The daily Gate City. [volume] (Keokuk, Iowa) 1855-1916, 1858-08-02

/
State.
/ For the Gate City
Who Wrote tho Jnnius Letters,
An article went the rounds of the press,
not long since, attributing to the late Col.
Benton an expression Of the opinion that the
elder Pitt, the great Lord Chatham, was tho
author OF the celebrated Junius letters. No
reason, however, accompanied this opinion,
il remember rightly; nor do recolect,
now, to have ever seen any assigned for it,
though it was not original with Col. Benton,
but found it's way before the public through
the press, as long back as the memory OF
the writer rupneth.
Several volumes have been published, fret
and last, to fix upon different individuals, to
wit Edmund Burke Lord George Sackville,
Horne Tooke, Hugh Macaulay Boyd, Gene
raj Lee, John Wilkes, &C., &C., &C., the auth
orship Of the remarkable letters referred to
vet the matter would seem to remain nearly
as much IN the dark as ever, though near
century has elapsed since they were written.
lucy Fi"uuScu upon thc Euohe HiHu u
Great Britain, at the time Of their appear
ance, such an effect as perhaps no other let
/ ters ever produced, before or since. re-
member to have read, many years ago, a
publication, the object OF which was to dem
/ ons,-atc that Sir Philip Francis was Junius
and to have been left, after its perusal, strong
liz impressed with that belief myself. Such,
too, was the opinion of ono who has proba-
bly, had as good an opportunity to investi-
gate the matter and Judge il correctly as any
other man, to wit Macaulay the great his
torian. J hat opinion is found recorded in
an article contributed by him seventeen years
ago, in 1911, to the Edinburgh Review, on
Warren Hastings. Hastings was the Govern
or General Of India, and, in l1I3, the year
following that in which the letters of Junius
ceased to appear in Woodfall's Public Adj
yertiser, Sir Philip Francis was sent out to
India, as one Of the Board Of Councillors TO
Hastings. Ii was hardly to have been ex-
pected that two such spirits as Hastings and
Francis would long continue to act in harmo-
avn uio n 4uaiiS4 coOH tuuh
place; they fought, and Sir Philip received
the ball from the pistol Of Hastings through
, mis- body. The wound was not mortal, and
/, Francis lived TO return to England, where,
co Cooperating with Burke and Sheridan, he
took "a prominent and vindictive part in the
worid-renowned impeachment against Hast
> ings, for his government Of India. In allu-
] ding to the bitter feud between these two re-
markAble men, while in India, Macaulay saws:
. 1T is scarcely possible 10 meEtion this en-
inent man Phillip Francis) without advert
Ing moment to the question which his name
at once suggests to every mind. Was he the
; author Of the Letters of Junius? Our own
, firm belief is that he was. The evidence is
We think, such as would support verdict in
Il civil, nay, in u criminal proceeding. The
handwriting of Junius is the very peculiar
hand writing Of Francis, slightly disguised
As TO the position, pursuits, and connections
Of janus, the following are the most lmpor-
tant facts which can be considered as clearly
proved: first, that he was acquainted with
the technical forms of the Secretary Of States
Office: secondly, that he was intimately ac.
quainted with the business Of the War Office:
thirdly, that he, during the year ITO, at.
tended debates in the House Of Lords. and
took notes of speeches. particularly of the
speeches OF Lord Chatham; fourthly, that he
bitterly resented the appointment Of Mr.
Chamier to the place of Deputy Secretary at
War; ifthY, that he was bound by some
strong tie to the first Lord Holland Now.
Francis passed some years in the Secretary
OF States Office lie was subsequently, Chief
Clerk Of the War ofhce. lle repeatedly men
, tIOnpH hat Ia MA bt,naa all IA
speeches OF Lord Chatham and some of
! these speeches were actually printed from
his notes. lie resigned his cerkship Mt tho
: War oihce from resentment at the appoint
ment u Mr.. Chamier. IL was BY Lord Uol-
land that be was first introduced into the
public service. Now, here are five marks.
az of WHICH ought to be found in Junius.-
, They are all found in Francis. We do not
bcheye that more than two OF them can be
found IN any other person whatever. If this
, argument does not settle the question. there
IS no end OF ali reasoning on circumstap,ial
evidence
''Ihe internal evidence seems to poin. the
same way. The style Of Francis bears a
strong resemblance TO that Of Jnnius, - & c.
There arc still further reasons urged by
by Macaulay, IN the article referred to, to
prove that Phihp Francis wrote the Junius
Letters and think he makes ont straAg
case. lie scouts, in the same article, NJ
suggestion tha. Edmund Burke could have
Deem The author, but says nothing about Chat.
ham ~ connection with II; deeming ii, prob
Ao'y, quite unnecessary to do so. There is an
fobstaeie ~ the way Of regarding Lord Chat.
ham as The author, agreeably to the opinion
attributed to Col. Benton, which does not ex.
ist 10 the case Of Philip Francis; aud that Is,