We come now to the Indian evidence. There is no doubt, that, by some individuals, Boyd was 'suspected of being the author of Junius. But mere suspicions and pri vate opinions are of little weight, in a question that must ultimately be decided by teal evidence. The information of Captain Neville is much too vague ; we are not told what the some:hing was which Boyd said when mellow with wine, which produced the particular impression on that gentle man when in the same situation. The evidence of Mon sieur BormecariCre, indeed, is more to the purpose ; but we own we arc rather suspicious of such declarations as the one alluded to, when we reflect upon the whole conduct of Boyd in regard to his identity with Junius ; and especially when we consider, that we have the very same sort of evi dence in the claim advanced for General Lee, wnich has long since been abandoned. If our memory serves us, a similar declaration is also said to have been made by the late Mr. Suett, the player, in favour of his own claim, as the author of Junius.
In addition to the foregoing remarks on the weakness of the evidence in favour of Mr. Boyd's claim, we shall state a few considerations, which, to out minds, render it almost incredible that Boyd should have been the author or Junius. Ac the period when Junius commenced his correspondence with the Public ..4dvertiser, Boyd had not attained his 21st year. Now, although we do not mean to deny that Boyd was a man of considerable ability, we have seen no proofs of such precocious talents and intuitive knowledge, as could have enabled him at that age to contend with the greatest wits, and best informed and mast experienced men of the day. Mr. Chalmers is aware of the strength of this ob jection; but we do not think he has been successful in his attempt to obviate it. He has produced no previous com positions of B•ryd, which could lead us to anticipate the fu ture Junius ; and the reference to Chatterton proves no thing. It is easy for a youth of ability to seize upon a com mon topic, to gather the floating chit-chat of the, uid-nuncs of the day, and to vamp up a composition, abounding in spirited declamation, and pointed invective. But Junius was evidently a writer of a different description. He pos sessed a knowledge of the world derived from experience; an intimate acquaintance with the leading characters in the state, wnich could only have been obtained from an inter course with them ; and he must have been in possession of some sources of information, which were not accessible to ordinary scribblers.
Mr. Chalmers, however, has attempted to get rid of this objection in a different way. Being unable to carry Boyd up to the standard of Junius, he has endeavoured to carry Junius down to the level of Boyd. We have not room for any strictures on this branch of his argument. But the productions of both writers are before the public, who arc perfectly well qualified to decide upon their respective merits ; and we shall have occasion to say a few words upon this subject in the sequel.
There is one very obvious consideration resulting from the situation of Boyd, which appears to us to possess great weight in this question. It is quite evident, as we have already observed, that Junius must have been in easy, if not in affluent circumstances. In one place, he expressly
affirms, that his " rank and fortalle pace him above a corn 1110I1 bribe." When Woodfall was involved in a pro secution at the instance of the crown, Junius generously came forward with au offer to indemnify him for any pecunia ry loss he might sustain on that account. And with the same spirit, when an edition of the Letters was published under his own correction, he positively declined \Voodfall's offer of half the profits, accompanying his refusal with the following remarkable declaration : " As for myself, be as sured that I am far above all pecuniary views, and no other person, I think, has any claim to share with you. Make the most of it, therefore, and let your views in life be directed to a solid, however moderate independence; with out it, no man can be happy, nor even honest." Now, it is notorious, that Boyd was a needy adventurer, constantly involved in pecuniary distress, in consequence of his dissi pated habits ; and therefore not very likely to refuse the half of the profits resulting from the sale of his own edi tion of his Letters, repeatedly pressed upon him, and to which he was fairly entitled ; much less was he in a situa tion to offer pecuniary assistance to his bookseller, having been actually compelled, at that very time, to fly to Ireland, through a fear of being arrested for debt, by which he had been long oppressed. It would require very strong evi dence to convince us, that ally Dian, in his sound senses, in Boyd's situation, have refused a sum of money, the fruit of his own talents and industry, to which he was fairly entitled, and which he might have accepted with honour.
The facts with regard to Boyd, seem to be these. Ile was from the first an enthusiastic admirer of the style and principles of Junius ; a circumstance natural enough, con sideri:ig his youth. We see, from the evidence of Mrs. Boyd, already referred to, that he was constantly talking about Junius in private ;• and his public conversation was continually directed to the same topic. In his own political papers, he is perpetually sounding the praises of Junius, and always striving to imitate his manner. Lord Macart ney, who was in company with Boyd during a four months passage to India, informs us, that " Mr. Boyd had many splendid passages of Junius by heart, as also of Mr. Burke's parliamentary speeches; and was also a great admirer of Sterne,'' ate. In short, Junius was Boyd's great standard of political principle, and his model of composition. In his own political lucubrations, there is, as we have already mentioned, a constant and affected, though not always very happy imitation of the sty le and manlier of Junius. In many instances, he copies his sentences verbatim, and some times blunders sadly through his metaphors. But it is im possible, we think, for a reader of any discrimination, to peruse tile papers of both authors, without perceiving the manifest inferiority of Boyd. We do not mean to disparage the talents of this gentleman, or to assert that he could net write well ; but we ale satislied, that he never attained the peculiar excellencies of Junius.