JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS.

Nameless the libeller lived, and shot his arrows in darkness; Undetected he passed to the grave; and leaving behind him Noxious works on earth, and the pest of an evil example, Went to the world beyond, where no offences are hidden.

Southey.

Without meaning an indecent comparison, I may venture to fortel that the Bible and Junius will be read, when the Commentaries of the Jesuits are forgotten.

you

Junius.

I shall now be told "Sir, what you say is plausible enough; but still you must allow that it is shamefully impudent in Junius to tell us that his works will live as long as the Bible." My answer is agreed; but first prove that he has said so. Look at his words, and will find that the utmost he expects is, that the Bible and Junius will survive the Commentaries of the Jesuits, which may prove true in a fortnight. The most malignant sagacity cannot shew that his works are, in his opinion, to live as long as the Bible. Suppose I were to fortel that Jack and Tom would survive Harry, does it follow that Jack must live as long as Tom?

Philo Junius.

CHAPTER II.

Proofs that Junius was neither a Lawyer, a Divine, nor an Author, by profession. Mr. Woodfall's account of the Letters written by Junius, under the signatures of Mnemon, * Atticus, Lucius, Junius, and Brutus.-The author's first Letter under the signature of Junius.—Woodfall's account of the mode of his Correspondence with Junius.-Two spurious editions of the Letters published.-Woodfall's proposal to publish a genuine edition.—Assented to by the author.-Curious private Correspondence between Junius and Woodfall, about bringing out the genuine edition.Wilkes revises the dedication and preface.-Junius orders the famous vellum-bound and gilt copy of the Letters.His alarm at the price of the book.-Assigns his copyright to Woodfall.-Proof that the Letters were composed by only one person.-Junius's mode of composing and finishing his Letters. His own opinion of his labours.-His farewell Letter to Woodfall.-The number of his communications with Woodfall.-Junius's confidential Correspondence with Wilkes. Various opinions respecting the handwriting of the Letters of Junius, and whether he employed an amanuensis or not.-Discussion as to what has become of the autographs of Junius's public letters.-Proofs that Junius resided constantly in London, or its vicinity. That he was an Englishman.—Argument to prove that he must have been a tall man. -Proofs that he was a man of high rank and independent fortune, and a Member of the House of Commons.-That he was a Christian, and a member of the Church of England.— That he was of mature age.—Mr. Jackson's account of the person of Junius.-Lord Byron's description of the Shade of Junius.

25

JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS.

I was not born to be a commentator, even of my own works. I speak to facts, with which all of us are conversant.—I speak to men and to their experience, and will not descend to answer the little sneering sophistries of a Collegian.

Junius.

In order to clear the way for investigating the identity of the author of the Letters of Junius, we purpose in the first instance to prove, that he could not have been either a lawyer, a divine, or an author, by profession; for although it is seldom requisite in legal proceedings to adduce evidence to establish a negative, this course may sometimes be expedient in such disquisitions as the present, as we thereby exclude whole classes, and render unnecessary the trouble of examining the claims of a host of pretenders belonging to those professions. The last head of the inquiry will also afford an opportunity of presenting the reader with a succinct, but we trust a clear and satisfactory account of all that is known respecting JUNIUS AND HIS WORKS.

Having now entered on that part of the inquiry when it becomes necessary to consider and decide on the degree of credit due to the assertions of Junius respecting himself, we have to remark, that whatever judgment may be formed about his moral character, there can be no doubt that his intellect was of too high an order to permit

him to descend to the meanness of advancing unnecessary and gratuitous falsehoods; and consequently, that the information incidentally furnished by his letters respecting himself, may generally be regarded as true, except only where his secret is concerned.

Mr. Butler, who was himself a very eminent lawyer, came to the conclusion that Junius could not have been a profound lawyer, from the gross inaccuracy of some of his legal expressions, and instances that passage in his Dedication, where he says, "the power of king, lords, and commons, is not an arbitrary power; they are the trustees, not the owners of the estate; the fee-simple is in us." Now, says Mr. Butler, in all trusts of inheritance, the fee-simple is in the trustees. The fact however of his not being a lawyer is placed beyond all doubt by the express disclaimers of Junius himself, and the way in which he speaks of lawyers in general. In the preface to his Letters, he says: "I am no lawyer by profession, nor do I pretend to be more deeply read than every English gentleman should be, in the laws of his country. If therefore the principles I maintain are truly constitutional, I shall not think myself answered, though I should be convicted of a mistake in terms, or of misapplying the language of the law."

Again, "As to lawyers, their profession is supported by the indiscriminate defence of right and wrong, and I confess I have not that opinion of their knowledge or integrity, to think it necessary that they should decide for me, upon a plain constitutional question."

In one of his private letters to Mr. Wilkes, he says, "Though I use the terms of art, do not injure me so much as to suspect I am a lawyer. I had as lief be a

Scotchman." These extracts, and particularly the last, will surely satisfy the most sceptical mind, that Junius was no lawyer.

It is equally clear that no divine would ever speak of the priesthood in the terms applied by Junius to Mr. Horne, or indulge in such allusions to the Scriptures and religious rites as are to be found in his Letters; which cannot always be successfully defended against the imputation of levity, if they be not open to the more grave charge of profaneness. Take the following instances,-speaking of the Rev. J. Horne, in a letter to the Duke of Grafton, Junius says: "Now let him go back to his cloister. The church is a proper retreat for him; in his principles he is already a bishop."-Letter dated 9th July 1771.

And in a letter to Mr. Horne himself, "The resentment of a priest is implacable; no sufferings can soften, no penitence can appease him."-15th August 1771.

In a private letter to Mr. Wilkes, he again alludes to Mr. Horne in these terms," I too am no enemy to good fellowship, and have often cursed that canting parson for wishing to deny you your claret. It is for him, and men like him, to beware of intoxication."--18th Sept. 1771.

Ample evidence we think has now been produced, to prove that no clergyman could possibly have had any hand in the composition of the Letters of Junius.

That Junius was not an author by profession, was the opinion of Mr. Wilkes and Mr. Butler, from the visible improvement which from time to time was discernible in his style, and the numerous errors of grammar and construction which may be discovered in the Letters, and which would not have appeared in the works of a