JUNIUS, LETTERS OF, a famous series of political letters signed "Junius," which appeared in a London newspaper, The Public Advertiser, during the last year of the administration of the duke of Grafton and the first two years of that of lord North. They were 44 in number; besides which are to be reckoned as proceeding from the same pen 15 signed Philo-Junius, 62 business-letters (mostly very shout) addressed to his pub lisher, Woodfall, and 10 to Wilkes (privately); anti in addition, 113 letters under various signatures. The first of the letters of Junius, published Jan. 21, 1769, treats of the "State of the Nation," and may be said to strike the key-note of all the subsequent correspondence. In it the author singles out several leading members of the ministry, and boldly denounces their inefficiency; and the last of the letters, dated Jan. 21, 1772, closes somewhat suddenly the long indictment against ministers in the same spirit in which it had begun. No sooner did the first Junius appear than the court-party took the alarm. An invisible and dreaded censor was evidently moving among them—one who, though as yet the days of parliamentary reports were still far Off, seemed cognizant of all the proceedings of both houses, who not only knew intimately the public career of ministers, but was fully informed regarding the follies and the crimes of their private character. Sir W. Draper, who entered into controversy with this unknown adversary, WAS in the end overmastered, and reduced to mere humble complaint and confession. The duke of Bedford, lord Mansfield, and chief of all, the duke of Grafton, writhed beneath his lash—the last of these being more indebted for immortality to the splendid sarcasm of Junius than to any measure which it was his fortune to introduce. It can not, however, be denied that the hatreds of Junius, though springing for the most part from his detestation of injustice, and his contempt for incapacity, were indreased and imbittered by party spirit and personal dislike. The style of these letters. though
perhaps occasionally somewhat stiff and formal, is of time very highest class. Occasion ally rising to the loftiest eloquence, it is always remarkable for closeness of argument, felicity, of illustration and allusion, and brilliant epigram. Whoever Junius was, his life depended upon his preserving his nom de plume. He had made too many enemies to be safe in acknowledging himself. From the day of the publication of his first letter, however, conjecture has been busy framing theories of the authorship. Burke, lord Shelburn, col. Barre, lord George Sackville, Home Tooke, Thomas lord Lyttle ton, among others, were supposed in turn to be Junius; but the general opinion now is that sir Philip Francis (q.v.) was the author of these letters. The Franciscan theory is supported by a weight of evidence, which, although 'entirely circumstantial, is sufficient, Macaulay thinks, " to support a verdict in a civil, nay, in a criminal proceeding." The handwriting of Junius is the handwriting of Francis slightly disguised. Junius, as is evident from his letters, kneW the forms of the secretary of state's office, was intimately acquainted with the business of the war office, attended the house of commons in 1770, and took notes of speeches, especially of those of the earl of Chatham; denounced the promotion of Mr. Chamier in the war office as unjust to Mr. Francis, and was bound by some strong tie to the first lord Holland. All these circumstances in the position of Junius correspond exactly with the history of Francis. Merivale's Memoir of Sir Philip Francis (1867) contains much new evidence; and experts having compared what was known to be the handwriting of Francis disguised with that of Junius, have pronounced them identical. See Chabot and Twisleton's Handwriting of j9.111i72$ Professionally gated (1871); also Junius, by Woodfall (1850); and Macaulay's Essays (Warren Hastings).