could not have been the author of the Life of Wolsey, and that we owe the work to his brother, George Cavendish of Glemsford. It results also as a corollary, that the foundation of the present grandeur of the house of

then, in favour of Sir Philip Francis, adopted from Mr. Taylor's book by the Reviewer, instead of strengthening the claims of Sir Philip, is converted by the Author into a powerful argument against the claims. For Sir Philip has NOWHERE attacked Lord Chatham, but has EVERYWHERE spoken of him in the highest terms; in ONLY ONE place has he censured him, and the censure is of such a nature in itself, and is so accompanied with praise, that the latter very greatly predominates. And this, being the plain state of the case, affects the other argument of the Reviewer about Lord Holland, also derived from Mr. Taylor's book; for, if Sir Philip Francis, as Junius, was the man to attack his patron and friend, Lord Chatham, he, as Junius, might have been the man to attack his earlier patron and friend, Lord Holland; and if virtuous principles would have restrained him, as Junius, in the one case, they would have restrained him, as Junius, in the other. In these circumstances, then, it is impossible for the Reviewer, who p. 110. says of Sir Philip," that he had long, in his proper person, POSSESSED

THE ADMIRATION OF ALL, WHO HAVE A DUE REGARD FOR UN

BLEMISHED PUBLIC VIRTUE, great talents and accomplishments," henceforth to contend that Sir Philip and Junius could have been one and the same person.

The Reviewer p. 113. follows Mr. Taylor p. 378. (2d. ed.) in saying that "both Junius and Sir Philip Francis place the asterisk, or star of reference, to a foot-note, at the beginning, and not at the end, of the passage, to which it belongs-contrary to what may be termed the invariable usage of other writers." The insecurity of such an argument is this, that a single instance of a similar practice observed by any other writer destroys its whole force. Now in Debrett's Collection of Scarce and Interesting Tracts, written by Persons of Eminence, published in 4 vols. 8vo. 1788. the reader may find many examples: 1, 119. 142. 176. 194. 199. 235. 321. 322. 323. 331. 335. 337.

In conclusion, it should be remembered by the reader, that this celebrated Review does not contain any new facts, or the development of any new principles of reasoning, for the elucidation of this subject, and that it does not display

Cavendish was not laid, as is commonly understood, in an attendance upon Cardinal Wolsey, and in certain favourable circumstances connected with that service. The inquiry, then, even in all its bearings, like many other literary enquiries, cannot be considered as of very high importance. The writer will not, however, affect to insinuate that he considers it as of no consequence. In works so universally consulted as the Biographia Britannica and the Peerages, it is desirable that no errors of any magnitude should remain undetected and unexposed. Error begets error, and truth begets truth: nor can any one say how much larger in both cases may be the offspring than the sire. I do not indeed scruple to acknowledge that, though not without a relish for inquiries, which embrace objects of far greater magnitude, and a disposition justly to appreciate their value, I should be thankful to the man, who should remove my uncertainty, as to whose countenance was concealed by the Masque de Fer, or would tell me whether Richard was the hunch-backed tyrant, and Harry the nimble-footed mad-cap' exhibited by our great dramatist; whether Charles wrote the Εἰκὼν Βασιλική, and Lady Packington The Whole Duty of Man? Not that I would place this humble disquisition on a level with the inquiries, which have been instituted, and so learnedly conducted into these several questions. In one material

any particular acquaintance with the subject, but that its sole merit consists in a clear and succinct, an able and lawyer-like statement of the evidence, which is contained in Mr. Taylor's book, and that this book, with Woodfall's Junius, is apparently the only book on the question, which the Reviewer had studied.

point, however, even this disquisition may challenge an equality with them. There is a much nearer approach made to certainty than in the discussions of any of the above-mentioned so much greater questions.

"There are amongst readers of books some persons, whose minds being every moment occupied in the contemplation of the objects of the highest importance, look down with contempt upon the naturalist at his leucophræ, the critic at his μèv and Sè work, the astronomer at his nebulæ, and the toiling antiquary at every thing. One word to these gentlemen before we part. To them may be recommended the words of a writer of our own day, a man of the most enlarged and highly-cultivated mind: -He, who determines with certainty a single species ' of the minutest moss, or meanest insect, adds so far 'to the general stock of human knowledge, which is more than can be said of many a celebrated name. No one can tell of what importance that simple fact may be < to future ages; and when we consider how many millions of our fellow-creatures pass through life without furnishing a single atom to augment that stock, we shall ' learn to think with more respect of those who do.” (The Rev. Joseph Hunter's Tract entitled) Who wrote Cavendish's Life of Wolsey?' Lond. 1814. 4to. p. 54.

The reader may, if he pleases, compare what I have said in p. 65.

The Edinburgh-Reviewer p. 106. informs us : — "There is reason also to believe that Junius was known to Garrick. He expresses himself much alarmed by the inquiries of the latter, and was afraid lest Woodfall

might have told him the place, where the Letters were sent, which he desires him to change. He writes a Note, to be sent to Garrick, with the view of intimi dating him, and thus preventing his meddling, and endeavouring to trace the secret; and he desires Woodfall to copy it in his own hand. Sir Francis has told us, in the Preface to the play of Eugenia, that he enjoyed the 'friendship and esteem' of Garrick." It is, I believe, Dr. Francis, who has so told to us, and Mr. Taylor p. 126., whom the Reviewer follows, intimates as much. But for other reasons I must quote this part of Mr. T.'s book:

"The Note, which Junius desired Woodfall to get transcribed, before he sent it to Garrick, was written to check the impertinent inquiries of the latter, whose assiduity to trace our author gave him excessive alarm. By implication, this precautionary measure, as in the case of Woodfall, leads us to conclude that Garrick, or some one, to whom the original might be shewn, was acquainted with the natural hand-writing of Junius, and might be able to detect it in spite of the disguise. This supposition, that the writer was a person known to Garrick, is further countenanced by the particular information Junius seems to have had of every proceeding on the part of his impertinent' spy. The opportunity, which it seems he possessed of knowing to what secret practices Garrick had recourse, affords evidence of peculiar means of inspection, and renders it probable that equal means of obtaining intelligence, mutatis mutandis, were in the power of the latter. But there is little doubt that Junius was personally known to Garrick, and that for this reason he was so exceedingly disturbed. He knew that, if he was once

seen by Garrick, detection was unavoidable. Let us observe the facts: :- - He knew that Garrick had learnt from Woodfall that Junius would write no more, but he did not know in what manner this information was obtained. He imagined that Garrick had drawn it from Woodfall by his own ingenuity; and he accordingly warns the latter in the following words: (Secret.) Beware of ‹ David Garrick; he was sent to pump you, and went Idirectly to Richmond to tell the King I should write no ' more.' Under the impression also that Garrick had gained this intelligence by insinuating himself into the confidence of Woodfall, he wrote the Note, which has been already mentioned, threatening vengeance if he persisted in his impertinent enquiries;' and, justly apprehensive lest Woodfall should have told Garrick the name of the Coffee-house, where his Letters were left, he writes to the former : I must be more cautious than ever. I am

sure I should not survive a discovery three days; or, if 'I did, they would attaint me by bill. Change to the Somerset Coffee-House, and let no MORTAL know the al'teration. I am persuaded you are too honest a man to 'contribute in any way to my destruction. Act honourably by me, and at a proper time you shall know me.' (1,* 231., private Letter to Woodfall.) On the outside of this Letter was written private and particular, (1,*233. Note by the Editor.) Woodfall explained that Garrick had been apprized of the intended discontinuance of the Letters, by his having named it confidentially in a Letter he was writing to Garrick; and therefore dissuades Junius from sending the Note. With this he at first seems satisfied: I have no doubt of what you say about David