immoral books. There are those who have the power, not of law, or place, or station, but of truth and right, to sink a brand on the forehead of books, whether of disguised or open profligacy, whether stealing or rushing upon society, as the Adventures of a Gentleman, or the Adventures of a Highwayman, so that they may be known for what they are, and duly estimated, and speedily exiled and forgotten. And with this power they have another, which they also ought sedulously to exert, the power of recommending good books; the power of diffusing knowledge, both useful and entertaining; the power of purifying and elevating the taste, of increasing the wisdom and confirming the virtue of the community. This power, in various degrees, belongs not only to the legislator, the magistrate, the teacher of youth, the minister of the gospel, but to every master and mistress of a family, to every respectable man and woman, to every individual who has at heart the safety of those who are dear to him, the good of society, the interests of religion, the honor of human nature, the glory of God; to every one who knows light from darkness, good from evil, his right hand from his left. If all who have this power were conscious of it, and regarded it as a sacred trust, and would resolve to use it, what might not be expected from its goings forth? If all who possess it, would join together, not in formal associations, but in the unity of a holy spirit and a righteous cause, to exert it, why would it not be irresistible? We wish that

of

every good man was sensible of his power, even the power goodness, and would learn how to exercise it over opinion, unostentatiously but honestly. We wish that every man who can tell a good book from a bad one, and prefers the good to the bad, would let his preference be known and felt ; and that no such man would buy or read, borrow or lend a foolish or immoral book, whoever might be its author, or whatever might be its subject or style. Every single opinion is important; for it is the aggregated weight of opinions which must finally decide the character of literature. And let it be remembered that literature is an exchangeable commodity, and is exchanged widely and freely. The character and spirit of the literature of one country, have an effect on the reading population, and through them on the whole population of another country. As lovers of our country, then, as real patriots, it should be our earnest prayer and endeavour,

both that our national literature should be colored as little as possible with foreign impurities, and that its own stream. should be so pure and clear of itself, as to carry none but the waters of healing and life to the ends of the habitable earth.

ART. VIII. — An Essay on Junius and his Letters; embracing a Sketch of the Life and Character of William Pitt, Earl of Chatham, and Memoirs of certain other Distinguished Individuals; with Reflections Historical, Personal, and Political, relating to the Affairs of Great Britain and America, from 1763 to 1785. By BENJAMIN WATERHOUSE, M. D., Member of several Medical, Philosophical, and Literary Societies in Europe and America. Boston. Gray & Bowen. 1831. 8vo. pp. 449.

THE authorship of the Letters of Junius is well said to be 'the most artfully contrived secret of modern times.' For sixty years it has baffled the most diligent and cunning inquiry, and seems to be still as far from detection as ever. Many shrewd guesses have been made, and many ingenious hypotheses ingeniously defended; but no argument has yet been brought forward sufficiently guarded at all points to command the assent of the world. The man in the iron mask is known, and the writer of Ikon Basilike' has been dragged into day. But no one has been able to pull off the visor of Junius, or disperse the night in which he wrapt himself. Meantime, curiosity is not weary, and the investigation is going on with as much keenness as ever. It is not long since a volume on the subject was published in New York; a second made its appearance in Boston; a third we understand is in preparation in another place; and we have before us an ample essay from the pen of a veteran scholar, who, having lived through the whole period of the publication of the letters and the search for the writer, is enabled to speak like one engaged in the affairs and moving among the actors of a former generation. His candidate for the equivocal honor is Lord Chatham; and it is a little remarkable, that just as this work issues from the press, a pamphlet arrives from England supporting the same hypothesis.

To support this hypothesis, is not, however, as the reader may gather from the title-page of the volume, its only design. 'In the course of our discussion,' says the author, 'Junius may appear a primary or a secondary object; for the mere solution of a puzzling question is hardly worth the labor we shall probably bestow upon it.' Accordingly he illustrates every point of the subject by the collateral history of the times, and collects together a mass of instructive and entertaining story, relating alike to public affairs and individual character. In doing this, he treats particularly of the character and policy of George the Third, especially as affecting the fortunes of this country, and introduces many anecdotes and characters to illustrate the preliminary history of our independence. In fact, his book is a glance at the times, quite as much in their bearing upon the American question as upon the authorship of the Letters; and will be found full of pleasant things for those who love their country, though they may care nothing about Junius. We have no room to follow him over this wide range. We propose only a brief sketch of what he has done toward unravelling the great

secret.

The suspicion that Chatham was the writer of these letters first arose in his mind, Dr. Waterhouse tells us, upon reading the singular eulogium on that nobleman in the fiftyfourth letter; a eulogy so strangely conceived and so awkwardly expressed, that it has perplexed all readers of the book, and given rise to the most various remarks. The supposition that Chatham himself wrote it, seemed to Dr. Waterhouse to solve the enigma, and render at once intelligible what is otherwise an unaccountable mystery.

In seeking confirmation of this conjecture, our author scrutinizes critically the history and character of the times, and the condition and fortunes of distinguished men, in order to learn who had been so placed as to gain the requisite minute acquaintance with affairs and men, who possessed the vehement and overbearing temper, the command of language, the motive to prompt him, the power to conceal himself, and a sufficient reason for inviolable and everlasting secrecy. All these postulates he seems to find in the Earl of Chatham, His vigor and impetuosity of mind were fully equal to what Junius exhibited, and his temper had the same character of overbearing and haughty sternness. The style of his

speeches, making due allowance for the superior elaborateness of the Letters, has the same strength, compression, and vehemence. Instances of the most remarkable resemblance, we had almost said identity, are quoted in the present work. He had always been conversant with public life, and had been in offices, for a long series of years, which would give him that commanding and intimate acquaintance with all the public and secret history of the court, and the government, and their agents, which has been thought so unaccountable. And at the time these letters were appearing, he was retired from public life, chagrined and disappointed, irritable through disease, though in the full vigor of his intellect. Does not such a description answer to the imaginary Junius? Is it improbable that such a man, so situated, should vent his anxious patriotism in expostulations and denunciations, such as we find in these letters? Have we not found in him the power to do, the occasion to call forth, the motive to excite, and the strong reason for secrecy?

Having thus stated the preliminary presumptions, Dr. Waterhouse proceeds a step further, and finds some striking coincidences which go to confirm him in his opinion. First, the date of the publication, which commenced within a few months after Chatham had withdrawn to his retirement. Next, the coincidence of sentiment in all matters of political importance. Again, and perhaps more strikingly still, the personal partialities and hostilities of both the great known and the great unknown. They had the same enmities and the same friendships. When we observe the rancor with which Chatham pursued Lord Mansfield on all occasions, even to his last dying speech, we can hardly help seeing in it the same unrelenting virulence with which Junius assailed that distinguished judge. When we read too his vituperation of Bedford and Grafton, we find the causes of it in the history of Pitt's connexion with those noblemen; while his tenderness and respect for Camden, Holland, and others, are displayed to the intimate and confidential friends of Chatham. To understand the force of these allusions, one must go into particulars for which we have no room, and for which we refer to the work before us.

But beyond all this, there are some singular agreements between certain letters of Junius and certain speeches of Lord Chatham, altogether inexplicable upon any other sup

position. These agreements relate both to the current of thought, the character of the illustrations, and the use of peculiar expressions and phrases. More than forty pages of the volume are occupied with these parallel passages; and we think that one might read on page after page, taking care to cover the name affixed to each passage, without being able to determine, from any difference of manner, when he was reading Junius and when Chatham. These coincidences had before been noticed by the author of 'Junius Identified'; to whom they appeared so remarkable, that he said, 'either Lord Chatham was the author of the Letters, or Junius reported Lord Chatham's speeches.' Upon this hint he built up the hypothesis, that Sir Philip Francis, the reporter of the speeches, was the writer of the Letters. Is it strange that Dr. Waterhouse has thought it more probable that the same person was the author of both? Especially as he thus avoids the fatal objection to the other, perhaps to every other, hypothesis, that sometimes the letter precedes in point of time the delivery of the speech; requiring us to suppose that Chatham borrowed of Francis, as well as Francis of Chatham.

There is a multitude of more minute considerations adduced by our author in confirmation of his conjecture. We may just hint at three of them. First, the air of easy equality with which Junius addresses the highest in rank, indicates a person familiar with title and state. This has been noticed even by his bitterest enemies, as the air and authority of a great personage in disguise.' Secondly, the incidental indications of advancing age which peep out here and there. Both these are certainly suitable to the pretensions of Chatham. Thirdly, Dr. Waterhouse being persuaded that it was impossible for any man to effect this difficult and delicate task alone, has a pleasant and ingenious chapter to show, that his help must have been that of bosom friends. He introduces us to Chatham's family, paints to us his accomplished wife and sister, and makes us believe that they knew and aided his plans. He finds a hint of their feminine zeal in the following sentence from one of Junius's private letters to Woodfall; The truth is, there are people about me, whom I wish not to contradict, and who would rather see Junius in the papers ever so improperly, than not at all.' Now, says Dr. Waterhouse, certainly these people were women, And