J U N I U S. 



395 



Junim, oonne with them ; ami lie mu't have been in posses- 

 *** e( - won of some sources of information, which were not ac- 

 "" cessible to ordinary scribbler-;. 



Mr. ( halmr, however, has attempted to get rid of 

 this objection in a different way. Being unable to car- 

 ry Boyd up to the standard of Junius, he has endea- 

 voured to carry Junius down to the level of Boyd. We 

 have not room for any strictures on this branch of his 

 argument. But the productions of both writers are be- 

 fore the public, who are perfectly well qualified to de- 

 cide upon their respective merits ; and we shall have 

 occasion to say a few words upon this subject in the 

 equel. 



There is one very obvious consideration resulting from 

 the situation of Boyd, which appears to us to possess 

 great weight in this question. It is quite evident, as we 

 have already observed, that Junius must have been in 

 easy, if not in affluent circumstances. In one place, he 

 ezpmaiy affirms, that his " rank and fortune place him 

 above a common bribe." When Woodfall was involved 

 hi a prosecution at the instance of the crown, Junius 

 generous ly camo forward with an offer to indemnify him 

 for any pecuniar) 1 loss he might sustain on that account. 

 And with thr same spirit, when an edition of the Let- 

 ten was published under his own correction, he posi- 

 tively declined Woodfall's offer of half the profits, ac- 

 companying his refusal with the following remarkable 

 declaration : " As for myself, be assured that I a.mfar 

 abovf all pecuniary views, and no other person, I think, 

 has any claim to share with you. Make the most of it, 

 therefore, and let your views in life l>e directed to a so- 

 lid, however moderate independence ; without it, no 

 nan can be happy, nor even honest." Now, it i-> 

 notorious, that Boyd was a needy adventurer, constant- 

 ly involved hi pecuniary distress, in consequence of his 

 dtMipated habit* ; and. therefore, not very likely to re- 

 fuse the half of the profits resulting from the sale of 

 hit own edition of his Letters, repeatedly pressed upon 

 him, and to which he was fairly entitled; much less 



he in a situation to offer pecuniary assistance to 

 hit bookseller, having been actually compelled, at that 

 very time, to fly to Ireland, through a fear of being 

 arrested for debt, by which he had be-.ii long oppres- 

 sed. It would require ery strong evidence to convince 

 u, that any man, in his sound senses, would, in I 

 trtution, have refused a turn of money, the fruit of 

 hw own talents and industry, to which lie was fairly 

 entitled, and which he might have accepted with ho- 



The fact* with regard to Boyd seem to be these. He 

 from the first an enthusiastic admirer of the style 

 and principles of Junius ; a circumstance natural 

 enough, nmMtt'mg hi )o:ith. We see, from the evi- 

 dence of Mr* Boyd, already referred to, that he was 

 constantly talking about Juniu<i in private ; and his 

 < con venation was continually directed to the 

 amc own political papers, he is perpe- 



tually K.unrimc the praises of Junius, and always striv- 

 ing to imitate his manner. Lord Macartney, who was 

 in company with Boyd during a four month's passage 

 is as, that " Mr. Boyd had many splen- 

 did poagei of Jnnius by heart, a* also of Mr. Burke's 

 parliamentary Beeches ; and was also a great admirer 

 t* Sterne," ft". In nhort, Junius was Boyd> great stand- 

 ard of pohtica I principle, and his model of composition. 

 In hi own political lucubrations, there is, as we have 

 alremly mentioned, a constant and affected, though not 

 alvy* v*ry happy imitation of the style and manner 

 1 



of Junius. In many instances, he copies his sentences 

 rertialim, and sometimes blunders sadly through his me- 

 taphors. But it is impossible, we think, for a reader 

 of any discrimination, to peruse the papers of both au- 

 thors, without perceiving the manifest inferiority of 

 Boyd. We do not mean to disparage the talents of 

 this gentleman, or to assert tilat he could not write 

 well ; but we are satisfied, that he never attained the 

 peculiar excellencies of Junius. 



Boyd, moreover, seems rather to have courted, than 

 to have been anxious to disclaim the imputation of be- 

 ing the author of Junius ; as we may perceive from 

 his ambiguous reply to Almon ; and from his silence to 

 his wife, when she mentioned to him her suspicions ; 

 although, at the same time, he seems to have used all the 

 means in his power to impress such suspicions upon 

 her mind. And how unlike to this conduct were the 

 apprehensions which the real Junius betrayed in his 

 private letters to Mr. Woodfall ! 



We shall only further observe, with regard to Mr. 

 Boyd's claim, that it was at once rejected by all those 

 who had the best opportunities of being acquainted 

 with Boyd, and the best means of forming a correct 

 opinion upon the subject. Mr. Woodfall constantly 

 delared hi.< belief, that Boyd was not Junius ; and 

 Lord Macartney, who " had frequent opportunities of 

 sounding his depth, and of studying and knowing him 

 well," expresses his opinion in the following words : 

 " I do not say that he was incapable of writing to the 

 full as well as Junius ; but, I say, I do not by any 

 means believe, that he was the author of Junius." And 

 this was his lordship's deliberate opinion, after having 

 perused Mr. Chalmers' Appendix to the Supplemental 



Ay / i'V. 



Having thus discussed the claim of Mr. Macauley 

 Boyd, we shall not detain our readers long with the 

 pretensions of the remaining candidates. 



The claim of Leonidas (Jim IT was first advanced a 

 few yean ago, and is founded chiefly upon a memoir 

 ofth.it author's writing, containing a sort of journal of 

 political transactions, from the year 1742 to 1757- The 

 political principles of Glover are found to coincide pret- 

 ty nearly with those of Junius ; his talents and acquire* 

 ments were undoubted : he was a man of ample for- 

 tune, a member of parliament, a popular man in the 

 city, well acquainted with public characters, public 

 measures, and ministerial intrigue. It is remarkable, 

 too, that he declined taking an ostensible part in poli- 

 tics, just about the time when Junius first attracted 

 public notice. He was well known, and much respect- 

 ed by Mr. Woodfill, the printer; who, in a letter ad- 

 dressed to Junius, says, after requesting instructions 

 how to vote at the next general election, " I have no 

 connections to warp me, nor am I acquainted but with 

 one person who would speak to me on the subject, and 

 that gentleman is, I believe, a true friend to the real 

 good of his country ; / mean Mr. Clover, the author of 

 Leotidai." To this letter Junius returned no answer. 

 Manyotherprcsumptive circumstances might be brought 

 forward in support of this gentleman's claim ; but as 

 there is nothing at all, in his case, that approaches to 

 direct evidence, we deem it unnecessary to prosecute 

 the inquiry. 



The claim of De Lolme, we believe, is not entirely 

 new ; but it has been recently revived, with " eviden- 

 ce* multifarious, analogical, phraseological, autogra- 

 nliical, argumentative, and circumstantial:" by Dr. 

 Busby, author of A Tranilalion o/Lncrelius. For Dr. 



Junins, 

 Letters of. 



