ask Mr. Taylor, 1. whether he can, in the acknowledged Writings and Speeches of Sir Philip Francis, discover similar "errors of grammar and construction," and equally "numerous;" 2. whether, if he cannot, he is justified in maintaining the pretensions of Sir Philip? For this sympathy in grammatical and syntactical errours is a most unsuspicious and most safe test of truth: so in invasions of literary property the Court of Chancery regards the copying of typographical errours as a main proof of plagiarism. I do not profess to have compared the Letters of Junius with the Writings of Sir Philip; I have not the leisure to make so laborious a comparison. But I can with truth affirm that I have in those compositions of Sir Philip, which have fallen under my eye, discovered no instances of grammatical and syntactical errours. Dr. Parr, who detected “Gallicisms" in Junius, expressly declares that "Francis uniformly writes English," and this is the very highest authority, to which I can appeal on the subject, because I have had abundant opportunities of observing, and possess many proofs of the fact, that Dr. Parr looked at compositions with the accuracy of a grammarian, the knowledge of a philologist, and the judgment of a critic.

*

7. Mr. Taylor, p. 162. has these words:" A youth, who acquired no more than the rudiments of learning in his native country, (Ireland,) and who quitted it altogether, when he was 10 years old, however he might overcome the habits of his youth, would still find it difficult to forget entirely the phraseology, with which he was first familiar. In all his compositions Junius laboured excessively to make his style pure and classical, yet rich in English idiom; and he generally succeeded. But in the Miscellaneous Letters are still to be found many oversights: that they were partly owing to the cause now mentioned, is at least a probable conjecture; and it serves in some measure to explain the reason of that labor limæ, which to many persons has appeared so much beyond the necessity of the case." I should have been glad if Mr. Taylor had pointed out these " many oversights," that we might know to what description of errours they belong. For, while Mr. Butler speaks of " numerous errours of grammar and construction," Mr. Taylor speaks of "many oversights" in respect to "phraseologies with which he was first familiar," viz. Irish phraseologies. But on the supposition that Junius was an Irishman, it is impossible to believe that he would ever undertake such a task, because he could not be sensible of those "phraseologies"— they would fall too naturally from his tongue and his pen-it would be for Englishmen to detect instances of Irish idiom. Mr. Prior, in his Memoirs of the Life and Character of Burke, informs us that Burke took infinite pains with the composition of his Thoughts on the French Revolution, writing and re-writing, correcting, altering, and adding. But his object was not to remove Irish " phraseologies," and Irish ideas, and Irish sentences, but to add strength and polish and accuracy to the language, elegance and vigour and majesty to the thoughts, circumstantialities to the statements, authorities to the facts,

corroborations to and illustrations of the arguments; and this wouldbe the object in the labor limæ employed by Junius.

VI. “That Junius had a personal regard for Woodfall, has been noticed by others; and it now appears that Sir Philip entertained a similar regard, founded on an acquaintance formed when they were boys. They were together at the same school; with the difference of one year only between their ages. When Woodfall declined: printing what Junius had sent him, the latter then forwarded it to Almon for publication ; and Almon was also assisted, in a similar way, by the communications of Sir Philip Francis." Mr. Taylor, p. 356. 1. I have elsewhere disarmed of its point Mr. Taylor's argument about Woodfall, and shall here say nothing on this question.

2. The value of Mr. Taylor's reasoning about Almon may be ascertained from the fact that there is another printer, about whom Mr. T. is silent, and of whom Junius, in a Letter to Woodfall, speaks with the feeling of private friendship, or the conviction of personal knowledge, or the confidence of political sympathy:-" At another time his indifference to the risk of the printer is unreservedly expressed. If you should have any fears, I entreat you to send it early enough, to appear tomorrow-night in the London Evening Post. In that case you will oblige me by informing the public tomorrow, in your own Paper, that a real Junius will appear at night in the London; MILLER, I am sure, will have no scruples.' (1, 214.)"''

3. With respect to Almon, there are reasons to be found, which may explain the cause of Sir Philip's good-will to him, independently of all considerations about Junius; and, as I shall prove the fact to the full conviction of Mr. Taylor, I shall not permit him to employ the argument for the purpose of identifying Sir Philip with Junius. Sir Philip was the friend of Mr. Calcraft, who has handsomely remembered him in his Will, and who was the particular friend of

1 The Memoirs of a late Eminent Bookseller, (Almon,) Lond. 1790. 8vo. p. 61. will make us better acquainted with this inferior bibliopolist:-" At this time, and for some time previous, there appeared a number of political Essays in the public Papers, signed Junius; which being written in strong, nervous, and elegant language, soon attracted the public attention, and became the subject of general conversation. The Ministry supposed Mr. Almon knew this Writer, and they were not mistaken in this supposition. These Essays were frequently copied into the Magazines, and other periodical publications. The printer of one of these monthly pamphlets, whose name was J. Miller, and (who) resided near Pater-noster Row in the City, advertised his Pamphlet, (the London Museum he called it,) to be sold also by J. Almon in Piccadilly. Mr. Almon gave him no authority for so doing, but it is pretty much the custom, (since the Metropolis has become so large and populous,) for booksellers residing in one part of the Town, to advertise their books etc. to be had also of booksellers residing in another part of the Town. Into one of the Numbers of this Museum, Miller copied from the Newspapers one of the Letters of Junius, addressed to the King. This Letter of Junius the Ministers called a libel; and they ordered the Attorney General to prosecute several Printers and Publishers. When Miller sent his Museums to Mr. Almon's shop, Mr. Almon was out of Town; however, he came home in the course of the day, and having heard of the Minister's orders to prosecute the Printers, he instantly ordered the sale of Miller's Pamphlets to be stopped, and the unsold copies to be returned." See also p. 68-70.

Almon. In the Memoirs of a late Eminent Bookseller, pp. 76-86. is inserted a series of Letters, (31 in number,) from Mr. Calcraft to Almon, of which the first is dated Rempston Hall, Sept. 2, 1770. and the last Ingress, Aug. 16, 1772. being part of the period, within which Junius began and terminated his politico-literary career. In a Letter dated Ingress, Jan. 13, 1772. we read:-" Your dispatch "yesterday is very interesting. The marriage makes it impossible "for Ministers to gratify Luttrell. Bradshaw's language, and Lord "Shelburne's visit to the Queen's House on his arrival, confirm your intelligence of that party. Pray tell me, in confidence, what "did Lord Temple's visits to St. James's mean? Does he talk as "loudly in commendation of Lord North, as the Ministers and their "friends boast, at Lady Primrose's particularly, as well as other places. If you put in paragraphs, put that MR. FRANCIS is ap"pointed Deputy Secretary at War, and continues his present employment also. It will teaze the worthy Secretary, as I well "know, and oblige me. I will give you my reasons, when you will "find more folly in that noble Lord, than even you thought him "capable of. This may be an interesting week. Pray continue your attention to your country friend."

66

In another Letter, dated Ingress, Saturday, we read :-" Thanks "" for your Letter. I was not mis-informed; I knew FRANCIS was

"not Deputy, but wished him to be so; and to cram the Newspapers with paragraphs that he was so. For he is very deserving." Now from these Letters we may fairly suppose that Sir Philip Francis was not particularly known to Mr. Almon prior to their date, viz. in Jan. 1772, when Junius had nearly finished his brilliant career; for, if Francis, the intimate friend of Mr. Calcraft, had been previously well known to Mr. Almon, also the particular friend of Mr. Caleraft, Mr. C. could not be ignorant of the fact, and the language of his Letters to Mr. Almon would have necessarily contained some such words as these, our friend Francis, 1. because Mr. Almon's intimacy with Francis would have been naturally seized by Mr. Calcraft as a reason why Mr. Almon should insert the contemplated paragraph, 2. because Mr. C. asks for the insertion merely on his own account, and not for the sake of a common friend. The real Junius was evidently an early friend of Almon, (in the Political Register for April 1768. published by Almon, was inserted a Letter from Junius, see Taylor, pp. 135-48.) and as I have shewn that Sir Philip Francis was not a friend of Almon prior to Jan. 1772, it is manifest that Francis and Junius were distinct persons.

4. It is well known that Mr. Almon in his Biographical Anecdotes published in 1797, and his Edition of Junius, (of which books I have neither at hand,) maintained that Hugh Macaulay Boyd was the Author of Junius, and his pretensions to that honour have been abundantly refuted by Dr. Mason Good in the Preliminary Essay prefixed to Woodfall's Edition of Junius. This is a satisfactory proof that Mr. Almon had no facts, which could lead him to a suspicion of Sir Philip Francis's authorship, though he had derived important

assistance from him in the Anecdotes of the Life of Earl Chatham, first published in 1791 or 1792: see Mr. Taylor, p. 139. It is also a satisfactory proof that Mr. Almon, himself a man of much talent, of various knowledge, of large information, of literary reputation, and of political connexions, had formed no such estimate of the abilities, and the attainments of Sir Philip as to suppose him equal to the composition of the Letters, or else he would not have advocated the claims of Boyd. These remarks are not unimportant, when it is confidently stated or broadly insinuated that, because Almon was a friend of Junius, between 1767 and 1773. and because Sir Philip Francis in 1791 or 1792. made communications to Almon for his Anecdotes of the Life of Earl Chatham, therefore Junius and Sir Philip were one and the same person. Mr. Taylor says in p. 148:-"So that it appears not only that Junius had a regard for Woodfall, in which he resembled Sir Philip Francis, but that the next printer, to whom the former had recourse, was equally distinguished by the favours of the latter." But Junius unquestionably had in view chiefly his own political objects. He preferred Wood fall's Paper, not because Woodfall was his school-fellow and his friend, but because his Paper was on many accounts the fittest receptacle for his Articles, because he could rely on the moral integrity and the personal courage and the political consistency of Woodfall. He gave the second preference to Almon for similar reasons, and not from any particular friendship for him. The sort of friendship, which he felt for Almon, is manifest from the very little effort, which was made by any party to re-imburse Mr. Almon for the expenses attending the prosecution for a libel in publishing Junius's Letter to the King: from the Memoirs of a late Eminent Bookseller, p. 76. it appears that the sum of 1007. collected by Sir John Aubrey, was all the compensation Mr. Almon received for the loss, vexation, trouble, etc. of this prosecution."

With great respect and esteem I remain, dear Sir,

Thetford, Feb. 5, 1827.

Very truly yours,

E. H. BARKER.

GENERAL SIR HERBERT TAYLOR'S

MEMORANDUM

OF THE ILLNESS AND DECEASE

་

OF THE

DUKE OF YORK.

LONDON:-1827.

THE interest excited by the situation of the late Duke of York, and by every circumstance connected with his long, painful, and lingering illness, from its commencement until the fatal hour which closed his valuable existence, has been so great, and the general feeling which it produced has caused so many particulars to be circulated and received by the public as authentic, for which there either was no foundation, or at least very imperfect foundation, that I have, on due consideration, been induced to draw up from minutes taken during this distressing and trying period of my attendance on his Royal Highness, a statement, not of the progress of the disease, or of the treatment pursued, but of such circumstances and facts as will show the condition of his Royal Highness's mind under this awful visitation of Providence, will do justice to the exemplary resolution and pious resignation with which he met and submitted to it, and will satisfy his attached friends that his Royal Highness was, in every point of view, deserving of the respect and affection which have so strongly marked their sentiments towards him, and of the deep grief and regret which his death has occasioned in their minds, and in those of the respectable and well-thinking individuals of every class in this country.

The state of his Royal Highness's health had, for some time, appeared far from satisfactory, and had occasioned more or less uneasiness to those about him, but the first indications of serious indisposition, such as to produce alarm, were on his Royal Highness's return from Ascot to his residence in Audley-square,