neither admire the writer nor his idol." [The Earl of Chatham.]-No. 23.

Vol. I. p. 452.-"Without any uncommon depravity of mind, a man so trusted might lose all ideas of public principle or gratitude, and not unreasonably exert himself to perpetuate a power, which he saw his fellow-citizens weak and abject enough to surrender to him. But if, instead of a man of a common mixed character, whose vices might be redeemed by some appearance of virtue and generosity, it should have unfortunately happened that a nation had placed all their confidence in a man purely and perfectly bad; if a great and good prince, by some fatal delusion had made choice of such a man for his first minister, and had delegated all his authority to him, what security would that nation have for its freedom, or that prince for his crown? The history of every nation, that once had a claim to liberty, will tell us what would be the progress of such a traitor [the Earl of Chatham], and what the probable event of his crimes.

"Let us suppose him arrived at that moment, at which he might see himself within reach of the great object to which all the artifices, the intrigues, the hypocrisy and the impudence of his past life were directed. On the point of having the whole power of the crown committed to him,

what would be his conduct? An affectation of prostrate humility in the closet, but a lordly dictation of terms to the people, by whose interest he had been supported, by whose fortunes he had subsisted. Has he a brother? that brother must be sacrificed. Has he a rancorous enemy? that enemy must be promoted. Have years of his life been spent in declaiming against the pernicious influence of a favourite? that favourite must be taken to his bosom, and made the only partner of his power. But it is in the natural course of things, that a despotic power, which of itself violates every principle of a free constitution should be acquired by means, which equally violate every principle of honour and morality. The office of a grand vizir is inconsistent with a limited monarchy, and can never subsist long, but by its destruction. The same measures by which an abandoned profligate is advanced to power, must be observed to maintain him in it. The principal nobility, who might disdain to submit to the upstart insolence of a dictator, must be removed from every post of honour and authority," &c.

Vol. II. p. 510.-" I will not suppose that the bulk of the British people is sunk into so criminal a state of stupidity: that there does exist a particular set of men, base and treacherous enough to have enlisted under the banners of a lunatic

[the Earl of Chatham], to whom they sacrificed their honour, their conscience, and their country, in order to carry a point of party, and to gratify a personal rancour, is a truth too melancholy and too certain for Great Britain. These were the wretched ministers, who served at the altar, whilst the high priest himself, with more than frantic fury offered up his bleeding country a victim to America."

Letter XI. Dec. 22, 1767, p. 515, is also in the same strain.

Vol. I. p. 108.-"I think I have now named all the cabinet but the Earl of Chatham. His infirmities have forced him into a retirement where I presume he is ready to suffer, with a sullen submission, every insult and disgrace that can be heaped upon a miserable, decrepid, worn out old man. But it is impossible he should be so far active in his own dishonour, as to advise the taking away an employment, given as a reward for the first military success that distinguished his entrance into administration. He is indeed a compound of contradictions, but his letter to Sir Jeffery Amherst stands upon record, and is not to be explained away. You know, my Lord, that Mr. Pitt therein assured Sir Jeffery Amherst, that the government of Virginia was given him merely as a reward, and solemnly pledged the royal faith that his residence should never be re

quired. Lost as he is, he would not dare to contradict this letter. If he did, it would be something more than madness. The disorder must have quitted his head, and fixed itself in his heart."

Vol. I. p. 174.-"The Earl of ChathamI had much to say, but it were inhuman to persecute, when Providence has marked out the example to mankind!”

sons.

These extracts are sufficient to shew that Sir Philip Francis and Junius were two distinct perCould Sir Philip Francis have made use of such language against the very man who had brought him forward in the world? It is contrary to reason and common sense.

The writer of the article in the Edinburgh Review for November 1817, has blended Sir Philip Francis with the speeches of the Earl of Chatham, which have nothing whatever to do with the question, any further than that Junius may have borrowed some of his ideas from Lord Chatham's eloquence, as he evidently did from other distinguished characters. The line of politics pursued by Junius and the Earl of Chatham, was totally different on American taxation, which of itself shews there was no connexion between them.

Sir Philip Francis, on the contrary, was an enthusiastic admirer of the Earl of Chatham.

On

the decease of that nobleman, he passed a high eulogium on his character, and observed that he had left no one behind him that bore any resemblance to him. Sir Philip had just cause for this opinion, having been raised to the station he then held in society through that nobleman's interest.

Junius had cause for his invective against the Earl of Chatham. The prominent part which he (when Mr. Pitt) took against Lord George Sackville after the unfortunate affair at Minden, would naturally sour him against that distinguished statesman, however highly he might admire his abilities. Junius admired the abilities of Lord Mansfield, but he detested the man.

On Sir Philip Francis's return from Lisbon, he was recommended to the notice of Welbore Ellis, afterwards Lord Mendip, who was at that time secretary at war. This gentleman also warmly patronized him, and gave him an important situation in his office. Junius invariably speaks of Welbore Ellis with the utmost contempt.Vol. I. p. 128.-"The little dignity of Mr. Ellis has been committed; the mine was sunk, combustibles provided, and Welbore Ellis, the Guy Faux of the fable, waited only for the signal of command. All of a sudden the country gentlemen discover how grossly they have been deceived; the minister's heart fails him, the