Previous Index Next
Page 128
(previous) (Page 000128) (next)

most important facts which can be considered as clearly proved:
first, that he was acquainted with the technical forms of the secre-
tary of state's oflice; secondly, that he was intimately acquainted
with the business of the war-office; thirdly, that he, during the
year 1770, attended debates in the House of Lords,. and took
notes of speeches, particularly of the speeches of Lord Chatham;
fourthly, that he bitterly resented the appointment of Mr. Chamier
to the place of deputy secretary-at-war; fifthly, that he was bound
by some strong tie to the first Lord Holland. Now, Francis
passed some years in the secretary of state’s ofiice. He was sub-
sequently chief clerk of the war-oflice. He repeatedly mentioned
that he had himself, in 1770, heard speeches of Lord Chatham;
and some of these speeches were actually printed from his notes.
He resigned his clerkship at the war-office from resentment at the
appointment of Mr. Chamier. It was by Lord Holland that he
was first introduced into the public service. Now, here are five
marks, all of which ought to be found in Junius. They are all
five found in Francis. We do not believe that more than two of
them can be found in any other person whatever. If this argu-
ment does not settle the question, there is an end of all reasoning
on circumstantial evidence.

The internal evidence seems to us to point the same way. The
style of Francis bears a strong resemblance to that of J unius; nor
are we disposed to admit, what is generally taken for granted, that
the acknowledged compositions of Francis are very decidedly in-
ferior to the anonymous letters. The argument from inferiority,
at all events, is one which may be urged with at least equal force
against every claimant that has ever been mentioned, with the
single exception of Burke; and it would be a waste of time to
prove that Burke was not Junius. And what conclusion, after
all, can be drawn from mere inferiority? Every writer must
produce his best work; and the interval between his best work
and his second best work may be very wide indeed. Nobody will
say that the best letters of J unius are more decidedly superior to
the acknowledged works of Francis than three or four of Cor-
neille’s tragedies to the rest, than three or four of Ben Jonson’s
comedies to the rest, than the Pilgrim's Progress to the other
works of Bunyan, than Don Quixote to the other works of
Cervantes. Nay, it is certain that J unius, whoever he may have
been, was a most unequal writer. To go no further than the

Previous Index Next