person of Junius's exquisite taste and discernment, if he had been accustomed to literary composition. On this subject, Mr. E. H. Barker remarks, that "Mr. Butler must be allowed to be a most competent judge as to the facts whether Junius was or was not an author by profession,' and whether his style did or did not from time to time manifest symptoms of improvement. I admit both the facts on his authority," p. 120.

Mr. Barker offers the following additional reasons in corroboration of Mr. Butler's views:-"A writer in the habit of publishing pamphlets or books, either with his name or without it, though accompanied by intimations which made the addition of the name unnecessary, either is not likely to have been the author of Junius, or would long ago have been discovered as the author; because every pamphlet or book would furnish an additional clue to a discovery in one way or other, and the author would feel conscious that the dangerous discovery might be made. Hence the great probability is that the real Junius was not an author by profession," p. 35.

Atticus Secundus also remarks, that "Junius has been frequently reproached with inaccuracy in the use of moods; and notices the following as one of the most remarkable of his mistakes: 'I will not assert that government would have recovered its dignity, but at least our gracious sovereign must have spared his subjects this last insult.' Those who delight in discovering spots on the sun, and in detecting the little slips and blemishes of genius, may further consult "Chambers' Supplemental Apology for the Believers in the Shakspeare Papers," where they will find other inaccuracies of this great writer pointed out, and commented on in no friendly

spirit; but taking no pleasure in such expositions, we rather feel disposed to apply to Junius Dr. Johnson's eulogy on Milton:-" As in displaying the excellence of Junius, we have not made long quotations, because of selecting beauties there had been no end; I shall in the same general manner mention that which seems to deserve censure; for what Englishman can take delight in transcribing passages, which, if they lessen the reputation of Junius, diminish in some degree the honour of our country." » Junius,” observes Mr. Barker, p. 96, "gives us the notion of a writer not early trained to habits of composition, nor much accustomed to deliver his opinions in public through the press. The understanding of Junius belonged to the highest order of intellect, but it had not been well and constantly exercised by free discussions, in the intimacy of social life, with kindred spirits, and therefore it was not capable of exerting its fullest powers." // Hence it is highly probable that the principal, if not the whole of the literary labours of Junius are comprised in Mr. Woodfall's three volumes; for in one of his private letters to Mr. H. S. Woodfall, he says, "my own Works you shall constantly have;" and in another, "I believe I need not assure you that I have never written in any other paper since I began with yours;" again, "I sometimes change my signature, but could have no reason to change the paper, especially for one that does not circulate half so much as yours." And in a letter to the printer of D. A. (August 15th, 1771) Junius says, "Mr. Horne asserts that he has traced me through a variety of signatures. To make the discovery of any importance to his purpose, he should have proved either that the fictitious character of Junius has not been

consistently supported, or that the author has maintained different opinions and principles under different signatures. I cannot recall to my memory the numberless trifles I have written; but I rely upon the consciousness of my own integrity, and defy him to fix any colourable charge of inconsistency upon me."

"It was on the 28th of April in the year 1767," says Mr. Woodfall's Editor, "that the late Mr. H. S. Woodfall received, amongst other letters from a great number of correspondents for the use of the Public Advertiser, of which he was a proprietor, the first public address of this celebrated writer. He had not then assumed the name, or rather written under the signature of Junius, nor did he always, indeed, assume a signature of any kind. When he did so, his signatures were diversified, and the chief of them are Mnemon, Atticus, Lucius, Junius, and Brutus; under the first he sarcastically opposed the ministry upon the subject of the Nullum Tempus Bill."

The letters signed Atticus and Brutus relate chiefly to the growing disputes with the American Colonies; and those subscribed Lucius exclusively to the dismission of Sir Jeffery Amherst from his post of Governor of Virginia, for the sole purpose, as it should seem, of creating a post for the Earl of Hillsborough's intimate friend, Lord Botetourt, who had completely ruined himself by gambling and extravagance. From the ardour with which Junius entered the lists in defence of Sir Jeffery, and the intimate knowledge he displayed of his services and character, there can be little doubt that he entertained a strong personal friendship for the veteran hero. His first letter on the subject addressed to Lord Hillsborough, minister

for the American department, is dated August 10, 1768. A vindication, or rather an apology, was entered into by three or four correspondents under different signatures, who were regarded by Junius, and indeed by the public at large, as the Earl of Hillsborough himself, or some writer under his immediate control. Lucius followed up the contest with spirit, the minister became ashamed of his conduct, and Sir Jeffery, within a few weeks after his dismissal and the resignation of two regiments which he commanded, was restored to the command of one of them, and appointed to that of another, and thus in a remarkable manner fulfilled the prophecy of Lucius in his last letter to Lord Hillsborough (20th Sept. 1768); "You have sent Sir Jeffery Amherst to the plough, you have left him poor in every article of which a false fawning minister could deprive him; but you have left him rich in the esteem, the love, and veneration of his country. You cannot now recal him by any offer of wealth or honours; yet I fortel that a time will come when you yourself will be the cause of his return; proceed my Lord as you have begun, and you will soon reduce this country to an extremity in which the wisest and best subjects must be called upon and must be employed; till then, enjoy your triumph."

In a letter of Atticus, dated 14th November 1768, the reinstatement of Sir Jeffery is alluded to in the following terms: "When an ungracious act was to be done, the Earl of Hillsborough was chosen for the instrument of it. He deserved since he submitted, to bear the whole reproach of Sir Jeffery Amherst's dismission. The gallant Knight obtained his price; and the noble Earl, with whatever appetite, must meet him, with a smile

of congratulation, and dear Sir Jeffery I most cordially wish you joy! After all it must be confessed, there are some mortifications which might touch even the callous spirit of a courtier."

As further proof of Junius's friendship for Sir Jeffery, and the great interest he took in his concerns, it may be noticed that in his letter of 7th February, 1769, to Sir William Draper, he makes the following charge against Lord Granby, the Commander in Chief:-"As to his 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?"

The attention paid to the philippics against Lord Hillsborough, and the celebrity they had acquired, stimulated the author to new and additional exertions; and having in the beginning of the ensuing year (1769), completed another letter, with more than usual elaboration and polish, which he seemed to have intended as a kind of introductory address to the nation at large, he sent it forth under the name of Junius (a name he had hitherto assumed but once) to the office of the Public Advertiser, in which journal it appeared on Saturday, January 21st, 1769. The popularity expected by the author from this performance was more than accomplished; and what in some measure added to his fame, was a reply (for the Public Advertiser was equally open to all parties) from a real character of no small celebrity, Sir William Draper— principally because the attack upon his Majesty's ministers had extended itself to Lord Granby, at that time Commander in Chief, for whom Sir William Draper