question your understanding. Far otherwise. The Latin word simplex conveys to me an amiable character, and never denotes folly. Though we may not be deficient in point of capacity, it is very possible that neither of us may be cunning enough for Mr. Garrick. But with a sound heart, be assured you are better gifted, even for worldly happiness, than if you had been cursed with the abilities of a Mansfield. After long experience of the world, I affirm before God, I never knew a rogue who was not unhappy.

Your account of my letter to the Bill of Rights astonishes me. I always thought the misrepresentations had been the work of Mr. Horne. I will not trust myself with suspecting. The remedy is on my own hands, but, for Mr. Wilkes's honour, I wish it to come freely and honourably from himself. Publish nothing of mine until I have seen it. In the mean time be assured, that nothing can be more express, than my declaration against long parliaments.-Try Mr. Wilkes once more speak for me in a most friendly but firm tone,that I will not submit to be any longer aspersed.-Between ourselves let me recommend it to you to be much upon your guard with patriots.-I fear your friend Jerry Dyson will lose his Irish pension.† Say received.

for having written with some degree of acrimony on the same side as the Knight of the Bath. The engagement, however, was not fulfilled under his signature of JUNIUS, and hence the propriety of omitting the postcript in question in his own edition. See farther on this subject, note to JUNIUS, Letter 4 post, p. 53. in which Titus's letter is inserted. *He here admits that he was mistaken in the conjecture that Horne had misrepresented the sentiments conveyed in his Letters to the Bill of Rights Society. Yet as he published the same apinion in his own edition, which is re-printed in Vol. II. p. 149. he must afterwards have had fresh grounds for re-accrediting it, while in the present letter he seems more than half to suspect Wilkes himself.

He feared with reason. Jeremiah Dyson, Esq. was one of the lords of the admiralty, and in Feb. 1770, resigned his seat in favour of our late lamented foreign minister Mr. Fox, upon an Irish pension of £1500 per annum for his own life, and that of his three sons. The following is an account of the mode in which he lost it:

"In a committee of supply of the House of Commons of Ireland, Nov. 25, 1771, after a long debate the question was put, and, on a division, it was carried against the pension by a majority of one, the numbers being for it 105, against it 106; on which the House immediately resolved, That the pension granted to Jeremiah Dyson, Esq. and his three sons, is an unnecessary charge upon the establishment of Ireland, and ought not to be provided for,' Ordered, 'That the said pension be struck off the list of pensioners upon the establishment of Ireland.”

In page 25, it should be the instead of your,* this is a woeful mistake;-pray take care for the future-keep a page

for errata.

David Garrick has literally forced me to break my resolution of writing no more.†

No. 45.

Dec. 5, 1771.

THESE papers are all in their exact order. Take great care to keep them so. In a few days more I shall have sent you all the copy. You must then take care of it yourself, except that I must see proof sheets of the Dedication and Preface, and these, if at all, I must see before the end of next week. You shall have the extract to go into the second volume, it will be a short one. Scævola, I see, is determined to make me an enemy to Lord Camden. If it be not wilful malice, I beg you will signify to him, that when I originally mentioned Lord Camden's declaration about the Corn Bill, it was without any view of discussing that doctrine, and only as an instance of a singular opinion maintained by a man of great learning and integrity. Such an instance was necessary to the plan of my letter. I think he has in affect injured the man whom he meant to defend.

When you send the above-mentioned proof sheets, return my own copy with them.

No. 46.

Dec. 10, 1771,

THE enclosed completes all the materials that I can give you. I have done my part. Take care you do yours. There are still too letters wanting, which I expect you will not fail to insert in their places. One is from Philo-Junius to Scævola about Lord Camden, the other to a friend of the people about pressing. They must be in the course of October.

* In the opening of the Letter of JUNIUS, No. 3, it was originally printed in the genuine edition, "Your defence," &c. In the present edition the correction has been duly adopted.

The letter alluded to is JUNIUS, No. 67.

For further particulars of this dispute, see Letters of JUNIUS, No. 60. These two letters are numbered Philo-Junius 60 and 62.

-I have no view but to serve you, and consequently have only to desire that the Dedication and Preface may be correct. Look to it. If you take it upon yourself, I will not forgive your suffering it to be spoiled. I weigh every word; and every alteration, in my eyes at least, is a blemish.

I should not trouble you or myself about that blockhead Scævola, but that his absurd fiction of my being Lord Camden's enemy has done harm.-Every fool can do mischief; therefore signify to him what I said.

Garrick has certainly betrayed himself, probably * * * ** ****, who makes it a rule to betray every body that confides in him. That new disgrace of Mansfield is true*: what do you mean by affirming that the Dowager is better? I tell you that she suckles toads from morning till night. I think I have now done my duty to you, so farewell.

*The allusion is to a cause which was tried at the Summer Assizes for the county of Surrey, in 1771, Mears and Shepley against Ansell, for a trespass, in which his Lordship was supposed to have given a very partial charge in favour of the Defendant, who hereby obtained a verdict. The Plaintiffs, however, on the Michaelmas Term following, moved the Court of Common Pleas for a new trial, on the ground of the misdirection of the judge. The judge was called upon for his report, which he could not make without sending to the Plaintiff's attorney for his affidavit of the transaction.-He made his report at last, to which he subjoined that he was perfectly satisfied with the verdict of the jury. The Court of Common Pleas was clearly of opinion, that Lord Mansfield had acted contrary to every principle of evidence both in law and equity, in admitting Matthews and Hiscox to give parol evidence, contrary to a clear explicit agreement in writing, which they had attested and asserted that, if such a practice was to obtain, it would go a great way towards subverting the Statute of Frauds and Perjuries, and would be a most dangerous inlet to perjury, and a means of rendering men's properties very precarious and insecure. The Court therefore set aside the verdict, and ordered a new trial; and it appeared to the Court to be so gross a misdirection, that it dispensed with the usual terms of payment of costs. Although Lord Mansfield, in his direction to the jury, represented the trespasses as small and insignificant, and the action as litigious, the Court of Common Pleas said the trespasses were obstinate, wilful, and malicious.

Mr. Rowlinson, the Plaintiff's attorney, felt so dissatisfied with the conduct of Lord Mansfield upon the occasion, that in the same term a motion was made at his instigation, to have his name struck off the Rolls of the Court of King's Bench, which was, after some expressions of astonishment, acquiesced in, when he was immediately admitted into the Common Pleas.

† He refers to the following paragraph in the Public Advertiser for December 6, 1771:

"We have the pleasure to assure the public, from the most undoubted authority, that the repeated accounts of Her Royal Highness the

No. 47.

Dec. 17, 1770.

MAKE your mind easy about me, I believe you are an honest man, and I never am angry. *-Say to-morrow "We are desired to inform Scævola, that his private note was received with the most profound indifference and contempt."† I see his design. The Duke of Grafton has been long labouring to detach Camden. This Scævola is the wretchedest of all fools, and dirty knaves.

Upon no account, nor for any reason whatsoever are you to write to me, until I give you notice.

When the book is finished, let me have a sett bound in vellum, gilt, and lettered JUNIUS I. II. as handsomely as you can-the edges gilt-let the sheets be well dried before binding.-I must also have two setts in blue paper covers. This is all the fee I shall ever desire of you. I think you ought not to publish before the second week in January.

The London Packet is not worth our notice. I suspect Garrick, and I would have you hint so to him.

Princess Dowager of Wales being very ill, and her life in great danger, are entirely false, such reports being only calculated to promote the shameful spirit of gambling, by insurance on lives." The Princess Dowager was at this time afflicted with a cancer, and died on the 8th of January in the following year.

* He had received a note from Mr. Woodfall, vindicating himself from any improper motive in his communication to Mr. Garrick, which has been already referred to.

†The information to Scævola was duly communicated in the Public Advertiser: and the flippancy of this writer's style, and the coquetry of his political attachments, fully merited the contempt here expressed for him. His first two or three letters were written as an apology for certain inconsiderate expressions which had fallen from Lord Camden, and were not deficient in merit. They were noticed by our author under the auxiliary signature of Philo-Junius, in Letters of JUNIUS, No. 60, Oct. 15, 1771. Scævola, whoever he was, became conceited by the attention thus bestowed upon him; and, more especially, as some other correspondent of the Public Advertiser had erroneously ascribed his letters to Lord Camden himself. To prove, however, that he was not Lord Camden, he now, in the midst of his general admiration of his Lordship's political character, attacks him upon a variety of, what he ventures to denominate, capital errors, and that with, at least, as much violence as any of his Lordship's avowed adversaries of the day. In few words he became a perpetual, wearisome and contemptible scribbler; and well deserved the chastisement here given him by JUNIUS.

No. 48.

January 6, 1772.

I HAVE a thing to mention to you in great confidence. I expect your assistance and rely upon your secrecy.

There is a long paper ready for publication, but which must not appear until the morning of the meeting of parliament, nor be announced in any shape whatsoever.* Much depends upon its appearing unexpectedly. If you receive it on the 8th or 9th instant, can you in a day or two have it composed, and two proof sheets struck off and sent me; and can you keep the press standing ready for the Public Advertiser of the 21st, and can all this be done with such secrecy that none of your people shall know what is going forward, except the composer, and can you rely on his fidelity? Consider of it, and, if it be possible, say YES, in your

paper to-morrow.

I think it will take four full columns at the least, but I undertake that it shall sell. It is essential that I should have a proof sheet, and correct it myself.

Let me know if the books are ready that I may tell you what to do with them.

No. 49.

Saturday, January 11, 1772.

YOUR failing to send me the proofs, as you engaged to do, disappoints and distresses me extremely. † It is not merely to correct the press (though even that is of consequence,) but for another most material purpose. This will be entirely defeated if you do not let me have the two proofs on Monday morning.

The paper itself, is, in my opinion, of the highest stile of JUNIUS, and cannot fail to sell.-My reason for not announcing it was that the party might have no time to concert his measures with the Ministry. But, upon reflection, I think it may answer better (in order to excite attention) to adver

Letter to Lord Mansfield. JUNIUS, No. 68.

t Of JUNIUS, No. 68, referred to in the preceding letter.

He seems to allude to a promise, or expectation, of legal assistance from some friendly quarter.