of the author';" a pamphlet in which the anonymous anecdotist takes it for granted, from his very outset, that JUNIUS and Edmund Burke were the same person, and then proceeds to reason concerning the former, from the known or acknowledged works of the latter.

It was not till the appearance of Newberry's edition, with which it is not pretended that our author had any concern, that even Woodfall himself had conceived an idea of the propriety of collecting these letters, and publishing them in an edition strictly genuine, in consequence of the numerous blunders by which the common editions were deformed; of these Newberry's was perhaps, the freest from mistakes: yet Newberry's had so many, that our author, upon receiving a copy of it, addressed a note to Woodfall, begging him to hint to Newberry, that as he had thought proper to reprint his letters, he ought at least to have taken care to have corrected the errata; adding at the same time, "I did not expect more than the life of a newspaper; but if this man will keep me alive, let me live without being offensive"."

His answer upon Woodfall's application to him for leave to reprint his letters collectively, and subject to his own revisal, was as follows: See Mr. Chalmers's Appendix to the Supplemental Apology &c. p. 24. 2 Private Letter, No. 4.

"I can have no manner of objection to your reprinting my letters if you think it will answer, which I believe it might, before Newberry appeared. If you determine to do it, give me a hint, and I will send you more errata (indeed they are innumerable) and perhaps a preface'." It was on this occasion he added, as conceiving it might afford him a proper opportunity for a general close of the character though so early in his correspondence under the name of JuNIUS, as July 1769, "I really doubt whether I shall write any more under this signature; I am weary of attacking a set of brutes &c." In answer to Woodfall's next letter upon the same subject he observes, "Do with my letters exactly as you please. I should think that to make a better figure than Newberry, some others of my letters may be added; and so throw out a hint that you have reason to suspect they are by the same author. If you adopt this plan I shall point out those which I would recommend, for you know I do not, nor indeed have I time to give equal carè to them all 3."

The plan for publication, however, though it commenced thus early, was not matured till October 1771: when it was determined that the work should comprise all the letters which had passed under the signatures of JUNIUS and Philo 2 Id. No. 6. 3 Id. No. 7.

* Private Letter, No. 5.

Junius to this period inclusively, and be occasionally enriched by a selection of other letters under a variety of other signatures, which, independently of that of Philo-Junius, our author, as has been observed already, not unfrequently employed to explain what required explanation, or defend what demanded vindication, and which he himself thought sufficiently correct to associate with his more laboured productions. In the prosecution of this intention however, he still made the two following alterations. Instead of closing the regular series of letters possessing the signature of JUNIUS with that dated October 5, 1771', upon the subject of "the unhappy differences," as he there calls them, "which had arisen among the friends of the people, and divided them from each other"-he added five others which the events of the day had impelled him to write during the reprinting of the letters, notwithstanding the intention he had expressed of offering nothing further under this signature. And instead of introducing the explanatory letters written under other signatures, he confined himself, in order that the work might be published before the ensuing session of parliament, to three justificatory papers alone: the first, under the title of "A Friend of JUNIUS," containing an answer to "A Barrister at Law;" the

'Letter LIX. Vol. II. p. 344.

second an anonymous declaration upon certain points on which his opinion had been mistaken or misrepresented; and the third an extract from a letter to Mr. Wilkes, drawn up for the purpose of being laid before the Bill of Rights Society, and vindicating himself from the charge of having written in favour of long parliaments and rotten boroughs. This last however was furnished, not by Mr. Wilkes, but from his own notes; you shall have the extract," says he, "to go into the second volume: it will be a short one 1."

દ

Private Letter, No. 45 The reader will readily pardon, and perhaps thank us, for pointing out to his particular attention the following exquisite paragraph with which the above letter closes, but which formed no part of it as originally addressed to Mr. Wilkes. It refers to an able argument that an excision of the rotten boroughs from the representative system might perhaps produce more mischief than benefit to the constitution. "The man, who fairly and completely answers this argument, shall have my thanks and my applause. My heart is already with him.-I am ready to be converted.-I admire his morality, and would gladly subscribe to the articles of his faith.-Grateful, as I am, to the GOOD BEING, whose bounty has imparted to me this reasoning intellect, whatever it is, I hold myself proportionably indebted to him, from whose enlightened understanding another ray of knowledge communicates to mine. But neither should I think the most exalted faculties of the human mind, a gift worthy of the divinity; nor any assistance, in the improvement of them, a subject of gratitude to my fellow-creature, if I were not satisfied, that really to inform the understanding corrects and enlarges the heart."

Of the five letters added after he meant to have closed, and had actually begun to reprint his series, four of them are either expressly addressed to Lord Mansfield, or incidentally relate to him, in consequence of his having illegally (as it was contended) admitted a felon of the name of John Eyre to bail, who, although pos sessing a fortune of nearly thirty thousand pounds sterling, had stolen a quantity of paper in quires out of one of the public offices at Guildhall, and was caught in the very theft. The other letter is addressed to his steady object of inveterate hatred, the Duke of Grafton, upon the defeat of his attempt to transfer the Duke of Portland's estate in Cumberland, consisting of what had formerly been crown lands, to Sir James Lowther, in order to assist the latter in securing his election for this county.

Yet such was his anxiety to get this work completed and published before the winter session of parliament that he was ready to sacrifice the appearance of the whole of these additional letters, even that containing his elaborate accusation of Lord Mansfield, and which he acknowledged to have cost him enormous pains, rather than that it should be delayed beyond this period. "I am truly concerned," says he in a private letter dated January 20, 1772, "to see that the publication of the book is so long delayed. It