gratification lies within a narrow circle. I am the sole depositary of my own secret."

Of course, he had not

"Written for praise."

And the printer, he tells us, in his Preface,

"Will acquit him of any view to profit."

The writer of this "Letter to Us," like the author to the "Letter to Almon," not only makes known the fact, that he writes without "any view to profit," but by the prominence and emphasis of his declaration, betrays the secret pleasure with which he gives publicity to his disinterestedness. Had not JUNIUS equally enjoyed the world's knowledge, that his Letters were not written for profit, would we have reminded us of it in his Preface,* after saying the same thing, in his 44th Letter; after asking Mr. Horne, in his 54th, "If there is no merit in dedicating his life to the information of his fellow creatures ?" and saying, in his 64th, that " He is not paid for his labours ?"

In his 1st Letter, we find JUNIUS observing, that if the people are obedient to the laws, prosperous in their industry, united at home, and respected abroad, we may reasonably presume, that their affairs are conducted by men of experience, abilities, and virtue:" And in the "Letter to US" we read--

"If a nation neither commands respect abroad, nor enjoys tranquillity at home, it does not require the aid of logic to conclude, that her real interests are betrayed."

In this same "LETTER to Us," we find the author saying--"The mind not open to what has been already said, must be bigotted to error, and like a religious fanatic, be only more strongly confirmed by being further urged."

And JUNIUS says to the king,

"You will not accept the uniform experience of your ancestors; and when once a man is determined to believe, the very absurdity of the doctrine confirms him in his faith."

Again, in his first Letter, after describing the folly and wickedness of ministers, JUNIUS adds--

"We are governed by counsels, from which a reasonable man can expect no remedy but poison, no relief but death;"

And in another part of the same epistle, observes that

"The printer will readily acquit me of any view to my own profit." (1st paragraph.)

"We are reduced to that state, which hardly any change can mend. And in the "Letter to US," we find-" Corruption and Luxury have carried us so far, that we are scarcely within the boundaries of reformation, within the power of amendment.”

In the succeeding paragraph, the author tells us, that,"The constitution is the property of the people."

And JUNIUS, in his 41st, says--

"The laws and constitution are the general property of the subject."*

One feature of JUNIUS, as a politician, consists in his importunate solicitude for posterity. In his twelfth Letter, he reminds us that

"There is a debt due to those who come after us."

In his 20th, he says--

"We owe it to posterity, not to suffer their dearest inheritance to be destroyed."

In his 46th we are apprized that,

"The decision of the Middlesex election, as a precedent, is one of the most dangerous that was ever established against those who are to come after us."

And in his Preface, he informs us, that the first object of his pride is, that his writings,—

"Will be found to contain principles worthy to be transmitted to posterity."

The author of the "Letter to US" is equally anxious for posterity.

"The duty we owe posterity," says he, "is of that sacred nature that admits of no abatement." And a little further onward, adds "From the mouths of how many do we hear this illiberal sentiment come forth?" "The constitution will last our time, and let posterity take care of themselves." "But," adds he, "I would tell such dronés in society, that they are committing a robbery on posterity."

In four different and distant passages, then, of JUNIUS, we find the whole substance, and nearly all the language of a connected series of sentences, in a publication containing numerous plagiarisms from the ESSAY ON THE ENGLISH CONSTITUTION! If DE LOLME wrote this Letter, and DE LOLME was not JUNIUS, De Lolme, a writer of the most independent spirit and principles;

*And in the ESSAY (p. 60) it will be remembered, we are toldThat nations are not the property of Kings."

De Lolme, conscious of his great talents, and proud, beyond all men, of thinking for himself, stooped from his native genius and dignity; resigned his originality; and, for the supply of a pamphlet, availed himself of numerous desultory pilferings from another writer ;---a writer whose popularity rendered his plagiarisms doubly dangerous. On the other hand, if JUNIUS, the lofty, the pre-eminent, the scornful JUNIUS, produced this Letter, and Junius was not De Lolme, then ceasing to avail himself of his own mighty powers; quitting the seat where he sat amid his native glory, he descended to clothe himself with borrowed rays; dwindled voluntarily into a secondary orb. If, again, DE LOLME and JUNIUS were two distinct persons, and neither of them wrote this Epistle, the Author,with all the powers of original thinking, and a masterly command of diction (for the interpolated passages are by no means the brightest and most unique) not only unnecessarily stooped to the meanest and most fagrant stealth, but, by furnishing from the ESSAY of De LOLME and the LETTERS of JUNIUS, more than one half of a regular and consistent composition, proved the perfect harmony between the thoughts and language of Junius and De Lolme.

To the evidences, last given, of the fact, that the "Letter to Us, from one of Ourselves," was written by JUNIUS, written also by DE LOLME, (and then the "Letter to Almon" was also written by DE LOLME, and by JUNIUS; for both Letters were evidently productions of the same pen) might be added many other proofs of the like nature; but if more such were necessary, others, after them, were necessary; for if those already adduced are not demonstrative, no multiple of their number would convince.*

But does the reader say, that he is still unpersuaded, that DE LOLME wrote the Letters signed JUNIUS? Still I promise to subdue his every doubt. In the next chapter, we will compare with the LETTERS OF JUNIUS, the ESSAY on the ENGLISH CONSTITUTION, and the " HISTORY OF THE FLAGELLANTS," without any reference to the "Epistle to Almon" or that "To Us, from one of Ourselves," except where we are urged upon those articles by some similitudes common to all the productions.

* In the language, again, of JUNIUS himself, "Their evidence is a strong as any presumptive evidence can be. It depends upon a combination of facts and reasoning, which requires no confirmation."

CHAPTER X.

General Remarks-Conclusion.

UPON the same principle, that those who are strangers to the proofs of the very extraordinary fact, would find it difficult to conceive, that a foreigner could have attained that mastery in the English language displayed generally, (not universally,) in the LETTERS of JUNIUS, many persons have supposed, that DE LOLME was not the translator of his own Essay. Had they, instead of resting their opinion on so fallacious a basis, examined more critically, both the ESSAY and the LETTERS, they would have been convinced, that the first was translated, and the latter were written, by a foreigner. Had not De Lolme translated his own ESSAY, we should not have read in page 167 of that Work,

"We shall see presently, how the Trial by Jury, peculiar to the English nation, is admirably adapted to the nature of a free state."* In page 171,

"A landed income of ten pounds by the year,"

"Some deserted to the enemy; others threw their arms ;”

Any more than, had JUNIUS been an Englishman, we should have found, amid his general (far from uniform) purity of style,—

They declared themselves to be mere creatures of execution." (Let. Mis. 14.) —

"The treasury, without hearing, is suffered to halloo an informer at your estate." (Let. Mis. 23.)

"But the Letters of your masterly correspondent, Junius, have drove his Lordship,"-(Let. Mis. 38.)

"The whole culprit ministry,"—(Let. Mis. 88.)

"The triplet union of crown, lords, and commons"—(Let. Mis. 92.) Or (in allusion to Mr. Wedderburne)

"His profession sets his principles at auction." (Let. Mis. 96.) The evidences that De Lolme translated his own ESSAY

* How admirably the Trial by Jury is adapted, had been English collocution.

are not less numerous than the proofs in the Letters of Junius, that the writer of those Letters was a foreigner. But to proceed to our collation of the Essay with the Letters.

It has been noticed, that DE LOLME, in his ESSAY, (p. 25,) remarks, that-What the constitution of England would have been at this time, had not the conquest taken place,

66

Might be matter of curious discussion to enquire :"

And JUNIUS, in his 35th Letter, says

"If an honest man were permitted to approach a King, in what terms he would address himself to his Sovereign, may be matter of curious speculation to consider :"

And again, in his 14th Miscellaneous Letter,

"The growth of arbitrary principles in this country, is a matter of serious consideration to observe."

DE LOLME, explaining (in page 26 of the above work,) the readiness with which, formerly, the different parts of England took the alarm at royal encroachment, says

"From the River Tweed to Portsmouth, from Yarmouth to the Land's-End, all was in motion."

This geographical antithesis, is one of JUNIUS's distinguished favourites. In his 26th Miscellaneous Letter, speaking of the guttural pomp of the Gazette writer, during the then late war, he says,

"He never lost a consonant, from the Elbe to the Weser :" To Lord Hilsborough, (Miscellaneous Letter 39,)—

"I would not cease to pursue you from father to son, if your pedigree extended from Denbigh to St. David's;"

And in his 37th (Miscellaneous) tells the same nobleman, that

"He does not doubt, the Duke of Grafton would, with all his heart, give to Sir Jeffery Amherst, the fee-simple of every acre in America, from the Missisippi to California."

It has already been noticed, that the ESSAY [speaking of the sea-forces] remarks that

"They cannot be turned against the liberties of the nation." JUNIUS, in his 69th Letter, observes that

"A seaman can never be employed but against the enemies of his country."

And the "Letter to US," we must remember, remarks— "That the navy is less an object of jealousy than the army, as not being able to do us so much mischief."