powers of discrimination; and the reader will find some proofs of this fact in the book itself. Emboldened by their "words of encouragement,' "smiles of favour," and "acts of assistance," he now lays before the public these compositions with many alterations and considerable additions. He trusts that the reader will discover in them the marks of a mind accustomed to investigate without prejudice, to refute without bitterness, and to decide without dogmatism; and, whatever criticisms his performance may receive from the public censors of literature, he will be ready to acknowledge any errours, which they may detect in his arguments, and to rectify any mistakes, which he may unintentionally have made in matters of fact. The reader will perceive from the dates of the Letters that they were written at different times, as the Author found intervals of leisure amidst literary pursuits of a weightier and very different nature. This circumstance will account for several repetitions, which may be found in them, and for the same argument being supported by different facts and different reasoning in different parts of the book, which in other circumstances would have been methodised into one paragraph. The general opinion of those, to whose perusal his papers have been submitted, is that he has completely succeeded in subverting the claims of Sir Philip Francis to the authorship of Junius's Letters, which the ingenuity of Mr. John Taylor had, in his book entitled The Identity of Junius with a Distinguished Living Character Established, apparently placed on a solid basis. A few weeks before the decease of Dr. John Mason Good, who was the editor of Mr. Woodfall's edition of Junius's Letters, and the writer of the Preliminary Essay, which is contained in it, the Author received from the Doctor the following Note: "DEAR SIR, 66 "Guildford Street, Oct. 13, 1826. Accept my thanks for your obliging copy of your first Letter on the subject of Junius and Sir Philip Francis. 'Many years ago, as perhaps you may be aware, I entered at full speed into this research, and beat the bush in every direction. At that time, however, the claims of Sir Philip Francis had not been advanced, at least not before the public. But, had they been brought forward, the arguments, by which it is obvious they may be met, and many of which you have yourself ably handled, would, I think, have succeeded in putting him as completely out of the list as all the other competitors appear to be put, whose friends have undertaken to bring them forward. "The question is, nevertheless, one of great interest, as well on the score of national history, as of literary curiosity. Yet, like many other desiderata, I am afraid it is likely to lie beyond the fathoming of any line and plummet, that will be applied to it in our days. "I shall always be happy to hear of am, dear Sir, faithfully yours, “ To E. H. Barker, Esq.” your success, J. M. GOOD." and The reader will observe, in the above Letter of Dr. J. M. G., his indirect acknowledgment of the authorship of the Preliminary Essay in Woodfall's edition of Junius, One or two friends of the Author are so satisfied with some single arguments against the claims of Sir Philip Francis, that they consider him to have taken on himself superfluous labour in accumulating proof on proof that the credit of these compositions does not belong to Sir Philip. The Author has told to them in reply that he perfectly agrees with them in thinking that there are some single arguments, which establish his case; but diversity of minds requires variety of proofs that ar- gument, which will satisfy one judgment, will not satisfy another, and yet that other person may be convinced, if he be met on his own ground. The Author has cunningly called their attention to the story, which the learned and eloquent Sir Thomas Browne tells to us in his Religio Medici 1, 21. p. 56. :-"I remember a Doctor-in-phy- "sick of Italy, who could not perfectly believe the im- "mortality of the soul, because Galen seemed to make a doubt thereof. With another I was familiarly ac- quainted in France, a divine, and a man of singular "parts, that on the same point was so plunged and gra- When we are told, (as the Author was told by an in- * "After death there is nothing, and death itself is no- Gibbs said of Mr. Taylor's book, (The Identity of Junius with a Distinguished Living Character Established,) that, if the matter had been argued before him as a Judge in a trial for libel, he should have directed the Jury to find Sir Philip Francis guilty, — a speech which has been also attributed to the late Lord Ellenborough, and even to the late Lord Erskine, - when the friend of the Author, Mr. Butler, in his Reminiscences 1, 93. apparently in allusion to these opinions, declares "the external evidence produced by Mr. Taylor to be very strong, so strong, perhaps, that, if he had been tried upon it for a libel, and the case had rested upon the facts, from which this evidence is formed, the Judge would have directed the Jury to find him guilty,”—and when the Edinburgh-Reviewer of Mr. Taylor's book, (57, 96.) has delivered the following character of it: - "We are half inclined to think, how ever, that the real author is at length detected; and "we shall proceed to lay before the reader the ground of "this opinion. The merit of the discovery, if the truth “is indeed found out, belongs entirely to the author of "the work before us. Sir Philip had never, as far as we know, been suspected. The book is written in a "way abundantly creditable to the author; especially if 66 as we suspect, he is not a professed literary man. It "does not certainly make the most of the evidence; it " is somewhat too prolix; frequently dwells upon trifles; " and is not always very distinct in its statements. But "it contains every thing necessary for determining the question, and is written without affectation. That "it proves Sir Philip to be Junius, we will not affirm ; "but this we can safely assert that it accumulates such 66 66 a mass of circumstantial evidence, as renders it ex tremely difficult to believe he is not; and that, if so many coincidences shall be found to have misled us in "this case, our faith in all conclusions drawn from proofs “of a similar kind may henceforth be shaken: when the evidence for Sir Philip Francis is thus characterised by three eminent Judges, one eminent Conveyancer, and one eminent Counsellor, it is entitled to a fair and full examination, and such an examination it has received from the Author of this book. He does not pretend, and without hypocrisy could not pretend, to be indifferent to the honour of having disproved claims thus powerfully supported; such philosophy is too high for him, he knows that he is mortal, and possesses the common feelings of humanity; he has endeavoured to merit the honour, and if the public voice re-echo the general opinion of his intellectual and literary friends, he will enjoy the honour without indecently exulting in the victory, or ungenerously insulting the vanquished. A friend in a Letter dated Oct. 31, 1827. compliments the pursuit in these terms: "If the riddle were solved, as in the case of any other riddle, the interest would instantly cease. The death of George III. took away much of the importance of this enquiry: its present state puts me much in mind of a Scotch story. A man, who had sold, and been paid for his horse, was asked to give its bona-fide character. Truly,' says he, it has but two faults, I. very hard to catch, 2. good for nothing, when you catch him. But yet, I doubt not, there is amusement in the pursuit." One thing, at least, is certain, that much, which has been written on this question, |