and man, of which the equitable condition, he said, was repentance and fincere, although imperfect obedience, which God, he added, was too juft, and too good, not to accept. As he read the fermon, and repeated every paffage of the fmalleft importance, it was impoffible for us to mistake the meaning of any of them.""When the established church was difmiffed in the evening, we went to the top of a walled ftair in the market-place, which the congregation had to pafs, and immediately began, as ufual, by finging. There might, probably, be near 1000 people who ftopped. Preached to them from Mark xvi. 15, 16. Explained to them the gofpel, and the circumftances which rendered it glad tidings to every creature; fhewed that it was a difpenfation wholly of grace, and that it was completely contradictory, both to feripture and to fact, to reprefent man as capable of doing any thing, in order to render himself acceptable to God. The pride of man, indeed, rejected this doctrine. He withed to recommend himself to God by his repentance, which he confidered, and was taught to confider, as we had heard from their minifter, as the equitable condition upon which God would be reconciled to him. Endeavoured to fhew the inconfiftency of this doctrine with the fcripture-account of man's being naturally dead in trefpaffes and fins, and the vanity of all thofe hopes which were not founded upon the complete atonement of the Lord Jefus Chrift. Told the people plainly, that what they had heard was not the gospel, and urged them to fearch the fcriptures for themselves, mentioning, at the fame time, that our only motive in making these observations, was love to their immortal fouls, whofe final ftate, we were convinced, depended upon their belief or rejection of the gofpel. As to their minifter, we could have no ill will at him, but, on the contrary, fincerely prayed to God, that he might give him repentance to the acknowledgement of the truth." Pp. 38-10.

They give a fimilar account of the established minifter, and of their own conduct in almost every parish which they vifited; and in their introduction, (P. 24,) "they hesitate not to say, that it would give them pleafure to learn, that the hearers of every minifter, whofe fermons they condemned as unfcriptural, had left him. They had much better ftay at home than go to church and hear error.”

cr

That men, who collected the mob, by the beat of drum, to hear fuch inflammatory doctrines as thefe; and who published, on their return, an account of their proceedings, in which they thus plainly attack the government, difcipline, and doctrine, of the eftablished church, together with the mode in which the clergy are fupported; that fuch men both preached and publifhed, for the avowed pur. pofe of fapping the foundation of the church," it is impoffible for us to doubt, And till Meffrs. Ja. Haldane, Aikman, and Rate, shall be cenfured for their conduct by the fociety for propagating the gospel at home, we cannot contradict the first of the three affertions in which Mr. Robert Haldane confiders his character as implicated.

When we afferted, that he is at the head of this fociety, we did not mean, and we could not be fuppofed to mean, that he either poffeffes or claims any epifcopal authority over his brethren; for every one knows that fuch authority is incompatible with the conftitution of congregational churches, in which no diftinction is allowed between clergy and laity. But we confidered him, and we still confider him, as a leading man in the fociety, as, perhaps, primus in paribus. To this rank he is well entitled for his zeal in the caufe; for he has purchafed what was the Circus, in Glasgow, and converted it into a theological fchool, for the education of miffionarics, to propagate the gospel at home and abroad ; and of thefe miffionaries, when students, we are affured that he fupports annually twenty or thirty at his own

expence. If to fuch a man the members of the fociety do not look up as to their head, (in the fenfe in which that word was used by us,) they are certainly ftrangers to the fentiment of gratitude.

The motive which prompted Mr. Haldane to fell his eftate can be certainly known only by God and himfelf; and, therefore, with refpect to this part of the obnoxious paragraph, we can have no con troverfy with him. To fatisfy our reiders, however, that our third affertion was not made at random, it may be proper 10 inform them, that the refpectable correfpondent, from whom we received Mr. Ranken's effay, affured us, that the motive which he affigned for the fale of Mr. H.'s eftate, was, in the metropolis of Scotland, univer. fally believed to be the true motive; and that this belief was founded on language ufed by Mr. H. himfelf fome years ago, when he talked of going to India, with three companions, to propagate the gofpel among the worshippers of Brahma. At any rate, if the education of preachers to propagate the gofpel at home be meritorious, Mr. H. cannot accufe either our correfpondent or us of having affigned for his conduct an unworthy motive, however far that motive may be from truth.

It is not, indeed, fafe to talk with too much confidence, either of men's motives or their intentions, except when their actions are fuch as to leave no room for doubt refpecting the fource from which they fpring. That many of the independents, who, in the laft century, propagated the gofpel at home by the favord, meant well, it would be rafh to deny; and that the defigns of Meunier, and fome other Members of the Conftituent Affembly of France, were good, feems incontrovertible. Yet in both thefe cafes, from good intentions, flowed the most dreadful confequences-even the murder of two virtuous Monarchs, and the overthrew of all authority, civil and ecclefiaftical, in two great kingdoms. In like manner, there may be, and we doubt not but there are, in the fociety for propagating the gospel at home, various members of upright views; but we must take the liberty to add, that these men fee not the confequences of their Conduct; for that conduct is fraught with danger to true religion, civil fociety, and domeftic peace. With this conviction deeply im preffed on our minds, we confider it as our duty, whatever Mr. H. may think, to beg the good people of Scotland, when thefe itinerants vifit them, and abufe their parochial clergy, to remember the words of Jefus to the multitude, and to his difciples. The Scribes and Pharifees, (the eft blifhed teachers among the Jews,) fit in Mofes feat. All, therefore, whatsoever they bid you obferve, that obferve and do." And again, "Beware of falfe prophets, who come to you in fheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye fhall know them by their fruits." We are not ourfelves Prefbyterians, and we think our religious eftablishment greatly preferable. to that of Scotland; but the worft of the two is, perhaps, beter than any other in Europe; and, inoft unquestionably, any eitabinh ment of Christianity, whatever, if Diffenters be tolerated, is infi pitely preferable to none.

MISCELLANIES.

346

JUNIUS's LETTERS.

DEAR SIR,

THE

TO THE EDITOR.

HE converfations I had with Mr. Wilkes, on the fubject of Junius's Letters, took place from 1776 to about 1784, during which time I lived with him in great intimacy; he even entrusted me with the manufcript Memoirs of his life. In his public ar political parties I never mixed, but I lived much with him in private; there he appeared to the greateft advantage; he was highly refpected and loved by those who lived with him on that footing, and I think, with great pleafure, that I was one of them,

Far from giving the least hint that he was the author of Junius's Letters, he always explicitly difclaimed it, and treated it as a ridicuJous fuppofition. No one acquainted with his ftyle can fufpect, for a moment, that he was the author of them; the merit of his style was fimplicity; he had both gaiety and ftrength, but to the rancorous farcafms, the lofty contempt, with which Junius's Letters abound, no one was a greater stranger than Mr. Wilkes. To this may be added the very flighting manner in which Junius expreffes himfelf of Mr. Wilkes. I am willing to admit, that if Mr. Wilkes had written Junius's Letters, he would have treated Mr. Wilkes uncivilly, for the fake of difguifing himself. But feer, and particu. larly that kind of fneer, which Mr. Wilkes occafionally receives from Junius, you may be affured, Mr. Wilkes would never have used in speaking of himfelf. With refpect, therefore, to his having faid to your friend that, "at his afcenfion, the author of Junius would be known," I am confident he never ufed those words, or any words like them. You mention to me your having heard that Junius's Letters were printed off before they were delivered to the printer. This was not the fact; if it had been true, it would have put Mr. Wilkes's authorship wholly out of the queftion, as he had no convenience whatever for printing. I once precured a copy to be made for him of fome very private papers, and he then greatly lamented to me his want of a private prefs.

Our converfations on Junius's Letters began from a whimsical circumstance. Bufinefs having carried me to Ireland in 1776, F wrote to Mr. Wilkes from Holyhead; on my retorn, he informed me that my letter had been ftopt at the poft-office, from the fimi. larity of the hand writing to that of Junius. This made me with to fee the original of Junius's Letters, and he produced them to me. We more than orce examined them together with great attention.

All of them, except the letter to the King, are, if I remember rightly, in the fame hand writing. It is like that which well educated ladies wrote about the beginning of the century; a large open hand; regular, approaching to the Italian, Mr. Wilkes had a card of invitation to dinner from old Lady Temple, written in her own hand; on comparing it with Junius's Letters, we thought there was fome refemblance between them. The letter to the King was in a hand writing perfectly different; a very regular, ftaid hand; no difference between the fair ftroke and the body of the letters; when I fee you I will fhew you fome writing very fimilar to it. As to my own hand writing, it has not now the flightest resemblance to it, nor do I think it ever had any,

The letters, generally, if not always, were fent in an envelope, (which was then by no means fo general as it now is,) and in the folding up, and the direction of the letter, we thought we could fee marks of the writers habit of folding and directing official letters. The lines were very even; very few blots, erafures, or marks of hurry. Mr. Wilkes received many letters from Junius, which never were published; one, in particular, on the fubject of improving the reprefentation of the people. Their opinions were different. I remember Junius's Letter began by his faying, "he was treated as a Pagan idol, with much incenfe, but with no attention to his oracles.”

We thought his high-wrought panegyric of Lord Chatham was ironical.

.1.

Mr. Wilkes fcouted the notion of Mr. Burke's being the author of the letters. His fufpicions fell on Dr. B*****, Bishop of H*******, but I don't recollect more than two reafons affigned by him for fufpecting his Lordship; one, that he had published a fermon, before Junius's Letters appeared, the ftyle of which was very like that of the letters; another after the letters appeared, in a ftyle wholly unlike. Thefe fermons, I think, I have feen, and that they did not appear to me to warrant Mr. Wilkes's obfervations. The other reason was, that the references to the Letters in the Bible were not to the received tranflation, but to the Vulgate, which, he said, the Bishop always ufed, and which, (by the way,) Mr. Wilkes greatly admired. He defcribed the Bishop to be a faturnine, obferving, profound, and filent man, fuch a one as, a priori, we should fuppofe Junius. But it was a mere fufpicion, and we frequently amufed ourselves with endeavouring to find a more likely perfon.

Arguing fynthentically, we determined that Junius mutt be a refi dent in London, or its environs, from the immediate answers which he generally gave his adverfaries; that he was not an author by profeffion, from the vifible improvement which, from time to time, was difcernible in his ftyle; that he was a man of high rank, from the tone of equality which he feemed to ufe quite naturally in his addreffes to perfons of rank and in his expreflions refpecting them; that he was not a profound lawyer, from the grofs inaccuracy of fome or his legal expreflions; that he had a perfonal animofity against the

King, the Duke of Bedford, and Lord Mansfield, from the bitterness of his expreffions refpecting them; that he had lived with military. men, from the propriety of his language on military fubjects; and that he was a great reader of novels, from his frequent allufions to them. The general idea, that the Letters were the compofition of more than one perfon, we always rejected. The ftory, that Singlefpeech Hamilton informed one of his friends that the Junius of the morning contained fuch and fuch paffages, and that, till the fubfequent day, no fuch Junius made his appearance, we thought fufficiently authenticated; and we alfo thought it fatisfactorily accounted for, by the fuppofition that Woodfall had fhewn the letter to Mr. Hamil. ton on the preceding day, and mentioned his intention of inferting it, but had been unexpectedly prevented; we also believed in the story that, while Garrick was writing a note to Mr. Ramus, or fome other of the pages, Woodfall, or fome one from him, came in and informed him, that Junius intended writing no more; that Garrick mentioned this circumstance in the note; and that, almost instantly after the note was fent, a thundering letter came from Junius to Garrick, abufing him for making free with his name. It was alfo mentioned to us from very good authority, that Lord North had declared that government had traced the porterage of the letter to an obfcure perfon in Staples Inn, but could never trace them farther.

This is all I can collect of the converfations which paffed between Mr. Wilkes and myself on the fubject in question; I have endeavoured to be accurate in my recollection of them but you will remember it verges towards twenty years fince they took place. apprehend the original Letters are in the cuftody of Mifs Wilkes.

I

Edmund Burke fpoke to me about Junius in terms of disgust; Mr. Gibbon appeared to me not to admire his ftyle, as much as it was admired by the public in general; and he told me that Mr. Fox thought flightingly of it.

Some letters, under the fignature of Julian, were attributed to Janius; but, to my certain knowledge, they were written by one Pillon, the author of fome dramatic picces of no great merit. Some refpectable perfons fay that Mr. Forth, who attended Lord Stormont's embally, knows fomething of the author.

The laft anecdote I have heard on the subject is, that an old man, feemingly poverty-ftricken, came in the Bath coach to the Devizes, or one of the next ftages, and fell fick at the inn; that a very decent gentleman came to him from London; that the old man died; that he was buried in the church-yard; that over his tomb his friend caufed a stone to be raised with Junius's motto, “Stat nominis umbra;” and that Mr. Fox, travelling that road, ftopt at the inn, and defired to be directed to the ftone. This story is confidentially circulated, but I certainly do not vouch for the truth of it.

As for Macaulay Boyd's being the author of Junius's Letters, it is a perfect joke; no two characters can be more perfectly unlike than Boyd's and Junius's. Boyd was a good natured lively man, famous for repeating Lord Chatham's and Burke's fpeeches, and always

bustling