heard them; and there seems no reason to doubt that he is the member of Parliament described by Almon in his life of Lord Chatham, as having furnished him with notes of those speeches, taken by him when he was not in Parliament. But there is a more remarkable coincidence than this between Junius and Sir Philip. Lord Chatham's speech, at the opening of the session in January 1770, was reported by Sir Philip, and communicated first to Almon, who published it in 1791, and then to the Parliamentary History, (xvi. 647.) The publisher of the latter work informed the author of the tract before us, that he received it from Sir Philip, who was present at the debate. Now, a comparison of this speech with some of Junius's letters, proves very satisfactorily, that Junius must either have heard the speech, and taken notes of it, or received notes from somebody who was present; and not only so, but that the notes which he took or received were nearly the same with those taken by Sir P. Francis. We shall cite some examples of this coincidence.

Sir P. Francis's Report. 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 judgment of his country.' p. 262.

Junius, (Woodfall II. 365.)- Instead of inserting that the proclamation was legal, he (Lord Camden) should have said, My Lords, I know 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." p. 262-3.

Sir P. Francis's Report. He owned his natural partiality to America, and was inclined to make allowance even for those excesses. That they ought to be treated with tenderness; for in his sense they were ebullitions of liberty which broke out upon the skin, and were a sign, if not of perfect health, at least of a vigorous constitution, and must not be driven in too suddenly, lest they should strike to the heart. p. 265.

Junius, (Woodfall, II. 153. I. 311.)-" No man regards an eruption upon the surface, when the noble parts are invaded, and he feels a mortification approaching to his heart.

"I shall only say, give me a healthy vigorous constitution, and I shall hardly consult my looking-glass to discover a blemish upon my skin." p. 265.

Sir P. Francis's Report. That the Americans had purchased their liberty at a dear rate, since they had quitted their native country, and gone in search of freedom to a desert.' p. 268.

Junius, (Woodfall, II. 77.)-" They left their native land in search of freedom, and found it in a desert." p. 268.

·

There are many other expressions in this speech, and in others of Lord Chatham, reported by Sir Philip, which appear to be favourite expressions of Junius. Thus, false fact I am a plain man' ipso facto the law of the land simplicity of common sense, &c.

There are many favourite expressions in the avowed original works of Sir Philip, which Junius also indulges habitually. Of his "side'-' so far forth'- I mean the public service' (for, I would promote). There is, moreover, in the general manner of writing, a resemblance extremely striking, especially where the author is off his guard, and permits his natural temper to appear. Sir Philip's later works resemble, in this respect, the private notes to Woodfall so strikingly, that we need scarcely give any examples. There is, for instance, a short note of Sir P. in this publication in the following terms. Pray never mind anything I say, I slave myself to death, and write and speak on instant impression. So I am very sorry if I have offended you.' The The very same tone, and almost the same words, occur in two notes of Junius, printed by Woodfall;-one of which begins, Pray tell me whether George Onslow means to keep his word with you;' and ends, and so I wish you goodnight: '-And another runs thus, Make yourself easy about me--I know you are ⚫ an honest man--and I am never angry--I am overcome with the slavery of writing.' We have not room to add other instances; but we have heard, that among those persons in London who have lived in his society, and are acquainted with his mode of expression, the conviction of his being the author of the Letters, is exceedingly strengthened by this likeness.

6

That the tempers of Junius and Sir Philip somewhat resemble each other, we have their own authority. Junius says to Woodfall Surely you have misjudged it very much about. the book. I could not have conceived it possible that you 'could protract the publication so long. At this time, particularly before Mr Sawbridge's motion, it would have been of ⚫ singular use. You have trifled too long with the public expectation. At a certain point of time the appetite palls. I fear you have already lost the season. The book, I am sure, will lose the ⚫ greatest part of the effect I expected from it. But I have done.' (p. 157.) And again, to Wilkes, You at least, Mr Wilkes, should have shown more temper and prudence, and a better knowledge of mankind. No personal respects whatsoever should ⚫ have persuaded you to concur in these ridiculous resolutions. But my own zeal, I perceive, betrays me: I will endeavour to keep a better guard upon my temper, and apply to your judg⚫ment in the most cautious and measured language.' (ib) Sir Philip, in his Speech (Parl. Debates, xxvii. 240.), says, most charac

teristically, It was his purpose on this occasion to say things strong, severe, and personal; and if he should be thought to exceed the bounds of moderation, he desired it might not be imputed to a hasty impatience of temper, to which he was supposed to be more subject than other men; for he said them coolly and deliberately, and after having maturely reflected on their cause, and on their consequences.' (p.158.) And again, in his Speech, February 26, 1788, Much has been said of my 'character, much of my temper. I have by one learned gentleman, not now present (the Master of the Rolls), been ac'cused of comparing myself with him, and with others of his profession. Such a comparison I never presumed to make. Arrogance is one thing; passion is another. Passion I have ever conceived to be an honest, open, and manly emotion of the mind: arrogance, on the contrary, I take to be a cold, deliberate, thoughtful thing. I may have made use of warm or passionate language perhaps, but I was never guilty of the presumption and arrogance which has been imputed to me.' (p. 158-9.)

There are some other considerations of a more general nature, which deserve notice in this argument. Sir Philip Francis is still living; and that of itself furnishes a ground of presumption. The improbability is great, that the real Junius should have died, and left no trace by which to detect him. That he should have wished to be for ever unknown, is not likely; that he should have been able to elude all discovery, after his decease, is still less so. The curiously bound set of Letters which he had from Woodfall by his own directions, at once afforded a reason for believing that he intended to retain the means of proving his title, at a distant period, and exposed him to detection after his death, if he allowed that event to happen before he declared himself. Sir Philip's appointment to India is also extremely well accounted for, by the supposition that he was the author of Junius's Letters. That a clerk in the War-office should, without having done any thing to make him known, be sent out at once as a member of the Supreme Council, to which, for the first time, the powers of Government were about to be entrusted, seem; at any rate sufficiently strange to require an explanation. He was not connected by family with any man of weight in the ministry; he was wholly unknown at the India House; he was equally obscure in the publick eye; nor does it appear that he had any patron who interested himself in his promotion, previously to spring 1772, since, at that time, he was turned out of the Office, to make way for a favourite of the minister in whose department he served. The next thing we hear of after this dismissal, is his mis

sion to India as a satrap, in very critical circumstances. But there is nothing surprising in the appointment, if we suppose that he either suffered himself to be known, or was detected as Junius after his removal from the War-office; and that the minister, now made aware of his extraordinary talents, and of the risk to which they might expose him, recommended a step, justified by the qualifications of Sir Philip, and counselled by his own apprehensions. If the secret was only communicated to one man-if Sir Philip knew this, and made that one man personally responsible for its being kept-there was no doubt that it would be so. Nothing but an idle love of talking could lead to its being divulged. There was something in the nature of the transaction which imposed silence upon both the parties; and Sir Philip, who had the chief interest in its concealment, was ready, during the whole lifetime of the other party, to watch over his fulfilment of the compact.

If it is demanded why Sir Philip should have persisted so long in the concealment, a satisfactory answer may be given, without having recourse to evidence drawn from the character and habits of the individual. Some of the principal personages attacked by Junius, have only been dead a very few years; the nearest relatives of many of them are still alive. The invectives of Junius against persons officially connected with Sir Philip, must have differed 'extremely from the letters which passed between them in the course of business, or in the intercourse of society. The circumstance of his appointment to India, the consequent silence of Junius, we may easily imagine to be a strong reason for reluctance to avow himself as the author. But if to these considerations we add, that Sir Philip has been, by the steady and honest course of his political life, thrown into habits of intimacy with the families of those whom Junius most unsparingly attacked, for their personal, as well as public conduct, in life, we shall be convinced that the discovery would at any time have been productive of far more pain than the gratification of vanity could compensate, even admitting the reputation of Junius to be much higher than that of Sir Philip, which we are not very sure that he is likely to think it, and are still less of opinion that he ought. He has long, in his proper person, possessed the admiration of all who have a due regard for unblemished publick virtue, great talents and accomplishments, He might well afford to forego the applause of the multitude, which could only be purchased by a sacrifice, certainly, of the tranquillity so invaluable in the decline of life, possibly of the good-will of some whose approbation he prefers to that of the crowd. Justice to this gentleman, as well as to the argument

which we are now bringing to a close, requires the insertion of the powerful testimonies borne to his rare merits, by the unanimous voice of the Managers of the Impeachment. The following is a part of the letter which they addressed to him, when the House of Commons, on account of his personal quarrel with Mr Hastings, had excluded him from the Committee.

"We have perused, as our duty has often led us to do, with great attention, the records of the Company, during the time in which you executed the important office committed to you by Parliament; and our good opinion of you has grown in exact proportion to the minuteness and accuracy of our researches. We have found that, as far as in you lay, you fully answered the ends of your arduous allegation. An exact obedience to the authority placed over you by the laws of your country, wise and steady principles of government, an inflexible integrity in yourself, and a firm resistance to all corrupt practice in others, crowned by an uniform benevolent attention to to the rights, properties, and welfare of the natives (the grand leading object in your appointment), appear eminently throughout those records. Such a conduct, so tried, acknowledged, and recorded, demands our fullest confidence.

"These, Sir, are the qualities, and this is the conduct, on your part, on which we ground our wishes for your assistance. On what we are to ground our right to make any demand upon you, we are more at a loss to suggest. Our sole titles, we are sensible, are to be found in the public exigencies, and in your public spirit. Permit us, Sir, to call for this further service in the name of the people of India, for whom your parental care has been so long distinguished, and in support of whose cause you have encountered so many difficulties, vexations, and dangers. p. 23, 2k.

23

This letter was written by the Chairman, Mr Burke, and signed by himself and his colleagues; among whom we find the names of Fox, Sheridan, Windham, North, and Fitzpatrick. Mr Burke, in one of his speeches upon the India Bills, has thus described him.

"This man, whose deep reach of thought, whose large legislative conceptions, and whose grand plans of policy, make the most shining part of our reports, from whence we have learned all our lessons, if we have learned any good ones; this man, from whose materials those gentlemen, who have least acknowledged it, have yet spoken as from a brief; this man, driven from his employment, discountenanced by the Directors, has had no other reward, and no other distinction, but that inward sunshine of the soul' which a good conscience can always bestow on itself." p. 25, 26.

Having shown that all the evidence which can be drawn from a comparison of Junius's Letters and Sir Philip Francis's Life and Writings, points him cut as the author-that there is no