the service? Did he not betray the just interests of the army, in permitting Lord Percy to have a regiment? And does he not at this moment give up all character and dignity as a gentleman, in receding from his own repeated declarations in favour of Mr. Wilkes?

In the two next articles I think we are agreed. You candidly admit, that he often makes such promises as it is a virtue in him to violate, aud that no man is more assiduous to provide for his relations at the public expence. I did not urge the last as an absolute vice in his disposition, but to prove that a careless disinterested spirit is no part of his character; and as to the other, I desire it may be remembered, that I never descended to the indecency of inquiring into his convivial hours. It is you, Sir William Draper, who have taken pains to represent your friend in the character of a drunken landlord, who deals out his promises as liberally as his liquor, and will suffer no man to leave his table either sorrowful or sober. None but an intimate friend, who must frequently have seen him in these unhappy, disgraceful moments, could have described him so well.

The last charge, of the neglect of the army, is indeed the most material of all. I am sorry to tell you, Sir William, that, in this article, your first fact is false; and as there is nothing more painful to me than to give a direct contradiction to a gentleman of your appearance, I could wish that, in your future publications, you would pay a greater attention to the truth of your premises, before you suffer your genius to hurry you to a conclusion. Lord Ligonier did not deliver the army (which you, in classical language, are pleased to call a palladium) into Lord Granby's hands. It was taken from him much against his inclination, some two or three years before Lord Granby was commander in chief. As to the state of the army, I should be glad to know where you have received your intelligence. Was it in the rooms at Bath, or at your retreat at Clifton? The reports of reviewing generals comprehend only a few regiments in England, which, as they are immediately under the royal inspection, are perhaps in some tolerable order. But do you know any

thing of the troops in the West-Indies, the Mediterranean, and North America, to say nothing of a whole army absolutely ruined in Ireland? Inquire a little into facts, Sir William, before you publish your next panegyric upon Lord Granby, and believe me, you will find there is a fault at head-quarters, which even the acknowledged care and abilities of the adjutant-general cannot correct.*

Permit me now, Sir William, to address myself personally to you, by way of thanks for the honour of your correspondence. You are by no means undeserving of notice; and it may be of consequence even to Lord Granby to have it determined, whether or no the man who has praised him so lavishly, be himself deserving of praise. When you returned to Europe, you zealously undertook the cause of that gallant army, by whose bravery at Manilla your own fortune had been established. You complained, you threatened, you even appealed to the public in print. By what accident did it happen, that in the midst of all this bustle, and all these clamours for justice to your injured troops, the name of the Manilla ransom was suddenly buried in a profound, and, since that time, an uninterrupted silence? Did the ministry suggest any motives to you, strong enough to tempt a man. of honour, to desert and betray the cause of his fellow-soldiers? Was it that blushing ribband, which is now the perpetual ornament of your person? Or was it that regiment, which you afterwards (a thing unprecedented among soldiers) sold to colonel Gisborne? Or was it that government, the full pay of which you are contented to hold, with the half-pay of an Irish colonel? And do you now, after a retreat not very like that of Scipio, presume to intrude yourself, unthought-of, uncalled-for, upon the patience of the public? Are your flatteries of the commander in chief directed to another regiment, which you may again dispose of on the same honourable terms? We know your prudence, Sir William, and I should be sorry to stop your preferment.

JUNIUS.

VOL. I.

* Adjutant General Harvey. EDIT.

G

LETTER IV.

TO THE PRINTER OF THE PUBLIC ADVERTISER.

SIR, 17 February, 1769. I RECEIVED JUNIUS's favour last night; he is determined to keep his advantage by the help of his mask; it is an excellent protection, it has saved many a man from an untimely end. But whenever he will be honest enough to lay it aside, avow himself, and produce the face which has so long lurked behind it, the world will be able to judge of his motives for writing such infamous invectives. His real name will discover his freedom and independency, or his servility to a faction. Disappointed ambition, resentment for defeated hopes, and desire of revenge, assume but too often the appearance of public spirit; but be his designs wicked or charitable, JUNIUS should learn that it is possible to condemn measures, without a barbarous and criminal outrage against men. JUNIUS delights to mangle carcases with a hatchet; his language and instrument have a great connexion with Claremarket, and, to do him justice, he handles his weapon most admirably. One would imagine he had been taught to throw it by the savages of America. It is therefore high time for me to step in once more to shield my friend from this merciless weapon, although I may be wounded in the attempt. But I must first ask JUNIUS, by what forced analogy and construction the moments of convivial mirth are made to signify indecency, a violation of engagements, a drunken landlord, and a desire that every one in company should be drunk likewise? He must have culled all the flowers of St. Giles's and Billingsgate to have produced such a piece of

* Whether such a conclusion were forced or natural from Sir William's description of his friend, JUNIUS, it seems, was not the only person who deduced it, if we may judge from a dispute the Knight of the Bath was involved in upon this very subject, with two other invisible correspondents, of whom the one signed himself Neocles, and the other the Ghost, and who wrote in the same newspaper (The Public Advertiser). To the first correspondent, Sir William replies as follows.

SIR,

oratory. Here the hatchet descends with tenfold vengeance; but, alas! it hurts no one but its master! For JUNIUS must not think to put words into my mouth, that seem too foul even for his own.

SIR,

Clifton, Feb. 13, 1769.

I must beg the favour of Neocles not to believe that I have described my friend to be frequently in a state of ebriety. Had I done so, I might indeed be justly accused of being insufficient to support his cause.

If Neocles is an officer, or a man of business, he must know that a commander in chief, or a minister of state, from a multiplicity of applications, cannot trust their memories with the whole of them: minutes and memorandums are necessary: when business is over, these are left with their secretaries, or in their bureaus. Should therefore any insidious man, either at dinner, or after dinner, importune a great person to give him some preferment, which, from the want of these minutes, he might not then recollect to be engaged, and thus obtain a promise of it; yet, if it should appear from the inspection of these memorandums afterwards, that such preferment was pre-engaged, I must again repeat, that in such a case it would be a virtue to break the unguarded promise made at dinner, or in convivial mirth, and to adhere to the first engagement. These things have happened, do happen, and may happen again, to the most temperate men living.

I am

Neocles most humble servant,

W. D.

The fact is, that Lord Granby, and his friend Sir William, appear to have been both jolly companions. Mr. Campbell says of the latter-that his favorite wine was Burgundy-the bewitching smiles of which had an irresistible influence on his heart. Life of Boyd, p. 186. JUNIUS seems to have appealed to a known fact, as well as to an unguarded expression of the pen. Sir William's answer to the Ghost occurs in the same newspaper, Mar. 2, 1769.

SIR,

Clifton, Feb. 24.

"Sir W. D. presents his compliments to the Ghost, and hopes, that when he shall please to revisit us, the cock may not crow too suddenly, and warn him hence, before he has sufficiently considered what Sir W. says with regard to anonymous writers. They are not condemned by him merely for being anonymous, but as they are defamatory and wicked; as they act as incendiaries, as they privily shoot at those who are true of heart, and as they basely stab in the dark. When they are thus guilty, they are worthy of the severest censures. A very fine writer, Mr. Addison, has not stuck to rank them with murderers and assassins. It were to be wished, that all such writers would read the paper upon this subject, No. 451, vol. 6. Sir W. hopes likewise, that the Ghost will not believe that flattery, or gladia

torial

My friend's political engagements I know not, so cannot pretend to explain them, or assert their consistency, I know not whether JUNIUS be considerable enough to belong to any party; if he should be so, can he affirm that he has always

torial vanity, or any desire of the golden cup, or its contents, called him forth.

"He stood forth upon a principle that no honest man should be ashamed of, upon the principle of Horace, who nobly and truly said,

Amicum

Qui non defendit, alio culpante-Hic niger est;

more especially when that friend is most unjustly attacked. He thinks that a real signature is better than a fictitious one, as the knowledge of the man is the surest guide to form a judgment of his motives for writing. He has indeed the vanity to think that no man living writes from more disinterested motives than himself, having studiously quitted what is called the great world, and all its pursuits. But he is not so totally lost to the sense of worldly knowledge, as not to foresee that the many distractions of this poor afflicted country must end in its ruin if some salutary means are not speedily taken to prevent it. This kingdom abounds with great men, capable of advising and of acting in the most efficacious manner for the public good; but unanimity must be the basis. If they can be prevailed upon to forgive, to forget, to unite, sincerely, there is no occasion to despair of the commonwealth Sir W. cannot subscribe to the Ghost's opinion, that the vox populi is the vox Dei. It would be too irreverent, it would vainly attempt to convert the immutable Deity into a most changeable and capricious being; nor would he take even the Ghost's word, or that of the greatest lawyer in the kingdom, should he affirm it. The voice of the people was heard loudly and strongly in favour of our great minister, Mr. Pitt. In this one instance it was just; but was it formerly less strong, less loud, in the favour of Titus Oates, the most abandoned of men? the voice of the people, and the voice of truth, are not always together: the latter must descend from above, the former but too often arises from below. In plain English, it generally comes out of the barrel and the cellar, as some honest bottle-men know full well."

In the following letter, inserted in the Public Advertiser about the same time, Lord Granby appears to have found a fuller, if not an abler advocate, than even his friend Sir William. It has various claims for an introduction in the present place; but chiefly, because JUNIUS himself, in a postscript to the last letter (inserted in the copy that appeared in the Public Adver. tiser, but omitted in his own edition) notices it with a view of answering it; although from a second resolution, not to reply under this signature to anonymous addresses, he never fulfilled his intention. The postscript is as follows:

"I had determined to leave the commander in chief in the quiet enjoyment of his friend and his bottle; but Titus deserves an answer, and shall have a complete one."

то