of these unhappy, friendless soldiers, would long since have been sacrificed, without scruple, to the security of their guilty officers.

I have been accused of endeavouring to inflame the passions of the people. Let me now appeal to their understanding. If there be any tool of administration, daring enough to deny these facts, or shameless enough to defend the conduct of the Ministry, let him come forward, I care not under what title he appears. He shall find me ready to maintain the truth of my narrative, and the justice of my observations upon it, at the hazard of my utmost credit with the public.

Under the most arbitrary governments, the common administration of justice is suffered to take its course. The subject, though robbed of his share in the legislature, is still protected by the laws. The political freedom of the English constitution, was once the pride and honour of an Englishman. The civil equality of the laws preserved the property, and defended the safety of the subject. Are these glorious privileges the birthright of the people, or are we only tenants at the will of the Ministry? But that I know there is a spirit of resistance in the hearts of my

countrymen; that they value life, not by its conveniences, but by the independence and dignity of their condition; I should, at this moment, appeal only to their discretion. I should persuade them to banish from their minds all memory of what we were; I should tell them this is not a time to remember that we were Englishmen; and give it, as my last advice, to make some early agreement with the Minister, that, since it has pleased him to rob us of those political rights, which once distinguished the inhabitants of a country where honour was happiness, he would leave us at least the humble, obedient security of citizens, and graciously condescend to protect us in our submission.

THE variety of remarks which

have been made upon the last letter of Junius, and my own opinion of the writer, who,

whatever may be his faults, is certainly not a weak man, have induced me to examine, with some attention, the subject of that letter. I could not persuade myself, that, while he had plenty of important materials, he would have taken up a light or trifling occasion to attack the Ministry; much less could I conceive, that it was his intention to ruin the officers concerned in the rescue of General Gansel, or to injure the General himself. These are little objects, and can no way contribute to the great purposes he seems to have in view, by addressing himself to the public. Without considering the ornamented style he has adopted, I determined to look farther into the matter, before I decided upon the merits of his letter. The first step I took was to enquire into the truth of the facts; for, if these were either false or misrepresented, the most artful exertion of his understanding, in reasoning upon them, would only be a disgrace to him. Now, Sir, I have found every circumstance stated by Junius to be literally true,General Gansel porsuaded the bailiffs to conduct him to the parade, and certainly solicited a corporal, and other soldiers, to assist him in making his escape. Captain Dodd did certainly apply to Captain Garth for the assistance of his guard. Captain Garth declined appearing himself, but

stood aloof, while the other took upon him to order out the King's guard, and by main force rescued the General. It is also strictly true, that the General was escorted by a file of musqueteers to a place of security. These are facts, Mr. Woodfall, which I promise you no gentleman in the guards will deny. If all, or any, of them arc false, why are they not contradicted by the parties themselves? However secure against military censure, they have yet a character to lose; and surely, if they are innocent, it is not beneath them to pay some attention to the opinion of the public,

The force of Junius's observations upon these facts, cannot be better marked, than by stating and refuting the objections which have been made to them. One writer says, Admitting "the officers have offended, they are punishable

rr

at common law; and will you have a British 66 subject punished twice for the same offence?" I answer, that they have committed two offences, both very enormous, and violated two laws.The rescue is one offence, the flagrant breach of discipline another; and hitherto it does not appear that they have been punished, or even censured for either. Another gentleman lays much stress upon the calamity of the case; and, in

stead of disproving facts, appeals at once to the compassion of the public. This idea, as well as the insinuation, that depriving the parties of their commissions would be an injury to their creditors, can only refer to General Gansel. The other officers are in no distress; therefore, have no claim to compassion: nor does it appear that their creditors, if they have any, are more likely to be satisfied by their continuing in the guards. But this sort of plea will not hold in any shape. Compassion to an offender, who has grossly violated the laws, is, in effect, a cruelty to the peaceable subject who has observed them: and, even admitting the force of any alleviating circumstances, it is nevertheless true, that, in this instance, the royal compassion has interposed too soon. The legal and proper mercy of a King of England may remit the punishment, but ought not to stop the trial.

Besides these particular objections, there has been a cry raised against Junius, for his malice and injustice in attacking the Ministry upon an event which they could neither hinder nor foresee. This, I must affirm, is a false representation of his argument. He lays no stress upon the event itself, as a ground of accusation against the Ministry, but dwells entirely upon their sub