's advocates, the writer in the 
 Edinburgh Review, has to urge in his behalf. The case 
 is opened by the Reviewer in the following manner: — 
 
SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 181 
 
 " To the greater number of readers, the first question 
 that presents itself is, whether Sir Philip Francis has 
 ever shewn the eminent talents displayed in Junius's 
 Letters ? However high his reputation may be in the 
 political world, there is no one avowed production of his 
 which has attracted much popular, or permanent notice, 
 or is at present familiar to the public recollection; and 
 he has therefore shared the fate of many able men whose 
 time has been devoted to the business of the world, and 
 whose labour, chiefly bestowed upon subjects connected 
 with their pursuits, has left no lasting monuments of 
 their skill in composition. So it has fared with Sir 
 Philip Francis. His contemporaries well knew him to 
 be one of the best writers of the age; but his writings 
 consisted chiefly of minutes, protests, speeches, and 
 pamphlets, which have long since ceased to interest the 
 world at large, and are only known to political men, or 
 curious inquirers into the details of modern history. 
 We shall therefore begin the argument by presenting a 
 few specimens of his composition, sufficient to justify the 
 assertion, that the author of Junius, whoever he may be, 
 was not a person of greater talents than Sir Philip 
 Francis. The proof drawn from similarity of expres- 
 sions will be further strengthened in the sequel by par- 
 ticular instances. All that we desire the reader, in this 
 stage of the discussion, to consider, is the general ability 
 displayed in the composition. We take all the examples 
 from his speeches, carefully written and published by 
 himself. These, though extracted from speeches, are really 
 specimens of Sir Philip Francis's manner of writing; 
 since they were all printed from his -own manuscript. 
 We shall add, however, one passage from a letter, or 
 
182 SIR PHILIP FBilNCIS. 
 
 discourse, sent, like those of Junius, to a public paper, 
 and subscribed by his own name. It is dated so late as 
 1811, and relates to the great question of restriction on 
 the Regency, then in contemplation. The author was 
 then far advanced in years; — but the reader, we think, 
 will be of opinion, that, both in spirit and style, it bears 
 a more striking resemblance to the papers written by 
 Junius forty years before, than anything else that could 
 be referred to during that long period." 
 
 The Reviewer then gives extracts from various speeches, 
 and a letter of Sir Philip Francis ; all written long after 
 the appearance of the Letters of Junius, and adds: — 
 '* Now we humbly conceive, that the most careless reader 
 must be struck, not only with the general ability and 
 eloquence of all these passages, but with their extra- 
 ordinary coincidence with the Letters of Junius, in all 
 their most remarkable characteristics. The boldness, 
 and even the fierceness of the tone — the studied force and 
 energy of the diction — the pointed epigrammatic cast of 
 the style — the concise and frequent metaphors — and the 
 mixture of the language of business and affairs with a 
 certain scholastic elegance and elaborate sarcasm." 
 
 Admitting, as we do, the fact of the similarity of style 
 between these extracts and the writings of Junius, but 
 denying the justness of the inference which has been 
 drawn from the premises, it is not essential to the argu- 
 ment, that we should encumber our pages with the 
 Reviewer's long quotations. We contend, that the extracts 
 which he has given, are inadmissible as evidence, to prove 
 that Sir Philip Francis was the author of the Letters of 
 Junius. If the extracts produced could be proved to have 
 been written prior to the Letters of Junius, we admit 
 
SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 183 
 
 that the argument grounded on the similarity of style 
 would be of considerable weight; but as they are known 
 to have been composed long after the publication of the 
 Letters, it is clear that they only prove Sir Philip Francis 
 to have been a successful imitator of the style of Junius, and 
 are of no value whatever to establish Sir Philip Francis's 
 identity with the author of compositions, which he had 
 evidently made his study, and taken as a model for the 
 formation of his own style. 
 
 There seems to be something extraordinary in the 
 imitative powers of some men, which has never yet been 
 philosophically explained, and would almost induce one 
 to believe in the doctrine of the transmigration of souls. 
 Well authenticated instances are recorded of successful 
 imitations, amounting to what may almost be termed 
 identification, being performed by persons of all countries 
 not only in literature, but in every department of the 
 fine arts. 
 
 But we need not resort to foreign examples to illus- 
 trate and prove our position; for there have been numer- 
 ous instances in England, of pertinacious literary disputes, 
 and fierce controversies, arising from a successful appli- 
 cation of the principle of imitation, and tending to prove 
 the fallaciousness oj the test of similarity of style to iden- 
 tify an author. Such as the celebrated controversy, 
 whether King Charles the First, or Bishop Gauden, was 
 the author of " Eikon Basilike," in which the arguments 
 on each side are so nicely balanced, that the scale remains 
 in equilibrio to the present day. The interpolations and 
 forgeries of Lauder, intended to blast the reputation of 
 Milton, and published under the title of " An Essay on 
 Milton's use and imitation of the Moderns in his Paradise 
 
184 
 
 SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 
 
 Lost/' — SO imposed on Dr. Johnson, that he wrote a 
 preface to the work, in full persuasion of Lauder's 
 honesty; and the fraud remained undiscovered, until 
 detected by Dr. Douglas. 
 
 There is also a little poem written by Goldsmith, 
 called " The Double Transformation,*' in which the style 
 of Swift is so closely imitated, that it was printed in an 
 edition of the Dean's works as one of his genuine poems. 
 
 In the Athenaeum of the 9th of July 1836, we find 
 the following remarks, in a review of a book called " The 
 Desennuyee:" — "It is singular that, with so much ability 
 of her own, the author should have imitated so closely 
 the style, the mannerism, the mode of thought and expres- 
 sion, of a contemporary writer; one is almost tempted to 
 believe, that the object was to pass off the work as a 
 production of Lady Morgan's, so closely does it copy 
 even her acknowledged faults." 
 
 Indeed, most of the literary impostures and forgeries 
 which have been perpetrated in England, can be traced 
 to the principle of imitation, and may be referred to three 
 classes : 
 
 First. They have either been put forth as unpublished 
 works of some eminent author, whose style, sentiments, 
 and sometimes his handwriting, have been imitated; or. 
 
 Secondly. They are pretended newly discovered manu- 
 scripts of some writer never before heard of, who is said 
 to have lived in a remote age; and then, the style and 
 manners of that particular age, are attempted to be 
 imitated, together with the peculiar handwriting of the 
 period;— or else. 
 
 Thirdly. They profess to be faithful translations, from 
 the oral or written literary treasures of some remote age 
 
SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 185 
 
 and rude people ; in which case, the fabricator assumes 
 a style, and adopts sentiments, which he supposes to be 
 characteristic of the people and age to which the works 
 are attributed; but this last class may, perhaps, be con- 
 sidered, as exhibiting as much of the power of invention 
 as of imitation. 
 
 To the first class belongs the celebrated " Shakspeare 
 Papers," forged by the younger Ireland; which imposi- 
 tion was, at first, attended with complete success; for 
 Dr. Parr was a sincere believer in their authenticity, and 
 Boswell fell upon his knees, kissed the imputed reliques, 
 and returned thanks that he had lived to see such valuable 
 documents brought to light. Many of the most eminent 
 literary characters of the day solemnly certified under 
 their hands, their belief in the authenticity of the papers, 
 and that the drama of "Vortigern and Rowena," was 
 unquestionably written by Shakspeare himself. Sheridan 
 stated as his opinion, that the play might have been written 
 by Shakspeare, but if it was, he thought the ^ Sweet Swan 
 of Avon,' must have been drunk when he wrote it. 
 
 After awhile, Ireland acknowledged the forgery; but 
 this was quite a work of supererogation, for Mr. Malone 
 had previously dissected and analyzed the whole bundle 
 of pretended documents, and in a work replete with 
 critical acumen and curious antiquarian lore, entitled, 
 " An Inquiry into the Authenticity of certain Miscellaneous 
 Papers and Legal Instruments attributed to Shakspeare^ Queen 
 Elizabeth, and Henry Earl of Southampton/' had laid open 
 the whole imposture. This work is really a fine specimen 
 of dialectical demonstration ; for such are the searching 
 tests which he applies to the spurious instruments, that 
 the detection and exposure of the forgery is perfect and 
 
186 SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 
 
 complete; no person can read the work, and entertain a 
 further doubt on the subject. 
 
 As a specimen of the second class, we would direct the 
 reader's attention to the Poems of Rowley, produced by 
 the boy Chatterton, in which the style and manners of 
 the fifteenth century are so admirably imitated, that 
 some of the best antiquarians and critics of the age were 
 deceived, and believed them genuine ; and Mr. Malone 
 declared, "that the authenticity or spuriousness of the 
 poems attributed to Rowley cannot be decided by any 
 person who has not a taste for English poetry, and a 
 moderate, at least, if not a critical knowledge of the com- 
 positions of most of our poets, from the time of Chaucer 
 to that of Pope." And as the unfortunate Chatterton 
 died without making any confession, the controversy is 
 still undetermined, notwithstanding all the arguments 
 brought on one side to support their authenticity, and on 
 the other to prove them the forgeries of a young literary 
 adventurer; for, as the partizans of each hypothesis 
 declare themselves unconvinced by the evidences of the 
 other, the matter may be considered as yet involved in 
 doubt and obscurity. Dr. Johnson. was so struck with 
 the talent displayed in these poems, that believing them 
 to be the compositions of Chatterton, he could not help 
 exclaiming in astonishment, " This is the most extraordi- 
 nary young man that has encountered my knowledge — 
 it is wonderful how the whelf has written such things." 
 
 The Poems of Ossian may be referred to the third 
 class, and made their appearance in the following manner. 
 In the year 1760, James Macpherson surprised the 
 world by the publication of " Fragments of Ancient Poetry, 
 collected in the Highlands of Scotland, and translated from 
 
SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 187 
 
 the Gaelic and Erse language,'" The avidity with which 
 these seemingly long neglected remains of a rude and 
 remote period were sought after and examined, was only 
 to be equalled by the delight which readers of taste ex- 
 perienced in discovering in them a vein of poetry, which 
 would have done honour to the most polished periods. 
 Mr. Gray, Mr. Home, Dr. Blair, and many other com- 
 petent judges, were loud in their praises. Being thus 
 encouraged, the success of Mr. Macpherson's further 
 researches, as reported by himself, exceeded all anticipa- 
 tion. He discovered one complete Epic poem of six 
 books, called Fingal j and another as complete, of eight 
 books, called Temora ; both composed by Ossian, the son 
 of Fingal. A translation of the former he published 
 in 1762, and of the latter in 1763; and so extensive 
 was their sale, that he is said to have cleared by them 
 1200/. 
 
 The authenticity of these poems was at first believed 
 by many in its fullest extent, even by men of high 
 character in the literary world ; Dr. Blair, in particular, 
 was so persuaded of the truth of Macpherson's state- 
 ment, that he wrote an elaborate dissertation, to prove the 
 antiquity, and illustrate the beauties of the poems. There 
 Avere others, however, of equal reputation for critical 
 acumen, who could not be persuaded of the possibility of 
 picking up complete epics in this way, among the 
 traditional literature of a rude country, and who, from 
 the style of the poems themselves, openly pronounced 
 them to be forgeries. Some few again, who doubted, 
 but were willing to believe, and among them Mr. David 
 Hume, put the question upon a very simple issue. Shew 
 us the original poems, from which you say these transia- 
 
188 SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 
 
 tions have been made, and tell us how they have been 
 thus wonderfully preserved during so many centuries. 
 
 Nothing could have been fairer than this appeal; but 
 Mr. Macpherson, from motives, of which all reasonable 
 men could form but one opinion, haughtily refused to 
 give the public any satisfaction on the subject. 
 
 The prince of literary impostors seems, however, to 
 have been George Psalmanazar; of whom it may be 
 affirmed that, 
 
 " None but himself could be his parallel." 
 Of this extraordinary man, we have the following account. 
 
 " In the beginning of the last century, there appeared 
 in England, a person calling himself George Psalmanazar, 
 who pretended to be a native of the island of Formosa, 
 converted from idolatry by a certain missionary of the 
 Society of Jesus, and that he was obliged to fly from the 
 vengeance of the Japanese, on becoming a Christian. In 
 support of his imposture, he invented a language, which 
 he wrote and spoke to the satisfaction of curious inquirers, 
 alleging it to be that of the island of Formosa, where he 
 was born. He was introduced to Dr. Compton, bishop 
 of London, who listened to his account with pity, and 
 implicit faith ; became his patron; and contributed gener- 
 ously towards his support. The artful conduct of the 
 stranger in producing, and speaking a language, alphabet, 
 and grammar, purely of his own invention, and of his eating 
 raw meat, roots, and herbs, soon rendered him an object 
 of public notice, and occasioned much curious disquisi- 
 tion, between many characters of the first rank in church 
 and state. Psalmanazar drew up in Latin, an account of 
 the island of Formosa, which was translated and hurried 
 through the press, had a rapid sale, and is quoted. 
 
SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 189 
 
 without suspicion, by Buffon. While his adherence to 
 certain singularities in his manner and diet, gathered 
 from popular opinion, or from books, considerably 
 strengthened the imposition, for the carrying on which 
 he was eminently qualified, by possessing a command of 
 countenance, temper, and recollection, which no per- 
 plexity, rough usage, or cross examination, could ruffle 
 or derange. By the favour of the Bishop of Oxford, 
 who proved a warm friend in his cause, Psalmanazar 
 was sent to the University of Oxford. On his return to 
 London, he drew up, at the desire of his ecclesiastical 
 friends, a version of the Church Catechism, in what he 
 called his native tongue, which was examined by the 
 learned, and found regular and grammatical, and pro- 
 nounced a real language, and no counterfeit. At last, the 
 critics, headed by Dr. Douglas, ' the scourge of impos- 
 tures, the terror of quacks,' pointed out various absurdities, 
 and many contradictions in Psalmanazar's narrative, as 
 well as in his declarations; by which he was lowered in 
 the general esteem, his benefactors gradually withdrew 
 their support, and the fraud become at length understood.** 
 He was afterwards employed by the booksellers in 
 writing part of the Universal History, and by degrees 
 became quiet, and comparatively respectable. Privately, 
 he confessed his imposture, but could never be prevailed 
 upon to disclose his real name and country (supposed to 
 be the south of France) saying, he was afraid of dis- 
 gracing his family. In the opinion of Dr. Johnson, who 
 knew Psalmanazar in his latter years, his repentance was 
 sincere ; and Johnson used to say, that the sorrows of 
 Psalmanazar in speaking of his deception, were heartfelt, 
 strong and energetic; it was no common grief, arising 
 
190 SIR PHILIP FRAJ^CIS. 
 
 from blasted hopes, but a real hatred of himself, for the 
 crime he had committed, and a dread of that punishment 
 which he thought he had deserved. 
 
 With these numerous facts before us, it surely ought 
 not to excite the least surprise, to find that the terse and 
 brilliant style of Junius has been successfully imitated 
 by Sir Philip Francis and others. 
 
 Mr. Barker strenuously denies that Sir Philip had 
 either talents or leisure to write the Letters of Junius. 
 '< I ask," says he, "Mr. Taylor, whether he supposes that 
 an inferior clerk in the War-Office, which Mr. Taylor 
 himself confesses to have required from its officers, con- 
 stant attendance, could, at the age of twenty-seven (when 
 the earliest production of Junius appeared), have found 
 leisure, — first, to learn the profession of authorship, — 
 secondly, to practise it, — thirdly, to commence the prac- 
 tice with writing, for a regular series of years, papers 
 perfect in their style of composition ? The fact is not at 
 all credible; and is so opposed to common experience, 
 that, if it had actually occurred, it must be regarded as 
 miraculous; and the testimony, even of an ocular wit- 
 ness, could not easily work its way to our belief. But 
 admitting that Sir Philip was constantly resident in town 
 during this period (and his private correspondence with 
 his friends, as well as the transactions in the War- Office, 
 would confirm or refute the fact of constant attendance) ; 
 admitting that he was the amanuensis of Junius; admit- 
 ting that, notwithstanding his situation at the War-Office 
 required constant attendance, he had leisure to corre- 
 spond with Woodfall so frequently and fully, in the name 
 of Junius, — I must in the most positive manner deny the 
 possibility of his having leisure to compose the public 
 
SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 191 
 
 Letters of Junius, which presuppose the most ample leisure 
 and the most undivided attention; — I will admit that Sir 
 Philip had the 'industry/ — I will admit that he had the 
 ^opportunities/ — but I will not admit, with Mr. Taylor, 
 that he had the Halents.' Mr. Taylor has produced no 
 proof whatever that Sir Philip was, at the time in question, 
 possessed of ' the talents.' It does not necessarily follow 
 that, because a man at the age of forty exhibits great 
 powers of reasoning and much skill in composition, he 
 must have had the same, or similar powers and skill, 
 when he was twenty-seven (the period when the earliest 
 of the Miscellaneous Letters, without the name of Junius, 
 appeared), or twenty-nine, (when the earliest public 
 Le^er of Junius appeared with that signature). There is 
 often a very late, as well as a very early development of 
 abilities; circumstances as often retard the one, as they 
 promote the other." — Barker's Letters, pp. 44 and 121. 
 
 '* Sir Philip, it should seem, had written nothing before 
 he entered the War-Office — not one of his avowed pub- 
 lications bear a date prior to the first acknowledged 
 compositions of Junius. The evidence, then, in favour 
 of Sir Philip, apparently strong on other points, totally 
 fails here. But had Sir Philip published any paper in 
 the style of Junius, prior to the appearance of Junius's, 
 it would have been a powerful argument for Sir Philip's 
 claim, in connexion with the other testimony." (p. 33). 
 
 " Sir Philip might, by a frequent perusal of Junius's 
 Letters as a model of composition, have gradually ob- 
 tained all that energy of expression, that cogency of 
 reasoning, and that power of sarcasm, for which Sir 
 Philip was, long subsequently to the retirement of 
 Junius, remarkable." (p. 35). 
 
192 SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 
 
 In order to afford the reader a clear view of the princi- 
 pal facts and arguments that have been advanced for and 
 against the claim of Sir Philip Francis, we shall proceed to 
 give, first, the Reviewer's statements in favour of his claim, 
 and then an abstract of Mr. Barker's answers thereto. 
 
 ''There are many particular circumstances of a per- 
 sonal and historical nature," adds the Reviewer, "that go 
 far to make out the proposition, that Sir Philip Francis 
 was the author of the Letters of Junius. The first of 
 these is the exactness with which the dates of the letters 
 tally with Sir Philip Francis's residence in this country, 
 and his going abroad. In biographical memoirs, under- 
 stood to have been drawn up by a person connected with 
 him, it is stated, that Sir Philip spent the greatest part 
 of the year 1772 on the continent. Now, the last letter 
 of Junius in that year, is dated May 12th, and was re- 
 ceived by Woodfall two days before. Sir Philip Francis's 
 dismissal from the War-Office is announced in one of the 
 letters of * Veteran' (a name under which Woodfall has 
 shewn that Junius then wrote), dated March 23d ; and 
 some time must naturally have elapsed before he set out, 
 A letter of Junius, dated in May, mentions his having 
 been out of town ; and, in point of fact, he wrote nothing 
 from March 23d to May 4th. Sir Philip's father was 
 then ill at Bath ; and it is most probable that he went to 
 see him before going abroad. From the above notice in 
 the memoirs, it appears that he must have returned at 
 the end of 1772, or early in 1773, provided we are 
 satisfied that he went abroad in May: for it is there 
 stated, that about half-a-year after his return, he was 
 recommended as one of the new Council at Fort William. 
 Now, the Act appointing the Council passed in June 
 
SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 193 
 
 1773; which tallies with the supposition of his arrival 
 having been in the month of December or January pre- 
 ceding. Keeping these facts in view, it is very important 
 to remark, that the first letter received by Woodfall from 
 Junius, after the letter of May 1772, is dated January 
 19, 1773. This, too, was also the last letter which he 
 ever wrote. The appointment of Sir Philip Francis to 
 India, was, either then or soon after, in agitation; for it 
 was finally arranged before June. And the presumption 
 is, that the prospect of being sent to India put a period 
 to the labours of Junius. 
 
 Ans, — I must confess that these are singular coinci- 
 dences; but if circumstances of this kind are to be consi- 
 dered as decisive evidences, the pretensions of many other 
 claimants are so far equally good. For — 1. It appears 
 that the final note of Junius to Woodfall is dated January 
 19, 1773, and Lloyd died on the 23d of the same month. 
 2. A speech of Burke's was reported by Junius and sent 
 to Almon for publication, and is the only existing report 
 of the speech. 3. Junius writes with a minute know- 
 ledge of military affairs, and Lord George Sackville is 
 thence supposed to have written the Letters of Junius. 
 4. Junius and General Lee coincide in personal hatred 
 of the Duke of Grafton, in the use of certain very 
 remarkable phrases, and in a quotation from Seneca. It 
 would be easy to multiply instances of curious agree- 
 ment between Junius and several of the claimants; but 
 the aggregate number of similar instances, in reference 
 to the entire number of claimants, may serve to convince 
 the wary that it is not safe, in the case of any particular 
 claimant, to rely confidently oij any such agreement. 
 (p. 163). 
 
194 SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 
 
 Rev. — It is known that Sir Philip was a clerk in the 
 War Office from 1763 to 1772 ; and Junius evinces a pecu- 
 liar acquaintance with, and interest in, the business and 
 persons of that department. As some of those persons 
 are obscure individuals, compared with the distinguished 
 objects of his ordinary attacks, a very strong presump- 
 tion arises from hence, that the anonymous writer was 
 himself connected with the office; and the familiar tone 
 in which they are mentioned, greatly strengthens the 
 conclusion. We shall principally advert to what he 
 says of Mr. Bradshaw, Mr. Chamier, and Mr. D'Oyly. 
 Junius, in the thirty-sixth letter, dwells at some length 
 upon Bradshaw's pension, and speaks of him in terms 
 indicative of considerable personal animosity. In a note, 
 he says, " He was too cunning to trust Irish security." 
 He gives a sketch of his history, tracing him from his 
 beginning, " as a clerk to a contractor for forage,'* — to 
 his being exalted to a petty place in the War Office, — 
 and sarcastically remarking, that, upon his subsequent 
 promotion, he thought it necessary to take the great house 
 in Lincoln's Inn Fields, where the Lord Chancellor 
 Worthington had resided. In the fifty-seventh letter, he 
 is called the Duke of Grafton's " cream-coloured para- 
 site;" and in the letters signed Domitian and Veteran, 
 published by Woodfall, he is familiarly mentioned as 
 Tommy Bradshaw, the cream-coloured Mercury, whose 
 sister. Miss Polly, like the moon, lives upon the light of 
 her brother's countenance, and robs him of no small part 
 of his lustre. In a letter, also written by Junius, but 
 under another name, Bradshaw is said to observe, that 
 the writer has drawn his intelligence from the first source, 
 and not the common falsities of the day; and of this, he 
 
SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 195 
 
 says, Bradshaw cannot be ignorant. But although it is 
 clear that Junius's prejudice against this gentleman was 
 of long standing, and connected with his more obscure 
 situation in the War Office, it is also true, that, at the 
 time of the attacks upon him, he filled a considerable 
 station, and was more in the public eye. This, however, 
 can hardly be said of Mr. Chamier, upon whom a far 
 more incessant fire is kept up. He is termed, that well- 
 educated, genteel young broker, Mr. Chamier. A scene 
 is figured between Lord Barrington, his patron, and a 
 general officer, in which every kind of ridicule is thrown 
 upon Chamier. He is called Tony Shammy — Little 
 Shammy — a tight, active little fellow — a little gambling 
 broker — Little Waddlewell — my Duckling — Little Three 
 per Cents, reduced — a mere scrip of a secretary — an 
 omnium of all that's genteel — with many other coarse 
 and scurrilous appellations. No less than four letters 
 are addressed to Lord Barrington in the bitterest tone 
 of invective, in consequence of Chamier's promotion; 
 and it appears that his relationship with Bradshaw is 
 one of the chief grounds of attack upon the latter. 
 
 Ans. — Mr. Taylor contends, from several arguments, 
 that " Junius was in some degree connected with the 
 Horse Guards." " There is such precision in the secret 
 intelligence from that quarter, conveyed to Woodfall or 
 to the public, as occurs in no other department of the 
 state, and could not be acquired from this, except by one 
 who had access to the fountain-head for information." 
 Admitting the fact to be so, am I obliged to admit that 
 Sir Philip was the sole oracle consulted? Am I obliged 
 to believe that an inferior clerk could know all the secrets 
 of his principals in the office? Am I obliged to confess 
 
 o2 
 
196 SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 
 
 that Lord George Sackville and others could not, directly 
 or indirectly, intentionally or unintentionally, have con- 
 veyed some of this secret information? (p. 225). 
 
 Does the military language of Junius merely betray 
 such "minute and commissarial knowledge" as might be 
 expected from one connected with the Horse Guards or 
 the War Office? Or does it exhibit a practical or theo- 
 retical knowledge of the military art itself? In the 
 former case it is equally applicable to Lord George 
 Sackville and Sir Philip Francis; and in the latter case 
 it so far favours the pretensions of General Lee. (p. 41). 
 
 Rev. — It is to be observed, that Junius took care not 
 to write any of the letters upon Chamier's promotion, 
 under his usual signature, because this would at once 
 have directed the suspicions of the public towards the 
 War Office, as the quarter in which he lurked, and even 
 towards the individuals chiefly interested in the questions 
 respecting Chamier. For the same reason, we find him 
 urging Woodfall to conceal his being the author of these 
 attacks upon Lord Barrington. Keep the author a 
 secret, says he, (Woodfall, i. 125); that is, keep the 
 secret that Junius, Veteran, Nemesis, etc., are the same 
 person; for he knew no other author than Junius. It 
 is, however, not at all improbable, that the clue to the 
 discovery of Sir Philip Francis was furnished by these 
 letters on the War Office; for they are the last ever 
 written by Junius, except the private letter to Woodfall 
 in January 1773; so that he seems, on being detected, 
 probably by Lord Barrington, to have given over writing; 
 and he was soon after appointed to the Council in 
 Calcutta. 
 
 Arts, — Had the earliest publication of Junius been 
 
SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 197 
 
 simultaneous with the appearance of the letters of 
 Veteran, there would have been much force in the argu- 
 ments of Mr. Taylor for identifying the two writers with 
 Sir Philip, as we can easily conceive that a man wishing 
 to plead his own cause may contrive to identify it with 
 public questions, — that public spirit may arise out of 
 private motives, — that public good may be the professed 
 aim, while individual interest is the secret spring, — and 
 that patriotism may be apparently the ruling principle, 
 while party purposes are the latent and real objects. 
 Events of this kind are, even in our times, sufficiently 
 obvious to attest the truth of this remark. Sir Philip 
 Francis might, as a clerk in the War Office, with the 
 consciousness of slig:hted services, or as a man with the 
 vengeance of outraged feelings, have had good reason 
 for exposing the transactions of that office to public 
 animadversion — for denouncing certain individuals — for 
 appealing to public sympathy, and for indentifying his 
 cause with the public good. All this is perfectly natural 
 and quite intelligible, — it might have given birth to a 
 Junius, but unluckily for the hypothesis, Junius had sprung 
 up two or three years before; at first under other names, 
 and then under that Roman appellation — Junius — had 
 taken his station, and that elevated station related not 
 to the proceedings of the War Office alone or chiefly, 
 avowedly or secretly, which we should have expected 
 from Sir Philip Francis as a clerk in that office ; but to 
 the proceedings of the ministry and of the parliament, 
 and the general transactions of the empire, and to the 
 advancement of the public interests. . Influenced then 
 by this consideration, I cannot admit the claims made 
 for Sir Philip Francis to the authorship of Junius, and 
 
198 SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 
 
 I would urge on the mind of the reader this novel objec- 
 tion, with all the force with which it can be employed. 
 (p. 4). 
 
 If the letters of Veteran were known to be the compo- 
 sition of Sir Philip himself, it would not thence follow 
 that Junius, who sent them to Woodfall, was the writer 
 of them, though he took pains to inform him that he was 
 the writer — the subject suited the political purposes of 
 Junius, and that would of itself be a sufficient motive 
 for him to let them pass under the shadow of his name, 
 (p. 226). 
 
 Rev, — Junius also shews an uncommon acquaintance 
 with, and interest in, the transactions of the Foreign 
 Department as well as the War Office ; and the period 
 to which his knowledge refers, precedes the death of 
 Lord Egremont in 1763. Now Sir Philip was appointed 
 a clerk in the Foreign Office in 1756; and having 
 afterwards gone to St. Cas, as General Bligh's secretary 
 in 1758, and to Lisbon in 1760, with Lord Kinnoul; 
 he returned to the Foreign Office between October 1761, 
 and August 1763 ; for, in a speech made by Sir Philip 
 in the House of Commons, he says, "that he possessed 
 Lord Egremont's favour in the Secretary of State's Office j 
 and that nobleman came into it, October 1761, and 
 died August 1763." 
 
 ^ns. — A man like Junius, conversant with courts and 
 courtiers, and ministers, and officers civil and military, 
 and members of parliament, was much more likely to 
 obtain secret news from some of them, than from an 
 inferior clerk in a public office, who could be expected to 
 furnish only facts and circumstances and proceedings of 
 a minor importance, because they alone would fall within 
 his ken. (p. 224). 
 
SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 
 
 199 
 
 Jle^c. — The manner in which Junius always treats 
 Lord Chatham, coincides exactly with the expressions of 
 Sir Philip in his speeches and writing ; and is such as 
 might naturally be expected to result from the kindness 
 he had received from that great man, as well as from his 
 known principles. But the high admiration of Lord Chat- 
 ham, which Junius has shewn, seems not easily reconciled 
 with his kindness towards his antagonist Lord Holland. 
 
 Ans. — In order to identify Sir Philip with Junius 
 from the sentiments avowed by each about Lord Chatham, 
 Mr. Taylor is required to prove that Sir Philip ever at 
 any period of his whole life sympathized with Junius in 
 personal hatred and political hostility, or even in the 
 smallest degree of personal and political aversion, to 
 Lord Chatham ; if he cannot produce such a proof, then 
 I maintain that he ought to abandon his opinion as quite 
 untenable, from this consideration alone. Had Junius 
 felt and avowed, on every occasion throughout his poli- 
 tical career, an ardent attachment to the person, and the 
 highest respect for the talents and the character, of Lord 
 Chatham, and a particular delight in adopting his sen- 
 timents and applying his language, as we know to have 
 been the case in regard to Sir Philip Francis, then I 
 hesitate not to declare that there would have been such 
 a proof of identity between these two patriots, as would 
 have been most satisfactory, and perhaps conclusive on 
 the question. Junius's early aversion to Lord Chatham 
 was political, and his late attachment to him was political 
 only ; whereas Sir Philip never had any political aversion 
 to him, and always felt, professed, and manifested a 
 steady personal attachment to himr Junius represents 
 Lord Chatham to have been a public criminal and a 
 
200 SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 
 
 political apostate, and Sir Philip merely describes hira 
 as "a great, illustrious, faulty human being;'^ and there- 
 fore Junius and Sir Philip were unquestionably two 
 distinct persons. — Sir Philip is, in his public character, 
 allowed by all impartial men to have been a man of the 
 most unblemished moral integrity^ and of the purest 
 political principles. Now, to suppose him to have been 
 the author of Junius, is in fact to proclaim him a villain 
 of no vulgar cast; for he must henceforth be regarded by 
 lis as a base in grate to his great benefactor, patron, and 
 friend, the Earl of Chatham, without any assigned or 
 assignable cause. It is to proclaim Sir Philip a hypo- 
 crite of the deepest dye^ professing in his parliamentary 
 speeches and avowed productions to have ever felt the 
 strongest attachment to the person, and the highest vene- 
 ration for the character, of Lord Chatham, when he had 
 in truth commenced his literary and political career by a 
 series of virulent and anonymous libels on him. (p. 30). 
 
 Rev. — Junius shews a manifest forbearance towards 
 the Fox family, not under his usual signature of Junius, 
 but under another, assumed for the obvious purpose of 
 concealing it, and yet of keeping them from forcing him 
 into a contest with them. The history of Sir Philip at 
 once explains all this. His father was Lord Holland's 
 domestic chaplain, lived on intimate terms with him, 
 and dedicated his translation of Demosthenes to him, 
 as the patron to whom he owed his church preferment. 
 Sir Philip himself received from Lord Holland his first 
 place in the Foreign Office. 
 
 There is reason to believe, that Junius was known to 
 Garrick. Sir Philip Francis has told us, in the preface 
 to the play of Eugenia, that he enjoyed the "friendship 
 
SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 201 
 
 and esteem of Garrick." — Under the administration of 
 Mr. Grenville, Sir Philip was appointed to the War 
 Office; with that statesman he most nearly concurred 
 in all political opinions; and Mr. Grenville was above all 
 men the declared favourite of Junius. 
 
 Ans. — If Junius did not, from motives of friendship, 
 spare Garrick, why should he from such motives spare 
 Lord Holland? If Sir Philip Francis were Junius, he 
 was evidently the most unprincipled politician and the 
 most profligate writer that ever lived; and I cannot 
 admit any argument founded on the honour or delicacy 
 of Sir Philip. There is no particular point in the argu- 
 ment about Mr. Grenville, because it would apply much 
 more strongly to Charles Lloyd, who was the private 
 Secretary to Mr. Grenville, and to Lord George Sackville, 
 who entertained a very high opinion of Mr. Grenville, as 
 an individual, and as a statesman, (p. 224). 
 
 Rev. — It is clear, from his private correspondence, 
 that Junius bore a great personal good-will towards 
 Woodfallj and in a letter to Mr. Wilkes, he expresses much 
 anxiety about Woodfall's safety; says that the danger 
 to which he is exposed, afflicts and distresses him; and 
 plainly insinuates, that he has spared Lord Mansfield for 
 WoodfalFs sake; but, for other publishers, he seems to 
 have felt no such tenderness; for he frequently tells 
 Woodfall, if he is afraid himself, that he may send such 
 and such letters to other printers, whom he names. 
 Now, it appears that Woodfall was only a year older 
 than Sir Philip, and was educated at St. Paul's School, 
 where the latter is known to have been bred; and it is 
 said, that Mr. Woodfall's son speaks"of the acquaintance 
 formed there between Sir Philip and his father, as having 
 
202 SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 
 
 given rise to a mutual kindness during their after lives, 
 though they rarely met. This tallies peculiarly well 
 with the suspicion expressed by Junius in one part of his 
 correspondence, that Woodfall might know him. He 
 says, " I beg you will tell me candidly whether you know 
 or suspect who I am." 
 
 Ans.— Junius preferred Woodfall's paper, not because 
 Woodfall was his schoolfellow and his friend, but because 
 his paper was on many accounts the fittest receptacle for 
 his articles — because he could rely on the moral integrity, 
 and the personal courage, and the political consistency of 
 Woodfall. He gave the second preference to Almon for 
 similar reasons, and not from any particular friendship 
 for him. (p. 129). 
 
 In a letter from Mr. Coventry to Mr. Barker, dated 
 June 18th, 1828, he says — "I breakfasted with Mr. 
 Woodfall yesterday morning at Westminster : he presents 
 his compliments, and requested me to forward the anec- 
 dote about Francis, if of any use. You are doubtless 
 aware that his father and Francis were schoolfellows — 
 educated at St. Paul's School. In after years they 
 generally attended the anniversary dinners. On one of 
 these occasions, on Mr. Woodfall's returning home, he 
 met an intimate friend, who said — <I met you and 
 Junius going to the Pauline Festival.' 'To whom do 
 you allude?' replied Mr. Woodfall. 'Francis to be sure, 
 there is no other Junius.' *To my certain knowledge,' 
 replied Mr. Woodfall, 'Francis had no more to do with 
 Junius than either you or I.' The gentleman was quite 
 satisfied with Mr. Woodfall's positive denial, and wished 
 him good evening. Mr. Woodfall informed me, that 
 there were many reasons why Francis had no hand in the 
 
SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 203 
 
 Letters — his father knew him so well — his capabilities — 
 his confined situation — the sphere which he moved in, as 
 well as the risk that he would run in being thrown upon 
 the world neglected, — all concurred, united with his 
 positive denial, to cause Mr. Woodfall to know, that 
 the motto ^ Stat nominis umbra' would never be solved in 
 the son of Dr. Francis." — Barker s Pref. 61. 
 
 Rev, — It appears, from various passages in Junius, 
 that the author used to attend the debates in parliament, 
 and that he frequently took notes of the more important 
 speeches: that he did so, more especially, in the years 
 1770 and 1771, is clearly proved, by his quoting Lord 
 Chatham's speeches, from reports not then made public, 
 and by his frequently referring to debates in which he 
 was present. Sir Philip Francis is known to have been 
 an occasional attendant upon the debates during the same 
 period, — for he cites Lord Chatham's speeches at that 
 time as having heard them; and there seems no reason 
 to doubt that he is the member of parliament, described 
 by Almon in his life of Lord Chatham, as having fur- 
 nished him with notes of those speeches, taken by him 
 when he was not in parliament. But there is a more 
 remarkable coincidence than this between Junius and 
 Sir Philip : — Lord Chatham's speech, at the opening of 
 the session in January 1770, was reported by Sir Philip, 
 and communicated, first to Almon, who published it 
 1791, and then to the Parliamentary History (xvi. 647). 
 The publisher of the latter work informed Mr. Taylor, 
 that he received it from Sir Philip, who was present at 
 the debate. Now, a comparison of this speech with some 
 of Junius's letters, proves very satisfactorily that Junius 
 must either have heard the speech, and taken notes of it. 
 
204 SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 
 
 or received notes from somebody who was present ; and 
 not only so, but that the notes which he took or received 
 were nearly the same with those taken by Sir Philip. 
 
 There are many expressions in the speeches of Lord 
 Chatham, reported by Sir Philip, which appear to be 
 favourite expressions of Junius : thus — * false fact' — */ am 
 a plain mart — ipso facto — the law of the land — simplicity of 
 common sense^ etc. 
 
 Ans. — These circumstances are not positive proofs of 
 identity, but only strong presumptions; and, as there 
 are strong presumptions in favour of many other claims 
 for the authorship of Junius, we should exercise great 
 caution in receiving such evidence in any particular 
 case. Junius had great and real occasion "to attend 
 the debates," because he wished " to collect the scattered 
 sweets" of parliamentary eloquence, and to obtain authen- 
 tic political information; and 'Uo take notes," because 
 he wished to refer to them as guides; and "to report 
 speeches," because he wished for his own purpose to 
 diffuse the information which he possessed. But Sir 
 Philip Francis, as an inferior clerk in a public office, 
 should be presumed to have had very different objects 
 in view ; and there is nothing to prove that these objects 
 were political, and every thing to presume that they 
 were not. As a man patronized and befriended by Lord 
 Chatham, whom a youthful mind would in any cir- 
 cumstances admire, and whom Sir Philip in his own 
 circumstances must have loved, there can be no doubt 
 that, if he took notes of, and reported any speeches, he 
 would feel particular delight in selecting the- speeches of 
 Lord Chatham. As a clever man, and of steady habits 
 in business, he would very probably be requested to take 
 
SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 205 
 
 notes and report speeches, by any person who for his 
 own purposes wished to have an account of parliamentary 
 proceedings — even Junius himself might, directly or 
 indirectly, have employed the head and the pen of Sir 
 Philip in this way. An inferior clerk in a public office, 
 who possessed shining talents, and constantly resided in 
 London, is precisely the person who would be likely to 
 eke out in this manner the deficiencies of income for a 
 genteel competency; and refined notions of honour, and 
 delicate scruples of conscience, must not be expected from 
 a man in that dependent situation, (p. 222). 
 
 Rev. — There are many favourite expressions in the 
 avowed original works of Sir Philip, which Junius also 
 indulges habitually : — ' Of his side' — * so far forth' — 
 'I mean the public service' — ^ (for, I would promote),* 
 There is, moreover, in the general manner of writing, a 
 resemblance extremely striking, especially where the 
 author is off" his guard, and permits his natural temper 
 to appear. Sir Philip's later works resemble, in this 
 respect, the private notes to Woodfall, so strikingly, that 
 we need scarcely to give any examples. There is, for 
 instance, a short note of Sir Philip in this publication, in 
 the following terms: — 'Pray never mind anything I say, 
 I slave myself to death, and write and speak on instant 
 impression ; 50 I am very sorry if I have offended you.* 
 The very same tone, and almost the same words, occur 
 in two notes of Junius, printed by Woodfall; — one of 
 which begins — 'Pray tell me whether George Onslow 
 means to keep his word with you;' and ends, 'and so I 
 wish you good-night :' and another runs thus — ' Make 
 yourself easy about me — I know you are an honest 
 man — I am never angry — I am overcome with the slavery 
 
206 SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 
 
 of writing/ We have not room to add other instances ; 
 but we have heard, that, among those persons in London 
 who have lived in his society, and are acquainted with his 
 mode of expression, the conviction of his being the author 
 of the Letters, is exceedingly strengthened by this likeness. 
 
 Ans. — The above "favourite expressions" are satisfac- 
 torily accounted for, on the supposition that Sir Philip 
 was the imitator of Junius. It is unnatural to suppose 
 that such a phrase, as " I am overcome with the slavery/ 
 of writing," would fall from the pen of one, who had, at 
 the time in question, been upwards of twenty years, and 
 was still employed, as a secretary or as a clerk. Writing 
 could not be so irksome to him; nor could it be irksome 
 to Burke, whose pen was so incessantly at work; though 
 it might be irksome to General Lee, or to Lord George 
 Sackville. But it is possible that Sir Philip might, either 
 by mere coincidence with Junius, or by imitation of him, 
 use such a phrase, and feel the truth of the idea, after 
 his return from a high station in India, when he had 
 forgotten, or was willing to forget, the secretaryships 
 and clerkships of his youth, (p. 93). 
 
 Rev» — Sir Philip's appointment to India is extremely 
 well accounted for, by the supposition that he was the 
 author of Junius's Letters. That a clerk in the War 
 Office should, without having done anything to make 
 him known, be sent out at once as a member of the 
 Supreme Council, to which, for the first time, the powers 
 of government were about to be entrusted, seems at any 
 rate sufficiently strange to require an explanation. 
 
 He was not connected by family with any man of 
 weight in the ministry ; he was wholly unknown at the 
 India House ; he was equally obscure in the public eye ; 
 
SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 207 
 
 nor does it appear that he had any patron who interested 
 himself in his promotion, previously to the spring of 1772, 
 since, at that time, he was turned out of the office, to make 
 way for a favourite of the minister, in whose department 
 he served. The next thing we hear of, after this dis- 
 missal, is his mission to India as a satrap, in very critical 
 circumstances. But there is nothing surprising in the 
 appointment, if we suppose that he either suffered him- 
 self to be known, or was detected, as Junius after his 
 removal from the War Office j and that the minister, 
 now made aware of his extraordinary talents, and of the 
 risk to which they might expose him, recommended a 
 step, justified by the qualifications of Sir Philip, and 
 counselled by his own apprehension. If the secret was 
 only communicated to one man — if Sir Philip knew this, 
 and made that one man personally responsible for its 
 being kept, there was no doubt it will be so. There was 
 something in the nature of the transaction which imposed 
 silence upon both the parties ; and Sir Philip, who had 
 the chief interest in its concealment, was ready, during 
 the whole lifetime of the other party, to watch over his 
 fulfilment of the compact. 
 
 Arts. — The administration of the day, in appointing a 
 council for the government of Bengal, would naturally 
 look round among their own friends, connexions, and 
 dependents, for a proper person to fill the important 
 office. On inquiry they found Sir Philip well qualified 
 for the situation, and recommended to them as such a 
 person. They knew that he had in 1756 held a post 
 in the Secretary of State's Office; in 1758, was appointed 
 secretary to General Bligh ; in 1760, secretary to the 
 Earl of Kinnoul, ambassador to Lisbon; and in 1763, 
 
208 SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 
 
 had held an important place in the War Office, which he 
 continued to hold till 1772. His moral character was, 
 therefore, perfectly well known to the Government; they 
 had had abundant experience of his capacity for public 
 business, and his adroitness in official arrangements; and 
 they must have discovered in him the germ of those 
 talents, which he was afterwards found to display, and 
 which amply justified their choice. They were of course 
 aware that he had quitted the War Office, in consequence 
 of a quarrel with Lord Barrington; but this personal 
 affair between him and his lordship was no sufficient 
 reason why they should decline appointing Mr. Francis to 
 a high office, which he was, in their opinion, so well quali- 
 fied to fill. They justly considered him to have a claim 
 on them for a long career of public services. They 
 would not have appointed him to the Indian post, if 
 Lord Barrington had opposed the appointment; but they 
 perceived that his lordship not only did not oppose, but 
 even recommended the appointment;* and it was not 
 necessary for the ministry to weigh the motives of Lord 
 Barrington in recommending it, whether he was tender- 
 ing to the public service a valuable servant, or was merely 
 desirous to deport an incorrigible offender, or to expel a 
 dangerous enemy to India. This seems to me a fair 
 way of accounting for the promotion of Sir Philip. I 
 grant that, if Lord Barrington had been a personage of 
 demoniacal malignity — such malignity as belonged to Junius 
 himselff — he would not only not have consented to the 
 
 * Lord Barrington 's brother, the late bishop of Durham, in- 
 formed Mr. Butler, that Sir Philip was indebted for his appoint- 
 ment in India to Lord Barrington 's recommendation of him to 
 Lord North. — Butler's Rem,inis. i. 94. 
 
SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 209 
 
 appointment of Sir Philip, but have resisted it in the 
 most determined manner. As, however, I am not dis- 
 posed to believe that such a spirit actuated his lordship, 
 and as I do believe that the generality of mankind would 
 in the same circumstances have acted in the way which 
 1 imagine, and under the feelings which I have described, 
 I cannot think that the elevation of Sir Philip is so very 
 marvellous an event as to require a miracle to attest it; 
 for it is little less than miraculous to make an inferior clerk 
 in the War Office the author of Junius's Letters, (p. 153). 
 
 Rev. — We shall now briefly advert to one or two 
 particulars of evidence more strictly external than any 
 which has yet been considered. 
 
 From several parts of the correspondence with Wood- 
 fall, it should seem that Junius frequently delivered the 
 letters himself. When he employed another hand, we 
 may be well assured it was that of a porter or other 
 ordinaiy messenger, as was ascertained, in one instance, 
 by Wilkes, who examined the person, and learned that he 
 received the packet from a gentleman. That he should 
 entrust anybody with his secret, for the mere purpose 
 of conveying the letters, appears highly improbable; 
 and to have given a packet for Woodfall to a friend to 
 carry, would have been telling him the whole. The 
 figure and appearance of Sir Philip is stated to answer 
 the description of the tall gentleman seen by Mr. Jackson 
 to throw a letter of Junius into Mr. Woodfall's office. 
 
 Jns. — If Sir Philip Francis were the messenger seen 
 by Mr. Jackson, it would not prove his identity with 
 Junius, because Sir Philip might have been both the 
 amanuensis and the messenger of Junius, (p. 59). 
 
 Mev. — There are various peculiarities of spelling which 
 
210 SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 
 
 occur uniformly in both writers ; and neither of them 
 has any such peculiarity that is not common to both. 
 Thus, they both write " practise" with an s ; compleatly, 
 instead of completely ; iwgross, mtire, iwtrust, and many 
 other such words which we usually begin with an e — 
 endeavor without an u; screen with a k; and several 
 others. There may not be much in any of these instances 
 taken singly ; but when we find that all the peculiarities 
 that belong to either writer are common to both, it is 
 impossible not to receive them as ingredients in the mass 
 of evidence. 
 
 It is stated by a person who examined, with Wilkes, 
 the form and folding of the letters received by him, that 
 they both agreed in 'thinking they could see marks of 
 the writer's habit of folding and directing official letters.* 
 
 Last of all, a careful examination has been instituted 
 of the handwriting of Junius ; and the specimens pub- 
 lished by Woodfall have been diligently compared with 
 letters of Sir Philip's. Those of Junius are known to 
 be all written in a feigned hand ; but its general character 
 agrees well with that of Sir Philip's. Wherever, in the 
 hurry of writing, (for example, where a word is inter- 
 lined), the natural hand, or something near it, breaks 
 out, the resemblance is more complete; and certain 
 peculiarities, preserved in the feigned hand, occur also 
 in Sir Philip's. We cannot follow the comparison 
 through its minute details ; but we are confident that it 
 must go far towards satisfying those whom the rest of 
 the argument may have failed to convince. 
 
 When Sir Philip Francis signs with his initials, he 
 draws a short strong line above and below them. The 
 very same lines are uniformly drawn under and over the 
 
SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 211 
 
 initials with which Junius signs his private letters to 
 Woodfall. In correcting the press, they both use, instead 
 of the ordinary sign of deletion, a different and very 
 peculiar sign, exactly the same in both. They both 
 place the asterisk or star of reference to a foot-note at the 
 beginning, and not at the end of the passage to which it 
 belongs— contrary to what may be termed the invariable 
 usage of other writers. They both writ^ the words you 
 and yours, in all cases, with a large Y, the form of 
 which is strikingly alike in both authors. They also use 
 a half-large C at the beginning of a word, — of a peculiar 
 and characteristic formation. Their ciphers or numerals 
 are all formed exactly on the same plan; as are most 
 of their compound letters. Instead of a round dot over 
 the 2, they both invariably use an oblique stroke, sloping 
 in the opposite direction to that of the general writing ; 
 and they mark their quotations, not by inverted commas, 
 but by short perpendicular lines. They are both uni- 
 formly correct, and systematic in the punctuation of 
 their MSS. Both write a distinct little a over &c. ; and 
 connect words divided at the end of a line, not by a 
 hyphen, but a colon, which is repeated, contrary to 
 general usage, at the beginning of the second line, as 
 well as at the end of the first. 
 
 As the above statement does not appear to have 
 been answered by Mr. Barker, or any one else, we sup- 
 pose it must be considered unanswerable. Mr. Barker 
 attempts, indeed, to shew the improbability of the Letters 
 of Junius being in the handwriting of Sir Philip Francis, 
 on account of his writing being so well known to Lord 
 Barrington, and other official persons ; but as many things 
 which at first appear highly improbable, turn out, upon 
 
 p2 
 
212 SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 
 
 mvestigation, to he true, it is quite clear that Mr. Barker's 
 ingenious reasoning cannot overturn Mr. Taylor's state- 
 ment of facts, namely, "that the peculiar orthography 
 and the handwriting of Sir Philip Francis correspond 
 with the Letters of Junius in Mr. Woodfall's possession." 
 
 This statement having now been many years before 
 the public without being denied, disproved, or impugned, 
 must be considered as having stood the necessary test, 
 and admitted to be true. 
 
 At the same time it should be remembered, that we 
 are quite in the dark as to whether the Letters were 
 written by the hand of Junius himself, or that of an 
 amanuensis, or whether some of them were written by 
 the one, and some by the other. And all the circum- 
 stances of the similarity of handwriting, and peculiarity 
 of orthography, may be fully accounted for on the sup- 
 position, of Sir Philip having been the amanuensis of 
 Junius. But this is a point Mr. Barker declined dis- 
 cussing; for he tells us, "I shall not, on the present 
 occasion, examine the claims of Sir Philip to be con- 
 sidered as the amanuensis of Junius ; he may or may not 
 have been the amanuensis; I know not what opinion 
 I might, on mature consideration, form about this point." 
 (p. 112). 
 
 In November 1817, when the Review, from which 
 the foregoing extracts are taken, was published, Sir Philip 
 Francis was still living, and it will be seen from the 
 following passage, that the Reviewer confidently antici- 
 pated the full disclosure of the secret at his death, for he 
 says: — "There are some other considerations, of a more 
 general nature, which deserve notice in this argument. 
 Sir Philip Francis is still living; and that of itself 
 
SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 213 
 
 furnishes a ground of presumption. The improbability 
 is great, that the real Junius should have died, and left 
 no trace by which to detect him. That he should have 
 wished to be for ever unknown, is not likely ; that he 
 should have been able to elude all discovery, after his 
 decease, is still less so. The curiously bound set of 
 Letters which he had from Woodfall by his own direc- 
 tions, at once afforded a reason for believing that he 
 intended to retain the means of proving his title, at a 
 distant period, and exposed him to detection after his 
 death, if he allowed that event to happen before he 
 declared himself." — But alas! these expectations were 
 never realized, for Sir Philip Francis died on the 22d 
 December 1818, without ^making any sign,' to corro- 
 borate the suspicions of his being the veritable Junius. 
 
 " It should be remembered by the reader," says Mr. 
 Barker, "that this celebrated Review does not contain 
 any new facts, or the development of any new principles 
 of reasoning, for the elucidation of this subject, and that 
 it does not display any particular acquaintance with the 
 subject; but that its sole merit consists in a clear and 
 succinct, an able and lawyer-like statement of the evi- 
 dence which is contained in Mr. Taylor's book; and 
 that this book, with Woodfall's Junius, is apparently the 
 only book on the question which the Reviewer had 
 studied." 
 
 "The impression produced by Mr. Taylor's well written 
 pamphlet," says Dr. Parr in a letter which has been laid 
 before the public — '* and an elaborate critique on it in the 
 Edinburgh Review, still direct the national faith towards 
 Sir Philip Francis. He was too proud to tell a lie, and 
 he disclaimed the work. He was too vain to refuse 
 
214 SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 
 
 celebrity, which he was conscious of deserving. He was 
 too intrepid to shrink, when danger had nearly passed by. 
 He was too irascible to keep the secret, by the pub- 
 lication of which, he, at this time of day, could injure no 
 party with which he is connected, nor any individual for 
 whom he cared. Besides, dear sir, we have many books 
 of his writing upon many subjects, and all of them 
 stamped with the same character of mind. Their general 
 lexis (as we say in Greek), has no resemblance to the lexis 
 of Junius; and the resemblance in particulars, can have 
 far less weight than the resemblance of which there is no 
 vestige. Francis uniformly writes English. There is 
 Gallicism in Junius. Francis is furious, but not male- 
 volent. Francis is never cool, and Junius is seldom 
 ardent." 
 
 Mr. Butler also makes the following remarks upon the 
 critique in the Edinburgh Review : — "That respectable 
 writer produced several passages from the works, of 
 which Sir Philip was certainly the author, and finds in 
 them a similar tone and equal merit. With due defer- 
 ence to his authority, the reminiscent begs leave to 
 think, that if these passages shew that Sir Philip was 
 no mean writer, they also prove that he was not Junius. 
 To bring the question to a direct issue — Are the glow 
 and loftiness discernible in every page of Junius, once 
 visible in any of these extracts ? Where do we find in 
 the writings of Sir Philip, those thoughts that breathe, 
 words that burn, which Junius scatters in every page? 
 a single drop of the cobra capella, which falls from Junius 
 so often ? The advocates of the claim in favour of Sir 
 Philip urge as a strong circumstance in its support, 
 that, without family, without patronage, without any 
 
SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 215 
 
 one pretension to the notice of the king or the minister, 
 he was suddenly raised from an obscure seat in the War 
 Office, to a situation of dignity and emolument, which a 
 nobleman would be happy to procure for his son. This, 
 they say, shews that something was attached to Sir Philip 
 Francis, which rendered the purchase of him, at that 
 time, even at a very high price, an object to government. 
 Now, at the critical moment, in which Sir Philip Francis 
 was thus promoted, Junius ceased to write : — this, they 
 conclude, makes it highly probable that the silence of 
 Junius was purchased by the promotion of Sir Philip. 
 
 "But this is open to several observations. — In all his 
 correspondence with Woodfall, Junius describes him- 
 self, — and very unaffectedly, — as a man of fortune, mix- 
 ing at large with the world; and promises to indemnify 
 him against any pecuniary loss which he might sustain 
 in consequence of any prosecutions for the Letters; 
 leaving him, however, to abide its other consequences. 
 Nothing of this is reconcileable with the situation of 
 Sir Philip Francis at the time when these Letters ap- 
 peared: — It should be added, that Sir Philip was then 
 very young. Junius had evidently been a great con- 
 stitutional reader; does Sir Philip appear to have been 
 such, from any of his writings — even the latest?" But to 
 bring the matter at once to issue, Mr. Butler transcribes 
 from the article on Junius, in the Edinburgh Review, a 
 passage from a publication, in which Sir Philip attacks 
 Lord Thurlow; then, inserts a passage in which Junius 
 attacks Lord Mansfield, and requests the reader will 
 compare them; and, afterwards, compare the extract 
 from Junius, with the passage on Hyder Ally's invasion 
 of the Carnatic, transcribed from one of Mr. Burke's 
 
216 SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 
 
 speeches; and asks, "will not he find the inferiority of Sir 
 Philip so great, as to render it impossible that he should 
 have been the author of Junius's Letters? On the other 
 hand, will he not find the difference, we do not say in 
 the styles, but in the minds of Junius and Burke, to be 
 such, as to render it quite evident that Burke and Junius 
 were not the same persons ?" — Butler's Reminis. i. 93. 
 
 ** I agree with my enlightened and excellent friend 
 Mr. Butler in many of his positions," says Mr. Barker; 
 " those I shall pass over, and merely notice such as 
 require some observations. 
 
 " Mr. Butler considers Junius to have been * a man of 
 rank, from the tone of equality which he seems to use 
 quite naturally in his addresses to persons of rank, and 
 in his expressions respecting them,' and from the diffi- 
 culty, which a man of an inferior rank would experience 
 in maintaining this 'tone of equality.' Now, it is 
 rather extraordinary that he should not have applied this 
 remark to Sir Philip Francis, and seized it as a fair 
 and strong argument against his claims. For — 1. Sir 
 Philip was *a man of inferior rank;' 2. He was a man 
 of inferior station, holding at the time an under-clerkship 
 in the War Office; 3. He must, at the age of twenty- 
 seven (when the earliest known production of Junius 
 appeared), be presumed not to have attained what Mr. 
 Butler properly considers to be matter of difficult attain- 
 ment, viz. 'the tone of equality' alluded to; 4. The 
 humbling servility of office, and the habitual servitude of 
 mind, connected with the daily performance of official 
 duties, and the daily submission to superior authority, 
 continued as they were for a series of years, most plainly 
 demonstrate that Sir Philip could not possibly be the 
 
SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 217 
 
 Junius of high mind, and of high spirit, and of high rank, 
 and of elevated station, whom we seek." (p. 118). 
 
 " He must be a bold man," adds Mr. Barker, " and 
 possess more boldness than judgment, who ventures to 
 contend — unsupported by strong evidence, against the 
 deliberate, and solemn, and impartial authority of Dr. 
 Parr and Mr. Butler, who are most distinguished writers, 
 and from their scholastic habits and professional pur- 
 suits, most admirable judges of literary composition and 
 of legal evidence — that Sir Philip Francis, as a writer, is 
 not inferior to Junius, and that the traces of equality are 
 so visible in Sir Philip, as to justify him in identifying 
 Sir Philip with Junius. Mr. Taylor has delivered such 
 an opinion, before he was acquainted with the sentiments 
 of those illustrious scholars ; and it remains to be seen 
 whether he will persevere in it, now that he has become 
 acquainted with them. It is true that the able writer in 
 the article in the Edinburgh Review has expressed the 
 same opinion as Mr. Taylor; but the Reviewer had not 
 seen the opposite opinion of Dr. Parr and Mr. Butler, 
 and the question is, whether the Reviewer would now 
 hold and assert the same opinion? for it is evident that 
 he had not closely investigated the comparative merits 
 of Junius and Sir Philip Francis as writers j he contents 
 himself with quoting four splendid passages from the 
 writings of Sir Philip, all of which occur in Mr. Taylor's 
 book, and from which he infers the general equality of 
 style between the two writers." (p. 113). 
 
 A writer in No. Ixv. of the North American Review, 
 is also at issue with the Edinburgh Reviewer, and urges 
 the following objections against the the claim of Sir 
 Philip Francis: — 
 
218 SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 
 
 " The pretensions of Sir Philip were set forth a few 
 years ago, in a volume entitled ' Junius Identified/ with 
 all the strength which ingenuity and skill in reasoning 
 could give them. This book was really an excellent 
 specimen of inductive argument, and to a superficial 
 reader, at first view, the evidence which it presents 
 appears absolutely overwhelming. This is owing to the 
 art of the writer, in spreading a few casual coincidences 
 over a great number of pages; in presenting the same 
 argument in different situations, and under different 
 shapes, so as to give it apparently the force of many 
 distinct proofs: in keeping totally out of view the most 
 important objections against his theory, and in making 
 facts and circumstances bend to suit the strain of his 
 reasoning. The evidence, which at first sight appeared 
 so overpowering, becomes very insignificant on a close 
 scrutinizing examination and comparison. It will give 
 some idea of the manner in which the book is made up, 
 when we say that more than sixty pages are occupied with 
 a comparison between the Letters of Junius and a speech 
 of Lord Chatham, said to have been reported by Sir 
 Philip Francis. It would be entirely superfluous at this 
 time to expose the sophistry and contradictions of this 
 work, but we will mention one instance of misrepresenta- 
 tion as a specimen of the rest. In arguing from the alleged 
 similarity of Sir Philip's political views with those of 
 Junius, the author quotes from one of Sir Philip's 
 speeches, a sentiment in regard to the royal prerogative. 
 He says, Sir Philip next observes, ' The prerogatives of 
 the crown are not vested for his own sake in the person 
 who wears it, but to ensure the execution of his office; and 
 then I ask, what power has the constitution reserved to 
 
SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 219 
 
 any set of men to strip the crown of those prerogatives?' 
 — He then goes on to assert, that 'Junius takes the same 
 view of the subject under the following figure: — 'The 
 feather that adorns the royal bird, supports his flight. 
 Strip him of his plumage, and you fix him to the earth.' 
 Now it happens, as any one may see on a reference to 
 the context, and as would have appeared evident, if but 
 the two previous sentences had been quoted, that Junius 
 in using this simile, does not ' take the same view of the 
 subject' in any sense; that he is not even speaking of the 
 king's prerogative at all, and far less attempting to define 
 its firmness or extent. He is speaking of the royal 
 honour, and the public credit. He says, 'The king's 
 honour is that of the people. Their real honour and 
 interest is the same. I am not contending for a vain 
 punctilio. A clear, unblemished character comprehends 
 not only the integrity that will not offer, but the spirit 
 that will not submit to an injury; and whether it belongs 
 to an individual or to a community, it is the foundation 
 of peace, of independence, and of safety. Private credit 
 is wealth; public honour is security. The feather that 
 adorns, etc' 
 
 "An argument is drawn from the similarity of Sir 
 Philip's political views to those of Junius. This simi- 
 larity is proved to exist in one or two instances, but there 
 are also cases of marked disagreement. Sir Philip was 
 an advocate for a more equal representation in the House 
 of Commons. Junius, in a letter to Wilkes, condemns 
 the projects for that purpose. In speaking of the Revo- 
 lutionary contest. Sir Philip declared in the House of 
 Commons, on the principles and in the language of Lord 
 Chatham, that he rejoiced that America had resisted. 
 
220 SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 
 
 ' If this be a concession, these gentlemen are welcome to 
 it. I do not believe it will avail them. I rejoice that 
 America resisted with success, because it was a triumph 
 of unquestionable right over outrageous wrong; of courage 
 and virtue, over tyranny and force.' 
 
 " How do these sentiments agree with the opposition 
 of Junius to Lord Chatham's language, principles, and 
 conduct, on this very subject, and with his unqualified 
 assertions that the noble Lord, and those who acted with 
 him were encouraging rebellion in the colonies? How 
 do they comport with what Junius says of the 'Stamp 
 Act?' 'The people who were most clamorous against it 
 never understood, or v/ilfully misrepresented it.'" 
 
 " It seems to be quite certain," observes Mr. Barker, 
 " that Sir Philip Francis had no private pecuniary 
 resources beyond the emolument of his clerkship in the 
 War Office, which Mr. Taylor estimates, and I dare say 
 correctly enough, at 4001. a-year. Now, from various 
 passages in the private letters of Junius to Woodfall, it is 
 apparent that Junius had good pecuniary resources; for 
 he assures his printer that he shall be indemnified for 
 any expenses which the latter migh incur by prosecutions 
 for libel. But had Sir Philip Francis this command 
 of money, — an inferior clerk in the War Office? It is 
 impossible to believe it ; and if Mr. Taylor expects me 
 to believe it, he is required to produce his authority to 
 substantiate the inference, or his evidence to prove the 
 fact. 2. A very little consideration will satisfy us, that, 
 in order to evince the authorship of Sir Philip, Mr. 
 Taylor has not only to shew that Sir Philip could com- 
 mand any sum necessary for paying the expenses of a 
 public trial, but to demonstrate that he could spare from 
 
SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 221 
 
 his very limited income the cash, which would be wanted 
 to bring out the Letters, in paying for pen, ink, and 
 paper, in collecting political information and private 
 news, in paying postage and carriage and porterage, in 
 remunerating waiters, and in attending taverns, and in 
 a hundred other respects, which would materially abridge 
 an annual income of 400/. 3. Mr. Taylor has not 
 undertaken to establish that Sir Philip, if the writer of 
 the Letters, had the pecuniary support of any political 
 party, or that he was identified with any political party 
 in feelings and in designs. 
 
 '^So much courage, so much talent, so much experience 
 of life, so much knowledge of the world, so perfect an 
 acquaintance with official characters and official business, 
 with public men and private individuals, with the history 
 of the times, the course of passing transactions, the 
 secret motives for ministerial measures, and the secret 
 biography of great statesmen; so much knowledge of 
 city politics and court manoeuvres, were required from 
 him, who should undertake the task of writing the Let- 
 ters of Junius, combined with the necessity of disguising 
 his handwriting, that an inferior clerk in the War Office, 
 habituated to 'the insolence of office' by long servitude, 
 would have shrunk with horror at the thought of making 
 even the attempt." (p. 166). 
 
 Mr. Taylor admits that Sir Philip, when a youth, 
 acquired no more than the rudiments of learning in his 
 native country, Ireland, which he quitted altogether 
 when he was only ten years old, and therefore the strong 
 presumptive evidence which has been adduced to prove 
 that Junius must have been an Irishman, or, educated 
 at the University of Dublin, will not apply to him. 
 
222 SIR PHILIP FRANCIS. 
 
 for he never was at any University; and he quitted 
 Ireland at such a tender age, as to render it morally im- 
 possible that he could have previously acquired that 
 extensive, minute, and local knowledge of Irish families, 
 affairs, and traditions, which forms one of the most 
 remarkable characteristics of Junius. 
 
 Another difficulty, in which Mr. Taylor places him- 
 self, is in respect to Welbore Ellis, Esq., the late Lord 
 Mendip, who was the early patron of Sir Philip Francis, 
 and has received the unmeasured abuse of Junius. After 
 the patronage, which Sir Philip Francis had in early 
 life experienced from Lord Chatham and Lord Mendip, 
 and after the severity, with which they had been treated 
 by Junius, any attempt to identify Sir Philip and Junius, 
 if successful, would be only to procure for Sir Philip 
 literary reputation by the total sacrifice of public and 
 private character; — to proverbialise his name, memorialise 
 his crimes, and eternise his infamy, (p. 171). 
 
 "A cause, however ingeniously pleaded," says Sir Wal- 
 ter Scott, "is not therefore gained. You may remember 
 the neatly-wrought chain of circumstantial evidence, so 
 artificially brought forward to prove Sir Philip Francis's 
 title to the Letters of Junius seemed at first irrefragible, 
 yet the influence of the reasoning has passed away, and 
 Junius, in the general opinion, is as much unknown 
 as ever." — Introductory Epistle to the "Fortunes of Nigel." 
 
LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 
 
 Proud was his tone, but calm ; his eye 
 Had that compelling dignity, 
 His mien that bearing haught and high 
 Which common spirits fear. 
 
 Sir W. Scott. 
 
 Mr. Fox used to say, that "although he would not take Single- 
 Speech Hamilton against the field, he would bet him against 
 any single horse." — On the supposition we have just stated, 
 might not the same bet, with a greater chance of success, have 
 been laid upon Lord George? 
 
 Butler's Meminiscences, i. 106. 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 Lord George Sackville suspected of being the Author of the 
 Letters of Junius on their first appearance. — Account of 
 Mr. Coventry's "Critical Enquiry," in support of his Lord- 
 ship's claim. — Several circumstances stated in favour of 
 his hypothesis. — Sketch of Lord George Sackville's life. — 
 His birth and education shewn to be consistent with certain 
 apparent contradictions concerning Junius. — Enters the 
 Army. — His desire to imitate the heroes of Homer. — The 
 study of Homer shewn to have a tendency to engender a 
 spirit of revenge. — Accompanies his father to Paris. — Is 
 appointed Lieutenant-colonel, and distinguishes himself at 
 the battles of Dettingen, Fontenoy, and Culloden. — Is 
 actively employed by the Duke of Cumberland in sup- 
 pressing the Rebellion of 1745. — The sentiments of Lord 
 George and Junius shewn to correspond respecting the 
 Scots and the Duke of Cumberland. — Attends the Duke of 
 Cumberland in the campaigns of 1 747 and 1 748. — Enters 
 Parliament as member for Dover. — Accompanies his father 
 when again appointed Lord-lieutenant of Ireland as his Chief 
 Secretary. — Lord Orford's account of their administration. — 
 Marries Miss Sambrook. — Is appointed Major-general. — 
 Anecdote of his Lordship and Whitfield. — Is appointed 
 Lieutenant-general and a Privy-counsellor. — Lord Orford's 
 description of his great abilities and influence. — Attends 
 the Duke of Marlborough in the expedition to St. Malo, and 
 afterwards with the army to Germany. — Becomes Commander 
 of the British forces under Prince Ferdinand of Brunswick, 
 on the death of the Duke of Marlborough. — Lord Granby 
 second in command. — Peculiar knowledge shewn by Junius 
 of Lord Granby 's character. 
 
LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 
 
 "I've been so long remember'd, I'm forgot.' 
 
 On the first appearance of the Letters of Junius, this 
 nobleman was suspected, and, in terms which could not 
 be misunderstood, treated as their author; yet, neither 
 at that time, nor at any subsequent period of his life, was 
 he ever known to deny the imputation. — The pretensions 
 however of other claimants, and the discussions that 
 arose respecting them, for some time diverted the atten- 
 tion of the public to other objects; but the publication 
 of Mr. Woodfall's Junius disclosed so many incidental 
 circumstances tending to corroborate his Lordship's claim, 
 that public attention was again awakened to the subject, 
 and several writers have since become his advocates. 
 In 1825, Mr. George Coventry published "^ Critical 
 Enquiry regarding the real y^uthor of the Letters of Junius, 
 ■proving them to have been written by Lord Viscount Sack- 
 ville/* — And in 1828, another work was published, at 
 Boston in America, entitled, '^Junius Unmasked, or Lord 
 George Sackville proved to be Junius " 
 
 We have seen with what confidence Mr. Taylor, sup- 
 ported by the writer in the Edinburgh Review, and also 
 Atticus Secundus, have expressed their opinions that 
 Sir Philip Francis was entitled to the laurels of Junius; 
 but Mr. Coventry, nothing daunted by this formidable 
 
 Q 
 
226 LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 
 
 array of authorities, boldly claims for Lord George 
 Sackville the glorious prize. — "I submit," says he, 
 "my inquiry to the public, with confidence, that this 
 grand literary desideratum is now fully established; the 
 mystery unravelled ; and that the veil which has so long 
 obscured the person of this illustrious writer, is removed 
 for ever/* Amid such conflicting opinions it might be 
 deemed presumptuous to pronounce any judgment on the 
 case, especially as that able and cautious investigator, 
 Mr. Charles Butler, seems no better satisfied with Mr. 
 Coventry's performance than with the labours of Sir Philip 
 Francis's advocates; for he thus criticises Mr. Coventry's 
 book : — " In this work, Mr. Coventry has collected, with 
 surprising industry, every particle in the public or private 
 letters of Junius, and every act and word of Lord 
 George Sackville, which can be brought to prove his 
 lordship's identity with Junius. He successfully shews, 
 that all who appear to have been peculiarly esteemed, 
 loved, despised, or hated by Junius, were particularly 
 esteemed, loved, despised, or hated by Lord George. 
 He mentions several coincidences, and other circum- 
 stances favourable to his hypothesis; but all he says, 
 seems to the present writer to fall very short of establish- 
 ing his hypothesis." — Butler s Reminis. ii. 123. 
 
 Mr. Coventry, however, not only strenuously con- 
 tends that Lord George was Junius, but that — "his 
 name, which before was buried in comparative obscurity, 
 will, in consequence of his discovery, be handed down 
 to posterity with as much dignity and splendour as other 
 branches of his noble family, who stand pre-eminent in 
 the literary world, for their talents, learning, and sound 
 judgment." Now, without stopping to inquire whether 
 
LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 227 
 
 the circumstance of identifying his Lordship with Junius 
 would derogate from the dignity, or tarnish the splendour 
 of his illustrious name, we may be permitted to express 
 a doubt whether it would not entitle him to the character 
 given by Lord Clarendon of Hampden : — '* What was 
 said of Cinna might well be applied to him : he had a 
 head to contrive, a tongue to persuade, and a hand to 
 execute any mischief." 
 
 In considering the claims of Lord George Sackviile, 
 it is to be noticed that, although Junius comments freely 
 on the characters and conduct of most of the eminent 
 political and military characters of his time, yet, in the 
 genuine edition of the Letters, edited by the author himself, 
 there is not to be found any mention whatever of Lord 
 George Sackviile, or the slightest allusion to his actions 
 or character; and this we cannot but consider a circum- 
 stance favourable to the hypothesis of his being the author 
 of the Letters; for, by observing a total silence respecting 
 himself, he avoided all risk of inadvertently betraying 
 his own secret.* But there is not the same paucity of 
 information respecting his Lordship's friends and ene- 
 mies; on the contrary, it can be satisfactorily shewn, 
 that the enemies and friends of Junius were also those 
 of Lord George. This seems another strong circum- 
 stance in his favour. We also find that Sir William 
 Draper at first divided his suspicion between this noble- 
 man and Mr. Burke; and upon the personal and une- 
 quivocal denial of the latter, he transferred them entirely 
 
 * Mr. Washington Irving, in giving an account of his visit to 
 Sir Walter Scott, at Abbotsford, observes, Vone proof to me of 
 his being the author of the Waverley Novels, was, that he never 
 adverted to them." 
 
 q2 
 
228 LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 
 
 to Lord George, It appears that he was likewise sus- 
 pected by other persons in the highest military circles, 
 where his martial knowledge and great talents were 
 best known and appreciated. Mr. Woodfall, it seems^ 
 also suspected him; for upon Mr. Coventry asking his 
 son to inform him candidly whether he believed his 
 father was acquainted with the name of his corre- 
 spondent, he replied, " that to a certainty he was not, 
 although his father at times suspected Lord George 
 Sackville." 
 
 In a work called the Royal Register (vol. vi. 181), 
 written by William Combe (better known as the author 
 of the Tour of Dr. Syntax), and published in 1781, is 
 the following passage : *' At this period, the remarkable 
 writings of Junius first made their appearance in the 
 public papers; and the conjectures of many curious 
 politicians rested for a long time upon Lord George 
 Sackville as the author of them. The spirit with which 
 these Letters were written, the penetration they dis- 
 covered, the matter they unfolded, the objects to which 
 their severity was directed, and the powerful language 
 in which the whole was clothed, found a very suspected 
 origin in the extensive abilities of this nobleman." 
 
 It has been justly remarked, that this early general 
 suspicion is of much weight, since many reasons for it 
 might then have existed which are now lost, and since 
 contemporaries were the best judges of talents, motives, 
 and all the probabilities of the case. 
 
 In addition to all this, there is to be found, in a private 
 letter written by Junius to Woodfall (July 21st, 1769), 
 the following most extraordinary paragraph: — 
 
 "That Swinny is a wretched, but a dangerous fool. 
 
LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE, 229 
 
 He had the impudence to go to Lord G. Sackville, 
 whom he had never spoken to, and to ask him whether 
 or no he was the author of Junius — take care of him." — 
 WoodfalVs Junius^ i. 174. 
 
 '^ This letter," observes Dr. Good, *' is, in fact, one of 
 the most curious of the whole collection. If written by 
 Lord George Sackville, it settles the point at once; and, 
 if not written by him, presupposes an acquaintance with 
 his Lordship's family, his sentiments, and his connexions, 
 so intimate as to excite no small degree of astonishment. 
 Junius was informed of Swinny's having called upon 
 Lord George Sackville a few hours after his cally and he 
 knew that before this time he had never spoken to him in 
 his life." It is therefore certain, that this nobleman, if 
 not Junius himself, must have been in habits of close 
 and intimate friendship with him. It also shews that 
 Junius knew him to be suspected, without denying, as in 
 the case of the author of the " Whig," etc., that he was 
 suspected wrongfully. 
 
 The question has often been asked — " Who was the 
 Swinny mentioned in Junius's letter to Woodfall?" and 
 it is rather remarkable to find, that Mr. WoodfalFs 
 editor is totally silent on the subject, though it is evident, 
 from the manner in which Junius expresses himself, that 
 Swinny was well known to Woodfall. Mr. Charles 
 Butler heard that Swinny was afterwards a bookseller at 
 Birmingham. But in a letter he wrote to Mr. E. H. 
 Barker, on the 14th June 1828, he says: "A letter from 
 a gentleman, upon whose accuracy I can rely, informs 
 me, that the Mr. Swinny who is mentioned in Junius's 
 Letters, was a clergyman, who had been attached to the 
 Russian embassy, and had afterward* been attached to an 
 
230 LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 
 
 English regiment serving in Germany; and that upon his 
 return to England, he was frequently at the Treasury 
 and its environs ; and that he was a carrier of new intel- 
 ligence to and from different persons." 
 
 *' The particular individual alluded to by Junius," 
 observes Mr. Barker (p. 280), " I suspect to have been 
 the author mentioned in Dr. Watts's Bihliotheca Britan- 
 mca:— 'Swinny Sidney, D.D. F.R. and A.S.S. The 
 Battle of Mindeuy a poem, in three books. London, 4to. 
 10s. — A Sermon. London, 1767, 4to. Is.' At any rate, 
 the author of a poem on the Battle of Minden has more 
 apparent connexion with Lord George Sackville than a 
 bookseller; there must have been to an author a greater 
 facility of access than to a bookseller." 
 
 We shall now submit to the reader a sketch of Lord 
 George Sackville's life, pointing out, as we proceed, such 
 facts and circumstances as tend to prove his identity with 
 the author of Junius. 
 
 Lord George Sackville was the youngest son of 
 Lionel, first Duke of Dorset, by Elizabeth, daughter of 
 Lieutenant-colonel Colyear, and was born on the 26th 
 June 1716, in the Haymarket, where his father at that 
 time resided. He received his name from George the 
 First, who was his godfather, and condescended to 
 honour with his presence the ceremony of the favoured 
 infant's baptism. His early years were passed at West- 
 minster School, where he distinguished himself, with 
 other young noblemen and gentlemen, by reciting verses, 
 both in Latin and English, on the coronation of George 
 the Second and his Queen, on the 18th February 1728, 
 at which period he was little more than eleven years 
 old. His inquisitive mind, we are told, soon became 
 
LORD GEORGE SA.CKVILLE. 231 
 
 stored with useful information; and he was thoroughly 
 grounded in the classics. Naturally endowed with a 
 strong memory, he rarely forgot circumstances or events 
 that attracted his attention. English history was his 
 delight; and he passed all his examinations with credit 
 to himself and his instructors. On entering his four- 
 teenth year, he left the School to accompany his father, 
 the Duke of Dorset, who went to Ireland as Lord- 
 lieutenant in 1730; and in order to ingratiate himself 
 with the Hibernians, the Duke sent his son. Lord 
 George, to finish his education at Trinity CoUegej Dublinf 
 where he was placed under the tuition of Dr. Whitcombe 
 and Mr. MoUoy, — the one a senior, and the other a 
 junior fellow of that university. Here our young student 
 soon made a rapid proficiency in literature; and he 
 quitted the university with great reputation. 
 
 The first remark we have to offer as connecting Lord 
 George with Junius, is, that we here find the birth and 
 education of his lordship to be perfectly consistent both 
 with the reiterated assertion of Junius that he was an 
 Englishman, and the apparently contradictory conclusion 
 drawn by the critics from the phraseology, and other 
 internal evidence afforded by the Letters, that their 
 author must have been an Irishman, or educated at the 
 university of Dublin, and not at either of the English 
 universities. This is more than can be affirmed of any 
 other claimant^ and is altogether a very curious and remark- 
 able coincidence. 
 
 It is said that Lord George's classical studies, and his 
 partiality for the Iliad, inspired his ardent mind with a 
 desire of performing achievements similar to those of the 
 heroes of old, and determined him to devote himself to a 
 
232 LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 
 
 military life; and he accordingly obtained a commission 
 in the army on the 11th July 1737. 
 
 As the most striking characteristic of the Letters of 
 Junius is uniTersally admitted to be the malignant spirit 
 of revenge and hatred which they exhibit, it may not be 
 unimportant to present the reader with the sentiments of 
 a competent authority as to the impression likely to be 
 made on a young and ardent mind by the study of the 
 Homeric poems. 
 
 " In Homer," says Mr. Poster, " the student will find 
 the mightiest strain of poetry employed to represent fero- 
 cious courage as the greatest of virtues, and those who 
 do not possess it, as worthy of their fate, to be trodden 
 in the dust. He will be taught, at least it will not be the 
 fault of the poet if he is not taught, to forgive a heroic 
 spirit for finding the sweetest luxury in insulting dying 
 pangs, and imagining the tears and despair of distant 
 parents or wives. He will be incessantly called upon 
 to worship revenge, the real divinity of the Iliad — in com- 
 parison of which the Thunderer of Olympus is but a 
 despicable pretender to power." — Essays, ii. 137. 
 
 In 1738, Lord George accompanied his father to Paris, 
 where he acquired a thorough knowledge of the French 
 language; which is another of Junius's qualifications, as 
 appears from the manner in which he criticised Lord 
 Rochford's French style in one of his letters. 
 
 " Dr. Parr, who detected ' Gallicisms' in Junius, ex- 
 pressly declares that ' Francis uniformly writes English/ 
 and this is the very highest authority," says Mr. Barker, 
 "to which I can appeal on the subject, because I have 
 had abundant opportunities of observing, and possess 
 many proofs of the facts, that Dr. Parr looked at com- 
 
LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 233 
 
 positions with the accuracy of a grammarian, the know- 
 ledge of a philologist, and the judgment of a critic." — 
 Barker s Letters, p. 123. 
 
 In a letter dated 23d April 1768, Junius remarks, " I 
 remember seeing Bassambaum, Saurez, Molina, and a 
 score of other Jesuitical books, burnt at Paris, for their 
 sound casuistry y by the hands of the common hangman." 
 
 An " old correspondent," in the Gentleman's Magazine 
 for October 1827, says he had discovered that the Jesuit- 
 ical books, twenty-four in number, were burnt by the 
 common hangman in Paris, on August 7th, 1761. "The 
 question," says Mr. Coventry, " is, whether this confla- 
 gration is the one alluded to by Junius, or whether it 
 was one of an earlier date? That it cannot be the one 
 alluded to by Junius, is, I think, evident from the cir- 
 cumstance, that we were at open hostility with France at 
 the era in question ; so that it would have been next to 
 an impossibility that Junius should have been in Paris 
 at the said conflagration, unless he were a prisoner of 
 war: even then, it is not likely that his quarters would 
 have been in the capital, — on reference to La Vie de 
 Bassambaum,! find there have been several conflagrations 
 of his works : one Sept. 9th, 1757, another on March 
 10th, 1758; and probably several other times at an earlier 
 period. Lord George Sackville might, therefore, have 
 seen the Jesuitical books mentioned by Junius burnt 
 at Paris during this, or at some subsequent, visit to 
 France." — Preface to Barker's Letters, p. 22. 
 
 In 1740, Lord George was appointed a lieutenant- 
 colonel of the 28th regiment of foot ; and, in 1742, he 
 accompanied George the Second to Hanover, and dis- 
 tinguished himself at the battle of Dettingen. There 
 
234 LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 
 
 were also present at this battle, Lord Townsend and 
 Lord Granby, which accounts for the intimate know- 
 ledge shewn by Junius of the characters of these two 
 noblemen ; for we find him, in his letter of 25th August 
 1767, when speaking of Lord Townsend, and his brother 
 Mr. Charles Townsend, making use of this remarkable 
 language: " I am not a stranger to this par nohile fratrum. 
 I have served under the one, and have been forty times 
 promised to he served ly the other;" — if this be not pure 
 fiction, it proves not only that Junius was a military 
 man, but also a person of rank and consequence, by 
 Mr. Charles Townsend having promised to serve (under) 
 him. 
 
 Shortly after this battle. Lord George was appointed 
 one of his Majesty's aids-de-camp, served in the cam- 
 paign of 1744, and was present at the battle of Fontenoy, 
 where he was wounded in the breast by a musket-ball, 
 and thrown upon a wagon with many others. He ever 
 afterwards preserved the uniforn which he wore on that 
 day, bearing on it the mark of the ball, and other bullet 
 holes in the skirt of the coat. On the breaking out of 
 the Rebellion in Scotland in 1745, Lord George accom- 
 panied the Duke of Cumberland, on his proceeding to 
 the North to take the command of the army against the 
 rebels ; and on the 10th February 1746, they arrived in 
 the neighbourhood of Edinburgh, of which they soon 
 gained possession. Leaving a sufficient garrison in that 
 city, the royal army pushed on to Stirling Castle, Falkirk, 
 and Inverness, and after encountering great fatigue and 
 harassing marches, they came up with the Pretender at 
 CuUoden, where the fate of that unfortunate prince was 
 decided. Here Lord George greatly distinguished him- 
 
LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 235 
 
 self; and as a testimony of the Duke's approbation of 
 his conduct, he was promoted to the colonelcy of the 20th 
 regiment. He was then sent to Perth, and during the 
 absence of Major-general Skelton, held the responsible 
 situation of Commander-in-chief of his Majesty's forces. 
 The extreme rigour exercised by the Duke of Cumberland 
 towards the adherents of the house of Stuart, and the 
 severe measures he adopted to crush the rebellion, ac- 
 quired for him the appellation of the Butcher ; and we 
 may learn the methods he employed to effect his purpose 
 from a letter written by an officer of his army, published 
 in the Gentleman's Magazine for June 1746, in which the 
 writer says : " Great numbers, especially the Camerons, 
 Macdonalds, Grants, and Frazers, were perfidious, often 
 promised to surrender, appointing their own time, and 
 as often broke their words ; which has obliged his Royal 
 Highness to lay the rod more heavy upon therriy by carrying 
 fire and sword through their country, and drawing off their 
 cattle, which we bring to our camp in great quantities, 
 sometimes 2000 in a drove. In short, we have detach- 
 ments at present in all parts of the Highlands; and the 
 people are deservedly in a most deplorable way, and must 
 perish either by sword or famine, A just reward for 
 traitors,*^ 
 
 From this statement, written by an eye-witness of the 
 scenes he describes, it appears that Smollett was little 
 indebted to poetical embellishment for the incidents 
 detailed in his beautiful and pathetic lament, — "The 
 Tears of Scotland." 
 
 Mourn, hapless Caledonia! mDum 
 Thy banished peace thy laurels torn; 
 
236 LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 
 
 Thy sons, for valour long renown 'd, 
 Lie slaughtered on their native ground ; 
 Thy hospitahle roofs no more 
 Invite the stranger to the door; 
 In smoky ruins sunk they lie, 
 The monuments of cruelty. 
 
 We now call the reader's attention to the way in which 
 Junius speaks of Lord George Sackville's old com- 
 mander the Duke of Cumberland, in his zealous defence 
 of Sir Jeffrey Amherst, who, we shall shew, was also 
 the intimate friend of Lord George. In a letter written 
 by Junius under the signature of Valerius, 23d August 
 1768, the following passage occurs: — 
 
 " As a part of this system, and in order to give it a 
 due roundness and relief, it was thought proper not only 
 to affront living merit, but to insult and trample upon 
 the sacred ashes of the dead. It was not forgot under 
 whose patronage Sir Jeffrey Amherst first appeared in the 
 world. It was not forgot that he was one of the many 
 public benefits derived to this country from that great 
 school of military knowledge and loyal sentiments, the family 
 of the late Duke of Cumberland. Here was a glorious 
 opportunity of cherishing a true friend to despotism, 
 Lord Boutetort, and at the same time of insulting the 
 memory of him who had been the heavy scourge, and (it 
 was once hoped) the final destroyer of that caused 
 
 The virulence displayed by Junius against the Scotch 
 is notorious; and that Lord George also thoroughly 
 detested that people and their country, is evident from 
 one of his letters, written on the 6th October 1746, 
 from Perth, to his friend Major Younge, in which 
 he says:— -"All I pray for is, that I may never have 
 
LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 237 
 
 occasion any more to visit those northern hills, for I 
 think nothing but another rebellion can ever call me 
 there again." 
 
 On a debate in the House of Commons many years 
 afterwards, respecting a bill for limiting the time for 
 soldiers to serve in the army, Lord George took occasion, 
 totally unconnected with the subject, to introduce his 
 opinion of the treachery of the Scotch ; and the following 
 passage must forcibly remind the reader of Junius's 
 abuse of that nation in his celebrated Letter to the King. 
 
 *' I will go further, sir: I will say, that if you should 
 shorten the time, it might endanger the present estab- 
 lishment. We know, and I am sorry to say, that 
 we have many great families disaffected to our present 
 happy establishment, especially in the North, and among 
 the highlands of Scotland. They have a commanding 
 influence over all those of their clan, and all the farms 
 within their estates; they would prevail with, or rather 
 command, every young fellow, whose father had any 
 dependence upon them, to enlist and serve his time in 
 the army; and by this means, they might provide them- 
 selves with a great number of disciplined soldiers, to be 
 employed for overturning our present establishment, as 
 soon as an opportunity offered. It is well known that 
 the disaffected chiefs in the highlands of Scotland made 
 use of the independent companies kept up in that country 
 for this very purpose; and since the breaking of those 
 companies, they have made use of the Scottish regiments 
 in the Dutch service for the same purpose. 
 
 '' It was this that made the late Rebellion so formidable, 
 and at first so successful. That army of rebels was not 
 made up of shepherds, or fellows just taken from the 
 
238 LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 
 
 plough, as it was represented through ignorance or 
 design, by the friends to the government here; it was 
 chiefly composed of disciplined soldiers, and commanded 
 by noblemen and gentlemen of rank and courage, though 
 I believe, of no great fortune; and if this bill should 
 pass into a law, we may soon expect to hear of such 
 another army appearing in favour of the Pretender." 
 
 On the termination of the campaign in Scotland, Lord 
 George proceeded with his regiment to Dover Castle, 
 where he staid to recruit during the Christmas holidays. 
 In the two ensuing campaigns of 1747 and 1748, he 
 again accompanied his old commander the Duke of 
 Cumberland to the Continent, who sent him on a mission 
 to Marshal Saxe, to conclude a general armistice between 
 the armies; which mission his Lordship performed to the 
 entire satisfaction of the Duke. Upon his return home 
 he took his seat in parliament as member for Dover, 
 although the family were in possession of boroughs of 
 their own. It can scarcely be necessary to remind the 
 reader, that Junius in his private correspondence with 
 Wilkes, and on several other occasions, expresses the 
 greatest abhorrence at the idea of extirpating rotten 
 boroughs, and on all occasions displays the sentiments of 
 a thoroughbred boroughmonger. According to Cobbett's 
 Parliamentary Debates, his Lordship made his first speech 
 in parliament during the year 1750, on a clause in the 
 Mutiny Bill, which evinces great talent, and a thorough 
 knowledge of all the points he spoke to. On the 1 st of 
 November 1749, he was promoted to the colonelcy of 
 the 12th regiment of Dragoons, and in January 1750, 
 was made Colonel of the king's regiment of Horse Cara- 
 bineers in Ireland. In the following year, 1751, he 
 
LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 239 
 
 went over to Ireland in the capacity of secretary to his 
 father the Duke of Dorset, who was again appointed 
 Lord-lieutenant'; but a quarrel having ensued between 
 their administration and the Irish parliament, the family 
 became disgusted, returned to England, and never went 
 over afterwards. 
 
 Lord Orford in " The Memoirs of the last Ten Years 
 of George the Second," gives the following account of 
 the administration of the Duke of Dorset, and his son, in 
 Ireland: — " Lord Harrington was succeeded in the Lord- 
 lieutenancy by Lionel Duke of Dorset, who was a man 
 of caution, dignity, and plausibility, and who had for- 
 merly ruled Ireland to their universal satisfaction. But 
 he then acted for himself; he was now in the hands of 
 two men most unlike himself, his youngest son. Lord 
 George Sackville, and Dr. George Stone, the Primate 
 of Ireland. The former a man of very sound parts, ofdis' 
 tinguished bravery, and of as honourable eloquence ; but hot, 
 haughty, ambitious, and obstinate." 
 
 It was in allusion to this era, that the writer of a 
 political article, dated 22d October 1767 (erroneously 
 attributed to Junius), and published by Woodfall among 
 the Miscellaneous Letters of Junius (No. 7), says, ** I 
 believe the best thing I can do will be to consult with 
 my Lord George Sackville. His character is known 
 and respected in Ireland, as much as it is here; and I 
 know he loves to be stationed in the rear as well as 
 myself." 
 
 This is the only instance in which Lord George 
 Sackville is either mentioned, or alluded to, in the 
 whole of the Letters, public or private, attributed to 
 the author of Junius (except the extraordinary letter 
 
240 LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 
 
 relating to Swinny), and the disparaging allusion in 
 this letter has been brought forward as a strong argu- 
 ment against Lord George's claim; but both Mr. Butler 
 and Mr. Coventry doubt the authenticity of this paper, 
 ■which is in the form of a dialogue, and entitled, " Grand 
 Council upon the Affairs of Ireland, after eleven adjourn- 
 ments;" and if it could be proved to be genuine, we 
 conceive so slight an allusion to his disgrace might have 
 been written by Lord George, for the express purpose of 
 more effectually misleading the suspicions of the public ; 
 and if so, it has, in a surprising degree, answered its 
 intended purpose. 
 
 In 1754, Lord George married Miss Diana Sambrooke, 
 who was second daughter and co-heiress of John Sam- 
 brooke, Esq., of Hertfordshire ; by whom he had two 
 sons, Charles, the present Duke of Dorset, and George, 
 and three daughters, Diana, Elizabeth, and Caroline. 
 
 In the year 1755, his Lordship was promoted to the 
 rank of Major-general ; in the spring of 1757 we find 
 him commanding the detachment of troops stationed at 
 Biggleswade, in Bedfordshire; and in the autumn of the 
 same year he commanded the camp near Chatham, at 
 which period, Captain Smith, father of Admiral Sir Sidney 
 Smith, was his aid-de-camp. During this encampment, 
 Mr. Whitfield came to Chatham to offer his spiritual 
 services to the soldiers, and Captain Smith brought the 
 following message to his Lordship : '*My Lord, Mr. Whit- 
 field is come hither; and sends his respects by me to 
 your Lordship, and requests that he may have your per- 
 mission to preach in the camp." His Lordship replied: 
 " Make my compliments to Mr. Whitfield, and tell him 
 from me, that he may preach anything to my soldiers, 
 that is not contrary to the articles of war." 
 
LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 241 
 
 On the 26tli January 1758, Lord George was nomi- 
 nated Lieutenant-general of his Majesty's forces, Lieu- 
 tenant-general of the Ordnance, and sworn a Member 
 of the Privy Council; and Lord Orfordthus notices him 
 in his Memoirs : — 
 
 " 1758. Lord George Sackville was now rising to a 
 principal figure. His abilities in the House of Commons, 
 and his interest with Pitt, gave him great weight in 
 government, and everything seemed to promise him the 
 first rank in the army, where, since the depression of 
 Conway, he stood without a rival. Marshal Ligonier 
 was very old, and was governed by him; and by his seat 
 in the Ordnance and his own address, he began to balance 
 Fox in the direction of the Duke of Marlborough. But 
 his impetuous temper was not to be restrained." 
 
 From Lord Orford's Memoirs, we learn, that Lord 
 George possessed, at this time, great influence in arrang- 
 ing diflPerent administrations; and Lord Orford enters 
 minutely into the cabinet differences between Lord Bute, 
 the Duke of Bedford, and the Earl of Chatham; by 
 which it appears, that Lord George was the most pro- 
 minent character of the day, without whose advice or 
 knowledge, it seemed impossible for the ministry to act 
 on any important occasion ; so that we cease to wonder 
 at the intelligence Junius evinces on all affairs connected 
 with the Court, when we become acquainted with the 
 high political station in which Lord George once moved. 
 Neither can we be surprised at his acrimony and in- 
 vective against those very men who once looked up to 
 him for advice, when they afterwards so ungenerously 
 united in aiding his downfall. 
 
 In 1759, a strong fleet was equipped, which carried 
 
 R 
 
242 LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 
 
 an army of 14,000 landsmen and 6000 marines. The 
 Duke of Marlborough, on whom Lord George Sackville 
 could not avoid attending, was appointed General; and 
 the transports, which for some days were kept back by 
 contrary winds, anchored on the 5th in Cancale Bay, 
 near St. Malo, where the troops landed without oppo- 
 sition; but the commanders discovered that the town 
 was so strongly situated, and approachable only by a 
 narrow causeway, that after burning a parcel of small 
 vessels, they returned to their ships; and the French 
 learned that they were not to be conquered by every 
 Duke of Marlborough. It is certain that both the Duke 
 and Lord George were so sick of naval expeditions, 
 that after parading before Granville and Cherburg, they 
 returned with the fleet to St. Helen's, and soon after- 
 wards they both set out for the army in Germany, where 
 the Duke took the command of the English forces. Pitt 
 had offered Lord George the command of the expedi- 
 tion to St. Cas, but his Lordship replied, "^e was tired 
 of buccaneering." To avoid this service, he insisted on 
 going to Germany; but Pitt did not forget Lord George's 
 sarcasm on his expeditions. While our army in Germany 
 lay on the defensive, the fatal distempers incident to a 
 camp carried off the Duke of Marlborough. The com- 
 mand of the English consequently devolved on Lord 
 George Sackville, between whom and Prince Ferdinand, 
 the commander in-chief, there was by no means any 
 cordiality. "Both," observes Lord Orford, "liked to 
 govern, — neither was disposed to be governed. Prince 
 Ferdinand had gained an ascendency over the Duke of 
 Marlborough; and Lord Granby, the next in rank to 
 Lord George, was an honest, open-hearted young man. 
 
LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 243 
 
 of undaunted courage, and no capacity ; and if he wanted 
 any other recommendation to Prince Ferdinand, besides 
 these ductile qualities, he drank as profusely as a German. 
 Lord George's haughtiness lost this young man, as he had 
 the Duke of Marlborough. Prince Ferdinand knew 
 better how to bend to domineer." 
 
 It is evident that Junius was well acquainted with the 
 unfortunate propensity of Lord Granby, alluded to by 
 Lord Orford, for when Sir William Draper in one of 
 his letters says: — "Lord Granby is next attacked for 
 not performing his promises and engagements. Where are 
 Junius's proofs ? Although I could give some instances 
 where a breach of promise would be a virtue, especially 
 in the case of those who would pervert the open unsus- 
 pected moments of convivial mirth into sly insidious 
 applications for preferment or party systems, and would 
 endeavour to surprise a good man, who cannot bear to 
 see any leave him dissatisfied, into unguarded promises;" 
 Junius immediately retorts: — "It is you, Sir William, 
 who have taken pains to represent your friend in the 
 character of a drunken landlord^ who deals out his pro- 
 mises as liberally as his liquor, and will suffer no man 
 to leave his table either sorrowful or sober, — none but 
 an intimate friend, who must frequently have seen him in 
 these unhappy, disgraceful moments, could have described 
 him so well." The concluding remark will probably be 
 thought as much applicable to Junius as to Sir William 
 Draper. 
 
 r2 
 
THE BATTLE OF MINDEN, 
 
 AND ITS CONSEQUENCES TO 
 
 LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 
 
 Charge, Chester, charge ! on Stanley on ! 
 
 Were the last words of Marmion. 
 
 Sir Walter ScotL 
 
 By heaven ! it is a splendid sight to see 
 (For one who hath no friend, no brother there) 
 Their rival scarfs of mix'd embroidery ; 
 Their various arms that glitter in the air ! 
 What gallant war-hounds rouse them from their lair 
 And gnash their fangs, loud yelling for the prey. 
 All join the chase, but few the triumph share ; 
 The grave shall bear the chiefest prize away. 
 
 Byron. 
 
 He fell perforce, he seem'd decreed to fall. 
 
 Crabbe. 
 
 And fired with all the pride of birth. 
 
 He wept a soldier's injured name. 
 
 Sir Walter Scott. 
 
 Farewell the neighing steed, and the shrill trump ; 
 The spirit-stirring drum, the ear-piercing fife, 
 The royal banner, and all quality. 
 Pride, pomp, and circumstance of glorious war. 
 
 ShaJcspeare. 
 
CHAPTER IX. 
 
 Retrospective view of Lord George's life. — Remarks on the nature 
 and tendency of the present Inquiry. — Lord Orford's account 
 of Lord George's conduct at the battle of Minden. — Lord 
 George arrives in England, and demands a court-martial. — 
 His letter to Lord Barrington, secretary-at-war. — Mr. E. H. 
 Barker's observations on Junius 's attack upon Lord Bar- 
 rington. — The sentiments of Junius and Lord George shewn 
 to coincide respecting the character of Lord Chatham. — 
 Numerous pamphlets published relative to Lord George's 
 conduct. — Is tried by a court-martial. — Lord Orford's 
 description of the way in which he conducted his defence. — 
 Is found guilty of disobedience of orders, and dismissed the 
 army. — The King confirms the sentence, and strikes Lord 
 George's name out of the Council-book. — Proofs that Lord 
 George had cause of complaint against George the Third 
 and the Princess Dowager. — Popular prejudice against him. 
 — Is defended by Smollett and Almon. — Is dismissed from 
 all his places, which are bestowed on the persons against 
 whom Junius exhibits the greatest virulence. — Lord George 
 frequently taunted in after-life with the sentence of the court- 
 martial. — Is forbidden to appear at Coiu-t. — His duel with 
 Governor Johnstone. — Extraordinary attempts to prevent 
 his entering the House of Peers upon being created Viscount 
 Sackville in 1782. — ^Remarks upon the opposite advice 
 given to his Lordship on that occasion, by Lord Amherst 
 and Mr. Cumberland. — Mr. Coventry's account of his inter- 
 view with the Duke of Dorset upon applying for leave to 
 inspect his father's letters. 
 
THE BATTLE OF MINDEN, 
 
 AND ITS CONSEQUENCES TO 
 
 LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 
 
 Is the laurel to the soldier due, 
 
 Who cautious comes not into danger's view ? 
 
 Crabbe. 
 
 The battle of Minden being the great epoch in the life 
 of Lord George Sackville, and followed by consequences 
 that embittered the remainder of his existence, we will 
 here pause, and take a retrospective view of his life, 
 before entering the gloomy vista which lies before us. 
 
 Hitherto we have beheld a man descended from noble 
 and illustrious ancestors, — having a sovereign for his 
 sponsor. Endued by nature with splendid talents, which 
 had been carefully cultivated and developed by education, 
 — possessing high reputation for skill and valour as a 
 soldier, acquired in many a well-fought Held; and a 
 character for eloquence little inferior to the greatest 
 orators of his age, — when suddenly, while pursuing his 
 career of prosperity and glory, we see this man, by a 
 single ambiguous action, hurled from his high estate — 
 expelled from his places — ignominiously stripped of his 
 honours, and driven amidst the execrations of a nation 
 into solitude, to exclaim with Wolsey : 
 
 " Farewell, a long farewell, to all my greatness." 
 
 It is true, that by coinciding in sentiment with George 
 
248 LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 
 
 the Third and his ministers, on the subject of the dis- 
 astrous war with America, Lord George was afterwards 
 for a time restored to place and court favour; yet his 
 character was never re-established in the estimation of 
 the public, and he remained a marked and unpopular 
 character to the end of his life. History affords nume- 
 rous examples of such vicissitudes of fortune, and there- 
 fore, this alone would not have distinguished Lord 
 George's case from many others of a similar nature ; 
 but we conceive, that if the Letters of Junius can be 
 traced to his pen, a moral phenomenon will be exhibited, 
 which is not to be paralleled in the annals of mankind, 
 when we consider the persevering and artful scheme 
 thereby carried into execution, for the purpose of inflict- 
 ing vengeance on the authors of his disgrace. 
 
 If this inquiry should tend to exhibit an important 
 phase of human action, not before observed, we think no 
 considerations of false delicacy ought to deter us from 
 discussing the conduct of a man, whose station in life 
 rendered his character public property, and whose actions 
 have now become materials for history, with the same 
 freedom as we canvass the actions and characters of 
 Caesar and Cromwell, or any of the numerous individuals 
 who have risen up in all countries and ages, to disturb, 
 by their feuds and ambition, the repose of the world. 
 
 The battle of Minden, which was attended with the 
 most brilliant success on the part of the Allies, and con- 
 sequences equally disastrous to the French and Lord 
 George Sackville, was fought on the 1st of August 1759, 
 when the French attacked the Allied army near the town 
 of Minden in great force. The action soon became very 
 hot towards the right, where six regiments of English 
 
LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 249 
 
 infantry and two battalions of Hanoverian guards, with 
 some artillery, not only bore the whole brunt of the 
 French carabineers and gendarmeries, but absolutely 
 broke every body of horse and foot that advanced to 
 attack them. The French were ultimately repulsed in 
 all their attacks with considerable loss, and at length, 
 giving way, were pursued to the very ramparts of 
 Minden. 
 
 The leading events of the battle are related, and the 
 characters of Prince Ferdinand of Brunswick and Lord 
 George Sackville are ably delineated in a clever work, 
 entitled *'Chrysal, or the Adventures of a Guinea," which 
 was published shortly after the event happened. This 
 work shews the popular opinion of the time, respecting 
 the motives which were supposed to have influenced Lord 
 George's conduct on that memorable day. But we prefer 
 giving Lord Orford's account of the transaction: — 
 "During the battle,^' says Lord Orford, "the Prince 
 sent Ligonier, one of his aids-de-camp, to Lord George, 
 with orders to bring up the cavalry ; Fitzroy immediately 
 after, for Lord George to march with only the British 
 cavalry, and to the left. Lord George (as Fitzroy, who 
 arrived suddenly after Ligonier, said) received the order 
 with some confusion, and replied, *This cannot be so; 
 would he have me break the line?' Fitzroy, young, 
 brave, and impetuous, urged the command. Lord George 
 desired he would not be in a hurry. *I am out of 
 breath with galloping,' said Fitzroy, 'which makes me 
 speak quick, but my orders are positive: the French 
 are in disorder; here is a glorious opportunity for the 
 English to distinguish themselves.' Lord George still 
 hesitated, saying, 'it was impossible the Prince could 
 
250 LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 
 
 mean to break the line/ Fitzroy stuck to the Prince's 
 order. Lord George asked, ^ which way the cavahy was 
 to march, and who was to be their guide?' 'I,' said 
 Fitzroy, bravely. Lord George pretending the different 
 orders puzzled him, desired to be conducted to the 
 Prince for explanation: in the mean time, despatched 
 Smith, his favourite, with orders to lead on the British 
 cavalry, from whence he pleaded no delay could happen. 
 Smith whispered Lord George, to convince him of the 
 necessity of obeying. Lord George persisted on being 
 carried to the Prince, who, at Fitzroy's report, was much 
 astonished. Even, when Lord George did march, he 
 twice sent orders to Lord Granby to halt, who was post- 
 ing on with less attention to the rules of a march, but 
 with more ardour for engaging. Before they arrived, 
 the battle was gained. Lord George defended himself 
 on the seeming contradiction of orders; on the short 
 space of time that was lost, at most, eight minutes; on 
 obstructions from a wood on his march ; and on his own 
 alertness, he having been one of the first on horseback 
 on hearing the French cannonade. That the whole 
 affair turned on a very few minutes is certain. Whether, 
 if employed, they would have been of great consequence, 
 cannot now be determined. Enough was evident to 
 prove that Lord George, at best, was too critically and 
 minutely cool in such a moment of importance. Indeed, 
 more was proved. Previous to the arrival of Ligonier, 
 he had lost time in affecting not to understand a message 
 delivered to him by a German aid-de-camp. Colonel 
 Sloper, too (who had been obliged to him), remarking 
 his confusion, said to Ligonier, 'For God's sake, repeat 
 your orders to that man, that he may not pretend not to 
 
LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 251 
 
 understand them — but you see the condition he is in !' 
 Had Lord George's courage been less problematic, one 
 might suspect that his hatred to Prince Ferdinand had 
 made him willing, by an affected delay, to balk the 
 Prince of his glory; but some late occasions had already 
 discovered that he was no hero. The late Duke of 
 Marlborough had remarked it on their joint expedition to 
 the coast of France; and the little spirit he had shewn 
 in Ireland, under the most grievous abuse, was now 
 recollected. His real constitution, I believe, was this: 
 he had a high and bold spirit, till danger came extra- 
 ordinarily near. Then his judgment was fascinated; yet, 
 even then, he seems not to have lost a certain presence of 
 mind. His quickness in distinguishing a trifling contra- 
 diction in a message delivered by two boys, in not pre- 
 cisely the same terms, shewed that all his senses were 
 not lost; but if that dexterity served his fears, it cut up 
 his fortune by the roots, annihilated his character, and 
 gratified the utmost spleen and vengeance of his enemy." 
 Of the dissensions among the commanders of the Allied 
 army previous to the battle. Lord Orford gives the 
 following account: — "Lord George Sackville, by his 
 weight with Mr. Pitt, and in parliament, had insisted 
 on going to Germany, and had gone without the King's 
 approbation, and even without waiting on his Majesty. 
 Lord Granby was next to Lord George, in command, 
 and so popular, that when he set out for the army, fifty- 
 two young officers had solicited to be his aids-de-camp. 
 Between these two lords, a coolness soon ensued, and 
 divided the army, if it can be called division, where 
 almost every heart sided with Lord Oranby. He was 
 open, honest, affable, and of such unbounded good- 
 
252 LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 
 
 nature and generosity, that it was impossible to say 
 which principle actuated him in the distribution of the 
 prodigious sums that he spent and flung away. Lord 
 George Sackville was haughty, and reserved except to a 
 few, and those chiefly Scotch; and with no pre-eminence 
 over his rival, but what his rank in command gave him, 
 and his great talents^ in which there could not be the 
 smallest competition ; and yet with those superior talents. 
 Lord George never had the art of conciliating affection; 
 he had thwarted Prince Ferdinand, and disgusted him 
 in the previous campaign; and was now in the army 
 against the Prince's inclination. The latter, with equal 
 haughtiness, but with far more art and address, could 
 not fail of fomenting a breach that tended so much to 
 mortify Lord George, and to promote his own views. 
 Lord Granby was tractable, unsuspicious, and not likely 
 to pry into, or control, the amazing impositions of the 
 German agents, which Lord George had too honestly, 
 too indiscreetly, or too insultingly, let Prince Ferdinand 
 see had not escaped his observations, instead of remon- 
 strating or withstanding such dissipation, as he should 
 have done at home. This was the state of things before 
 the battle of Minden; but being a little or not at all 
 known in England, it was with equal surprise and in- 
 dignation that the people heard Lord Sackville, who 
 had always stood in high estimation for courage, more 
 covertly at first, now openly accused of cowardice, and of 
 having thrown away the moment for completing the total 
 destruction of the French army. Prince Ferdinand had 
 passed this reproach on him, indirectly and artfully 
 indeed, but when combined with the circumstances of 
 the battle, not to be misunderstood. In the orders which 
 
LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 253 
 
 he gave out the next day, he expressed concern that 
 Lord Granby had not had the command of the cavalry 
 on the right wing, which, if led by him, his Highness 
 did not doubt would have given a more decisive lustre to 
 the day, — more mysterious, yet still more pointed, was 
 a paragraph in the same orders, requiring that for the 
 future, his commands delivered by his aids-de-camp 
 should be more exactly obeyed." — Lord Orford's Memoirs 
 of the last Ten Years of George the Second, vol. ii. 361. 
 
 Upon Lord Sackville's arrival in England he imme- 
 diately wrote to Lord Holderness, the secretary of state, 
 demanding a court-martial, and was told that the officers 
 who would be necessary witnesses on the trial were 
 employed abroad. Lord Ligonier, the commander-in- 
 chief, and Lord Barrington, secretary - at - w ar, were 
 more explicit, and informed him, that if he desired a 
 court-martial he must seek it in Germany. This was 
 followed by a message delivered by Lord Barrington, 
 acquainting Lord George, that not only the command of 
 his regiment would be taken from him, but that he would 
 be dismissed from his rank of General, and from his 
 post of Lieutenant-general of the Ordnance ; and Lord 
 Barrington asked civilly, if his Lordship chose to receive 
 that notification from his mouth, or in writing. Lord 
 George preferred the latter; then, replied Lord Barrington, 
 ^'I know but one precedent, that of the late Lord Cobham. 
 I will send your Lordship a similar letter." Lord Bar- 
 rington accordingly wrote to Lord George, signifying 
 that his Majesty had no further occasion for his services 
 as Lieutenant-general and Colonel of Dragoon Guards; 
 which communication Lord George acknowledged by 
 the following letter : — 
 
254 LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 
 
 Pall Mall, September llthy 1759. 
 My Lord, 
 
 I have received the honoiir of your Lordship's letter, 
 
 signifying to me his Majesty has no further occasion for my 
 
 service, as Lieutenant-general and Colonel of Dragoon Guards. 
 
 If I were conscious of having deserved this mark of his Majesty's 
 
 displeasure, I should he most unhappy ; as it is, I only regret 
 
 that I shall have no further opportunity of exerting my zeal in 
 
 the service of my king and country. 
 
 I am, 
 
 My Lord, etc. etc. 
 
 To Lord Barrington. George Sackville. 
 
 This letter is deposited in the War Office, and Mr. 
 Coventry obtained a copy through the politeness of Lord 
 Palmerston. 
 
 On the 28th of February 1760, Lord Barrington 
 acquainted the House of Commons, that Lord George 
 Sackville had been put under arrest for disobedience of 
 orders. 
 
 We here take leave to direct the reader's attention to 
 the following observations of Mr. E. H. Barker (p. 174). 
 " Junius had ceased -writing under that signature, when 
 the name of Sir Philip Francis was mentioned by him. 
 January 25th, 1772, Junius informs Mr. Woodfall, — 
 ' Having nothing better to do, I propose to entertain 
 myself and the public with torturing that * * * * Bar- 
 rington.' Three days afterwards, a severe invective 
 against that nobleman followed, which was two months 
 before the public were apprised of the dismal of Sir 
 Philip Francis; and after this dismissal, we have a long 
 account of Lord Barrington's life; an attentive perusal 
 of which must convince every reader, that such a narra- 
 tive proceeded from a very different quarter than from 
 
LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 255 
 
 the pen of Sir Philip Francis. Events are referred to, 
 which happened before Sir Philip Francis was born, but 
 of which Junius had a thorough knowledge; he con- 
 fesses " Lord Barrington and he were ^old acquaintance;' 
 and in taking ' a short review of him from his political 
 birth,' comments on many subjects, which could only- 
 have been known to one, who moved in a very different 
 circle to Sir Philip Francis." 
 
 At this time Mr, Pitt was prime minister, and had 
 attained the zenith of his power. From the first moment 
 of Lord George's disgrace, Mr. Pitt warmly adopted 
 the sentiments of Prince Ferdinand, whom he was deter- 
 mined heartily to support, and though he went to visit 
 Lord George in form, he by no means intended to sup- 
 port him. " He would not," he said, " condemn any 
 man unheard, but he was sworn to the German cause, 
 and to the heroes whose success reflected such lustre on 
 his own administration." When Colonel Fitzroy returned 
 to the army, Mr. Pitt charged him with the strongest 
 assurances to Prince Ferdinand; "tell him," says Mr. 
 Pitt, " he shall have what reinforcements, what ammu- 
 nition, he pleases, — tell him I will stand or fall with 
 him." From this statement, it plainly appears that the 
 Earl of Chatham by his conduct gave suflicient cause for 
 Lord George's resentment. 
 
 Mr. Butler observes that Junius expresses himself 
 differently at different times of Lord Chatham ; and that 
 to one of Mr. Butler's friends Lord George observed, 
 that '* the unpleasant part of his own life was mixed up 
 with the most glorious part of Lord Chatham's, but this 
 did not prevent him from doing justice to the services 
 which that great man had done his country." 
 
256 LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 
 
 Dr. Good, in a note on the first of the miscellaneous 
 letters written by Junius under the signature of Poplicola, 
 dated 28th April 1767, (ii. 453), observes : — " This 
 severe invective is aimed against the late Lord Chatham, 
 formerly the Right Honourable William Pitt. The 
 reader, by a perusal of the preceding letters, is already 
 acquainted with the utter aversion which Junius at first 
 felt for this nobleman, on various political accounts, 
 and especially on the subject of the American dispute. 
 His aversion, however, softened as their political view^s 
 approximated, and was at length converted into appro- 
 bation and eulogy." And in another note, (iii. 4), he 
 says: — *^ In reality it was not till about the date of Letter 
 fifty-four, under his favourite signature of Junius^ that 
 he began to think commendably of this nobleman. ' I 
 am called upon,' says he, in that letter, * to deliver my 
 opinion, and surely it is not in the little censure of Mr. 
 Home to deter me from doing signal justice to a man, 
 who, I confess, has grown upon my esteem.' " 
 
 The views of Dr. Good, respecting the conduct of 
 Junius towards Lord Chatham, will be found to corre- 
 spond exactly with Lord George's sentiments with regard 
 to that nobleman, as expressed to Mr. Butler's friend. 
 
 Previously to the trial taking place, the nation was in 
 a state of the greatest ferment on the subject, and nume- 
 rous pamphlets were written on both sides of the question. 
 His Lordship published a short address, requesting the 
 public to suspend its judgment, until he had an opportu- 
 nity of defending himself. He also addressed a letter 
 to Colonel Fitzroy, which the colonel answered. 
 
 On this occasion the Scotch did not forget the benefits 
 conferred on them in 1745, by the Lieutenant of the Duke 
 
LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 257 
 
 of Cumberland, for there was printed in 1759, for Sands 
 and Co., at Edinburgh, "y^ Letter to a late Noble Com- 
 mander of the British Forces in Germany"* which was 
 circulated anonymously, and in it his Lordship was treated 
 with considerable severity. Lord George threatened 
 the printers with a prosecution, which he afterwards 
 abandoned. He, however, wrote a pamphlet in answer 
 to the insinuations thrown out against his character in 
 the letter, and employed Mr, Wood/all to print it. 
 
 The case against Lord George is stated with equal 
 force and moderation in another pamphlet, entitled " A 
 Second Letter to a late Noble Commander of the British Forces 
 in Germany ; in which the Noble Commander's Address to 
 the Public, his Letter to Colonel Fitzroy, together with the 
 Colonel's Answer, and Captain Smith's Declaration, are can- 
 didly and impartially considered. By the Author of the First 
 Letter." This pamphlet was published in London, by 
 R. Griffiths, — and we shall present the reader with some 
 interesting passages from the work: — 
 
 "With respect to the matter of your address," says 
 the writer, " it does no more than inform us, what we 
 have long since heard, that you have applied by your 
 letter to the Secretary of State, and are still eager, to 
 obtain a court-martial, 'that you may have a public 
 opportunity given you of attempting to justify yourself to 
 his Majesty, and to your country.' Give me leave to 
 observe of the contents of this letter, that, as to the con- 
 sciousness you express of having done your duty to the 
 utmost of your abilities, no man but yourself can judge 
 of it. Human tribunals cannot pry into the motives of 
 
 * This letter is published at length in Mr. Coventry's "Critical 
 Enquiry," page 109. 
 
3S8 LORD GEORGE SikCKYILLE. 
 
 men's conduct. They cannot always decide whether 
 delinquents offend ignorantly or wilfully. In many cases, 
 they can only determine whether the offence has been 
 committed or not, and they must leave it to heaven to 
 trace the source of the crime. You must be sensible, my 
 Lord, that no man could express a stronger conviction 
 of his own innocence, or greater consciousness of having 
 done his duty to the utmost of his abilities, than a late 
 unhappy admiral (Byng). 
 
 " His manly deportment at his trial ; the fortitude with 
 which he received an unexpected sentence; the resigna- 
 tion with which he met an untimely fate, — all afforded 
 the strongest proofs of his inward conviction, with respect 
 to the rectitude of his own conduct. But although to all 
 appearance he acquitted himself in his own conscience, 
 his judges nevertheless condemned him. Bound by the 
 laws of their country, they could not determine otherwise. 
 
 " With respect to the conclusion of your letter, it is 
 really astonishing to find you affect to be ignorant of 
 your crime, and of your accusers. Is not the Prince, 
 the commander-in-chief, your accuser? Is not your 
 crime declared to be disobedience to orders ? Have not 
 you yourself confessed by your address, that you were 
 acquainted with the nature of your crime? You say, 
 however, that the censure passed upon you by his High- 
 ness is only implied; — true my Lord ; but it is such an 
 implication, as arraigns your conduct in the clearest and 
 strongest terms, though it may not amount to a legal 
 impeachment. 
 
 " When you complain of the severity with which you 
 think you have been treated, you rather judge from your 
 own partial feelings than from the true circumstances of 
 
LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 259 
 
 the case. It may be natural for a man of high birth, 
 accustomed to pre-eminence, and used to the smiles of 
 fortune, to be mortified even by the slightest instance of 
 disrespect ; no wonder, therefore, that you are affected 
 by such public circumstances of humiliation. 
 
 " That some indecent liberties have been taken with your 
 character, cannot be denied. But remember, my Lord, 
 though publicly accused of disobedience, you were not 
 brought home a prisoner. You were not carried from 
 town to town like a felon. You were not vilified and 
 insulted by a mob — I had almost said, a hired mob. 
 You travelled in a manner suitable to your fashion, and 
 was suffered to pass unmolested. You still enjoy your 
 liberty, and are permitted to recriminate upon your 
 accuser. Every newspaper has been your advocate, and 
 shoals of pamphlets have pleaded your apology. You 
 complain, however, that you have been censured unheard, 
 condemned before you were tried, and dismissed from all 
 your military employments. You think it hard. You 
 forget, my Lord, that it is an unavoidable imperfection 
 in government, that persons accused, or even suspected 
 of delinquency, must, till they have an opportunity of 
 manifesting their innocence, undergo many of the incon- 
 veniences of guilt. 
 
 " Divest yourself, for a moment, of your rank and title, 
 and consider yourself only as a subject of Great Britain ; 
 then reflect on the number of your fellow-citizens who 
 are at this time confined in loathsome prisons, and laden 
 with heavy irons, on suspicion of crimes of which several 
 of them will probably appear innocent at their trials. 
 
 "A commander ordered to advance, should always have 
 that saying of Pompey's in remembrance — ' It is necessary 
 that I should go y hut not necessary that I should live.* " 
 
 s2 
 
260 LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 
 
 This important trial, on which the attention of the 
 whole kingdom was fixed, was held at the Horse-Guards, 
 and commenced on Friday the 7th March 1760, on the 
 return of the troops from Germany. The Court con- 
 sisted of sixteen officers and the Deputy-advocate-general. 
 Ten out of this number were Scotsmen, as well as several 
 of the officers who gave their evidence against him. 
 
 The principal witnesses on the trial were the Marquis 
 of Granby, Lieutenant-colonel Fitzroy, brother to the 
 Duke of Grafton, Colonel Sloper, and Lieutenant-colonel 
 William Augustus Pitt. These families stand pre-emi- 
 nent in the Letters of Junius. A careful perusal of the 
 trial, and a knowledge of the parties connected with it, 
 must convince every reader that the pen of a disgraced 
 soldier was afterwards exercised in retaliation — not one 
 family being spared, who had any share in the trans- 
 action. 
 
 Lord Orford gives the following description of the 
 mode in which Lord George conducted his defence, 
 (ii. 430) : — " Lord George's own behaviour was most 
 extraordinary. He had undoubtedly trusted to the 
 superiority of his parts to extricate him. Most men in 
 his situation would have adapted such parts to the con- 
 ciliating the favour of his judges, to drawing the wit- 
 nesses into contradictions, to misleading and bewildering 
 the Court, and to throwing the most specious tjolours on 
 his own conduct, without offending the parties declared 
 against him. Very different was the conduct of Lord 
 George. From the outset, and during the whole pro- 
 cess, he assumed a dictatorial style to the Court, and 
 treated the inferiority of their capacities as he would 
 have done if sitting among them. He browbeat the 
 
LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 261 
 
 witnesses, gave the lie to Sloper, and used the Judge- 
 advocate (a Scotsman), though a very clever man, with 
 contempt. Nothing was timid, nothing humble in his 
 behaviour. His replies were quick and spirited. He 
 prescribed to the Court, and they acquiesced. An instance 
 of such resolution at Minden had established his character 
 for ever." 
 
 " No man can have read Junius carefully," observes 
 Mr. Barker (p. 36), " without observing the high-minded- 
 ness and pride which belong to his character. Such a 
 writer would not be willing to impress his readers with 
 a notion that he derived any considerable assistance from 
 the pen of any living writer, or from the conversation of 
 any living statesmen." 
 
 On the 3rd of April 1760, the proceedings against 
 Lord George Sackville closed, when the Court pro- 
 nounced the following sentence : — 
 
 " This Court, upon due consideration of the whole 
 matter before them, is of opinion, that Lord George 
 Sackville is guilty of having disobeyed the orders of 
 Prince Ferdinand of Brunswick, whom he was by his 
 commission and instructions directed to obey, as com- 
 mander-in-chief, according to the rules of war. And it 
 is the further opinion of this Court, that the said Lord 
 George Sackville is, and he is hereby adjudged unfit to 
 serve his Majesty in any military capacity whatever" 
 
 The sentence was confirmed by the king in the following 
 words : " It is his Majesty's pleasure that the above 
 sentence be given out in public orders, that officers, being 
 convinced that neither high birth nor great employments can 
 shelter ofiences of such a nature; and that seeing they are 
 subject to censures much worse than death, to a man who 
 
262 LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 
 
 has any sense of honour, they may avoid the fatal con- 
 sequences arising from disobedience of orders." 
 
 The king also struck Lord George's name out of the 
 Council-book, and forbade his appearance at Court. The 
 Lord Chamberlain too was ordered to notify that prohi- 
 bition to the Prince of Wales and the Princess Dowager ; 
 and lest that should not be sufficient, the Vice-chamber- 
 lain was sent to acquaint Lord Bute with it, who said, 
 " to be sure the Prince would not think of seeing Lord George 
 while it was disagreeable to his Majesty." Accordingly, 
 both the Princess Dowager and Lord Bute prohibited 
 the young prince from seeing him. 
 
 From this, it appears that Lord George was on terms 
 of intimacy with the Princess Dowager and family 
 previously to his disgrace, and that Junius was also 
 perfectly acquainted with the character of the Princess 
 and her son, afterwards George III., is evident from the 
 following passages in his Letters. He thus speaks of the 
 king in his letter to Mr. Home. 
 
 " 24th July 1771. I know that man much better than 
 any of you. Nature intended him only for a good- 
 humoured fool. A systematical education, with long 
 practice, has made him a consummate hypocrite." 
 
 And in his private letters to Mr. Woodfall, will be 
 found the following passages : 
 
 " 21st February 1771. I think the argument about 
 Gibraltar, etc. is too good to be lost; as to the satirical 
 part, I must tell you (and with positive certainty), that 
 our gracious ♦ * ♦ ♦ is as callous as a stockfish to every 
 thing but the reproach of cowardice. That alone is able 
 to set the humours afloat. After a paper of that kind, he 
 won't eat meat for a week." 
 
LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 263 
 
 " 10th December 1771 . What do you mean by 
 affirming that the Dowager is better ? I tell you that she 
 suckles toads from morning till night." 
 
 No person, we think, can read the above and similar 
 passages in Junius's Letters, without acquiescing in the 
 justice of Mr. Butler's conclusion, that he must have 
 been a man of "%^ rank,'' and "in habits of confidential, 
 intercourse with those who were most intimately familiar 
 with the Court, and intrusted with all its secrets," as 
 suggested by Dr. Good. 
 
 In the Royal Register before referred to (vol. vi. 177), 
 it is said : — " The Court-martial seemed to imbibe the spirit 
 of all ranks of men when it condemned him; and his 
 sentence was passed, as it were, with the general assent of 
 the nation. Even the pity of the English people, which 
 discovers itself towards the most hardened and atrocious 
 malefactors, did not appear to dart one ray towards this 
 unpopular nobleman. Among the many political reasons 
 which might be given for this strong tide of displeasure, 
 it may be observed, that the army thought itself disgraced 
 by its late commander, and the navy raised its head on 
 the occasion, and almost forgot the fate of an unfortunate 
 admiral. But there was another circumstance, which 
 deprived him of those consolations to the unfortunate 
 which friendship so kindly bestows. The haughtiness of 
 his temper was intolerahlej and had displayed itself in every 
 situation of his life. They who had favours to ask, were 
 treated with an inattention which aggravated disappoint- 
 ment; and they who received them, lost half their satis- 
 faction by the manner in which he conferred them ; while 
 persons of all ranks, who had concerns of business with 
 him, were witnesses to that haughty demeanour which 
 
264 LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 
 
 tends to make men more unpopular than even crimes 
 themselves/' 
 
 Notwithstanding the popular prejudice against Lord 
 George, he still had some zealous and able advocates ; for 
 Smollett, in his History of England, has given a very 
 interesting account of the whole transaction j and after 
 ably vindicating Lord George from the imputation of 
 cowardice, concludes his narrative in the following strain 
 of generous and manly eloquence : — " Thus have we given 
 a succinct detail of this remarkable affair, with that 
 spirit of impartiality, that sacred regard to truth, which 
 the importance of history demands. To the best of our 
 recollection, we have forgot no essential article of the 
 accusation, nor suppressed any material circumstance 
 urged in defence of Lord George Sackville. Unknown 
 to his person, unconnected with his friends ; unmoved by 
 fear, unbiassed by interest, we have candidly obeyed the 
 dictates of justice and the calls of humanity, in our 
 endeavours to dissipate the clouds of prejudice and mis- 
 apprehension, warmed perhaps, with an honest disdain, 
 at the ungenerous, and in our opinion unjust persecution, 
 which, previous to his trial, an officer of rank, service, 
 and character, the descendant of an illustrious family, the 
 son of a nobleman universally respected, a Briton, a 
 fellow-subject, had undergone." 
 
 In "Almon's Biographical, Literary, and Political 
 Anecdotes" will also be found an eulogy on his Lord- 
 ship, and an exculpatory account of the motives which 
 influenced his conduct at Minden; and some curious 
 reasoning is employed to vindicate Lord George from the 
 imputation of pride and hauteur^ which seem very generally 
 to have been urged against him. The conclusion of the 
 
LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 265 
 
 argument is, that it was ** resentment, not cowardice, 
 that suspended the march of the cavalry in the plains of 
 Minden." 
 
 Several of the numerous places held by Lord George 
 Sackville were bestowed by the king on those very men 
 who had given evidence against him. The Marquis of 
 Granby was appointed Commander-in-chief and Master- 
 general of the Ordnance. Lord Townshend, Lieutenant- 
 general of the Ordnance. The Honourable Colonel 
 Fitzroy was appointed Aid- de-camp to the king. Lord 
 Charles Manners, and the Honourable John Barrington, 
 were likewise promoted; and the Duke of Bedford was 
 made a Lieutenant-general, and Deputy Ranger of the 
 Phoenix Park^ Dublin^ which had been Lord George's sinecure 
 for many years, Johnstone, Elliot, and many other officers 
 whom Junius treats with great severity, and mentions with 
 the most sovereign contempt, were likewise promoted. 
 
 Thus have we shewn, that the unhappy victims against 
 whom Junius hurled his thunderbolts with tremendous 
 force and unerring aim, had either by themselves, or their 
 immediate connexions, been instrumental in Lord George's 
 disgrace, or had obtained honours and offices from which 
 he had been degraded and expelled ; and we must remember 
 that a dishonoured soldier, having his understanding 
 warped by a deep sense of irremediable wrongs, and in- 
 furiated by revenge, was not likely to be very particular 
 in selecting the objects of his vengeance. Like the wolf 
 in the fable, it mattered little to him whether it was 
 the unoffending lamb, or some of his kindred, who had 
 rendered turbid the stream of his reputation. The sacrifice 
 of any of the offi3nding race, would be some atonement to 
 the manes of his departed honour, for this, 
 
 " If not victory, was at least revenge." 
 
266 LOUD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 
 
 The haughty and ambitious spirit of Lord George 
 brooded in solitude over his disgrace; and it can be 
 shewn, that the sense of his degradation ever afterwards 
 haunted his imagination, and that the incurable wound 
 rankled in his breast, and embittered the last hours of 
 his existence. 
 
 The sentence of the Court-martial rose up in judgment 
 against Lord George on many occasions during the sub- 
 sequent part of his life, and painfully reminded him of 
 the high estate from which he had fallen. On the acces- 
 sion of George III. in 1760, he ventured to appear 
 at Court; but this was considered so .great an indignity 
 to the memory of the late king, and those ministers who 
 conducted the German war, that an inquiry was set on 
 foot to ascertain who invited him. It was traced to Lord 
 Bute, and he was officially informed that such an invitation 
 was a great breach of decorum. Thd same was signified 
 to Lord George, who, highly indignant at being thus 
 made the dupe of Lord Bute and the ministry, never 
 appeared at Court afterwards during that administration. 
 Even after he had been sworn a member of the Privy 
 Council, and appointed one of the Vice-Treasurers of 
 Ireland in 1765, he was removed in the following year, 
 in consequence of the new ministry objecting to his taking 
 a part in the administration, on the ground of the censure 
 of the Court-martial being still in force against him, and 
 he held no other place under Government until the year 
 1775. It was during this interval that the Letters of 
 Junius appeared. In order to preserve unbroken this 
 important chain of evidence, it will be necessary here to 
 anticipate an incident or two in Lord George's life. 
 
 On introducing a motion in the House of Commous, 
 
LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 267 
 
 on the 14th of December 1770, Lord George said, " what 
 he had been urging was for the honour of the nation, in 
 which he declared that he greatly interested himself.'^ Upon 
 which Governor Johnstone took occasion to remark, " he 
 wondered the noble Lord should interest himself so deeply 
 in the honour of his country, when he had hitherto been 
 so regardless of his own,'* The remark was not heard by 
 Lord George, but some good-natured friend of course 
 quickly informed him of it, and the consequence was a 
 duel between the parties, which ended without injury to 
 either of the combatants, but called forth the usual com- 
 pliments to each other's politeness, coolness, and courage. 
 Immediately on Lord George's resigning his office of 
 Secretary of State in 1782, he was created a peer by 
 the title of Viscount Sackville; which was no sooner 
 publicly known, than the Marquis of Carmarthen, on 
 the 7th of February 1782, called the attention of the 
 House of Peers to the circumstances, and brought for- 
 ward a motion to prevent the newly created peer from 
 taking his seat among them. The Marquis disclaimed 
 any personal animosity; but said he understood that a 
 person who had in his military character been publicly 
 degraded, was shortly to be called up to that House. 
 He did not mean to dispute the prerogative of the Crown, 
 but he thought the creating such a person a peer, was a 
 disgrace to the House. He felt so in his own breast, and 
 he trusted every one of their Lordships would be impressed 
 with feelings of a similar nature. He therefore called 
 upon the House, for assistance and instructions. The 
 Lord Chancellor however declared, that it would be in 
 his mind altogether irregular and disorderly, even to 
 put such a motion. Lord Denbigh moved an adjourn- 
 
268 LORD OEORGE SACKVILLE. 
 
 ment, which, after some debate, was carried by a majority 
 of seventy-five to twenty-eight. 
 
 Even after the peerage had actually been conferred, 
 the Marquis of Carmarthen, on the 18th of February, 
 again brought forward the subject, and made the follow- 
 ing motion: — "That it was highly reprehensible in any 
 person to advise the Crown to exercise its indisputable 
 right of creating a peer, in favour of a person labouring 
 under the heavy censure of the sentence of a court- 
 martial, and public orders given out in consequence 
 thereof/* Lord Sackville, who had taken his seat a few 
 days before, was upon this occasion his own defender, 
 and delivered a speech which was admitted on all hands 
 to be one of great ability. 
 
 The motion was supported by the Dukes of Grafton 
 and Richmond, the Earls of Abingdon and Derby, 
 Lord Southampton (formerly Colonel Fitzroy), and Lord 
 Shelburne, who, after charging Lord Sackville with 
 having had the whole strength of the country put into 
 his hands to carry on the American war, and having 
 failed most miserably, nevertheless gave him credit 
 for having held a more manly style of language than 
 any other minister, and for having uniformly acted 
 with the nicest feelings, the strictest honour, the most un- 
 impeachable integrity, and the most distinguished ability. 
 With regard to the person who had been appointed the 
 noble Viscount's successor (Mr. Welbore Ellis), all he 
 would .say of him was, that he, at least, could not be 
 charged with disobedience of orders ^ from the first day of 
 his getting admission into the ministerial phalanx to the 
 present moment.*' The result was the defeat of the 
 motion by a majority of ninety -three to twenty-eight j but 
 
LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 26 
 
 a strong protest against the decision was entered on the 
 Journals, and signed by nine peers. Thus terminated 
 this unprecedented affair; and it is worthy of remark, 
 that nearly the whole of those who were in the minority, 
 had been fersonally attached by Junius. 
 
 The following observations are made by Mr. Richard 
 Cumberland on this transaction: — "The well-known cir- 
 cumstance that occurred upon the event of Lord George's 
 elevation to the peerage, made a deep and painful impres- 
 sion on his feeling mind; and if his seeming patience 
 under the infliction of it should appear to merit in a 
 moral sense the name of virtue, I must candidly acknow- 
 ledge it was a virtue that he had no title to be credited 
 for, inasmuch as it was entirely owing to the influence of 
 some who overruled his propensities, and made them- 
 selves responsible for his honour, that he did not betake 
 himself to the same abrupt, unwarrantable mode of dis- 
 missing this insult, as he had resorted to in a former 
 instance. No man can speak from a more intimate 
 knowledge of his feelings upon this occasion than I can; 
 and if I was not on the side of those who no doubt 
 spoke well and wisely, when they spoke for peace, it is 
 one amongst the many errors and offences which I have 
 yet to repent of. There was once a certain Sir Edward 
 Sackville, whom the world has heard of, who probably 
 would not have possessed himself with so much calm- 
 ness and forbearance as did a late noble head of his 
 family, whilst the question I allude to was in agitation, 
 and he present in his place. It was by the medium of 
 this noble personage, that the Lord Viscount Sackville 
 meditated to send that invitation he had prepared, when 
 the interposition and well considered remonstrance of 
 
270 LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 
 
 some of his nearest friendsy in 'particular of Lord Amherst j 
 put him by from his resolve, and dictated a conduct 
 more conformable to prudence, but much less suited to 
 his inclination."* — Cumberland's Memoirs, ii, 175. 
 
 These remarks of Mr. Cumberland afford much ground 
 for serious reflection. Of the friends whom Lord Sack- 
 ville consulted on the important subject, whether he 
 should vindicate his honour by " a gothic appeal to cold 
 iron," it appears that General Lord Amherst, a warrior 
 by profession, who had passed his life amidst perils and 
 dangers of all kinds, whose courage was undoubted, and 
 his honour without a stain, counselled conciliation and 
 peace. While Cumberland, whose life had been devoted 
 to the cultivation of literature, and those polite arts which 
 are said to soften and humanize the heart of man, and 
 purge it from every sanguinary and ferocious feeling, 
 declared in the words of Moloch, 
 
 " My sentence is for open war." 
 
 But on most similar occasions it will be found, that 
 the man of real courage and unsullied honour, regards 
 with indifference and contempt, those charges and in- 
 sinuations from which duels generally spring — such a 
 man feels conscious that his character is above all base 
 imputations. ** It is the middle, compound character," 
 as Junius tells Sir William Draper, " which alone is 
 vulnerable; the man who, without firmness enough to 
 avoid a dishonourable action, has feeling enough to be 
 ashamed of it;" that resorts to this mode of vindicating 
 his reputation. Fortunately on the present occasion. 
 Lord Sackville had the good sense to prefer the wise 
 counsel of the rude soldier, to the contrary advice of the 
 accomplished dramatist. 
 
LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 271 
 
 *' Understanding," says Mr. Coventry (Preface, p. 17), 
 " that the family of Lord Sackville still possess documents 
 of great interest, and considering the political ferment 
 of the day too long subsided to awaken any unpleasant 
 feelings, I resolved to write candidly to the Duke of 
 Dorset on the subject. 
 
 " I stated to his Grace, that I was engaged in a literary 
 inquiry, with which his illustrious father was intimately 
 connected, and should feel particularly obliged by his 
 permitting me to see the letters which were written by 
 Lord George from CuUoden and Minden; hoping that 
 the liberality which so conspicuously characterises the 
 nobility of the present day, in elucidation of any literary 
 pursuit, would plead an excuse for my freedom in thus 
 addressing him. I subsequently waited on his Grace by 
 appointment. He received me in the most polite manner, 
 but told me it was out of his power to render me assistance, 
 not having any of his father* s letters in his possession. Upon 
 the whole he considered, that as the aflfair in question 
 was now at rest, it would be as well not to revive it, lest 
 animadversions should be made that would tend to recall 
 past events. His Grace more than once observed during 
 the interview, that his father was an injured man; but he 
 believed there never existed one, who naturally possessed 
 a better or more susceptible heart. I told him that this 
 was my firm belief, and that the inquiry in which I was 
 engaged would not, in the slightest degree, tend to alter 
 that opinion." 
 
LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE'S 
 
 LIFE CONTINUED, FROM HIS TRIAL TO HIS BEING APPOINTED 
 SECRETARY OF STATE. 
 
 The web of our life is of a mingled yarn, good and ill together : 
 our virtues would be proud, if our faults whipped them not; 
 and our crimes would despair, if they were not cherished by our 
 virtues. 
 
 ShaJcspeare. 
 
 Twist ye — twine ye — ever so 
 Mingle human joy and woe. 
 
 Sir Walter Scott. 
 
CHAPTER X. 
 
 The nature of circumstantial evidence explained. — Lord George 
 retires to his seat in Kent. — Is appointed a Privy-councillor 
 and one of the Vice-treasurersof Irelandin 1765. — His perfect 
 leisure found to agree with Mr. Barker's conclusion respecting 
 the situation of Junius. — His age shewn to correspond with 
 Dr. Good's opinion of the age of Junius. — Junius's contra- 
 dictory assertions with regard to his being a soldier proved 
 to be consistent with Lord George's peculiar situation. — Lord 
 George resident in London during the time the Letters were 
 written. — The position of his house at Kew enabled him to 
 obtain intelligence of what was passing in the King's palace. 
 — The opinion of the author of "Junius Unmasked" respecting 
 Lord George's qualification for writing the Letters of Junius. 
 — Lord George treated as the author of the Letters of Junius 
 by "Titus." — Junius's attack on Lord Granby consistent 
 with Lord George being the author. — The general suspicion 
 of his being Junius further shewn from Chatterton's Poems. — 
 His Lordship takes the name of Germain. — Anecdote of 
 his Lordship and a young clergyman. — Lord Germain again 
 makes a conspicuous figure in the House of Commons in 
 1770. — Junius's antipathy to Sir Fletcher Norton and Lord 
 Mansfield shewn to be also entertained by Lord Germain. — 
 That his Lordship, as well as Junius, was the friend of Alder- 
 man Sawbridge. — His Lordship's defence of Woodfall, and 
 disregard of Mr. Home, when brought before the House 
 of Commons for a libel. — Junius and Lord Germain both 
 proved to be great admirers of Mr. G. Grenville's political 
 principles. — Lord Germain supports the Ministers in their 
 coercive measures against America. 
 
LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE 
 
 CONTINUED. 
 
 Whenever a fact is touched upon, there I fix. 
 
 Junius. 
 
 As we now approach the period when the Letters of Junius 
 appeared, it becomes necessary to detail with some degree 
 of minuteness, the evidence which has been adduced to 
 prove the identity of Lord George Sackville with the 
 author of those Letters. This evidence, it is obvious 
 from the nature of the case, cannot be direct and positive, 
 but must necessarily be presumptive, or circumstantial. 
 It may, therefore, not be out of place to offer a few 
 remarks on the nature of such evidence. Circumstantial 
 evidence, by the law of England, is admissible both in 
 civil and criminal cases ; for the modes of reasoning and 
 drawing conclusions from facts must be uniform. When 
 direct facts cannot be supplied, as must continually 
 happen in some of the worst species of crime, reasonable 
 minds will necessarily form their judgment on circum- 
 stances, and act on the probabilities of the case : indeed, the 
 whole system of human action depends on probability; and 
 " as mathematical, or absolute certainty (to use the words 
 of Lord Mansfield) is seldom to be attained in human 
 affairs, reason and public utility require that Judges, and 
 all mankind, in forming their opinion of the truth of facts, 
 should be regulated by the superior number of the proba- 
 bilities on the one side or the other, whether the amount of 
 
 t2 
 
276 LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 
 
 these probabilities be expressed in words and arguments, 
 or by figures and numbers." Lord Kennet, in delivering 
 his judgment in the celebrated Douglas cause, says: — 
 " Of all evidence to prove a crime, circumstantial evi- 
 dence is the most convincing j and what is more, the least 
 suspicious. In judging of such a proof, the whole cir- 
 cumstances must be taken together; some by themselves 
 may appear trivial, which when joined to others, appear 
 exceedingly material." 
 
 It has been further remarked of this species of evidence, 
 that when the proofs are dependent on each other, or 
 when all the proofs are dependent upon one, the number 
 of proofs neither increase nor diminish the probability of 
 the fact; for the force of the whole is not greater than the 
 force of that on which they depend, and if this fail, they 
 all fall to the ground. But when the proofs are distinct 
 and independent of each other, the probability of the fact 
 increases in proportion to the number of the proofs, for 
 the falsehood of one does not diminish the veracity of 
 another. 
 
 After his disgrace. Lord George Sackville retired to 
 his paternal mansion at Knowle in Kent; and from the 
 year 1760 to 1765, there appears an interregnum in his 
 public life, though he continued member of parliament 
 for Hythe. In the year 1765 he was nominated by 
 George the Third a member of the Privy-council, and 
 appointed one of the Vice-treasurers of Ireland; but this 
 last situation his Lordship resigned a few months after- 
 wards, upon the Duke of Grafton being appointed to 
 the Treasury. These appointments gave him an oppor- 
 tunity of knowing every minute circumstance connected 
 with Irish affairs, all the movements of the Ministry, all 
 
LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 277 
 
 that was passing in the immediate circle of the Court, as 
 well as in the various departments of the army, the navy, 
 and the foreign office. 
 
 During his retirement, Lord George had ample leisure 
 in solitude to brood over his wrongs and injuries, and of 
 " nursing his wrath to keep it warm," as well as to improve 
 himself in composition, and amass those stores of legal 
 and constitutional knowledge which the Letters of Junius 
 exhibit; indeed, his situation seems exactly to have corres- 
 ponded with that of Junius, as described by Mr. E. H. 
 Barker, who says (p. 141): — *^ It may be affirmed beyond 
 all contradiction, and I particularly invite the attention of 
 the reader to the importance and novelty of the observa- 
 tion, because it is decisive against the claim of Sir Philip 
 Francis and several other persons, that the author could 
 not have had leisure for any other pursuit, or any other 
 business, while he was engaged in writing these Letters : 
 he must have lived in the retirement of his own presence, 
 confining his society, when he could admit society, chiefly 
 to those few individuals who furnished him with facts, 
 and incidents, and circumstances, or in any way favoured 
 his views and facilitated his labours. In solitary majesty, 
 in oriental seclusion, in the realm of silence, and in the 
 land of oblivion, he was " left at large to his own dark 
 designs," till, like another Aurungzebe, he came forth, 
 " fierce from his lair to lap the blood of kings," — with 
 Titanian look denouncing 
 
 " Desperate revenge and battle dangerous 
 To less than Gods,"— 
 
 till arrayed at length in "Gorgon terrors," and armed 
 with infernal thunder, he, as from " a firmament of hell, 
 spouted his cataracts of fire." 
 
278 LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 
 
 The Letters written by the Author of Junius in the 
 Public Advertiser, commenced on the 28th April 1767, 
 and ended the 12th May 1772, except one letter to Mr. 
 Woodfall, which is dated January 19, 1773. By an ex- 
 amination of the dates of the letters during this period, it 
 will be found, that the writer could not have been absent 
 from London many weeks together. At the time the first 
 letter appeared, Lord George was in the fifty-first year of 
 his age; which coincides with Dr. Good's conjecture 
 respecting the age of Junius, and fully satisfies that test 
 which requires him to have " attained an age which could 
 allow him, without vanity, to boast of an ample knowledge 
 and experience of the world." He had also been dismissed 
 from the army eight years, and therefore, he could then 
 truly assert that he was not a soldier; which reconciles 
 perhaps the only contradictory assertion, not essentially 
 connected with the preservation of his secret, to be found 
 in the Letters of Junius. During the whole period in 
 which the Letters appeared, Lord George was constant in 
 his attendance on his parliamentary duties^ and his town 
 residence then, and for many years previously, was the 
 house afterwards occupied by the late Mr. Angerstein, 
 in Pall Mall, and recently well known as the National 
 Gallery. Of the multitudes of persons who have viewed 
 the treasures of art in this mansion, few have suspected 
 that in all probability they were traversing the apart- 
 ments in which the perturbed spirit of Junius sought 
 revenge in composing his caustic and brilliant Letters. 
 It is to be remarked, that one letter, written by the author 
 of Junius under the signature of ** Tell Truth," on the 
 8th May 1772, is dated " Pall Mall" similar to the letter, 
 written by Lord George to Lord Barrington, and dated 
 
LORD GEORGE SACXVILLE. 279 
 
 from the same place, in September 1759, which we have 
 given at p. 254; but this is the only instance in which 
 the wary Junius has been guilty of such an inadvertence. 
 To account for the wonderful dispatch with which 
 Junius became acquainted with Garrick's visit to Rich- 
 mond, and the exact knowledge he displays of other 
 secret transactions in the interior of the palace, the 
 industry of Mr. Coventry has discovered that at the 
 period in question. Lord George rented a house at 
 Richmond, formerly occupied by the poet Thomson. 
 This house stood exactly opposite to the entrance to the 
 grounds of the palace, near Richmond Green, which the 
 King then occupied. The front of Lord George's house 
 so completely overlooked the palace, that without excit- 
 ing suspicion, he could notice the daily arrivals with the 
 utmost facility; and his friend Colonel Amherst (brother 
 to Sir Jeffery Amherst) was one of the King's aids -de- 
 camp, and held the situation of groom of the bed- 
 chamber, from whom he could obtain intelligence of 
 what took place within the palace. As this seems a 
 point of some importance in the chain of evidence, Mr. 
 Coventry gives the following authority for his statement, 
 "The circumstance that Lord George did occupy this 
 house at the time of Garrick's visit, was communicated 
 to me by W. Little, Esq., of Richmond, and has been 
 fully confirmed by a most respectable gentleman, an old 
 inhabitant of the place, who knew Lord George per- 
 sonally at the time of his residence there." The palace 
 was several years since pulled down, and the grounds 
 now form part of Richmond Gardens ; but the house in 
 which Thomson, and afterwards Lord George resided, 
 and which has now became classic ground, is still in 
 
280 LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 
 
 existence, and was lately occupied by Lady Shaftesbury. 
 The author of ' Junius Unmasked/ observes that : — ''The 
 situation of Privy Councillor, which Lord George held 
 during ten years^ commencing from 1765, rendered his 
 opportunities for information of the most secret nature, 
 in regard to every department of the government, very 
 far superior to those of any other individual, who has 
 ever been suspected as the author of Junius. His friend- 
 ship for Mr. D'Oyly (whom we afterwards find holding 
 the situation of Lord George's private and confidential 
 secretary), reveals the source of Junius's knowledge as 
 regards the War Office, and his situation as Vice-Trea- 
 surer of Ireland, accounts for the very surprising and 
 intimate acquaintance which Junius manifested with the 
 most secret deliberations in regard to the affairs of that 
 kingdom. 
 
 " His rank and situation gave him access to the person 
 of the King, and having been familiar with him from 
 his youth, he was intimately acquainted with his habits 
 and disposition. His age and experience ; his long and 
 intimate acquaintance with the history of his country, 
 and especially that of his own times; his familiarity 
 with every family of rank in the nation ; his services as a 
 soldier, his interest in the army, and his practical know- 
 ledge of every thing connected with it; his legal and 
 political learning, acquired not only from the study of 
 the English constitution, but from the practice of its 
 forms, and the observations of its workings in the House 
 of Commons ; his attainments as a scholar, and a man of 
 the world; in fine, all the circumstances of his life and 
 character, rendered him well fitted for a task like that of 
 composing the Letters of Junius." 
 
LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 281 
 
 The notice of the public, we have seen, was first drawn 
 to the writings of Junius by his controversy with Sir 
 William Draper, respecting the character of The Mar- 
 quis OF Granby, then commander-in-chief. Now it 
 will be recollected, that Lord Granby served under Lord 
 George at the Battle of Minden, and was complimented 
 by Prince Ferdinand for his conduct on that day, at the 
 expense of Lord George, and therefore, they must have 
 been perfectly well acquainted with each other's talents 
 and character j and it appears very strong circumstantial 
 evidence to prove that Lord George was the author of 
 the Letters of Junius, when we find he was treated as 
 such, not only by Lord Granby's intimate friend Sir 
 William Draper, but also by a writer, who under the 
 signature of 'Titcs,' put forth another defence of Lord 
 Granby. Sir William Draper, as remarked by Junius, 
 *' entered the lists as a volunteer, with all the unpremedi- 
 tated gallantry of a soldier ;'* but it is not probable that 
 the commander-in-chief was such a novice, as to leave 
 the entire defence of his character to a volunteer, however 
 able, and therefore it is not unreasonable to conclude, 
 that Titus wrote from authority ^ and was furnished with 
 materials and ammunition from head-quarters, for the 
 purpose of repelling the assault on his chief. The letter of 
 Titus will accordingly be found to contain an able defence 
 of Lord Granby; and in terms which cannot be misun- 
 derstood, points out Lord George Sackville as the author 
 of the attack on the Commander-in-chief, by bitter and 
 sarcastic allusions to his disgraceful conduct at Minden. 
 As the letter is of considerable length, and may be seen 
 at large in Woodfall's Junius (vol. i". 83), we shall only 
 give such extracts from it, as will confirm our statement: — 
 
282 LOUD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 
 
 <'My Lord Granby's character," says Titus, "as a 
 man, as a soldier, and even as a general, will stand the 
 test. The honesty of his heart, the integrity of his inten- 
 tions, his intrepidity as a soldier, and his conduct as 
 an officer, are unimpeached. It is true, his talents as 
 commander-in-chief have never been tried in the field; 
 but if we may be allowed to judge from the whole of his 
 conduct during the late war in Germany, where the 
 execution of many important enterprises were intrusted 
 to him by one of the greatest generals, and one of the 
 best judges of military merit in Europe, we may form 
 great expectations, with the highest probability of not 
 being disappointed. He knows how to obey; he knows 
 that a good soldier never disputes the commands of his 
 superior. He always discharged his duty to the satis- 
 faction of Duke Ferdinand, whose approbation, thanks, 
 and acknowledgments, he repeatedly obtained. Where- 
 ever he was employed, he gained honour to himself — he 
 was beloved and esteemed by the army under his com- 
 mand — he was honoured and respected by the enemy — 
 dear to the victors ! — generous to the vanquished ! You 
 know, Junius, that he feared not to lead on the cavalry at 
 Minden, He gained glory and honour at Warburg. It 
 was the corps under his command who fought and gained 
 the battle at Phillinghausen. He was principally con- 
 cerned, and acted as became the soldier and general, at 
 Wilhelmstahl." Again: "Whatever Junius may think 
 (though he may, for aught I know, be perfectly unac 
 quainted with it himself), the gaining the affections of the 
 soldiers will always be esteemed no mean qualification in 
 a general." 
 
 Junius, it appears, intended to answer this letter, for 
 
LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 283 
 
 his Letter to Sir William Draper of 18th February 1768, 
 when first printed, contained the following postcript: — 
 " I had determined to leave the Commander-in -chief in 
 the quiet possession of his friend and his bottle; but Titus 
 deserves an answer , and shall have a complete one" It 
 seems, however, that Junius changed his mind, for no 
 answer was ever given to the Letter of Titus; and there- 
 fore, when the genuine edition of the Letters of Junius 
 were published, edited by the author himself, he informs 
 Woodfall, in a note of 27th November 1771, that '* the 
 postcript to Titus must be omitted.'* Now this is a very 
 curious circumstance, and strongly confirmative of Titus 
 being right in his conjecture. Junius was evidently 
 irritated at the first appearance of Titus's Letter, and 
 meditated an answer; and his subsequent conduct can 
 only be accounted for, on the supposition, that upon 
 more mature reflection, he considered it would be too 
 dangerous to enter into a contest with a man who had 
 penetrated his disguise, and so let the matter drop; and 
 when the Letters were afterwards collected into volumes, 
 he artfully suppressed the only evidence of his having ever 
 noticed the obnoxious letter. 
 
 It seems clear likewise, that when Junius found Sir 
 William Draper pertinaciously continued the contest, 
 notwithstanding the severe castigation inflicted on him, 
 he took the earliest opportunity of retiring from the 
 field. " My answer," says he, *' to your last letter shall 
 be short; for I write to you with reluctance^ and I hope 
 we shall now conclude our correspondence for ever." It 
 must, however, be admitted that he made his retreat in 
 excellent order, with colours flying, and all the honours 
 of war. As the remembrance of his old comrade Lord 
 
284 LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 
 
 Granby, and the rest of his brethren in arms, would 
 naturally be associated with unpleasant recollections in the 
 mind of Lord George, the conduct of Junius towards 
 Lord Granby is quite intelligible and consistent with 
 the hypothesis of Lord George's being the author of the 
 Letters. But although he could not be expected to 
 love the man who had crossed his path, and eclipsed his 
 fame at Minden, — who had been a witness against him 
 on his trial, and afterwards obtained an honourable and 
 lucrative office from which he had been dismissed; still 
 he seems to have been impressed with sentiments of 
 respect for Lord Granby's character, for in a note to the 
 genuine edition of the Letters, it is observed : — " The 
 death of Lord Granby was lamented by Junius. He 
 undoubtedly owed some compensations to the public, 
 and seemed determined to acquit himself of them. In 
 private life, he was unquestionably that good man, who, 
 for the interest of his country, ought to have been 
 a great one" " Bonum virum facile dixeris; magnum 
 libenter. — I speak of him now without partiality; I 
 never spoke of him with resentment." 
 
 As a further proof that Lord George Sackville was 
 generally considered the writer of the Letters on their first 
 appearance, we find in a poem entitled the 'Consuliad,' 
 written by the unfortunate Chatterton, in Januaiy 1770, 
 the following lines: — 
 
 Let Draper to improve his diction fight; 
 
 Our heroes, like Lord George, could scold and write. 
 
 Chatterton, in a few political letters which appeared in 
 the periodicals of the day, evidently aimed at the style 
 of Junius; he very probably attended to the rumours 
 then afloat concerning the authorship. It was a question 
 
LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 285 
 
 sure to interest the discoverer of Rowley's Poems ; and 
 the bold and passionate boy, whom neither disappoint- 
 ment, hunger, nor certain death, could depress — would 
 hail a kindred spirit in the savage Junius. So that his 
 opinion is altogether deserving of attention. 
 
 By the will of Lady Betty Germain, Lord George in 
 1769, came into possession of personal property amount- 
 ing to upwards of 20,000/., in addition to very valuable 
 estates at Drayton in Northamptonshire ; upon taking 
 possession of which, he dropped the name of Sackville, 
 and took that of Germain, which he continued to use 
 until he was called to the Upper House by the title of 
 Viscount Sackville, in the year 1782. 
 
 One of the most remarkable traits in the character of 
 Junius, was the imperturbable coolness and self-posses- 
 sion displayed in his public letters; and that Lord George 
 was equally cool and collected, is evident from the 
 following anecdote. Shortly after he had taken the 
 name of Germain, he had presented a living in his gift 
 to a young clergyman who was totally unknown to him, 
 on the recommendation of a relative; and upon the 
 gentleman's waiting on his Lordship to return thanks 
 for the favour. Lord Germain, in the most courteous 
 manner observed, — that if he had any objection to the 
 living, on account of the parsonage-house being situate 
 near a powder-mill, he would exchange it for another 
 which had just fallen in. To this the clergyman, to 
 shew at once his gratitude and his wit, answered, that he 
 would gladly avail himself of his Lordship's kind offer, 
 as he disliked powder as much as Lor^ George Sackville, 
 To which his Lordship, without the least change of coun- 
 tenance, replied, " In that particular, Sir, you may find, 
 
286 LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 
 
 upon consideration, that common fame has deceived you." 
 He then bowed and retired; and the facetious priest soon 
 afterwards discovered, to his astonishment and dismay, 
 that Lord George Germain and Lord George Sackville 
 were the same person ! 
 
 Early in the session of 1770, Lord George again 
 performed a conspicuous part in Parliament, where his 
 eloquence and sound reasoning soon gained him the 
 applause of the House as an able oppositionist to the 
 measures of ministers. His quickness at reply, and his 
 judgment on all important aflfairs, were so highly thought 
 of by Mr. Pitt, that he styled him the Agamemnon of 
 the day. 
 
 It is remarkable, that from the time of his trial in 1760 
 to the year 1769 (although in the interim he had been 
 introduced as a member of the Privy Council), he did 
 not come forward in any public capacity; but soon after 
 the commencement of Junius's Letters, we find him in 
 the House of Commons assuming a position decidedly 
 hostile to the existing administration. 
 
 The antipathy of Junius towards Sir Fletcher 
 Norton, the Speaker, is evident from the contempt with 
 which he uniformly speaks of him. And we find, that 
 on the death of Sir John Cust in 1770, Lord North, on 
 the 22d of January, proposed Sir Fletcher Norton to fill 
 the vacant seat, and Mr. Rigby seconded the motion; 
 but Lord George Germain did not approve of the 
 worthy knight, for he seconded the motion of Lord John 
 Cavendish, who proposed the Right Honorable Thomas 
 Townshend : Sir Fletcher, however, being a stanch 
 ministerialist, was elected. 
 
 On the 28th May 1770, Junius thus mentions the new 
 
LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 287 
 
 Speaker: — ''The Speaker being young in office, began 
 with pretending ignorance, and ended with deciding for 
 the Ministry. We were not surprised at the decision ; 
 but he hesitated and blushed at his own baseness, and 
 every man was astonished." 
 
 Lord George, however, finally succeeded in expelling 
 Sir Fletcher Norton from the chair in the year 1780, 
 when, in an able speech, he proposed Charles Wolfran 
 Cornwall, Esq., to fill the chair, who was elected, after 
 considerable opposition. 
 
 At the opening of the session of parliament early in 
 January 1770, we find Lord George in the House of 
 Commons, foremost in the ranks of opposition, cavilling 
 at the Ministers' answer to the King's speech. From a 
 long speech he made on the occasion, which is given by 
 Mr. Coventry (p. 227), we extract the following passage 
 respecting the Middlesex election: "The unprecedented 
 decision of the majority of this House, with regard to the 
 Middlesex election, has spread a gloom throughout the 
 whole kingdom; every brow is clouded, and every heart 
 is heavy. The freedom of election is the sacred palla- 
 dium of English liberty, and when that is violated, it 
 cannot be long before our constitution is in ruins. It is 
 not enough that the majority who decided the question 
 are satisfied with the rectitude of their intentions, or that 
 they did not mean to break in upon that freedom, — the 
 people must be satisfied. Their all is at stake; they 
 apprehend that is in danger, and therefore they have a 
 right to demand security. The powerful influence that 
 operates in this House is too visible. , The people see it 
 and dread it. But a snare is now laid to involve our 
 Sovereign in the gulph of his corrupt administration ; to 
 
288 LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 
 
 draw him in as a party, and to countenance the desperate 
 measures of his Ministers; a snare which it is to be hoped 
 this House will break. Whoever can concur in offering 
 such indignity to his Sovereign, is neither a good senator 
 nor a good subject. He can have no worthy conception 
 of the exalted character of a great prince, nor of the 
 inestimable value of the liberty of a free people." 
 
 " Can any one read this speech," observes Mr. Coventry, 
 "without being forcibly reminded of the strong, energetic, 
 powerful language of Junius? Many of the sentences 
 are almost verbatim. The same violent attack on the 
 Ministers, the same voice in reference to the King, the 
 same allusion to the freedom of election, the massacre in 
 St. George's Fields, the expulsion of Mr. Wilkes, and 
 finally, a fear lest the shattered remains of the constitution 
 should fall a prey to the violence of the people, and they 
 in the end resolve to be governed without a parliament. 
 Lord George could not have borrowed his ideas from 
 Junius, provided he were not the author, as the speech 
 was delivered in 1770, and the Letter of Junius, con- 
 taining the allusions above referred to, was not then 
 published." 
 
 The extreme hatred evinced by Junius to Lord 
 Mansfield is notorious. " Our language," says he, in 
 his letter to his Lordship, " has no term of reproach, the 
 mind has no idea of detestation, which has not been 
 happily applied to you, and exhausted." It is equally 
 clear that Lord Mansfield was likewise the subject of 
 Lord George's dislike; but the cause of this enmity is 
 involved in considerable obscurity. Mr. Coventry says 
 that it arose from Lord Mansfield's having assured him, 
 previously to his trial, that he could not be convicted; 
 
LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 289 
 
 but as Lord Mansfield had been appointed Chief Justice 
 in 1756, four years prior to Lord Sackville's trial, and 
 then became a member of the Cabinet, it is not probable 
 that he would give an extra-judicial opinion on a doubt- 
 ful point of law. Mr. Butler, who was more likely to be 
 correctly informed on a subject of this nature, suggests, 
 that Lord George's hatred against Lord Mansfield arose 
 from his being the secret and confidential adviser of 
 government in all state prosecutions: but from whatever 
 cause the antipathy may have originally arisen, it appears 
 that Woodfall's trial before Lord Mansfield, for publish- 
 ing Junius's Letter to the King, took place on the 13th 
 of June 1770, and Junius's virulent Letter to Lord 
 Mansfield is dated the 14th of November following. It 
 is therefore not unlikely, that Lord George's dislike to 
 Lord Mansfield was greatly heightened by the Chief 
 Justice's conduct and demeanour on that trial; for we 
 find, that when Serjeant Glynn brought forward his 
 motion in the House of Commons on the 6th December 
 following, for a committee to inquire into the administra- 
 tion of criminal justice. Lord George delivered the follow- 
 ing speech on the occasion, in which a vein of satire and 
 invective will be observed to run through the whole, 
 under the mask of friendship for Lord Mansfield : 
 
 " Consider, gentlemen," says the orator, '< what will 
 be the consequence of refusing this demand, this debt, 
 which you owe to the anxious expectation of the public. 
 The people, seeing his avowed defenders so loth to bring 
 him forth on the public stage, and to make him plead his 
 cause before their tribunal, will naturally conclude, that 
 he could not bear the light, because his deeds were evil; 
 and that, therefore, you judged it advisable to screen him 
 
 u 
 
290 LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 
 
 behind the curtain of a majority. Though his conduct was 
 never questioned in parliament, mark how he is every day, 
 and every hour, pointed out in print and conversation, as 
 a perverter of the law, and an enemy of the constitution. 
 No epithet is too bad for him. Now he is the subtile 
 Scroggs, now the arbitrary Jeffries. All the records of 
 our courts of law, and all the monuments of our lawyers, 
 are ransacked, in order to find sufficiently odious names 
 by which he may be christened. The libellous and 
 virulent spirit of the times has overleaped all the barriers 
 of law, order, and decorum. The judges are no longer 
 revered, and the laws have lost all their salutary terrors. 
 Juries will not convict petty delinquents, when they 
 suspect grand criminals go unpunished. Hence libels and 
 lampoons, audacious beyond the example of all other 
 times; libels, in comparison of which, the North Briton, 
 once deemed the ne plus ultra of sedition, is perfect 
 innocence and simplicity. The sacred number, Forty- 
 five, formerly the idol of the multitude, is eclipsed by 
 the superior venom of every day's defamation: all its 
 magical and talismanic powers are lost and absorbed in 
 the general deluge of scandal which pours from the press. 
 When matters are thus circumstanced, when the judges 
 in general, and Lord Mansfield in particular, are there 
 hung out to public scorn and detestation, now that 
 libellers receive no countenance from men high in power 
 and in the public esteem, — what will be the consequence 
 when it is publicly known, that they have been arraigned, 
 and that their friends quashed inquiry which it was pro- 
 posed to make upon their conduct ? The consequence is 
 more easily conceived than expressed. I foresee that the 
 imps of the press, the sons of ink, and the printers' 
 
LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 291 
 
 devils, will be all in motion; and they will spare you 
 as little as they will the judges. Like the two thieves in 
 the Gospel, both will be hung up and gibbeted, with the 
 law crucified between you, for the entertainment of coffee- 
 house politicians, greasy carmen, and porters and barbers 
 in tippling houses and night cellars. I cannot help 
 thinking that it is the wish of Lord Mansfield himself to 
 have his conduct examined; nay, I collect as much from 
 the language of a gentleman who may be supposed to 
 know his sentiments. What foundation then is there for 
 obstructing inquiry? None at all. It is a pleasure to 
 me to see my noble friend discovering such symptoms 
 of conscious innocence. His ideas perfectly coincide 
 with my own. I would never oppose the minutest 
 scrutiny into my behaviour. However much condemned 
 by the envy or malice of enemies, I would at least shew 
 that I stood acquitted in my own mind. Qui fugit 
 judicium, ipso teste, reus est.'* 
 
 Mr. Coventry considers this speech one of the most 
 extraordinary ever delivered in the House of Commons. 
 " Would any one," he asks, " who had any real feeling 
 for another, place his noble friend in the degraded station 
 of the thief in the Gospel, or gibbet him for the amuse- 
 ment of the vulgar! There is also ample testimony on 
 the face of the speech to prove that no intimacy subsisted 
 between them at this period, from the avowal that * it was 
 from the language of a gentleman who might be supposed 
 to know his sentiments,' that he considered Lord Mans- 
 field wished his conduct to be inquired into" (p. 189). 
 
 In allusion to the debate on Serjeant Glynn's motion, 
 Junius says, in a letter dated December 13th, 1770: " Let 
 it be known to posterity, that when Lord Mansfield was 
 
 u2 
 
292 LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 
 
 attacked with so much vehemence in the House of Com- 
 mons, on Thursday the 6th instant, not one of the Ministry 
 said a word in his defence." 
 
 Here we find Junius and Lord George both acting 
 against Lord Mansfield at the same time, and on the 
 same subject, in so similar a manner as to be not a little 
 remarkable, if they were not like la republique Frangaise — 
 
 ONE AND INDIVISIBLE. 
 
 We have before noticed the extraordinary pains which 
 Junius took to promote the interest of Alderman 
 Sawbridge, and his strenuous endeavours to get him 
 appointed Lord Mayor, and we learn from Mr. Coventry 
 that the Alderman resided at Olintigh, in Kent. He 
 was Major in the East Kent militia, and afterwards 
 Colonel of the East Battalion, and on intimate terms with 
 Sir Jeffery Amherst and Lord George Sackville. 
 
 These three families, whose estates were situated in 
 Kent, possessed considerable influence in the county, 
 particularly that of Lord George, being descended from 
 an ancient and powerful house. He represented Hythe 
 in two successive parliaments, in conjunction with 
 William Glanville, Esq. On the decease of that gentle- 
 man, which took place in 1765, the vacancy was filled 
 up by William Amherst, Esq., brother to Sir Jeffery. 
 In the new parliament of 1768, Lord George resigned 
 in favour of Alderman Sawbridge. The election was, how- 
 ever, strongly contested by the Ministerial party, but 
 Lord George's interest was so great, that the Alderman 
 was returned by a considerable majority. The line of 
 politics pursued by Alderman Sawbridge was strictly in 
 unison with Lord George's principles at this eventful 
 period. Both were strenuous in their efforts to shorten 
 the duration of parliaments. 
 
LORD GEOHGE SACKVILLE. 293 
 
 This is a characteristic trait in Junius, and it is evident 
 from the interest uniformly manifested by that writer 
 towards Alderman Sawbridge, that he was not only per- 
 sonally acquainted with him, and respected his private 
 character, but was a sincere admirer of his principles as 
 a politician. In a private letter to Mr. Woodfall (17th 
 February 1772) Junius says, " I could not have conceived 
 it possible, that you could protract the publication so long. 
 At this time, particularly before Mr. Saw bridge's motion 
 (in favour of triennial parliaments), it would have been of 
 singular use." And in another letter, of 29th February 
 1772, he says, '* I am very glad to see that the book will 
 be out before Mr. Sawbridge's motion." On the 4th 
 March 1772, Mr. Sawbridge's motion came on, when the 
 Alderman made a long speech, which is the only one 
 reported, and the motion was of course lost by a large 
 majority. After a long search to find whether Lord 
 George voted on the occasion, Mr. Coventry discovered 
 the following paragraph in the Daily Advertiser of the 
 10th March 1772 :— " Through the kindness of one of 
 our correspondents, we have been favoured with a few 
 of the names who voted in favour of Mr. Alderman's 
 motion," and in this short catalogue stands the name of 
 Lord George Sackville, which not only shews that he 
 was in the House that night, but also that his opinion was 
 in unison with that expressed by Junius. 
 
 On the 7th February 1774, John Horne and Henry 
 Sampson Woodfall were summoned to the bar of the 
 House of Commons, the one as the author, and the other 
 the printer of a libel on the Speaker; and although many 
 able speeches were made for and against Mr. Horne, 
 Lord George took no part in the debate, but preserved 
 
 4 
 
294 LORD GEORGB SACKVILLE. 
 
 an entire silence. When, however, Captain Phipps 
 presented a petition from Mr. Woodfall, acknowledging 
 his offence, and throwing himself upon the clemency of 
 the House, Lord George was the only member who 
 spoke in favour of receiving it, " hoping the House would 
 discharge the prisoner at the bar: his case," he said, " was 
 singularly hard ; he was about to be punished for what 
 his brother printers were daily guilty of, viz. printing the 
 proceedings of the House;" and Woodfall was accordingly 
 ordered to be discharged. 
 
 It will be recollected that Junius, in a private letter to 
 Woodfall, dated ■'2th December 1769, says: '^as to the 
 House of Commons, there may be more danger. But 
 even then, I am fully satisfied, the Ministry will exert 
 themselves to quash such an inquiry, and on the other 
 hand you will have friends,'* 
 
 " Of all the political characters of the day," observes 
 Dr. Good (Preliminary Essay, p. 81), *' Mr. Grenvillb 
 appears to have been Junius's favourite; no man was more 
 open to censure in many parts of his conduct, but he is never 
 censured; while, on the contrary, he is extolled wherever 
 an opportunity ofi'ers : yet Junius positively asserted that 
 he had no personal knowledge of Mr. Grenville." 
 
 In his letter of the 6th August 1768, Junius applauds 
 Mr. Grenville for enforcing the Stamp Act in America, 
 and concludes by saying : — " Your correspondent con- 
 fesses that Mr. Grenville is still respectable: yet he 
 warns the friends of that gentleman not to provoke him, 
 lest he should tell them what they may not like to hear. 
 These are but words. He means as little what he 
 threatens, as when he condescends to applaud. Let us 
 meet upon the fair ground of truth, and if he finds one 
 
LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 295 
 
 vulnerable part in Mr. Grenville's character, let him fix 
 his poisoned arrow there." 
 
 Mr. Coventry (p. 181) shews that Lord George Ger- 
 main, in a speech delivered in the House of Commons on 
 the 7th March 1774, in reply to Mr. Burke, observed, 
 when speaking of the Stamp Act, " / was of opinion that 
 it should not be repealed, and voted accordingly.^* 
 
 In one of Junius's private letters to Mr. Wilkes, dated 
 7th September 1771, he declared himself favourable to 
 repealing the duty on tea in America; and in a speech 
 delivered in parliament on the 26th January 1775, Lord 
 George Germain expresses similar sentiments. 
 
 On a motion for making the " Grenville Act" per- 
 petual, which was brought before the House of Commons 
 on the 25th February 1774, Lord George expressed his 
 admiration of Mr. Grenville's talents as a statesman, and 
 his character as an individual, in the following words : 
 "The author of this bill (Mr. Grenville) had preserved 
 a good name while in office and when out, and he sin- 
 cerely hoped the noble Lord would endeavour to have his 
 name handed down to posterity with the same honour as 
 Mr. Grenville had.'* 
 
 In 1757, an administration was attempted to be formed, 
 including Lord George as Secretary of War, and George 
 Grenville as Chancellor of the Exchequer ; this was how- 
 ever abandoned, from that period down to the time of 
 Junius, although they continued members of successive 
 parliaments, and coincided in every respect in politics^ " I 
 have never been able," observes Mr. Coventry, " to find 
 that they were on terms of personal acquaintance ; but it 
 is evident from Lord George's eulogium on his character 
 after his decease, that he continued a warm admirer of 
 Mr. Grenville's talents as a statesman." 
 
298 LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE. 
 
 Lord George Germain took a very active part in the 
 debates on Indian affairs, which were carried on with 
 much acrimony and violence ; but he seems to have acted 
 conscientiously, giving his opinions with moderation, and 
 preserving a strict regard to the merits of the case. It 
 was, however, on American affairs that he was most 
 calculated to influence the House by his extensive know- 
 ledge of that country, acquired through the medium of 
 his intimate friend Sir Jeffery Amherst, and others who 
 had served there during the late war. He likewise 
 obtained every information of what was then passing in 
 America, through his nephew Lord Thanet, who cor- 
 responded with Lee and other republicans in that country, 
 and could therefore lay before the House information on 
 American affairs to which most of the members were 
 utter strangers. Although his Lordship was decidedly 
 hostile to ministers in everything else, he strenuously 
 continued to support the opinions maintained by Junius 
 respecting the dispute with America ; and while the rest 
 of the opposition condemned the whole of the ministers' 
 measures. Lord George gave them his support on this point. 
 At last, on the 28th March 1774, he laid down so clearly 
 the policy which ought to be adopted in the then crisis 
 of affairs, that Lord North publicly thanked him for his 
 hints, observing, that they were worthy of so great a 
 mind, and shortly afterwards it was discovered that his 
 Lordship's personal assistance was required to extricate 
 ministers from the labyrinth in which they were involved. 
 
LORD GEORGE GERMAIN, 
 
 AS SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE AMERICAN DEPARTMENT, 
 AND HIS MODE OF CONDUCTING THE AMERICAN WAR. 
 
 This glorious spirit of Whiggism animates millions in America, 
 
 who prefer poverty with liberty, to gilded chains and sordid 
 
 affluence, and will die in defence of their rights as men — as 
 
 freemen, — what shall resist this spirit ? 
 
 Lord Chatham. 
 
 With regard to the high-sounding, unintelligible phrases of 
 
 legislative supremacy and parliamentary omnipotence towards 
 
 the Americans, for my part, it only conveys to my mind such 
 
 an idea, and equal satisfaction, as the answer given by the fine 
 
 gentleman in the Play, who being charged with baseness by his 
 
 friend, who told him he had eat his meat, drank his wine, and 
 
 lain with his wife, made no other reply, at the end of every 
 
 sentence, but, " Sir, I wear a sword." 
 
 Lord Camden. 
 
 Unfortunately for this country Mr. Grenville was at any rate 
 
 to be distressed, because he was minister; and Mr. Pitt and Lord 
 
 Camden were to be the patrons of America, because they were in 
 
 opposition. Their declarations gave spirit and argument to the 
 
 colonies ; and while perhaps they meant no more than the ruin 
 
 of a minister, they in efiect divided one half of the empire from 
 
 the other. 
 
 Junius. 
 
CHAPTER XI. 
 
 Lord Germain appointed Secretary of State for the American 
 department — The price paid for his assistance. — His Under- 
 Secretaries of State and Private Secretary, etc. — Commence- 
 ment of hostilities with America. — The British Ministers 
 engage German mercenaries to coerce the Americans. — 
 General Howe obliged to evacuate Boston. — Declaration of 
 American Independence. — General Burgoyne and his army 
 surrender prisoners of war. — The General denied a Court- 
 martial. — Mr. Temple Luttrell's attack on Lord Germain. — 
 Mr. Fox denounces Lord Germain's mode of conducting the 
 war. — Unpopularity of Ministers. — Sir JefFery Amherst 
 appointed Commander-in-chief. — France and Spain declare 
 war against England. — Speech of George the Third to his 
 Cabinet Ministers. — The surrender of Lord Comwallis and 
 his army to Washington. — The effect of the intelligence on 
 the King and his Ministers. — Quarrel amongst the Ministers. 
 — Resignation of Lord Germain. — Is created an English 
 Peer. — Account of his Lordship's interview with his Majesty. 
 — Further proofs of Lord Germain's identity with Junius. — 
 Resignation of Lord North. — Peace with America. — Remarks 
 on Lord Germain's conduct while Secretary of State. 
 
LORD GEORGE GERMAIN. 
 
 When Lord Chatham affirms that the authority of the British 
 legislature is not supreme over the colonies, in the same sense 
 in which it is supreme over Great Britain, I listen to him with 
 diffidence and respect ; but without the smallest degree of con- 
 viction or assent. Jtmius, 
 
 Lord Germain having adopted all those opinions 
 which were hostile to America, and supported Lord 
 North's bills, for altering the government of Massa- 
 chusett's bay, and shutting up the port of Boston, the 
 ministry considered him so valuable an auxiliary, that 
 it was resolved to secure his future services. An oppor- 
 tunity for carrying this design into execution soon pre- 
 sented itself, by the resignation of the Duke of Grafton, 
 who being convinced of the hostile intentions of the 
 cabinet against America, declared that his conscience 
 forbade him supporting those measures in parliament, 
 and therefore he resigned the privy seal, which was given 
 to Lord Dartmouth; who was succeeded as secretary 
 of state for the American department, on the 7th Sep- 
 tember 1775, by Lord Germain, and the conduct of the 
 war against America was principally entrusted to his 
 guidance. 
 
 The immediate price paid by the ministry for the 
 accession of Lord Germain's talents to the government, 
 appears to have been the place of Receiver-general of the 
 
300 LORD GEORGE GERMAIN. 
 
 island of Jamaica, which by letters patent, dated 10th 
 September 1776, was granted to Thomas Walley Parting- 
 ton, Esq., for the life of one of Lord Germain's sons; 
 but his Lordship by his will, disposes of the place, and 
 declares that his friend Partington only held it as his 
 Lordship's trustee. Here we find the grant of a lucrative, 
 if not an important public office, masked with all the 
 tact and skill of Junius, and this is probably the first 
 intimation given to the public, that the emoluments of 
 the sinecure place of Receiver-general of the island of 
 Jamaica have been received by Lord Germain and his 
 nominee from 1776 to the present time. Lord Germain's 
 own opinion of the propriety of a man of his rank and 
 fortune, having anything to do with such a place, is 
 pretty plainly indicated by the pains taken to mask and 
 conceal the real party benefited by the transaction. 
 
 Upon receiving the appointment of Secretary of State, 
 his Lordship continued as his under-secretaries Mr. De 
 Grey and Mr. William Knox. The latter gentleman 
 was one of Mr. Grenville's friends, and a very strenuous 
 and persevering advocate for the British policy against 
 America, and Mr. De Grey was the son of the Attorney- 
 general who prosecuted Woodfall for publishing Junius's 
 Letter to the King. 
 
 With the seals of the colonial department, Lord Ger- 
 main held the office of First Lord of the Board of Trade, 
 and in this department he appointed Mr. Richard Cum- 
 berland, the dramatist, Secretary to the Board. While 
 the situation of his private and confidential secretary was 
 held by Mr. D'Oyly; the same gentleman, be it remem- 
 bered, who had been discharged from the War Office, 
 by Lord Barrington (previously to the expulsion of Mr. 
 
LORD GEORGE GERMAIN. 301 
 
 Francis from the same office), which first called forth the 
 Letters written by Junius on Lord Barrington, under 
 the signature of Veteran. 
 
 It has been said, that Lord Germain's adoption of 
 Mr. Grenville's principles respecting America, was in a 
 great degree influenced by a letter written by Sir Joseph 
 Yates, one of the Judges of the King's Bench, to Chris- 
 topher Griffiths, Esq., M.P. for Berks, relative to the 
 dispute between Great Britain and her colonies ; and we 
 find Junius eulogizing the character of Mr. Justice 
 Yates, in a note to his letter of November 14th, 1770, 
 to Lord Mansfield. 
 
 To carry on the war with vigour against the Colonists, 
 the British ministers engaged 16,000 German merce- 
 naries to assist in their subjection: this not only exas- 
 perated the Americans to the highest degree, but was 
 severely censured by many members of the opposition in 
 parliament. 
 
 About the beginning of the year 1776, affairs began to 
 take an unfavourable turn, General Howe being com- 
 pelled by Washington to evacuate the town of Boston, 
 on the 17th of March, and sail with the whole of his 
 garrison, amounting to 7000 men, to Halifax, in Nova 
 Scotia; and on the ever-memorable 4th of July 1776, 
 the Congress voted their Declaration of Independence, by 
 which act they for ever withdrew their allegiance from 
 the king of England. Lord Germain now perceived 
 that the war, which he flattered himself would have ter- 
 minated favourably, began to assume an alarming aspect, 
 still he, and his colleague Lord North, continued inex- 
 orably firm in their determination to support the King's 
 private opinion, which was to prosecute the war to the 
 last extremity. 
 
302 LORD GEORGE GERMAIN, 
 
 Further disasters followed in the succeeding year, 
 when General Burgoyne and nearly 6000 men were 
 obliged to surrender prisoners of war by the Convention 
 of Saratoga; and upon the General's arrival in England 
 on his parole, he was refused admittance into the pre- 
 sence of his sovereign, denied the justice of a court- 
 martial on his conduct, and subjected to a series of mini- 
 sterial persecutions. 
 
 Mr. Vigners, having moved in parliament for an inquiry 
 into the Convention of Saratoga, Mr. Temple Luttrell 
 (a name held in utter abhorrence by Junius), drew a com- 
 parison between the conduct of the General and the War 
 Minister. '* In former times," he said, " it had been the 
 custom of Britons to give praise and thanks to such of 
 their officers and servants as exerted their strenuous and 
 zealous efforts for the public weal, even if those effoits 
 were not crowned with success; but now-a-days they 
 bestowed praise only in proportion to the listlessness and 
 inattention with which those servants performed their 
 duty. The noble lord in the blue riband (Lord North) 
 had recommended to his Sovereign a war minister (Lord 
 George Germain), whose public incapacities for every 
 vigorous exertion of mind, whose disgrace at the Court of 
 George the Second was founded on the most decicive censure of 
 a Court-martial f whose loss of the nation's confidence and his 
 own character is on public record. What had the nation to 
 expect from his councils? What plan of his, since he has 
 been in office, dare he expose to the public eye, and say it 
 has succeeded? Why then should we give him a partial 
 acquittal, to the prejudice of a gallant officer (General 
 Burgoyne), whose only crime has been avowedly that he 
 was too zealousy too brave, too enterprising, too anxious for the 
 
LORD GEORGE GERMAIPf. 303 
 
 good of his country , had strictly obeyed his orders^ and done 
 all that British valour was capable ofj to carry the Minister's 
 plan into execution? Had he, instead of that, receded from 
 his colours, disobeyed the commands of his superiorsj and hid 
 himself from dangerj he might have had pretensions to 
 one noble lord's patronage (Lord North's), and to the 
 other's (Lord George Germain) dignities and emoluments. 
 General Burgoyne asks a fair and open trial; the man 
 who shrinks from it, and avails himself of an unjust 
 partial acquittal, must be guilty." 
 
 Lord George Germain replied, that he never was per- 
 sonal in the House to any one, never by any conduct of 
 his merited such an attack; he despised that honorable 
 member, but would level himself with his wretched character 
 and malice; old as he was, he would meet that fighting 
 gentleman, and be revenged. (Here he was interrupted by 
 a cry of order in the House, and general confusion). 
 
 The Speaker said, if the House would support him, he 
 would keep order. (A cry of chair, chair). 
 
 Lord North admitted that Lord Germain had been 
 out of order; what fell from him had nothing to do with 
 the question, it was a personal attack on an individual, 
 and therefore out of order. 
 
 Mr. Luttrell said he would not be bullied out of the 
 privilege of a member of that House, he had a right to 
 speak his sentiments publicly and fully on a public cha- 
 racter. The sentence of the Court-martial in the reign of 
 George the Second^ was a public record relative to a man in 
 a public post of trust, which required spirit, zeal, abilities, 
 and integrity, and many essential qualities, as requisite in 
 a war minister as in a general. He had not alluded to 
 the noble Lord's private vices or virtues, and if he could 
 
304 LORD GEORGE GERMAIN. 
 
 be conceived out of order as to the question, it could not 
 imply that a public charge against the minister was a 
 private personality. 
 
 Mr. Luttrell took an opportunity, in the confusion of 
 debate, to get out of the House, to avoid being compelled 
 not to resent Lord Germain's personal abuse of him ; but 
 the Speaker gave orders to the Serjeant-at-Arms, to stop 
 Mr. Luttrell, and bring him to his seat, when the affair 
 was prevented from proceeding to extremity by the inter- 
 vention of the Speaker and the House. 
 
 The reader, we think, cannot fail to be struck with the 
 similarity of an expression in Lord George's reply to 
 the phraseology used by Junius. In a private letter to 
 Mr. Woodfall, he says, " that Swinny is a wretched^ but 
 dangerous fool ;" and in another letter of the 1 7th Decem- 
 ber 1771, he observes, *' this Scaevola is the wretckedest 
 of all fools and dirty knaves." 
 
 Mr. Fox, in a speech made on the 2d December 1777, 
 thus comments on Lord Germain's mode of conducting 
 the war: — "For two years that a certain noble Lord has 
 presided over American affairs, the most violent, scalping, 
 tomahawk measures have been pursued: bleeding has 
 been his only prescription. If a people deprived of their 
 ancient rights are grown tumultuous — bleed them! If 
 they are attacked with a spirit of insurrection — bleed them ! 
 If their fever should rise into rebellion — bleed them! cries 
 this state physician: more blood! more blood! still more 
 blood! When Dr. Sangrado had persevered in a similar 
 practice of bleeding his patients, killing by the very 
 means which he used for cure, his man took the liberty 
 to remonstrate upon the necessity of relaxing in a practice 
 to which thousands of their patients had fallen sacrifices, 
 
LORD GEORGE GERMAIN. 305 
 
 and which was beginning to bring their names into dis- 
 repute. The Doctor answered, " I believe we have indeed 
 carried the matter a little too far, but you must know 
 I have written a book upon the efficacy of this practice; 
 therefore, though every patient we have should die by it, 
 we must continue the bleeding for the credit of my book." 
 
 And in another debate, on the appointment of Sir Hugh 
 Palliser as Governor of Greenwich Hospital, Mr. Fox 
 observed, that " the late promotion of Sir Hugh was on a 
 par with the promotion of a man to one of the highest 
 civil employments in the state, who had been publicly 
 degraded last war, and declared incapable of serving again 
 in any military capacity at the head of every regiment in 
 the army." To this direct attack. Lord Germain made 
 no other reply than to remark, with his usual hauteur, 
 " that he treated it and Us author with the contempt they 
 deserved J' 
 
 The extreme unpopularity of the ministers, and parti- 
 cularly Lord Germain, at this period, may be seen from 
 the following passage in Mr. Cumberland's Memoirs, 
 (i. 398) : 
 
 " The conflict with America now raged at its height ; 
 that was a business out of my office to be concerned in, 
 and I willingly pass it over; but it was in my way to know 
 the effects it had upon the anxious spirit of my friend 
 (Lord Germain) ; and very much it was my wish and my 
 endeavour, by every means in my capacity, to be helpful 
 at those hours, which were necessary for his relaxation, 
 and take to my share as many of the burthensome and 
 vexatious concerns, as, without intrusion upon other 
 people's offices, I could relieve him from. All that I could 
 I did; and as I was daily with him, and never out of call, 
 
 X 
 
306 LORD GEORGE GERMAIN. 
 
 I reflect with comfort, there were occasions when my 
 zeal was not unprofitably exerted for his alleviation and 
 repose. I might say more, for these were trying and 
 unquiet times. It is not a very safe or enviable predicament 
 to he marked out for a known attachment to an unpopular 
 character, and be continually under arms to turn out and 
 encounter the prejudices of mankind." 
 
 It was in the year 1778, by the influence of Lord 
 Germain, that his most intimate friend General Lord 
 Amherst was appointed commander-in-chief of the army, 
 and made a cabinet-minister, he having two years before 
 been created a peer by the title of Baron Amherst. 
 General Amherst and Lord George Germain had lived 
 on the most intimate terms from childhood. Jeffery 
 Lord Amherst was born within a mile of Knowle Park, 
 Lord George's paternal residence, and it was to Lionel 
 Duke of Dorset that he owed his first appointment in 
 the army. When the Duke was Lord-lieutenant of Ire- 
 land, and his son Lord George was his secretary. Lord 
 Amherst formed part of the household. As an instance 
 of the great intimacy subsisting between the two families, 
 it is to be observed, that Lord Amherst's eldest brother 
 was named Sackville Amherst. 
 
 The friendship evinced by Junius for General Sir 
 Jeffery Amherst on all occasions, the zeal he displayed 
 in avenging his wrongs, and the intimate knowledge 
 he shews of the GeneraFs services and character, have 
 already been pointed out, and must be obvious to the 
 most careless reader of his Letters. 
 
 Shortly after the surrender of General Burgoyne, the 
 French entered into an alliance with the Americans, offen- 
 sive and defensive j and on the delivery of the Spanish 
 
LORD GEORGE GERMAIN. 307 
 
 rescript, by which war was declared by that nation against 
 Great Britain, in June 1779, it is said his Majesty 
 ordered all his cabinet-ministers to attend him at the 
 Queen's Palace. They were shewn into the library, where 
 there was a long table, and chairs for every minister, 
 and an arm-chair at the top for the King. When they 
 were all seated, his Majesty made a long speech to his 
 ministers. He began with expressing his regard for 
 Mr. Grenville, and his concern for his loss, and after- 
 wards declared his resolution to carry on the war against 
 America, France, and Spain ; and if they approved of it, 
 he gave them an assurance of his firmest support. The 
 ministers all acknowledged their perfect devotion to his 
 Majesty's commands. 
 
 About two years afterwards, an event occurred which 
 first caused the dismission of Lord Germain from the 
 ministry, and ultimately the retirement of Lord North 
 himself, and was the virtual termination of the war; this 
 was the surrender, on the 19th of October 1 781, of Lord 
 Comwallis and the whole of his army at York Town in 
 Virginia. 
 
 " During the whole month of November 1781," says 
 Sir N. Wraxall, " the concurrent accounts transmitted to 
 government, enumerating Lord Cornwallis's embarrass- 
 ments, and the positions taken by the enemy, augmented 
 the anxiety of the Cabinet. Lord George Germain, in 
 particular, conscious that in the prosperous or a,dverse 
 termination of that expedition must hinge the fate of the 
 American contest, his own stay in office, as well as pro- 
 bably the duration of the ministry itself, felt, and even 
 expressed to his friends, the strongest uneasiness on the 
 subject. The meeting of parliament, meanwhile, stood 
 
 x2 
 
308 LORD GEORGE GERMAIN. 
 
 for the 27th of November. On Sunday the 25th, about 
 noon, official intelligence of the surrender of the British 
 forces at York Town, arrived from Falmouth, at Lord 
 Germain's house in Pall Mall. Lord Walsingham, who 
 previous to his father Sir William De Grey's elevation 
 to the peerage, had been under-secretary of state in that 
 department, and who was selected to second the address 
 in the House of Peers, on the subsequent Tuesday, 
 happened to be there when the messenger brought the 
 news. Without communicating it to any other person, 
 Lord George, for the purpose of dispatch, immediately 
 got with him into a hackney-coach, and drove to Lord 
 Stormont's residence in Portland Place. Having im- 
 parted to him the disastrous intelligence, and taken him 
 into the carriage, they instantly proceeded to the Chan- 
 cellor's house in Great Russell-street, Bloomsbury, whom 
 they found at home; when, after a short consultation, 
 they determined to lay it themselves, in person, before 
 Lord North. He had not received any intimation of 
 the event, when they arrived at his door in Downing- 
 street, between one and two o'clock. The first Minister's 
 firmness, and even his presence of mind, gave way for 
 a short time, under this awful disaster. I asked Lord 
 George afterwards, how he took the communication 
 when made to him? 'As he would have taken a ball in 
 his breast,' replied Lord George ; ' for he opened his 
 arms, exclaiming wildly, as he paced up and down the 
 apartment during a few minutes, * Oh God! it is all 
 over!' Words which he repeated many times, under 
 emotions of the greatest agitation and distress. When 
 tlie first agitation of his mind had subsided, the four 
 ministers discussed the question, whether or not it might 
 
LORD GEORGE GERMAIN. 309 
 
 be expedient to prorogue parliament for a few daysj but 
 as scarcely an interval of forty-eight hours remained 
 before the appointed time of assembling, and as many 
 members of both houses were already either arrived in 
 London, or on the road, that proposition was abandoned. 
 It became, however, indispensable to alter, and almost to 
 model anew, the King's speech, which had been already 
 drawn up and completely prepared for delivery from 
 the throne. This alteration was therefore made without 
 delay; and at the same time. Lord George Germain, as 
 secretary for the American department, sent off a des- 
 patch to his Majesty, who was then at Kew, acquainting 
 him with the melancholy termination of Lord Corn- 
 wallis's expedition. Some hours having elapsed before 
 these different, but necessary acts of business, could take 
 place, the members separated, and Lord George Germain 
 repaired to his office in Whitehall. There he found a 
 confirmation of the intelligence, which arrived about two 
 hours after the first communication, having been trans- 
 mitted from Dover, to which place it was forwarded 
 from Calais, with the French account of the same event. 
 " I dined that day at Lord George's ; and though the 
 information, which had reached London in the course of 
 the morning from two different quarters, was of a nature 
 not to admit of long concealment, yet, it had not been 
 communicated either to me, or to any individual of the 
 company, as it might naturally have been, through the 
 channel of common report, when I got to Pall Mall, 
 between five and six o'clock. Lord Walsingham, who 
 also dined there, was the only person present, except Lord 
 George, acquainted with the fact. The party, nine in 
 number, sat down to table. I thought the master of the 
 
310 LORD GEORGE GERMAIN, 
 
 house appeared serious, though he manifested no discom- 
 posure. Before the dinner was finished, one of the 
 servants delivered hira a letter, brought back by the 
 messenger who had been dispatched to the King. Lord 
 George opened and perused it, then looking at Lord 
 Walsingham, to whom he exclusively directed his obser- 
 vation, 'the King writes,' said he, 'just as he always 
 does, except that I observe he has omitted to mark the 
 hour and minute of his writing with his usual precision.* 
 This remark, though calculated to awaken some interest, 
 excited no comment; and while the ladies. Lord George's 
 three daughters, remained in the room, we repressed our 
 curiosity. But they had no sooner withdrawn, than Lord 
 George having acquainted us that, from Paris, information 
 hadjust arrived of the old Count de Maurepas, first minister, 
 lying at the point of death. ' It would grieve me,' said 
 I, ' to finish my career, however far advanced in years, 
 were I first minister of France, before I had witnessed 
 the termination of this great contest between England and 
 America.' ' He has survived to see that event,' replied 
 Lord George with some agitation. Utterly unsuspicious 
 of the fact which had happened beyond the Atlantic, I 
 conceived him to allude to the undecisive naval action, 
 fought at the mouth of the Chesapeake, early in the 
 preceding month of September, between Admiral Graves 
 and Count de Grasse, which, in its results, might prove 
 most injurious to Lord Cornwallis. Under this impres- 
 sion, ' My meaning,* said I, ' is, that if I were the Count 
 de Maurepas, I should wish to live long enough to behold 
 the final issue of the war in Virginia.' ' He has survived 
 to witness it completely,' answered Lord George; * the 
 army has surrendered, and you may peruse the particulars 
 
LORD GEORGE GERMAIN. 311 
 
 of the capitulation in that paper;' taking, at the same time, 
 one from his pocket, which he delivered into my hand, 
 not without visible emotion. By his permission I read 
 it aloud, while the company listened in profound silence. 
 We then discussed its contents, as affecting the country, 
 the ministers, and the war. It must be confessed they 
 were calculated to diffuse a gloom over the most convivial 
 society, and that they opened a wide field for political 
 speculation. After perusing the contents of Lord Corn- 
 wallis's surrender at York Town, it was impossible for 
 all present not to feel a lively curiosity to know how the 
 King had received the intelligence, as well as how he had 
 expressed himself in his note to Lord George Germain, 
 on the first communication of so painful an event. He 
 gratified our wish by reading it to us, observing at the 
 same time, that it did the highest honour to his Majesty's 
 fortitude, firmness, and consistency of character. The 
 words made an impression on my memory, which the 
 lapse of more than thirty years has not erased, and I shall 
 here commemorate its tenor, as serving to shew how that 
 Prince felt and wrote, under one of the most afflicting, as 
 well as humiliating, occurrences of his reign. The billet 
 ran nearly to this effect. * I have received with sentiments 
 of the deepest concern, the communication which Lord 
 George Germain has made to me, of the unfortunate 
 result of the operations in Virginia. I particularly lament 
 it, on account of the consequences connected with it, and 
 the difficulties which it may produce in carrying on the 
 public business, or in repairing such a misfortune. But 
 I trust that neither Lord George Germain, nor any mem- 
 ber of the cabinet, will suppose, that it makes the smallest 
 alteration in those principles of my conduct, which have 
 
312 LORD GEORGE GERMAIN. 
 
 directed me in past time, and which will always continue 
 to animate me under every event, in the prosecution of 
 the present contest.' Not a sentiment of despondency nor 
 of despair was to be found in the letter; the very hand- 
 writing of which indicated composure of mind. What- 
 ever opinion we may entertain relative to the practicability 
 of reducing America to obedience by force of arms at 
 the end of 1781, we must admit that no sovereign could 
 manifest more calmness, dignity, or self-command, than 
 George the Third displayed in his reply." 
 
 The surrender of Lord Cornwallis and his army* caused 
 the ministry to quarrel among themselves. They first 
 laid the cause of this disaster upon each other; but at 
 length settled it upon only two persons: namely, Lord 
 Sandwich and Lord Germain. Those who laid the blame 
 upon Lord Sandwich, contended that the misfortune was 
 owing to the not having sufficient naval force on the 
 American station. The other party contended that the 
 misfortune was owing to Lord Germain's plan of opera- 
 tions. It is not necessary to state the facts upon which 
 these two opinions were founded. They have been pub- 
 lished by Lord Cornwallis and Sir Henry Clinton, in 
 vindication of themselves. The contention upon the 
 question, whether the Secretary of State, or the First 
 Lord of the Admiralty, should be removed, lasted some 
 time. 
 
 It was in this divided state of the ministry that parlia- 
 ment met, and on the first day of the session it was obvious 
 to every one that the dispute was not settled. In the 
 debate on the address. Lord George Germain said, " that 
 his opinion was, notwithstanding the surrender of Lord 
 * Almon's Anecdotes, ii. 135. 
 
LORD GEO 
 
 rIgE GERMAIN. 313 
 
 Comwallis, that if Great Britain gave up the sovereignty 
 of America, we were undone." Mr. Dundas, Lord-advo- 
 cate of Scotland, contradicted and reprobated this opinion 
 severely; and Mr. Rigby, who was Paymaster, bluntly 
 said, ** we were beaten, and must therefore give up the 
 plan of the war." When parliament adjourned for the 
 Christmas holidays, the dispute continued open. 
 
 It is certain that when Lord George Germain delivered 
 his opinion, he thought he delivered the opinion of a 
 much greater authority than his own. But he was not 
 entrusted with the real secret. There were other persons 
 who were honoured with a larger share of confidence 
 than he was at this time ; and this party triumphed. They 
 resolved to remove Lord George Germain from office, 
 and to recall Sir Henry Clinton, who had requested it; 
 and to make one measure the consequence of the other, 
 although there was no connexion between the two cases; 
 but in order to make a connexion between them, they 
 applied to Sir Guy Carleton to succeed Sir Henry Clinton, 
 being perfectly well assured that Sir Guy Carleton would 
 never go to America, while Lord George Germain con- 
 tinued secretary of state for the American department. 
 The manoeuvre succeeded. Sir Guy Carleton wrote a 
 letter to the Lord Chancellor (Lord Thurlow), saying, in 
 substance, that he could not accept the command under 
 the American secretary. The Lord Chancellor carried 
 this letter into the closet. On Wednesday, the 2nd of 
 January 1782, previously to the levee, there was a meeting 
 of ministers, attended by Lords Mansfield, Hillsborough, 
 Stormont, and North, and Mr. Jenkinson (afterwards 
 Earl of Liverpool), when it was finally decided to remove 
 Lord Germain. When Lord George was informed that 
 
314 LORD GEORGE GERMAIN. 
 
 his fate was decided, he desired leave to resign, which 
 was allowed him; and to lighten his fall, he was created 
 an English peer. Accordingly, early in the month of 
 February 1782, Lord Germain resigned the seals of his 
 office into the king's hands, and received in recompense 
 for his services the honour of the peerage. The separation 
 between the sovereign and the secretary, was not unaccom- 
 panied with emotion on either side. The circumstance 
 attending his elevation is thus related by Sir Nathaniel 
 Wraxall, who received his information from the mouth 
 of Lord George the same day it occurred. " The king, 
 after regretting the unfortunate events that had dictated 
 the measure, and thanking Lord George for his services, 
 added; ' Is there any thing I can do to express my 
 sense of them, which would be agreeable to you V * Sir,' 
 answered he, ' if your Majesty is pleaded to raise me to 
 the dignity of the peerage, it will form at once the best 
 reward to which I can aspire, and the best proof of 
 your approbation of my past exertions in your affairs.' 
 * By all means,' said the king : * I think it very proper, 
 and shall do it with pleasure.* 'Then, Sir,' rejoined 
 Lord George, * if you agree to my first request, I hope 
 you will not think it unbecoming or unreasonable in me, 
 to ask another favour. It is to create me a Viscount, as, 
 should I be only raised to the dignity of a Baron, my 
 own secretary, my lawyer, and my father's page, will all 
 take rank of me.' The king expressing a wish to know 
 the names of the persons to whom he alluded; ' The first,' 
 replied Lord George, *is Lord Walsingham, who, as 
 your majesty knows, was long under-secretary of state in 
 my office, when Mr. De Grey. The second is Lord Lough- 
 borough, who has always been my legal adviser. Lord 
 
LORD GEORGE GERMAIN. 315 
 
 Amherst is the third, who when page to my father, the 
 late Duke of Dorset, has often sat on the braces of the 
 state coach that conveyed him, as Lord-lieutenant of 
 Ireland, to the parliament-house at Dublin.' The king 
 smiled, adding, 'What you say is very reasonable; it 
 shall be so; and now let me know the title that you 
 choose.' ' 1 have already. Sir,' answered Lord George, 
 * in the possible anticipation of your majesty's gracious 
 disposition towards me, spoken to the Duke of Dorset, 
 and obtained his permission as the head of my family, to 
 take the title of Sackville ; having been compelled to 
 renounce my own name, in order to avail myself of the 
 bequest of the estate of Drayton in Northamptonshire, 
 made me by Lady Betty Germain in her will, I shall 
 therefore in some degree recover it by this means.' ' I 
 quite approve of that idea," replied his majesty, 'and if 
 you will state to me your title, I will write it down myself 
 before we part, and send it directly to the Chancellor.' 
 The king immediately placed himself at a table, took 
 the pen and ink lying upon it, and having committed 
 the Viscounty to paper, asked him what Barony he chose? 
 Lord George answered, ' that of Bolebrook in Sussex, 
 being one of the most ancient estates belonging to the 
 family, and contiguous to Buckhurst, the original peerage 
 conferred by Queen Elizabeth on his ancestor, the first 
 Earl of Dorset.' When the king had copied it, he 
 rose up, and with the most condescending expressions of 
 concern, as well as satisfaction, allowed Lord George to 
 withdraw from the closet." The extraordinary opposi- 
 tion made by certain peers to Lord Sackville's entrance 
 into the Upper House, has been related in a former 
 chapter. It will be remarked that the reason given by 
 
316 LORD GEORGE GERMAIN. 
 
 Lord George for wishing to be made a viscount was, 
 that if he were created only a baron, his secretary ^ Lord 
 Walsingham, his lawyer. Lord Loughborough j and his 
 father's page, Lord Amherst, would take precedence of 
 him. Probably it may be thought singular, that the 
 author of Junius should have formed any connexions 
 with the two first-mentioned noblemen. For the father 
 of Lord Walsingham, while he was Mr. De Grey and 
 Attorney- general, conducted the prosecution against 
 Woodfall for publishing the celebrated Letter to the 
 King. Junius, however, appears to have regarded 
 him with sentiments of respect, for in his preface, he 
 mentions Mr. De Grey's mode of conducting the trial 
 in the following terms: — "My Lord Chief Justice De 
 Grey, who filed the information ex officio, is directly with 
 Junius. If he had concurred with Lord Mansfield's 
 doctrine, the trial must have been a very short one; the 
 facts were either admitted by WoodfalVs counsel, or easily 
 proved to the satisfaction of the jury. But Mr. De Grey, 
 far from thinking he should acquit himself of his duty 
 by barely proving the facts, entered largely and not 
 without ability, into the demerits of the paper which he 
 called a seditious libel. The criminal intent, the libellous 
 matter, the pernicious tendency of the paper itself, were 
 the topics on which he principally insisted, and of which 
 for more than half an hour, he tortured his faculties to 
 convince the jury. If he agreed in opinion with Lord 
 Mansfield, his discourse was impertinent, ridiculous, and 
 unreasonable. But understanding the law as Junius 
 does, what he said was at least consistent, and to the 
 purpose." 
 
 Lord Germain probably found Mr. De Grey acting 
 
LORD GEORGE GERMAIN. 317 
 
 as under-secretary when he became secretary of state, 
 and therefore, did no more than continue an efficient 
 officer, whose services he could not well dispense with. 
 
 Mr. Wedderburne, it must be admitted, is never men- 
 tioned by Junius but in terms of contempt and hatred; 
 still we think Lord Germain's connexion with this 
 learned gentleman is by no means irreconcilable with 
 the hypothesis of his being Junius, for it cannot be 
 considered anything uncommon for a discreet man to 
 consult the most eminent lawyers of his time respecting 
 his private affairs, without reference to their political 
 principles, and we are inclined to think, that Junius was 
 in the habit of treating with asperity many individuals 
 with whom he lived on terms of intimacy, and apparent 
 friendship, and that such unwarrantable conduct was one 
 of the principal reasons of his intense anxiety to preserve 
 his secret inviolable. 
 
 Lord North's administration did not continue long 
 after the dismission of his colleague Lord Germain, for 
 on the 4th of March following, the House of Commons 
 declared, that whosoever should advise his Majesty to 
 any further prosecution of offensive war against the 
 colonies of North America, should be considered as a 
 public enemy. This was the death-blow of Lord North's 
 administration. His Lordship retired from office early 
 in the month of March, and was succeeded by the Mar- 
 quis of Rockingham, who dying shortly afterwards, the 
 Earl of Shelburne was called to preside over his Majesty's 
 counsels; under whose auspices provisional articles of 
 peace were signed, on the 30th of November 1782, by 
 which the independence of the thirteen provinces was 
 unreservedly acknowledged by his Britannic Majesty. 
 
318 LORD GEORGE GERMi^IN. 
 
 During the seven years that Lord Germain was secre- 
 tary of state, he had principally Charles Fox to contend 
 with, and throughout this long and arduous period it is 
 admitted that he displayed signal ability, particularly in 
 his replies. 
 
 " In business," says Sir Nathaniel Wraxall, " Lord 
 George Germain was clear and accurate, rather negli- 
 gent in his style, which was that of a gentleman and a 
 man of the world, unstudied and frequently careless, 
 even in his official despatches. But there was no 
 obscurity or ambiguity in his compositions." 
 
 Sir Egerton Brydges, in his notes on Wraxall's Memoirs, 
 observes that, "there was one man who always moved 
 with an impenetrable cloud around him — Lord George 
 Germain; but he was an able man, industrious, saga- 
 cious, and wise. His extreme gravity and melancholy 
 were a contrast to the lightness and wit of Lord North. 
 Misfortunes sunk deeper into his heart, and he thought 
 of future consequences with more fear and regret; but, 
 I believe, that he had the good of his country in his con- 
 science, and executed his duties with fidelity and skill." 
 
VISCOUNT SACKVILLE'S 
 
 CONNEXION WITH 
 
 MR. RICHARD CUMBERLAND 
 
 EXAMINED, 
 
 WITH ANECDOTES OF HIS LORDSHIP, AND AN ACCOUNT OF HIS 
 LAST ILLNESS AND DEATH. 
 
 On some fond breast the parting soul relies, 
 Some pious drops the closing eye requires ; 
 E'en from the tomb the voice of nature cries, 
 E'en in our ashes live their wonted fires. 
 
 Gray's Elegy. 
 
 Where now 's the Trifler ? where the child of Pride ? 
 These are the moments when the heart is tried ! 
 Nor lives the man, with conscience e'er so clear, 
 But feels a solemn, reverential fear. 
 
 Can volume, pillar, pile, preserve thee great? 
 Or must thou trust tradition's simple tongue, 
 When flattery sleeps with thee, and history does thee wrong? 
 
 Byron, 
 
CHAPTER XII. 
 
 Remarks on Mr. Richard Cumberland's zealous attachment to 
 Lord Germain. — His situation when Lord Germain became 
 head of the Board of Trade. — His introduction to his new 
 chief. — Extraordinary intimacy between Lord Germain and 
 Mr. Cumberland. — Cumberland's account of his unexpected 
 appointment to the Secretaryship of the Board of Trade. — 
 His character of Lord Germain as a man of business. — 
 Remarkable agreement between this account and Junius's 
 description of his own mental operations. — Surprise of Lord 
 Germain's friends at his intimacy with Mr. Cumberland. — 
 Lord Sackville's mode of life in retirement, with anecdotes 
 of his Lordship. — Proofs of his haughty disposition. — His 
 condescension to inferiors shewn not to be inconsistent with 
 his real character. — Mr. Cumberland's gratitude to his 
 patron. — His disbelief that he had any connexion with 
 Junius. — The suspicion mentioned by his Lordship in his 
 last illness. — Probable motives for making the communica- 
 tion. — The real bond of union between Lord Sackville and 
 Mr. Cumberland explained. — His Lordship's last conversa- 
 tion with Mr. Cumberland on the affair of Minden. — Instances 
 of Junius's extraordinary malignity against Lord Mansfield. 
 — Mr. Cumberland's account of the mysterious interview 
 between Lord Mansfield and Lord Sackville, when the latter 
 was at the point of death. — The conduct of the parties 
 inexplicable on any other assumption than that of Lord 
 Sackville's being Junius. — Mr. Cumberland's description of 
 his last hours. — His death. — His Lordship's personal ap- 
 pearance and character. — The objections to the hypothesis 
 of Lord Sackville's being Junius stated, and answered. — 
 Proofs that his handwriting was similar to that of Junius. — 
 Lord Sackville proved to have all the characteristics of 
 Junius enumerated by Mr. Butler and Dr. Good. 
 
VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 
 
 Even now they tell you, that life is no more than a dramatic 
 scene, in which the hero should preserve his consistency to the 
 
 *^*' Junius to the Duke of Bedford. 
 
 We now approach the last stage of Lord Sackville's 
 eventful life, and find in the Memoirs of Mr. Richard 
 Cumberland another torch, whose clear light will guide 
 us through the remainder of his gloomy career. Even 
 those who do not concur with Mr. Cumberland in think- 
 ing his patron was " an ill-used and much-injured man," 
 must admire the honest zeal with which he defends and 
 vindicates the memory of his benefactor. He has emi- 
 nently succeeded in investing his narrative of the trans- 
 actions that took place during the last days of Lord 
 Sackville with a deep and melancholy interest, by the 
 touching nature of the incidents described, the sympathy 
 shewn for the sufferings of his friend, and the heartfelt 
 gratitude expressed for favours received at his hand — all 
 this proves the sincerity of Mr. Cumberland's attachment 
 to Lord Sackville, and imparts additional value to his 
 testimony — indeed, so tenacious is Mr. Cumberland of 
 his Lordship's honour, that we much.doubt whether his 
 narrative would ever have been published, if the writer 
 could have foreseen, that it would furnish evidence to 
 
 Y 
 
322 VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 
 
 identify his Lordship with the Author of the Letters of 
 Junius ; such however is the contracted ken of mortals, 
 that we often become the unconscious instruments . of 
 effecting what we least desire ; and by such unexpected 
 means (for we deem it improper to term them accidents) 
 are crimes, and deviations from the path of rectitude, 
 frequently brought to light. 
 
 It appears that Mr. Cumberland, to use his own words, 
 " was a subaltern in the Board of Trade, uncomfortably 
 executing the office of Clerk of the Reports, when by the 
 accession of Lord George Germain to the seals of the 
 colonial department, he had a new principal to look up 
 to." Before this period, he was an entire stranger to 
 Lord Germain, and thus describes his introduction to his 
 Lordship: "When Lord George had taken the seals, 
 I asked my friend Colonel James Cunningham to take 
 me with him to Pall Mall ; which he did, and the cere- 
 mony of paying my respects was soon dismissed. I 
 confess I thought my new chief was quite as cold in 
 manner as a minister need be, and rather more so than 
 my intermediate friend had given me reason to expect." 
 
 Here we have to note, that Colonel James Cunningham, 
 to whom Mr. Cumberland was indebted for his formal 
 introduction to Lord Germain, was not only one of his 
 Lordship's intimate friends j but is the same officer 
 mentioned by Junius in his account of the "infamous 
 transaction" about appointing Colonel Luttrell adjutant- 
 general in Ireland, which we have before cited (p. 75). 
 And as Colonel Cunningham alone appears to advantage 
 in that obscure and complicated military intrigue, and 
 Junius was fully acquainted with all its ramifications, 
 the probability is, that he derived his information from 
 
VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 323 
 
 Cunningham himself: and thus we have another strong 
 and independent proof, of the identity of Junius with 
 Lord George. 
 
 The notice taken of the affair by Junius, had such an 
 effect upon the ministry, that Colonel Luttrell was obliged 
 to resign a few days afterwards, and Cunningham was 
 again reinstated in his situation of adjutant-general in 
 Ireland. 
 
 Shortly after this unpromising introduction, we find 
 Lord George and Mr. Cumberland on terms of the 
 closest friendship, without any apparent reason for the 
 unusual intimacy between persons moving in such differ- 
 ent spheres of life. We are told of the proud and aris- 
 tocratic principal, inviting his subaltern to his country 
 seat, and soon afterwards appointing him secretary to 
 the Board of Trade. 
 
 " One day," says Mr. Cumberland, " as Lord George 
 was leaving the office, he stopped me on the outside of 
 the door, at the head of the stairs, and invited me to pass 
 some days with him and his family at Stoneland, near 
 Tunbridge Wells. It was on my part so unexpected, 
 that I doubted if I had rightly understood him, as he had 
 spoken in a low and subdued voice, as his manner 
 was, and I consulted his confidential secretary Mr. jyOylyy 
 whether he would advise me to the journey. He told 
 me that he knew the house was filled from top to bottom 
 with a large party, that he was sure there would be no 
 room for me, and dissuaded me from the undertaking. 
 I did not quite follow his advice by neglecting to present 
 myself, but resolved to secure my retreat to Tunbridge 
 Wells, and kept my chaise in waiting to make good my 
 quarters. When I arrived at Stoneland, I was met at 
 
 y2 
 
324 VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 
 
 the door by Lord George, who soon discovered the pre- 
 caution I had taken, and himself conducted me to my 
 bed-chamber, told me it had been reserved for me, and 
 ever after would be set apart as mine, where he hoped I 
 would consent to find myself at home. This was the 
 man I had esteemed so cold, and thus was I at once 
 introduced to the commencement of a friendship, which 
 day by day improved, and which no one word or action 
 of his life to come, ever for an instant interrupted or 
 diminished. Shortly after this, it came to his know- 
 ledge that there had been a treaty between Mr. Pownall 
 and me, for his resignation of the place of secretary, and 
 he asked me what had passed ; I told him how it stood, 
 and what the conditions were that my superior in office 
 expected for the accommodation. I had not yet men- 
 tioned this to him, and probably never should. He said 
 he would take it into his own hands, and in a few days 
 signified the King's pleasure that Mr. PownalFs resig- 
 nation was accepted, and that I should succeed him as 
 secretary in clear and full enjoyment of the place, without 
 any compensation whatsoever. Thus was I, beyond all 
 hope, and without a word said to me that could lead me 
 to expect a favour of that sort, promoted by surprise to a 
 very advantageous and desirable situation. I came to my 
 office at the hour appointed, not dreaming of such an 
 event, and took my seat at the adjoining table, when 
 Mr. Pownall being called out of the room, Lord George 
 turned round to me and bade me take his chair at the 
 bottom of the table, announcing to the Board his Majesty's 
 commands, as above recited, with a positive prohibition 
 of all stipulations. When I had endeavoured to express 
 myself as properly on the occasion, as my agitated state 
 
VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 325 
 
 of spirits would allow of, I remember Lord George made 
 answer, ''that if I was as well pleased upon receiving 
 his Majesty's commands, as he was in being the bearer 
 of them, I was indeed very happy." If I served him 
 truly, honestly, and ardently ever after, till I followed 
 him to the grave, where is my merit? How could I do 
 otherwise?" — Cumberland's Memoirs^ i. 393. 
 
 The plain English of Mr. Cumberland's statement 
 seems to be, that Lord George dismissed Mr. Pownall 
 from his situation of secretary to the Board of Trade, 
 and appointed Mr. Cumberland to his place, without his 
 paying any consideration to Mr. Pownall for the accom- 
 modation, which it appears he was willing to do. This 
 arrangement was no doubt very satisfactory to Mr. Cum- 
 berland, and as we are not told that Mr. Pownall made 
 any complaint, the probability is, that he received com- 
 pensation from the public in the shape of a retiring pension 
 — but however this might be, it is quite clear that the job 
 was so managed as to confer a great boon on Mr. Cum- 
 berland, for he says, *' I had four sons at Westminster 
 school, boarding at one house, and my two daughters 
 coming into the world, so that the accession to my cir- 
 cumstances, which my promotion in office gave me, put 
 me greatly at my ease, and enabled me to press their 
 education with advantage." 
 
 When Lord George entered upon the duties of his 
 new office, Mr. Cumberland soon discovered his Lord- 
 ship's superiority in point of talents over his predecessor 
 Lord Clare, and gives the following account of his 
 straightforward and able mode of transacting his official 
 business: — "A very short time sufficed to confirm the 
 idea I had entertained of Lord George's character for 
 
326 VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 
 
 decision and dispatch in business: there was at once an 
 end of all circumlocutory reports and inefficient forms, 
 that only impeded business, and substituted ambiguity 
 for precision; there was (as William Gerard Hamilton, 
 speaking of Lord George, truly observed to me) no 
 trash in his mind; — he studied no choice phrases, no super- 
 fluous words, nor ever suffered the clearness of his conceptions 
 to be clouded by the obscurity of his expressions, for these 
 were the simplest and most unequivocal that could be 
 made use of for explaining his opinions, or dictating his 
 instructions. In the mean while he was so momentarily 
 punctual to his time, so religiously observant of his 
 engagements, that we, who served under him in office, 
 felt the sweets of the exchange we had so lately made in 
 the person of our chief." 
 
 Here we find Lord George praised for that clearness 
 of expression, and terse, and condensed style, so remark- 
 able in Junius; and Mr. Cumberland's account will be 
 found to correspond precisely with Junius's own descrip- 
 tion of his mental operations, in rejecting and casting off 
 all those extraneous accessories that embarrass men of 
 ordinary capacity, and coincides with the direct and 
 determined manner in which Junius at once proceeds to 
 the very heart and core of any subject under his investi- 
 gation, as described in a letter written by Junius, under 
 the signature of ^Amicus Curice^ and dated lOtli of June 
 1769, in which he says: — 
 
 " I am an old reader of political controversy. / 
 remember the great Walpolean battles; and am not a 
 little diverted with the combats of party at this time. 
 They are still carried on with ability and vigour. Long 
 habit has taught me to pass by all the declamation with 
 
VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 327 
 
 which the champions parade. I look upon it as no 
 better than those flourishes of the backsword with which 
 the great masters of my time in the amphitheatre enter- 
 tained the spectators, merely to shew their dexterity, but 
 "which made no part of the real engagement. I regard 
 as nothing the trappings of panegyric with which they 
 decorate their friends. I entirely overlook the dirt with 
 which they so very liberally bespatter their enemies. 
 Whenever a fact is touched upon, there I fix. When a 
 distinct charge is made upon a minister, I look for a 
 distinct and particular answer, that denies, or admitting, 
 explains, or in some favourable manner accounts for the 
 fact charged. If, instead of this, I find nothing more 
 than a long paper, in which the author of the charge is 
 called a thousand names, and the person accused is lifted 
 up to the skies as a miracle of ability and virtue, I am 
 obliged, as an equitable judge, to consider the cause not 
 as defended, but as utterly abandoned; and the Court 
 must enter an admission, by his own advocates, of the 
 charge against him." 
 
 The above paragraph is further remarkable as tending 
 in other respects to establish the claim of Lord George, 
 as it proves that Junius must have passed the meridian 
 of life; for the Walpolean battles ceased in 1741, when 
 Sir Robert Walpole was driven from power. At that 
 time Lord George was not a member of parliament, and 
 therefore he says, " I am an old reader of political con- 
 troversy." The allusion also to the gladiatorial exhibitions 
 of former times,* with which Junius appears to have 
 
 * A very curious account of these -gladiatorial exhibitions, 
 which were superseded in this country by the modern science of 
 boxing, will be found in the Spectator (vol. vi., No. 436). 
 
328 VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 
 
 been quite familiar, was more likely to proceed from the 
 pen of a cavalry officer than a civilian. 
 
 Lord Germain's extraordinary partiality for Mr. Cum- 
 berland's society appears to have been particularly noticed 
 by some of his Lordship's friends; for Mr. Cumberland 
 adds : " Here I hope to be forgiven if I record an answer 
 of Lord George Germain's to an officious gentleman, who 
 upon some reference to me in his concerns, expressed 
 himself with surprise at the degree of influence which I 
 appeared to have. 'You are very right,' replied my 
 friend; * that gentleman has a great deal to do with me 
 and my affairs, and if you can find any other to take his 
 place as disinterestedly attached to me, and as capable 
 of serving n;ie, I am confident he will hold himself very 
 highly obliged to you for relieving him from a burden 
 that brings him neither profit nor advantage, and only 
 subjects him to such remarks as you have now been 
 making.' " 
 
 Whether Mr. Cumberland merited this compliment 
 for his " disinterested attachment" to his Lordship, the 
 reader will form his own opinion from Mr. Cumberland's 
 preceding statement; but we shall presently find, that 
 Lord Germain had a more private and particular reason 
 for the kindness and patronage bestowed by him on bis 
 proteg^, which continued unabated to the time of his 
 Lordship's death. 
 
 From the period of Lord George's quitting office and 
 being called to the House of Peers, he lived in a retired 
 manner, occasionally at Drayton, in Northamptonshire, 
 or at Bolebrook, near Tunbridge Wells, but principally 
 at his beautiful mansion Stoneland Park, in Sussex. 
 Here, away from the bustle of public life and the cavils 
 
VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 329 
 
 of party, he passed the remainder of his days in peace 
 and retirement. 
 
 From Mr. Cumberland's Memoirs we collect many 
 interesting particulars of his Lordship's domestic life 
 and habits in his latter days, which will be found to 
 agree with the conclusions drawn by Dr. Good, that the 
 author of Junius was " strict in his moral conduct and 
 in his attention to public decorum, and an avowed 
 member of the established church." " I now foresaw," 
 says Mr. Cumberland, "the coming on of an event that 
 must inevitably deprive me of one of the greatest comforts 
 which still adhered to me in my decline of fortune. It 
 was too evident that the constitution of Lord Sackville, 
 long harassed by the painful visitation of that dreadful 
 malady the stone, was decidedly giving way. There was 
 in him so generous a repugnance against troubling his 
 friends with any complaints, that it was from external 
 evidence only, never from confession, that his sufferings 
 could be guessed at. Attacks that would have confined 
 most people to their beds, never moved him from his 
 accustomed punctuality. It was curious, and probably 
 in some men's eyes would, from its extreme precision, 
 have appeared ridiculously minute and formal; yet in 
 the movements of a domestic establishment so large as 
 his, it had its uses and comforts, which his guests and 
 family could not fail to partake of. As sure as the hand 
 of the clock pointed to the half-hour after nine, neither 
 a minute before nor a minute after, so sure did the good 
 lord of the castle step intd his breakfast- room, accoutred 
 at all points according tj his own invariable costume, 
 with a complacent countl lance, that prefaced his good 
 morning to each person there assembled; and now. 
 
330 VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 
 
 whilst I recall those scenes to my remembrance, I feel 
 gratified by the reflection, that I never passed a night 
 beneath his roof, but that his morning's salutation met 
 me at my post. He allowed an hour-and-a-half for 
 breakfast, and regularly at eleven took his morning's 
 circuit on horseback, at a foot's pace; for his infirmity 
 would not admit of any strong gestation. He had an 
 old groom, who had grown grey in his service, that was 
 his constant pilot upon these excursions; and his general 
 custom was to make the tour of his cottages, to recon- 
 noitre the condition they were in, — whether their roofs 
 were in repair, their windows whole, and their gardens 
 well cropped and neatly kept. All this it was their 
 interest to be attentive to, for he bought the produce of 
 their fruit trees; and I have heard him say with great 
 satisfaction, that he has paid thirty shillings in a season 
 for strawberries only to a poor cottager, who paid him 
 one shilling annual rent for his tenement and garden. 
 This was the constant rate at which he let them to his 
 labourers; and he made them pay it to his steward at his 
 yearly audit, that they might feel themselves in the class 
 of regular tenants, and sit down at table to the good 
 cheer provided for them on the audit day. He never 
 rode out without preparing himself with a store of 
 sixpences in his waistcoat-pocket for the children of the 
 poor, who opened gates and drew out sliding bars for 
 him in his passage through the inclosures. These barriers 
 were well watched, and there was rarely any employ- 
 ment for a servant. But these sixpences were not indis- 
 criminately bestowed; for as he kept a charity school 
 upon his own endowment, he knew to whom he gave 
 them, and generally held a short parley with the gate- 
 
VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 331 
 
 opener as he paid his toll for passing. Upon the very- 
 first report of illness or accident, relief was instantly- 
 sent, and they were put on the sick list, regularly visited, 
 and constantly supplied with the best medicines, admini- 
 stered upon the best advice. If the poor man lost his 
 cow or his pig or his poultry, the loss was never made 
 up in money, but in stock. It was his. custom to buy 
 the cast-off liveries of his own servants as constantly as 
 the day of clothing came about, and these he distributed 
 to the old and worn-out labourers, who turned out daily 
 on the lawn and paddock in the Sackville livery to pick 
 up boughs and sweep up leaves, and in short do just 
 as much work as served to keep them wholesome and 
 alive. 
 
 " To his religious duties this good man was not only 
 regularly, but respectfully attentive. On the Sunday 
 morning he appeared in gala, as if he was dressed for a 
 drawing-room; he marched out his whole family in 
 grand cavalcade to his parish church, leaving only a 
 centinel to watch the fires at home, and mount guard 
 upon the spits. His deportment in the House of Prayer 
 was exemplary, and more in character of times past than 
 of time present. He had a way of standing up in sermon 
 time, for the purpose of reviewing the congregation, 
 and awing the idlers into decorum, that never failed to 
 remind me of Sir Roger de Coverley at church. Some- 
 times, when he has been struck with passages in the 
 discourse which he wished to point out to the audience 
 as rules for moral practice worthy to be noticed, he would 
 mark his approbation of them with such cheering nods 
 and signals of assent to the preacher, as were often more 
 than my muscles could withstand; but when to the total 
 
332 VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 
 
 overthrow of all gravity, in his zeal to encourage the 
 efforts of a very young declaimer in the pulpit, I heard 
 him cry out to the Reverend Mr. Henry Eatoff in the 
 middle of his sermon, — 'Well done, Harry!' — it wq,s 
 irresistible; suppression was out of my power: what 
 made it more intolerably comic was, the unmoved sin- 
 cerity of his manner, and his surprise to find that any 
 thing had passed, that could provoke a laugh so out of 
 time and place. He had nursed up with no small care 
 and cost in each of his parish churches a corps of rustic 
 psalm- singers, to whose performances he paid the greatest 
 attention, rising up, and with his eyes directed to the 
 singing-gallery, marking time, which was not always 
 rigidly adhered to; and once, when his ear, which was 
 very correct, had been tortured by a tone most glaringly 
 discordant, he set his mark upon the culprit by calling 
 out to him by name, and loudly saying, ' Out of tune, 
 Tom Baker!' Now this faulty musician Tom Baker, 
 happened to be his Lordship's butcher, but then in order 
 to set names and trades upon a par, Tom Butcher was 
 his Lordship's baker; which I observed to him was 
 much such a reconcilement of cross partners as my illus- 
 trious friend George Faulkner hit upon, when in his 
 Dublin Journal he printed — * Erratum in our last — For 
 his Grace the Duchess of Dorset, read her Grace the 
 Duke of Dorset.' I relate these little anecdotes of a 
 man, whose character had nothing little in it, that I may 
 shew him to my readers in his private scenes, and be as 
 far as I am able the intimate and true transcriber of his 
 heart." — Cumberland's Memoirs, ii. 237. 
 
 The lofty hauteur and sovereign contempt, with which 
 Junius treats all his opponents, is another of his principal 
 
VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 333 
 
 characteristics, and that Lord Sackville was of a proud 
 and haughty disposition is clear from the concurring 
 testimony of all his contemporaries. We have before 
 mentioned the elaborate and singular defence which Mr. 
 Almon makes in answer to this charge, and find also 
 Lord Orford, when speaking of Lord Granby, remarking 
 that "Lord George's haughtiness lost this young man, 
 as he had the Duke of Marlborough." Mr. Butler too 
 says, he recollects Lord George was considered ^^emi- 
 nently aristocratic" Wilkes, in one of his Letters to his 
 daughter, tells her — " I have been this morning at the 
 meeting of the commissioners for new paving West- 
 minster, Lord George Germain looked very stately." 
 
 Like many other proud men. Lord Sackville appears to 
 have been kind and benevolent to his inferiors — where 
 no opposition was offered to his sovereign will — when all 
 pretension to equality was out of the question — when 
 " the toe of the peasant did not approach too near the 
 heel of the courtier," and nothing came "between the 
 wind and his nobility," he was all affability and con- 
 descension. His kindness to Mr. Cumberland for a long 
 series of years was most remarkable, and it appears from 
 the following anecdote, that his benevolence extended 
 below Mr. Cumberland's sphere of life; and that his 
 domestics felt the comfort of living with him rather as 
 humble friends than as menial servants. His Lordship 
 one day on entering his house in Pall Mall, observed 
 a large basket of vegetables standing in the hall, and 
 inquired of the porter to whom they belonged, and from 
 whence they came? Old John immediately replied, 
 " they are ours my lord, from our country house. 
 "Very well," rejoined the peer. At that instant a car- 
 
334 VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 
 
 riage stopped at the door, and Lord George turning 
 round, asked what coach it was ? " Ours,'' said honest 
 John. "And are the children in it ours too?" said his 
 lordship, laughing. " Most certainly, my lord,*' replied 
 John, with the utmost gravity, and immediately ran to 
 lift them out. 
 
 It must not however be concluded, that these instances 
 of a kind and benevolent disposition are sufficient to out- 
 weigh the mass of facts, and strong chain of circumstantial 
 evidence, which have been adduced to prove him the 
 author of compositions fraught with so much malignity 
 as the Letters of Junius. Man, in his best state, is an 
 anomalous being — a strange compound of tenderness 
 and cruelty, dignity and meanness. Heroes, who have 
 not scrupled to sacrifice without pity or remorse, tens of 
 thousands of their fellow-mortals on the altars of Moloch, 
 have been known to exhibit symptoms of sensibility on 
 accidentally beholding a single individual in imminent 
 danger. Those who have searched deepest into the 
 recesses of the human heart tell us, that there is a pro- 
 pensity in our nature to lull " the still small voice of 
 conscience," and to atone for secret transgressions by 
 illusive acts of penitence ; and it should seem that men of 
 the highest order of intellect are most prone to this self- 
 delusion, for Dr. Johnson confessed, a short time before 
 his death, that for an act of disobedience to his father 
 caused by pride, he went in advanced age to Uttoxeter 
 in very bad weather, and stood for a considerable time 
 bareheaded during a heavy rain in the market-place. 
 " In contrition," says the great moralist, " I stood, and I 
 hope the penance was expiatory j" and it is recorded of 
 Eugene Aram, that he endeavoured to atone for his foul 
 
VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 335 
 
 crime, and to conciliate the esteem of mankind, by a tender 
 regard for the welfare of worms and reptiles. 
 
 Mr. Cumberland proved the sincerity of his gratitude 
 by attending his patron with much assiduity and kindness 
 during his last illness, and was present when he expired ; 
 and it is from his account of various conversations and 
 incidents that occurred during this illness, that we may 
 extract evidence, — unintentional and indirect certainly, 
 but for that very reason the more valuable and decisive, 
 to prove that this nobleman was the author of the Letters 
 of Junius. 
 
 " I never heard," says Mr. Cumberland, " that my 
 friend Lord George was amongst the suspected authors 
 of Junius, till by way of jest he told me so not many days 
 before his death. I did not want him to disavow it, for 
 there could be no occasion to disprove an impossibility ;" 
 and then he goes on to give that opinion of Junius which 
 we have stated in our first chapter. 
 
 Now, as Lord Sackville was quite sensible that he was 
 in extremis when he made this communication, and in all 
 other respects seems to have been preparing for the last 
 solemn change, with that seriousness and composure of 
 mind befitting his situation, it is not a little extraordinary 
 that he should jest on this particular subject. Is it not 
 more probable that the great mystery of his life was then 
 struggling for vent in his perturbed breast.? and thai 
 he was seeking that relief, which a disclosure of the 
 oppressive secret would afford to the firmest mind in 
 such an awful moment ? 
 
 If such were his intention, Cumberland's blunt and 
 honest avowal of his sentiments respecting Junius, was 
 not calculated to encourage his Lordship to unbosom 
 
836 VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 
 
 himself, and accordingly the subject appears to have 
 dropped ; but from what passed, we gain a knowledge of 
 this important fact, that even then, Lord Sackville did not 
 disavow the imputed authorship. 
 
 From the same authentic source of information we 
 learn, that the disgraceful sentence of the Court-martial 
 rankled in his Lordship's breast to the latest hour of his 
 existence, and was almost the last topic of discussion 
 which he held with Cumberland. 
 
 Here too, we have disclosed to us the real bond of union 
 and sympathy between Lord Sackville and Mr, Cumberland. 
 It appears that Cumberland had attended his Lordship's 
 trial through the whole of the process, and regularly 
 reported what occurred to the celebrated Bub Dodington, 
 who was then out of town, and from what Cumber- 
 land heard and observed on that occasion, he formed a 
 favourable opinion of his Lordship's case. 
 
 This at once explains the cause of Lord Sackville's 
 kindness and patronage to Mr. Cumberland. He thereby 
 attached to himself a humble friend^ who was ever ready 
 to aid him in "fighting his battles o'er again," and to 
 condole and sympathize with him on the all-absorbing 
 subject of his misfortunes and wrongs. 
 
 As Mr. Cumberland's account of this interesting con- 
 versation cannot be curtailed without injury, we shall 
 give it entire, in his own words : — 
 
 " I well remember the evening being most serene and 
 lovely, we seated ourselves in the chairs, that were placed 
 out upon the garden gi-ass-plat, which looks towards Crow- 
 bery and the forest. Our conversation led us to the affair 
 of Minden; my friend most evidently courted the discussion. 
 I told him I had diligently attended the whole process of 
 
VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 337 
 
 the trial, and that I had detailed it to Mr. Dodington ; 
 I had consequently a pretty correct remembrance of the 
 leading circumstances as they came out upon the evidence. 
 But I observed to him that it was not upon the ques- 
 tions and proceedings agitated at that court, that I could 
 perfect my opinion of the case; there must probably be 
 a chain of leading causes, which, though they could not 
 make a part of his defence in public court, might, if 
 developed, throw such lights on the respective conduct 
 of the parties, as would have led to conclusions different 
 to those which stood upon record. To this he answered, 
 ' that my remarks were just: there were certain circum- 
 stances antecedent to the action, that should be taken 
 into consideration, and there were certain forbearances 
 posterior to the trial, that should be accounted for. The 
 time was come, when he could have no temptation to dis- 
 guise and violate the truth, and a much more awful trial 
 was now close at hand, where he must suffer for it if he did. 
 He would talk plainly, temperately, and briefly, to me, as 
 his manner was, provided I would promise him to deal 
 sincerely, and not spare to press him on such points as 
 required explanation. This being premised, he entered 
 upon a detail, which, unless I could give, as taken down 
 from his lips, without the variation of a word, so sacred 
 do I hold the reputation of the dead intrusted to me, and 
 the feelings of the living, whom any error of mine might 
 wound, that I shall forbear to speak of it except in general 
 terms. He appeared to me throughout his whole discourse, 
 like a man who had perfectly dismissed his passions; his 
 colour never changed, his features never indicated embar- 
 rassment, his voice was never elevated, and being relieved 
 at times by my questions and remarks, he appeared to 
 
 z 
 
VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 
 
 speak without pain, and in the event his mind seemed 
 to be lightened by the discharge. When I compare 
 what he said to me in his last moments (not two hours 
 before he expired), with what he stated at this conference, 
 if I did not from my heart, and upon the most entire 
 conviction of my reason and understanding, solemnly 
 acquit that injured man (now gone to his account) of the 
 opprobrious and false imputation deposed against him at 
 his trial, I must either be brutally ignorant, or wilfully 
 obstinate against the truth." — Memoirs, ii. 245. 
 
 The malignity with which Junius pursued Lord Mans- 
 field is sufficiently notorious from a perusal of his 
 public Letters, but it is only from his private notes to 
 Woodfall, that we learn the intenseness of his hatred 
 against that great and amiable nobleman. The polished 
 and brilliant Junius does not scruple to apply to his 
 Lordship such coarse and atrocious expressions as these : 
 " We have got the rascal down, let us strangle him i] ii be 
 'possible" Again, ** I will never rest till I have destroyed 
 or expelled that wretch — the fellow truckles already." And 
 we learn from Junius's private letter to Lord Chatham, 
 recently published, that he urged the latter to impeach 
 Lord Mansfield, and move for his commitment to the 
 Tower. 
 
 On this subject we beg leave to remark, that the cir- 
 cumstance of Lord Mansfield having always maintained 
 a dignified composure, and never shewn any symptoms 
 of petulance or resentment, under the virulent attacks of 
 Junius, from the press; or the terrible philippics of Lord 
 Chatham, in the House of Lords, speaks trumpet-tongued 
 in favour of the purity of his motives, and the integrity 
 of his conduct. Serene in conscious innocence, his calm 
 and well-regulated mind never lost its equilibrium. 
 
VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 339 
 
 Virtue may be assailed, but never hurt ; 
 Surprised by unjust force, but not enthralled : 
 Yea, even that which mischief meant most harm, 
 Shall in the happy trial prove most glory. 
 
 Milton. 
 
 Lord Mansfield certainly survived one, and we believe 
 both, of his great antagonists many years, passing the 
 remainder of a long and illustrious life in the tranquillity 
 of a philosophical retirement; possessing his mental 
 faculties unimpaired to the last, and blessed with that 
 peace of conscience, which is the sweetest reward that 
 can be enjoyed in this world, at the close of a virtuous 
 and well-spent life. 
 
 Junius has told us in his dedication, that " a death-bed 
 repentance seldom reaches to restitution ;" and the truth 
 of the axiom seems to be strikingly exemplified in the 
 extraordinary interview that took place at the desire of 
 Lord Sackville, in his last moments, with Lord Mansfield, 
 which is described by Mr. Cumberland in so powerful 
 and graphic a manner as to arrest the attention of the 
 most careless reader. We must, therefore, allow Mr. 
 Cumberland to describe the scene in his own language: 
 
 ** Lord Sackville wished," says Mr. Cumberland, " to 
 take his last leave of the Earl of Mansfield, then at 
 Tunbridge Wells. I signified this to the Earl, and 
 accompanied him in his chaise to Stoneland j I was pre- 
 sent at their interview. Lord Sackville, just dismounted 
 from his horse, came into the room, where we had waited 
 a very few minutes, and staggered as he advanced to 
 reach his hand to his respectable visitor; he drew his 
 breath with palpitating quickness, and if I remember 
 rightly, never rode again ; there was a deathlike character 
 in his countenance, that y'isWAj affected and disturhedJuOYd. 
 
 z2 
 
340 . VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 
 
 Mansfield, in a manner that I did not quite expect, for 
 it had more of horror in it, than a firm man ought to 
 have shewn, and less 'perhaps of other feelings than a 
 friend, invited to a meeting of that nature, must have 
 discovered, had he«o^ been frightened from his propriety. 
 
 " As soon as Lord Sackville had recovered his breath, 
 his visitor remaining silent, he began by apologizing for 
 the trouble he had given him, and for the unpleasant 
 spectacle he was conscious of exhibiting to him in the 
 condition he was now reduced to ; ' But my good lord,' 
 he said, * though I ought not to have imposed upon you 
 the painful ceremony of paying a last visit to a dying man, 
 yet so great was my anxiety to return you my unfeigned 
 thanks for all your goodness to me, all the kind protec- 
 tion you have shewn me through the course of my un- 
 prosperous life, that I could not know you was so near 
 to me, and not wish to assure you of the invariable 
 respect I have entertained for your character; and now 
 in the most serious manner to solicit your forgiveness, if 
 ever in the fluctuations of politics, or the heats of party, 
 / have appeared in your eyes at any moment of my life 
 vnjust to your great merits, or forgetful of your many favours.* 
 
 " When I record this speech," says Mr. Cumberland, 
 " I give it to the reader as correct ; I do not trust to 
 memory at this distance; I transcribe it— I scorn the 
 paltry trick of writing speeches for any man, whose name 
 is in these Memoirs ; or for myself, in whose name these 
 Memoirs shall go forth respectable, at least for their 
 veracity; for I certainly cannot wish to present myself 
 to the world in two such opposite and incoherent cha- 
 racters, as the writer of my own history and the hero of 
 a fiction. Lord Mansfield made a reply perfectly becoming 
 
VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 341 
 
 and highly satisfactory ; he w as far on in years, and not 
 in sanguine health, or a strong state of nerves : there was 
 no immediate reason to continue the discourse; Lord 
 Sackville did not press for it; his visitor departed, and 
 I staid with him. He made no other observation upon 
 what had passed, than that it was extremely obliging in 
 Lord Mansfield, and then turned to other subjects." 
 — Cumberland's Memoirs^ ii. 249. 
 
 On any other assumption than that of Lord Sack- 
 ville being the Author of the Letters of Junius, this 
 affecting and mysterious meeting seems quite inexplicable, 
 when we take into account all the attending circum- 
 stances. The hasty summons sent by a man tottering on 
 the brink of eternity, — the promptness with which that 
 summons was obeyed, — the solemnity of the meeting, — 
 the evident embarrassment of the parties, — the nothing- 
 ness of the result! 
 
 To send express for Lord Mansfield to solicit his for- 
 giveness, if ever Lord Sackville had appeared in Lord 
 Mansfield's eyes unjust to his great merits, or forgetful 
 of his many favours, — really seems more like one of 
 those solemn sneers, or cutting gibes, which the Chief 
 Justice had been accustomed to receive from Junius, than 
 the last mournful farewell of an ancient friend, or the 
 frank acknowledgment of a generous political opponent : 
 considering, however, Lord Sackville's state, it is not 
 only more charitable, but more in accordance with pro- 
 bability to conclude, that the meeting was sought by him 
 with a sincere intention of making a full confession to 
 Lord Mansfield, and to solicit the forgiveness of a man 
 he had so deeply injured in the assumed character of 
 Junius; — but when the decisive moment arrived, either 
 
342 VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 
 
 Lord Sackville's spirit sunk within him, or his pride 
 revolted at the fancied humiliation of a particular confes- 
 sion, and he compromised the matter with his conscience 
 by making the general acknowledgment recorded by 
 Mr. Cumberland. 
 
 It is evident that the demeanour of the parties towards 
 each other made a profound impression on the mind of 
 Mr. Cumberland, although, from his being unacquainted 
 with the important secret, he could do little more than 
 look on in mute amazement. He may therefore be ex- 
 cused for having drawn erroneous conclusions respecting 
 the motives which he supposed influenced Lord Mansfield's 
 deportment at the interview : but this does not in the least 
 affect the truth of his observation, that Lord Mansfield 
 was ^^ frightened from his propriety.'* If the parties 
 understood each other (which is by no means improbable), 
 his Lordship's look of " horror" will not astonish us so 
 much as it did the only witness to the interview. 
 
 The following is Mr. Cumberland's description of the 
 last hours of his friend ; in which it will be observed, that 
 even at the closing scene, dark allusions are made to 
 some ancient and inveterate feud, which engrossed the 
 thoughts of the dying noble; and that all vindictive 
 feelings were not finally extinguished until the last gasp 
 of exhausted and expiring nature. 
 
 "He allowed me," continues Mr. Cumberland, "to 
 call in Sir Francis Millman, then practising at Tonbridge 
 Wells: all medical assistance was in vain; the sapona- 
 ceous medicines, that had given him intervals of ease, 
 and probably many years of existence, had now lost 
 their efficacy, or by their efficacy worn their conductors 
 out. In him the vital principle was strong, and nature, 
 
VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 343 
 
 which resisted dissolution, maintained at every outpost 
 that defended life, a lingering agonizing struggle. 
 Through every stage of varied misery — 'extremes by 
 change more fierce' — his fortitude remained unshaken, 
 his senses perfect, and his mind never died, till the last 
 pulse was spent, and his heart stopped for ever. 
 
 " As I knew he had been some time meditating upon 
 his preparation to receive the sacrament, and death 
 seemed near at hand, I reminded him of it ; he declared 
 himself ready, and at peace with all mankind; in one 
 instance only he confessed it cost him a hard struggle. What 
 that instance was he needed not to explain to me^ nor am I 
 careful to explain to any. I trust according to the infirmity 
 of man's nature, he is rather to be honoured for having 
 finally extinguished his resentment, than condemned for 
 having fostered it too long. A christian saint would 
 have done it sooner; how many men would not have 
 done it ever ! 
 
 " The Reverend Mr. Sackville Bayle, his worthy 
 parish priest and ever faithful friend, administered the 
 solemn office of the sacrament to him, reading at his 
 request the prayers for a communicant at the point of 
 death. He had ordered all his bed-curtains to be opened 
 and the sashes thrown up, that he might have air and 
 space to assist him in his efforts: what they were, with 
 what devotion he joined in those solemn prayers that 
 warn the departing spirit to dismiss all hopes that centre 
 in this world, that reverend friend can witness; I also 
 was a witness and a partaker, none else was present at 
 that holy ceremony. 
 
 " A short time before he expired, I came by his desire 
 to hie bedside, when taking my hand, and pressing it 
 
344 VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 
 
 between his, he addressed me for the last time, in the 
 following words: — ^ You see me now in those moments, 
 when no disguise will serve, and when the spirit of a 
 man must be proved. I have a mind perfectly resigned, 
 and at peace within itself. I have done with this world; 
 and what I have done in it, I have done for the best ; 
 I hope and trust I am prepared for the next. Tell not 
 me of all that passes in health and pride of heart; these 
 are the moments in which a man must be searched, and 
 remember that I die, as you see me, with a tranquil 
 conscience, and content." Such was the calm and peace- 
 ful end of — 
 
 Viscount Sackville, 
 
 who expired on the 26th of August 1785, in the 
 
 sixty-ninth year of his age. 
 
 So, through the cloud of death his spirit passed 
 Into that pure and unknown world of love, 
 "Where injury cannot come. 
 
 His Lordship was interred in the family vault at 
 Withyhan church, contiguous to the park, and his 
 faithful friend, Mr. Cumberland, followed his remains to 
 the tomb. 
 
 Having accomplished his warfare on earth, the mortal 
 remains of Lord Sackville were deposited in " the house 
 appointed for all living," where '' the wicked cease from 
 troubling, and the weary be at rest." There the malignant 
 contentions of hatred are heard no more, but the oppressor 
 and the oppressed repose together in peace, and the 
 aristocrat and the plebeian commingle their dust together. 
 " When I look upon the tombs of the great," says Addi- 
 son, " every emotion of envy dies in me. When I see 
 kings lying by those who deposed them. When I con- 
 
VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 345 
 
 sider rival wits placed side by side; or the holy men 
 that divided the world with their contests and disputes, 
 I reflect with sorrow and astonishment on the little 
 competitions, factions, and debates of mankind. When 
 I read the several dates of the tombs, of some that died 
 yesterday, and some, hundreds of years ago, I consider 
 that great day, when we shall all of us be contemporaries, 
 and make our appearance together.*' 
 
 In person Lord Sackville was full six feet high. He 
 always wore a bag, and invariably a sword, after he 
 quitted the army, as may be observed by the fine portrait 
 of him published by Alderman Boydell in 1775, and so 
 far his personal appearance agrees with the gentleman 
 seen by Mr. Jackson. 
 
 " On my landing at Dover from Paris in 1785," says 
 Sir Nathaniel Wraxall, " I received the intelligence of 
 Lord Sackville's death. I lost in him a zealous friend. 
 He would have appointed me under-secretary of state 
 in July 1781, when a vacancy took place in his office ; 
 but Mr. Knox, who principally conducted the business 
 of that department, opposed my appointment. He said, 
 not without some reason, that * he could no longer 
 perform the duties of his employment, if his colleague 
 occupied a seat in parliament, as the necessary attendance 
 there must leave the whole weight and drudgery upon 
 him.' In 1784, Lord Sackville brought me into the 
 House of Commons, leaving me equally free in my par- 
 liamentary capacity, as he did his own son-in-law, Mr. 
 Herbert, and Mr. Medley, the two members for East 
 Grinstead. His correspondence, which I enjoyed down 
 to the close of his life, exhibits in every letter the acute- 
 ness of his intellect, the elevation of his mind, and the 
 
346 VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 
 
 playful vivacity of his temper, unsubdued by age. Nor 
 does it less forcibly display that strong attachment to 
 the king, cemented by recent marks of his favour, which 
 always characterised Lord Sackville. 
 
 "Among the peculiar features of Lord Sackville's 
 intellectual formation, was a quickness of perception, 
 which seemed at times to partake of prescience and intui- 
 tion. Being likewise destitute of all reserve where secrecy 
 was not demanded, he rarely declined answering any 
 question put to him ; and he was a stranger to circum- 
 locution or evasion. In February 1784, when Pitt's 
 eventual stability in office began to be evident, and his 
 final triumph over the coalition almost certain. Lord 
 Walsingham and I asked Lord Sackville, ' How long 
 will Pitt remain first minister T He looked up for two 
 or three seconds, and then replied, ' Five years.' The 
 accomplishment of this prediction, or rather opinion, 
 proved ridiculously accurate; for, in February 1789, 
 Pitt in fact was out, and only the folly of his opponents, 
 by furnishing him from week to week with new subjects 
 of delay, had allowed time for the King's recovery from 
 his great malady. Nor did Lord Sackville possess less 
 candour than he manifested acuteness. The < Rolliad ' 
 did not spare him, among the individuals selected for 
 satire or ridicule by the authors of that production. 
 
 " Lord Sackville though not a man of letters^ nor even 
 inclined to literary pursuits, yet seemed to inherit his 
 grandfather Charles Earl of Dorset's partiality for talents. 
 As Hobbes wrote under the protection of the Earls of 
 Devonshire, at Chatsworth and at Hardwick ; so Cum- 
 berland composed several of his dramatic pieces under 
 that nobleman's roof, either at Stoneland, or at Drayton. 
 
VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 347 
 
 I have myself assisted several times at the reading of 
 his tragedies or comedies. 
 
 " There was not probably a nobleman in England who 
 combined a more liberal economy with a hospitable and 
 splendid establishment. He maintained three separate 
 households; one in Pall Mall, another at Stoneland in 
 Sussex — a family seat to which he was partial, where he 
 had passed much of his youth, and which he rented 
 of his nephew the Duke of Dorset. He kept up a 
 third, at his magnificent place of Drayton, in the county 
 of Northampton. His table was admirably served, and 
 his house never wanted a select company of both sexes. 
 Yet his income did not exceed nine or ten thousand pounds 
 a year; and when he went out of office, he made no 
 reduction whatever in his household, nor dismissed a single 
 domestic. With him may justly be said to have become 
 eclipsed the name of Sackville, as a parliamentary beacon. 
 Though Minden and America exposed him to popular 
 clamour, yet posterity, I am persuaded, viewing him 
 dispassionately, will rank him among the most eminent 
 persons who performed a part on the great theatre of 
 public life during the reigns of George II. and of his 
 present Majesty." — WraxalVs Memoirs^ i. 418. 
 
 Having thus pursued Lord Sackville through life, 
 and laid before the reader the proofs that have been 
 adduced to render his " name immortal," by identifying 
 it with that of Junius, it only remains to answer the 
 objections which have been arrayed against this over- 
 whelming mass of evidence. 
 
 " To all arguments which may be suggested in favour 
 of Lord George," says Mr. Butler, " the Author of the 
 ingenious Essay prefixed to Woodfall's edition of the 
 
348 VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 
 
 Letters of Junius objects an expression in a political 
 squib attributed to Junius, in which he alludes to the 
 supposed tergiversation of Lord George at the battle of 
 Minden.* This may be thought a strong, but it evidently 
 is not a decisive argument, particularly if we suppose, 
 what certainly is not impossible, that Lord George had, 
 on this subject, all the pride of conscious innocence. It 
 must also be observed, that it is by conjecture only that 
 the jeu d^ esprit f in which this expression is found, is 
 imputed to Junius/' 
 
 Mr. Butler having answered the only objection urged 
 by Dr. Good against the claims of Lord Sackville, we 
 think it will not be difficult to give answers equally 
 satisfactory to the objections of Mr. Butler himself. He 
 proceeds thus: *'To the reminiscent it appears more 
 difficult to reconcile Lord George's authorship of Junius 
 with that writer's advances to Mr. Wilkes, or his intro- 
 mission of himself into city politics, or the importance 
 which he appears to have attached to them. The high 
 aristocracy of the whigs was, at that time, just beginning 
 to thaw ; but the reminiscent recollects that Lord George 
 was considered as eminently aristocratic — it is difficult to 
 think he would have run, as Junius did, into the city, 
 or considered it to be of the importance which Junius 
 thought it, that one man or another should be the Lord 
 Mayor."— i^M^Zer's Remin. i. 102. 
 
 As facts are always more to be relied on than hypo- 
 thesis, the best answer that can be given to Lord George's 
 supposed aristocratic contempt for aldermen, and in- 
 diffisrence about lord mayors, is, that his Lordship was 
 well known to have been the intimate friend of Alderman 
 • See p. 239. 
 
VICOUNT SACKVILLE. 349 
 
 Sawhridge^ and that Juniiis's first advance to Mr. Wilkes 
 was made for the express purpose of obtaining the civic 
 chair for Alderman Sawbridge, before the usual and 
 regular period, and this Junius well knew could not 
 possibly be accomplished without the co-operation of Mr. 
 Wilkes, whose influence at that time was paramount in 
 the city.* Besides, the aldermen of that day were a 
 very different race from their successors of the present 
 time. Aldermen Townshend, Oliver, and Sawbridge, 
 whose talents and political conduct are mentioned with 
 respect and approbation by Junius, were all gentlemen 
 of fortune and education, little connected with trade. 
 Alderman Wilkes was for many years the friend and 
 confident of Earl Temple, and we doubt whether even 
 the " eminently aristocratic " Lord George Sackville 
 would have considered it any degradation to associate 
 with any of the gentlemen above mentioned. 
 
 Mr. Butler likewise puts the following queries : — 
 " Having written as Junius had done, would Lord 
 North have recommended him to the King? Could tlie 
 King have accepted Junius for his minister ?" Now we 
 feel much inclined to answer these objections according 
 to the improved system of transatlantic logic, by asking 
 a few other questions. What proof is there that either 
 Lord North, or the King, knew or suspected that Lord 
 George was the Author of Junius? And is not the 
 negative sufficiently proved by the fact of the secret never 
 having been divulged? Does not Mr. Butler himself 
 
 * This influence is expressly acknowledged by Junius, in a 
 private letter to Woodfall, in which he says, " If I saw any pro- 
 spect of uniting the city once more, I would readily continue to 
 labour in the vineyard. Whenever Mr. Wilkes can tell me that 
 such an union is in prospect, he shall hear of me." 
 
350 VISCOUNT SACKVILLE, 
 
 answer his own objections, when he tells iiss "It was 
 also mentioned to us from very good authority, that Lord 
 North had declared that government had traced the 
 porterage of the Letters to an obscure person in Staples 
 Inn, hut could never trace them farther. ^^ 
 
 The question however seems to be set at rest by 
 Mr. Barker (p. 67), who says: "The Duke of Sussex 
 informed me, through his surgeon and librarian, and 
 my excellent friend Mr. Pettigrew, that in the last con- 
 versation which His Royal Highness held with his 
 mother, the late Queen Charlotte, she assured him that 
 George the Third did not Jcnow who wrote the Letters 
 of Junius.'^ 
 
 Among the objections to the claims of Lord Sackville, 
 we have to notice, "A Letter to an honorable Brigadier- 
 General, Commander-in-Chief of His Majesty^ s Forces in 
 Canada^^ which was first published in 1760, seven years 
 previously to the first letter bearing the signature of 
 Junius, and attacks, in the bitterest terms, the conduct 
 of General, afterwards Lord, Townshend, in Canada, and 
 episodically that of Lord George Sackville at Minden, 
 and on his court-martial. 
 
 This letter was re-published in 1841, by Mr. R. W. 
 Simons of the British Museum, for which he offers the 
 following reason : — " Some months since, in the perform- 
 ance of his duties in the library of the British Museum, 
 the writer met with a pamphlet, which, in his judgment, 
 bore a close resemblance to the style and composition of 
 Junius. It was referred as well to some friends, as to 
 other gentlemen of impartiality and judgment; and the 
 unhesitating opinion of all being, that the pamphlet and 
 the Letters of Junius were by the same hand, it is now 
 submitted to the public." 
 
VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 351 
 
 Mr. Simons also gives several quotations selected from 
 the Letter, and from Junius, and contends that a peculiar 
 resemblance will be observed between them, which he 
 very justly remarks, from the early date of the former, 
 derives an importance that cannot, for a contrary reason, 
 be ascribed to similar coincidences in the works of Sir 
 Philip Francis, and other writers; as the one can by no 
 possibility, but the latter may with great probability, be 
 considered an imitation. Here it will be observed, that 
 it is from the similarity of style alone, Mr. Simons con- 
 cludes the letter to be the composition of Junius, and as 
 the letter itself is anonymous, this hypothesis (if correct) 
 would not tend to throw the least light on the real author 
 of Junius, though it would negative the claim of Lord 
 Sackville, who certainly would not, as Mr. Simons 
 observes, even to conceal the authorship or for any other 
 purpose, have satirised, traduced, and stigmatised himself. 
 But after a careful perusal of the " parallel passages " 
 from the Letter and Junius given by Mr. Simons, we 
 cannot concur with him and his friends in opinion, that 
 they were written by the same hand, as the evidence 
 appears quite insufficient to establish the fact. 
 
 The principal objection, however, to the claims of Lord 
 George Sackville, is thus stated by Mr. Butler: 
 
 " It is also observable, that there is nothing in the 
 speech which Lord George Sackville made in his defence 
 before the Court-martial, by whom he was tried, that has 
 the slightest appearance of the style of Junius; the same 
 observation, on the difference between the Letters and his 
 Lordship's general style of oratory, was made during the 
 debates which followed his Lordship's coming into office, 
 by the reminiscent, and by several with whom he then 
 
352 VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 
 
 associated. The Aimiial Register for 1759 and 1760, 
 contains some letters from his Lordship: in these, nothing 
 of the mind, or style, of Junius is discoverable. 
 
 This objection, it will be observed, is grounded on the 
 dissimilarity of style; as the principal argument in favour 
 of Sir Philip Francis's claim, is on the similarity of style 
 to the Letters of Junius, — but we think the conclu- 
 sions drawn from both hypotheses are fallacious, and of 
 little weight. 
 
 The eminent abilities of Lord Sackville seem to have 
 been universally appreciated and acknowledged by his 
 contemporaries ; and will not, we apprehend, be disputed 
 at the present day, after the testimony given on the point 
 by Lord Chatham, Lord Orford, Sir Nathaniel Wraxall, 
 Sir Egerton Brydges, and Mr. Richard Cumberland, 
 who were all competent judges of the subject: but, if any 
 further proof be required, we have the additional evidence 
 of Dr. Good, who says: ''The talents of Lord George 
 Sackville were well known and admitted, and his political 
 principles led him to the same side of the question that 
 was so warmly espoused by Junius." 
 
 Let us, however, examine Mr. Butler's objections a 
 little more minutely. The first is, that Lord George's 
 defence on his trial is quite unlike the style of Junius : but 
 this defence cannot be taken into consideration in deciding 
 the question, for we are assured by Mr. Cumberland, 
 that it is the composition of Dr. Shebbeare, who received 
 lOOOZ. for his pains. Mr. Butler next objects to his 
 Lordship's general style of oratory, being dissimilar to the 
 Letters of Junius : but surely this is not a fair test to 
 apply to the case, for the mental training, if not the talents, 
 requisite for speaking and writing well, are so dissimilar, 
 
VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 353 
 
 that no inference can be drawn from a person excelling 
 in the one, of what he may be capable of performing in 
 regard to the other. Both Addison and Gibbon, it must 
 be remembered, were silent senators, and that such of 
 Burke^s speeches as were revised by himself previous to 
 publication, were so improved by the operation as scarcely 
 to be recognised by those who had heard their delivery. 
 And who can discover any traces of the energetic and 
 impassioned eloquence of Lord Chatham in his written 
 compositions? 
 
 The only writings of Lord Sackville's extant, are there- 
 fore reduced to a few letters ; and one or two pamphlets, 
 which appeared with his name prefixed just before his 
 trial; and as his Lordship's defence on the trial is now 
 known to have been composed by Dr. Shebbeare, it is 
 highly probable that the pamphlets published about the 
 same time, and on the same subject, proceeded from the 
 same pen ; and if so, the genuine compositions of Lord 
 Sackville left for comparison with the Letters of Junius 
 are reduced to almost nothing, for the Duke of Dorset 
 informed Mr. Coventry it was out of his power to render 
 him assistance, not having any of his father s letters in his 
 possession. 
 
 Even admitting the whole of what Mr. Butler has stated 
 to be true, we beg leave to suggest, that as Mr. Butler 
 himself arrived at the conclusion that Junius " was not 
 an author by profession, from the visible improvement 
 which, from time to time, was discernible in his style ;" 
 it may fairly be assumed that Lord George Sackville 
 employed the years he passed in retirement and solitude 
 after his disgrace, in the successful study of composition, 
 
354 VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 
 
 and in amassing those stores of constitutional and general 
 knowledge which the Letters of Junius exhibit. 
 
 If it could be shewn that Lord George's style at the 
 time, or subsequently to the appearance of the Letters of 
 Junius, was on ordinary occasions inferior to the latter, 
 we think this would afford no criterion to judge of what 
 he was capable of performing, when writing under the 
 excitement of the most powerful passions of our nature. 
 Perhaps it may be conceded, that notwithstanding the 
 acknowledged abilities and great acquirements of Lord 
 Sackville, it was only when inspired by the demon of 
 revenge that he surpassed himself, and displayed that 
 spirit of malignity, and exerted those almost supernatural 
 energies against the authors of his disgrace, which are 
 so apparent in the Letters of Junius. As a man under 
 the influence of opium is said to have his faculties 
 sharpened and exalted to an extraordinary degree, and 
 to enjoy ecstatic visions of pleasure and happiness for a 
 brief period, to be inevitably succeeded by the most 
 depressing sensations of horror and despair; so would 
 the tension of mind and high state of excitement expe- 
 rienced by Lord George on a 'particular subject, be fol- 
 lowed by a corresponding state of lassitude and inanition, 
 sufficient to account for the inferiority of his style when 
 writing or speaking on comparatively indifferent subjects. 
 
 The tendency of any strong excitement to impart vigour 
 and energy to the intellectual faculties was not unknown 
 to Dr. Johnson, for upon some person expressing a doubt 
 respecting the authenticity of one of Dr. Dodd's last 
 publications, on account of its superiority to his general 
 style, " Why should you think so?" observed Johnson ; 
 "depend upon it. Sir, when a man knows that he is 
 
VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 365 
 
 to be hanged in a fortnight, it concentrates his mind 
 wonderfully." 
 
 " In one point of view," says Sir Philip Francis's 
 advocate, ** it seems unfortunate that the Letters of 
 Junius were ever written. The improbability that the 
 author would remain concealed or unsuspected, were he 
 frequently to appear before the public, would compel him 
 either to shun composition altogether, or to continue to 
 write anonymously.*' 
 
 Similar sentiments are expressed by Mr. E. H. 
 Barker, who not only acquiesces in Mr. Butler's conclu- 
 sion, that Junius was not an author by profession, but 
 adds, as his own opinion, that '* a writer in the habit of 
 publishing pamphlets or hoohsj either with his name or 
 without it, was not likely to have been the author of 
 Junius, or he would long ago have been discovered as the 
 author." This is certainly a very candid admission on 
 the part of Mr. Barker, inasmuch as it at once demolishes 
 the pretensions of his favourite, Charles Lloyd, who was 
 a prolific pamphleteer, and at the same time advances 
 the claim of Lord Sackville, who stood precisely in the 
 situation which both Mr. Taylor and Mr. Barker conclude 
 Junius must have done to preserve his secret. 
 
 Lord Sackville's autograph appears to have been so 
 extremely scarce when Mr. Woodfall published his 
 edition of Junius, in 1812, that although he has given 
 specimens of the handwriting of Edmund Burke, Gerard 
 Hamilton, and all the principal suspected persons, his 
 book does not contain any autograph of Lord Sackville : 
 this seems so extraordinary an omission, that it can only 
 be accounted for on the supposition, that Mr. Woodfall 
 was unable to procure a specimen. 
 
 aa2 
 
356 VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 
 
 Mr. Coventry was either more diligent or more fortu- 
 nate, for he has given in his work a fac-simile of a long 
 letter written hy Lord George Sackville to his friend 
 Captain Younge, in the year 1745, and taken the trouble 
 to compare particular letters and words in that letter, 
 with similar letters and words taken from the Letters of 
 Junius published by Mr. Woodfall, by placing them in 
 juxta-position to each other; and adds: "Most of the 
 words which I have selected to compare with those of 
 Junius, bear so clear a resemblance, particularly where 
 there is any peculiarity, that the reader will probably 
 be convinced they were written by one and the same 
 person." 
 
 The writer of the present review, has likewise in his 
 possession the fragment of a letter, signed " Sackville," 
 without date, but probably written after his Lordship was 
 called to the House of Peers ; and upon comparing this 
 with the specimens of Junius's autographs, particularly 
 No. 6, in Woodfall's second volume, there appears a very 
 striking similarity between them. 
 
 In conclusion, it may be observed, that although the 
 author of the Letters of Junius is not to be discovered 
 either by the similarity of style alone, or even when that is 
 united with a supposed identity of handwriting, because it 
 has been shewn that both these striking characteristics 
 may be fallacious, yet we confidently submit that, having 
 proved Lord Sackville possessed all the characteristics 
 of Junius mentioned by Mr. Butler and Dr. Good, and 
 enumerated in our first chapter, his identity with the 
 author of the Letters of Junius has been satisfactorily 
 established. True it is, that some of the other claimants 
 have made good their pretensions to one or more of these 
 
VISCOUNT SACKVILLE. 357 
 
 characteristics; but no person, except Lord Sackville, has 
 been proved to possess the whole; and Dr. Good has 
 emphatically declared, that " the claimant who cannot 
 produce them conjointly, is in vain brought forwards 
 as the author of the Letters of Junius," 
 
 " if this fail, 
 
 The pillar'd firmament is rottenness, 
 And earth's base built on stubble." 
 
THE CLAIMS OF 
 
 SIR PHILIP FRANCIS 
 
 AND 
 
 LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE 
 
 COMPARED. 
 
 Look here ! upon this picture ! and upon this 
 
 The coiuiterfeit. 
 
 Hamlet. 
 
 Zounds! I am afraid of this gunpowder Percy, 
 
 though he be dead. How if he should counterfeit too, and 
 rise ? I am afraid he would prove the better counterfeit. 
 
 Fulstaff, 
 
CHAPTER XIII. 
 
 Remarks on the present state of the controversy. — The different 
 bearings of the objections to each claim pointed out. — The 
 internal evidence afforded by the letters of " Veteran " 
 particularly examined. — The probabilities of the whole case 
 shewn to be against the claim of Sir Philip Francis, and in 
 favour of Lord George Sackville. — The evidence adduced in 
 support of each claimant, shortly stated and compared. — 
 Mr. Butler's summing up of the evidence. — Conclusion that 
 Lord George Sackville was Junius, and Sir Philip Francis 
 his amanuensis. — This hypothesis shewn to reconcile all 
 apparent contradictions, and clear up all difficulties. — The 
 progress of public opinion respecting the claim of Lord 
 George Sackville stated. — Character of Junius as a man and 
 an author. 
 
THE CLAIMS OF 
 
 SIR PHILIP FRANCIS 
 
 AND 
 
 LORD GEORGE SACKVILLE 
 
 COMPARED, 
 
 The scales are equally poised. It is not the printer's fault, if 
 the greater weight inclines the balance. 
 
 Junius. 
 
 If the reader be not convinced that Junius has been 
 identified, by what we have already advanced, he may 
 at least rest satisfied that every suspected individual has 
 been fairly hunted down, and that another name cannot 
 be mentioned at the present day, to which a shade of 
 suspicion is attached. 
 
 When Ford, instigated by Uhe green-eyed monster,' 
 commenced his search forFalstaff, he declared that "lest 
 the devil that guides him should aid him, I will search 
 impossible places." A chase equally keen has now been 
 in progress for seventy years after Junius, and can we 
 suppose that the pursuit of such accomplished literary 
 sportsmen as Messrs. Wilkes, Butler, Coventry, and 
 Barker ; and Doctors Good, Parr, and Waterhouse, have 
 been wholly unsuccessful and fruitless ? This we cannot 
 credit — on the contrary, we believe that they have 
 all, by their labours, more or less assisted in tracking 
 
362 THE CLAIMS OF SIR P. FRANCIS 
 
 the great Boar of the forest to his lair ; and in conclu- 
 sion, we shall endeavour to make this clear, by shortly 
 recapitulating the evidence, and comparing the proofs 
 adduced on behalf of Sir Philip Francis and Lord George 
 Sackville (the two favourite Candidates) with each other, 
 and inquiring how far they respectively agree with the 
 requisite characteristics of Junius. 
 
 But before entering on this task we have to remark, 
 that whenever several competitors are found all eagerly 
 contending for some honorary distinction, and each 
 admitting, that with the exception of himself, one parti- 
 cular candidate is clearly entitled to the prize, we may be 
 pretty sure that the individual to whom all his compeers 
 unanimously award the second place, is in reality entitled 
 to the first. Such is the position in which Lord George 
 Sackville stands with regard to this controversy ; for not 
 only the investigators, but even the advocates, of the other 
 claimants, either directly or indirectly, expressly or by 
 implication, award to him, at least the second place. 
 
 Before the subject was much canvassed. Dr. Good 
 could not help remarking upon the private note respect- 
 ing Swinney, that: "Such letter was in fact one of the 
 most curious in the whole collection, and if written by 
 Lord George Sackville, settled the point of the author- 
 ship at once." And Mr. Butler says : " Supposing the 
 evidence in favour of Lord George Sackville to rest 
 entirely upon the circumstances which have been men- 
 tioned, it must be pronounced to be defective. On this 
 supposition, however, it might have been observed that 
 the evidence in his favour was stronger than the evidence 
 in favour of any other person." 
 
 In the course of Mr. Barker's argument on behalf of 
 
AND LORD G. SACKVILLE COMPARED. 363 
 
 Lloyd, he remarks, "Many intelligent persons are in- 
 clined to suspect that Lord George Sackville was the 
 writer of Junius. I by no means concur in that opinion. 
 But though he were not Junius, he might nevertheless, 
 directly or indirectly, consciously or unconsciously, inten- 
 tionally or accidentally, furnish Junius with information 
 about military matters, and who will undertake to say that 
 he did not V And Mr. Taylor, the champion of Sir Philip 
 Francis, makes several similar admissions, as we shall 
 presently shew. The Quarterly Review (xiii. 207), like- 
 wise contains the following remarkable passage, in a 
 critique on Wraxall's Historical Memoirs : — 
 
 " On the subject of Junius, Sir Nathaniel informs us, 
 that the King knew who the author was — that he. Sir 
 Nathaniel, believes that Gerard Hamilton was ; and that 
 he is confident that Lord Sackville was not. Now let us 
 say here, en passant, that we have good reason to believe 
 that the King did not know, and of course did not affect 
 to know Junius, — that Gerard Hamilton's claims are 
 very slight 5 and that of all the claimants, we are decidedly 
 of opinion that there is the greatest mass of evidence 
 against Lord Sackville — we say against, because un- 
 doubtedly his Lordship would lose more in moral cha- 
 racter than he would gain in literary and political 
 reputation from being proved to have written Junius. 
 But it is amusing, though in Sir Nathaniel's work not 
 singular, that his reasoning on this subject leads to con- 
 clusions exactly the reverse of those at which he arrives. 
 For example — he thought, at first, that ' Junius's death, 
 whenever it took place, would infallibly remove the veil 
 which conceals his name. On more mature reflection, 
 nevertheless, very strong causes for continuing to preserve 
 
864 THE CLAIMS OF SIR P. FRANCIS 
 
 his incognito beyond the grave, may present themselves. 
 If he left behind him lineal representatives, he might dread 
 exposing them to the hereditary animosity of some of 
 the vrorst and most powerful men of this country. Even 
 should he have left no descendants, it is possible that he 
 might dislike the comparison between his actions and 
 his writings, which must have been made by mankind. 
 If, for instance, it would have been proved that he 
 accepted an office, a pension, or a peerage, from the 
 Sovereign and the Minister whom he had recently accused 
 as enemies to their country, or as having betrayed its 
 interests; would not the moral aversion or contempt 
 excited towards his memory by such a disclosure, have 
 overbalanced the meed of literary fame obtained from the 
 labours of his pen?' Now not one of these considerations 
 (and we admit to Sir Nathaniel that they are all very 
 forcible) occurs in the case of Mr. Hamilton, and every 
 one of them suit in a remarkable manner that of Lord Sack- 
 ville. If more than one person was concerned, Hamilton 
 may have assisted ; but that his Lordship was, if not the 
 author, at least the informer and instigator of Junius, we 
 have a very confident^ and, we think, well grounded belief; 
 but on this interesting subject, we may say something 
 on a future and more appropriate occasion." 
 
 It is also important to bear in mind, that the objections 
 to the claim of Sir Philip constitute, in almost every 
 instance, arguments in favour of the pretensions of Lord 
 Sackville: although the contrary facts and reasons urged 
 in proof of the pretensions of Sir Philip Francis do not 
 interfere in any way with those in favour of Lord Sack- 
 ville. For instance, the fact that Junius appears to have 
 been a member of the House of Commons, and the pro- 
 
AND LORD G. SACKVILLE COMPARED. 365 
 
 bability that he was a person of mature age, and expe- 
 rience, which are very powerful objections against the 
 title of Sir Philip, constitute arguments of weight in 
 favour of the pretensions of Lord Sackville. But the 
 presumption arising from the personal interest which 
 Junius exhibited on occasion of the discharge of Mr. 
 D'Oyly and Mr. Francis from the War Office, in favour 
 of Sir Philip's claim, apply with equal force to the pre- 
 tensions of Lord Sackville, since it is certain, that he 
 entertained a personal friendship for Mr, D'Oyly; and as 
 this is one of the strongest arguments urged by Sir 
 Philip's advocate in his favour, we will examine its 
 validity and force rather more minutely. 
 
 Great stress is laid on the evident connexion between 
 Junius and the War Office, founded upon the official 
 information disclosed in the Letters signed 'Veteran,' 
 to prove that these Letters must have been written by Sir 
 Philip, (it being admitted that the author of the Letters 
 of Junius also wrote those signed 'Veteran'); and yet, 
 Mr. Taylor acknowledges that the internal evidence 
 afforded by these letters, which relate almost exclusively 
 to the dismission of Mr. D'Oyly by Lord Barrington, 
 and the appointment of Mr. Chamier in his place, as 
 deputy- secretary, point strongly to Lord Sackville as 
 their author, and to escape from the difficulty, he is 
 obliged to assume that a deception was practised by Mr. 
 Francis to divert the attention of Lord Barrington from 
 himself, for he says: — "All the letters upon Chamier's 
 appointment were under the name of Veteran, perhaps to 
 insinuate that they proceeded from the pen of Lord George 
 Germain.'^ But it is obvious that such a ruse de guerre 
 could answer no useful purpose, for if Lord Barrington 
 
366 THE CLAIMS OF SIR P. FRANCIS 
 
 knew that the facts stated in these letters were confi- 
 dential and official secrets, he must have been equally 
 aware that the writer, whoever he might be, could only 
 have derived his information from some faithless clerk. 
 And the result proves that Lord Barrington was not 
 misled by such supposed deception; for finding the 
 secrets of his office still divulged, notwithstanding the 
 dismissal of Mr. D'Oyly, he discharged Mr. Francis 
 also; and Veteran, in his fourth and last letter, addressed 
 to the printer of the P. A., on the 23d of March 1772, 
 says: — "I desire you will inform the public that the 
 worthy Lord Barrington, not contented with having 
 driven Mr. D'Oyly out of the War Office, has at last 
 contrived to expel Mr. Francis." '' He speaks," says 
 Sir Philip Francis's advocate, " of Mr. Francis and his 
 friend Mr. D'Oyly, in terms of unqualified approbation. 
 His friendship is no less conspicuous than his enmity, 
 nor less indicative of the writer; they are described as 
 men, who do their duty with credit and ability. And, 
 therefore, are not proper instruments for Barrington to 
 work with. He must have a broker from Change-alley 
 for his deputy, and some raw, ignorant boy for his first 
 clerk. I think the public have a right to call upon 
 Mr. D'Oyly and Mr. Francis to declare their reasons 
 for quitting the War Office. Men of their unblemished 
 characters do not resign lucrative employments without 
 some sufficient reasons. The conduct of these gentlemen 
 has always been approved of and I know that they stand 
 as well in the esteem of the army, as any persons in their 
 stations ever did. What signifies abilities, or integrity, 
 or practice, or experience in business? Lord Barrington 
 feels himself uneasy while men with such qualifications 
 
AND LORD G. SACKVILLE COMPARED. 367 
 
 are about him." Again : — *' I wish that Mr. Francis and 
 Mr. D'Oyly would give the public some account of what 
 is going forward at the War Office. I think these 
 events so remarkable, that some notice ought to be taken 
 of them in the House of Commons." 
 
 The fulsome praise lavished on Mr. Francis in this 
 letter is strong presumptive evidence that he was not the 
 writer, for the dignified Junius assures us that even 
 Philo- Junius "is never guilty of the indecorum of praising 
 his principal." 
 
 It appears then, that Veteran commenced his attack 
 upon Lord Barrington in consequence of the dismission 
 of Mr. U Oyly from the War Office, and the appointment 
 of Mr. Chamier in his place, and that Mr. Francis's 
 dismission did not take place till about the time that 
 Veteran wrote his last letter, before which period there 
 is no evidence that Mr. Francis had any cause of com- 
 plaint against his Lordship, and even in Veteran's last 
 letter we never find Mr. Francis mentioned, except in 
 conjunction with Mr, UOyly. The facts and circum- 
 stances contained in the letters of Veteran, certainly 
 shew that the writer must have derived his information 
 from some person in possession of the secrets of Lord 
 Barrington's office; but it ife quite clear that Mr. D'Oyly 
 was equally competent with Mr. Francis to have furnished 
 Lord Germain with such information, and when we 
 afterwards find the same Mr. D^Oyly living in Lord Sack- 
 ville's house, and acting as his private and confidential 
 secretary, need we look farther for the source of his infor- 
 mation. Or, if we suppose that both Mr. D'Oyly and 
 Mr. Francis betrayed the secrets of their office, can we 
 doubt that they were anything more than mere tools in 
 
368 • THE CLAIMS OF SIR P. FRANCIS 
 
 the hands of "that man of high rank, who moved in the 
 immediate circle of the Court, and was intimately con- 
 nected, either directly or indirectly, with all the public 
 offices of government/* 
 
 If the author of Junius should prove to be Sir Philip 
 Francis, it will certainly stand out as one of the most 
 extraordinary and unaccountable occurrences ever known, 
 " that he, a mere clerk in the War Office" (as Mr. Barker 
 remarks, p. 6), " should have commenced his literary 
 career by a series of papers perfect in their style of com- 
 position; and his political career by professing those 
 high public principles which belong only to the tongues 
 or the pens of men who have been for a series of years 
 running their course of usefulness and of fame. That he 
 should have denounced the conduct of the ministry in the 
 severest terms, with the apparent stile of an experienced 
 rhetorician, the exact knowledge of an able statesman, the 
 lofty tone of an independent spirit, and a Demosthenic 
 vehemence of diction unparalleled in the history of 
 human eloquence. 
 
 " If Sir Philip Francis did in such circumstances write 
 the Letters of Junius, then the history of the world itself 
 has exhibited no similar or second instance of this sort ; 
 the phenomenon cannot be explained by all the philo- 
 sophy of the human mind, and nothing is too little or 
 too great for human credulity." 
 
 If, on the contrary, Junius should prove to be Lord 
 Sackville, we have the instructive history of a man of 
 powerful abilities, but strong passions, burning with 
 indignation on account of his degraded and wounded 
 honour, thirsting for revenge against those whom he 
 considered the authors of his disgrace, plotting the over- 
 
AND LORD G. SACKVILLE COMPARED. 
 
 throw of his enemies, and contriving an intricate plan 
 to raise his own fortunes under the specious garb of 
 patriotism, and working on the loftiest feelings of his 
 countrymen as auxiliaries in the prosecution of his own 
 selfish and ambitious designs. 
 
 Upon examining and comparing the evidence adduced 
 on behalf of each claimant, the balance of testimony- 
 appears to stand as follows : — 
 
 The principal characteristics required by Dr. Good 
 and Mr. Butler to be produced conjointly by the suc- 
 cessful claimant for the honours of Junius, are, that he 
 must be — *'An Englishman of high rank, and of easy 
 if not affluent circumstances. That he moved in the 
 immediate circle of the Court, and was intimately con- 
 nected either directly or indirectly with all the public 
 offices of government. That he was in habits of con- 
 fidential intercourse, if not with different members of 
 the Cabinet, with politicians who were most intimately 
 familiar with the Court, and entrusted with all its 
 secrets. That he was of mature age and experience. 
 That he had a personal animosity against the King, the 
 Dukes of Bedford and Grafton, Lord Mansfield, and 
 others." All these indispensable characteristics are 
 found centred in Lord George Sackville, and not one 
 OF THEM in Sir Philip Francis. 
 
 It is proved that Lord Sackville was the first person 
 suspected of being Junius by those most competent to 
 form a correct judgment on the subject. That all the 
 circumstances and actions of his life, and his behaviour 
 in his last moments, confirm such suspicion. That he was 
 aware of this, and yet was never known to contradict 
 or deny the imputation. That no suspicion attached to 
 
 B B 
 
370 THE CLAIMS OF SIR P. FRANCIS 
 
 Sir Philip Francis until more than fifty years after the 
 first appearance of the Letters, and upon being questioned 
 on the subject he wrote a letter, treating the report as 
 a silly malignant falsehood; and finally, that he died and 
 *' made no sign/' 
 
 That the strongest argument urged in favour of the 
 claim of Sir Philip Francis, founded upon the similarity 
 of style between the Letters of Junius and the writings 
 and speeches of Sir Philip, of dates long posterior to the 
 appearance of the Letters, is shewn to be fallacious. And 
 the objections against the claim of Lord Sackville, arising 
 from his supposed inability to compose the Letters of 
 Junius, have been satisfactorily answered. 
 
 In various passages in the Letters of Junius, it is either 
 expressly asserted, or it may be fairly inferred, that the 
 author was an Englishman. That his rank and fortune 
 placed him above a common bribe. That he was "far 
 above all pecuniary views." That he possessed a per- 
 sonal knowledge of the King, and his domestic habits; 
 that he was a man of mature age and experience; that 
 he was an old reader of controversy, and remembered the 
 Walpolean battles; that he was a member of the House 
 of Commons; that he had seen certain Jesuitical books 
 burnt at Paris ; that he was a soldier, and had served 
 under Lord Townshend, and that his brother Mr. Charles 
 Townshend has repeatedly promised to serve under him. 
 All these numerous and important asseverations are 
 proved to be true, or might be true, if written by Lord 
 Sackville; but on the supposition of their being written 
 by Sir Philip Francis, they are every one, deliberate, 
 voluntary, and unnecessary falsehoods. 
 
 The reiterated assertion of Junius, that he was "an 
 
AND LORD G. SaCKVILLE COMPARED. 371 
 
 Englishman," and the contrary inference drawn by the 
 critics, that he must have been an Irishman, or educated 
 in Ireland, are both found to be consistent with the facts 
 as regards Lord Sackville, who was born in London, 
 and educated in the university of Dublin; whereas the 
 converse of this is true, if applied to Sir Philip Francis, 
 who was born in Dublin, and educated in St. Paul's 
 School, London. 
 
 The profound knowledge displayed by Junius of 
 military aifairs, proves that he must have been an old and 
 experienced soldier; and the contradictory assertion in 
 one of his letters, wherein he says, " I am not a soldier, 
 my lord;" is also shewn to be consistent with the 
 peculiar situation of Lord Sackville, and could scarcely 
 be applicable to any other person. Certainly not to Sir 
 Philip Francis. 
 
 Junius declares that he was not personally acquainted 
 with Mr. George Grenville; but Sir Philip Francis served 
 with him a short time in ofl5ce, and he possessed the 
 personal favour of Lord Egremont, Mr. Grenville's 
 brother-in-law; there is no evidence that Lord Sackville 
 was personally acquainted with Mr. George Grenville. 
 
 Junius shews the most intimate knowledge of the 
 affairs of Sir Jeffery Amherst, and takes the greatest 
 interest in his welfare. He also speaks on all occasions 
 in the highest terms of admiration of the character of 
 Alderman Sawbridge, and opened a private corres- 
 pondence with Mr. Wilkes, for the purpose of getting 
 Sawbridge appointed Lord Mayor, out of the usual 
 rotation. It is proved that Lord Sackville, Sir Jeffery 
 Amherst, and Alderman Sawbridge, were near neigh- 
 bours, having estates contiguous to each other in the 
 
 B b2 
 
372 THE CLAIMS OF SIR P. FRANCIS 
 
 county of Kent, and were intimate private friends. There 
 is no evidence that Sir Philip Francis was acquainted 
 with either Sir Jeffery Amherst or Alderman Sawbridge. 
 
 During the period in which the Letters of Junius 
 appeared, Mr. Francis held an official situation which 
 would necessarily occupy the principal part of his time. 
 That the author of Junius had no such restraint on his 
 leisure is highly probable, from the immense care and 
 labour evidently bestowed on the composition of the 
 Letters, and the rapidity with which they were produced ; 
 and this agrees with the situation of Lord Sackville at 
 that time. 
 
 That Junius, while writing his Letters, " resided 
 almost constantly in LondoUj or its vicinity," is an infer- 
 ence drawn by Mr. Woodfall's editor. One of the letters 
 written by Junius under the signature of *' Arthur Tell- 
 truth," is dated with the words "Pall Mall." Mr. 
 Francis during the same time held an official situation 
 which required constant attendance in London. Lord 
 Sackville was then closely attending his parliamentary 
 duties, and had a town-house in Pall Mall, and a country- 
 house at Richmond, where the King then resided. 
 
 Junius was an advocate for triennial parliaments. He 
 supported the Stamp Act. He was in favour of repealing 
 the duty on tea, as an impolitic act, not an oppressive 
 one. On all these points and many others. Lord Sack- 
 ville agreed with Junius. Junius was opposed to a 
 reform in parliament by cutting away the rotten boroughs. 
 So was Lord Sackville, who represented a borough he 
 had purchased. With respect to Sir Philip Francis, this 
 similarity of political sentiment with Junius is proved 
 to exist in one or two instances, but there are also cases 
 
AND LORD G. SACKVILLE COMPARED. 373 
 
 of marked disagreement; indeed, Sir Philip Francis's 
 political career belongs to another, and later era. 
 
 It is concluded that Junius entertained sentiments 
 of kindness for Woodfall, his printer. Mr. Francis was 
 Woodfall's schoolfellow. Lord Sackville employed him 
 to print a pamphlet many years before the appearance of 
 the Letters of Junius. 
 
 Junius was excessively bitter against the Scotch. A 
 majority of the officers on the court-martial which con- 
 demned Lord Sackville, were Scotchmen. He had also 
 served under the Duke of Cumberland (who is highly 
 commended by Junius), against the friends of the Pre- 
 tender in Scotland, and he expressed the greatest dislike 
 to the country and people; no such antipathy against the 
 Scotch nation was ever shewn by Sir Philip Francis. 
 
 With regard to the remainder of the " characteristics" 
 of Junius, enumerated by Dr. Good, namely, " that he 
 was of a highly cultivated education, deeply versed in the 
 language, the laws, the constitution, and history of his 
 native country'* — there can be no doubt, from the con- 
 curring testimony of his contemporaries, that these 
 characteristics were possessed by Lord Sackville at the 
 time the letters of Junius appeared, — but there is not the 
 slightest evidence that Mr. Francis had any pretensions 
 to them at that timet whatever might be his knowledge 
 thirty years afterwards, which is about the period when 
 the specimens of his compositions were written, that are 
 brought forward to prove his equality with Junius — and 
 such equality at any time is denied by such competent 
 judges as Dr. Parr and Mr. Butler. . 
 
 Lastly, it is proved that the handwritings of Sir 
 Philip Francis and Lord Sackville, both resemble the 
 
374 THE CLAIMS OF SIR P. FRANCIS 
 
 fac-simile specimens of the autographs of the private 
 letters of Junius to Woodfall. It is likewise inferred 
 that Junius was tall of stature, which corresponds with 
 the personal description both of Sir Philip Francis and 
 Lord Sackville. 
 
 We shall now present the reader with Mr. Butler's 
 remarks upon the evidence produced on behalf of both 
 parties; and although the learned gentleman, following 
 the example of all cautious and impartial judges, gives no 
 decisive opinion of his own upon the merits of the case, he 
 nevertheless takes care to place the principal facts in such 
 lucid order, and comments in so pertinent and masterly a 
 manner on the most material points of the evidence, as 
 cannot fail to lead an intelligent jury to a correct conclu- 
 sion, and enable them to pronounce a just verdict between 
 the parties : — 
 
 " Such, in our opinion," says Mr. Butler, "is the state 
 of the question : all external evidence is in favour of Sir 
 Philip Francis; all internal evidence is against him. Thus 
 the argument on one side neutralizes the argument on the 
 other; and the pretensions of Sir Philip Francis vanish. 
 
 " A third hypothesis is therefore necessary : the con- 
 clusion to which it should lead, ought to be such as is 
 consistent with the evidence on each side, and restores 
 to each its individual activity. Now this is done — and 
 perhaps can only be done — by supposing that Sir Philip 
 was not Junius, but the amanuensis of Junius; that the 
 real Junius was too high to be bought, so that when he 
 made his terms with government, he was contented to 
 remain in a proud obscurity; but stipulated a boon for 
 his scribe ; and was of consequence enough to insist that 
 the boon should be liberal. Now several passages in 
 
AND LORD G. SACKVILLE COMPARED, 375 
 
 Junius's Letters seem to shew that he employed an aman- 
 uensis. In a note to Woodfall, he says, ' You shall have 
 the letter some time to-morrow. It cannot be corrected 
 and copied sooner/ In another he says, ' The enclosed, 
 though begun within these few days, has been greatly 
 laboured. It is very correctly copied.' In another, he 
 mentions, ' the gentleman who transacts the conveyancing 
 part of their correspondence;' and who told him 'there 
 was much difficulty last night/ That gentleman, there- 
 fore, must have known, that a mysterious something 
 attended those letters. Mr. Jackson's testimony, as 
 reported by Woodfall, is, that 'this gentleman wore a 
 bag and sword.' If the recollection of the writer, that 
 Junius's letter to the King is in a handwriting different 
 from the handwriting of the other letters, be accurate, 
 the evidence for an amanuensis is certainly very strong. 
 
 " If the copies, to which Junius refers, were made, not 
 by himself, but, which is certainly most probable, by 
 some other person, it follows incontrovertibly, that Sir 
 Philip Francis and Junius were different persons. 
 
 *' We do not, however, say that Sir Philip was a mere 
 copyist : he may occasionally have conveyed useful infor- 
 mation, and suggested useful hints to his principal, so 
 that, to a certain extent, he might, without impropriety, 
 be said to have been his collaborator. 
 
 " To this hypothesis the Reminiscent begs leave to say 
 that he inclines. It includes all the data required by him 
 for the author of Junius; it equally admits the arguments 
 in favour of Sir Philip Francis, from external, and the 
 arguments against him, from internal, evidence; and 
 reconciles and gives activity to each. 
 
 "Junius, in his dedication, prefixed to his own edition of 
 
376 THE CLAIMS OF SIR P. FRANCIS 
 
 his Letters, declares, that * he was the sole depository of 
 his own secret.' This seems not to be easily reconcile- 
 able with what he says in one of his letters to Woodfall 
 — ^ The truth is, that there are 'people about me, whom I 
 would wish not to contradict, and who had rather see 
 Junius in the papers ever so improperly than not at all.' 
 This sounds like the language of a partisan, who felt 
 both his talents and his chains : and it may be thought 
 a confirmation, though slight, of the Reminiscent^s 
 hypothesis. 
 
 " All we know with certainty of Junius, is to be col- 
 lected from one of his private letters to Woodfall : • That 
 Swinney is a wretched, dangerous fool : he had the im- 
 pudence to go to Lord Sackville, whom he had never 
 before spoken to, and to ask him whether or no he was 
 the author of Junius.' 
 
 " These few words disclose several facts : — that Junius 
 knew Swinney — knew his character — knew that Swinney 
 had called on Lord George Sackville — knew that Swinney 
 had never called on him before — and knew of the inter- 
 view very soon after it took place. From this it may 
 be argued that Junius was intimate with Lord George 
 Sackville; it has even been inferred that he was Lord 
 George Sackville himself. 
 
 "The Reminiscent well remembers that his Lordship 
 was the person to whom the Letters were first attributed ; 
 and that his Lordship had the reputation of possessing 
 literary talents and habits. It is known that Sir William 
 Draper at first divided his suspicions of the authorship 
 of Junius, between Burke and Lord George; and on 
 Burke's unequivocal denial of it, transferred them to his 
 Lordship. 
 
AND LORD O. SACKVILEB COMPARED. 377 
 
 " There certainly was an event in his Lordship's life, 
 which would sour him against mankind, and fill his 
 soul with bitter hatred against the king in whose reign it 
 happened, and his immediate successor on the throne ; 
 against Lord Mansfield, their secret and confidential 
 adviser in all state prosecutions; and against the Duke 
 of Grafton, the brother of Lord Southampton, a strong 
 witness against Lord George on the court-martial which 
 was held upon him. Something or other might easily 
 have occurred, which would have extended this hatred 
 to the Duke of Bedford. 
 
 " The event, to which we have referred, would render 
 concealment necessary ; and after Lord George had taken 
 an office in Lord North's administration, and accepted a 
 peerage from the king, it must, if he had any feelings of 
 honour, have made him desire that his authorship of the 
 Letters of Junius, if he were the author of them, should 
 be buried in eternal oblivion. 
 
 " Junius, in many parts of his Letters, seems to intimate 
 his having a personal knowledge of the late king. ' I 
 know that man better than you,' he says of the king, 
 in one of his letters to Mr. Home. To this personal 
 knowledge of the king, the high birth of Lord George, 
 and the habits of his family about the court, entitled him : 
 but this personal knowledge of the king cannot be claimed 
 for any other person to whom the Letters of Junius have been 
 ascribed. The rank and character of Lord George Sack- 
 ville account also for his knowledge of some very obscure 
 transactions of government, and some private events in 
 the Duke of Bedford's family. It may be added, that 
 Junius ceased to write in May 1772; that, soon afterwards, 
 Lord George made his second appearance in the public 
 
S78 THE CLAIMS OF SIR P. FRANCIS 
 
 world in the debates on East India affairs, and that in 
 1775, he was appointed one of his Majesty's principal 
 secretaries of state. Allowing for the time which it 
 must necessarily take to bring into public office a man 
 so apparently undone in public opinion, it is not contrary 
 to probability, that the pour parler for his restoration to 
 favour began about the time at which Junius ceased to 
 write.'' — Butler's Reminiscences, i. 100. 
 
 This statement appears satisfactory, and when taken 
 in connexion with the review of the whole controversy, 
 will, we submit, warrant the conclusion that Lord George 
 Sackville was Junius, and Sir Philip Francis his con- 
 fidant and amanuensis ; for Mr. Butler, in his last letter 
 to Mr. Barker on the subject of Junius, dated June 14th, 
 1828, remarks, *' that there was some connexion between 
 Junius and Sir Philip appears to me sufficiently proved 
 by Mr. Taylor's publication." 
 
 On this hypothesis, therefore, and no other, can all the 
 apparent contradictions be reconciled, complete justice be 
 rendered to both parties, and the case cleared from those 
 doubts and difficulties, in which it otherwise seemed to 
 be inextricably involved; and among others, it will solve 
 the only remaining difficulty not hitherto noticed, which 
 is thus stated by Mr. Butler: 
 
 " Can it be supposed that Lord George Sackville 
 could have informed Woodfall, that ' his Veridicus was 
 Mr. Whitworth, his Lycurgus, a Mr. Kent, a young 
 man of good parts upon the town.' In fact, one of the 
 greatest difficulties in fixing upon any one person the 
 character of Junius, is to find one who like him, was 
 at once well acquainted with the circle of the court, with 
 city conflicts, with the public offices of government, and 
 
AND LORD G. SACKVILLE COMPARED. 379 
 
 with the character and habits, both of the leaders of the 
 parties and their runners." 
 
 The conflicting claims of Lord George Sackville and 
 Sir Philip Francis seem so irreconcilable on any other 
 hypothesis than the one suggested by Mr. Butler, that 
 Mr. Barker insists that the evidences adduced in support 
 of their claims neutralize and destroy each other; but we 
 have endeavoured to prove that the facts brought forward 
 on both sides are not only consistent with, but mutually 
 support, the share assigned to each party in the production 
 of the Letters of Junius : that the difficulties in any other 
 view of the case are neither few nor unimportant, appears 
 from the following extract from Mr. Barker's work (p. 2) : 
 
 " Mr. Taylor has adduced a multitude of facts, incidents, 
 circumstances, and arguments, to identify Sir Philip 
 Francis with Junius : he supposes himself to have suc- 
 ceeded in his object. Mr. Coventry is equally confident 
 of having successfully identified Lord George Sackville 
 with Junius, and he has produced a work of equal mag- 
 nitude. Well then, if so many apparently striking proofs 
 support the claims made for the knight, as well as for 
 the nobleman, we may learn the great caution which is 
 necessary to be observed in pursuing the subject, if we 
 hope to arrive at any right conclusion. And I draw 
 a most important inference from the fact of these con- 
 flicting proofs of authorship, viz : that the claims in a 
 great degree neutralize each other; for he who on strong 
 grounds contends for Sir Philip Francis's authorship, 
 is on strong grounds opposed by him who pleads for the 
 authorship of Lord George Sackville ; then it proves that 
 such grounds of argument in favour of the one may be 
 entitled to no great weight, because similar grounds are 
 
380 THE CLAIMS OF SIR P. FRANCIS 
 
 taken in favour of the other, and our confidence in 
 either body of arguments is weakened or destroyed. For 
 instance, if Sir Philip Francis, in penmanship, write like 
 Junius, so does Lord George Sackville. But Junius 
 was not a duality j like the German deity Aids, mentioned 
 by Tacitus; if he was Sir Philip, he was not Lord George. 
 Then similarity of handwriting is a fallacious criterion 
 for tracing the authorship of Junius. Then in discussing 
 the question between the knight and the nobleman, we 
 must strike out of the account all the arguments common to 
 eachy and judge by the number and the weight of those 
 peculiar to each. On this plan we shall bring the con- 
 troversy to a narrow point, and proceed on safer prin- 
 ciples. But no man has yet made the attempt to act on 
 this plan; and can we then wonder that the controversy 
 still continues?" 
 
 Mr. Barker appears to have supposed that Junius was 
 **the sole depository of his own secret," and had neither 
 confidant nor amanuensis, and finding the/<2c^5 of the case 
 opposed to this hypothesis, he somewhat rashly threw 
 overboard all the evidence which is applicable both to 
 the claim of Lord Sackville and Sir Philip. But if he 
 had investigated the subject a little deeper, he would have 
 discovered a state of affairs to which the whole of the 
 evidence might have been applied, without any strain- 
 ing or violence, and thus have been led to the adoption 
 of Mr. Butler's hypothesis. 
 
 The question, whether Sir Philip was the amanuensis 
 of Junius, Mr. Barker declined discussing, but acknow- 
 ledges (p. 34) that: — 
 
 "If he was employed as the amanuensis of Junius, 
 or as the transcriber of his papers, the employment, 
 
AND LORD G. SACKVILLE COMPARED. 381 
 
 continued for so long a period, would, by the mere force 
 of imitation, give to him severe habits of thinking, close 
 powers of reasoning, a great turn for sarcasm and invec- 
 tive, a facility of expression, a readiness at composition, 
 a pointed and impassioned and polished style— his mind 
 would gradually rise above the little world of official 
 knowledge — borne on a bolder wing, he would take a 
 loftier flight — he could not fail in his assent to imbibe 
 a portion of the ether by which he was surrounded, and 
 in approximating the sun to reflect some of the glory by 
 which he was irradiated — the expressions, the thoughts, 
 and the sentiments of Junius would be familiarised to his 
 mind— the mannerism of that original writer would be 
 his object of imitation — he could propose to his aspiring 
 ambition no nobler model of excellence — he could find 
 within the recesses of his bosom no graver authority to 
 direct and support his opinions — by that high altar he 
 would vow eternal patriotism — to that great demi-god 
 he would pay his secret adoration — inspired by his 
 presence, and protected by his arm, he would fearlessly 
 pursue his career of usefulness and of fame, exulting 
 in his strength, and rejoicing to be deemed by the 
 sagacious an emanation of that divine intelligence, and 
 careless of being mistaken by the vulgar for the intel- 
 ligence itself. On this principle, then, we can fully 
 account for the vigorous style and the powerful mind of 
 Sir Philip, without supposing him to be Junius." 
 
 On the other hand, it may be observed, that supposing 
 Junius to have submitted the revision of his Letters to his 
 amanuensis, they would probably be^ improved in point 
 of accuracy of style, and purged from some of those 
 grammatical errors and minor blemishes which generally 
 
382 THE CLAIMS OF SIR P. FRANCIS 
 
 disfigure the compositions of an unpractised writer, and 
 from wliich it is admitted that the Letters of Junius are 
 not altogether free. It is related, that Sir Richard Black- 
 more laid the MS. of his "Creation" before a club of 
 wits for improvement or correction; upon which Dr. 
 Johnson remarks, "When all reasonable, all credible 
 allowance is made for this friendly revision, the author 
 will still retain an ample dividend of praise : for to him 
 must always be assigned the plan of the work, the dis- 
 tribution of its parts, the choice of topics, the train of 
 argument, and what is yet more, the general predomi- 
 nance of philosophical judgment and poetical spirit, — 
 correction seldom effects more than the suppression of 
 faults; a happy line, or a slight elegance, may perhaps 
 be added, but of a large work the general character must 
 always remain." To the extent here specified. Lord 
 Sackville may have been indebted to his literary collabo- 
 rator Sir Philip Francis. 
 
 It may probably be objected, that no personal inter- 
 course has been traced between Lord George and Mr. 
 Francis — the answer to this is, that it was essential to 
 the preservation of the secret, that they should keep 
 aloof and appear strangers to each other. It is evident 
 that Mr. D'Oyly was the connecting link between 
 the man of high rank, mature age, and independent 
 fortune, having a personal hatred against the King and 
 his Ministers, whose handwriting is found to bear a 
 strong resemblance to some of the short private notes 
 written by Junius to Woodfall, ind the clever, young, 
 inferior clerk, who was intrusted with " the slavery of 
 writing," or copying for the press, the longer and more 
 elaborate letters. This view of the case is corroborated 
 
AND LORD G. SACKVILLE COMPARED. 383 
 
 by the testimony of Mr. Jackson, one of Mr. Woodfall's 
 assistants, who says j " the superscription of the Letters of 
 Junius was invariably written in the same handwriting, but 
 that the contents were not always so.'' 
 
 We have seen that Lord Sackville "belonged to an 
 order of minds that make to themselves great reverses," 
 as Lord Wellesley observed of Napoleon; and it is 
 equally clear, that he possessed in a considerable degree 
 those peculiar talents by which the ablest (but not the 
 best) of men have in all ages cajoled and ruled mankind, 
 namely, the talent of selecting with consummate tact and 
 judgment, the fittest instruments for executing his various 
 designs, and of attaching those instruments firmly to his 
 interest. By likewise taking the precaution of not letting 
 any one know more of his designs than suited his purpose, 
 it became unnecessary to give his actors the advice which 
 Hamlet impressed on the poor players, of "speaking no 
 more than was set down for them." 
 
 We accordingly find, that Sir Nathaniel Wraxall and 
 Mr. Richard Cumberland were patronised by Lord Sack- 
 ville for very different purposes, and these gentlemen 
 have in their respective Memoirs given many interesting 
 particulars of his Lordship; but they were not the instruments 
 of the noble Peer's vengeanccj — they had nothing to do 
 with Junius, and therefore the important secret was so 
 carefully concealed from them, that Mr. Cumberland 
 deemed it utterly impossible that his kind patron should 
 have been the author of such *' execrable attacks," as are 
 contained in the Letters of Junius ; and Sir Nathaniel 
 seems to have entertained a similar opinion, for he be- 
 lieved Sir Philip Francis to be their author. 
 
 If we examine the conduct of Sir Philip Francis and 
 
384 
 
 THE CLAIMS OF SIR P. FRANCIS 
 
 Mr. D'Oyly, it will be found that they remained faithful 
 to the compact made with their illustrious chief, and 
 correctly performed the parts which were allotted to 
 them, for they have descended to the tomb without 
 leaving behind them either " Lives " or " Memoirs/' or 
 if they did, their labours have not been permitted to see 
 the light ; and for aught they have voluntarily done, the 
 secret might have perished with them. But with all his 
 splendid talents. Lord Sackville appears to have been 
 wanting in what has ever been considered the consum- 
 mation of art — the skill of concealing it j for Lord Orford 
 discovered that " with a frankness in his speech, there 
 was a mystery in his conduct which was far from in- 
 viting." And Sir Egerton Brydges remarked, that " he 
 always moved with an impenetrable cloud around him." 
 
 The opinion of the public respecting the claim of Lord 
 Sackville has been remarkably fluctuating. We have 
 seen that on the first appearance of the Letters, he was 
 suspected in the highest military circles of being the 
 author; and with what address Junius withdrew him- 
 self from the controversy with his military opponents 
 Colonel Draper and Titus, and then adroitly suppressed 
 all trace of his having noticed the attack of the latter, 
 who had distinctly pointed out his Lordship as Junius. 
 
 He then contrived to have his coadjutor and amanu- 
 ensis, Sir Philip Francis, sent to India, and secured the 
 silence of Mr. D'Oyly, by taking him into his own 
 service as his private and confidential secretary. By 
 these artful means the first suspicion was effectually 
 lulled, and the attention of the public was afterwards 
 diverted from the further consideration of his Lordship's 
 claim, by the dust and clamour raised by discussing the 
 
AND LORD G. SACKVILLE COMPARED. 385 
 
 pretensions of Hugh Macaulay Boyd, General Lee, the 
 Rev. Philip Rosenhagen, and others. 
 
 Here the matter seems to have rested, until the pub- 
 lication of Mr. Woodfairs edition of Junius, which first 
 brought to light the extraordinary letter from Junius to 
 Woodfall about Swinney, and disclosed, in the private 
 letters to Woodfall, strong additional evidence in support 
 of Lord George's claim. 
 
 The right track being again opened to the public, was 
 never afterwards entirely lost sight of; but in the interim, 
 up started a new candidate in the person of Sir Philip 
 Francis, between whom and Junius a similarity of style 
 and handwriting was shewn to exist; and whose claim was 
 likewise supported by a formidable array of remarkable 
 coincidents, and enforced by many plausible arguments. 
 
 But when Sir Philip " died, and made no sign,'' the 
 tide of public opinion, which for some time had been 
 flowing fast in his favour, began to ebb. In the mean 
 while Mr. Coventry was silently pursuing the right clue; 
 and, in his " Critical Enquiry," presented to the world 
 such a mass of facts, and so complete a chain of circum- 
 stantial evidence, in favour of Lord George Sackville, as 
 appeared irresistible; and the Commentary of Mr. Butler 
 on the rival pretensions of the Knight and the Nobleman, 
 seemed all that was necessary to end the controversy. 
 
 Although the moralist cannot but condemn, and the 
 christian must view with abhorrence the vindictive spirit 
 which pervades the Letters of Junius, no person can 
 withhold from their author the applause due to a great 
 WRITER, of whose genius any country might be justly 
 proud. 
 
 In the powers of combination and generalization 
 
 c c 
 
386 SIR p. FRANCIS AND LORD G. SACKVILLE. 
 
 requisite to strike out broad and philosophical views of 
 politics, Junius may have been excelled by Burke; but 
 in the ability to concentrate all the energies of a com- 
 manding intellect on any subject he chose to discuss, and 
 to depict in a vivid and graphic manner, every varying 
 shade of human character, — in the talent for presenting 
 the results of a matured experience derived from an 
 extensive intercourse with every grade of society; in just, 
 striking, and profound axioms on human nature, and the 
 affairs of the world, — few authors, besides Shakspeare, 
 can be placed in competition with him. Whilst in the 
 extraordinary union of keen and withering sarcasm, with 
 a style condensed and clear to an eminent degree, and 
 polished to intense brilliancy by the most delicate and 
 refined taste, we believe him to stand unrivalled. 
 
 Thus it appears, that the materials for erecting a 
 triumphal arch to the genius and glory of Junius had 
 already been dug from the quarry by patient and perse- 
 vering labourers ; the structure itself had been raised, and 
 all but finished, by the skill of able architects; and 
 nothing more was wanting to complete the work, than 
 to fix in and adjust the keystone, in order to bind and 
 consolidate the mass into one perfect and harmonious 
 whole, and on the superstructure should unquestionably 
 be inscribed the name of 
 
 3lortr ©totge SatittJtlfe. 
 
 Here will I build him 
 
 A monument, and plant it round with shade 
 
 Of laurel ever green, and branching palm. 
 
 With all his trophies hung, and acts enrolled. — Milton. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 PORTRAITS AND SKETCHES BY JUNIUS. 
 
 A flattering pamtef, who made it his care 
 To draw men as they ought to be, not as they are; 
 Until sick of pursuing each troublesome elf, 
 He grew lazy at last, and drew from himself. 
 
 Goldsmith. 
 
 cc2 
 
His Majesty George the Third.— The Duke of Grafton.— The 
 Luttrells.— The Duke of Bedford.— Lord Chief Justice 
 Mansfield. — Lord North. — Lord Barrington. — Lord Towns- 
 hend. — Earl of Sandwich. — The Earls of Bute and Chatham. 
 —The Earl of Hillsborough.— The Earl of Shelburne.— 
 Sir Edward Hawke. — Lord Halifax. — Lord Weymouth. — 
 Sir William Blackstone. — The Rev. Mr. Home.— The North 
 Britons. 
 
PORTRAITS AND SKETCHES BY JUNIUS. 
 
 " Every common dauber writes rascal and villain mider his 
 pictures, because the pictures themselves have neither character 
 nor resemblance, — but the works of a master require no index. 
 His features and colouring are taken from nature."— /w«m*, i. 125.* 
 
 The choice collection of elaborately finished Portraits and 
 spirited Sketches, which we have the honour of exhibiting to 
 the public, are the genuine works of an artist of undoubted 
 power and original genius, whose singular modesty would never 
 allow his name to be divulged. Conscious of the merit of his 
 pencil, and regardless of fame, he sent his works — marked by 
 a particular monogram, which long baffled the sagacity of the 
 connoisseurs to decipher — to a well-known dealer of the last 
 age, with a request that he would submit them to the test of 
 public opinion, and not only retain the profits of the exhibition, 
 but likewise keep the pictures as a compensation for his risk and 
 trouble. Hogarth, we are assured, used to sketch his inimitable 
 figures on the nail of his left thumb, and afterwards transfer them 
 to canvass ; and our artist is supposed to have adopted a similar 
 method; for no sooner had the collection appeared, than most 
 of the PROTOTYPES Vehemently protested against the correctness 
 of the likenesses, alleging that they had no recollection of ever 
 having sat for their portraits to any other artist than Sir Joshua, 
 and that if he had presumed to delineate them in such a style, 
 the daubs would have been returned on his hands. But a discern- 
 ing public considered these reasons unsatisfactory and frivolous, 
 and pronounced the pictures equal to the bestproductions of the 
 
 * Woodfall's Junius, ed. 1812, is referred to throughout the 
 Appendix. 
 
390 APPENDIX. 
 
 most eminent masters; and this decision has heen confirmed 
 by posterity. 
 
 The collection, having been cleaned and re-arranged, is again 
 submitted to public inspection. 
 
 HIS MAJESTY GEORGE III. 
 
 I know that man much better than any of you. Nature 
 intended him only for a good-humoured fool. A systematical 
 education, with long practice, has made him a consummate 
 hypocrite (ii. 265). The man I speak of has not a heart to feel 
 for the frailties of his fellow-creatures. It is their virtues that 
 afflict, it is their vices that console him (ii. 313). I reverence 
 the character of Charles the First, as little as Mr. Home ; but 
 I will not insult his misfortunes by a comparison that would 
 degrade him (ii. 309). The unfeigned piety, the sanctified 
 religion of George the Third, have taught him to new model the 
 civil forces of the state. The natural resources of the Crown are 
 no longer confided in. Corruption glitters in the van; — collects 
 and maintains a standing army of mercenaries, and at the same 
 moment impoverishes and enslaves the country. His Majesty's 
 predecessors had some generous qualities in their composition, 
 with vices, I confess, or frailties in abundance. They were kings 
 or gentlemen, not hypocrites or priests. They were at the head 
 of the church, but did not know the value of their office. They 
 said their prayers without ceremony, and had too little priestcraft 
 in their understanding, to reconcile the sanctimonious forms of 
 religion with the utter destruction of the morality of their people 
 (ii. 323). The morality of a king is not to be measured by 
 vulgar rules. The situation is singular. There are faults which 
 do him honour, and virtues that disgrace him. A faultless, 
 insipid equality in his character, is neither capable of vice nor 
 virtue in the extreme; but it secures his submission to those 
 persons whom he has been accustomed to respect, and makes 
 him a dangerous instrument of their ambition. Secluded from 
 the world, attached from his infancy to one set of persons, and 
 
APPENDIX. 391 
 
 one set of ideas, he can neither open his heart to new connexions, 
 nor his mind to better information. A character of this sort is 
 the soil fittest to produce that obstinate bigotry in pohtics and 
 religion, which begins with a meritorious sacrifice of the under- 
 standing, and finally conducts the monarch and the martyr to 
 the block (ii. 152). Our gracious Sovereign has had wonderful 
 success in creating new attachments to his person and family. 
 He owes it, I presume, to the regular system he has pursued in 
 the mystery of conversion. He began with an experiment upon 
 the Scotch, and concludes with converting Mr. Home (ii. 316). 
 Our religious, benevolent, generous Sovereign, has no objection 
 to selling his own timber to his own Admiralty to repair his own 
 ships, nor to putting the money into his own pocket. People of 
 a religious turn naturally adhere to the principles of the church. 
 "Whatever they acquire falls into mortmain (ii. 326). He adver- 
 tises for patients, collects all the diseases of the heart, and turns 
 a royal palace into an hospital for incurables. A man of honour 
 has no ticket of admission at St. James's. They receive him like 
 a virgin at the Magdalen; — Go thou and do likewise (ii. 439). 
 Our gracious King, indeed, is abundantly civil to himself. Instead 
 of an answer to a petition, his Majesty very gracefully pronounces 
 his own panegyric (ii. 117). His Majesty is much addicted to 
 useful reading, and, if I am not ill-informed, has honoured the 
 Public Advertiser with particular attention. I have endeavoured 
 therefore, and not without success, to furnish it with such interest- 
 ing and edifying intelligence, as probably would not reach him 
 through any other channel. Nor have his own virtues been 
 entirely neglected. These Letters are read in other countries and 
 in other languages; and I think I may affirm without vanity, 
 that the gracious character of the best of princes is by this time 
 not only perfectly known to his subjects, but tolerably well 
 understood by the rest of Europe (ii. 251). That he is the king 
 of a free people, is indeed his greatest glory. That he may 
 long continue the king of a free people, is the second wish 
 that animates my heart. The first is, that the people may be 
 free (ii. 122). 
 
392 APPENDIX. 
 
 THE DUKE OF GRAFTON. 
 
 This portrait is considered the artist's chef d'oBuvre, and he 
 directed the following descriptive lines to be affixed to it in the 
 catalogue : 
 
 Detested as thou art, and ought to be, 
 
 Nor oath, nor pact, Achilles plights with thee : 
 
 Instead of amity, I vow one constant state 
 
 Of lasting rancour and eternal hate : 
 
 No thought but rage, and never-ceasing strife, 
 
 Till death extinguish rage, and thought, and life. 
 
 Pope's Iliad. 
 
 In what language shall I address so black, so cowardly a 
 tyrant — thou worse than one of the Brumwicks, and all the 
 Stuarts! (ii. 328). There is something which distinguishes you, 
 not only from all other ministers, but all other men. It is not 
 that you do wrong by design, but that you should never do right 
 by mistake. You are the pillow upon which I am determined 
 to rest all my resentments (ii. 257). This letter, my Lord, is 
 only a preface to my future correspondence. The remainder 
 of the summer shall be dedicated to your amusement. I mean 
 now and then to relieve the severity of .your morning studies, and 
 to prepare you for the business of the day. Without pretending 
 to more than Mr. Bradshaw's sincerity, you may rely upon my 
 attachment as long as you are in office (ii. 248). With a rate 
 of abilities which Lord Weymouth very justly looks down upon 
 with contempt, you have done as much mischief to the commu- 
 nity as Cromwell would have done, if Cromwellhad been a coward, 
 and as much as Machiavel, if Machiavel had not known that an 
 appearance of morals and religion are useful in society (ii. 322). 
 The unhappy Baronet (Sir James Lowther) has no friends, even 
 among those who resemble him. You, my Lord, are not yet 
 reduced to so deplorable a state of dereliction. Every villain in 
 the kingdom is your friend; and, in compliment to such amity, 
 I think you should suffer your dismal countenance to clear up. 
 
APPENDIX. 393 
 
 Besides, my Lord, I am a little anxious for the consistency of 
 your character. You violate your own rules of decorum, when 
 you do not insult the man whom you have betrayed (ii. 401), 
 In your treatment of particular persons, you have preserved the 
 uniformity of your character. Even Mr. Bradshaw declares that 
 no man was ever so ill-used as himself (ii. 99). Colonel Luttrell, 
 Mr. Onslow, and Governor Burgoyne, were equally engaged with 
 you, and have rather more reason to complain than Mr. Brad- 
 shaw. These are men, my Lord, whose friendship you should 
 have adhered to, on the same principle on which you deserted 
 Lord Rockingham, Lord Chatham, Lord Camden, and the Duke 
 of Portland. We can easily account for your violating your 
 engagements with men of honour, but why should you betray 
 your natural connexions? Why separate yourself from Lord 
 Sandwich, Lord Gower, and Mr. Rigby, or leave the three worthy 
 gentlemen above-mentioned to shift for themselves? With all 
 the fashionable indulgence of the times, this country does not 
 abound in characters like theirs ; and you may find it a difficult 
 matter to recruit the black catalogue of your friends (ii. 100). 
 Through the whole course of the Duke of Grafton's life, I see 
 a strange endeavour to unite contradictions, which cannot be 
 reconciled. He marries to be divorced; he keeps a mistress to 
 remind him of conjugal endearments; and he chooses such friends 
 as it is a virtue in him to desert (i. 157). If vice itself could be 
 excused, there is yet a certain display of it, a certain outrage to 
 decency, and violation of public decorum, which, for the benefit 
 of society, should never be forgiven. It is not that he kept 
 a mistress at home, but that he constantly attended her abroad. 
 It is not the private indulgence, but the public insult of which 
 I complain. The name of Miss Parsons would hardly have been 
 known, if the first Lord of the Treasury had not led her in triumph 
 through the Opera House, even in the presence of the Queen. 
 When we see a man act in this manner, we may admit the 
 shameless depravity of his heart, but what are we to think of his 
 understanding? (i. 159). The condition of a king is often miser- 
 
a94 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 able, but it required your Grace's abilities to make it contemptible 
 (ii. 97). We are authorised to conclude, that you either differed 
 from your colleagues, whose measures you still affect to defend, 
 or that you thought the administration of the King's affairs no 
 longer tenable. You are at liberty to choose between the hypo- 
 crite and the coward. Your best friends are in doubt which way 
 they shall incline. Your country unites the characters, and gives 
 you credit for them both. For my own part, I see nothing 
 inconsistent in your conduct. You began with betrajdng the 
 people — you conclude with betraying the King (ii. 98). Yet you 
 have other merit in abundance, — Mr. Hine, the Duke of Port- 
 land, and Mr. Yorke, — breach of trust, robbery, and murder. 
 You would think it a compliment to your gallantry, if I added 
 rape to the catalogue ; — but the style of your amours secures you 
 from resistance (ii. 246). With what countenance dare you 
 appear in the royal presence, branded as you are with the infamy 
 of a notorious breach of trust? With what countenance can you 
 take your seat at the Treasury board, or in council, when you feel 
 that every circulating whisper is at your expense alone, and stabs 
 you to the heart? Have you a single friend in parliament, so 
 shameless, so thoroughly abandoned, as to undertake your defence? 
 You know, my Lord, that there is not a man in either House, 
 whose character, however flagitious, would not be ruined by 
 mixing his reputation with yours ; and does not your heart inform 
 you, that you are degraded below the condition of a man, when 
 you are obliged to hear these insults with submission, and even 
 to thank me for my moderation? (ii. 59). And now, my good 
 Lord, does not your conscious heart inform you, that the justice 
 of retribution begins to operate, and that it may soon approach 
 your person? Do you think that Junius has renounced the 
 Middlesex election? or that the King's timber shall be refused 
 to the Royal Navy with impunity? or that you shall hear no more 
 of the sale of that patent to Mr. Hine, which you endeavoured 
 to screen by suddenly dropping your prosecution of Samuel 
 Vaughan, when the rule against him was made absolute? I 
 
APPENDIX. 395 
 
 believe, indeed, there never was such an instance in all the 
 history of negative impudence. But it shall not save you. The 
 very sunshine you live in is a prelude to your dissolution. When 
 you are ripe, you shall be plucked (ii. 405). 
 
 THE LUTTRELLS. 
 
 A FAMILY GROUP. 
 
 There is a certain family in this country, on which nature seems 
 to have entailed an hereditary baseness of disposition. As far as 
 their history has been known, the son has regularly improved 
 upon the vices of his father, and has taken care to transmit them 
 pure and undiminished into the bosom of his successor. In the 
 senate their abilities have confined them to those humble, sordid 
 services, in which the scavengers of the ministry are usually 
 employed. But in the memoirs of private treachery, they stand 
 first and unrivalled (ii. 403, note). When this accomplished 
 youth (Colonel Luttrell) declared himself the champion of govern- 
 ment, the world was busy in inquiring what honours or emolu- 
 ments could be a sufficient recompense to a young man of his 
 rank and fortune, for submitting to mark his entrance into life 
 with the universal contempt and detestation of his country. His 
 noble father had not been so precipitate. To vacate his seat in 
 Parliament — to intrude upon a county in which he had no interest 
 or connexion — to possess himself of another man's right — and to 
 maintain it in defiance of public shame as well as justice, bespoke 
 a degree of zeal or of depravity, which all the favour of a pious 
 prince could hardly requite. I protest, there is in this young 
 man's conduct a strain of prostitution, which, for its singularity, 
 I cannot but admire. He has discovered a new line in the human 
 character; he has degraded even the name of Luttrell, and 
 gratified his father's most sanguine expectations (ii. 155). An 
 intimate connexion has long subsisted between Bradshaw and 
 the worthy Lord Irnham. It arose from a fortunate similarity 
 of principles, cemented by the constant mediation of their common 
 
396 APPENDIX. 
 
 friend, Miss Davis. Yet I confess I should be sorry that the 
 opprobrious infamy of this match should reach beyond the family. 
 We have now a better reason than ever to pray for the long life 
 of the best of princes, and the welfare of his royal issue. I will 
 not mix anything ominous with my prayers ; but let Parliament 
 look to it. A Luttrell shall never succeed to the Crown of England.* 
 If the hereditary virtues of the family deserve a kingdom, Scotland 
 will be a proper retreat for them (ii. 402). 
 
 THE DUKE OF BEDFORD. 
 
 You are so little accustomed to receive any marks of respect 
 or esteem from the public, that, if in the following lines a com- 
 pliment or expression of applause should escape me, I fear you 
 would consider it as a mockery of your established character, and 
 perhaps an insult to your understanding. You have nice feelings, 
 my Lord, if we may judge from your resentments. Cautious, 
 therefore, of giving offence, where you have so little deserved it, 
 I shall leave the illustration of your virtues to other hands. 
 Your friends have a privilege to play upon the easiness of your 
 temper, or possibly they are better acquainted with your good 
 qualities than I am. You have done good by stealth. The 
 rest is upon record. You have still left ample room for specu- 
 lation when panegyric is exhausted (i. 231). I reverence the 
 afflictions of a good man — his sorrows are sacred. But how can 
 we take part in the distress of a man, whom we can neither love 
 nor esteem ; or feel for a calamity of which he himself is insen- 
 sible? Where was the father's heart, when he could look for, or 
 find, an immediate consolation for the loss of an only son in con- 
 sultations and bargains for a place at Court; and even in the 
 misery of balloting at the India House ! (i. 238). Your history 
 begins to be important at that auspicious period, at which you 
 were deputed to represent the Earl of Bute at the Court of 
 Versailles. It was an honourable office, and executed with the 
 
 • The Duke of Cumberland had recently married Mrs. Horton, 
 Colonel Luttrell 's sister. 
 
APPENDIX. 397 
 
 same spirit with which it was accepted. Your patrons wanted an 
 ambassador, who would submit to make concessions, without 
 daring to insist upon any honourable condition for his Sovereign. 
 Their business required a man who had as little feeling for his 
 own dignity as for the welfare of his country ; and they found 
 him in the first rank of the nobility. Belleisle, Goree, Gauda- 
 loupe, St. Lucia, Martinique, the Fishery, and the Havanna, are 
 glorious monuments of your Grace's talents for negotiation. My 
 Lord, we are too well acquainted with your, pecuniary character, 
 to think it possible that so many public, sacrifices should have 
 been made, without some private compensations. Your conduct 
 carries with it an internal evidence, beyond all the legal proofs 
 of a court of justice (i. 239). Let us consider you, then, as 
 arrived at the summit of worldly greatness ; let us suppose, that 
 all your plans of avarice and ambition are accomplished; and 
 your most sanguine wishes gratified in the fear, as well as the 
 hatred, of the people. Can age itself forget that you are now in 
 the last act of life? Can grey hairs make folly venerable? and is 
 there no period to be reserved for . meditation and retirement? 
 For shame ! my Lord : let it not be recorded of you, that the 
 latest moments of your life were dedicated to the same unworthy 
 pursuits, the same busy agitations, in which your youth and 
 manhood were exhausted. Consider that, although you cannot 
 disgrace your former life, you are violating the character of age, 
 and exposing the impotent imbecility after you have lost the 
 vigour of the passions (i. 245). Your friends will ask, perhaps, 
 whither will this unhappy old man retire? Can he remain in the 
 metropolis, where his life has been so often threatened, and his 
 palace so often attacked ! If he returns to Woburn, scorn and 
 mockery await him. He must create a solitude round his estate, if 
 he would avoid the face of reproach and derision. At Plymouth, his 
 destruction would be more than probable ; at Exeter, inevitable. 
 No honest Englishman will ever forget his. attachment, nor any 
 honest Scotchman forgive his treachery, to Lord Bute. At every 
 town he enters he must change his liveries and his name. Which 
 
398 APPENDIX. 
 
 ever way he flies, the Hue-and-Cry of the country pursues him. 
 It is in vain, therefore, to shift the scene. You can no more fly 
 from your enemies than from yourself. Persecuted abroad, you 
 look into your own heart for consolation, and find nothing but 
 reproaches and despair. But, my Lord, you may quit the field 
 of business, though not the field of danger : and though you 
 cannot be safe, you may cease to be ridiculous. I fear you have 
 listened too long to the advice of those pernicious friends, with 
 whose interests you have sordidly united your own, and for whom 
 you have sacrificed every thing that ought to be dear to a man 
 of honour. They are still base enough to encourage the follies of 
 your age, as they once did the vices of your youth. As little 
 acquainted with the rules of decorum, as with the laws of 
 morality, they will not suffer you to profit by experience, nor 
 even to consult the propriety of a bad character. Even now they 
 tell you, that life is no more than a dramatic scene, in which the 
 hero should preserve his consistency to the last, and that as you 
 lived without virtue, you should die without repentance (i. 246). 
 Sir William Draper may rest assured this worthy nobleman 
 laughs, with equal indifference, at my reproaches, and Sir 
 "William's distress about him. But here let it stop. Even the 
 Duke of Bedford, insensible as he is, will consult the tranquillity 
 of his life, in not provoking the moderation of my temper. If, 
 from the profoundest contempt, I should ever rise into anger, he 
 should soon find that all I have already said of him was lenity 
 and compassion (ii. 18). 
 
 LORD CHIEF JUSTICE MANSFIELD. 
 
 Our language has no term of reproach, the mind has no idea 
 of detestation, which has not already been happily applied to 
 you, and exhausted. Ample justice has been done by abler pens 
 than mine to the separate merits of your life and character. Let 
 it be my humble office to collect the scattered sweets, till their 
 united virtues torture the sense (ii. 161). When I acknowledge 
 your abilities, you may believe I am sincere. I feel for human 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 nature, when I see a man so gifted as you are, descend to such 
 vile practices. Yet do not suffer your vanity to console you too 
 soon. Believe me, my good Lord, you are not admired in the 
 same degree in which you are detested. It is only the par- 
 tiality of your friends, that balances the defects of your heart with 
 the superiority of your miderstanding. No learned man, even 
 among your own tribe, thinks you qualified to preside in a 
 court of common law. Yet it is confessed, that under Justinian, 
 you might have made an incomparable Praetor. It is remarkable 
 enough, but I hope not ominous, that the laws you understand 
 best, and the Judges you affect to admire most, flourished in the 
 decline of a great empire, and are supposed to have contributed 
 to its fall (ii. 181). The cunning Scotchman never speaks truth 
 without a fraudulent design. In council, he generally affects 
 to take a moderate part. Besides his natural timidity, it makes 
 part of his political plan, never to be known to recommend 
 violent measures. When the Guards are called forth to murder 
 their fellow-subjects, it is not by the ostensible advice of Lord 
 Mansfield. The designs of Mansfield are more subtle, more 
 effectual, and secure. Who attacks the liberty of the press? — 
 Lord Mansfield. Who invades the constitutional power of juries ? 
 — Lord Mansfield. What Judge ever challenged a juryman ? — 
 Lord Mansfield. Who was that judge, who, to save the king's 
 brother, affirmed that a man of the first rank and quality, who 
 obtains a verdict in a suit for criminal conversation, is entitled to no 
 greater damages than the meanest mechanic ? — Lord Mansfield. 
 Who is it makes Commissioners of the Great Seal? — Lord Mans- 
 field. Who is it forms a decree for those commissioners, deciding 
 against Lord Chatham ; and afterwards (finding himself opposed 
 by the Judges) declares in parliament, that he never had a doubt 
 that the law was in direct opposition to that decree? — Lord 
 Mansfield. Who is he that has made it the study and practice 
 of his life to undermine and alter the whole system of juris- 
 prudence in the court of King's Bench? — Lord Mansfield. There 
 never existed a man but himself, who answered exactly to so 
 complicated a description. Compared to these enormities, his 
 
400 APPENnix. 
 
 original attachment to the Pretender (to whom his dearest brother 
 was confidential secretary) is a virtue of the first magnitude. 
 But the hour of impeachment will come, and neither he nor 
 Grafton shall escape me (ii. 355). The distinction between 
 doing wrong and avoiding to do right belongs to Lord Mansfield. 
 Junius disclaims it (ii. 317). A judge under the influence of 
 government may be honest enough in the decision of private 
 causes, yet a traitor to the public. When a victim is marked 
 out by the ministry, this judge will offer himself to perform the 
 sacrifice. He will not scruple to prostitute his dignity, and 
 betray the sanctity of his office, whenever an arbitrary point 
 is to be carried for government, or the resentment of a court 
 to be gratified (i. 60). Considering the situation and abilities 
 of Lord Mansfield, I do not scruple to aflfirm, with the most 
 solemn appeal to God for my sincerity, that, in my judgment, 
 he is the very worst and most dangerous man in the kingdom. 
 Thus far I have done my duty in endeavouring to bring him to 
 punishment. But mine is an inferior ministerial office in the 
 temple of justice. I have bound the victim, and dragged him 
 to the altar (ii. 443). 
 
 LORD NORTH. 
 Who is Lord North? The son of a poor unknown Earl, who 
 four years ago was a needy commissioner of the Treasury for 
 the benefit of a subsistence, and who would have accepted a 
 commission of hackney-coaches upon the same terms. The 
 politics of Carlton House, finances picked up in Mr. Grenville's 
 ante-chamber, and the elocution of a Demosthenes, endeavouring 
 to speak plain with pebbles in his mouth, form the stuffing of that 
 figure that calls itself minister, that does homage to the Princess 
 Dowager, and says, "Madam, 1 am your man!" (iii. 317). This 
 graceful minister is oddly constructed. His tongue is a little 
 too big for his mouth, and his eyes a great deal too big for their 
 sockets. Every part of his person sets natural proportion at 
 defiance. At this present writing, his head is supposed to be 
 much too heavy for his shoulders (ii. 128, note). 
 
APPENDIX. 401 
 
 LORD BARRINGTON. 
 
 Having nothing better to do, I propose to entertain myself and 
 the public with torturing that * ♦ * * Barrington, but be careful 
 not to have it known to have come from me. Such an insig- 
 nificant creature is not worth the generous rage of Junius (i. 247). 
 Besides the singular good fortune of never being himself a moment 
 out of place, he has had extraordinary success in providing for 
 every branch of his family. One brother was a general officer, 
 with a regiment and chief command at Guadaloupe. A second is 
 high in the navy, with a regiment of marines. A third is a judge, 
 and the fourth is a bishop. Yet this is the man who complains that 
 he gets nothing! (iii. 454). The people of this country will never 
 forget nor forgive the inhuman part he took in the affair of 
 St. George's Fields. Other secretaries at war have ordered out 
 troops to assist the civil magistrate. For this man it was reserved, 
 to give it under his hand, that he rejoiced and exulted in the blood 
 of his fellow subjects (iii. 456). While that bloody scene was 
 acting, where was the gentle Barrington? Was he sighing at the 
 feet of antiquated beauty ? Was he dreaming over the loo-table ? 
 or, was he more innocently employed in combing her ladyship's 
 lap-dog? (iii. 436). You are not insensible of the scorn and 
 hatred of the world, though you take no care to avoid it. When 
 the bloody Barrington — that silken, fawning courtier at St. James's 
 — that stern and insolent minister at the war-office, is pointed 
 out to universal contempt and detestation; you smile, indeed, 
 but the last agonies of the hysteric passion are painted in your 
 countenance. Your cheek betrays what passes within you, and 
 your whole frame is in convulsions (iii. 431). The proceedings 
 of this wretch are unaccountable. There must be some mystery 
 in it, which I hope will soon be discovered to his confusion. Next 
 to the Duke of Grafton, I verily believe thaf the blackest heart 
 in the kingdom belongs to Lord Barrington (i. 254). 
 
 DD 
 
402 APPENDIX. 
 
 LORD TOWNSHEND. 
 
 Why is that wretched creature, Lord Townshend, maintained 
 in Ireland? Is it not universally known that the ignorance, 
 presumption, and incapacity of that man, have ruined the King's 
 aifairs in Ireland ? — that he has in a great measure, destroyed the 
 political dependence of that country upon Great Britain? But 
 he too, is an unconnected being, without any hope of support 
 but in the protection of Lord Bute and the Princess Dowager 
 (iii. 319). 
 
 THE EARL OF .SANDWICH. 
 
 His Majesty, who judges of men by their moral characters, 
 has discovered at last that this nobleman is as well qualified for 
 one post as another. His religion would do honour to a mitre. 
 If he were Archbishop of Canterbury, the Princess Dowager of 
 Wales could not do better than make him her father confessor. 
 In the primitive spirit of Christianity they might confess to one 
 another (iii. 309). The choice and preference of the most profli- 
 gate character in the kingdom may suit well enough with the 
 substantial purposes of Carlton House, but how does it consist 
 with the hypocritical decorum of St. James's? What opinion 
 are we to entertain of the piety, chastity, and integrity of the 
 best of Princes, when in the face of England and of all Europe, he 
 takes such a man as Sandwich to his bosom ! (iii. 320). Let us 
 hear no more of the piety of St. James's. To talk of morals or 
 devotion in such company is a scandalous insult to common sense, 
 and a still more scandalous mockery of religion (iii. 321). 
 
 THE EARLS OF BUTE AND CHATHAM. 
 
 To create or foment confusion, to sacrifice the honour of a king, 
 or to destroy happiness of a nation, requires no talent, but a 
 natural itch for doing mischief. We have seen it performed for 
 years successively, with a wantonness of triumph, by a man who 
 had neither abilities nor personal interest, nor even common 
 personal courage (Lord Bute). It has been possible for a noto- 
 
APPENDIX. 403 
 
 rious coward, skulking under a petticoat, to make a great nation 
 the prey of his avarice and ambition. But I trust the time is not 
 very far distant when we shall see him dragged forth from his retire- 
 ment, and forced to answer severely for all the mischiefs he hath 
 brought upon us. It is not above a twelvemonth ago since all 
 his arts might have been defeated, and the venomous spider itself 
 caught and trampled on in its own webs. It was then his good 
 fortune to corrupt one man, from whom we least of all expected 
 so base an apostacy (the Earl of Chatham). Who, indeed, could 
 have suspected, that it should even consist with the spirit or 
 understanding of that person, to accept of a share of power under 
 a pernicious court minion, whom he himself had affected to detest 
 or despise, as much as he knew he was detested and despised by 
 the whole nation ? I will not censure him for the avarice of a 
 pension, nor the melancholy ambition of a title. These were 
 objects which he perhaps looked up to, though the rest of the 
 world thought them far beneath his acceptance. But to become 
 the stalking-horse of a stallion, to shake hands with a Scotchman 
 at the hazard of catching all his infamy; to fight under his 
 auspices against the constitution ; and to receive the word from 
 him, prerogative and a thistle (by the once-respected name of 
 Pitt) ; it is even below contempt. May that union, honourable 
 as it is, subsist for ever ! may they continue to smell at one thistle, 
 and not be separated even in death ! (ii. 466). 
 
 THE EARL OF HILLSBOROUGH. 
 
 That you are a civil, polite person, is true. Few men under- 
 stand the little morals better, or observe the great ones less, than 
 your Lordship. You can bow and smile in an honest man's face 
 while you pick his pocket. These are the virtues of a Court in 
 which your education has not been neglected. In any other 
 school, you might have learnt that simplicity and integrity are 
 worth them all. Sir Jeffery Amherst was fighting the battles 
 of this country while you, my Lord, the darling child of prudence 
 
404 APPENDIX. 
 
 and urbanity, were practising the generous arts of a courtier, 
 and securing an honourable interest in the ante-chamber of a 
 avourite (iii. 147). 
 
 THE EARL OF SHELBURNE. 
 
 The life of this young man is a satire on mankind. The 
 treachery which deserts a friend, might be a virtue compared to 
 the fawning baseness which attaches itself to a declared enemy. 
 Lord Chatham became his idol, introduced him into the most 
 difficult departments of the state, and left him there to shift for 
 himself. It was a masterpiece of revenge. Unconnected, unsup- 
 ported, he remains in office without interest or dignity, as if the 
 income were an equivalent for all loss of reputation. Without 
 spirit or judgment to take an advantageous moment of retiring, 
 he submits to be insulted as long as he is paid for it (iii. 173). 
 
 SIR_ EDWARD HAWKE. 
 I cannot mention the name of Sir Edward Hawke without 
 concern. How unfortunate it is, that a heart unacquainted with 
 fear should have so little sense of propriety and decorum! I 
 should be sorry to puzzle him with intricate questions, either 
 of policy or morals, but there are some distinctions within the 
 reach of even his understanding. In his situation it particularly 
 became him to regulate his conduct by the judgment of the 
 public. Though not expected to think for himself, he might have 
 taken a generous part with the friends of his country, and still 
 have been respected for the integrity of his intentions. To what a 
 poor, insignificant condition has he now reduced himself! (iii. 249). 
 
 LORD HALIFAX. 
 
 What merit has Lord Halifax? The issue of general warrants 
 — ^the opposition of his privilege, for years together, to the laws 
 of his country — prostitution in private life, and poverty in the 
 extreme (iii. 320). 
 
APPENDIX. 405 
 
 LORD WEYMOUTH. 
 
 Lord Weymouth had distinguished himself in his first employ- 
 ment by a spirited, if not judicious, conduct. He had animated 
 the civil magistrate beyond the tone of civil authority, and had 
 directed the operations of the army to more than military execu- 
 tion. Recovered from the errors of his youth, from the distrac- 
 tion of play, and the bewitching smiles of Burgundy, behold him 
 (Bxerting the whole strength of his clear, unclouded faculties in 
 the service of the Crown. It was not the heat of midnight 
 excesses, nor ignorance of the laws, nor the furious spirit of the 
 house of Bedford : no. Sir, when this respectable minister inter- 
 posed his authority between the magistrate and the people, and 
 signed the mandate on which, for aught he knew, the lives of 
 thousands depended, he did it from the deliberate motion of his 
 heart, supported by the best of his judgment (i. 57). 
 
 SIR WILLIAM BLACKSTONE. 
 
 Dr. Blackstone is Solicitor to the Queen. The Doctor recol- 
 lected that he had a place to preserve, though he forgot that he 
 had a reputation to lose. We have now the good fortune to 
 understand the Doctor's principles as well as writings. For the 
 defence of truth, of law, and reason, the Doctor's book may be 
 safely consulted ; but whoever wishes to cheat a neighbour of his 
 estate, or to rob a country of its rights, need make no scruple 
 of consulting the Doctor himself (i. 158). 
 
 THE REV. MR. HORNE. 
 
 Permit me to recommend this Gentleman to your Grace's pro- 
 tection. You will find him copiously gifted with those qualities 
 of the heart which usually direct you in the choice of your 
 friendships. He too was Mr. Wilkes's friend, and as incapable 
 as you are, of the liberal resentment of a gentleman. No, my 
 Lord ; it was the solitary vindictive malice^of a monk, brooding 
 over the infirmities of his friend, until he thought they quickened 
 into public life ; and feasting with a rancorous rapture, upon the 
 
406 APPENDIX. 
 
 sordid catalogue of his distresses. Now let him go back to his 
 cloister. The church is a proper retreat for him. In his princi- 
 ples he is already a Bishop (ii. 256). 
 
 THE NORTH BRITONS. 
 
 (a study, not FROM NATURE.) 
 
 Permit me to begin with paying a tribute to Scotch sincerity 
 wherever I find it. I own I am not apt to confide in the profes- 
 sions of gentlemen of that country, and when they smile I feel an 
 involuntary emotion to guard myself against mischief (ii. 160). 
 As to the Scotch, I must suppose your Majesty's heart and 
 understanding so biassed from your earliest infancy in their 
 favour, that nothing less than your own misfortunes can undeceive 
 you. Appearances are, however, in their favour; so strongly 
 indeed that one would think they had forgotten that you are 
 their lawful King, and had mistaken you for a Pretender to the 
 Crown. Let it be admitted then, that the Scotch are as sincere 
 in their present professions as if you were in reality not an 
 Englishman, but a Briton of the North. You would not be the 
 first Prince of their native coimtry against whom they have 
 rebelled, nor the first whom they have basely betrayed. Have 
 you forgotten, Sir, or has your favourite concealed from you that 
 part of our history, when the unhappy Charles (and he too had 
 private virtues) fled from the open avowed indignation of his 
 English subjects, and surrendered himself at discretion, to the 
 good faith of his own countrymen ? Without looking for support 
 in their aifections, as subjects, he applied only to their honour, as 
 gentlemen, for protection; — they received him, as they would 
 your Majesty, with bows, and smiles, and falsehood, and kept 
 him until they had settled their bargain with the English Parlia- 
 ment, then basely sold their native King to the vengeance of his 
 enemies. This, Sir, was not the act of a few traitors, but the 
 deliberate treachery of a Scotch Parliament, representing the 
 nation (ii. 27S). 
 
LONDON: 
 
 PKINTEI) BY MANNING AND MASON, 
 IVY-LANE, PATERNOSTKR-ROW. 
 
LH' 
 
14 DAY USE 
 
 RETUKN TO DESK FROM WHICH BORROWED 
 
 LOAN DIPT. 
 
 RENEWALS ONLY—TEL. NO. 642-3405 
 
 This book is due on the last date stamped below, or 
 
 on the date to which renewed. 
 
 Renewed books are sub jea to immediate recall. 
 
 
 "^^^'70.3P^ 
 
 ^^AN Or : 
 
 LD21A-60m-6,'69 
 (J90968l0)476-A-32 
 
 General Library 
 
 University of California 
 
 Berkeley 
 
f 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY