he conferred honor, made it immortal, as his works. In short, Europe and America (for the letters of Junius soon circulated in all quarters of the world) were in wonder at the prodigy, who as an author was most illustrious, as a man, most obscure. Junius had said, that he was the sole depository of his own secret, and that it should be buried with him; yet he was unable to lay curiosity at rest. For the deep mystery, in which he veiled himself, has increased perseverance in explaining it. The darkness, which enveloped his person, gave birth to conjecture; and whatever shape or aspect was discovered, resembling Junius, was confidently pronounced to be the man. Every new editor of the book has given it a new author; and the rival pretenders to the glory of the authorship are as numerous, as the letters themselves. It would therefore be impossible to examine the merits of all those, who have been supposed the real Junius, and useless to mention their names. Those, who unite the greatest number of opinions in their favor, are Burke, Hamilton, Boyd, and Dunning.

The evidence, on which either of these is asserted to be Junius, is the slightest of what is termed circumstantial. No one was ever seen writing those letters, and the hand writing never was with certainty recognized. The manuscript of those letters is destroyed. No one, but the printer, was ever known to have had them in his possession. Mr. Woodfall did not know, who brought them to him; and lastly no one, except Gen. Lee, which story nobody believes, has avowed himself to be the author. All those marks therefore being concealed, by which we might with probability identify an author, we are obliged to form our opinion on such general circumstances and trivial incidents, as can by possibility denote him. The more remote those circumstances, the greater will be the number of men, to whom they will attach; and the more uncertain will be our decision. Thus among a great number of competitors we may be persuaded, one is the man, but not be able to ascertain whom. It is still conjecture, but in a narrower compass. These remarks were applicable

on the first appearance of those letters, when every thing relative to them was known better, than at present, and the invention of the public was exerted to trace the writer. How then must we admire the confidence of those editors, who in their zeal for their author make partiality supply the deficiency of evidence, and construe" trifles light as air" into demonstrations ? The world has upwards of thirty years endeavored to discover the real Junius; now he is probably laid in his grave, and his secret with him. In the struggle between discovery and concealment Junius has gained the victory, and his prediction is accomplished.

It would be a curious speculation to view the different modes of reasoning used by those, who have been engaged in this inquiry. Mr. Campbell, who edited the works of Hugh Boyd, and was obliged to acknowledge his very moderate share of science and experience, especially at the age of twenty two, when those letters were written, has contended, that there is not much political intelligence, nor profound thinking discernible in the works of Junius. Those on the contrary, who support Mr. Dunning, argue, that he only could display those talents of the civilian, which Junius exhibited. Some are decided in favor of Lord Chatham, since it was he, who, standing on high ground, could best view the intrigues of inferior statesmen, and assume the tone of imperious indignation. Others persuade themselves, that the private situation of Boyd at once gave him leisure to polish the elaborate productions of Junius, and to conceal that malignant spirit, which pervades them. Some imagine that Boyd having quoted Junius so frequently forms an inference against his being the man; others, that this circumstance argues in his favor, and that he did it for the purpose of concealing the fact, knowing that this inference would naturally be drawn. Different conclusions are thus made from contrary and even the same species of evidence; and the assertions without proof and the argumentation without reason, adopted by those in different interests, induce one to believe, that, having der luded themselves, they are determined literally to force conVol. II. No. 4. Ада

viction on their readers. Mr. Chalmers, in despair of raising the merit of his friend, Boyd, to the high estimation of Junius, has labored to lower that estimation, and has even descended to the exposure of grammatical faults in the elegant structure of his periods.

Similarity of style subsequent to the publication of Junius' letters is slight evidence of the identity of the author. They formed an era in English literature. They were admired, and of course imitated. Some imitations were more perfect than others, and he, who approached nearest the original, would convince many, that he himself was the original. Indeed it is probable that some, knowing that Junius would not reveal himself, have practised the artifice of endeavoring to be suspected that author, and of thus sharing that treasure of renown, which was reserved for a legal proprietor. But where shall we discover the style of Junius, except in his letters? Where can we find in the writings of Boyd a specimen equal to the common tenor of Junius' composition? We see an evident attempt to place words in the same arrangement; there is every where the same form of antithesis, and there is a tone of invective throughout; but there is not that gentlemanly wit and elegant sarcasm, which in Junius has a far more poignant effect, than mere passionate abuse. It is not sufficient to answer, as Dr. Johnson does on another occasion, that of all the works of genius one will be best, and another worst. When we compare the series of the letters of Junius with that of the Freeholder, written by Boyd, and find the chief excellence of the one totally wanting in the other, insomuch that one is universally admired, and will be handed down to posterity, and the other is almost forgotten; when we consider further, that the first were produced by the original genius of the writer, unaided by similar example, and that the last, with the advantage of a precedent, were written on the same subject, and addressed to men, whose conduct afforded still fairer opportunities of pointed philippic, and are yet destitute of any feature of uncommon excellence ; we cannot consider them both, as

emana

tions of the same mind. Can any believe, that Hugh Boyd, who wrote the following period, was author of the most elegant compositions in the language? In the Freeholder he speaks of a courtier possessed of estates in Ireland, who "remembers that country only in the large remittances, which he draws from her exhausted bosom." Again, a prologue, which he wrote in Ireland begins thus ;

"Whilst Shakespeare's name our sister kingdom fills,

"Shall we not write? Shall we not use our quills ?” &c.

More has been advanced respecting this individual, because more external evidence can be produced in favor of him, than any other. He was instructed under the inspection of an intelligent parent, who was himself the friend of Swift; and early taught his son to be his admirer. He began the study of law; but inconstant and untractable, he soon broke the restraints of application, and engaged a warm partizan in the politics of his country. Attendance on the debates of parliament occupied one portion of his time; another was spent in a regular correspondence with the Public Advertiser, at the same period, when the letters of Junius were first published. He continued in London during these publications; then retired to Ireland, and soon after the Freeholder appeared. No series of compositions in the Public Advertiser can be traced to him, unless we suppose him the author in question. Many facts however depend on the testimony of Mrs. Boyd, who seems early to have suspected her husband of being the author, she so much admired. Much is related of his extreme reserve and uneasiness, whenever the name of Junius was mentioned. But the fond remembrance of a widow would naturally deceive her in favor of the man, who was once her husband. Besides, she would be solicitous to induce the world to believe, that the works then collecting for her own benefit, were the works of Junius. On this subject Mr. Heron's summary decision is thus delivered. "Boyd's "works have been published; and if there be any thing by "internal evidence more conspicuous in them than another, "it is, that Boyd was the aping imitator of Junius and of

"Johnson, with a mind of which the native energies, the "discipline, and the acquired knowledge, were utterly unequal to the efforts of his masters." His preten

Of Mr. Burke there is no direct evidence. sions, advanced by some, are his splendid talents, and his motives arising from his connection with those, who espoused the politics of Junius. Mr. Heron's opinion is thus given. "It was not Burke. The style, the favorite phraseology, the "methods of reasoning, several of the principles, the topics "and images of illustration in the letters of Junius are as en"tirely different from the works of Burke, as it is possible "for the effusions of one great mind to be from those of "another, on the same class of subjects."

There are many, who still maintain with confidence, that W. Gerard Hamilton is the object of our enquiry. Reserved, yet conscious of his powers, he had meditated his attack on the ministry long before he gave vent to the fermentation of his mind in that admirable philippic, called his singlespeech. The politics and style of that harangue, as well as of the Diaboliad, written by Mr. Hamilton, at once confvinced the world, that he had both the ability and the feelings of Junius. This was the opinion of Sir William Draper. It is related, that he had waited a long time at the post office, hoping to surprise some one in possession of a communication from Junius. At length he discovered by the light of a lamp a man of suspicious appearance, muffled in his cloak. Sir William approaching recognized the countenance of Mr. Hamilton, who retired in confusion. It is also said, that Mr. Hamilton incautiously repeated the substance of a letter of Junius, which he affirmed had appeared the same day, but which in fact was not published till the day following. These anecdotes might gain confidence, were they not opposed by others of as good authority. But it is also related, that Mr. Woodfall, proud of being the vehicle of the communications of Junius, did usually, on the receipt of one, assemble his friends and read them its contents. Ma ny therefore beside Mr. Hamilton were apprized of the sen