510
NOTES AND QUERIES. in- s. v. JOM 30, im
was attached to his person, and how I have been
grateful to his memory, they who know me know.
A person whose name I should never recollect
without admiration and reverence."
And this person Junius (or Junia) described as "an abandoned profligate, a patron of sedition, a traitor, a man purely and per- fectly bad so black a villain that a gibbet would be too honourable a situation for his carcase." Now, Lord Chatham himself com- plained that Lord Temple was the encourager of this abuse (Lloyd to Mr. Grenville), yet, "since his marriage with Lady Hester Grenville in 1754, Lord Temple had become his most intimate and affectionate friend" (' Grenville Papers/ pref.), (9). is it any wonder that, in Lord Coleridge's opinion, "no one, who knows what Junius wrote and what Francis wrote under his own name, will hesi- tate to say that if Francis really was J unius he was a scoundrel of the deepest dye " ?
Is it credible that Francis wrote the ' Letter to the King,' who had pensioned his father so generously < The family feud was healed ; Lord Temple, or Junius, lauded Lord Chat- ham, who, in turn, lauded George Grenville.
In his speeches and writing (Sir Philip Francis evinced his allegiance throughout to the Grenville party, his instructors and patrons (12). In 1806 George Grenville's son, Lord Grenville, then Prime Minister, recommended him for the Order of the JBath.
29. No doubt Junius influenced the style of Francis and others at the time, but Taylor's remarks on the similarity of their hand- writing prove an obliquity of vision that blinded his reason and caused him to stumble. Junius said he was not personally known to Mr. Grenville, which "declaration was supposed to proceed from his equal in rank and consequence," which Francis was not. bo says Mr. Taylor, and observes further that in the * Memoirs ' of Francis " there is no reason to infer that he [Francis] ever was personally known to him [Mr. Grenville], nor have I met with any circumstances that in the least tend to make such knowledge pro- bable" ('Identity/ p. 102). At p. 106 his words are :
"I shall state here that in this return of Sir Philip to the .Secretary of State's office, exists a chance of his having been personally known to Mr. Grenville."
Earl Temple was of the supposed rank, and, as a nomims umbra, was personally known to no one. Francis declared, emphatically and intelligibly, that saying he was the writer of Junius was "a silly, malignant falsehood/' Mr. Taylor says this is so evasive that he wondered " how any one could be misled by it for a moment." It is apparent by this that
his mind was riveted on his 'Identity' and
why most of his arguments in favour of
Francis may apply better to Earl Temple.
30. Was Junius unknown as supposed? He confessed to having a monitor at home Almon, knowing him, was probably taken to task tor a Lapsus linguae, and bungled over it About a dozen of Earl Temple's near rela- tions admitted their knowledge of Junius Independently of the Dropmore packet the I)ukes of Buckingham possessed reliable evi- dence, and the last duke visited his relatives the lortescues, at Boconnoc. From the in- ternal evidences of the letters (9 th 8 ii 329 m. 250) it might be that Junius was esteemed a skeleton in the family cupboard.
31. Compare the portrait of Sir Philip .trancis, the frontispiece to Taylor's 'Iden- tity,' with that of Earl Temple given by Almon, and pronounce which of the two men wrote 'Harry and Nan'* and the reply to Juma. Did Francis write poetry at all, or such as both Earl and Countess Temple indulged in ?t
32. Taylor says that Junius " seemed fully informed of what was going on in Parlia- ment, especially in the House of Lords."
33. John Wilkes to Junius, 6 November,
" I followed Junius's advice about the card.. I wish to know his sentiments about certain projects against the usurped powers of the House of Lords.'
Junius in reply, 9 November, writes : " Your offer to communicate your plans against the Lords was voluntary. Do now as you think proper, i have no resentments but against the common enemy, and will assist you in any way that
you will suffer yourself to be assisted Do not
conceive that 1 solicit new employment. 1 am overcome with the slavery of writing. .Farewell." Why this snub 1 When Wilkes wished to attack the House of Lords, Juiiius, as a peer- resented it, and bade him " Farewell."
Junius well says : "To convey instruction into the heads which perceive nothing, is as hard a task as to instil sentiment into hearts that feel nothing," and I am well aware that many would rather trim the truth, like Taylor in regard to Sir Philip Francis's denouncement, to suit their rooted convic- tions than abandon them ; but, aided by the strongest array of convergent facts, truth will prevail, and so far, in my humble
- Duke of Grafton and Nancy Parsons.
f That Lord Temple was J unius and Sir Philip Francis knew it is highly probable, and (as Mr. lay lor surmises) that 4'raiicis was the tall gentle- man who threw the Junius letter into the printer's othce and made oif (certainly as conveyancer, not as author, see ' Identity, 5 p. ltj(j).
