George Grenville just then, and being a Grenvillite, would most admirably second the desire of Lord Chatham to keep himself free from suspicion. But, of course, he would not confine himself to one system of ambages and feints. His object would be to distract inquiry by other demonstrations. And we, accordingly, see that he desires to look like Edmund Burke, a man whose great ability, quickness of feeling, and tone of prirciple, together with a certain audacity of speech, would lead many to suspect him. In the Public Advertiser, under date of October 22d, appeared Junius's melo-dramatic account of a "Grand Council" of ministers on the affairs of Ireland.* A day or two after, another writer (we think we do know that sharp Roman hand!) gives, in the same paper, what he calls a real account of what passed, at the same time charging Burke with being the author of the satire. In his account, he introduces the latter into a pretended dialogue, under the name of "Brazen," and makes him talk in the most bombastic and ridiculous style of a political partisan, till he is fairly turned out of the room. With the letter signed "Y. Z."† Junius sends for publication to the Public Advertiser a speech recently spoken by Burke in his place, against the ministry, the king's speech, etc., but not published regularly by Mr. Burke till 1772. Burke's advocates have greatly relied on this fact, and proved, with critical success, that Burke, desiring to remain forever unknown as Junius, would send one of his speeches to be * Miscellaneous Letter vii., Oct. 22, 1767. + Ibid. ix., Dec. 5, 1767. printed through the recognized channel of that writer. In March, 1768, Junius writes sharply against his own letter of March 4th (Mnemon's), signing himself "Anti Van Teague"*-the opponent of that Irishman! Then Junius comes out again as "Anti-Stuart,"† in retort against “Anti Van Teague." Again, in that letter already alluded to, signed "Y. Z.," where he speaks of "a party of us," Junius shows his design; and also in his letter to Woodfall, where he says "there are people about me whom I would wish not to contradict, and who would rather see Junius in the papers ever so improperly, than not at all." Every one was aware of the fact that Edmund Burke's house was full of his relations and namesakes-William Burke, and his brother Richard, being public writers as well as himself; and it was believed by their opponents that they were always concocting vituperation against every one and every thing opposed to the Rockinghams. That family was, in fact, called "a nest of adders," as we see from a passage in Burke's Correspondence,§ lately published. In another place, "Modestus" (who is also Junius), writing to contradict Junius for some of his assertions in the Gansel case, tries to make the public think Junius an Irishman, concluding thus: "I recommend it to you to tie up that over-drove animal, John Bull, who seems indeed to be stimulated * Miscellaneous Letter, xv., Mar. 11, 1768. † In a subsequent chapter we shall speak more at length of this dividing and going to buffets with himself, practiced by Junius. Private letter, No. viii., Sept. 10, 1769. "Burke's Correspondence," edited by Earl Fitzwilliam and Gen. Bourke. || Miscellaneous Letter lxvii., Nov. 28, 1769. This is, probably, in to madness, that he may no longer profane a respectable name, but own that which he received from his godfathers and godmothers-Sir Patrick O'Bully.” These instances, and others that might be particularized, show the dexterous efforts of the mask to send inquirers in the direction of the only man of that day who approached the intellectual, or, rather, the rhetorical, standard of Lord Chatham. Having, in his commencement, made the feints we have set forth, and provided for all future collateral guards of his secret, Junius felt himself at liberty to pursue with boldness his cherished object—the annihilation of the ministry, which had been forced on him, and which was, up to October, 1768, calling on him for help, abusing him, deserting to the enemy, and declaring that his sickness was nothing but a sham. Shut up from the world for about two years, during which he only showed himself in public on fitful occasions, he sternly continued, in the midst of questions, calls, and exhortations, from the king and his colleagues, to elaborate his fierce letters against the government, the court party, and all persons and things connected with their policy. The perplexity he left behind was a grim comfort to his solitude; and while the king's horses were wearing themselves out with galloping between the old brick palace and Hayes, we can conceive how the bitterhearted hermit would bring to mind the king's cunning solicitude to have just such a piebald ministry, and, with a smile of savage pleasantry, murmur to himself, from a allusion to a letter signed "John Bull," written on the side of Junius, against Gen. Gansel. favorite author: "Vous l'avez voulu, vous l'avez voulu, George Dandin; vouz l'avez voulu !" Lord Campbell, in his "Lives of the Chancellors," alluding to the political blunders and confusions of this period, says, that the inept and mischievous Lord Northington, one of Chatham's colleagues in that shipwrecked ministry, should have been fairly thrown overboard, and then the vessel might have a chance of righting.* The terrible old earl seems to have been of his lordship's opinion-only that he went a little further, and did his best to throw them all overboard. * "Lives of the Chancellors," vol. v., p. 267. CHAPTER V. LORD CHATHAM'S UNDENIABLE LITERARY ABILITY, AND THE REMARKABLE VERSATILITY OF HIS INTELLECTUAL POWERS. William Pitt, the Cicero and Roscius of his age. LORD ALBEMARLE. His eloquence was of every kind; his invective was terrible. To show the identity of Chatham and Junius, it may be necessary to dwell upon the fact, that the great minister was an accomplished literary man, master of many expressions, ranging from grave to gay, from lively to severe, and thus meet the objections of those who speak from certain acquired notions, and without investigating the matter for themselves. One great dissuasive of the belief we hold, is the idea the world has entertained of that venerable historic personage, who talks with such loftiness, and falls with such dignity upon the stage-an idea at variance with the truculent activity and bitterness of the letters. Another is the impression, pretty generally made, that the earl was no letter-writer. Lord Mahon, who labors hard in his history of England, to avert suspicion from his ancestor, tries, in some passages, to throw discredit upon the earl's letter-writing |