"Sir, what you say is plaufible enough; but ftill you must allow, that it is fhamefully 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 faid fo. Look at his words, and you will find, that the utmoft he expects is, that the Bible and Junius will furvive the commentaries of the Jefuits; which may prove true in a fortnight. The moft malignant fagacity cannot fhow that his works are, in his opinion, to live as long as the Bible.-Suppose I were to foretel, that Jack and Tom would furvive Harry-does it follow, that Jack muft live as long as Tom? I would only illuftrate my meaning, and protest against the leaft idea of profaneness.

Yet this is the way in which Junius is ufually anfwered, arraigned, and convicted. Thefe candid criticks never remember any thing he fays 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 religions carries with it. I quote his words; and conclude from them, that he is a true and hearty Chriftian, in fubftance, not in ceremony; though poffibly 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.

PHILO JUNIUS.

LETTER LVI.

FROM THE REVEREND MR. HORNE TO JU

NIUS.

Aug. 17. 1771.

Congratulate you, Sir, on the recovery of your wonted ftyle, though it has coft you a fortnight. I compaffionate your labour in the compofition of your letters, and will communicate to you the fecret of my fluency.--Truth needs no ornament;

and,

and, in my opinion, what she borrows of the pencil is deformity.

You brought a positive charge against me of corruption. I denied the charge, and called for your proofs. You replied with abufe, and reafferted your charge. I called again for proofs. You reply again with abufe only, and drop your accufation. In your fortnight's letter there is not one word upon the fubject of my corruption.

I have no more to fay, but to return thanks to you for your condefcenfion, and to a grateful publick and honeft miniftry for all the favours they have conferred upon me. The two latter, I am fure, will never refuse me any grace I fhall folicit; and fince you have pleafed to acknowledge, that you told a deliberate lie in my favour out of bounty, and as a charitable donation, why may I not expect that you will hereafter (if you do not forget you ever mentioned my name with difrefpect) make the fame acknowledgment for what you have faid to my prejudice?-This fecond recantation will perhaps be more abhorrent from your difpofition; but, fhould you decline it, you will only afford one more inftance, how much eafier it is to be generous than juft, and that men are fometimes bountiful who are not honeft.

At all events, I am as well fatisfied with your panegyrick as Lord Chatham can be. Monument I fhall have none; but over my grave it will be faid, in your own words, " Horne's fituation did not 66 correfpond with his intentions *”

JOHN HORNE.

* The epitaph would not be ill fuited to the character ;----at the beft, it is but equivocal.

LETTER

LVII.

TO HIS GRACE THE DUKE OF GRAFTON.

MY LORD,

Sept. 28. 1771.

THE HE people of England are not apprized of the full extent of their obligations to you. They have yet no adequate idea of the endless variety of your character. They have feen you distinguished and fuccefsful in the continued violation of thofe moral and political duties, by which the little, as well as the great focieties of life are collected and held together. Every colour, every character became you. With a rate of abilities, which Lord Weymouth very juftly looks down upon with contempt, you have done as much mischief to the community as Cromwell would have done, if Cromwell had been a coward; and as much as Machiavel, if Machiavel had not known, that an appearance of morals and religion are ufeful in fociety. To a thinking man, the influence of the Crown will, in no view, appear fo formidable, as when he obferves to what enormous exceffes it has fafely conducted your Grace, without a ray of real understanding, without even the pretenfions to common decency or principle of any kind, or a single spark of perfonal refolution. What must be the operation of that pernicious influence, (for which our Kings have wifely exchanged the nugatory name of prerogative), that, in the highest stations, can fo abundantly fupply the abfence of virtue, courage, and abilities, and qualify a man to be the minifter of a great nation, whom a private gentleman would be ashamed and afraid to admit into his family! Like the univerfal paffport of an ambaffador, it fuperfedes the prohibition of the laws, banishes the staple virtues of the country, and introduces vice and folly triumphantly into all the departments of the state. O

ther

ther princes befides his Majefty, have had the means of corruption within their reach, but they have used it with moderation. In former times, corruption was confidered as a foreign auxiliary to government, and only called in upon extraordinary emergencies. The unfeigned piety, the fanctified religion of George the Third, have taught him to new-model the civil forces of the state. The natural refources of the Crown are no longer confided in. Corruption glitters in the van;collects and maintains a standing army of mercenaries, and at the fame moment impoverishes and enflaves the country.-His Majefty's predeceffors, (excepting that worthy family from which you, my Lord, are unquestionably defcended), had fome generous qualities in their compofition, with vices, I confefs, 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 faid their prayers without ceremony; and had too little priestcraft in their understanding, to reconcile the fanctimonious forms of religion with the utter deftruction of the morality of their people.--My Lord, this is fact, not declamation. With all your partiality to the houfe of Stuart, you must confefs, that even Charles the Second would have blushed at that open encouragement, at thofe eager, meretricious careffes, with which every fpecies of private vice and publick proftitution is received at St. James's.-The unfortunate house of Stuart has been treated with an afperity, which, if comparison be a defence, feems to border upon. injustice. Neither Charles nor his brother were qualified to fupport fuch a fyftem of measures as would be neceflary to change the government and fubvert the conftitution of England. One of them was too much in earneft in his pleafures-the other in his religion. But the danger to this country Bb 3 would

would ceafe to be problematical, if the crown fhould ever defcend to a Prince, whofe apparent fimplicity might throw his subjects off their guard,

who might be no libertine in behaviour,-who fhould have no sense of honour to restrain him,— and who, with just religion enough to impose upon the multitude, might have no fcruples of conscience to interfere with his morality. With thefe honourable qualifications, and the decifive advantage of fituation, low craft and falfehood are all the abilities that are wanting to deftroy the wifdom of ages, and to deface the noblest monument that human policy has erected-I know fuch a. man--My Lord, I know you both; and with the bleffing of God (for I too am religious), the people of England fhall know you as well as I do. I am not very fure that greater abilities would not in effect be an impediment to a defign, which feems at first fight to require a fuperior capacity.. A better understanding might make him fenfible. of the wonderful beauty of that fyftem he was endeavouring to corrupt. The danger of the attempt: might alarm him. The meannefs and intrin fick worthleffnefs of the object, (fuppofing he could attain it), would fill him with fhame, repentance, and difguft. But thefe are fenfations which find no entrance into a barbarous contracted heart. In fome men, there is a malignant paffion to deftroy the works of genius, literature, and freedom. The Vandal and the monk find equal gratification in it.

Reflections like thefe, my Lord, have a general relation to your Grace, and infeparably attend you in whatever company or fituation your character occurs to us. They have no immediate connection with the following recent fact, which I lay before the publick, for the honour of the best of Sovereigns, and for the edification of his people.

A