the conduct internal and a convincing evidence against him. Sir William Draper seems not to know the value or force of such a proof. He will not permit us to judge of the motives of men, by the manifest tendency of their actions, nor by the notorious character of their minds. He calls for papers and witnesses, with a sort of triumphant security, as if nothing could be true, but what could be proved in a court of justice. Yet a religious man might have remembered, upon what foundation some truths, most interesting to mankind, have been received and established. If it were not for the internal evidence, which the purest of religions carries with it, what would have become of his once well-quoted decalogue, and of the meekness of his Christianity? of this minister carries with it an He The generous warmth of his resentment makes him confound the order of events. forgets that the insults and distresses which the Duke of Bedford has suffered, and which Sir · William has lamented with many delicate touches * If Sir W. D, will take the trouble of looking into Torcy's Memoirs, he will see with what little ceremony a bribe may be offered to a Duke, and with what little ceremony it was only not accepted. AUTHOR. It is too generally known to need further explanation that the first Duke of Marlborough is the nobleman here referred to. of the true pathetic, were only recorded in my letter to his Grace, not occasioned by it. It was a simple, candid narrative of facts; though, for aught I know, it may carry with it something prophetic. His Grace undoubtedly has received several ominous hints; and I think, in certain circumstances, a wise man would do well to prepare himself for the event. But I have a charge of a heavier nature against Sir William Draper. He tells us that the Duke of Bedford is amenable to justice ;that parliament is a high and solemn tribunal; and that, if guilty, he may be punished by due course of law; and all this, he says, with as much gravity, as if he believed every word of the matter. I hope indeed, the day of impeachments will arrive, before this nobleman escapes out of life;-but to refer us to that mode of proceeding now, with such a ministry, and such a house of commons as the present, what is it, but an indecent mockery of the common sense of the nation? I think he might have contented himself with defending the greatest enemy, without insulting the distresses of his country. His concluding declaration of his opinion, with respect to the present condition of affairs, is too loose and undetermined to be of any ser vice to the public. How strange it is that this gentleman should dedicate so much time and argument to the defence of worthless or indif ferent characters, while he gives but seven solitary lines to the only subject, which can deserve his attention, or do credit to his abilities. JUNIUS. LETTER XXVIII. TO THE PRINTER OF THE PUBLIC ADVERTISER. SIR, 20 October, 1769. I VERY sincerely applaud the spirit with which a lady has paid the debt of gratitude to her benefactor *. Though I think she has mistaken the point, she shews a virtue which makes her respectable. The question turned upon the personal generosity or avarice of a man, whose private fortune is immense. The proofs of his munificence must be drawn from the uses to which he has applied that fortune. I was not speaking of a Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, but of a rich English duke, whose wealth gave him the means of doing as much good in this country, as he derived from his power in another. I am far from wishing to lessen the merit of this single benevolent action;-perhaps * See Note to p. 19. Mrs. Griffiths's letter signed Frances. it is the more conspicuous from standing alone. All I mean to say is, that it proves nothing in the present argument. JUNIUS. LETTER XXIX. TO THE PRINTER OF THE PUBLIC ADVERTISER. SIR, 19 October, 1769. I AM well assured that JUNIUS will never descend to a dispute with such a writer as Modestus (whose letter appeared in the Gazetteer of Monday*) especially as the dispute must be chiefly about words. Notwithstanding the partiality of the public, it does not appear that JUNIUS values himself upon any superior skill in composition, and I hope his time will always be more usefully employed than in the trifling refinements of verbal criticism. Modestus, however, shall have no reason to triumph in the silence and moderation of JUNIUS. If he knew as much of the propriety of language, as I believe he does of the facts in question, he would have been as cautious of attacking JUNIUS upon his compo * The gentleman who wrote several letters under this signature in the Gazetteer, and subsequently in the Public Advertiser, was a Mr. Dalrymple, a Scotch Advocate. For a specimen of his stile, see Miscellaneous Letters, No. LXVII. EDIT. sition, as he seems to be of entering into the subject of it; yet after all, the last is the only article of any importance to the public. I do not wonder at the unremitted rancour with which the Duke of Bedford and his adherents invariably speak of a nation, which we well know has been too much injured to be easily forgiven. But why must JUNIUS be an Irishman?-The absurdity of his writings betrays him.—Waving all consideration of the insult offered by Modestus to the declared judgment of the people (they may well bear this among the rest) let us follow the several instances, and try whether the charge be fairly supported. First then,—the leaving a man to enjoy such repose as he can find upon a bed of torture, is severe indeed; perhaps too much so, when applied to such a trifler as Sir William Draper; but there is nothing absurd either in the idea or expression. Modestus cannot distinguish between a sarcasm and a contradiction. 2. I affirm with JUNIUS, that it is the frequency of the fact, which alone can make us comprehend how a man can be his own enemy. We should never arrive at the complex idea conveyed by those words, if we had only seen one or two instances of a man acting to his own prejudice. Offer the proposition to a child, or a man unused to compound his ideas, and you |