:-NRLF 
 
 SB Ml fiS7 
 
wn 
 
 ill 
 V ! c* 
 
XX 
 
 tr v 
 


 a ^Xt 
 
 * s 
 
 *"&^^4fi^, 
 
 x^<^ 
 
 /&&& Jis "fr^-i^r tr~*i^ *S /VT^+*^, fr^- 
 
 ?' 
 
 frz*, y^^v^ v>>^%5^^. ^fcy^^/M^C_, 
 
 ^ 
 
 rJ 
 
 
x>l/ 
 
*/l~ /**JLS 
 
 i^bsist #-*+sv**^ -v 
 
 &&***< ? ^^^ j^~ %^**~^ Ot^^ 
 /*** &t*^- L* s*~~~~-**^*^j^ _, SL<*'tJ f -*+~^Jl' - ^. 
 
 <# fL*s*<&-<'</ &~* 
 
 /a-^_y . 
 
JUNIUS 
 
 LORD CHATHAM, 
 
 AND THE MISCELLANEOUS LETTERS 1 ' PROVED 
 TO BE SPURIOUS. 
 
 BY JOHN SWINDEN. 
 
 " A writer who builds his arguments upon facts, is not easily to be confuted. 
 He is not to be answered by general assertions, or general reproaches. He 
 may want eloquence to amuse or persuade, but, speaking truth, he must 
 always convince." JUNIUS. 
 
 " The evidence which truth carries with it is superior to all argument ; it 
 neither wants the support, nor dreads the opposition, of the greatest 
 abilities." LORD CHATHAM. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 LONGMAN, REES, ORME, BROWN, GREEN, AND LONGMAN; 
 AND JOHN CROSS, LEEDS. 
 
 1833. 
 
r C. 
 
 STEPHENS 
 
 BY R. PEBRINO, LEEDS. 
 
TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE WILLIAM, 
 EARL OF DARTMOUTH, D.C.L. 
 
 MY LORD, 
 
 I take leave to dedicate this small volume to your 
 Lordship without the previous ceremony of requesting 
 permission. 
 
 Your Lordship's name is a sure passport to public 
 favour ; I have therefore a manifest interest in connecting 
 it with my pages. But I beg to assure your Lordship that 
 higher motives actuate me. Residing in a part of York- 
 shire in which your Lordship possesses property, I have 
 had frequent opportunities of witnessing your Lordship's 
 generosity of disposition and benevolence of heart. In 
 that district the Earl of Dartmouth's name is intimately 
 blended with every useful institution, and is heard in 
 the prayers of the grateful poor. I wish to gratify my 
 feelings by adding to this humble record a public 
 expression of unfeigned admiration and respect on my 
 own part. 
 
 509658 
 
IV 
 
 Your Lordship's close attention to every thing 
 concerning the political and constitutional history of the 
 country must render interesting the question which I 
 have endeavoured to elucidate ; and there is obviously 
 a family reason why the Earl of Dartmouth should 
 desire to see the solution of a mystery which has long 
 baffled the sagacity of political and literary critics. 
 
 I have the honour to subscribe myself, 
 
 MY LORD, 
 Your Lordship's faithful and obedient servant, 
 
 JOHN SWINDEN. 
 
 Morley, July 15, 1833. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 THIS is not a new edition of " An Attempt to prove that Lord 
 Chatham was Junius," published by me in 1830, but a new work, 
 containing, certainly, the same line of argument, but supported, I trust, 
 by a considerable body of additional evidence. In my title-page I have 
 assumed what some may deem a bold position. I say Junius was Lord 
 Chatham. Let the question be judged by what I have placed on record. 
 I ask no more. 
 
 But should I have failed in establishing my case to the satisfaction 
 of any of my readers, I think I may confidently claim the credit of 
 having detected, beyond question or cavil, the spuriousness of the 
 " Miscellaneous Letters," and in doing this have at least brushed away 
 from the memory of a great man a mass of deformity and absurdity. 
 
 That Lord Chatham was capable of writing the Letters of Junius, 
 must be conceded ; that his general style and tone of thinking were the 
 same as those of Junius, cannot be rationally denied ; that he was in a 
 position to acquire the peculiar information with which his letters abound, 
 must be admitted by all who know any thing of Chatham and the history 
 of the period in which he nourished ; that he had motives for anger, and 
 provocations to violence, no one will venture to dispute. 
 
 I shall not enter into a metaphysical investigation of the effect of 
 political disappointment and resentment upon an ardent mind. That 
 Chatham was overbearing and violent, and could not brook contradiction, 
 and was steadily fierce in his anger, are matters of history. The writer 
 of " A Sketch of Home Tooke," published in the 209th number (June, 
 1833,) of Blackwood's Magazine, has given a brief and forcible summary 
 of his character. " Lord Chatham," he says, " was driven from power 
 by his own imperiousness ; by the utter difficulty of finding a Cabinet 
 with whom he could act, for he would be despotic or nothing ; and by 
 the awakened indignation of the King, who must have surrendered to 
 him all but the sceptre. England had long honoured him, for she had 
 
IV 
 
 never seen a more successful Minister. In the early years of his govern- 
 ment, his name was triumph, but all his great qualities were already 
 tarnished by the spirit of dictation. Prompt, sagacious, and bold, no 
 man was ever more distinctly moulded for command. But his pride drew 
 an impassable line between him and all public men. He could condescend 
 to no associate. He tolerated no alliance. All authority must be con- 
 centered in his person. He at length urged his claims to a height which 
 would have made the King a citizen, the Cabinet a tool, and .the 
 Government a dictatorship. He fell ; and he revenged himself by assailing 
 the Cabinet through the sides of the country, and labouring to make the 
 King feel the loss of the Minister by his power of stimulating the popular 
 hostility to the throne, and sanctioning the outrage of the Colonies against 
 the Empire. It is painful to be compelled thus to desecrate the tomb 
 where the man of fame and of genius lies. But it should be more painful 
 to disguise the truth. The more brilliant the name the more important 
 the example. The mighty mind of Chatham, humiliated and rendered 
 useless for a great portion of his public career by a single fault, supplies 
 a moral to all the future weaknesses of ambition. If a combination of 
 qualities, unrivalled in English political history, the highest eloquence, 
 the most commanding foresight, the most vigorous and daring activity of 
 mind, should have sunk into the clientship of a factious opposition, and 
 the advocacy of an illegitimate revolt ; if Chatham could stoop from 
 wielding the destinies of England to the patronage of the mob; how 
 sensitively should the inferior race of statesmen shrink from the crime, 
 if they would escape the condemnation !" These remarks are for the 
 most part correct both in fact and conclusion. They were not seen by 
 me till after my pages had nearly passed through the press, but the 
 principle they involve is the basis of my case, the key to the lesson which 
 I claim to have " made easy" to every intelligent and unprejudiced mind. 
 When Cicero returned to Rome from the honourable exile occasioned 
 by the dastardly revenge of Clodius, " all Italy/' it was said, 
 " brought him back upon its shoulders." In a similar way alone would 
 Chatham have consented to return to office ; he refused the call of his 
 King, preferring his resentment to his duty. And if the affiliation 
 of the Letters of Junius upon him, while it increases his literary 
 fame, should detract from his merits as a man, I too must adopt the 
 language quoted above. It is painful to desecrate the tomb of genius 
 and fame, " but it should be more painful to disguise the truth." It is 
 
not my fault if the mode of disseminating the Letters of Junius, 
 and the motives which inspired many of them, cast a shade over the 
 splendour of the author's achievement. 
 
 Of the character of Chatham's eloquence little need be said in this 
 place. I may apply to him that which has been stated of Demosthenes. 
 " Energy and Majesty are his peculiar excellencies. From the gravity of 
 Thucydides, the pomp and dignity of Plato, the ease and elegance, the 
 neatness and simplicity of the Attic writers, he formed a style and 
 manner admirably fitted to his own temper and genius, as well as that 
 of his hearers. His own severity determined him to the more forcible 
 methods of astonishing and terrifying, rather than to the gentle and 
 insinuating arts of persuasion." I have cited ample testimony of the 
 justness of this panegyric. 
 
 One of Lord Chatham's favourite maxims was, that " in any 
 question of religious controversy we must appeal to the great source and 
 evidence of Religion, the Bible." With equal propriety I appeal, in 
 this question, to the Letters of Junius and to the Speeches and Life of 
 William Earl of Chatham. I have not trodden in the beaten track of 
 other writers ; I have investigated for myself and drawn my own 
 inferences ; I have not knowingly advanced false facts, nor, I hope, 
 reasoned falsely from true principles. 
 
 To descend to myself, I may perhaps be allowed to say that I make 
 no pretensions to style. I have written what I thought on the impulse 
 of the moment, and printed what I wrote. " The evidence which truth 
 carries with it," says Chatham himself, ' ' is superior to all argument ; it 
 neither wants the support nor dreads the opposition of the greatest 
 abilities." I am content to be judged by this doctrine. Like all parents, 
 I naturally feel an affection for my offspring, but its real value must be 
 determined by its correctness. The question of " Who was Junius ?" 
 has long been held to be an interesting one. It is said that a Living 
 Nobleman (Lord Grenville) has placed on record the means of resolving 
 the riddle after his death. If I have succeeded in deducing the same 
 truth from the scanty circumstantial evidence at my command, I 
 shall at any rate escape the mortification of playing the part of the 
 mountain which laboured and only brought forth a mouse. 
 
 I observe that Dr. Waterhouse, an American, has published in the 
 United States a bulky octavo to prove that Lord Chatham was Junius. 
 He has done me the honour of taking from my "Attempt" my strongest 
 
VI 
 
 arguments, but has forgotten to acknowledge their source. As, however, 
 he has not discarded the " Miscellaneous Letters," though inclined to 
 doubt their authenticity, he in a considerable degree stultifies himself 
 and lessens the value of his work. 
 
 I may venture to add that my motive for coming before the public a 
 second time is not an interested one. I lay no tax upon the public, for 
 I write not for the market, having confined the present edition within 
 the limits of the circle of my personal friends. My sole ambition is to 
 elucidate an important point in political and literary history. 
 
 Morley, near Leeds, July 15, 1833. J. S. 
 
JUNIUS LORD CHATHAM. 
 
 To those who have made themselves acquainted with the state of 
 political parties in this kingdom at the accession of George the Third, 
 and during the first ten years of his reign, nothing can appear more 
 evident than that a spirit of jealousy and dissatisfaction was extensively 
 diffused through the people. To whatever cause this general discontent 
 may be attributed,, it must be acknowledged that George the Third 
 commenced his reign inauspiciously. After having dismissed from his 
 councils those individuals who had been honoured with the confidence of 
 his predecessor, and with the respect of the people, his Majesty deter- 
 mined to exercise his royal power by dissolving every administration 
 which presumed to question the propriety of any measure recommended 
 by himself, or by the Earl of Bute, who had acquired the unpopular and, 
 at all times, odious appellation of the Favourite. 
 
 The ill-defined power, called prerogative, had, in preceding reigns, 
 been a stumbling-block to our kings ; and every attempt to exercise it, 
 in its fullest extent, had terminated in narrowing its boundaries, and in 
 enlarging the rights and privileges of the people. Had George the 
 Third perused the annals of our history with attention, he would not 
 have disregarded the lessons of experience and wisdom there recorded 
 for the benefit of kings as well as subjects. 
 
 In the early days of his Majesty's reign, we find him assuming for 
 the Crown the right to seize the private papers of individuals who had 
 in their published writings violated the privileges of Parliament. What 
 those privileges were, had, indeed, never been defined; yet their 
 existence and their nature were to be made dependent on the arbitrium 
 of one man. Not satisfied with the possession and exercise of a power 
 so liable to be misused, the Crown claimed the right to arrest any one 
 who published what was termed a libel, before the individual had been 
 tried for the supposed offence, and a submissive House of Commons 
 proceeded to expel one of its members for having published a paper on 
 political subjects which one of the Peers considered a personal reflection 
 on himself, and a violation of the privileges of the Upper House of 
 Parliament. 
 
2 
 
 The unrestrained issue of general warrants had at all times placed 
 the personal liberty of the subject on a precarious and dangerous footing. 
 Invested with such a power, the legality of which had hitherto never 
 been questioned, the Government could arrest individuals without any 
 definite charge of crime being made against them. How liable a power 
 of this nature was to be arbitrarily used, is evident to every one. The 
 most obnoxious man to the Ministry resisted the right claimed by the 
 Crown to issue general warrants : " he brought them to trial ; and the 
 moment they were tried, they were declared illegal." 
 
 The decisive steps taken by the King and the Favourite, to enforce 
 these unconstitutional measures, were attended with some degree of 
 success but short was their triumph. The people became aware of the 
 importance of resistance ; and having, as they believed, a fair opportu- 
 nity afforded of bringing the question to a beneficial issue, made the 
 affair of a private man their own. The struggle ended as might have 
 been expected. The Crown was obliged not merely to surrender the 
 question of the right claimed, but to acknowledge that it could not 
 legally exercise it. 
 
 The loss of such important privileges turned the attention of the 
 King from his subjects at home, and in an unlucky moment he listened 
 to a plan, devised by one of his Ministers, to tax the Colonies, without 
 allowing to them the right of representatives in the House of Commons, 
 where taxes alone could be imposed. The termination of that proceeding 
 was unexpected. The Colonies resisted the right to tax them ; and, not 
 contented with the single advantage of a successful resistance, they 
 insisted on being governed by laws made by themselves. 
 
 The trial by jury did not escape the attention of the dependent 
 Ministers of the King, and a very powerful effort was made to render 
 nugatory one of its best provisions. Contrary, however, to the authority 
 of the Lord Chief Justice, and the power of the Ministry, a jury deter- 
 mined that the law, as well as the fact, was a question for their special 
 consideration. 
 
 The privileges of Parliament had hitherto protected the speeches of 
 the Members from being reported to the public with any degree of 
 accuracy ; fictitious names were given to the speakers, and the debates 
 of the senate of Lilliput were too meagre to attract particular attention. 
 But an important though a gradual change was effected at this period, 
 the Parliament tacitly submitting to see its proceedings fully reported. 
 
It is not to be presumed that the Crown would willingly surrender 
 what it considered as hereditary privileges ; nor can we reasonably 
 imagine that the people could have wrested them from its powerful 
 grasp without the assistance of men who possessed information, talent, 
 courage, and an intimate knowledge of our laws, on which the rights of 
 the Crown and the People were based. The conduct of the people proved 
 that they were sensible of this. 
 
 A slight glance at the Parliamentary debates in these memorable 
 years will show to us the names of men who were strenuous in opposing 
 the Ministry. The Whigs, as a party, were influenced, possibly, in the 
 first instance, by personal motives, to join the people. Power, and the 
 good things accompanying its possession, had passed into the hands of 
 their opponents ; that produced no kindly feelings in the breasts of the 
 Whig leaders ; and it increased the spirit of scrutiny which was exerted 
 to foil every measure brought forward by the Government. 
 
 The importance of public opinion was not unknown to the Whigs, 
 and they willingly united their cause with the people. The Ministry 
 were as sensible of the value of popular opinion, and every artifice was 
 practised by Whig and Tory to keep or to acquire possession of it. 
 
 Innumerable writers were employed and paid by the Government to 
 support their plans, and to bring into contempt the private and public 
 characters of the leaders of the Opposition. The Whigs had also the 
 assistance of literary men, who appeared to be influenced by patriotic 
 motives, yet unceasingly attacked the King and the Ministry, indulging, 
 without scruple or delicacy, in revelations of the most important secrets, 
 and traducing, without remorse, men who were respected and esteemed. 
 Dr. Johnson was the hired champion of the Ministry. But the most 
 influential writer who joined the opposition, was an anonymous author, 
 who signed his Letters " JUNIUS." The sources of his information were 
 so numerous and important, and the effect which they produced of 
 alienating the affections of the people from the King was so manifest, 
 that the King and the Ministry became seriously alarmed. The anony- 
 mous Junius seemed to possess a spirit of ubiquity. No secret, however 
 important, escaped him no information was too difficult to be attained 
 by him. Like Asmodeus, he drew aside the curtains in the palaces of 
 Kings and Nobles, and indulged the prying curiosity of the multitude 
 with a sight of scenes which had never entered into their hearts to 
 imagine. 
 
Many talented individuals, contemporary with Junius, publicly 
 acknowledged the impression which his Letters produced. Mr. Burke 
 was so powerfully convinced of their influence that he called the 
 attention of the House of Commons to the subject in the following 
 language. 
 
 " Where, then, shall we look for the origin of this relaxation of the 
 laws and all government ? How comes this Junius to have broke through 
 the cobwebs of the laws, 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. 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 their efforts avail ? No sooner has he wounded one, than he lays 
 down another dead at his feet. For my part, Avhen 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 bold truths. Yes, Sir, there are, in that composition, 
 many bold truths by which a wise prince might profit. It was the 
 rancour and venom with which I was struck. In these respects, the 
 North Briton is as much inferior to him as in strength, wit, and judg- 
 ment. 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. Yes ; he did make you his quarry, and you still bleed 
 from the wounds of his talons. You crouched, and still crouch, beneath 
 his rage. 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 could escape his vigilance and activity. Bad Ministers could 
 conceal nothing from his sagacity ; nor could promises nor threats induce 
 him to conceal any thing from the public." 
 
 If, however, the Whigs had received no more effective support than 
 from anonymous writers, the people would not have declared themselves 
 so strongly attached to the sentiments maintained by Junius ; he exer- 
 cised, indeed, an almost unlimited power over the imaginations and 
 passions of the Whig partizan ; and the boldness and seeming predictions 
 of his language were received by the people as oracular. Yet his autho- 
 rity was feeble it was unsupported by a name and character. 
 
5 
 
 At this crisis, the speeches and conduct of an individual effected 
 what the writings of Junius had paved the way for. The nation made 
 one simultaneous effort to recover their rights ; the consequence was 
 fatal to prerogative, and to hereditary and arbitrary power. 
 
 By the politicians of the times, he is called the Leader of Opposi- 
 tion ; by others, he is emphatically styled " the Man of the People;" 
 and the Whigs acknowledged him as William Pitt, Earl of Chatham. 
 Burke, Lord Chesterfield, Wilkes, the Abbe Raynal, the King of 
 Prussia, and Charles Butler, have each contributed to record his great 
 abilities in the language of truth and panegyric. If such men thought 
 him deserving of their highest encomiums, we may unhesitatingly credit 
 the eulogiums of those who were not his Lordship's contemporaries. 
 
 Mr. Butler, in his Reminiscences, says, " It was frequently given 
 to the writer of these pages to hear the speeches of Lord Chatham. No 
 person in his external appearance was ever more bountifully gifted by 
 nature for an orator. In his look and gesture, grace and dignity were 
 combined, but dignity presided ; the * terrors of his beak, the lightning 
 of his eye,' were insufferable. His voice was both full and clear ; his 
 lowest whisper was distinctly heard ; his middle tones were sweet, rich, 
 and beautifully varied ; when he elevated his voice to its highest pitch 
 the House was completely filled with the volume of the sound. The 
 effect was awful, except when he wished to cheer and animate, and then 
 he had spirit-stirring notes which were perfectly irresistible. He 
 frequently rose, on a sudden, from a very low to a very high key, but 
 it seemed to be without effort. His diction was remarkably simple, but 
 words were never chosen with greater care. His sentiments, too, were 
 apparently simple ; but sentiments were never adopted or uttered with 
 greater skill ; he was often familiar and even playful, but it was the 
 familiarity and playfulness of condescension ; the lion that dandled the 
 kid. The terrible, however, was his peculiar power. Then the whole 
 House sank before him. Still he was dignified ; and wonderful as was his 
 eloquence, it was attended with this important effect, that it impressed 
 every hearer with a conviction that there was something in him finer 
 even than his words ; that the man was infinitely greater than the orator." 
 Here I might pause, satisfied that the Reminiscent has presented to. 
 us so beautiful and perfect a sketch of the character of Lord Chatham ; 
 but the opinions of Burke, and those who were contemporary with his 
 Lordship, must not be passed over unnoticed. Thus speaks Burke : 
 
" Lord Chatham ! a great and celebrated name, who possessed 
 every outward requisite to bespeak respect and awe, whose lofty genius 
 and persuasive eloquence rendered him the idol of the nation who had 
 the best understanding of any man in England. Whose superior talents 
 had subdued the House of Commons, whose integrity and disinterested- 
 ness, whose zeal against corruption, arid whose inviolable attachment to 
 the interests of his country, had procured for him a great and celebrated 
 name. Possessed of an eloquence that was irresistible, and a genius that 
 was at once enterprising and steady. Conscious of his own virtue, he 
 never sought to conceal any part of his conduct. Plis invectives were 
 terrible, and uttered with such energy of diction, and such dignity of 
 action and countenance, that he intimidated those who were the most 
 willing and the best able to encounter him." 
 
 Thomson, in his Seasons, alluding to Lord Chatham, says 
 
 " . Thy pathetic eloquence, that moulds 
 
 Th' attentive senate, charms, persuades, exalts ; 
 
 Of honest zeal th' indignant lightning throws, 
 
 And shakes corruption on her venal throne." 
 
 Lord John Russell has given a summary of the opinions of others, 
 combined with his own, which cannot fail to interest us : " He was a 
 man endowed with qualities to captivate a nation, and subdue a popular 
 assembly. Bold and unhesitating in the part he was to take upon every 
 public question, he was the master of a loud harmonious voice, a com- 
 manding eye, an unrivalled energy, but at the same time propriety of 
 language, and a light of imagination which flashed from him with 
 brilliant splendour, and was gone ere any one could pronounce that the 
 speaker was fanciful or digressive. Upon every important subject, he 
 appealed to some common and inspiring sentiment; the feeling of 
 national honour, disgust at political corruption, the care of popular 
 liberty, contempt of artifice, or hatred of oppression. But, provided the 
 topic were animating and effective, he little cared whether it were one on 
 which a wise patriot could honestly dilate ; a vulgar prejudice served his 
 turn as well as an ancient and useful privilege : he countenanced every 
 prevailing delusion, and hurried the nation to war, not as a necessary 
 evil, but as an honourable choice. Above all, he loved to nurse the 
 popular jealousy of France ; and it was upon his means of gratifying this 
 feeling that he seemed to build his hopes of future power. Ever ready 
 to be the mouth-piece of the cry or clamour of the hour, he could be as 
 inconsistent as the multitude itself. In his earlier days, when reproached 
 
with his change of opinion, he pleaded honest conviction of error : after 
 he had acquired authority, he faced down his accusers with a glare of his 
 eye and the hardihood of his denial. Nor, although he assumed a tone 
 of virtue superior to his age, was he more scrupulous than others in 
 political intrigue. But his object was higher ; instead of bartering his 
 conscience for a large salary, or a share of patronage, he aimed at 
 individual power the fame of a great orator ; to be the fear of every 
 cabal, and the admiration of a whole people." * 
 
 Mr. Wilkes's " Character of Lord Chatham," published in the 
 Political Register of ] 769, will assist us in forming a proper estimate of 
 his Lordship's abilities : 
 
 " He raised himself to the greatest offices of the State by the rare 
 talent of command in a popular assembly. He was indeed born an 
 orator ; and, from nature, possessed every outward requisite to bespeak 
 respect, and even awe. A manly figure, with the eagle face of the 
 famous Conde, fixed your attention, and almost commanded reverence 
 the moment he appeared ; and the keen lightning of his eye bespoke 
 the haughty, fiery soul, before his lips had pronounced a syllable. His 
 tongue dropped venom. There was a kind of fascination in his look, 
 when he eyed any one askance. Nothing could withstand the force of 
 that contagion. The fluent Murray has faultered, and even Fox shrunk 
 back appalled from an adversary fraught with fire unquenchable, if I 
 may borrow the expression of our great Milton. He always cultivated 
 the art of speaking with the most intense care and application. He 
 has passed his life in the culling of words, the arrrangement of phrases, 
 and choice of metaphors." 
 
 Extract from the Preface to Lord Chatham's Speeches, by Mr. 
 Boyd ; published in 1779 : 
 
 " Those who have been witnesses to the wonders of his eloquence ; 
 who have listened to the music of his voice, or trembled at its majesty ; 
 who have seen the persuasive gracefulness of his action, or have felt its 
 force ; those who have caught the flame of eloquence from his eye, who 
 
 * " In those qualities that form a great statesman, in solid judg- 
 ment, in immoveable purpose, in enlargement of views and rapidity of 
 decision, Cicero is not to be compared with Demosthenes or Pericles 
 among the Greeks with Caesar among the Romans with Chatham, 
 Burke, or Napoleon among the moderns." Westminster Rev. July 1832. 
 
8 
 
 have rejoiced in the glories of his countenance, or shrunk from its frowns ; 
 will remember the resistless power with which he impressed conviction. 
 In these sketches of his original genius, they will read what they have 
 heretofore heard : and their memory will give due action to the picture, 
 by refiguring to their minds what they have with admiration seen. But 
 to those who never heard nor saw this accomplished orator, the utmost 
 effort of imagination will be necessary to form a just idea of that 
 combination of excellence which gave perfection to his eloquence ; his 
 elevated aspect, commanding the awe and mute attention of all who 
 beheld him j while a certain grace in his manner, conscious of all the 
 dignities of his situation, of the solemn scene he acted in, as well as his 
 own exalted character, seemed to acknowlege and repay the respect he 
 received. His venerable form, bowed with infirmity and age, but 
 animated by a mind which nothing could subdue : his spirit shining 
 through him, arming his eye with lightning, and clothing his lips with 
 thunder : or, if milder topics offered, harmonising his countenance in 
 smiles, and his voice in softness for the compass of his powers was 
 infinite. As no idea was too vast, no imagination too sublime, for the 
 grandeur and majesty of his manner ; so no fancy was too playful, nor 
 any allusion too comic, for the ease and gaiety with which he could 
 accommodate the occasion. But the character of his oratory was dignity : 
 this presided throughout ; giving force, because securing respect, even to 
 his sallies of pleasantry. This elevated the most familiar language, and 
 gave novelty and grace to the most familiar allusions ; so that, in his 
 hand, even the crutch became a weapon of oratory."* 
 
 I am indebted for the following energetic outline to the Retrospective 
 Review : 
 
 " Great, however, as we seriously believe Lord Chatham's merits as 
 a Minister to have been, we turn with still higher pleasure to his efforts 
 as a leader of opposition. He was, indeed, and emphatically, the man 
 of the people. He was their constant, sincere, and most able advocate, 
 their warm and zealous friend ; ready to ward off any danger which 
 might threaten their true interests, whether proceeding from ministerial 
 encroachment, or their own imprudence. And never, certainly, were 
 the people of this country in greater need of such a friend, than during 
 
 * Almon's Edition of <c Junius." 
 
9 
 
 the first ten years of George the Third. Administration succeeded to 
 administration with a rapidity quite unparalleled ; each heterogeneous, 
 discordant, and weak ; all the alternate tools and victims of a single 
 favourite's caprice, Lord Bute, Avhose influence was the curse of Britain 
 for so many years, precipitated the Court into many acts so arbitrary 
 and wilful as to exasperate the country almost to rebellion. At such a 
 time, Lord Chatham stood forward to repress the violence of parties ; 
 and while he vindicated the rights of the people, in language the boldest 
 and most eloquent, and with a zeal and manner to which (as contempo- 
 rary writers tell us) no description could do justice, he rebuked the 
 revolutionary spirit, and rescued multitudes from its unholy domination. 
 The very austerity which partly disqualified him for a minister, ren- 
 dered his efforts, as the people's advocate, only more impressive and 
 successful. Corruption, impudent as it was in those days, not unfre- 
 quently trembled before him. He kept apostacy and tyranny in 
 seasonable awe. The scoffer at patriotism, the derider of human rights, 
 the ignorant or interested partisan of intolerance, rarely ventured to 
 encounter the thunder and lightning of his indignation. He was 
 contented with the constitution as he found it ; and though he believed 
 that many abuses had vitiated it, and that some disorders had crept in, 
 which, if not reformed in season, would bring about its dissolution, he 
 yet resisted every proposal to take away even one of the principles on 
 which it was built. He thought that so long as the influence of the 
 Crown was kept within moderate bounds, so long as justice was 
 administered in purity, so long as the voice of the people could make 
 itself heard in those deliberations which involved their interests, the 
 constitution was a good one, and ought to be affectionately cherished. 
 He was no innovator ; but neither would he submit to innovation upon 
 the country's rights. His loyalty was unblemished, but it comprehended 
 the people as well as the king. He discountenanced every thing like 
 wantqn resistance to any public authority ; but, at the same time, he 
 believed with Lord Somers, that the highest authority might act in a 
 way which would justify resistance." 
 
 I have said that all men have been emulous to praise Lord Chatham ; 
 that friend as well as foe "unanimously" voted him the honour of a 
 public funeral ; that the Norths and the Cavendishes of the day joined in 
 the "unanimous" and humble address to the King, to confer some 
 signal favour on the family of the deceased Earl. But I must limit my 
 
10 
 
 remark to honourable foes : " It was not for a man like Horace 
 Walpole, a man of petty notions, of narrow views, and of very slender 
 charity, to understand a character like that of the elder Pitt ; as well 
 might the ant attempt to judge of the symmetry of the elephant. Still 
 less, however, was it likely, a priori, that if Walpole had, by possibi- 
 lity, understood such a man, he would have praised him. The stern and 
 haughty virtue of Chatham, his austere patriotism, and that lofty 
 decision of character, so regardless of all the forms of etiquette, and so 
 hostile to every thing like political intrigue, were ill calculated to 
 conciliate praise from the meddling, polished, timid, lady-like Walpole. 
 Moreover, when it is considered that the power of the historian's own 
 father was incessantly attacked, and at length overturned, by a Parlia- 
 mentary phalanx, of which Mr. Pitt was a most conspicuous member, we 
 shall be able to understand why the memory of that statesman is perse- 
 cuted by a writer, who seems never to have forgiven an insult upon 
 himself or his family." * 
 
 We are now in some degree prepared to examine the question of 
 Lord Chatham's claim to the authorship of the Letters of Junius ; that 
 his Lordship had abilities equal to the task, cannot be disputed. The 
 editor of Mr. George WoodfalFs edition of Junius has given, in the 
 preliminary essay, a tolerably correct outline of the characteristics 
 required by a claimant who is brought forward as the author of the 
 Letters of Junius. I have no hesitation in admitting the opinions of Dr. 
 Mason Good as correct, with but one or two exceptions j and I have as 
 little fear in quoting them, because I am convinced that no man, known 
 either by his writings, speeches, or orations, existed in the days of Junius, 
 who, in all important points, answered to the characteristics required, 
 excepting Lord Chatham. 
 
 In Woodfall's edition, Vol. I. p. 97, we are informed 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 of 
 affluent circumstances, of 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 account : that he was in habits of confidential intercourse, 
 
 * Ret. Rev. Vol. VII. p. 353. 
 
11 
 
 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, without 
 vanity, to boast of an ample knowledge and experience of the world ; 
 that during the years 1767, 1768, 1769, 1770, 1771, and part of 1772, 
 he resided almost constantly in London or its vicinity, devoting a very 
 large portion of his time to political concerns, 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 
 highly independent 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 forward as the author of the Letters of Junius." 
 
 Before we proceed to the discussion of the authorship of the Letters 
 of Junius, we must be careful to select a genuine edition of the writings 
 of that celebrated individual : so needful a procedure will not be deemed 
 superfluous. If we produce a copy of the Letters published under the 
 immediate care of Junius himself, few persons will feel disposed to 
 question its authenticity ; if, however, the edition of Mr. G. Woodfall 
 be called the Letters of Junius, I shall protest against its legitimate right 
 to that title. 
 
 The almost unbounded credence which has been given to Mr. G. 
 WoodfalFs edition of the " Miscellaneous Letters of Junius" would have 
 deterred me from an investigation into their genuineness if I were not 
 convinced that the most irrefragable proofs can be adduced that they 
 were not written by Junius. 
 
 It is a fortunate circumstance that Junius was subjected to the 
 mortification of seeing a spurious edition of his Letters. To that we are 
 indebted for an edition " corrected and improved by the author." In 
 the preface, Junius says " The encouragement given to a multitude of 
 spurious, mangled publications of Junius, persuades me that a complete 
 edition, corrected and improved by the author, will be favourably 
 
12 
 
 received. This edition contains all the Letters of Junius, Philo-Junius, 
 and of Sir William Draper and Mr. Home to Junius, with their respec- 
 tive dates, and according to the order in which they appeared in the 
 Public Advertiser." 
 
 In a private letter to his printer, dated Dec. 1771, Junius writes " The 
 enclosed completes all the materials that I can give you. I have done 
 my part take care you do your's. There are still two letters wanting, 
 which I expect you will not fail to insert in their places. One is from 
 Philo- Junius to Scaevola about Lord Camden, the other (also a Philo- 
 Junius) to a friend of the people about pressing." 
 
 Let us now examine the evidence which Mr. George Woodfall has 
 produced to invalidate the explicit assertion of Junius that he had 
 published a complete edition. 
 
 Mr. G. Woodfall, in the year 1812, came into possession, by pur- 
 chase, of the private letters of Junius to Mr. Woodfall, senior, the printer 
 of the Public Advertiser, and to Mr. Wilkes. I am satisfied to grant 
 this ;* but I would inquire How came Mr. G. Woodfall to publish 
 with the letters he had purchased another selection of letters which he 
 termed the Miscellaneous Letters of Junius? Surely he offered some 
 proof of their authenticity ? We will quote his own explanation : " The 
 proofs of their having been composed by the writer denominated Junius 
 are incontestible ; the manner, the phraseology, the sarcastic exprobratory 
 style, independently of any other evidence, sufficiently identify them. 
 These therefore are now added, together with such others whose 
 genuineness is equally indisputable, to the acknowledged Letters of 
 Junius, to render his productions complete. It is no objection to their 
 being genuine that they were omitted by Junius in his own edition 
 published by Mr. Woodfall, senior." 
 
 Such is the evidence which announced a volume of Letters called 
 the Miscellaneous Letters of Junius. I cannot assent to the mere opinion 
 
 * Mr. C. Butler ' ' who amused himself in an inquiry after the author 
 of Junius's Letters," remarks in a letter to Dr. Parr " There is little 
 doubt of the authenticity of the private correspondence between Junius 
 and Woodfall." (Rern. Vol. II. p. 239.) The Miscellaneous Letters 
 are not even named by either Mr. Butler or Dr. Parr : a silence so 
 expressive cannot be misunderstood. 
 
13 
 
 of the purchaser and publisher of the Correspondence of Junius with his 
 Father and Mr. Wilkes, and I will candidly state my reasons for pre- 
 suming to require more than an exprobratory style to class a letter as the 
 production of Junius. 
 
 If the Miscellaneous Letters had been indebted for their first public 
 appearance to Mr. George Woodfall, or been brought to light by any 
 explanation contained in the Private Letters, I should consider Mr. G. 
 Woodfall entitled to submit them to the public as the presumed Letters 
 of Junius ; but, unfortunately for that gentleman, the entire series of 
 Miscellaneous Letters had been in the columns of a public newspaper for 
 nearly half a century. They had been read or seen by Dr. Johnson, 
 Mr. Burke, Sir W. Draper, Mr. Wilkes, Mr. Home, Dr. Parr, Mr. 
 Butler, and by a host of men eminent for critical research and political 
 knowledge ; yet no observation had ever been made by any one about 
 them ; they were perused with no more than ordinary attention they 
 elicited no passing remark and they never became the subject of contro- 
 versy, until Mr. G. Woodfall rescued them, after forty years, from the 
 oblivion which they deserved. 
 
 Do we find, in " the complete edition corrected by Junius," a single 
 Letter, or a solitary sentence, from the mass of Letters called " The 
 Miscellaneous Letters of Junius ?" Certainly not. Neither does Junius 
 give even a hint, in his private letters to Mr. Woodfall, senior, about having 
 written a long series of letters prior to his first Junius in 1769. Surely 
 Junius might have selected, for his " complete edition," one letter out of 
 the 113 which he had written, says Mr. Woodfall, in 1767 and 1768, 
 and he was strangely negligent in overlooking so ample a series of his 
 own letters ! 
 
 A different fate awaited the appearance of a real Junius. " The 
 first letter which appeared under the signature of Junius brought the 
 writer into instant and full celebrity." The Editor of the Gentleman's 
 Magazine for February, 1769, introduces Junius by observing " The 
 following papers are written with a knowledge of public affairs beyond 
 the line of ordinary information, and are therefore submitted to the 
 public." The subsequent jnumbers of that Magazine verified the remark : 
 each Letter of Junius was inscribed in the order of its appearance. The 
 Political Register for May, 1769, remarks" The Letters which have 
 been written by the masterly pen of Junius, having excited and engaged 
 the attention of the admirers of elegant diction, we cannot but congra- 
 
14 
 
 tulate the public on finding that this celebrated writer appears to be a 
 sound reasoner on political facts, which he likewise states with great 
 precision and impartiality." 
 
 I may, perhaps without impropriety, remind the believers in the 
 authenticity of the Miscellaneous Letters, that in January, 1769, when 
 the first Junius was published, Fifty-five of the Miscellaneous Letters had 
 appeared in the columns of public newspapers, without note or comment, 
 although they were signed with a variety of Roman names to catch the 
 attention of the learned as Valerius, Titus, Silurus, Publius, Lucius,* 
 Brutus. The bait, however, never took. 
 
 Mr. Samson Woodfall does not give us any intimation that he had 
 the slightest suspicion that Junius was an old correspondent. When 
 Junius was forming an edition of his works, " complete, and corrected 
 by the author," he says to Woodfall, " there are still two letters want- 
 ing." In a prior letter to his printer, he writes" 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 they are by the same author. 
 If you adopt this plan, / shall point out those I would recommend ; for 
 you know I do not, neither have I time to, give equal care to them all." 
 Woodfall adopted the plan, and Junius pointed out the Philo-J amuses, 
 written to defend or explain particular passages in Junius, but not a 
 single letter from the Miscellaneous Collection. Mr. Woodfall made no 
 comment on this omission ; he was satisfied to believe that Junius knew 
 his own letters \ and as Woodfall never for an instant imagined that 
 Junius wrote under different signatures, no motive could induce him to 
 make an appeal in favour of 110 letters previously published in the 
 periodicals of the day. The fact stands uncontradicted, that the Woodfall 
 who corresponded with Junius, permitted the entire collection of 
 Miscellaneous Letters, since published by Mr. George Woodfall, to be 
 unknown as the Letters of Junius. The inference is obvious. 
 
 * Mr. Almon, the bookseller, " called Lord Temple's man," " was 
 warm in favour of the repeal of the American stamp act, writing and 
 publishing a good deal in support of it." He ' ' wrote many letters under 
 signatures, but several of them under that of an Independent Whig, 
 which, and Lucius, were his most usual signatures." Memoir? of a late 
 eminent Bookseller. 
 
15 
 
 In the Gentleman's Magazine for Oct. 1799, p. 845, is a letter from 
 Mr. Wm. Woodfall, brother to Henry Samson Woodfall, from which the 
 following quotation is taken : " The cause of truth is every man's cause, 
 and I would willingly go out of my way to serve it. That gentleman, 
 ( Junius) whoever he was, wrote in the Public Advertiser under the three 
 distinct signatures, Lucius, Junius, Brutus, exclusive of what he himself 
 terms ' the auxiliary part of his correspondence/ the letters signed 
 Philo- Junius. I believe I may safely assert that every one of his letters 
 was shewn me in manuscript by my brother previous to publication, and 
 no one of them ever bore the appearance of being written in a disguised 
 hand." Mr. William WoodfalFs account, which I have no wish to 
 doubt, will not contribute to increase the claims of Poplicola, Y. Y., 
 X. X., &c &c., to be considered as from the pen of Junius, although it 
 may entitle Lucius and Brutus to more consideration. 
 
 The notes to the preliminary essay let us a little into the secret of 
 proving any given letter, with or without a signature, to be from the 
 pen of Junius. At page *14, we are informed " that those under the 
 signature of Lucius were early and generally traced to the pen of Junius, 
 may be fairly inferred from the following passage in a letter dated April, 
 1769, by " a long forgotten correspondent." " In the warm and ener- 
 getic, though keen and sarcastic style of Junius, we may, I think, easily 
 descry the Lucius, long dreaded by his opponents ; and from the warmth 
 of his sentiments, if they do indeed correspond with his expression, we 
 may expect a future Brutus." Mr. Woodfall then remarks that " the 
 celebrity acquired by these earlier letters of Junius, under the signature 
 of Lucius, induced several other writers of the same period to adopt the 
 same signature ; and hence Lucius, and Lucius Verus, are common 
 signatures in the Public Advertiser during the years 1769, 1770. But 
 there is no more reason to suppose that Junius himself ever had recourse 
 to this signature than he had to that of Atticus, or Brutus, after the 
 assumption of this last appellative. He would not degrade the name of 
 Lucius by an unfinished production ; and to all that he regarded as 
 finished, he continued to subscribe Junius as a still more popular 
 signature." 
 
 Now if I correctly understand this explanation, (not very clearly 
 expressed,) Mr. Woodfall infers that Lucius was Junius because " a long 
 forgotten correspondent" thinks he can descry a keen and sarcastic style 
 in Junius, corresponding with the style formerly adopted by the dreaded 
 
16 
 
 Lucius. An inference so fair leads to a general rule, that any or every 
 letter signed Lucius or Brutus must be from the pen of Junius, if the 
 style is keen and sarcastic. The sentence quoted above informs us that 
 " other writers adopted the same signature, and hence Lucius is a 
 common signature during 1769, 1770." 
 
 Are we to understand Mr. Woodfall to say that no Lucius appeared 
 before 1769 ? I should feel inclined to conclude that such was his 
 meaning, if I did not read in the same page that " the letters of Lucius 
 and Atticus preceded those with the signature of Junius by a few weeks." 
 In possession of dates, we may proceed with tolerable safety. The first 
 Lucius (I quote from Mr. Woodfall's edition) is dated 10th Aug. 1768 ; 
 and Atticus appears for the first time on the 19th of the same month ; 
 Junius dates his first letter, January 21, 1769. So much for Mr. 
 Woodfall's accuracy in dates antecedent to Junius. If there were a 
 necessity to mention dates, surely it was proper to be correct, and not to 
 say that a letter written in August, 1768, preceded only by a few weeks 
 one written in January, 1769. " But there is no reason to suppose that 
 Junius ever had recourse to the signature Lucius after he had adopted 
 that of Junius." This I believe is the meaning of Mr. Woodfall's 
 expression. The inference may be a convenient one, because it enables 
 that gentleman to degrade certain other letters signed Lucius, Atticus, 
 and Brutus, which appeared after the first Junius ; perhaps the absence 
 of a keen and sarcastic style may have contributed to condemn them as 
 spurious ; at all events, Mr. W. thought them " unfinished productions," 
 they are not included in the Miscellaneous Selection. 1 have compared 
 the discarded Lucius, Atticus, Brutus, and a "remarkable Vindex," 
 published in the periodicals of 1769, 1770, and I should infer that they 
 had as legitimate a claim to be considered from the pen of Junius, 
 " after he had assumed that appellative," as the letters given in the 
 Miscellaneous Selection. Mr. Woodfall, by some mistake, inserts a 
 Junius, dated 21st November, 1768, two months before the real Junius 
 appeared ; and by as unaccountable an oversight, a Junius to Lord North, 
 printed in the Gentleman's Magazine for 1772, is not to be found in his 
 volume. 
 
 That some of the letters signed Junius were cautiously received by 
 the public at the time of their first publication, is clear from the notices 
 to correspondents in the periodicals of 1772 : an instance or two will be 
 sufficient as proof. 
 
17 
 
 " The following letter was inserted in the London Packet of May 1, 
 but that not being the channel through which the celebrated Letters of 
 Junius have been usually conveyed to the public, some persons, notwith- 
 standing the elegance of the style, suspected this was not the production 
 of that able writer." The letter is signed Junius. It came not from the 
 original adopter of that signature, because it is not inserted by Junius in 
 his own corrected edition. 
 
 The second example is more interesting than the first. 
 
 " The following letter was inserted in a daily paper ; by the style, 
 some think it NOT to be the work of that admired author ; the ideas, 
 they say are too vague, and the language too flat to come from the pen 
 of Junius. The piece, however, has merit ; on which account, and to 
 oblige some of our correspondents, we insert it."* 
 
 This was also signed Junius. In the corrected edition by Junius, 
 the letter is inserted. It may reasonably be supposed that Mr. Almon, 
 (the editor and publisher of the Political Register, and of many pam- 
 phletst and letters relating to the politics of the Junian era), was as 
 capable of detecting a genuine from a spurious letter as Mr. Woodfall. 
 Yet Mr. Almon has in these instances proved that he was incompetent 
 to form a correct opinion ; he pronounced a genuine Junius to be vague 
 and flat, and not from the pen of the admired author, and the jackdaw 
 in borrowed plumes passes for the celebrated Junius. 
 
 The truth is, " that several other writers of the same period adopted 
 the same signatures ;" and our only safe guide is to consider " the 
 corrected and improved edition by Junius" as a complete edition. 
 
 Miscellaneous Letter 7, and the note at p. *37, merit a few remarks, 
 The letter may be considered a sort of comic farce ; but in strict fairness 
 to Mr. Woodfall, we will quote his own explanation : The letter, 
 
 * Political Register for 1772. 
 
 t In Mr. Erskine's defence of Mr. Almon for libel, he says Mr. 
 Almon was the friend and favourite of the Earl of Chatham, and I 
 believe he suffered considerably in supporting his interest he was often 
 tried for libels wrote in his favour" Memoirs of a late eminent Book- 
 seller, p. 259. This is a curious admission from so learned a man as Mr. 
 Erskine. Mr. Almon was tried for selling Junius's Letter to the King. 
 Why should Mr. Erskine connect Almon, Chatham, and Junius in an 
 action for libel ? 
 
18 
 
 independently of its containing the style and sentiment of Junius, is 
 additionally brought home to him by the printer's customary acknowledg- 
 ment in the P. A. being followed by the subjoined observation : " Our 
 friend and correspondent C. will always find the utmost attention paid to 
 his favours." 
 
 The characters in the letter are, "Tilbury, Judge Jefferies, Caution, 
 Malagrida, and Sulky." The opening speech of Tilbury will shew us a 
 specimen of the " style and sentiment which,, (says Mr. Woodfall,) 
 independently of any other evidence, will sufficiently identify a Junius." 
 " Tilbury. In the name of the devil and his dam, can any body tell 
 what accident brings us five together ?" His next sentiment is " B t 
 me if I care whether he has any instructions or not. But who the devil's 
 to draw them up ?" So much for keen and sarcastic style. 
 
 The authority of " our friend and correspondent C." is very properly- 
 produced to support Mr. Woodfall ; but can we infer that our friend C. 
 of October, 1767* * s tne same correspondent as the friend C. of April, 
 1769? It is perhaps possible that the celebrity of the earlier letters 
 signed C. or Lucius, may have induced other writers of the same period 
 to adopt the same signature ; and that Junius was so delighted with the 
 keen sarcastic style of C. in 1767> as to induce him to continue the same 
 signature in 1769. 
 
 We should, or ought to be, in possession of clear and explicit 
 information to warrant us in saying this or that letter was from the pen 
 of Junius. Conjectures are not proofs ; and an inference is not a fair 
 one, unless we have correct data. What, then, have we to support Mr. 
 Woodfall's opinion that these Miscellaneous Letters are written by 
 Junius ? 
 
 We will pass over a long list of signatures, as various as the style 
 of the letters, and devote a little time to " Atticus." 
 
 " There were, says Mr. Woodfall, p. *55, some very excellent 
 letters, signed Atticus, that appeared in the Public Advertiser between 
 the dates of June 26, 1772, and October 14, 1773, and exhibit much 
 of Junius's style, spirit, and sentiments; and which, hence, by some 
 tolerable judges, have been actually ascribed to him ; but for various 
 reasons, the editor is convinced they are not the production of Junius. 
 The talents they afford proof of, though considerable, are inferior ; and 
 they contain attacks upon some statesmen who were never attacked by 
 Junius." 
 
19 
 
 The fatuity of these admissions is unaccountable. On previous 
 occasions, letters were admitted into the Miscellaneous Selection on 
 account of the style, spirit, and sentiments, independently of any other 
 evidence ; but now it pleases Mr. Woodfall to condemn a letter as 
 spurious, although " some tolerable judges" have pronounced it " a very 
 excellent letter," and " it also exhibits much of Junius's style and 
 sentiment." The reasons, however, for so unceremonious a rejection 
 of Atticus, are stated as " inferior to Junius in talents, and they contain 
 attacks upon some statesmen who are never attacked by Junius." The 
 justness of these observations satisfies me ; but how can Mr. Woodfall be 
 judged by these rules ? How is it that the same test was not applied to 
 all the Miscellaneous Letters ? Inferiority of style and talents condemn 
 an Atticus why not also a Lucius, a Veteran, a Tilbury, a Correggio, 
 and id genus omne ? Surely the law which banishes one impostor 
 should not allow a score not only to escape all punishment, but to be 
 exalted to titles of honour. Inferiority of style is conclusive evidence 
 against the Miscellaneous Letters generally ; and inferiority of style and 
 sentiment will be conclusive evidence against any claim depending on 
 them for proofs of identity. Dr. Johnson said " I should have believed 
 Burke to be Junius, because I know no man but Burke who mas capable 
 of writing these letters, but Burke spontaneously denied it." 
 
 Mr. Woodfall very properly remarks that Atticus could not be 
 written by Junius, " because he attacks statesmen who were never 
 attacked by Junius." Will not the same objection extend to Poplicola 
 and nearly one half of these letters ? We cannot be unacquainted with 
 the abuse therein freely bestowed on many eminent statesmen never 
 attacked by Junius. In a subsequent page, we will supply a few facts 
 to show that the most impudent and blackguard language is applied to 
 statesmen never attacked by Junius. I will confine myself at present 
 to one example Lord Camden : " An apostate lawyer, weak enough to 
 sacrifice his own character, and base enough to betray the laws of his 
 country." Poplicola. " The laws of England under his feet, and before 
 his distorted vision a dagger, which he calls the law of nature, and which 
 marshals him the way to murder the constitution." Correggio. " The 
 assertor of prerogative independent of law." Atticus. And letter 17 
 and 21 " hold him to public odium." These epithets may be compared 
 with Junius's opinion of Lord Camden in letter 69. " To the Right 
 Hon. Lord Camden. My Lord I turn with pleasure from that barren 
 
20 
 
 waste in which no salutary plant takes root, no verdure quickens, to a 
 character fertile, as I willingly believe, in every great and good qualifi- 
 cation. I call upon you, in the name of the English nation, to stand 
 forth in the defence of the laws of your country : and to exert, in the 
 cause of truth and justice, those great abilities with which you were 
 entrusted for the benefit of mankind. Your Lordship's character assures 
 me that you will assume that principal part which belongs to you, in 
 supporting the laws of England against a wicked judge, who makes it 
 the occupation of his life to misinterpret and pervert them." 
 
 The only inference which can be drawn from this comparison, is, 
 that the same writer cannot have published such opposite opinions ; 
 consequently, that Junius cannot be identified in Correggio, Poplicola, and 
 Atticus. 
 
 It could not have escaped Mr. G. Woodfall's observation, that no 
 private letter was received by his father from Junius before April, 1769, 
 two years after the date of the first Miscellaneous Letter, signed Poplicola ; 
 an omission so singular as to persuade an unprejudiced person that 
 Junius was not in correspondence with Mr. Woodfall, senior, either as a 
 public or private writer, prior to the appearance of the first Junius 
 in 1769. 
 
 The Miscellaneous Letters signed Poplicola require a particular 
 examination. The prominence of their station, being the 1st and 2d in 
 the order of Mr. G Woodfall's arrangement, and their " sarcastic 
 exprobratory style," entitle them to it; but I have more powerful 
 motives than these in taking up this investigation. 
 
 The letters of Poplicola are at variance with those of Junius on a 
 material question, and wilful or ignorant misrepresentations are visible 
 throughout them. In the second letter, we have the following specimen 
 of " false facts." " Mr. C. D. wilfully misrepresents the cause of that 
 censure which was very justly thrown upon Lord Chatham, when the 
 exportation of corn was prohibited by proclamation. The measure itself 
 was necessary, and the more necessary from the scandalous delay of the 
 Ministry in calling the Parliament together ; but to maintain that the 
 proclamation was legal, and that there was a suspending power lodged 
 in the Crown, was such an outrage to the common sense of mankind, and 
 such a daring attack upon the constitution, as a free people ought never 
 to forgive. The man who maintained those doctrines ought to have had 
 the Tarpeian rock or a gibbet for his reward. Another gentleman, upon 
 
21 
 
 that occasion, had spirit and patriotism enough to declare, even in a 
 respectable assembly, that when he advised the proclamation, he did it 
 with the strongest conviction of its being illegal ; but he rested his defence 
 upon the unavoidable necessity of the case, and submitted himself to the 
 judgment of his country. This noble conduct deserved the applause and 
 gratitude of the nation, while that of the Earl Chatham, and his miser- 
 able understrappers, deserves nothing but detestation and contempt." 
 
 On referring to the speech of Lord Chatham on the 9th of January, 
 1770, and comparing his language with the assertions of Poplicola, we 
 shall have little hesitation in saying that he knowingly stated what was 
 false. His Lordship " was satisfied there was a power in some degree 
 arbitrary with which the constitution entrusted the Crown, to be made 
 use of under correction of the legislature, and at the hazard of the 
 minister, upon any sudden emergency or unforeseen calamity which 
 might threaten the welfare of the people or the safety of the state. That 
 on this principle he had himself advised a measure which he knew was 
 not strictly legal; but he had recommended it as a measure of necessity, 
 to save a starving people from famine, and had submitted to the judg- 
 ment of his country." 
 
 We will now turn to the Sixtieth Letter of Junius. 
 
 " With regard to Lord Camden, the truth is, that he inadvertently 
 over-shot himself, as appears plainly by that unguarded mention of a 
 tyranny of forty days, which I myself heard. Instead of asserting that 
 the proclamation was legal, he should have said, f My Lords, the 
 proclamation was illegal, but I advised it, because it was indispensably 
 necessary to save the kingdom from famine ; and I submit myself to the 
 justice and mercy of my country/ Such language as this would have 
 been manly, rational, and consistent; not unfit for a lawyer, and every 
 way worthy of a great man." 
 
 In this inquiry we observe Poplicola at variance with Junius, and 
 designedly confounding Lord Chatham with Lord Camden. No one will, 
 I hope, now consider the letters of Poplicola as the productions of Junius. 
 The inequality of composition and style is, I imagine, sufficiently appa- 
 rent between the Letters of Junius and the Miscellaneous Letters, an 
 argument decidedly opposed to their being the production of the same 
 mind. Mr. Barker, after contending with Dr. Parr and Mr. Charles 
 Butler that no great inequality of style and composition can proceed 
 
from the same individual, observes " But I must be permitted to 
 remark that Junius, when he writes under the signature of Junius, is 
 always true to himself; the same spirit, the same vigour, the same mind, 
 the same sarcasm, the same point, the same heart, the same intelligence, 
 the same elegance of thought, the same splendour of diction, the same 
 harmony, pervades every letter." " No man can have read Junius 
 carefully without observing the high-mindedness and pride which belong 
 to his character." Lord Chatham addresses his nephew in the following 
 nervous language : 
 
 ' Fmitimis Oratori Poeta.' " Substitute Tully and Demosthenes 
 in the place of Homer and Virgil ; and arm yourself with all the variety 
 of manner, copiousness and beauty of diction, nobleness and magnificence 
 of ideas of the Roman Consul ; and under the powers of eloquence, 
 complete by the irresistible torrent of vehement argumentation, the close 
 and forcible reasoning, and the depth and fortitude of mind of the 
 Grecian statesman." 
 
 The Editor of the Anniversary Calendar remarks that " this imperial 
 style would not disgrace the page of Junius himself." 
 
 But where shall we seek for an eulogium on the Miscellaneous 
 Letters ? The Reviewers have manifested great shyness about these 
 Letters. The promises in the Gentleman's Magazine for December, 
 1812, are yet unfulfilled. In that Number, Mr. Urban pledged himself 
 to continue the Review of Mr. G. Woodfall's edition of Junius ; not a 
 line has been written about them since. If I ventured a guess as to the 
 cause of the omission, it would probably wear the appearance of being an 
 uncharitable one. 
 
 The general inattention of literary men to these letters is unaccoun- 
 tably provoking : " The phraseology, the manner, the exprobratory style, 
 independently of any other evidence, sufficiently identifying them as the 
 productions of Junius" ! ! 
 
 The following epithets, applied to the Earl of Chatham, are 
 examples of the high-mindedness of the Junius of Mr. G. Woodfall's 
 Miscellaneous Collection. 
 
 " A Man purely and perfectly bad a Traitor a Traitor hung on 
 a gibbet, (by way of distinction) a Grand Vizier an abandoned 
 Profligate the Patron of Sedition a Villain, (by way of ^distinction 
 from) a black Villain -a Madman a Stalking Horse to a Stallion, 
 
23 
 
 smelling at a Thistle a Lunatic brandishing a crutch a Lunatic 
 bawling through a grate a Lunatic writing with desperate charcoal a 
 Dotard old Gouty Legs" cum multis aliis. 
 
 To comment on these " high-minded" expressions is needless. 
 Junius might probably have remarked " Every common dauber writes 
 rascal and villain under 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 the 
 impression they make is immediate and uniform : Nor is it possible to 
 mistake his characters, whether they represent the treachery of a Minister 
 or the abused simplicity of a King." 
 
 The writer of the preliminary essay to Mr. Woodfall's edition of 
 Junius grasped at too much ; the public should have been spared the 
 expense of purchasing an incongruous collection of letters possessed of no 
 intrinsic merit whatsoever. 
 
 In concluding this investigation, I will remark that he must be a 
 bold man, and possess more boldness than judgment, who ventures to 
 contend, unsupported by strong evidence, that the Miscellaneous Letters 
 were written by Junius. 
 
 The question of what claim has Lord Chatham to be considered 
 the author of the Letters of Junius, will now be one for serious and 
 attentive investigation. 
 
 I will proceed, in the first instance, to examine and compare the 
 political opinions of Lord Chatham and Junius.* If I succeed in pro- 
 ducing parallel passages from the writings of Junius and the speeches of 
 Lord Chatham, I shall have laid a foundation on which I shall be able to 
 erect a substantial and durable claim for his Lordship to the authorship of 
 those Letters. Take the following : 
 
 JUNIUS. " I too have a claim to the candid interpretation of my 
 country, when I acknowledge an involuntary compulsive assent to one 
 very unpopular opinion. I lament the unhappy necessity, whenever it 
 arises, of providing for the safety of the state by a temporary invasion 
 of the personal liberty of the subject. Would to God it were practicable 
 
 * The great object is to connect the rival claimants, with the various 
 personal opinions, prejudices, and, above all, spleens of Junius. Here 
 is in reality the most difficult part of the business." -Blackwood's 
 Magazine, Vol. XVIII. p. 168. 
 
24 
 
 to reconcile these important objects in every possible situation of public 
 affairs ! The community has a right to command, as well as to purchase, 
 the service of its members. I see that right founded originally upon a 
 necessity which supersedes all argument. I see it established by usage 
 immemorial, &c."* 
 
 LORD CHATHAM. " I willingly take this occasion to declare my 
 opinion upon a question not a very popular one, neither am I running 
 the race of popularity. I am myself clearly convinced that without 
 impressing, it is impossible to equip a respectable fleet. I do not rest 
 my opinion merely upon necessity. I am satisfied that the power of 
 impression is founded upon uninterrupted usage. It is the consuetudo 
 Regni, and part of the common law prerogative of the Crown."t J 
 
 JUNIUS. " His Majesty proceeds to assure us that ( he has made 
 the laws the rule of his conduct.' Was it in ordering or permitting his 
 Ministers to apprehend Mr. Wilkes by a general warrant ? General 
 warrants, it is true, had been often issued, but they had never been 
 regularly questioned or resisted till the case of Mr. Wilkes ; he brought 
 them to trial, and the moment they were tried, they were declared 
 illegal." Letter 41. 
 
 CHATHAM. " Ministers had refused to lay the warrant before the 
 House, because they were conscious of its illegality. Neither the Law 
 Officers of the Crown, nor the Minister himself, had attempted to defend 
 the legality of this warrant. He therefore did not hesitate to say that 
 there was not a man to be found of sufficient profligacy to defend this 
 warrant upon the principle of legality. It was no justification, he said, 
 that general warrants had been issued." Parl. Hist. Vol. XV. p. 1402. 
 
 JUNIUS TO THE KING. " Are you a Prince of the House of 
 Hanover and do you exclude all the leading Whig families from your 
 
 * Letter 59. t Gent. Mag. Vol. XL. p. 573. 
 
 J Dr. Parr directed the attention of Mr. Barker to a letter about 
 Junius in the Morning Chronicle, Dec. 26, 1812, where the following 
 words occur : " It is not a little remarkable that both Junius and Lord 
 Chatham should have expressed the same unpopular opinion respecting 
 the legality of press warrants ; a deviation from their general system 
 almost unaccountable in two men professing so strong an attachment to 
 the liberty of the subject, and who so commonly appealed to popular 
 feelings." Letters on the author of Junius, p. 281. 
 
25 
 
 councils ? Do you profess to govern according to law ; and is it con- 
 sistent with that profession to impart your confidence and affection to 
 those men only who, though now perhaps detached from the desperate 
 cause of the Pretender, are marked in this country by an hereditary 
 attachment to high and arbitrary principles of government ?" Junius 
 writes to Lord Mansfield" In your earlier days you were but little 
 infected with the prudence of your country you had some original 
 attachments which you took every proper opportunity to acknowledge. 
 The liberal spirit of youth prevailed over your native discretion. 
 Your zeal in the cause of an unhappy Prince (the Pretender) was 
 expressed with the sincerity of wine and some of the solemnities of 
 religion." Letter 41. 
 
 CHATHAM. " I cannot avoid seeing some capital errors in the 
 distribution of the royal favour. There are men, my Lords, who, if their 
 own services were forgotten, ought to have an hereditary merit with the 
 House of Hanover ; whose ancestors stood forth in the day of trouble, 
 opposed their persons and fortunes to treachery and rebellion, and 
 secured to his Majesty's family this splendid power of rewarding. There 
 are other men, my Lords, (looking sternly and shaking his fist at Lord 
 Mansfield) who, to speak tenderly of them, were not quite so forward in 
 the demonstrations of their zeal to the reigning family ; there was another 
 cause, my Lords, and a partiality to it, which some persons had not, at 
 all times, discretion enough to conceal." Parl. Hist. vol. 16, p. 1107- 
 
 JUNIUS. " There is no statute existing by which the specific 
 disability* is created. There is no precedent in all the proceedings of the 
 House of Commons which comes entirely home to the present case. An 
 attempt has been made, not merely to rob a single county of its rights, 
 but, by inevitable consequences, to alter the constitution of the House 
 of Commons. This fatal attempt has succeeded, and stands a precedent, 
 recorded for ever." Letter 16. 
 
 " Mr. Walpole's incapacity (to sit as a member of the House of 
 Commons) arose from the crimes he had committed, not from the punish- 
 ment the House annexed to them." Letter 20. 
 
 * The specific disability was " The expulsion of a member of the 
 House of Commons, of itself, creates in him such an incapacity to be 
 re-elected, that at a subsequent election any votes given to him are null 
 and void." Junius, Letter 16. 
 
 1 
 
26 
 
 " But Junius has a great authority to support him, which, to speak 
 with the Duke of Grafton, I accidentally met with this morning in the 
 course of rny reading. It contains an admonition which cannot be 
 repeated too often. Lord Somers, in his excellent tract upon the 
 rights of the people makes this observation/" &c. Letter 46. 
 
 LORD CHATHAM'S SPEECH. " Now, my Lords, I affirm, and am 
 ready to maintain, that the late decision of the House of Commons, upon 
 the Middlesex election, is destitute of every one of those properties and 
 conditions which I hold to be essential to the legality of such a decision. 
 It is not founded in reason, for it carries with it a contradiction, that 
 the representative should perform the office of the constituent body. It 
 is not supported by a single precedent ; for the case of Sir R. Walpole is 
 but a half precedent, and even that half is imperfect. His incapacity 
 was indeed declared, but his crimes are stated as the ground of the 
 resolution, and his opponent was declared to be not duly elected, even 
 after his incapacity was established." " His Lordship quoted Lord 
 Somers in support of his law ; he called him an honest man, who knew 
 and loved the English constitution." Parl. Hist. vol. 16, p. 661. 
 
 JUNIUS. " I can more readily admire the liberal spirit and integrity, 
 than the sound judgment, of any man who prefers a republican form of 
 government, in this or any other empire of equal extent, to a monarchy 
 so qualified and limited as our's. I am convinced that neither is it in 
 theory the wisest system of government nor practicable in this country." 
 
 LORD CHATHAM. " I revere the just prerogative of the Crown. I 
 acknowledge the just power and reverence the constitution of the House of 
 Commons. The constitution of this country depends upon King, Lords, 
 and Commons, and which, by their power, are a balance to each other." 
 
 JUNIUS. " The power of King, Lords, and Commons is not an 
 arbitrary power. The power of the Legislature is limited, not only by 
 the general rules of natural justice and the welfare of the community, 
 but by the forms and principles of our particular constitution. If this 
 doctrine be not true, we must admit that King, Lords, and Commons 
 have no rule to direct their resolutions, but merely their own will and 
 pleasure. They unite the legislative and executive power in the same 
 hands, and dissolve the constitution by an Act of Parliament. But I am 
 persuaded you will not leave it to the choice of seven hundred persons, 
 notoriously corrupted by the Crown, whether seven millions of their 
 equals shall be freemen or slaves." Dedication to the Letters, p. 5. 
 
27 
 
 CHATHAM. " The House of Commons, we are told, have a supreme 
 jurisdiction, that there is no appeal from their sentence. We all know 
 what the constitution is we all know that the first principle of it is, 
 that the subject shall not be governed by the arbitrium of any one man, 
 or body of men (less than the whole Legislature,) but by certain laws, 
 to which he has virtually given his consent, which are open to him to 
 examine, and not beyond his ability to understand. Let us consider 
 which we ought to respect most, the representative or the collective body 
 of the people. My Lords, five hundred gentlemen are not ten millions ; 
 and if we must have a constitution, let us take care to have the English 
 nation on our side. If the freeholders of England desert their own cause, 
 they deserve to be slaves." Parl. Hist. vol. 16, p. 659. 
 
 JUNIUS. " I am no friend to the doctrine of precedents exclusive 
 of right, though lawyers often tell us that whatever has been once done, 
 may lawfully be done again." Preface to Junius's Letters, p. 45. 
 
 CHATHAM " With respect to the decision of the courts of justice, 
 I am far from denying their due weight and authority ; yet, placing them 
 in the most respectable view, I still consider them not as law, but as an 
 evidence of the law ; and before they can arrive at even that degree of 
 authority, it must appear that they are founded in and confirmed by 
 reason that they do not violate the spirit of the constitution. The 
 justice of the measure is superior to the force of precedents." Parl. Hist, 
 pp. 66 J, 958. 
 
 JUNIUS. " The people of Ireland have been uniformly plundered 
 and oppressed. In return, they give you every day fresh marks of their 
 resentment. It is not from the alienated affections of Ireland or America 
 that you can reasonably look for assistance, still less from the people of 
 England." Letter 35. 
 
 CHATHAM. " Ireland has various reasons to complain ; you may 
 judge of their number and magnitude by the present flame. The fact is, 
 that Great Britain, Ireland, and America are equally dissatisfied, and 
 have reason to be dissatisfied, with the present Ministry." Parl. Hist, 
 vol. 17, p. 220. 
 
 JUNIUS. The affray in St. George's Fields, at the contest for the 
 Middlesex election in 1769, when Clarke was killed by Edward M'Quirk, 
 is described as " wretches butchered by the Guards," and M'Quirk is 
 called ' a monster.' Letter 8. 
 
28 
 
 CHATHAM. " The measures taken to carry the Middlesex election in 
 favour of the court, the decision of that election, the murders in St. 
 George's Fields," &c. &c. Parl. Hist. vol. 17, p. 221. 
 
 JUNIUS TO WILKES. " Whenever the question shall be seriously 
 agitated, I will endeavour (and if I live I will assuredly attempt it,) to 
 convince the English nation by arguments, to my understanding 
 unanswerable, that they ought to insist upon a triennial, and banish 
 the idea of an annual Parliament." " Lord Chatham's project of 
 increasing the number of Knights of Shires appears to me admirable, 
 and the moment we have obtained a triennial Parliament, it ought to 
 be tried." 
 
 RECORDED OPINION OF LORD CHATHAM. " With the most deli- 
 berate and solemn conviction to his understanding, he now declared 
 himself a convert to triennial Parliaments." Parl. Hist. vol. 17* p- 223. 
 
 JUNIUS TO WILKES. " I do most earnestly wish that you would 
 consider of, and promote a plan for, forming constitutional clubs all 
 through the kingdom. A measure of this kind would alarm Government 
 more, and be of more essential service to the cause, than any thing that 
 can be done relative to new-modelling the House of Commons." 
 
 LORD CHATHAM. " The Americans, sore under injuries, and 
 irritated by wrongs, stript of their inborn rights and dearest privileges, 
 have resisted, and entered into associations, for the preservation of that 
 blessing to which life and property are but secondary considerations ; 
 associations prompted by no other motive than that glorious and exalted 
 one, the preservation of their common liberties." Gent. Mag. v. 25, p. 7- 
 
 JUNIUS. " As to cutting away the rotten boroughs, I am as much 
 offended as any man at seeing so many of them under the direct influence 
 of the crown, or at the disposal of private persons ; yet I own I have 
 both doubts and apprehensions in regard to the remedy you propose. I 
 shall be charged, perhaps, with an unusual want of political intrepidity, 
 when I honestly confess to you that I am startled at the idea of so exten- 
 sive an amputation. In the first place, I question the power de jure of 
 the legislature to disfranchise a number of boroughs upon the general 
 ground of improving the constitution. When you propose to cut away 
 the rotten parts, can you tell us what parts are perfectly sound ? Are 
 there any certain limits, in fact or theory, to inform you at what point 
 you must stop, at what point the mortification ends ? I highly approve 
 
29 
 
 of Lord Chatham's idea of infusing a portion of new health into the 
 constitution, to enable it to bear its infirmities." Letter 69. 
 
 LORD CHATHAM. " The boroughs of this country have properly 
 enough been called the rotten parts of the constitution. But in my 
 judgment, these boroughs, corrupt as they are, must be considered as the 
 natural infirmity of the constitution. Like the infirmities of the body, 
 we must bear them with patience, and submit to carry them about with 
 us. The limb is mortified, but the amputation might be death. Let us 
 try whether some gentler remedies may not be discovered. Since we 
 cannot cure the disorder, let us endeavour to infuse such a portion of 
 new health into the constitution as may enable it to support its -most 
 inveterate diseases." Parl. Hist. vol. 16, p. 753. 
 
 JUNIUS. LIBERTY OF THE PRESS. " Let it be then impressed 
 upon your minds, let it be instilled into your children, that the Liberty 
 of the Press is the palladium of all the civil, political, and religious 
 rights of an Englishman. The liberty of the press is our only resource ; 
 it will command an audience when every honest man in the kingdom is 
 excluded." Dedication and Preface to Letters. 
 
 CHATHAM. " The circumstances had justly alarmed the nation, 
 and made them uncommonly attentive to the operations of Parliament. 
 Hence the publication of the parliamentary debates. And where was 
 the injury, if the members acted upon honest principles ? For a public 
 assembly to be afraid of having their deliberations published, is monstrous 
 and speaks for itself. Not satisfied, however, with shutting their doors, 
 the Commons would overturn the liberty of the press. The printers had 
 spirit, and resisted. The irritated Commons exerted their privilege above 
 the laws of the land, and their servants acted illegally in the execution 
 of their illegal orders." Parl. Hist. vol. 16, p. 221.* 
 
 * Chiefly by the exertions of Mr. Burke in the contest between the 
 House of Commons and the Magistrates of the City, the Government 
 were compelled tacitly to concede the privilege, against which they had 
 long and zealously contended, of publishing the debates and proceedings 
 in Parliament. Lord Chatham had probably opened the way to it by the 
 peculiar force of his character, by the original and impressive nature of 
 his eloquence, and still more by the example, so rare before his career, of 
 elevation to the highest power and honours of the state, founded solely on 
 personal merit and Parliamentary usage. Quar. Rev. vol. 34, 465, 477- 
 
30 
 
 JUNIUS TO THE KING. " How long, and to what extent, a King 
 of England may be protected by the forms when he violates the spirit of 
 the constitution, deserves to be considered. A mistake in this matter 
 proved fatal to Charles and his son. You have no enemies, Sir, but 
 those who persuade you to aim at power without right. Sir, the man 
 who addresses you in these terms is your best friend, he would willingly 
 hazard his life in defence of your title to the crown." 
 
 CHATHAM. " I know that when the liberty of the subject is invaded, 
 and all redress denied him, resistance is justified. Power without right is 
 the most odious and detestable object that can be offered to the human 
 imagination ; it-is not only pernicious to those who are subject to it, but 
 it tends to its own destruction. Unlimited power is apt to corrupt the 
 minds of those who possess it ; and this I know, my Lords, that where law 
 ends, tyranny begins. I revere the just prerogative of the Crown, and 
 would contend for it as warmly as for the rights of the people. I esteem 
 the King in his personal capacity, I revere him in his political one/' 
 Parl. Hist. vol. 16, pp. 359, 650, 748. 
 
 " It has been a subject for remark and regret that JiiTiius should 
 believe that the constitution allows him to regard the reigning prince as 
 occasionally culpable in his own person. To few people, perhaps, in the 
 present day, will his reasons carry conviction. But, bating this single 
 opinion, his view of the principles and powers of the constitution appears 
 to be equally correct and perspicuous." 
 
 To have proved that Lord Chatham and Junius were perfectly 
 agreed in opinion on this important question, is highly satisfactory to my 
 argument, but the full value of the parallel will be more apparent if we 
 consider that it is impossible to bring forward another individual, 
 (answering in all other essential points,) contemporary with Junius, 
 except Lord Chatham, who acknowledged that the constitution allows a 
 subject the right of resistance on particular occasions. 
 
 The religious opinions of Junius have afforded matter for controversy. 
 By some "he has been accused of deism and atheism, by others he has 
 been conceived to be a dissenter. To judge from the passages in his 
 writings, he appears to have been a Christian upon the most sincere 
 conviction ; one of whose chief objects was to defend the religion 
 established by law. To the religion of the court it must be confessed 
 that he was no friend." 
 
31 
 
 If I have the requisite labour to collect the passages in the Letters of 
 Junius bearing on the subject of religion it will be sufficient the charge 
 of atheism, deism, or sectarianism, is quite irrelevant to our inquiry. 
 
 " Divided as the Americans are into a thousand forms of policy and 
 religion, there is one point on which they all agree : they equally detest 
 the pageantry of a King, and the supercilious hypocrisy of a Bishop." 
 " His Majesty's predecessors had some generous qualities in their com- 
 position, 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 
 undertakings to reconcile the sanctimonious forms of religion with the 
 destruction of the morality of the people." 
 
 " The fundamental principles of Christianity may still be preserved, 
 though every zealous sectary adheres to his own exclusive doctrine, and 
 pious Ecclesiastics make it part of their religion to persecute one another." 
 
 <c If I thought Junius capable of uttering a disrespectful word of the 
 religion of his country, I should be the first to renounce and give him up 
 to the public contempt and indignation. As a man, I am satisfied that 
 he is a Christian upon the most sincere conviction. As a writer, he 
 would be grossly inconsistent with his political principles if he dared to 
 attack a religion established by those laws which it seems to be the 
 purpose of his life to defend. Critics never remember any thing he says 
 in honour of our holy religion ; though it is true that one of his leading 
 arguments is made to rest upon the internal evidence which the purest of 
 all religion carries with it. I quote his words, and conclude from them 
 that he is a true and hearty Christian, in substance, not in ceremony ; 
 though possibly he may not agree with my Reverend Lords the Bishops, 
 or with the Head of the Church, that prayers are morality, or that 
 kneeling is religion" Letters 39, 55, 57, 59. 
 
 The contumelious epithets selected by Junius, when speaking of 
 the forms and ceremonies of our religion, are sadly at variance with Mr. 
 Woodfall's assertion " that he defended the religion established by law." 
 With this, however, I am less interested than in producing a parallel to 
 Junius's religious opinions in the sentiments of Lord Chatham. That his 
 Lordship was neither deist, atheist, nor sectarian, is a fact requiring no 
 proof from me to substantiate ; he was an acknowledged and professed 
 member of the Church of England ; how " he defended the religion 
 
32 
 
 established by law," may be inferred from certain expressions which we 
 will now notice. " When any doubts," says Lord Chatham, " in point of 
 faith arises, or any question of controversy is started, we must appeal at 
 once to the great source and evidence of our religion the Holy Bible." 
 
 In replying to one of the Bishops who had spoken a great deal of 
 the dogmas of foreign colleges, he said " there was a college of much 
 greater antiquity, as well as veracity, which he was surprised he never 
 heard so much as mentioned by any of his Lordship's fraternity ; arid 
 that was, the college of the poor, humble, despised fishermen, who 
 pressed hard upon no man's conscience, yet supported the doctrine of 
 Christianity both by their lives arid conversations superior to all j but, 
 my Lords, probably I may affront your rank or learning, by applying to 
 such simple, antiquated authorities ; for I must confess there is a wide 
 difference between the Bishops of those times and the present. He 
 recommended and defended the Bill for the Relief of Protestant 
 Dissenters, on the general principles of a liberal toleration." Parl. Hist, 
 vol. 17, p. 441. 
 
 " I am fully convinced that religion has really nothing to do in the 
 dispute ; but the people without doors have been made to believe it has ; 
 and upon this the old High Church persecuting spirit has begun to take 
 hold of them." Parl. Hist. vol. 15, p. 154. 
 
 " He did not deserve to be ranked among the human species ; he 
 was a blasphemer of God." (Parl. Hist. vol. 15, p. 1364.)" In ancient 
 days, the Crown, the Barons, and the Clergy, possessed the lands ; the 
 Church (God bless it) has now but a pittance." (Parl. Hist. vol. 16, 
 p. 99.) " She pledged herself to set on foot an inquiry in order to 
 discover who were the authors and advisers of letting loose the blood- 
 hounds and hell-hounds, the savages of America, upon our brethren 
 there. It shall be a kind of lustrum to cleanse and purify the nation 
 from the odious guilt of those horrid barbarities. You, my Lords, 
 the Bishops, I trust, will assist in this pious work ; and you my Learned 
 Lords, who are both the constitutional guardians and interpreters of the 
 laws, (addressing himself to the Lord Chancellor and Lord Mansfield,) 
 will not, I trust, be wanting. I shall implore the aid of the lawn sleeves 
 and ermine on that occasion ; we shall then be assisted by the lawn and 
 ermine, by innocence and wisdom ; we shall have the pious assistance of 
 that learned bench, and the no less constitutional and efficacious aid of 
 the sages of the law of our right reverend and most learned brethren on 
 
S3 
 
 both sides of the House in dragging the authors of this satanic measure 
 into broad day-light, and inflicting on them the most exemplary and 
 condign punishment." 
 
 An attentive and impartial consideration of such remarkable coinci- 
 dences of thought, opinion, and style, on a subject which is generally 
 avoided, as well by political writers as statesmen, will produce, in 
 every unbiassed mind, an impression favourable to the argument I am 
 attempting to establish ; yet, I would cautiously abstain from placing 
 too much reliance on mere similarity of opinions. The question of who 
 was Junius, is too complicated to be determined by so simple and easy a 
 plan of investigation. 
 
 An experienced writer remarks " Numerous coincidences in 
 respect to thought and style, notions and opinions, views and doctrines, 
 may be traced between Junius and any great man like Burke ; 
 and he who is at the pains of collecting them, conceives that he has 
 established his hypothesis in favour of a particular individual this is a 
 fatal mistake." 
 
 The individual selected for the comparison is an unfortunate one ; 
 and the phrase, " any great man," can scarcely be termed a tangible 
 argument; the indefinite nature of the expression proves nothing. If 
 I could bend to the authority of names, I would yield to Mr. Barker. 
 The political creed of the Whigs might, indeed, be confined to certain 
 prescribed dogmas to which every individual of the party was expected to 
 assent ; yet within these bounds there were many shades of difference of 
 opinion. When, therefore, we say that J.unius was a Whig, we mean 
 that in political principles he agreed with the fundamental opinions of 
 the Whigs. We do not wish to imply that he could, Proteus like, 
 accommodate himself to every varying fashion of political doctrine. Lords 
 Rockingham, Camden, Chatham, Mr. G. Grenville, and Mr. Wilkes, 
 were Whigs ; yet, " in views and doctrines, in thought and style," they 
 were opposed to each other. 
 
 Our inquiries must be directed to ascertain what peculiar sentiments 
 Junius maintained not generally acknowledged by the Whigs. With 
 one, he was at variance on the Stamp-Act ; with another, about 
 Triennial Parliaments ; with a third, Mr. Wilkes was a subject for 
 disagreement ; and with those who came nearest to him in general 
 and particular opinions, a difference on some points might be 
 
34 
 
 observed.* Such an investigation may possibly terminate in our ascer- 
 taining that one great man can be identified in all the opinions of Junius, 
 and, at any rate, it will assist our future researches on this intricate 
 question. 
 
 JUNIUS ON THE STATE OP THE NATION. e " The situation of this 
 country is alarming enough to rouse the attention of every man who pre- 
 tends to a concern for the public welfare. The ruin or prosperity of a state 
 depends so much upon the administration of its government, that, to be 
 acquainted with the merit of a ministry, we need only observe the con- 
 dition of the people. If we see them obedient to the laws, prosperous in 
 their industry, united at home, and respected abroad, we may reasonably 
 presume that their affairs are conducted by men of experience, abilities, 
 and virtue. If, on the contrary, we see an universal spirit of distrust 
 and dissatisfaction, a rapid decay of trade, dissensions in all parts of the 
 empire, and a total loss of respect in the eyes of foreign powers, we may 
 pronounce, without hesitation, that the government of that country is 
 weak, distracted, and corrupt. Perhaps there never was an instance of 
 a change in the circumstances and temper of a whole nation so sudden 
 and extraordinary as that which the misconduct of ministers has within 
 these very few years produced in Great Britain. When our gracious 
 sovereign ascended the throne, we were a nourishing and a contented 
 people. After a rapid succession of changes, we are reduced to that 
 state which hardly any change can mend. The finances of the nation are 
 sinking under its debt and expenses. As to the debt upon the civil list, 
 the people of England expect that it will not be paid without a strict 
 inquiry how it was incurred. The manner in which the late debt upon 
 
 * " Chatham, and Rockingham, and Savile, the fathers of our 
 political church, cannot agree about the bounds which ought to be set to 
 the duration of Parliament. The first is become a convert to a triennial 
 seat; the two last still remain infidels; and Burke, their orator and 
 pamphleteer, for an obvious reason, contends for the same doctrine. 
 Chatham declares that we have no right to tax the Americans ; the 
 Rockinghamites assert that we have, but ought not to exercise the right. 
 Chatham affirms that pressing is the right hand of the constitution ; 
 Wilkes insists that it is the worst species of general warrants. Thus are 
 the patriots at daggers drawing among themselves." Polit. Reg. 
 
35 
 
 the civil list was pretended to be incurred, and really paid, demands a 
 particular examination; never was there a more impudent outrage 
 offered to a patient people." (Junius to Wilkes.) " In one view, behold 
 a nation overwhelmed with debt ; her revenues wasted ; her trade 
 declining ; the affections of her colonies alienated ; the duty of the 
 magistrate transferred to the soldiery : a gallant army, which never 
 fought unwillingly but against their fellow-subjects, mouldering away for 
 want of the direction of a man of common abilities and spirit ; and, in 
 the last instance, the administration of justice becomes odious and 
 suspected to the whole body of the people." Letter 1. 
 
 CHATHAM ON THE STATE OP THE NATION. " This is no time 
 for silence or reserve. If we do not stand forth and do our duty in the 
 present crisis, the nation is irretrievably undone. I mean to rouse, to 
 alarm the whole nation to rouse the ministry, if possible, who seem to 
 awake to nothing but the preservation of their places to awaken the 
 king. It was particularly their duty, at a crisis of such importance and 
 danger, to lay before their sovereign the true state and condition of his 
 subjects, the discontent which universally prevailed amongst them, the 
 distresses under which they laboured, the injuries they complained of, 
 and the true causes of this unhappy state of affairs. Distractions and 
 divisions prevail in every part of the empire. Will any man deny that 
 discontents prevail in many parts of his Majesty's dominions? The 
 kingdom is in a flame. It is not many years since this nation was the 
 envy and terror of its neighbours ; alone and unassisted it seemed to 
 balance the half of Europe. Nor was the aspect of its affairs abroad 
 more flattering than at home. Concord and unanimity prevailed 
 throughout the whole extent of the British Empire. No complaints, no 
 murmurs were heard. No petitions, much less remonstrances for redress 
 of grievances, were carried up to the throne, nor were hired mobs 
 necessary to keep the sovereign in countenance by their venal shouts. 
 But how is the prospect darkened ! how are the mighty fallen ! The 
 complexion of our government has been materially altered ; and I can 
 trace the origin of the alteration up to a period which ought to have been 
 an sera of happiness and prosperity to this country. 
 
 " The payment of the immense debt contracted by the Crown without 
 inspecting any account alarmed the nation. Have any measures been 
 taken to satisfy, or to unite the people ? Are the grievances they have 
 so long complained of, removed ? or do they stand not only unredressed 
 
36 
 
 but aggravated ? Is the right of free election restored to the elective 
 body ? The ministry by a series of oppressive, unconstitutional measures, 
 have destroyed all content and unanimity at home and have betrayed the 
 honour of the nation to private emolument. The liberty of the subject 
 is invaded,, not only in provinces, but here at home."* 
 
 Throughout the whole of Junius, and of Lord Chatham's speeches, 
 there is a feeling of despondency for the public weal. 
 
 JUNIUS ON THE SEIZURE OP THE FALKLAND ISLANDS. " The 
 system of government is uniform. Violence and oppression at home can 
 only be supported by treachery and submission abroad. When the civil 
 rights of the people are daringly invaded on one side, what have we to 
 expect, but that their political rights should be deserted and betrayed 
 in the same proportion by the other. The plan of domestic policy, which 
 has been invariably pursued from the moment of his present Majesty's 
 succession, engrosses all the attention of his servants. They know that 
 the security of their places depends upon their maintaining, at any hazard, 
 the secret system of the closet. Whether or no there be a secret system 
 in the closet, and what may be the object of it, are questions which can 
 only be determined by appearances, and on which every man must decide 
 for himself. 
 
 (i The King of Great Britain had been for some years in possession 
 of Falkland Island, to which, as the ministry themselves have repeatedly 
 asserted, the Spaniards had no claim or right. A military force (from 
 Spain) appears, and compels the garrison to surrender. Instead of im- 
 mediate restitution we have a four months negotiation. An open act of 
 hostility, authorized by the Catholic King, is an act of the governor. 
 When the first magistrate speaks to the nation, some care should be taken 
 of his apparent veracity. Have we any security that the peace we have 
 so dearly purchased will last a twelvemonth ? and if not, have xve or have 
 we not, sacrificed the fairest opportunity of making war with advantage ? 
 We might have dictated the law to Spain." Junius, Letter 42. 
 
 " Without regarding the language of ignorant or interested people, 
 depend upon the assurance I give you, that every man in administration 
 looks upon war as inevitable." Private Letter to Woodfall, 28. 
 
 * Lord Chatham's speech in the House of Lords in 1770, as reported 
 in Parl. Hist, vol. 16, and Gent. Mag. for that year. 
 
37 
 
 " Junius does not speak of the Spanish nation as the natural enemies 
 of England. He applies that description with the strictest truth and 
 justice to the Spanish Court." Philo- Junius, Letter 43. 
 
 CHATHAM ON THE SEIZURE OP THE FALKLAND ISLANDS. 
 " Something must be done, my Lords, and immediately, to save an injured, 
 insulted, undone country. If not to save the state, at least to mark out 
 and drag to public justice those servants of the crown by whose ignorance, 
 neglect, or treachery, this once great flourishing people are reduced to a 
 condition as deplorable at home as it is despicable abroad. Examples 
 are wanted, my Lords, and should be given to the world, for the instruc- 
 tion of future times, even though they be useless to ourselves. Before 
 this country the ministers stand as the greatest criminals. Such I will 
 prove them to be. I doubt not, my Lords, that there are some important 
 mysteries in the conduct of this affair (the surrender of Falkland Islands) 
 which, whenever they are explained, will account for the profound silence 
 now observed by the king's servants. The time will come, when they 
 shall be dragged from their concealments. 
 
 " A foreign power has forcibly robbed his Majesty of a part of his 
 dominions. Is the Island restored ? Are you placed in statu quo ? If 
 that had been done, it might then perhaps have been justifiable to treat 
 with the aggressor upon the satisfaction he ought to make for the insult 
 offered to the Crown of England. But you make it matter of negotiation 
 whether his Majesty's possessions shall be restored to him or not. The 
 Court of Spain has not disavowed the act of their governor. His Majesty 
 has been advised to confirm and give currency to an absolute falsehood. 
 I am well acquainted with the character of the Spanish nation, at least 
 as far as it is represented by their court and ministry. With their 
 ministers I have often been obliged to negotiate, and never met with an 
 instance of candour and dignity in their proceedings ; nothing but low 
 cunning, trick, and artifice. After a long experience of their want of 
 candour and good faith, I found myself compelled to talk to them in 
 peremptory and decisive language. I submitted my advice to a trembling 
 Council for an immediate declaration of war with Spain. It has been 
 thought advisable to negotiate with the Court of Spain. We are not in 
 that situation in which a great and powerful nation is permitted to 
 negotiate. I know where this honourable negotiation will end where 
 it must end. We may perhaps be able to patch up an accommodation for 
 the present, but we shall have a Spanish war in six months." 
 
38 
 
 In the assurance of Junius, and in the assertion of Lord Chatham, 
 we have an incorrect statement. The predicted Spanish war did not 
 take place. It may seem trifling with the subject to allude to such 
 apparently unimportant coincident opinions ; but recollecting the general 
 accuracy of the statements made by Junius, and the facilities of obtaining 
 correct information possessed by Lord Chatham, we are prepared to attach 
 a proper value to this parallel. 
 
 REMONSTRANCE OF THE CITY, 1770. " The city of London have 
 expressed their sentiments with freedom and firmness. They have 
 spoken truth boldly ; and in whatever light their remonstrance may be 
 represented by courtiers, I defy the most subtle lawyer in this country 
 to point out a single instance in which they have exceeded the truth." 
 Junius, Letters 41 and 42. 
 
 CHATHAM. " Debate in the Lords on the Earl of Chatham's motion 
 touching the King's answer to the remonstrance of the city of London." 
 Parl. Hist. vol. 16, p. 966. His Lordship maintained the justice of the 
 petition, and adopted the same line of argument as in Junius's 41st and 
 42d Letter.* 
 
 The coincidence of opinion on this subject is important ; Mr. 
 Grenville was opposed to the remonstrance. 
 
 JUNIUS TO WILKES " I would have the right of Juries to return 
 a general verdict in all cases whatsoever, considered as a part of the 
 constitution, fundamental, sacred, and no more questionable by the 
 legislature than whether the government of the country shall be in King, 
 Lords, and Commons." 
 
 * The Edinburgh Reviewer for June, 1826, is surprised at " the 
 extravagantly disproportioned interest taken by Junius in any petty 
 intrigue of aldermen and sheriffs which touched that celebrated adven- 
 turer (Wilkes)." And Mr. Barker frankly acknowledges that " this part 
 of the mystery still needs explanation." A reference to Lord Chatham's 
 speech on the 4th of May, 1770, " on the King's answer to the city 
 remonstrance," will afford Mr. Barker and the Edinburgh Reviewers the 
 desired information. His Lordship says " When I mentioned the 
 livery of London, I thought I saw a smile of ridicule upon some faces, 
 as if they were a body too insignificant for attention in this assembly ; 
 let me, however, declare that, though I have the honour to be a Member 
 of this House, I think my character exalted by concurring in the cause 
 of liberty with such virtuous citizens." Parl. Hist. vol. 16, p. 968. 
 
39 
 
 CHATHAM. " Lord Chatham stood up again, and said that if he 
 conceived the Noble Lord on the Woolsack right, the doctrine was ' that 
 a libel, or not a libel, was a matter of law, and was to be decided by the 
 bench ; and the question to be left to the jury to determine was only the 
 fact of printing and publishing;' to which Lord Mansfield assented. Lord 
 Chatham then expressed his astonishment, declaring that he had never 
 understood that to be the law of England." Parl. Hist. vol. 16, p. 1305. 
 
 JUNIUS. " We owe it to our ancestors to preserve entire those 
 rights which they have delivered to our care : we owe it to our posterity 
 not to suffer their dearest inheritance to be destroyed." Letter 20. 
 
 CHATHAM. " There is one ambition at least which I ever will 
 acknowledge which I will not renounce but with my life. It is the 
 ambition of delivering to my posterity those rights of freedom which I 
 have received from my ancestors." 
 
 JUNIUS." The noble spirit of the metropolis is the life-blood of 
 the state, collected at the heart ; from that point it circulates with health 
 and vigour through every artery of the constitution. The liberty, the 
 laws, and property of an Englishman have in truth but one neck ; to 
 violate the freedom of election, strikes deeply at them all." Letters 37 
 and 43. 
 
 CHATHAM.-" The right of election is the vital circulation in the 
 body politic ; stop it, and we are politically destroyed." 
 
 JUNIUS " No man regards an eruption on the surface when the 
 noble parts are invaded, and he feels a mortification approaching to his 
 heart." Letter 39. 
 
 CHATHAM." They were ebullitions of liberty which broke out 
 upon the skin, and were a sign, if not of perfect health, at least of 
 vigorous constitution, and must not be driven in too suddenly lest they 
 should strike to the heart." 
 
 JUNIUS. " The rays of royal indignation, collected upon Mr. 
 Wilkes, served only to illuminate and could not consume. Is this a 
 contention worthy of a King ?" Letter 35. 
 
 CHATHAM. " It was solely to the measures of government, equally 
 violent and absurd, that Mr. Wilkes owed all his importance." Anec- 
 dotes of the Life of Lord Chatham, vol. 2, p. 101. 
 
 JUNIUS TO WOODFALL. " By way of intelligence, you may inform 
 the public that Mr. De la Fontaine, for his secret services in the alley, 
 is appointed Barrack Master to the Savoy." 
 
40 
 
 LORD CHATHAM. " There is a set of men, my Lords, in the city of 
 London who are known to live in riot and luxury upon the plunder of 
 that part of the community which stands most in need of, and best 
 deserve, the care and protection of Parliament. To me, my Lords, 
 whether they be miserable jobbers of Change Alley, or the lofty Asiatic 
 plunderers of Leadenhall-street, they are equally detestable." Gent. 
 Mag. vol. 40, p. 575. 
 
 JUNIUS TO THE KING. " It is not from the alienated affections of 
 America that you can reasonably look for assistance. The Americans 
 left their native land in search of freedom, and found it in a desart." 
 
 LORD CHATHAM. The Americans purchased their liberty at a dear 
 rate, since they quitted their native country, and went in search of 
 freedom to a desart." Parl. Hist. vol. 16, p. 650. 
 
 JUNIUS TO THE KING. " When it was proposed to settle the 
 present King's household as Prince of Wales, it is well known that the 
 Earl of Bute was forced into it, in direct contradiction to the late King's 
 inclination. That was the salient point from which all the mischiefs and 
 disgraces of the present reign took life and motion. From that moment 
 Lord Bute never suffered the Prince of Wales to be an instant out of his 
 sight. We need not look farther." Note. 
 
 " The plan of domestic policy which has been invariably pursued 
 from the moment of his present Majesty's accession, engrosses all the 
 attention of his servants. They know that the security of their places 
 depends upon their maintaining, at any hazard, the secret system of the 
 closet." 
 
 " His Majesty, God bless him ! has now got rid of every man whose 
 former services or present scruples could be supposed to give offence to 
 her Royal Highness the Princess Dowager of Wales. She has succeeded 
 in disuniting every party and dissolving every connexion ; and, by the 
 mere influence of the Crown, has formed an administration, such as it is, 
 out of the refuse of them all." 
 
 " If I were to characterise the present Ministry from any single 
 virtue which shines predominant in their administration, I should fix 
 upon duplicity as the proper word to express it." Letters 21, 35, 42, 
 and 87- 
 
 LORD CHATHAM. " Lord Chatham complained strongly of the 
 secret influence of the Earl of Bute, which had prevented there having 
 been any original minister since the accession of his present Majesty he 
 
41 
 
 spoke of the secret influence of an invisible power. ' All the obstacles and 
 difficulties which attended every great and public measure, were suggested, 
 nourished, and supported by that secret influence I have mentioned ; 
 first by secret treachery then by official influence afterwards in public 
 councils. A long train of such practice has at length unwillingly 
 convinced me that there is something behind the throne greater than the 
 King himself." Parl. Hist. vol. 16, p. 843. 
 
 JUNIUS. " Be assured that the laws which protect us in our civil 
 rights grow out of the constitution." Dedication, p. 3. 
 
 CHATHAM'S SPEECH. " It is the constitution, and it alone, that 
 limits sovereignty and allegiance." Gent. Mag. vol. 45, p. 7- 
 
 JUNIUS. " We now see the Chancellor of Great Britain (Lord 
 Camden) tyrannically forced out of his office, not for want of abilities, nor 
 for want of integrity, or of attention to his duty, but for delivering his 
 honest opinions in Parliament upon the greatest constitutional question 
 that .has arisen since the revolution." Letter 36. 
 
 CHATHAM'S SPEECH. " I recommended Lord Camden to be Chan- 
 cellor his public and private virtues were acknowledged by all they 
 made his station precarious. My suspicions have been justified. His 
 integrity has made him once more a poor and private man ; he was 
 dismissed for the vote he gave in favour of the right of election in the 
 people/' Parl. Hist. vol. 16, p. 850. 
 
 The arguments of Lord Chatham on the 19th of January, 1770, 
 had so powerful an effect on the mind of Lord Caniden, then Chancellor, 
 that he rose in his place in the House of Lords, and with the greatest 
 animation said " that he had accepted the seals without any condition ; 
 that he meant not, therefore, to be trammelled by his Majesty I beg 
 pardon, said he by his Ministers ; that he had suffered himself to be so 
 too long ; that, for some time, he had beheld with silent indignation, 
 the arbitrary measures which were pursuing by the Ministers ; that he 
 had often drooped down and hung his head in council, and disapproved, 
 by his looks, those steps which he knew his avowed opposition could not 
 prevent ; that, however, he would do so no longer, but would openly and 
 boldly speak his sentiments." Parl. Hist. vol. 16, p. 644.* 
 
 * Mr. Barker, p. 36, asks " what private reason Junius had for 
 panegyrising Lord Camden ?" rt But, says Mr. B., it may be worth 
 while to consider whether any of the other persons, marked out as the 
 
 G 
 
42 
 
 " As to his (Lord Granby) 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." Junius, 
 Letter 40. 
 
 Almon informs us that " Sir Jeffery (afterwards Lord) Amherst had 
 always been the friend and favourite of the Earl of Chatham, and he was 
 therefore made choice of to be the sacrifice to make room for Lord 
 Bottetourt." " With respect to the navy, I shall only say that this 
 country is so highly indebted to Sir Edward Hawke, that no expense 
 should be spared to secure to him an honourable and affluent retreat." 
 Junius, Letter 1. 
 
 Almon says " Sir Edward Harvke was the favourite admiral of Lord 
 Chatham." 
 
 JUNIUS, CHATHAM, AND THE DUKE OF GRAFTON. No one can 
 fail to notice in the Letters of Junius a bitterness of expression and a 
 feeling of personal dislike in every reference to the Duke of Grafton ; 
 and in the speeches of Lord Chatham after the year 1768 are evident 
 indications of disappointment, mortification, and ill-suppressed anger, 
 and more sensitively shewn when his Lordship speaks of his Grace. 
 
 It will be an inquiry of no trivial importance to search for the cause 
 of the personal hostility expressed by Junius to the Duke of Grafton. 
 In a subsequent page I propose to give an outline of the state of political 
 parties from the accession of George III. to the year 1770. It will, 
 however, be now necessary to refer to particular transactions which more 
 immediately relate to the subject of this portion of my inquiry. 
 
 At the close of the Rockingham administration in 1766, " Negocia- 
 tions were opened by Lord Northington with Mr. Pitt, through the 
 channel of the Duke of Grafton. His Lordship offered Mr. Pitt a carte- 
 blanche, and Mr. Pitt was introduced to the King at Richmond. His 
 Majesty confirmed the offer made my Lord Northington, arid added that 
 he had no terms to propose he put himself into Mr. Pitt's hands." 
 
 " The Duke of Grafton attached himself to Mr. Pitt ; this attach- 
 ment he publicly avowed in the House of Lords, declaring that he knew 
 
 authors of Junius, had any particular connection with Lord Camden." 
 I always feel happy to answer satisfactorily any question asked by that 
 gentleman. 
 
43 
 
 no man who could give strength and solidity to an administration but 
 Mr. Pitt ; and, that under him, he should be willing to serve in any 
 capacity." Anecdotes of the Life of Chatham, vol. 1, p. 316. 
 
 For a few months Lord Chatham and the Duke of Grafton were 
 ostensibly good friends ; but in the latter end of 1768, when his Lord- 
 ship's administration terminated, the Duke of Grafton came into power, 
 excluding Lord Chatham from any share in the administration. 
 
 An explanation and apology was offered in the House of Lords in 
 1770 by Lord Chatham " for having recommended the Duke of Grafton 
 to the King as First Lord of the Treasury." This explanation so 
 freely entered into by Lord Chatham I will give, and I particularly 
 request the attention of my readers to it. 
 
 (i After condemning the conduct of his Majesty's servants in almost 
 every particular, he complained that he had been duped, when he least 
 suspected treachery, at a time when the prospect was fair, and when the 
 appearances of confidence were necessary." 
 
 " When I was earnestly called upon for the public service, I came 
 from Somersetshire with wings of zeal ; I consented to preserve a peace 
 I abominated ; a peace I would not make, but preserve when made. I 
 undertook to support a government by law, but to shield no man from 
 public justice. These terms were accepted ; I thought with sincerity 
 accepted. I own I was credulous I was duped- I was deceived ; for 
 I soon found that there was no original administration to be suffered in 
 this country. The same secret invisible influence still prevailed which 
 had put an end to all the successive administrations as soon as they 
 opposed or declined to act under it." 
 
 Here the Duke of Grafton rose and said " I rise to defend the 
 King, though, if I understand rightly the words which have been spoken, 
 they are only the effects of a distempered mind brooding over its own 
 discontents." To which Lord Chatham replied " I rise, neither to deny, 
 to retract, nor to explain away the words I have spoken. As to the 
 Noble Duke, there was in his conduct, from the time of my being taken 
 ill, a gradual deviation from every thing that had been settled and 
 solemnly agreed to by his Grace, both as to measures and men, till at 
 last there were not left two planks together of the ship which had been 
 originally launched. As to a distempered mind, I have a drawer full of 
 proofs that my principles have never given way to any disease ; and that 
 
44 
 
 I have always had sufficient vigour of mind remaining to support them ; 
 and, consequently, to avoid all those snares which, from time to time, have 
 been so artfully laid to take advantage of my state of health : his Grace 
 can witness better than any other man, because he has himself the letters 
 which sufficiently prove it. The conduct of the Noble Duke has con- 
 vinced me that I am as likely to be deceived as any other man, and as 
 fallible as my betters." Anecdotes of the Life of Chatham, vol. 2, p. 45. 
 Parl. Hist. vol. 16, p. 841.* 
 
 This plain and open avowal, from one of the greatest men in the 
 kingdom, must carry conviction to the minds of the most captious, that 
 Lord Chatham had ample cause for his ungovernable anger when the 
 Duke of Grafton's conduct was the subject for consideration.t 
 
 The 27th Letter of Junius offers a quotation which shows the writer 
 to have been as imperious as Lord Chatham : " 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 profound con- 
 tempt, I should ever rise into anger, he should soon find that all I have 
 said of him was lenity and compassion." 
 
 The editor of Blackwood's Magazine, and the writer of the Preli- 
 minary Essay to Woodfall's edition of Junius, admit that " Junius must 
 
 * In the year 1743, Mr. Pitt said " the extent and complication of 
 political questions is such that no man can justly be ashamed of having 
 been sometimes mistaken in his determinations ; and the propensity of 
 the human mind to confidence and friendship is so great that every 
 man, however cautious, however sagacious or however experienced, is 
 exposed sometimes to the artifices of interest, and the delusions of 
 hypocrisy ; but it is the duty and ought to be the honour of every man 
 to own his mistake whenever he discovers it, and to warn others against 
 those frauds which have been too successfully practised upon himself." 
 Gent. Mag. 1743, p. 131. 
 
 t " In speaking of his political opponents, he frequently assumed 
 the language of mingled scorn and detestation, with a manner so authori- 
 tative and bitter, as would not have been tolerated for a moment in any 
 man but himself; nor was his conduct towards those with whom he acted 
 in politics, especially towards his colleagues, when he was in office, 
 conciliatory or even respectful." Eetros. Rev. vol. 7> P* 359. 
 
45 
 
 have been a man who had some reasons of gigantic force for hating the 
 chief members of the British government at the time, with not merely a 
 political but a personal rancour." 
 
 Let us now examine the language addressed by Junius to the Duke 
 of Graf ton : 
 
 " Without much political sagacity, or any extraordinary depth of 
 observation, we need only mark how the principal departments of the 
 state are bestowed, and look no farther for the true cause of every 
 mischief that befals us. The finances of a nation, sinking under its 
 debts and expences, are committed to a young nobleman already ruined 
 by play.* Introduced to act under the auspices of Lord Chatham, and 
 left at the head of affairs by that nobleman's retreat, he became minister 
 by accident ; but deserting the principles and professions, which gave 
 him a moment's popularity, we see him, from every honourable engage- 
 ment to the public an apostate by design." Letter 1. 
 
 " Lord Chatham was the earliest object of your political wonder 
 and attachment ; yet you deserted him, upon the first hopes that offered 
 of an equal share of power with Lord Rockingham. Still, however, he 
 was your friend, and you are yet to explain to the world why you 
 consented to act without him. Lord Chatham formed his last adminis- 
 tration upon principles which you certainly concurred in, or you could 
 never have been placed at the head of the treasury. By deserting those 
 principles, and by acting in direct contradiction to them, in which he 
 found you were secretly supported in the closet, you soon forced him to 
 leave you to yourself, and to withdraw his name from an administration 
 which had been formed on the credit of it." (Letter 12.) " Was not 
 Lord Chatham the first who raised the Duke of Grafton to the rank and 
 post of a minister and the first whom he abandoned ? After deserting 
 Lord Chatham's principles, and sacrificing his friendship, is he not now 
 closely united with a set of men, who, though they have occasionally 
 
 * " The Duke of Grafton took the office of Secretary of State with 
 an engagement to support the Marquis of Rockingham's administration. 
 He resigned however in a little time, under pretence that he could not act 
 without Lord Chatham, nor bear to see Mr. Wilkes abandoned ; but that 
 under Lord Chatham he would act in any office. This was the signal of 
 Lord Rockingham's dismission. When Lord Chatham came in, the Duke 
 got possession of the Treasury. Reader, mark the consequence !" 
 
46 
 
 joined with all parties, have in every different situation, and at all times, 
 been equally and constantly detested by this country ?" Letter 13. 
 
 " The Duke of Grafton has always some excellent reason for 
 deserting his friends. The age and incapacity of Lord Chatham ; the 
 debility of Lord Rockingham ; or the infamy of Mr. Wilkes. Lord 
 Chatham, Mr. Grenville, and Lord Rockingham have successively had 
 the honour to be dismissed for preferring their duty, as servants to the 
 public, to those compliances which were expected from their station. 
 A submissive administration was at last gradually collected from the 
 deserters of all parties, interests, and connexions : and nothing remained 
 but to find a leader for these gallant well-disciplined troops. Stand forth 
 my Lord, for thou art the man." (Letter 15.) " If I were personally 
 your enemy 1 might pity and forgive you. You have every claim to 
 compassion, that can arise from misery and distress. The condition you 
 are reduced to would disarm a private enemy of resentment, and leave 
 consolation to the most vindictive spirit, but that such an object as you 
 are would disgrace the dignity of revenge. If I had followed the dictates 
 of my own opinion, I never should have allowed you the respite of a 
 moment. I submitted, however, to the judgment of men, more mode- 
 rate, perhaps more candid, than myself." (Letter 36.) " His Majesty 
 remembers with gratitude how soon you had accommodated your morals 
 to the necessities of his service how cheerfully you had abandoned the 
 engagements of private friendship, and renounced the most solemn 
 professions to the public. The sacrifice of Lord Chatham was not lost 
 upon him ; even the cowardice and perfidy of deserting him may have 
 done you no disservice in his esteem." (Letter 49.) " You are the 
 pillow upon which I am determined to rest all my resentment. 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 interest to this 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 than even the unfortunate ambition of Lord Bute." (Letter 54.) 
 " The divine justice of retribution seems now to have begun its progress. 
 Deliberate treachery entails punishment upon the traitor ; there is no 
 possibility of escaping it, even in the highest rank to which the consent 
 of society can exalt the meanest and worst of men." Letter 67- 
 
47 
 
 I have taken the preceding quotations from twelve of the Letters of 
 Junius to His Grace the Duke of Grafton ; and although I have quoted 
 rather extensively, from the first Letter in January 1769, " when Junius 
 began his warfare/' to the sixty-seventh, which closed his correspondence 
 with the Duke, I could have multiplied their number, there being 
 scarcely one Letter of Junius's which does not directly allude to His 
 Grace. It is almost superfluous to make any comment on what Junius 
 and Lord Chatham have said about the Duke of Grafton ; yet o 
 important is the parallel which I am endeavouring to substantiate, that 
 I will, with the utmost possible conciseness, review what has been 
 stated in reference to this particular subject. 
 
 Without favouring us with an express declaration of his own station 
 in society, Junius assures us that he has an intimate knowledge of the 
 Duke of Grafton's character that he detests and abhors him and that 
 if he had followed the dictates- of his own opinion he never should have 
 allowed him the respite of a moment. Where, I would ask, ought we to 
 seek for Junius ? Not in the anti-chambers of our nobility not at the 
 Board of the Exchequer not in the throng of common characters. No ! 
 we must range through the mansions of the great, and fixing our attention 
 on the individual who had an intimate knowledge of the Duke of Grafton, 
 who had been perfidiously deserted and betrayed by the Duke, who felt 
 an abhorrence and detestation of him. I repeat, on such a man our 
 attention should be directed ; and it will not be a very improbable 
 supposition if we presume that such an one may be the author of the 
 Letters of Junius. 
 
 Lord Chatham had an intimate knowledge of the Duke of Grafton. 
 He had been " duped, deceived by the Duke, when he least suspected 
 treachery at a time when the prospect was fair, and the appearances of 
 confidence were strong. Snares had been artfully laid by his Grace to 
 take advantage of his Lordship's state of health," and his Lordship's 
 speeches had been publicly characterised by the Duke as " the effects of 
 a distempered mind brooding over its own discontents/' Dr. Bisset 
 remarks " Personal motives evidently inflamed this writer (Junius) 
 against individual officers of the crown, whom party considerations 
 induced him to assail as members of a body which was to be driven from 
 the councils of the king to make way for the restoration of the Whigs." 
 And Junius says of the Duke of Grafton " You are the pillow upon 
 which I am determined to rest all my resentment." Mr. Home's explana- 
 
tion or opinion of the meaning of this last sentence is too valuable not to 
 be noticed : " Because Lord Chatham has been ill treated by the King, 
 and treacherously betrayed by the Duke of Grafton ; the latter is to be 
 ' the pillow on which Junius will rest his resentment.' " 
 
 " Had the author of Junius drawn as much wisdom from life as he 
 did from books had he been accustomed to the busy hum of men had he 
 frequented the crowded halls of nobles had he often championed popular 
 rights in multitudinous assemblies the harsher features of his mind 
 would have been gradually softened cunning would have taught him the 
 necessity of pretending to feel human sympathies, if his heart had not 
 been opened to generous sensibilities ; he would have maintained his 
 opinions, though in a more subdued tone, with the same intellectual 
 energy : he would have still pursued the public criminals, but have not 
 forgotten what was due to public decorum ; the courtesies of society 
 would have been generally observed, and some kind of specious respect 
 would have been habitually shewn to noble rank, and elevated station, 
 and commanding influence, and high reputation, and professional fame, 
 and sacred royalty. Junius is the only well-educated writer who seems 
 not in these points to have been actuated by the feelings of mankind. 
 And how shall we account for this perfect independence of mind, and 
 this reckless heart of steel, except by supposing him to have been parti- 
 cularly circumstanced to have been placed in unavoidable seclusion or 
 to have indulged in solitary majesty ?" Mr. Barker's Letters. 
 
 If there be any truth in the declarations of Mr. Charles Butler " to 
 whom it was frequently given to hear the speeches of Lord Chatham" if 
 Mr. Burke, his contemporary, be entitled to attention and credit if 
 Lord John Russell and the Editor of the Retrospective Review have 
 presented us with a faithful outline of the character of Lord Chatham if 
 all history be not false and if we be allowed to form our opinions of his 
 Lordship from his speeches and actions then, I confidently say, no man, 
 except Lord Chatham, can be compared and identified with the character 
 of Junius so beautifully pourtrayed by Mr. Barker. 
 
 I will now leave the consideration of this subject to those who have 
 remarked that Lord Chatham had no hostile feeling to the Duke of 
 Grafton. If the Letters of Junius are not to be received as conclusive 
 evidence of the fact, I know not to what we must refer for information. 
 
 Having proved that the Letters of Juniuf to the Duke of Grafton 
 are remarkable for a personal feeling of animosity, I will show that those 
 
49 
 
 written by that writer to Sir William Draper are equally so, for a total 
 absence of any bad passion j yet Jtmius condemns, and in the most 
 uncourteous manner, the conduct of Sir William. 
 
 " The defence of Lord Granby does honour to the goodness of your 
 heart. You feel, as you ought to do, for the reputation of your friend ; 
 and you express yourself in the warmest language of the passions. 
 Touched with your generosity, 1 freely forgive the excesses into which it 
 has led you ; and far from resenting those terms of reproach, which, 
 considering that you are an advocate for decorum, you have heaped upon 
 me rather too liberally, I place them to the account of an honest indig- 
 nation, in which your cooler judgment and natural politeness had no 
 concern. I am not your enemy, nor did I begin this contest with you. 
 I write to you with reluctance." Junius to Sir William Draper. 
 
 The Letters of Junius develope so intimate an acquaintance with 
 the most private transactions of men, we must infer that he not merely 
 had unusual opportunities of gaining information, but also that he was 
 personally acquainted with the transactions and characters of those 
 who are the objects of his notice. If, on the contrary, Junius had to 
 acquire his knowledge on the spur of the moment, how indefatigable he 
 must have been in obtaining it ; and he would have to exercise uncom- 
 mon caution in avoiding the prying curiosity of his informants. In the 
 case of Sir William Draper, he had not ten entire days to devote to the 
 task. Junius, we recollect, did irot begin the contest ; his expressions 
 are " Really, Sir William, I am not your enemy, nor did I begin this 
 contest." Unprepared, however, as we may presume he was for the 
 contest, how did'he extricate himself from the dilemma ? To the asto- 
 nishment and r niortifi cation of Sir William, he entered into a minute 
 detail of facts, implicating him in certain transactions which, to the 
 generality of men, were either unknown or not comprehended. 
 
 The Editor of the Gentleman's Magazine for 1769, p. 65, submitted 
 the Letters of Junius to Sir William Draper to his readers, because 
 " the papers are written with a knowledge of public affairs beyond the 
 line of ordinary information." In that opinion every one will concur 
 and few will say that Lord Chatham had not a knowledge of public 
 affairs beyond the line of ordinary information.* 
 
 * An American gentleman, Mr. Newhall, who has written a book 
 endeavouring to prove Earl Temple to be Junius, remarks at page ixxi., 
 
50 
 
 Lord Chatham was not the enemy of Sir W. Draper ; a few lines 
 from a speech of Mr. Pitt's, in January, 1766, decides this point. " Will 
 you quarrel with yourselves, now the whole House of Bourbon is united 
 against you, while the ransom for the Manillas is denied by Spain, and 
 its gallant conqueror basely traduced into a mean plunderer, a gentleman 
 (Colonel Draper) whose noble and generous spirit would do honour to 
 the proudest grandee of the country." Parl. Hist. vol. 16, p. 107* 
 
 The next question for consideration, although surrounded with 
 difficulties, I shall approach with some diffidence ; yet not for a moment 
 will I shrink from a fair review of it, feeling neither doubt nor fear as 
 to the result. 
 
 The positive declarations of almost every writer on the controversy 
 of who was Junius, are arrayed against me on the subject which now 
 demands an investigation. 
 
 It is stated by the Editor of the Edinburgh Review for June, 1826, 
 that " Junius supported the cause of authority against America with 
 Mr. Grenville, the Minister who passed the Stamp Act. He maintained 
 the highest popular principles on the Middlesex election with the same 
 statesman who was the leader of opposition on that question. No other 
 party in the kingdom but the Grenvilles combined these two opinions. 
 Whoever revives the inquiry, therefore, unless he discovers positive and 
 irresistible evidence in support of his claimant, should show him politi- 
 cally attached to the Grenville party, which Junius certainly was ; and 
 must also produce some specimens of his writings of tolerable length, 
 such as might afford reasonable ground for believing that he could have 
 written these letters. A simple text, therefore, ascertains the political 
 connexion of Junius." 
 
 Mr. Barker's observation on the above sentence is " The reviewer 
 has clearly shewn the political connection between Junius and George 
 Grenville, and I therefore subscribe to his opinion that such connection 
 
 that " the familiarity of Junius with the affairs of the War-Office Depart- 
 ment, in all its details, has long been an obstacle, which the advocates 
 of almost every candidate for the authorship have found it impossible to 
 overcome." Perhaps Mr. Newhall does not include Lord Chatham in 
 his list of candidates, or, what is not improbable, he forgot that his 
 Lordship was, par excellence, The War Minister. 
 
51 
 
 must be proved to have existed in the case of any claimant for the author- 
 ship of the Letters, or the claims should be at once rejected. It is well 
 known that Junius always differed from Lord Chatham on the subject of 
 the taxation of America. As an admirer of Mr. George Grenville in the 
 part he took on that occasion, it was impossible that Junius could approve 
 of Lord Chatham's conduct." 
 
 Mr. Coventry remarks " The line of politics pursued by Junius 
 and the Earl of Chatham was totally different on American taxation, 
 which of itself shews there was no connection between them." 
 
 The writer of the Preliminary Essay to Mr. WoodfalPs Ed. of Junius 
 cautiously gives an opinion that, " anterior to the American contest, 
 Junius was as thoroughly convinced as Mr. G. Grenville himself of the 
 supremacy of the legislature of this country over the American colonies." 
 
 In the absence of any definite declaration of Junius in favour of the 
 opinion that he supported Mr. G. Grenville, I will select from the Letters 
 every passage, quoted by others, to favour that hypothesis. 
 
 The first Letter of Junius affords a long quotation : " A series of 
 inconsistent measures had alienated the colonies from their duty as sub- 
 jects, and from their natural affection to their common country. When 
 Mr. Grenville was placed at the head of the Treasury, he felt the 
 impossibility of Great Britain's supporting such an establishment as her 
 former successes had made indispensable, and, at the same time, of 
 giving any sensible relief to foreign trade and to the weight of the public 
 debt. He thought it equitable that those parts of the empire which had 
 benefited most by the expenses of the war, should contribute something 
 to the expenses of the peace, and he had no doubt of the constitutional 
 right vested in Parliament to raise that contribution. But unfortu- 
 nately 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 declara- 
 tions gave spirit and argument to the colonies ; and while, perhaps, they 
 meant no more than the ruin of a Minister, they in effect divided one 
 half of the empire from the other." Letter 1. 
 
 I cannot suppose that any one can correctly infer from these quota- 
 tions that Junius advocates Mr. G. Grenville's American tax, or that he 
 
 " * Yet Junius has J)een called the partizan of Lord Chatham !" 
 
52 
 
 supports the cause of authority with that gentleman against the Ameri- 
 cans. As, however, the point disputed is of considerable consequence, 
 we will dispassionately examine each sentence. 
 
 Junius informs us, that Mr. Grenville thought it equitable to exert 
 a certain power, having no doubt of the constitutional right. Substi- 
 tuting Junius for Grenville, my argument would not be tenable, but I 
 object to such a transposition, and so unfair a manner of procuring data. 
 Junius continues " But unfortunately for this country, Mr. Grenville 
 was at any rate to be distressed because he was Minister, and Mr. Pitt* 
 and Lord Chatham were to be the patrons of America, because they were 
 
 * The Notes to Woodfall's Edition of Junius are termed by the 
 Editor explanatory. Some of them were made by Junius himself, and 
 are marked Author. A second class are the Editor's, and a third are so 
 very explanatory, that neither Author nor Editor has claimed them. No 
 one will disturb the first two classes of notes ; our inquiries must be for an 
 owner to the unclaimed and nameless ones. In matters of importance 
 references to particular passages or circumstances are indispensable. The 
 first Letter of Junius afforded us an example of the annotations which 
 have found their way into that edition of Junius. It stands as follows : 
 " Yet Junius has been called the partizan of Lord Chatham" ! Indeed. 
 Where at what time and by whom has been ? Why, I thought 
 this Jirst Letter of Junius was verily and truly the first ! How comes 
 it to pass that the exclamation is in the past tense ? Junius has been 
 called. Oh ! you bungling annotator ! the note should have been 
 reserved and given, explanatory of any random ^passage in any Letter 
 except the first. Now who will pride himself to avow his legitimate 
 right to that explanatory note ? It appeared before Mr. Woodfall pub- 
 lished his edition, and it has been sufficiently referred to by every writer on 
 this question since ; and what amuses me is the fact that it has always been 
 considered as an original note ; in short, that it was written by Junius. 
 How very inconsistent would it have appeared for Junius to have made 
 such a remark, is apparent. The Letters printed in 1769 are without 
 that note when it was first introduced, I have no means of ascertaining. 
 Mr. Newhall makes a shrewd remark when he notices the first Letter : 
 " This note by Junius illustrates why he had been so called, because he 
 had been politically opposed to Mr. Grenville. "j^If it could be proved 
 
in opposition." (Surely Junius might term any particular circumstance 
 unfortunate, without being subject to the charge of advocating the cause 
 of America with Mr. Grenville.) " Their declaration gave spirit and 
 argument to the colonies, and while perhaps they meant no more than 
 the ruin of a Minister, they in effect divided one half of the empire 
 from the other." 
 
 To rightly understand this sentence we must turn to the state of 
 political parties antecedent to, and at the period of, the introduction of 
 the Stamp Act. 
 
 Mr. Pitt's Ministry continued from 1756 to October 1761, and was 
 supported by his intimate friend and brother-in-law, Mr. G. Grenville. 
 When the Duke of Bedford's Ministry was formed in 1763, the gentlemen 
 who took office were hostile to the line of policy adopted and recommended 
 by Mr. Pitt, and with but few exceptions were not members of Mr. Pitt's 
 administration. At this critical period the brother-in-law* and friend of 
 
 that Junius appended the note, I would observe that it was a perfectly 
 unnecessary one, and intended to perplex his readers on any question 
 which might arise connecting Lord Chatham with the author of the 
 Letters. 
 
 * I will give a brief sketch of these changes from a paper in the 
 London Magazine for 1769, p. 71- "At length Lord Bute, finding his 
 acting publicly in office with any degree of credit an utter impossibility, 
 withdrew himself apparently from the chief direction of affairs, and 
 was succeeded at the treasury board by Mr. George Grenville, who had 
 filled many employments, and was supposed to be one of the ablest 
 financiers in the kingdom. The enemies of the late Premier asserted 
 that Mr. G. Grenville was nothing more than the creature of the favourite. 
 The minority, headed by Mr. Pitt, Lord Temple, the Duke of Newcastle, 
 &c. could by no means forgive Mr. Grenville's junction with Lord B., 
 though in that junction Mr. G. shewed a firm resolution to support his 
 own independence, and was soon after dismissed from his employments. 
 After this dismissal he was above the condescension of acting a secondary 
 character in the Ministry, and was therefore considered by Mr. Pitt and 
 Lord Temple, who were the oracles of that party, as an impracticable 
 man, with whom there was no possibility of carrying on the opposition 
 heartily." * 
 
54 
 
 Mr. Pitt, joined the Duke of Bedford, and was companion to Lords 
 North, Sandwich, Hillsborough, Mr. Welbore Ellis, and Jerem. Dyson. 
 In 1765 he became the more associated to his new friends, and more 
 estranged from his old friend Mr. Pitt, by introducing the bill termed 
 the American Stamp Act. Under such circumstances, Mr. Pitt would 
 distress Mr. Grenville, because, as Junius says, he was Minister ; and 
 <e while, perhaps, he meant no more than the ruin of a Minister, he in 
 effect divided one half of the empire from the other." 
 
 It cannot be from such declarations that we infer Junius to be an 
 advocate for the cause of authority against the Americans. I acknow- 
 ledge that nothing definite can be obtained from the first Letter, either 
 to support those who disagree with me in opinion on this subject, or to 
 give weight to my own. The same objection cannot be advanced to 
 weaken my argument in the following quotations, and I willingly allow 
 to others the benefit of holding opinions directly opposed to the explicit 
 declarations of Junius. 
 
 " Under one administration the Stamp Act is made ; under the second 
 it is repealed ; under the third, in spite of all experience, a new mode of 
 taxing the colonies is invented, and a question revived which ought to 
 have been buried in oblivion. In these circumstances, a new office is 
 established for the business of the plantations, and the Earl of Hillsbo- 
 rough called forth at a most critical season to govern America. * * * 
 When he entered into office, the most refractory of the colonies were 
 still disposed to proceed by the constitutional methods of petition and 
 remonstrance. Since that period, they have been driven into excesses 
 little short of rebellion. Petitions have been hindered from reaching the 
 throne, and the continuance of one of the principal assemblies rested 
 upon an arbitrary condition,* which, considering the temper they were 
 in, it was impossible they should comply with, and which would have 
 availed nothing as to the general question if it had been complied with. 
 So violent, and I believe I may call it so unconstitutional, an exertion 
 of the prerogative, to say nothing of the weak, injudicious terms in 
 which it was conveyed, give us as humble an opinion of his Lordship's 
 capacity as it does of his temper and moderation. While we are at peace 
 with other nations, our military force may perhaps be spared to support 
 
 * " That they should retract one of their resolutions, and erase the 
 entry of it." 
 
55 
 
 the Earl of Hillsborough in America. Whenever that force shall be 
 necessarily withdrawn or diminished, the dismission of such a Minister 
 will neither console us for his imprudence, nor remove the settled 
 resentment of a people, who, complaining of an act of the Legislature, 
 are outraged by an unwarrantable stretch of prerogative, and supporting 
 their claims by argument, are insulted with declamation." Junius, 
 Letter 1, p. 56. 
 
 " The distance of the Colonies would make it impossible for them to 
 take an active concern in your affairs, if they were as well affected to 
 your government as they once pretended to be to your person. They 
 were ready enough to distinguish between you and your ministers. They 
 complained of an act of the legislature, but traced the origin of it no 
 higher than to the servants of the crown. They pleased themselves with 
 the hope that their Sovereign, if not favourable to their cause, at least 
 was impartial. The decisive personal part you took against them has 
 effectually banished that first distinction from their minds. 
 
 " They consider you as united with your servants against America, 
 and know how to distinguish the Sovereign and a venal parliament on one 
 side, from the real sentiments of the English people on the other. It is 
 not from the alienated affections of America that you can reasonably look 
 for assistance." (Letter 35 to the King.) " In the repeal of those acts, 
 which were most offensive to America, the Parliament have done every 
 thing but remove the offence. They have relinquished the revenue, but 
 judiciously taken care to preserve the contention. It is not pretended 
 that the continuance of the tea duty is to produce any direct benefit 
 whatsoever to the mother country. What is it then but an odious, un- 
 projitable exertion of a speculative right, and Jixing a badge of slavery 
 upon the Americans, without service to their masters. But it has pleased 
 God to give us a Ministry and a Parliament who are neither to be persuaded 
 by argument nor instructed by experience." Letter 39. 
 
 " Since the repeal of the Stamp Act, I know of no acts tending to 
 tax the Americans, except that which creates the tea duty, and even that 
 can hardly be called internal ; yet it ought to be repealed as an impolitic 
 act, not as an oppressive one. It preserves the contention between the 
 mother country and the colonies, when every thing worth contending for 
 is in reality given up. I am not sufficiently informed upon the subject 
 of that excise, which you say is substituted in North America to the laws 
 of customs, to deliver such an opinion upon it as I would abide by ; yet 
 
56 
 
 I can easily comprehend that, admitting the necessity of raising a revenue 
 for the support of Government there, any other revenue laws but those 
 of excise must be nugatory in such a country as America. I say this 
 with great diffidence as to the point in question, and with a positive 
 protest against any conclusion from America to Great Britain." Junius 
 to Wilkes. 
 
 " Are these the terms which men who are in earnest make use of 
 when the salus reipublicce is at stake ?" 
 
 " Junius considers the right of taking the colonies, by an act of the 
 British legislature, as a speculative right merely, never to be exerted, 
 nor ever to be renounced/' Letter of Philo- Junius 64. 
 
 Now, would any twelve honest men, without any preconceived theory 
 to support would, I ask, twelve well informed men pronounce such 
 language decisive of the question that Junius supported the cause of 
 authority against the Americans ? We may wilfully misunderstand these 
 quotations, and we may boldly assert that Junius intended to convey a 
 meaning in the term speculative right, which, if properly understood, 
 implies more than the expression taken in a literal sense imports. But, 
 let us not interpret the clear and positive words of Junius, as we wish, 
 but as they fairly stand in each sentence. ' ' Let it be remembered that we 
 are speaking of the intention of men who lived more than half a century 
 ago, and that such intention can only be collected from their words and 
 actions, as they are delivered to us upon record." (Junius, Letter 20.) 
 There are indeed a few lines in the 59th Letter which stand opposed to 
 my opinion, or rather appear to do so. I have no desire to conceal even 
 the weakness of the position I am endeavouring to maintain. Truth is 
 the grand object of my research, and on no consideration will I designedly 
 refrain from seeking it, although surrounded with difficulties and dangers. 
 If in our search for Junius we met with no impediments, he would have 
 been dragged before the King and the Ministers whom he unsparingly 
 libelled, and every man capable of reasoning correctly from true data 
 given, would long ere this have discovered who Junius was. Let us 
 remember the momentous importance there was that Junius should be a 
 concealed writer, and we may then be more disposed to put a charitable 
 construction on any defect which we may have in explaining every word 
 written by that individual. 
 
 " As for differences of opinion upon speculative questions, if we wait 
 until they are reconciled, the action of human affairs must be for ever 
 
57 
 
 suspended. But neither are we to look for perfection in any one man, 
 nor for agreement among many. 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 with 
 diffidence and respect, but without the smallest degree of conviction or 
 assent ; yet, I doubt not, he delivered his real sentiments, nor ought he 
 to be hastily condemned." Letter 59. 
 
 I must be permitted to make a few observations on this last quotation, 
 and to enter into a short review of the state of public feeling at the time 
 the question of the right of Great Britain to tax the Colonies was agitated 
 by Mr. Grenville and the Government. The ambiguous term adopted 
 by Junius, when his attention is called to the right to tax America, 
 cannot have escaped our notice, because it was so at variance with his 
 general plan of full discussion of the subject he writes about. He is at 
 no loss for arguments and authorities when the right to impress seamen 
 is questioned ; he hesitates not to contest a legal point with Lord Chief 
 Justice Mansfield; and he devotes his best energies on the Falkland 
 Island affair ; yet from one subject he shrinks, and is satisfied to give 
 a doubtful opinion. The system of iniquity disclosed in the Falkland 
 Island transaction was no doubt very properly a fit topic for the pen of 
 Junius ; still, after all, it was but a question of trifling importance, 
 compared with the American stamp act ; the one might be explained, or 
 compensation might satisfy the nation for the injury ; but the right to 
 tax our Colonies was a vital question : on its fate hung the future destinies 
 of the new world. Besides, during the period of its agitation, it engrossed 
 the undivided attention of the greatest statesmen ; it possessed a power 
 which tore asunder the bonds of private friendship and of fraternal love. 
 Yet, strange to tell, Junius, whose Letters were written expressly to 
 support the people's rights, neither advocates the right to tax the Colonies, 
 nor supports, with the great leader of the opposition, the opposite opinion. 
 The conduct of Junius is singular, but not, I conceive, inexplicable. 
 
 When Mr. Grenville introduced the Stamp Act, " Mr. Pitt and Lord 
 Camden were to be the patrons of America because in opposition." Within a 
 few years of that period, and when men had waxed warm with contentions, 
 the Letters of Junius appeared, " diffusing among the body of the people 
 a clearer knowledge of their constitutional rights than they had ever before 
 attained, and animated them with a more determined spirit to maintain 
 them inviolate" ff with an almost electric speed they acquired a popu- 
 
58 
 
 lurity which no series of letters have since possessed." Burke, when 
 describing the impression which they made on the public, concludes, 
 " King, Lords, and Commons, are but the sport of his fury." So 
 libellous were they considered by the Government, that every method 
 which art or ingenuity could devise was employed to detect the writer, 
 who, conscious of his danger, adopted every precaution to escape the 
 myrmidons of the court. 
 
 The mercenary hirelings of Government were engaged to draw him 
 into a literary contest ; ' ' hence they would possess a greater facility of 
 detecting him." We may fairly presume that every sentence in the 
 Letters themselves would be scrutinised with the most critical attention 
 in the hope of detecting the kingly libeller. And we may also infer that 
 Junius was aware that so natural a mode of " hunting him out'' would be 
 resorted to. Well might he exclaim " I must be more cautious than ever.'' 
 
 The political connections and opinions of the Opposition, headed by 
 Lord Chatham, would be subjected to the most rigorous examination ; 
 and from the almost uniform congeniality of sentiment in the Letters of 
 Junius and in the speeches of Lord Chatham, the Ministry would be 
 more than commonly attentive to his movements ; and I cannot doubt 
 that, had Junius unequivocally maintained the right to tax the colonies, 
 the Ministry would have had very strong internal evidence, from the 
 general tenour of the Letters, that his Lordship was personally concerned 
 in their publication. The cautious and very brief expressions used by 
 Junius on a topic, be it remembered, of then primary importance, imply 
 a more than ordinary motive. I may perhaps be censured for presuming 
 to say that Junius designedly abstained from an argumentative discussion 
 of the question of the right to tax the colonies, and that as he could not 
 with propriety avoid the subject altogether, he as designedly gave an 
 opinion which, without agreeing with the Grenville party, who advocated 
 the right, or with the opposition, answered his chief purpose the 
 concealment of the writer of the Letters.* I have no wish to resort to 
 improbable conjectures, or attempt to explain or reconcile minor differ- 
 
 * I should be gratified to read a commentary on the following 
 sentence, from the pen of either Mr. Barker or the Edinburgh 
 Reviewers : " // is not my design to enter into a formal vindication of 
 Mr. Grenville upon his own principle*." Letter 18. 
 
59 
 
 ences of opinion between Junius and Lord Chatham, nor do I, by 
 acknowledging* their existence, weaken the claim which I set up for 
 that nobleman. The contemporary writers with Junius placed no improper 
 value on every unimportant contradiction in the Letters and in the 
 character of the claimant for their authorship. Dr. Johnson remarks,, 
 " I should have believed Burke to be Junius, because I know no man 
 but Burke who was capable of writing these Letters, but Burke sponta- 
 neously denied it." Croker's Life of Dr. Johnson, vol. 4, p. 246. 
 
 The doctor founded his belief on the ability of the individual to 
 write the Letters; a mere difference of opinion was not a subject of 
 sufficient consideration or importance to regulate his judgment. The 
 Doctor's language cannot be misunderstood. If I had no other proof to 
 offer in support of Lord Chatham's claim, I would confidently say, I 
 believe Lord Chatham to be Junius, because I know no man but Chatham 
 who was capable of writing these Letters. 
 
 " A simple test ascertains the political connexion of Junius," say the 
 co-editors of the Edinburgh Review, and Mr. Barker distinctly states 
 that Junius was the political friend of Mr. G. Grenville,t and that the 
 great unknown was politically hostile to Lord Chatham because his 
 Lordship was separated from Mr. Grenville. So simple a statement can 
 be readily investigated. If there be no incorrectness in what Mr. Barker 
 says, we may expect to find that Junius was not opposed to some of the 
 
 * " Great caution, observes Mr. Barker, p. 59, is necessary to be 
 observed in discussing fairly the question of Junius ; we must neither 
 over-state nor under-state facts, neither over-rate nor under-rate aro-u- 
 ments, neither increase nor diminish the natural force of circumstances 
 and incidents, but maintain an even, because consistent a true, because 
 just a successful, because wary course throughout the investigation of 
 this most curious subject." 
 
 t " Previous to the publication of Junius's Letters, the Grenvilles 
 were all reconciled to each other and to Lord Chatham ; and it was at 
 this time the general opinion of all ranks that these persons must succeed 
 to the highest departments of the State whenever a change of ministers 
 should take place. Thus, it may be presumed, two points are explained 
 which have often excited surprise ; the apparent or probable cause of 
 attacking the Duke of Grafton, and the apparent or probable motive for 
 spuring the Grenvilles." Almon's Biographical, &c. Anecdotes. 
 
60 
 
 measures defended by Mr. Grenville. A friend of Mr. Barker's has 
 taken a just view of this question, and I will avail myself of his obser- 
 vations. Mr. Roche observes " The present, I believe, is the first 
 time in which it has been gravely maintained that Junius, (in spite of 
 his own declaration to the contrary, affirming that he is of no party,) 
 was the advocate and partizan of Mr. Grenville. That he had a high 
 respect for his abilities, character, and integrity, is clear from various 
 parts of his writings ; but it is equally manifest that Junius rvas In direct 
 hostility to some of the measures of Mr. Grenville s administration. 
 For instance, did Junius approve of the proceedings against Mr. Wilkes, 
 which commenced while Mr. Grenville was Minister, and by his advice ? 
 Did he approve of the seizure of his papers, or of his arrest by a general 
 warrant ? Or did Junius approve of another doctrine not only maintained, 
 but carried into execution during that administration, that the crown, 
 during a recess, had the power of suspending the operation of an act of 
 the legislature ? It would be needless to multiply instances of this kind 
 to show how much he differed in many things from Mr. Grenville." 
 
 The subject is too interesting to be left imperfect. Did Junius 
 approve of the peace in 1763?* Mr. Grenville decidedly did so. Did 
 Junius approve of a cyder tax, supported by Mr. Grenville ? Junius 
 condemned an arbitrary extension of prerogative in the case of Mr. 
 Wilkes and the North Briton. Mr. Grenville approved of an exercise 
 of that arbitrary power. Junius did not advocate the right of this kingdom 
 to tax the colonies ; Mr. Grenville did. Junius wrote two long letters 
 in support of the remonstrance of the city of London ; Mr. Grenville 
 was opposed to the " inflammatory measure." 
 
 Simple as the test is which ascertains Junius's connections, we shall 
 have some difficulty in applying the same test to Mr. G. Grenville. If 
 we confine ourselves to mere political opinions, we find a total disagree- 
 ment on subjects of sufficient importance to engage much of the attention 
 of Junius. Can we then say with the Edinburgh Reviewers that Junius 
 was a constant admirer of Mr. Geo. Grenville ? It will be my care to 
 prove that Lord Chatham and Junius not only held the same sentiments 
 
 * Junius might very justly have adopted the words used by Lord 
 Chatham in 1766 "As to the late Ministry (turning himself to Mr. G. 
 Grenville who sat within one of them), every capital measure they have 
 taken has been entirely wrong" Parl. Hist. vol. 16, p. 97- 
 
61 
 
 on all questions, but that their ideas were expressed in similarity of style, 
 and in many instances by a choice of metaphors and figures bearing 
 evident marks of being the product of the same mind. 
 
 To clearly comprehend some of the Letters of Junius, and to 
 perceive the connection which there is between certain portions of them 
 and the conduct of Lord Chatham, it will be necessary to give a general 
 outline of the political relations of his Lordship immediately preceding 
 and subsequent to the accession of George the Third. I will be as brief as 
 possible, referring to the pages of history for a more minute account of 
 the intrigues and factions of the " ins and outs" of that period. " The 
 Anecdotes of the Life of Lord Chatham" afford me sufficient data. From 
 this book the following outline is taken : 
 
 Anno. 1757' George II. gave his confidence to Mr. Pitt, and the 
 latter, upon discovering the whole of the King's views, saw he could 
 make them secondary and subservient to the interests of Great Britain. 
 During the remainder of the reign they acted together. 
 
 1760. Two days after the King's accession, the Earl of Bute, " the 
 favourite," was introduced into the Privy Council. Writers were 
 employed by the Earl of Bute's party to calumniate Mr. Pitt and the 
 Whigs, who were styled republicans. But Mr. Pitt was the principal 
 object of their calumny. 
 
 1761. The Faction resolved to change the ministry. Lord Bute 
 became Secretary of State. Lord Temple supported Mr. Pitt, but every 
 other member in the cabinet declaring against their measures, they both 
 resigned. Mr. Pitt's character was assailed with the most ardent malignity 
 and savage phrenzy by all the hired writers in the service of the Favourite's 
 party they branded him with the name of pensioner, apostate, deserter, 
 lie retired from office an indigent man, with little more than his annuity 
 for his support. The revenue stood clear of all incumbrances. 
 
 1762. Mr. Pitt attended in Parliament, and said we had sacrificed 
 the public faith by an abandonment of our allies. 
 
 1763. Mr. Pitt opposed the lay ing a duty upon cyder and perry, upon 
 the dangerous precedent of admitting the officers of excise into private 
 houses. 
 
 Mr. Pitt had an interview with the King and Lord Bute, by their 
 desire, to form an administration ; he addressed his Majesty in the 
 following words : " Affairs cannot be carried on without the great 
 families who have supported the revolution, and other great persons, 
 
62 
 
 of whose abilities and integrity the public have had experience, and 
 who have weight and credit with the nation." The negociation failed. 
 
 1764. Mr. Pitt opposed the law of General Warrants. 
 
 1765. Mr. Pitt again applied to join the Ministry. He refused 
 " unless he could carry the constitution along with him." 
 
 1766. Mr. Pitt opposed the American Stamp Acts. Again desired 
 by the Faction to form an Administration. The Duke of Grafton 
 attached himself to him. Mr. Pitt and Lord Temple disagree about the 
 unlimited power given to Mr. Pitt by the King to form an administration. 
 Created Earl of Chatham, and attempted to form an Administration of 
 different persons of great weight and consideration he failed in doing so. 
 
 In September, Lord Chatham's penetration suggested to him the 
 necessity of uniting himself to the Court. He was not unacquainted that 
 a powerful and violent opposition was forming against him. The court 
 party promised to support him, he gave them full credit because he 
 believed them sincere. Although the vacant offices were filled, yet he 
 was far from being satisfied with the choice he had been obliged to make 
 of several individuals, or with the union he had been obliged to accept, 
 and he regretted more than any other circumstance the loss of his brother 
 Lord Temple. Grief, vexation, and disappointment, preyed upon his 
 nerves a violent attack of the gout was the consequence. 
 
 1767. He retired to Hampstead. In July an application was made 
 to him by the King to return to the assistance of the cabinet ; he replied, 
 " that such was his ill state of health that his Majesty must not expect 
 from him any fresh assistance in any arrangement whatever." 
 
 The Parliament met in November and was dissolved in March, 
 1768. Lord Chatham did not attend during the Session, but resigned 
 the Privy Seal. 
 
 A short time before his resignation we find him agitated by con- 
 tending passions,* mortified in having been obliged to join himself to 
 
 * " LordChatham saw with dissatisfaction many of the late ministerial 
 proceedings ; he was displeased with their conduct respecting America ; 
 indignant at the tranquillity with which his colleagues suffered the 
 French to possess themselves of Corsica ; and, in many other respects, 
 discontented : he also felt great repugnance at seeing his name connected 
 with men and measures so generally unpopular, and determined to resign. 
 He would not even attend at court to announce his resolution, but sent 
 the Privy Seal by Lord Camden." Adolphus. 
 
63 
 
 individuals personally disagreeable to him, and in whom he had no 
 confidence. Called upon to connive at a double system of intrigue 
 apparent to the whole nation, " which had for its objects, the debasement 
 of the English nobility, the extension of the power of the crown, and the 
 humiliation of the pride of the nation :" grief, disappointment, and 
 vexation preyed upon his nerves ; he retired to the solitude of Hampstead, 
 and declined acceding to the King's request of joining the Ministry. 
 
 In this retirement he had full leisure, powers fresh and vigorous, 
 and capable of being, at the shortest notice, waked into active and awful 
 energy. 
 
 Lord Chatham returned to London in March, 1767; he retired to 
 a house at Hampstead, and remained there some time. For a short 
 period, he went down to Hayes, in Kent ; but on the 2d of July, we 
 find him sick* at Hampstead. As soon as his health permitted, he 
 retired into Somersetshire, but before December we find him again at 
 Hampstead. 
 
 1768. " His Lordship at his old seat at Hayes," but acquainted with 
 the measures of Government, communicating frequently with Lord 
 Temple ; and, from a variety of incidents alluded to by him and his 
 friends, in which he was personally interested, I have just cause in 
 belioving that he was in London or at Hampstead during many months 
 in this year. There is nothing definite in the Anecdotes of his Life. 
 
 In the Letters of Lord Chesterfield, we meet with an explanation 
 of the sickness which so often and conveniently confined Lord Chatham : 
 " November, 1765. Mr. Pitt keeps his bed here, with a real gout, and 
 not a political one as is often suspected. April, 1767- Lord Chatham has 
 been so ill these two last months, that he has not been able (some say 
 not willing j to do or hear of any business. May, 1767- Lord Chatham 
 is still ill, and only goes abroad for an hour in a day to take the air in 
 his coach. July, 1767- Lord Chatham will neither hear of or do any 
 business, but lives at Hampstead and rides about the heath : his gout is 
 said to be fallen upon his nerves. January, 1768. Lord Chatham is at 
 his house at Hayes, but sees no mortal. Some say that he has a fit of 
 the gout, which would do him good ; but many think that his worst 
 complaint is in his head, which I am afraid is too true." 
 
 * " The gout, his convenient friend in every political distress, came 
 opportunely to his aid." Political Register, vol. 5, p. 177- 
 
64 
 
 1769. " The respite which Lord Chatham gave himself from all 
 kinds of business, and the happiness he enjoyed in the reconciliation of 
 his relations, so largely contributed to the restoration of his health, that 
 on the approach of the following session he found himself able to attend 
 the labours of Parliament." 
 
 Lord Chatham might be engaged ee during this long respite, freed 
 from all kinds of business" " and with a mind never affected by disease," 
 in organising a systematic attack " on all that was vile and contemptible." 
 
 " The Author of the Letters of Junius, (says Mr. Barker, p. 141,) 
 could not have had leisure for any other pursuit, or any other business, 
 while he was engaged in writing those 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 Aurengzebe, he came forth 
 
 " Fierce from his lair to lap the blood of kings." 
 
 The truth of these remarks is confirmed by what Junius writes to Mr. 
 Wilkes. " I offer you the sincere opinion of a man, who, perhaps, has 
 more leisure to make reflections than you have, and who, though he 
 stands clear of all business and intrigue, mixes sufficiently for the purposes 
 of intelligence in the conversation of the world" 
 
 The year 1770 was a memorable one. The journals of the House 
 of Lords, and the various publications of this year, record his Lordship's 
 numerous speeches in Parliament. We ascertain from the Anecdotes of 
 his Life, that " he retired into Somersetshire during the summer of this 
 year." A particular reference to the dates of Junius's Letters in 1770, 
 will satisfactorily solve any objection which might be raised on this 
 question of his Lordship's retirement. The dates are February 14, 
 March 19, April 3, May 28, August 22 ; and in the private Letters, 
 March 18, October 19. The coincidence is at least singular. Junius 
 had retired somewhere in the summer months of June, July, and to the 
 22d of August. 
 
 In 1771 we learn that Lord Chatham " attended to his Parliamentary 
 duties until the close of the Session in May ;" where he was after this I 
 have no means of ascertaining. 
 
65 
 
 In 1772 and 1773, Lord Chatham did not attend Parliament. Where 
 he resided during these years is of little consequence, for " the last poli- 
 tical letter" with the signature " Junius" was dated January 21, 1772. 
 Junius's last letter to Woodfall, dated January 19, 1773, assures him 
 that he will write no more : " I feel for the honour of this country, 
 when I see that there are not ten men in it who will unite and stand toge- 
 ther upon any one question. But it is all alike vile and contemptible." 
 Lord Chatham died in the year 177& 
 
 This brief investigation will, I trust, warrant me in saying that 
 Lord Chatham had it in his power to have written to the Editor of the 
 Public Advertiser during the years when Junius was in correspondence 
 with that paper. 
 
 Junius gives a very sparing account of himself and his station in 
 life, yet there are some particulars hinted at in his Letters which appear 
 to merit more attention than they have received. In the private Letter 
 76, dated October, 1771? Wilkes asks this question " Does Junius 
 wish for any dinner or ball tickets for the Lord Mayor's day ?" Junius 
 answers " My age and figure would do but little credit to my partner." 
 In a note, by the Editor, p. 160, vol. 1, of Junius's Letters, we read that 
 tf Lord Chatham, it is well known, laboured under a premature decrepi- 
 tude of body, from frequent and violent attacks of the gout ; but his 
 mind was never affected by such paroxysms." It is not impossible, says 
 Woodfall, to form a guess at the age of Junius. In one of his Letters, 
 dated November 27, 1771? Junius writes, " after long experience of the 
 world, I never knew a rogue that was not unhappy" and at the 
 conclusion of the Dedication, " that civil liberty may still last the 
 life of Junius." Lord Chatham was in the 63d year of his age 
 in 1771- 
 
 Woodfall describes Junius as a " man of independent fortune that 
 he moved in the immediate circle of the court and was intimately 
 acquainted, from its first conception, with almost every public measure, 
 every ministerial intrigue, and every domestic incident." 
 
 Mr. Woodfall, senior, closes his correspondence with Junius by 
 expressing his conviction that he was in a superior condition and advanced 
 in years. " Should (says W.) it please the Almighty to spare your life 
 till the next general election, and I should at that time exist, I should 
 hope you will deign to instruct me for whom I should give my vote, as 
 my wish is to be represented by the most honest and able, and / know 
 
 K 
 
66 
 
 there cannot be any one who is so fit to judge as yourself." p. 258.* 
 Senex, in the Gent. Mag. for Feb. 1829, has an inference from this 
 sentence which I perfectly coincide with : " This profound humility 
 could not be addressed to his schoolfellow, Sir P. Francis, then likely to 
 see half a dozen general elections. Woodfall, therefore, clearly either 
 fancied the writer to be an old man, a sick man, or a man greatly superior 
 to himself in condition." 
 
 Lord Chatham was independent in fortune ; he moved in the imme- 
 diate circle of the court, and it may fairly be presumed that he was 
 intimately acquainted with every public measure, every ministerial 
 intrigue, and every domestic incident. His rank* and station in life, 
 and his family connections, necessarily brought him in contact with all 
 the celebrated characters of the day, and we may easily imagine that he 
 knew how to manage " the myrmidons of the court," and to obtain from 
 them information on any subject of consequence, t 
 
 In the Gent. Mag., vol. 87- pt. 2, 131, we have a very curious illus- 
 tration of the above description. " The divisions are great in the 
 
 besieger's camp, particularly between Lord T. and C n, about the 
 
 author of Junius's Letters." On this sentence the late Mr. Justice 
 Hardinge remarks" These few words are of no trivial import, and 
 they wonderfully confirm a passage in a conversation between Lord 
 Camden and me. He told me that many things in Junius convinced 
 him that the materials were prompted by Earl Temple, and he mentioned, 
 in particular, a confidential statement which had been made in private 
 between Lord Chatham, Lord Temple, and Lord Camden, which, from 
 the nature of it, could only have been disclosed by Lord Temple, through 
 Junius, to the public." The inference drawn by the Learned Judge was 
 not so very logical as he supposed. Surely Lord Chatham might have made 
 the confidential statement known ; the presumption that he did so, is as 
 fair and probable as that Lord Temple revealed it to the unknown Junius. 
 
 * " Arguing synthetically, we determined that Junius 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." Butler's Reminiscences. 
 
 t " Lord Chatham's information of the proceedings of the Cabinet 
 Council was supposed to have been derived from Lord Camden, who, in 
 1770, was Lord Chancellor." Anecdotes of his Life, vol. 2, p. 21. 
 
67 
 
 In a private letter to Woodfall, Junius uses an expression to which 
 I attach considerable importance. When Woodfall was under prosecution 
 for having printed Junius's Letter to the King, Junius writes, " If your 
 affair should come to a trial, and you should be found guilty, you will 
 then let me know what expense falls on you." Again, " Avoid prosecution 
 if you can." To Wilkes he says, " I know that in the ordinary course 
 of law they cannot hurt you, but did the idea of a Bill of Banishment 
 never occur to you ?" But in what language, and by what legal 
 technicality did Junius designate the punishment that would fall on his 
 own head if he were discovered ? Leaving a printer to be fined or 
 prosecuted, and a city patriot to be banished, as an ordinary affair, feelingly 
 might Junius or Lord Chatham say " they would attaint me by bill" In 
 a private letter to Mr. Woodfall, this remarkable sentence is introduced : 
 " / 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." Would 
 a commoner, or mere member of the House of Lords or Commons, 
 under the identical circumstance referred to by Junius, have said " they 
 would attaint me by bill" ? Certainly not. To whom then could this 
 expression apply ? To a Member of the Privy Council or to one who 
 had been a Privy Councillor ? Such a character is sworn to keep all 
 the King's secrets ; * and if he divulged any secret revealed to him, he 
 would be guilty of High Treason. Would Lord Chatham have been 
 liable to be attainted by bill if it could have been proved that his 
 Lordship had written the Letters of Junius ? Certainly he would. 
 The precautions of Junius were not unnecessary. If I have put a 
 legal construction on this question, all individuals, except Privy Coun- 
 cillors, will be debarred from claiming any right and title to the 
 authorship of the Letters of Junius. 
 
 In a letter to Woodfall in 1769, Junius says, " I doubt much 
 whether I shall ever have the pleasure of knowing you ; but if things 
 
 * On a motion in the House of Commons, in 1761, for the produc- 
 tion of certain memorials, Mr. Pitt said " that he could not mark out, 
 nor call in a parliamentary way, for a specific paper, with the contents 
 of which he had been entrusted by the king under the seal of secrecy." 
 And on the 19th of January, 1762, "Lord Temple declined answering 
 certain questions from the effect of his oath as a Privy Councillor." 
 Parl. Hist. vol. 15, p. 1126. 
 
68 
 
 take the turn I expect, you .shall know me by my works." In this year, 
 what was Lord Chatham engaged in ? History informs us that he was 
 sick at Hampstead : that in a few months after he spoke for three hours 
 on the opening of the Session of Parliament. Woodfall might have 
 known him by his works ! 
 
 But another construction may be put on this expression. Junius 
 might hope to have it in his power to render Woodfall an essential service. 
 That Lord Chatham had a hope of reinstating himself in the Cabinet is 
 not improbable. In the beginning of 1770, he says, " I shall never be 
 Minister, certainly not, without full power to cut away all the rotten 
 branches from Government." Now in this very year Junius writes to 
 Wilkes, and uses the following remarkable language : " And though / do 
 not disclaim the idea of some personal views to future honour and advan- 
 tage, yet I can truly affirm that neither are they little in themselves, nor 
 can they by any possible conjecture be collected from my writings." And 
 to Woodfall he says, " Now is the crisis" 
 
 There is a singular coincidence of time and sentiment, of style and 
 argument, in the above sentences ; it is a strong link in the chain of 
 proof which I possess, and which I shall advance, that Lord Chatham 
 may be identified in Junius.* 
 
 Mr. Barker's observations on the Letter to Woodfall is not uninte- 
 resting. " When the Letter of Junius was sent to Woodfall, the writer's 
 hopes were at the highest point of elevation. He had heard that Lord 
 Chatham meant to support the remonstrance, and under that impression 
 having at once laid aside his wonted caution, and all the prejudices he 
 had entertained against that Nobleman, he directly avows himself to be 
 of his party." His note to Woodfall is as follows : " Sunday, March 18, 
 This Letter is written wide, and I suppose will not fill two columns. 
 
 * Without deviating from my original plan, I may be permitted in 
 a note to give an extract from the Gentleman's Magazine for 1770, p. 44, 
 strongly confirmatory of this part of my argument. " A conference was 
 said to be held on the 18th of January, at a house in Grosvenor-square, 
 at which, among other things, it was settled, that should the present 
 opposition succeed, Lord Chatham, Lord Temple, and the Marquis of 
 Rockingham, should be created Dukes, and hold each a cabinet office ; 
 that George Grenville, under the controul of three Dukes, should appear 
 .as ostensible minister at the head of the Treasury." 
 
69 
 
 For God's sake let it appear to-morrow. I hope you received my note of 
 yesterday. Lord Chatham is determined to go to the Hall to support the 
 Westminster Remonstrance. I have no doubt that WE shall conquer them 
 at last." 
 
 I scarcely know any one Letter which has so gratified me as the 
 above. We are positively told by Junius that he had facilities of knowing 
 Lord Chatham's intentions, and that his Lordship was firm and deter- 
 mined to support a certain motion. So anxious is he to co-operate with his 
 Lordship, "for now is the crisis," that he says to his printer, "for God's 
 sake let my Letter appear to-morrow. I have no doubt that rve shall 
 conquer them at last." What rve ? Surely Junius does not mean Lord 
 Chatham, the infamous ! the black villain ! the tyrant ! so termed, with a 
 hundred worse epithets, by the Poplicola of the Miscellaneous Letters. 
 
 The knowledge which Junius had of private transactions in families 
 of great consequence, is apparent in almost every letter. To Woodfall 
 in October, 1 769, he writes, " As to you, it is clearly my opinion that 
 you have nothing to fear from the Duke of Bedford. I reserve some 
 things expressly to awe him. I am sure I can threaten him privately 
 with such a storm as would make him tremble even in his grave." 
 Lord Chatham was in possession of information on a subject of some 
 importance, which he might reserve " expressly to awe" the Duke of 
 Bedford. " When Mr. George Grenville, brother-in-law to Lord Chatham, 
 became reconciled to his brother Lord Temple, in 1765, he unbosomed 
 himself to his brother, and related all the arts and clandestine steps of 
 Lord Bute, which if possible increased his brother's ardour in opposition 
 to Lord Bute. The unpopular peace of 1763 was negotiated by the 
 Duke of Bedford. The rumour became current that the French court 
 had purchased this peace by bribes to the Princess Dowager of Wales, 
 Lord Bute, the Duke of Bedford, &c. &c." (Anecd. Life of Chatham.) 
 Recollecting that Mr. George Grenville was in 1763 First Lord 
 Treasurer, may it not reasonably be supposed that he was acquainted 
 with the terms of that secret treaty. He unbosomed himself to his 
 brother, Lord Temple, and related certain nameless clandestine arts 
 practised by one of the bribed Lords j he also might tell certain other 
 things to his brother-in-law, Chatham, about the Duke of Bedford and 
 the peace of Paris. 
 
 Junius must also have had a personal knowledge of the King. 
 Writing to Home, he says, "I know that man better than you." Is it 
 
70 
 
 required of me to prove that Lord Chatham was personally known to 
 George the Third ? By referring to the history of the numerous con- 
 ferences which his Lordship had with his Majesty, prior to the year 
 1769, every person will be satisfied that Lord Chatham could justly 
 say, tf I know that man better than you." Can this last question be 
 answered satisfactorily by any other person who has been brought forward 
 as the writer of the Letters of Junius ? 
 
 Junius, in a letter to Wilkes, intimates, by the following expression, 
 that he was well acquainted with the domestic affairs of his family : " I 
 would still appeal to your heart ; or, if you have any scruples about that 
 kind of evidence, ask that amiable daughter whom you so implicitly confide 
 in" Is it possible that Junius should betray me ? Wilkes, in a previous 
 letter to Junius, says, " Lord Chatham said to me ten years ago, * * * 
 is the falsest hypocrite in Europe." How strange ! William Pitt, Earl 
 of Chatham, on terms of familiarity with Wilkes how passing strange 
 that Junius also knew him. The inference to me is plain. 
 
 Junius speaks of the great learning and integrity of Lord Camden, 
 and of the absurd fiction of his being that noble Lord's enemy. He 
 calls upon him " to stand forth in the defence of the laws of his country, 
 and to exert, in the cause of truth and justice, those great abilities with 
 which he was entrusted for the benefit of mankind." 
 
 Lord Chatham named Lord Camden one of his Trustees. 
 
 Junius is very angry with Lord Mansfield he holds him up to the 
 world as an object to be despised, and in the violence of his indignation 
 says, " In council he generally affects to take a moderate part." How 
 did Junius know this ? Neither Lords Mansfield and North, nor the 
 Duke of Grafton, would make such a fact known. To Lord Chatham, 
 the affectation of Lord Mansfield in council must have been known and 
 seen; and when his Lordship left his Majesty's Ministers in 1769, his 
 friend, Lord Camden, was Lord Chancellor. Such trifling facts as these 
 may be of little weight individually but linked together, a chain of 
 proof may be formed in favour of Lord Chatham, solid and durable. 
 
 The whole tenour of the letters satisfies us that the writer was 
 acquainted with every transaction connected with the King, the Privy 
 Council, and the private affairs of the Ministry. 
 
 " Junius was deeply versed in the language, the laws, the constitu- 
 tion and history of his native country" or, as Mr. Butler observes, he 
 was a great " constitutional reader." Lord Chatham equalled him in a 
 
71 
 
 knowledge of these things, and he could join with Jtmius in the expres- 
 sion, " I am no lawyer by profession." 
 
 Junius has been repeatedly accused of being a party man. " This 
 letter," says Junius, " I doubt not, will be attributed to some party 
 friend, by men who expect no applause but from their dependents." 
 But perhaps no political satirist was ever less so. " Let us employ these 
 men," says he, " in whatever departments their various abilities are best 
 suited to, and as much to the advantage of the common cause as their 
 different inclination will permit. If individuals have no virtues, their vices 
 may be of use to us. I care not with what principle the new-born patriot 
 is animated, if the measures he supports are beneficial to the community." 
 Burke's opinion of Lord Chatham was that, " He made an adminis- 
 tration so checked and speckled patriots and courtiers, kings, friends, 
 and republicans ; whigs and tories ; treacherous friends and open enemies. 
 Deprived of his guiding influence, they were whirled about the sport of 
 every gust." 
 
 Wilkes says, " He was such a bigot to the interests of the public 
 that no private connections whatever could induce him to prefer an 
 undeserving person." Speaking of Wilkes, Lord Chatham says, " I 
 consider him merely and indifferently as an English subject, possessed of 
 certain rights which the laws have given him, and which the laws alone 
 can take from him. I am neither moved by his private vices, nor by 
 his public merits. In his person, though he were the worst of men, I 
 contend for the safety and security of the best." Even Lord Chesterfield 
 condescends to praise him for " disinterestedness." 
 
 Junius was secret in all his transactions with Woodfall ; not all the 
 myrmidons of the court could track him. In the " North Briton" we 
 read " that Lord Chatham was of such unshaken secrecy, that during the 
 whole course of his ministry, he gave no opportunity to the most willing 
 of discovering our designs to the enemy." 
 
 Junius must have had unusual opportunities of gaining Parliamentary 
 intelligence. In letter 60, he remarks, " With regard to Lord Camden, 
 the truth is, that he inadvertently overshot himself, as appears plainly by 
 that unguarded mention of a tyranny of forty days which I myself heard." 
 This sentence has reference to a speech of Lord Camden's in the House 
 of Lords, on the bill of indemnity for those concerned in the embargo of 
 corn in the year 1766. In the Annual Register for 1767* p- 46, we read, 
 " that in those cases the evil cannot be very great, since it is but forty days' 
 
72 
 
 tyranny. Junius heard Lord Camden make use of these words, and he tells 
 us moreover that it was an inadvertent expression. Lord Chatham was 
 present when Lord Camden used these words, and he felt particularly 
 interested in the expression " a tyranny of forty days," for Lord Camden 
 had advocated the legality of the embargo, contrary to Lord Chatham's 
 wishes. It must have been so singular a contradiction for Lord Camden 
 to have termed his own legal measure a tyranny, that his friend Chatham 
 would have an opportunity of reminding him of the inconsistency of his 
 conduct; then might come the apology, "he inadvertently overshot 
 himself." How could Junius be so well acquainted with such secret 
 expressions without supposing that he was not only present, but 
 interested in the debate, and intimately known to Lord Camden ? That 
 Lord Chatham was present, interested, and known to Lord Camden, 
 Junius himself confesses in the subsequent sentence. Instead of Lord 
 Camden's saying the Proclamation was legal, he should have said "I 
 know the proclamation was illegal, but I advised it because it was indis- 
 pensably necessary to save the kingdom from famine, and submit myself 
 to the justice and mercy of my country." Here we not only have another 
 proof that Junius was present in the House of Lords, and interested in 
 the question, but we have the language which Lord Camden should have 
 used ; and, singular as it may seem, the sentiment which Lord Chatham 
 expressed four years after the inadvertent words of Camden had been 
 uttered. At the opening of the Session of Parliament in 1770, Lord 
 Chatham says, " I myself advised the measure to the Council, which 
 / knew was not strictly legal, but I recommended it as a measure of 
 necessity, to save a starving people from famine, and I submitted to the 
 judgment of my country." Perhaps it may be said that Junius gives the 
 first sentence as a quotation. But how or where was he to seek for it ? 
 He does not tell us that he is indebted to Lord Chatham for the idea ; 
 it is given to the world as his own, and we have no right to dispute it. 
 Lord Chatham might, in this instance, have been Junius. 
 
 The Ministry employed different plans to detect Junius ; large sums 
 of money were paid by them to spies and " court myrmidons." In his 
 private letters to Woodfall, the word caution is frequently used. The 
 literary hacks of the day were hired to write him down and even Dr. 
 Johnson, " the pensioner/' condescended to receive the word of command 
 from Lord Bute, and " to muster the whole of his political and argumenta- 
 tive powers in defence of the ministry." Junius thought proper to be 
 
73 
 
 very indignant with tlie Government about the Falkland Islands affair. 
 He exerted his best arguments to convince the public that it was a base 
 transaction. This was in January, 1771- In the preceding November, 
 Lord Chatham had discussed that transaction so ably in the House of 
 Lords, that his arguments and even expressions were pirated by Junius. 
 Two such opponents roused the Ministry ; and Dr. Johnson, the Giant 
 of Literature, attacked " the mighty boar of the forest," " with which 
 the Ministry were not a little proud, especially as they made no doubt 
 that Junius would hereby be drawn into a paper contest with Johnson, 
 and that hence they would possess a greater facility of detecting him." 
 Junius was aware of the trap, and made no reply to Johnson. 
 
 Junius had some knowledge of Garrick. Lord Chatham conde- 
 scended to write verses in his praise. 
 
 The mysterious portions of Junius's Letters have been frequently 
 selected as themes for critical answer, and, after the manner of commen- 
 tators, conjectures have supplied the want of explanations which 
 Junius thought proper to withold. More importance, indeed, has been 
 attached to trivial and unimportant expressions, and to mere verbal 
 peculiarities, than to the principles advocated by Junius. 
 
 It has afforded matter of surprise and dissatisfaction to some, that in 
 the former edition of this work I did not " controvert all the extraordinary 
 amount and variety of evidence, and the mass of proofs, produced in 
 favour of Sir Philip Francis's claims to the authorship of Junius' s Letters." 
 The evidence, arguments, and proofs on which those claims are based, 
 have been so satisfactorily and conclusively disproved by Mr. Barker, 
 that I might, without prejudice to myself, fairly decline entering the 
 lists against Sir Philip, for " a question once decided is no longer a 
 subject of argument." If gentlemen possessed sufficient candour to read 
 what has been written on this controversy before they so authoritatively 
 pronounce dogmatical opinions, a superficial examination of the proofs of 
 presumed identity between Sir Philip Francis and Junius would carry 
 conviction to the most prejudiced mind that the hypothesis had been 
 founded on " false facts." 
 
 As, however, it is apparent that Mr. Barker's observations have 
 been either not read, or inattentively examined, by some of the 
 Franciscans, I feel less hesitation in entering, cursorily, into an exposi- 
 tion of the kind of proofs which have been considered entitled to so great 
 attention, and on which an argument has been maintained that Junius is 
 identified with Sir Philip Francis. 
 
74 
 
 ' A free quotation from Mr. Barker will appropriately introduce my 
 own remarks: "Mr. Taylor infers the identity of Sir Philip Francis 
 with Junius/Jbecause Sir Philip reported speeches of Lord Chatham 
 which were used by Junius, although they were not in print at the time, 
 and because Sir Philip, to the day of his death, continued to quote from 
 imprinted speeches of Lord Chatham. But surely, looking to the situa- 
 tion which Sir Philip held under Lord Chatham* looking at the patron- 
 age and friendship which he experienced from him looking to the high 
 admiration of his talents, and the deep veneration of his character, and 
 the great fondness for the energetic language of Lord Chatham which Sir 
 Philip has avowed in his writings we need not wonder that Sir Philip 
 should have taken notes of his Lordship's speeches for his own use, or 
 have reported them for the benefit of the public." Mr. Taylor has these 
 words " Sir Philip declares that he was in the House of Lords on the 
 night (January 9, 1770) this speech was made, and that he heard Lord 
 Chatham make use of the very words which it contains." 
 
 In this instance the identity is brought home. " I heard it from 
 Lord Chatham" says Sir Philip, " that power without right is the most 
 odious and detestable object that can be offered to the human imagination. 
 It is at once ' res deiestabilis et cadusa.' " (Essay on the Regency, 
 p. 223, in Mr. Taylor's book.) " In the printed speech this passage is 
 as follows : ' Power without right is the most odious and detestable 
 object that can be offered to the imagination ; it is not only pernicious to 
 those who are subject to it, but tends to its own destruction. It is what 
 my noble friend, Lord Lyttleton, has truly described it res detestabilis 
 et cadusa.' The motto in the same essay presents us with another quota- 
 tion from Lord Chatham's speech : f There is one ambition, at least, 
 which I will not renounce but with my life. It is the ambition of 
 delivering to my posterity those rights of freedom which I have received 
 from my ancestors/ {Earl of Chatham, Jan. 9, 1770.) In this quota- 
 tion the words which I ever will acknowledge should have been inserted 
 after least. By the alteration, as in the former example, Sir Philip 
 again proves his incontrovertible property in the printed speech. But 
 what does he say besides ? ' After the noble speaker of these words, no 
 man has as good a right to make use of them as I have.' Perhaps it was 
 not intended, but according to our present argument, there is a truth in 
 this assertion beyond what strikes the eye ; for, if his Lordship uttered 
 
 * Sir Philip Francis acted at one time as Lord Chatham's Secretary. 
 
75 
 
 the words, Sir Philip, who had given them to the public, had a better 
 title to them than any other man except his Lordship. Letters on the 
 Author of Junius, p. 23 et seq. 
 
 The unknown author of " Junius Identified," (reviewed in vols. 86 
 and 87 of the Gent. Mag.) whose name, Mr. Urban remarks, is particu- 
 larly desirable, pushes Sir P. Francis forward in the rud?s.t .manner, 
 and in defiance of his positive declaration that it is " a r- silly anct' 
 malignant falsehood" to suppose him the author of Junius's Letters. 
 Determined, however, to crown the worthy knight, this unknown writer 
 diligently seeks in the Earl of Chatham's speeches for pearls and jewels 
 to make the coronal. The gist of his arguments is, that " Sir Philip 
 Francis reported certain speeches of Lord Chatham's which are clearly 
 paralleled in the Letters of Junius. The style, the uncommon expressions, 
 the sentiments and arguments, for the space at times of a whole para- 
 graph, agree exactly with the Letters." Therefore, argues this somebody, 
 Sir Philip Francis must be the writer of the Letters. The modesty of his 
 deduction is entitled to some praise. Why not have said, in more intel- 
 ligible words, that because Sir Philip reported Lord Chatham's speeches 
 he must have spoken them ? "If the reader will leisurely examine the 
 quotations about Lord Chatham, made by the author of Junius Identified, 
 from the speeches and the writings of Sir Philip Francis, he will see in 
 them alone sufficient reason for rejecting those claims. The evidence is 
 internal, and therefore unsuspicious. The evidence supplied by one 
 quotation is confirmed by the other quotations, while each quotation is 
 sufficient for our purpose ; not dependent links in a chain, but pillars 
 standing on their own base. The passages (in Junius Identified) one 
 and all, mark the affection, esteem, respect, and veneration uniformly 
 entertained by Sir Philip for the person of Lord Chatham, while they 
 attest his particular fondness for the nervous language of this second 
 Demosthenes." (Letters on the author of Junius, p. 29.) " Sir Philip 
 had a better title to these speeches than any other except his Lordship." 
 
 The publication, by Mr. G. Woodfall, of Fac-similes of the Private 
 Correspondence of Junius with his Father, stimulated the industry of 
 every collector of autograph letters with the hope of detecting the writer, 
 and the claims of individuals to that title were made to rest on the pre- 
 sumed similarity of their hand-writings to the Letters. The absurdity 
 of so fallacious a mode of examining a question, so long enveloped in 
 mystery, would be apparent to most men, if the criterion had not been 
 
76 
 
 adopted as fair evidence by public writers, entitled., by their abilities, to 
 to our chief regard. If, indeed, the advocates for such an argument had 
 been agreed in their opinions of what was similarity of hand-writing, 
 they would have confined their meed of approbation within more circum- 
 scribed limits ; as it is, they dispute about the forms cf almost every 
 letter in the alphabet, and instead of one Junius we have half a dozen. 
 The fac-similes which are offered in evidence of Sir Philip Francis's 
 identity with Junius are met by Mr. Coventry with equal confidence by 
 a beautifully engraved plate of Lord Sackville's hand-writing, which he 
 says bears the strongest possible resemblance to Junius's. The honour 
 of the discovery is, however, soon snatched from these gentlemen, by a 
 fair lady, a soi-disante Princess, who, by the production of a mere fragment 
 of a letter or memorandum, confidently claims of the public an assent to 
 her opinion that Dr. Wilmot was Junius. But the question remained for 
 debate, and our attention was directed in the Gent. Mag. for 1817 to 
 the subject of the identity of Mr. Greatrakes with Junius. His advocate, 
 not having an entire fac- simile letter, nor the half of a sentence, on 
 which to ground his belief, limits his pretensions to " the small s, which 
 is certainly elongated and struck off in the same peculiar manner as those 
 letters are in the fragments which have been copied and published" by 
 Mr. Woodfall in his edition of Junius. 
 
 The editors of the Edinburgh Review for June, 1826, gratuitously 
 infer that the hand-writing of Junius is artificial, and that it coincides 
 with the artificial hand-writing of Sir P. Francis ; from such premises 
 they conclude that Sir Philip was probably the amanuensis of Junius. I 
 cannot bend to the authority of these gentlemen, and I have no inclina- 
 tion to attempt a critical exposition of the absurdity of the declaration 
 that the Letters of an unknown writer are written in a disguised hand. 
 Whether Junius was his own amanuensis or not, is a mystery which 
 cannot be solved by any arguments fairly deducible from his own Letters 
 or the fac-similes given by Mr. Woodfall, consequently, presumed 
 "similarity of hand- writing is a fallacious criterion for tracing the 
 authorship of Junius." 
 
 Mr. Home was no favourite with Junius, and the dislike was 
 reciprocal. In the expression of Home's anger, he has given us a curious 
 and valuable explanation of facts relating to Junius and Lord Chatham. 
 His sagacity led him to reflect and comment on the indescribable connec- 
 tion which appeared to him to exist between Junius and his Lordship. 
 
77 
 
 The studied and cautious language of Junius, whenever he has occasion 
 to allude to Lord Chatham, puzzled him ; he tried to solve the Sphinx's 
 riddle, and demanded of Junius his opinion of that nobleman. The 
 very words in which he put the question imply his suspicions and 
 discernment and in the subsequent conduct of Junius, he evidently 
 dreads the prying curiosity of the Monk. Mr. Home's letter is an 
 answer to some sarcastic remarks of Junius. After replying to his 
 charges, he turns round upon Junius, abuses him in no very delicate 
 language, and makes one observation of more importance to me than all 
 the letters of Mr. Home. " Because Lord Chatham had been ill-treated 
 by the King, and treacherously betrayed by the Duke of Grafton, the 
 latter is to be ' the pillow on which Junius will rest his resentment,' and 
 the public are to oppose the measures of government, from mere motives 
 of personal enmity to the Sovereign ! These are the avowed principles 
 of Junius." In reply to this Junius says, " I see the pitiful advantage 
 he has taken of a single unguarded expression in a letter not intended 
 for the public. I am called upon to deliver my opinion of Lord Chatham," 
 &c. He takes good care, however, to avoid giving a direct answer ; 
 yet he is clearly aware of what Mr. Home implies, for, he observes, 
 " Mr. Home intimates that he knows the author of these letters ; 
 but I am called upon to deliver my opinion of Lord Chatham." 
 Reluctantly he answers " It seems I am a partisan of the great Leader 
 of Opposition (Lord Chatham.) If the charge had been a reproach, it 
 should have been better supported ; / did not intend to make a public 
 declaration of the respect I bear Lord Chatham, I well knew what 
 unworthy conclusions would be drawn from it ; but I am called upon 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. As for the common, sordid views of avarice, or 
 any purpose of vulgar ambition, I question whether the applause of 
 Junius would be of service to Lord Chatham. My vote will hardly 
 recommend him to an increase of his pension, or to a seat in the Cabinet. 
 But if his ambition be upon a level with his understanding ; if he judges 
 of what is truly honourable for himself, with the same superior genius 
 which animates and directs him to eloquence in debate, to wisdom in 
 decision, even the pen of Junius shall contribute to reward him. Recorded 
 honours shall gather round his monument and thicken over him. It is a 
 solid fabric ; and will support the laurels that adorn it. I am not conver- 
 
78 
 
 sant in the language of panegyric. These praises are extorted from me ; 
 but they will wear well, for they have been dearly earned." In a letter 
 to Wilkes he says " I have no objection to paying him (Lord Chatham) 
 such compliments as carry a condition with them, and either bind him 
 firmly to the cause or become the bitterest reproach to him if he deserts it. 
 Of this last I have not the most distant suspicion." * 
 
 The metaphors and similes in the Letters of Junius have been extolled 
 as the finest in any language. One of them has excited the greatest 
 attention, and has been alluded to by numerous writers. Mr. Butler 
 extends his praises so far as to say that " it is difficult to mention another 
 so exquisitely beautiful and so happily illustrative and confirmatory of 
 the argument." I will extract the figure from the 42d Letter : " The 
 King's honour is that of his people. Their real honour and real interest 
 are the same. Private credit is wealth ; public honour is security. The 
 feather that adorns the royal bird, supports its flight. Strip him of his 
 plumage, and you fix him to the earth." Poetry and prose have been 
 ransacked ; Burke, Pope, and Dry den have been made to surrender up 
 passages which have been supposed worthy of standing by the side of this 
 delightful metaphor, but no simile has been produced so exquisitely 
 beautiful " I turn with pleasure from that barren waste in which no 
 salutary plant takes root, no verdure quickens," and in the lofty genius 
 of Lord Chatham I find a metaphor "happily illustrative and confirma- 
 tory of the argument." " I revere," says Lord Chatham, " the just 
 prerogative of the crown, and would contend for it as warmly as for the 
 rights of the people. They are linked together, and naturally support 
 
 * No public man of the period was, perhaps, more capable than 
 Lord Chatham of writing the Letters of Junius ; but the Earl, although 
 secure against detection, could not, it may be presumed from his general 
 conduct, have applied those terms of eulogy to himself with which he was 
 deservedly honoured by the pen of Junius. Georgian Era, v. 1, p. 344. 
 
 " Junius never once mentions the name of Lord Temple; and 
 whenever he mentions his brother-in-law, Lord Chatham, it is evidently 
 with great caution and hesitancy ; and it is alike remarkable that this 
 illustrious nobleman never mentions, in any of his fine speeches, the 
 name of Junius." Gent. Mag. v. 100, p. 581. 
 
79 
 
 each other. I would not touch a feather of the prerogative. The entire 
 command and power of directing the local disposition of the army is in 
 the royal prerogative as the master feather in the eagle's wing." 
 
 To make a single comment on this passage is unnecessary ; it stands 
 a parallel to the metaphor of Junius, and equals it. 
 
 It is asserted by almost every writer on this controversy that Junius 
 was politically hostile to Lord Chatham. If this were true, Junius cannot 
 be identified in his Lordship. The authorities selected to support such 
 an opinion are from " The Miscellaneous Letters," but not a single 
 sentence is produced to favour that supposition from the Letters of 
 Junius. Mr. Barker takes the lead in this class of authors, and shows 
 considerable anxiety to impress upon the attention of his readers that he 
 believes in that hypothesis. In his preface, p. 11, he says " Now in the 
 following pages the author has abundantly proved that Lord Chatham 
 was, in the earlier part of Junius's reign, the constant object of attack ; 
 and that Junius subsequently but very guardedly panegyrised him ; and 
 that as political aversion was the cause of the attack, so political attach- 
 ment was the cause of the panegyric." So again, p. 18, " The dislike 
 which Junius, in the early part of his authorship, had to Lord Chatham, 
 originated in the difference of political feelings and objects, as the subse- 
 quent attachment to him is to be traced to an approximation in their 
 political opinions." At p. 30, Mr. B. continues " Junius's early aver- 
 sion to Lord Chatham was political, and his attachment was political 
 only." At pages 178, 247, 248, and 282, Mr. Barker reiterates, in nearly 
 the same language, his decided conviction that Junius's aversion to Lord 
 Chatham was entirely political and confined to the earlier part of his 
 reign ; and he concludes, " The early aversion of Junius for Lord Chatham 
 terminated about the date of the 54th letter under his favourite signature 
 of Junius ; he then began to think commendably of this nobleman." 
 
 The early aversion of Junius for Lord Chatham is confined to the 
 Miscellaneous Letters, and I conceive the language selected to show that 
 aversion indicates more a personal than an entirely political feeling of 
 hostility towards that nobleman. Let us never forget that the Letters of 
 Junius do not display any aversion to Lord Chatham ; and that when 
 his Lordship's name is mentioned, Junius " very guardedly panegyrises 
 him." ff No particular inference is safe reasoning when any other 
 inference can be drawn from the same fact ; that inference is alone valu- 
 able argument which is the only inference deducible from the same fact." 
 
80 
 
 If we try the validity of Mr. Barker's inference by his own logical postu- 
 latum, we shall be compelled to say that his fact was false. The Editor 
 of Blackwood's Magazine (vol. 18, p. 168,) in a long dissertation about 
 Junius, remarks that " Junius attacks Lord Chatham bitterly, although he 
 uniformly lauds his genius, and on most points coincides with his general 
 politics." If any but a reviewer had written this sentence I would have 
 broken a lance wifh him. To doubt a dogma ex cathedra, would subject 
 me to the critic's rod. Thus much, however, I may without danger 
 remark, that Junius must have been, according to these gentlemen, a 
 strange anomalous being. Mr. Barker says that Junius's hostility to 
 Lord Chatham was entirely political. The Reviewer says he lauds his 
 genius, and coincides with him in his general politics. Opposite 
 inferences from one fact can never be considered fair deductions. 
 
 I cannot refrain from observing that Mr. Barker, (as well as 
 most writers on this controversy,) can scarcely write a single page 
 without introducing the name of Lord Chatham. The connection 
 between him and Junius was too evident to have passed unnoticed. 
 The " early aversion" of that writer to Lord Chatham was unheard 
 of prior to the publication of the Miscellaneous Letters. Mr. Barker 
 supplies me with a sentence which shall conclude this part of my investi- 
 gation : " Had Junius (says Mr. B. p. 30,) felt and avowed on every 
 occasion throughout his political career an ardent attachment to the per- 
 son of, and the highest respect for, the talents and the character of Lord 
 Chatham, and a particular delight in adopting his sentiments 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." 
 
 A question of considerable interest must now be discussed. If Lord 
 Chatham were the author of the Letters of Junius, what probable and 
 adequate reason prevented him or his descendants and friends from 
 avowing the fact. Mr. Barker gives us a communication from a friend, 
 of the discovery of some papers at Stowe which possess more than an 
 ordinary interest : " I was informed some time ago that the Duke of 
 Buckingham had, from certain documents found in his archives, disco- 
 vered 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 portion of his time at Stowe, to 
 
81 
 
 let me know whether he had heard any thing 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." 
 
 The remark on this sentence, by the Editor of the Gent. Mag. for 
 October, 1828, when reviewing Mr. Barker's work, deserves more than 
 common attention: " One of the Grenville family must be the only 
 (Edipus who can solve this Sphinx's riddle " And in corroboration of 
 that opinion, I may quote what Mr. Charles Butler, author of the 
 Reminiscences, says, when noticing the set of vellum-bound books 
 directed by Junius to be prepared for him by Mr. Woodfall. " Who is 
 the fortunate possessor of these 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." * I presume he means Lord 
 Grenville, the founder of whose noble house was Mr. George Grenville. 
 
 The family papers of the Earl of Chatham were bequeathed by him 
 " in trust to Lady Chatham, Richard Earl Temple, and Charles Lord 
 Camden." Now bearing in mind that Lord Temple and Lady Chatham 
 were in the relationship of brother and sister to George Grenville, and of 
 uncle and aunt to the Marquis of Buckingham, it will not require a great 
 stretch of imagination to conceive " that the Duke of Buckingham had, 
 from certain documents found in his archives, discovered who really was 
 the author of the Letters of Junius." That the Grenville family knew 
 the writer of these letters the literary world have long acknowledged. 
 Even Dr. Parr condescends to point out to the Grenville family ; nay, he 
 is pleased to express an opinion that Charles Lloyd, private Secretary to 
 the Right Hon. George Grenville, must be Junius, because he was 
 Secretary to a man who knew more than others about Junius. 
 
 " Dr. Parr remarked that Junius speaks very guardedly of George 
 Grenville, because he wished to disguise the fact that his sources of 
 information were Lord Chatham, (whom he mentions as seldom and with 
 
 * Known to the literary circles as (c The Grenville Homer." 
 
 M 
 
82 
 
 the same caution), Lord Temple, and George Grenville himself." * 
 Again he observes " 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." The Doctor's correspondent, Mr. 
 Charles Butler, writes " I think the Letters are a production of the 
 Grenville school." The Editor of Blackwood's Mag. vol. 18, p. 177, has 
 this comment on Mr. Butler's conjecture : " Mr. Butler hints that 
 Lord Grenville could tell something about that copy if he pleases. 
 Without doubt the last of the generation to which that eminent statesman 
 belongs must have passed away ere this mysterious controversy can be 
 fully settled." The observations of the Editors of the Edinburgh Review 
 for 1826 are too valuable to have escaped my attention. After making 
 some general remarks, these critics proceed to say " That the writer of 
 the Letters of Junius is still undiscovered, Whoever revives the inquiry, 
 therefore, unless he discovered positive and irresistible evidence in sup- 
 port of his claimant, should show him to be politically attached to the 
 Grenville party, which Junius certainly was, and must also produce some 
 specimens of his writings of tolerable length, such as might afford 
 reasonable ground for believing that he could have written these Letters. 
 Though a few letters were written after the death of Mr. George 
 Grenville, yet to that event, and the dissolution of his party, the cessa- 
 tion of Junius is to be attributed. In the cases of Dyer and Sir Philip 
 Francis, the two candidates of most plausible pretension, no proof has 
 hitherto appeared of connexion with the Grenville party. Some resem- 
 blance of style in Francis is a very inconsiderable argument, for almost 
 every contributor to a newspaper, during the twenty years which followed 
 the Letters, was an imitator of Junius." 
 
 These quotations abundantly prove that the Grenville family 
 are generally presumed to know something about the author of Jtinius's 
 Letters. It would be rather a subject of curiosity than of elucida- 
 tion if we were confined in this inquiry to the mere knowledge that 
 
 * " 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 subordinate understandings cannot make one master-mind. 
 Junius might have subalterns to assist, but he was alone and unrivalled 
 in the execution." Letters on the Author of Junius, p. 278. 
 
83 
 
 general consent and accidental yet favourable circumstances pointed 
 to a particular individual as the QEdipus who could solve the riddle ; 
 and the question would be not the less perplexing if, at the same 
 time, we could not ascertain that an adequate reason now exists why the 
 full solution of the riddle is not made known by the family with whose 
 archives it has been hitherto so securely concealed. 
 
 <e 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 sceptered Majesty, and in 
 teaching the multitude to think and to speak contemptuously of kings." 
 In a letter which I received in 1830, from the late Mr. Charles Butler, 
 the Reminiscent, he observes, " I have been recently informed that Sir 
 P. Francis owed his India appointment to the first Lord Holland, who 
 had always been his patron ; and that Francis by his will bequeathed an 
 elegant copy of Junius to his wife. The former fact makes it unnecessary 
 to connect Sir Francis's appointment with the authorship ; the last may 
 be thought to indicate his wish to be thought the author of the Letters/' 
 
 If the " vellum bound books" and manuscripts had been discovered 
 with the archives of the Francis family, what motives exist to prevent 
 their publicity? Lady Francis would have been tempted by vanity, 
 interest, and ambition, to reveal a secret, neither discreditable to 
 Sir Philip's memory nor injurious to the feelings and interests of his 
 relations. The same argument is as conclusive against Boyd, Wray, 
 Lloyd, and the numerous claimants who in their life-time would have 
 been proud to have been known as the writer of Junius's Letters. The 
 fear of a discovery, which influenced Junius to adopt that excessive 
 precautionary language and plan of communication with his printer, 
 Woodfall, has long ceased to deter men from revealing such a secret 
 if they had been in possession of it. What mortal can now say " I 
 should not survive a discovery three days" ? Can a bill of banishment 
 disturb the ashes of the dead ? Can a bill of attainder blot the escutcheon 
 on the tomb ? The anger of insulted and offended majesty is subdued 
 by " the king of terrors," and Junius himself has long slept the sleep of 
 death. 
 
 " Who is Junius is not an idle question at the present day, for it 
 seems the secret is worth keeping ; and, indeed, if he were a man of 
 
84 
 
 rank and influence, as is universally supposed, there are descendants, 
 relatives, connections, which hitherto may have required the protecting 
 hand of oblivion ; but many lamps are already extinguished, and others 
 have long been burning, so that in all human probability, a little 
 climacteric, or even a ternary of years, will unfold the mystery in good 
 time to supply the Kussells, or the House of Manners, with at least one 
 able and fearless historian." Anniversary Calendar, p. 69. 
 
 The Stowe archives are kept as a sealed book, and no ordinary 
 inducements will ever lead the Grenvilles, the Buckinghams, Temples, 
 or Chathams of this generation to break the seal of secrecy. Whenever 
 this mystery is elucidated, we shall find that the Father of the Pilot 
 that weathered the storm was a Whig and the Author of the Letters of 
 Junius. 
 
 The motto, " Stat nominis umbra," prefixed by Junius to his 
 Letters, possessed sufficient interest to engage my attention to this 
 investigation. The beauty and lovely proportions of the shadow tempted 
 me to seek the substance. Protected by the genius of liberty, I found it 
 te faithful among the faithless." The pen of Junius has recorded the 
 honours that gather round his monument. If they " thicken over him" 
 through my agency I shall not have laboured in vain ; I shall have added 
 no mean ray to the bright fame of a Chatham. I may say, too, without 
 egotism, that I shall have rendered some little service to the republic of 
 letters and to the literary world. 
 
 PRINTED BY K. PERKING, LEEDS. 
 
509658 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY