ture.

than as affirming any belief that he is erroneous in his conjecOn the contrary, our own opinions have hitherto leaned with great force towards Hamilton, nor is our belief entirely shaken by what is mentioned on that subject by the editor.

Of the two next reputed authors, Hamilton had neither energy nor personal courage enough for such an undertaking, and Burke could not have written in the style of JUNIUS, which was precisely the reverse of his own, nor could he have consented to have disparaged his own talents in the manner, in which JUNIUS has disparaged them in his letter to the printer of the Public Advertiser, dated October 5, 1771, independently of which, both of them so. lemnly denied that they were the authors of these letters; Hamilton to Mr. Courtney in his last illness, as that gentleman has personally informed the editor; and Burke expressly and satisfactorily to sir William Draper, who purposely interrogated him upon the subject; the truth of which denial is, moreover, corroborated by the testimony of the late Mr. Woodfall, who repeatedly declared that neither of them were the writers of these compositions.

And again;

Mr. Malone, in his preface to a well-known work of Mr. Hamilton, entitled Parliamentary Logic, offers a variety of remarks in disproof that this gentleman was the writer of the letters, several of which are possessed of sufficient force, though few persons will perhaps agree with him in believing that if Hamilton had written them, he would have written them better. The following are his chief arguments:

"Now (not to insist on his own solemn asseveration near the time of his death, that he was not the author of JUNIUS) Mr. Hamilton was so far from being an ardent party man, that during the long period above mentioned [from January 1769 to January 1772] he never closely connected himself with any party. • Notwithstanding his extreme love of political discussion, he never, it is believed, was heard to speak of any administration or any opposition with vehemence either of censure or of praise; a character so opposite to the fervent and sometimes coarse acrimony of JUNIUS, that this consideration alone is sufficient to settle the point, as far as relates to our author, forever. ⚫ On the question-who was the author?-he was as free to talk as any other person, and often did express his opinion concerning it to the writer of this short memoir; an opinion nearly coinciding with that of those persons who appear to have had the best means of information on the subject. In a conversation on this much agitated point, he once said to an intimate friend, in a tone between seriousness and pleasantry—'You know, H********n, I could have written better papers than those of JUNIUS;' and so the gentleman whom he addressed, who was himself distinguished for his

rhetorical powers, and a very competent judge, as well as many other per.

sons, thought.

"It may be added, that his style of composition was entirely different from that of this writer. · That he had none of that minute commissarial knowledge of petty military matters, which is displayed in some of the earlier papers of JUNIUS.

"And finally it may be observed, that the figures and allusions of JUNIUS are often of so different a race from those which our author [Hamilton] would have used, that be never spoke of some of them without the strongest disapprobation; and particularly when a friend, for the purpose of drawing him out, affected to think him the writer of these papers; and bantering him on the subject, taxed him with that passage in which a nobleman, then in a high office, is said to have travelled through every sign in the political zodiac, from the SCORPION, in which he stung lord Chatham, to the hopes of a VIRGIN,' &c. as if this imagery were much in his style—Mr. Hamilton with great vehemence exclaimed, 'had I written such a sentence as that, I should have thought I had forfeited all pretensions to good taste in composition forever!"

Mr. Malone further observes, that Hamilton filled the office of chancellor of the exchequer in Ireland, from September 1763 to April 1784, during the very period in which all the letters of JUNIUS appeared before the public; and it will not very readily be credited by any one that this is likely to have been the exact quarter from which the writer of the letters in question fulminated his severe criminations against government. The subject moreover of parliamentary reform, for which JUNIUS was so zealous an advocate, Mr. Malone expressly tells us was considered by Hamilton to be "of so danger. ous a tendency, that he once said to a friend now living, that he would sooner suffer his right hand to be cut off, than vote for it."

The only reason indeed that appears for these letters having ever been attributed to Hamilton is, that on a certain morning he told the duke of Richmond, as has been already hinted at, the substance of a letter of JUNIUS which he pretended to have just read in the Public Advertiser; but which, on consulting the Public Advertiser, was found not to appear there, an apology instead of it being offered for its postponement till the next day, when the letter thus previously adverted to by Hamilton did actually make its appearThat Hamilton, therefore, had a knowledge of the existence and purport of this letter is unquestionable; but without conceiving him the author of it, it is easy to account for the fact, by supposing him (as we have supposed already) to have had it read to him by his friend Woodfall, antecedently to its being printed.

ance.

After disposing of all these claims, we are surprised at the introduction of lord George Sackville's name. The evidence is

however, we think, very inconclusive in his favour: indeed there does not seem much room for doubt, if we can trust to the authenticity of one of the letters in this collection ascribed to Junius, in which he accuses lord George of a want of personal courage; an imputation not easily made by any man against himself.

The private correspondence with Woodfall relates chiefly to the manner in which they are to communicate together, with occasional remarks, which are in the true spirit of Junius. shall insert a few of them.

SIR,

We

Sept. 10, 1769.

The last letter you printed was idle and improper, and I assure you printed against my own opinion. The truth is, there are people about me, whom I would wish not to contradict, and who had rather see Junius in the papers ever so improperly than not at all. I wish it could be recalled. Suppose you were to say-We have some reason to suspect that the last letter signed Junius in this paper, was not written by the real Junius, though the observation escaped us at the time: or, if you can hit off any thing yourself more plausible, you will much oblige me, but without a positive assertion. Don't let it be the same day with the enclosed. Begging your pardon for this trouble, I remain your friend and humble servant,

C.

Thursday night, Oct. 5, 1769.

I shall be glad to see the pacquet you speak of. It cannot come from the Cavendishes, though there be no end of the family. They would not be so silly as to put their arms on the cover. As to me, be assured that it is not in the nature of things, that they, or you, or any body else should ever know me, unless I make myself known. All arts or inquiries, or rewards would be equally ineffectual.

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, in case he should think of bringing you before the house of lords. I am sure I can threa ten him privately with such a storm, as would make him tremble even in his grave. You may send to-morrow to the same place without farther notice; and if you have any thing of your own to communicate, I shall be glad to hear it.

SIR,

C.

December 12, 1769.

You may tell Mr. A. B. C. that I did not receive his letter till last night, and have not had time to look into the paper annexed. I cannot at present understand what use I can make of it. It certainly shall not be an ungenerous one to him. If he or his counsel know how to act, I have saved him already,

and really without intending it. The facts are all literally true. Mr. Hine's place is customer at the port of Exeter. Colonel Burgoyne received 40001. for it. To mend the matter, the money was raised by contribution, and the subscribers quartered upon Mr. Hine. Among the rest, one doctor Brook, a physician at Exeter, has 1001. a year out of the salary. I think you might give these particulars in your own way to the public. As to yourself, I am convinced the ministry will not venture to attack you, they dare not submit to such an inquiry. If they do, show no fear, but tell them plainly you will justify, and subpœna Mr. Hine, Burgoyne, and Bradshaw of the treasurythat will silence them at once. As to the house of commons there may be more danger. But even there I am fully satisfied the ministry will exert themselves to quash such an inquiry, and on the other side, you will have friends:--but they have been so grossly abused on all sides, that they will hardly begin with you.

Tell A. B. C. his paper shall be returned. I am now meditating a capital, and I hope a final piece-you shall hear of it shortly.

SIR,

Dec. 26, 1769.

With the inclosed alterations I should think our paper might appear. As to embowelling, do whatever you think proper, provided you leave it intelligible to vulgar capacities; but would not it be the shortest way at once to print it, in an anonymous pamphlet? Judge for yourself. I enter seriously into the anxiety of your situation, at the same time I am strongly inclined to think that you will not be called upon. They cannot do it without subjecting Hine's affair to an inquiry, which would be worse than death to the minister. As it is, they are more seriously stabbed with this last stroke than all the rest. At any rate, stand firm--(I mean with all the humble appearances of contrition)—if you trim or faulter, you will lose friends without gaining others. A. B. C. has done right in publishing his letter, it defends him more effectually than all his nonsense. I believe I shall give him a lift, for I really think he has been punished infinitely beyond his merits. I doubt much whether I shall ever have the pleasure of knowing you; but if things take the turn I expect, you shall know me by my works. C.

SIR,

Monday Evening, Nov. 12, 1770. The enclosed, though begun within these few days, has been greatly laboured. It is very correctly copied, and I beg you will take care that it be literally printed as it stands. I don't think you run the least risk. We have got the rascal down, let us strangle him if it be possible. This paper should properly have appeared to-morrow, but I could not compass it, so let it be announced to-morrow, and printed Wednesday. If you should have any fears, I entreat you send it early enough to Miller, to appear to-morrow night in the London Evening Post. In that case, you will oblige me by informing the pub

lic to-morrow, in your own paper, that a real Junius will appear at night in the London. Miller, I am sure, will have no scruples.

Lord Mansfield has thrown ministry into confusion, by suddenly resigning the office of speaker of the house of lords.

SIR,

Feb. 21, 1771.

It will be very difficult, if not impracticable for me to get your note. I presume it relates to Vindex. I leave it to you to alter or omit as you think proper—or burn it. I think the argument about Gibraltar, &c. is too good to be lost; as to the satirical part, I must tell you (and with positive certainty) that our gracious is as callous as stockfish to every thing but the reproach of cowardice. That alone is able to set the humours afloat. After a paper of that kind he won't eat meat for a week.

You may rely upon it, the ministry are sick of prosecutions. Those against Junius cost the treasury above six thousand pounds, and after all they got nothing but disgrace. After the paper you have printed to-day (signed Brutus) one would think you feared nothing. For my own part I can very truly assure you that nothing would afflict me more than to have drawn you into a personal danger, because it admits of no recompence. A little expense is not to be regarded, and I hope these papers have reimbursed you. I never will send you any thing that I think dangerous; but the risk is yours, and you must determine for yourself.

All the above is private.

C.

Thursday, June 20, 1771.

I am strangely partial to the enclosed. It is finished with the utmost care. If I find myself mistaken in my judgment of this paper, I positively will never write again. C. Let it be announced to-morrow, Junius to the duke of Grafton for Satur

day.

I think Wilkes has closed well. I hope he will keep his resolution not to write any more.

(Secret.)

Beware of David Garrick, he was sent to pump you, and went directly to Richmond to tell the king I should write no more.

Garrick had received a letter from Woodfall just before the above note of Junius was sent to the printer, in which Garrick was told, in confidence, that there were some doubts whether Junius would continue to write much longer. Garrick flew with the intelligence to Mr. Ramus, one of the pages to the king, who immediately conveyed it to his majesty, at that time residing at Richmond, and from the peculiar sources of information that were open to this extraordinary writer, Junius was apprised of the whole transaction on the ensuing morning, and wrote the above postscript, and the letter that follows it, in consequence.