the ardent force with which he reasoned, of that vigorous combination of imagery and sentiment with reasoning, which was never better exemplified in any other writings than in his. His mind, feeling how much meaning was compressed into each epigrammatic comparison, might acquire a bias beyond what taste can approve, to the frequent use of such modes of thought and expression. This disposition would be favoured by the turn of composition in those nervous energetic writers whose books he chiefly studied. But, it was not so much imitation as the power of nature, which gave this feature to his works. Merely imitative writers are ever feeble. His knowledge of the constitutional law was great and accurate. But the consideration of this knowledge in detail is reserved to be the subject of a separate Essay. BUT, knowledge considered separately from the ACTIVE ENERGIES of genius which are in habitual exertion, will never account sufficiently for the production of such a work as these Letters. What were, then, the habits and personal character of this JUNIUS? Ir is sufficiently clear, that his UNDERSTANDING was naturally, and by the whole train of culture which it had received, a vigorous one. It must have been in habits of incessant activity; never languishing in a feeble, careless diffusion of its conceptions; never satisfying itself with halfdiscernment, nor with obscure knowledge; ever searching for the strongest relations of contrariety or resemblance in the ideas it compared; chastening constantly the train of thought that passed through it, so as not to suffer remote and feeble associations to supplant, in that train, associations close, strong, and direct. The first principles embo died into its very texture, were those rather of jurisprudence and logic than of meta, hysics. Its teasonings were habitually, in the cast of those of the lawyer and the polemical logician. It was, however, evidently more accustomed to detect the sophisms of others, than to adhere inflexibly to attain truth for itself. It cannot have been, at any time, left to slumber in idleness. But, we should suppose it to have been rather one of those intellects which are occasionally, and but occasionally roused to gigantic efforts than of those which never languish, but are never roused to extraordinary exertion. His fancy, that energy of the mind which is employed, not in deducing truth, but in picturing impressive possibilities, appears to have been very powerful. Reading and the observation of life, though not of exterior nature, supplied it with abundant materials. It was often roused to acvity by glowing passion. It was often employed in embodying the abstractions of reason and of science. It burns in all the higher efforts of his Eloquence. Its very presence seems entirely lost whenever the plain closeness of ratiocination, or the simplicity of the style of business, are alone required for the writer's purpose. Never was fancy so vigorous, more perfectly under the controul of propriety and reason. It is that sort of fancy which has its origin from vigour of understanding, and instead of impairing that vigour, serves but to animate and strengthen it. Its efforts in these Letters must have been the result of long previous habit. They cannot have been the first attempts of an untried energy. It is easy to perceive, that the writer of these Letters, was a man of strong glowing passions. That his passions were not wildly frantic or irregularly capricious, is sufficiVOL. I. g* ently ently evident. They never lost sight of reason and utility. But, they must have been high, impetuous, and while they yielded in part, to the constraint of reason, must also have had power to make his reason become, to a certain degree, subservient to their rage. The objects of these passions, seem, however, to have been truth, power, liberty, the triumph of genius, and the humiliation of those who were hated for rival interests or dishonest intentions. The mind of the writer must have been nurtured to this cast and tone of passion. He could not have thus displayed them, if they had not been habitually predominant in his breast from early youth to the prime of manhood. His greatest weaknesses of passion are a wild intemperance of rage which somefimes carries the stroke beyond its own aim, and a literary vanity which sometimes exults beyond measure in the success of his eloquence. THERE is nothing in these Letters, from which we can infer their author to have been in his moral habits, either very bad or uncommonly good. That his moral feelings were cagerly alive, sufficiently appears. But, it is not improbable, that their exercise might be directed much rather upon the conduct of others, than on his own. THESE passions, these moral sentiments, such a fancy, and so vigorous an understanding, with all the stores of knowledge with which they were furnished, bespeak a character in the prime of mature manhood, practically acquainted with active and contemplative life, conversant more probably in juridical, but certainly in political business, full of ambition, and certainly not writing these Letters merely for political amusement, nor concealing that he was the author, upon any other reason, than the inevitable ruin of his hopes and fortunes, if he were as such publickly known. In It is from the tenor of the following Letters, that these facts concerning the oratorical and personal character of their author, are inferred. Let his character as an orator, let the qualities of the eloquence in these Letters,be com pared with whatever in the same way, either ancient or modern eloquence can produce; the result of the comparison will, certainly, not be disadvantageous to JUNIUS. knowledge of the principles and modifications of human character, in skill to sway the passions of the multitude, in extent and accuracy of general science, in ardent oratorical intrepidity, and in the habitual exercise of shrewdness and prudence, DEMOSTHENES was not his superior. Of the technical knowledge of the rhetorician, of the dialectics and ethics of the schools of that age, CICERO possessed, undeniably, a larger portion than can be with truth ascribed to JUNIUS. But, in fearless, manly energy of soul, in independent decision of mind, in invigorating and commanding self-confidence, in the power of bringing knowledge by the pearest way to the uses of business, we must not venture to compare the Roman orator with the English.-It is true, that, in his famous Letter to D'Alembert on the influence of Theatrical Exhibitions upon Public Morality,-in his answer to those who attempted the refutation of his parodoxical opinions concerning the relation of science to the happiness of human life, in his epistle of self-defence, to Beaumont Archbishop of Paris, ROUSSEAU has, no doubt, exercised some of the best powers of the true orator. But, his eloquence continually wanted that foundation in the principles of common sense, and that application to the real affairs of men, without which eloquence is but the amusement of romantic ingenuity. His knowledge was less than that of the Author of these Letters.-In generous self-confidence, and in effusions of animated sentiment, the great Earl of CHATHAM was certainly not unequal to JUNIUS. But, he *g 2 wanted - 1 wanted the extensive and profound knowledge of the author of these Letters: and, he had even less skill to unite the arts of insinuation with those of overbearing confidence and energy. CHATHAM does not appear to have usually reasoned well in his speeches. Much of his eloquence was in his elocution, much of it in his intrepidity and disinterestedness, oratorical and political. The Letters of JUNIUS have been even attributed to the late Mr. BURKE. But, BURKE, though he had of the forms and exterior apparatus of knowledge perhaps much more than JUNIUS, had of its soul, its quintessence, its elementary principles greatly less. In sound and manly sense, and in oratorical discretion, he was greatly inferior. His knowledge and learning continually o'erinform his eloquence, so as, not seldom to weaken its effects. He had not at all that insight into human character which so conspicuously appears in the Letters of JUNIUS. He knew not to sacrifice the ostentation of eloquence to persuasive effect. He used still to affect the rhetorician and the man of letters, when he should have thought only of doing business in the shortest and most decisive way. No; he was not at all equal to the composition of these Letters, His Eloquence had ever in it much of the diffusion of Cicero's, and the romance of Rousseau's; but Rousseau was often more logical than Burke.-There is great resemblance between the oratorical efforts of the late MIRABEAU, and those of JUNIUS. MIRABEAU has indeed more than JuNIUS of what seems an unseasonable use of metaphysics. Yet, there was perhaps good sense in the use of metaphysics to persuade those to whom Mirabeau had to address himself. In similar circumstances JUNIUS might possibly have done as much. DAVID WILLIAMS does not indeed possess that deep and various knowledge which is displayed in these Letters. In discarding from his mind, the prejudices of precedent and old vulgar opinion, he has certainly gone too far towards |