most disagreeable partner upon her for a long winter's night, because he could not dance with her himself?

You will now say;-Sir, we understand the politics of the city better than you do, and are well assured that Mr. Crosby will be chosen Lord Mayor; otherwise we allow that upon your plan he might acquire credit without forfeiting any real advantage.' Upon this ground I expect you, for I confess it is incumbent upon me to meet your argument, where it lies strongest against me.-Taking it for granted, then, that Mr. Crosby may be Lord Mayor, I affirm that it is not his interest, because it is not his greatest interest. The little profit of the salary cannot possibly be in contemplation with him. I do not doubt that he would rather make it an expensive office to himself. His view must be directed then to the flattering distinction of succeeding to a second mayoralty, and, what is still more honourable, to the being thought worthy of it by his fellow-citizens.-Placing this advantage in its strongest light, I say that every purpose of distinction is as completely answered by his being known to have had the employment in his power (which may be well insisted upon in argument, and never can be disproved by the fact) as by his accepting it. To this I add the signal credit he will acquire with every honest man by renouncing, upon motives of the clearest and most disinterested public spirit, a personal honour, which you may fairly tell the world was unquestionably within his reach.-But these are trifles.-I assert that by now accepting the mayoralty (which he may take hereafter whenever he pleases) he precludes himself from soliciting, with any colour of decency, a real and solid reward from the city.-I mean that he should be returned for London in the next Parliament.-I think his conduct entitles him to it, and that he cannot fail of succeeding if he does not furnish his opponents with too just a pretence for saying that the city have already rewarded him. On the contrary with what force and truth may he tell his fellow-cítizens at the next election, for your sakes I relinquished the honour you intended me. The common good required it. But I did not mean to renounce my hopes that upon a pro

•

per occasion you would honour me with a public mark of your approbation.'

You see I do not insist upon the good effects of Mr. Sawbridge's gratitude, yet I am sure it may be depended upon. I do not say that he is a man to go all lengths with Mr. Wilkes; but you may be assured that it is not danger that will not deter him, and that wherever you have the voice of the people with you, he will, upon principle, support their choice at the hazard of his life and fortune.

Now, Sir, supposing all objections are removed, and that you and Mr. Crosby are agreed, the question is in what manner is the business to be opened to Mr. Sawbridge. Upon this point too I shall offer you my opinion, because the plan of this letter would not otherwise be complete.At the same time I do very unaffectedly submit myself to your judgment.

I would have my Lord Mayor begin by desiring a private interview between him, Mr. Crosby and yourself. Very little preface will be necessary. You have a man to deal with who is too honourable to take an unfair advantage of you. With such a man you gain every thing by frankness and candour, and hazard nothing by the confidence you repose in him. Notwithstanding any passages in this letter I would shew him the whole of it; in a great business there is nothing so fatal as cunning management;-and I would tell him it contained the plan upon which Mr. Crosby and you were desirous to act, provided he would engage to concur in it bona fide, so far forth as he was concerned. There is one condition I own which appears to me a sine qua non; and yet I do not see how it can be proposed in terms unless his own good sense suggests the necessity of it to him.-I mean the total and absolute renunciation of Mr. Horne. It is very likely indeed that this gentleman may do the business for himself, either by laying aside the masque at once, or by abusing Mr. Sawbridge for accepting the mayoralty upon any terms whatsoever of accommodation with Mr. Wilkes.

This letter, Sir, is not intended for a correct or polished

composition; but it contains the very best of JUNIUS's understanding. Do not treat me so unworthily, or rather do not degrade yourself so much, as to suspect me of any interested view to Mr. Sawbridge's particular advantage. By all that's honourable I mean nothing but the cause; and I may defy your keenest penetration to assign a satisfactory reason why JUNIUS, whoever he be, should have a personal interest in giving the mayoralty to Mr. Sawbridge, rather than to Mr. Crosby.

I am heartily weary of writing, and shall reserve another subject, on which I mean to address you, for another opportunity.I think that this letter, if you act upon it, should be a secret to every body but Mr. Sawbridge and my Lord Mayor.

JUNIUS*.

No. 66.

TO JOHN WILKES, ESQ.

London, 7th Sept. 17711.

As this letter, Sir, has no relation to the subject of my last, the motives upon which you may have rejected one of my opinions, ought not to influence your judgment of ano

* The plan recommended by JUNIUS in the above letter was not acted upon by Mr. Wilkes, for the reasons assigned by him in his letter of Sept. 12, 1771, (No. 67.) The consequence was, that Mr. Alderman Nash, the ministerial candidate, was elected Lord Mayor, to the infinite mortification of JUNIUS, who, in Private Letter, No. 56, makes the following observation upon him and his election. "What an abandoned, prostituted idiot is your Lord Mayor! The shameful mismanagement, which brought him into office, gave me the first, and an unconquerable disgust." The subjoined is a list of the candidates for that office, with the numbers affixed to their respective names as they stood at the close of the poll:

For Mr. Alderman Nash

Mr. Alderman Sawbridge

The Lord Mayor

2199

1879

1795

* Marked by Mr. Wilkes, "Received in Prince's Court, Saturday, Sept.

7, 1771."

ther. I am not very sanguine in my expectations of persuading, nor do I think myself intitled to quarrel with any man, for not following my advice; yet this, I believe, is a species of injustice you have often experienced from your friends. From you, Sir, I expect in return, that you will not remember how unsuccessfully I have recommended one measure to your consideration, lest you should think yourself bound to assert your consistency, and, in the true spirit of persecution, to pass the same sentence indifferently upon all my opinions. Forgive this levity, and now to the busi

ness.

A man, who honestly engages in a public cause, must prepare himself for events which will at once demand his utmost patience, and rouse his warmest indignation. I feel myself, at this moment, in the very situation I describe; yet from the common enemy I expect nothing but hostilities against the people. It is the conduct of our friends that surprises and afflicts me. I cannot but resent the injury done to the common cause by the assembly at the London Tavern, nor can I conceal from you my own particular disappointment. They had it in their power to perform a real, effectual service to the nation; and we expected from them a proof, not only of their zeal, but of their judgment.— Whereas the measure they have adopted is so shamefully injudicious, with regard to its declared object, that, in my opinion, it will, and reasonably ought, to make their zeal very questionable with the people they mean to serve. When I see a measure excellent in itself, and not absolutely unattainable, either not made the principal object, or extravagantly loaded with conditions palpably absurd or impracticable, I cannot easily satisfy myself, that the man, who proposes it, is quite so sincere as he pretends to be. You at least, Mr. Wilkes, should have shewn more temper and prudence, and a better knowledge of mankind. No personal respects whatsoever should have persuaded you to concur in these ridiculous resolutions. But my own zeal, I perceive, betrays me: I will endeavour to keep a better guard upon my temper, and apply to your judgment in the most cautious and measured language.

I object, in the first place, to the bulk, and much more to the stile of your resolutions of the 23d of July*; though some part of the preamble is as pointed as I could wish. You talk of yourselves with too much authority and im

A copy of which is subjoined, to enable the reader the better to understand JUNIUS's objections to them. They are as follow:

London Tavern, July 23, 1771.

SUPPORTERS OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS.

Resolved,

SAVAGE BARRELL, ESQ. IN THE CHAIR.

THAT the preamble, with the articles reported this day from the committee, be printed and published from this society.

Whoever seriously considers the conduct of administration, both at home and abroad, can hardly entertain a doubt, that a plan is formed to subvert the constitution.

In the same manner, whoever attentively examines into the proceedings of the present House of Commons, must apprehend, that such another house for seven years, after the termination of the present parliament, would effectually accomplish the views of the Court, and leave no hope of redress but in an appeal to God.

The Middlesex election, taken on its true ground; the employment of the standing army, in St. George's Fields; the granting half a million, without inquiring into the expenditure of the civil list money, and upon the dangerous principle of considering the debts of the civil list as the debts of the nation; and encroaching, to discharge them, upon the sinking fund, the great support of public credit; the attempts made on juries, the last sacred bulwark of liberty and law; the arbitrary and venal hand with which government is conducted in Ireland; the new and most unconstitutional mode of raising a revenue on the people of America, without asking the consent of their representatives; the introduction of an universal excise in America, instead of the laws of customs; the advancing the military above the civil power, and employing troops to awe the legislature:-All these are measures of so marked, so mischievous a nature, that it is impossible they should be unfelt or misunderstood: yet these are measures which the House of Commons have acquiesced in, countenanced, or executed.

If the present House of Commons then have given such vital wounds to the constitution, who is it can doubt, who is it can hope, that the conduct of such another House, will not be mortal to our liberties?

The trustees of the people should be pure of all interested communication with the Court or its ministers; yet the corrupt correspondence between the members of the House and the Court is as notorious now as it is abhorrent from every great and good purpose of their institution. Placemen, pensioners, contractors and receivers of lottery tickets, abound

to