voyage to India upon official business relating to the Nabob of Arcot. It was Maclean who, according to his biographer, furnished Boyd with the greater part of the secret transactions of our own government, and the intelligence he made use of in relation to the oriental concerns of the Nabob Mahomed Ali Khaân; who largely and liberally assisted him with pecuniary aid while at home, and "faithfully promised him he would, upon his return from India, assist in clearing him from all his pecuniary difficulties." The proofs are unquestionable, that the above letter was written by JUNIUS; and that he wrote it also in contempt and ridicule of Laughlin Maclean, who instead of being, as Mr. Campbell affirms, an opponent of the ministry at this time, was an avowed defendant of them.

-Will Mr. Boyd's biographers and advocates, after this anecdote, so far vilify his memory as to contend that it was written by himself?

Of all the reputed authors of these celebrated addresses, Dunning, lord Ashburton, offers the largest aggregate of claim in his favour; and, but for a few facts which seem decisive against him, might fairly be admitted to have been the real JUNIUS. His age and rank in life, his talents and learning (though perhaps not classical learning,) his brilliant wit, and sarcastic habit, his common residence, during the period

in question, his political principles, attachments and antipathies conspire in marking him as the man: but unfortunately for such a conclusion, Dunning was solicitor-general at the time these letters first appeared, and for more than a twelvemonth afterwards: and JUNIUS himself has openly and solemnly affirmed, "I am no lawyer by profession; nor do I pretend to be more deeply read than every English gentleman should be in the laws of his country'." Dunning was a man of high unblemished honour, as well as of high independent principles; it cannot therefore be supposed that he would have vilified the King, while one of the King's confidential servants and counsellors: nor would he, as a barrister, have written to Woodfall in the course of a confidential correspondence, "I am advised that no jury will find a bill2.

Another person who has had a claim advanced in his favour upon the same subject, is the late celebrated Henry Flood, M. P. of Ireland. Now, without wandering at large for proofs that Mr. Flood could not have been the writer of the Letters of JUNIUS, it is only suffi cient to call the reader's attention to the two following facts, which are decisive of the subject in question:

First, Mr. Flood was in Ireland throughout

Preface, post, p. 350. 2 Private Letter, No. 18.

a great part of the summer of 1768, and at a time when JUNIUS, whoever he may have been, was perpetually corresponding with the printer of the Public Advertiser, and with a rapidity which could not have been maintained, not only in Ireland, but even at a hundred, and occasionally at less than fifty miles distance from the British metropolis. This fact may be collected, among other authorities, from the following passage in Mr. Campbell's Life of Boyd, and is just as adverse to the pretensions of the one as of the other.

"In the summer of 1768 Boyd went to Ireland for a few months, on some private business. During his stay in Dublin he was constantly in the company of Mr. Flood."

Next, by turning to the Private Letter of JUNIUS, No. 44, of the date of Nov. 27, 1771, the reader will find the following paragraph: "I fear your friend Jerry Dyson will lose his Irish pension. Say "received." The mark "received" occurs accordingly in the Public Advertiser of the day ensuing. Now by turning to the Irish debates of this period, we shall find that the question concerning this pension was actually determined by the Irish parliament just two days before the date of the above mentioned Private Letter, and that Mr. Flood was one of the principal opponents of the grant, a circum

stance which precludes the possibility of believ ing him to have written the letter in question. We shall extract the article from whence this information is derived, from the Public Advertiser of Dec. 18, 1771.

"Authentic copy of the conclusion of the speech which Mr. Flood made in the Irish House of Commons, on Monday the 25th of November last, when the debate on the pension of Jeremiah Dyson, Esq. came on, before the committee of supplies:

66

But of all the burthens which it has pleased government to lay upon our devoted shoulders, that which is the subject of the present debate is the most grievous and intolerable. -Who does not know Jeremiah Dyson, Esq.?We know little of him indeed, otherwise than by his name in our pension list; but there are others who know him by his actions. This is he who is endued with those happy talents, that he has served every administration, and served every one with equal success-a civil, pliable, good-natured gentleman, who will do what you will, and say what you please for pay

ment.

"Here Mr. Flood was interrupted, and called to order by Mr. M, who urged that more respect ought to be paid to Mr. Dyson as one of his Majesty's officers, and, as such, one

whom his Majesty was graciously pleased to repose confidence in. However Mr. Flood went on.

"As to the royal confidence reposed in Mr. Dyson, his gracious Majesty (whom God long preserve) has been graciously lavish of it, not only to Mr. Dyson, but to the friends of Mr. Dyson; and I think the choice was good: The royal secrets will, I dare say, be very secure in their breasts, not only for the love they bear to his gracious Majesty, but for the love they bear to themselves. In the present case, however, we do not want to be informed of that part of Mr. Dyson's character—we know enough of him -every body knows enough of him-ask the British treasury-the British council-ask any Englishman who he is, what he is-they can all tell you, for the gentleman is well known.But what have we to do with him? He never served Ireland, nor the friends of Ireland. And if this distressed kingdom was never benefited by his counsel, interest, or service, I see no good cause why this kingdom should reward him. Let the honourable members of this house consider this, and give their voices accordingly, -For God's sake let every man consult his conscience: If Jeremiah Dyson, Esq. shall be found to deserve this pension, let it be continued; if not, let it be lopped off our revenue as burthensome and unnecessary."