' 
 
 Hpjl ■ flpifflP 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 T 
 
 
 
 i 7 \ 
 
 
 
 
 
HUGH BOYD ESQ? 
 
 Enoraved by W.Evanj./rom an original ficture by Robert Home, Esq . 
 
 TublisJied. December 4.17$$, Try Oidell &. Davies'. Strand. 
 
 Jj' Vt 
 
THE LIFE 
 
 O F 
 
 HUGH BOTH ,, 
 
 B Y 
 
 Lawrence Dundas Campbell. 
 
 a 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 in 2016 
 
 https://archive.org/details/lifeofhughboydOOcamp 
 
THE LIFE 
 
 O F 
 
 HUGH BOYD 
 
 Hugh BOYD was the fecond fon of 
 Alexander Macauley, Efq. of the 
 county of Antrim, in Ireland, who had long 
 been the intimate friend of Dean Swift*. 
 
 Mr. 
 
 # Swift appointed Mr. Macauley one of the exe- 
 cutors of his Will, in which he fpeaks of him in the fol- 
 lowing terms : 
 
 “ Item : I bequeath to Alexander Macauley, Efq. 
 ** the gold box in which the freedom of the city of 
 “ Dublin was prefented to me, as a teftimony of the 
 “ efteem and love I have for him, on account of his 
 “ great learning, fine natural parts, unaffe£led piety and 
 “ benevolence, and his truly honourable zeal in defence 
 “ of the legal rights of the clergy, in oppofition to all 
 lt their unprovoked oppreflors.” 
 
 See Swift’s Will, in the 12 th vol. of his works . 
 
 a 2 This 
 
4 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 Mr. Macauley was bred to the law, and 
 having very early diftinguilhed hipifelf at 
 
 This eulogium appears, from all accounts, to have 
 been very juftly merited. Few men of his time, were 
 more univerfally efleemed in Ireland, than Mr. Macau- 
 ley. Nor was he unknown to people of the firfl diftinc- 
 tion in England. He had been patronized by Frede- 
 rick, Prince of Wales, to whom he was introduced 
 by the good Lord Lyttleton. As a pra&ical lawyer, 
 he is faid to have been fq confcientious, that he always 
 refufed to be retained in an iniquitous caufe. It is alio 
 related of him, that when Baldwin was Provoft of 
 Dublin College, one of the fellows, a man of rank and 
 great influence, was to be expelled Irom it, for fome 
 very glaring impropriety. The gentleman knowing 
 Mr. Macauley V intei eft with Baldwin, folicited the 
 former, in the moil earned manner, to intercede in his 
 behalf; promifing, that if he prevailed on Baldwin to 
 mitigate the puniihment, he ihould get him (Mr. Ma- 
 cauley) appointed a fenior judge on the fir ft vacancy, 
 and his wile’s uncle made a biihop. But Mr. Macau- 
 ley reje&ed his offers, and refufed to interfere, faying, 
 “ he had too high an opinion of Baldwin, to fuppofe he 
 would ever punifh unjuftly.” 
 
 The pen-knife, with which the aflaflin Guifcard at- 
 tempted to murder the celebrated Harley Earl of Ox- 
 ford, was given by his Lordfhip to Swift, fome years 
 after that event took place. Swdft gave it to Mr. Ma- 
 cauley, who, after Swift’s death, ufed to keep it in 
 the gold box mentioned above : but on Mr. Macauley ’s 
 demife, neither the box nor knife could be found. 
 
 I 
 
 the 
 
Vsn t £* ^ 
 
 Y3 
 
 HUGH BOYD. 5 
 
 the Xrifh bar, he was firft appointed one of 
 the King’s counfel, and afterwards judge of 
 the confiftory court of Dublin. At the 
 time of his death he had a feat in the Irifh 
 Houfe of Commons, and was, through his 
 whole life, much efteemed for his talents 
 and virtues. He married Mifs Boyd, the 
 daughter of Hugh Boyd, Efq. of Bally- 
 caflle, in the fame county ; a gentleman of 
 plentiful fortune and great refpeftability. 
 By this lady, Mr. Macauley had two fons and 
 two daughters. Hugh, the youngeft of his 
 fons, and the fubjeft of this narrative, was 
 born at Ballycaftle, in the county of Antrim, 
 the family feat of his maternal grandfather, 
 in the month of Oftober 1746, where he 
 continued during his infancy. 
 
 The circumftances of his being named after 
 his grandfather, of his living under his care 
 until he was four years old, and of his {hew- 
 ing, even at that age, ftrong indications of 
 talents, endeared him to the old gentle- 
 man, who beheld the dawn of his geni- 
 us with mingled emotions of pleafure and 
 pride, and who ufed frequently to fay, 
 “ Hugh will become a great man '!” 
 
 The 
 
 438x25 
 
6 LIFE OF 
 
 The pleafure which every man of fenfi- 
 bility and refle&ion receives from contem- 
 plating the gradual expanfion of the infant 
 mind, renders him prone to magnify the 
 force and merit of thofe fmart, and often 
 juft obfervations, which fprightly children 
 occafionally make. And the parent, or 
 friend, who is employed in the delightful talk 
 of “ teaching the young idea how to (hoot,” 
 views whatever is commendable, or fafcina- 
 ting in the darling objefl of his care, with 
 an eye fo full of pride and affe&ion, as to 
 be blinded to every defeft, and to fee every 
 beauty through a microfcope. Hence pa- 
 rents are led to cherifh the flattering hope 
 of future excellence in their children, in 
 which they are fo frequently deceived. 
 And hence we are apt to miftake thofe 
 {harp flafhes of vivacity which, fometimes, 
 fparkle in the morning of life, for that broad 
 effulgence which precedes the afcenfion of 
 genius. That no accurate judgment of the 
 underftanding can be formed from the live- 
 ly Tallies of youth, experience fufficiently 
 proves. Innumerable inftances might be 
 adduced, in which boys, who difplayed the 
 
 moft 
 
Hugh boyd. 
 
 7 
 
 frioft vigorous as well as brilliant parts at 
 fchool, became weak and frivolous when 
 they mixt with the world ; and in fome 
 cafes, indeed, forgetting their early acquire- 
 ments, have palled through life, noticed 
 only for their ignorance, imbecility, or dul- 
 nefs. Few men have (hewn any real indi- 
 cations of abilities before the age of fixteen, 
 when the mind begins to reflect on its own 
 operations, and to arrange the ideas it has 
 received. 
 
 There are, however, two anecdotes re- 
 lated of Mr. Boyd, while he was a boy, 
 which deferve to be mentioned, as they 
 feem to juftify the opinion his grandfather 
 entertained of him ; and as they mark the 
 firft growth of that fpirit, and thofe fenti- 
 ments which animated and diftinguilhed 
 him through life. 
 
 Mr. Boyd had an infatiable third: for in- 
 formation, from his earlieft infancy ; and 
 as foon as he was taught to read, which 
 was at five years old, he became fond of 
 books, and ufed to read all he could lay his 
 hands on. lie was fcarce fix years old, 
 when reading Vertot’s Hillory of the Revo- 
 lutions 
 
8 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 lutions of Sweden, one evening in a retired 
 corner of the drawing-room, he fuddenly 
 exclaimed, cc I fhall never forgive Gufta- 
 vus !” The vivacity with which he expref- 
 fed his difapprobation, attrafted the notice, 
 and excited the laughter and admiration of 
 the company, one of whom afked him, 
 how the Swede had offended him ? — <% He 
 has taken the crown,” anfwered Hugh ; “ I 
 hope, Sir,” anfwered his friend, (who was 
 an old fo’dier) “ you do not diflike kings?” 
 “ Not always,” replied the boy, “ but I 
 thought Guftavus had conquered for the 
 people , inftead of which I now find it was for 
 himfelf” 
 
 Soon after this occurrence, another little 
 incident took place, which, however trivial 
 it may feem to the generality of my readers, 
 merits attention as being highly charac- 
 teriflic of Mr. Boyd ; and as ferving to 
 fhew, that the playfulnefs and humour with 
 which, during his whole life, he ufed to 
 affuage anger and parry an attack, and 
 which muft be Rill frefh in the recolleftion 
 of all who knew him, was a natural felicity 
 of difpofition, rather than an acquired polite- 
 
 nefs. 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 9 
 
 nefs. He had been one day playing mar- 
 bles, and eager at his fport, did not obferve 
 the approach of the dinner hour, and had 
 neglefted to wafh his hands. On being 
 called into the parlour, he was going to 
 place himfelf at table, when his mother, 
 obferving his brown knuckles, ordered him 
 to retire, for he had dirty hands. “ It is 
 only a little duft, madam, (faid Hugh) for 
 my father and I have always clean hands, 
 uncontaminated by bafe bribes .” He was 
 of courfe permitted to fit down ; and ob- 
 tained, in the approving fmiles of his pa- 
 rents, an earneft of the future meed of his 
 large honour, — the applaufe of the wife and 
 virtuous. 
 
 He began to pun while he was yet in his 
 childhood ; and he often punned fo aptly, 
 that he both furprifed and amufed his 
 friends. This propenfity ftuck to him 
 through life. 
 
 He has himfelf told me of his early pre- 
 dileftion for literature and politicks. That 
 he had made but little progrefs at fehool, 
 when he felt the infpirations of fancy ; 
 which he did not indulge like the common 
 
 run 
 
id 
 
 LIFE or* 
 
 run of fprightly boys, by making Latiii 
 verfes to his mafler, but by - writing po- 
 litical letters, and fending them to his 
 father. 
 
 “ Not to name/ 5 fays Dr. Johnfon, “ the 
 fchool, or the mailers of men, illuftrious for 
 literature, is a kind of hiftorical fraud, by 
 which honeft fame is injurioufly diminifhed.” 
 I am therefore happy at being now able to 
 trace Mr. Boyd through the procefs of his 
 education. After being inftru&ed in the firft 
 rudiments of knowledge by his father, whofe 
 ample acquirements and mild authority fo well 
 fitted him for the tafk ; he was fent to the well- 
 known and refpeftable fchool of Mr. Ball, 
 in Dublin. At this fchool he firft became 
 acquainted with the celebrated Mr. Henry 
 Grattan, who, though two years older, pur- 
 fued his ftudies in the fame clafs, where their 
 early admiration of each other's talents, gave 
 birth to that friendfhip which ever afterwards 
 fubfifted between them. It is worthy of be- 
 ing remarked, as an honour to the excellent 
 tuition of Mr. Ball, that the prefent Lord 
 Chancellor of Ireland, the late Mr. Forbes, 
 together with many other gentlemen, emi- 
 nent 
 
HUGH BOYD. It 
 
 nent for their literary acquirements, were 
 alfo educated under his aufpicious care. 
 
 At this fchool Mr. Boyd made great pro- 
 ficiency in his ftudies ; and his altonifhing 
 memory, no lefs than his prompt difcern- 
 ment, and fine tafte, excited the admiration 
 of ail who knew him. Yet the praifes which 
 were lavifhed upon him, did not infufe into 
 his difpofition any thing of that vanity or 
 petulance, which ellranges a boy from the 
 love of his fchool- fellows : his unaffuming 
 manner, together with his gentle but manly 
 and ardent fpirit, made him alike the favour- 
 ite of his companions, and his mailer. 
 
 So early as the age of fourteen he was 
 placed at the Trinity College, Dublin, and 
 was entered a gentleman commoner of that 
 fem inary at the November term in 1760. 
 About this time he became known to the 
 late Mr. Flood, who was then the greatell 
 ornament of the Irifh Houfe of Commons ; 
 and whofe eloquence firft produced in Mr. 
 Boyds mind that defire of attending par- 
 liamentary debates which fo much dillin- 
 guilhed his future life. The attention with 
 which he ufed to lilten to Mr. Flood’s pri- 
 vate 
 
12 
 
 tlFE OF 
 
 vate converfation, and the accurate reports 
 which he ufed to make of his publick 
 fpeeches, induced that accomplifhed man to 
 cherifh thofe rifing talents, which, in their 
 maturity, he continued to befriend. 
 
 At college, he was as much remarked for 
 his facility of acquiring, as for his power of 
 retaining knowledge. Without feeming to 
 attend to any thing but the pleafures of fo- 
 ciety, he made very confiderable advances 
 in literature and fcience ; and in claffical 
 learning he was equalled by few, and fur- 
 palTed by hone of his fellow-ftudents. He 
 polfelfed, indeed, many peculiar advantages 
 in the courfe of his fludies. His father, 
 who was himfelf a man of great information, 
 attended to the cultivation of his fon’s mind 
 with the utmoft care, and fpared no expence 
 whatever in his education ; for he appointed 
 as his tutors, firft Mr. Marten, and then 
 Mr. Kearney, both men of literary emi- 
 nence at that time in Dublin, and of great 
 refpe&ability in private life. Mr. Marten 
 ufed to characterize his pupil, by faying, 
 “ that he united the meeknefs of the lamb, 
 with the fpirit of the lion.” 
 
 In 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 *3 
 
 111 1765, he took his degree of Matter of 
 Arts ; and his grandfather, Boyd, whofe 
 affeCtion for him grew with his years, wiflied 
 him to enter into the Church : but the death 
 of that virtuous and venerable man, which 
 happened the fame year, induced him to 
 turn his thoughts to a profeffion more con- 
 genial to the native vivacity of his mind. 
 He accordingly fixed on the army ; but his 
 father being defirous he flhould go into the 
 infantry, and he preferring the cavalry, 
 fome delay in confequence took place, and 
 before the matter was decided, Mr. Macauley 
 died in 1766, of an lllnefs of only a few 
 days : and no will being found among his 
 papers, Mr. Boyd was left totally unprovid- 
 ed for, the whole of the family eftate being 
 fettled by right of inheritance on the eldeft 
 fon. 
 
 As this fudden and unexpected lofs dafhed 
 his hopes of rifing in the army, he relin- 
 quifhed his defign of purfuing that line of 
 life ; and his attachment to literature and 
 politicks led him to choofe the law, as the 
 profeffion, with which, above all others, his 
 favourite ftudies were the molt intimately 
 
 connected. 
 
*4 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 conne&ed, and in which, therefore, he could 
 attend to them, without neglecting his duty. 
 
 With thefe views, he left his native coun- 
 try, a few months after the death of his 
 father, and came to London, in fearch of 
 fortune and fame. In hopes of procuring 
 the patronage of the late Marquis, then Earl 
 of Hertford, to whom his father had ren- 
 dered many important and acknowledged 
 fervices, he called at his Lordfhip’s houfe, 
 fhortly after his arrival. But that noble 
 lord was poffeffed of fuch peculiar delicacy 
 of feeling and fentim'eht , that he flirunk from 
 an interview with the fon of his deceafed 
 friend ; who frequently waited on him with- 
 out once gaining admittance to his prefence. 
 The worthy earl’s behaviour, however, ap- 
 peared no way furprifmg to Mr. Boyd, 
 whofe early acquaintance with the world had 
 enabled him to form a competent, judgment 
 of the motives and aftions of men. He was 
 little difcouraged, therefore, by this circum- 
 flance; and the refpeCtability of his family, 
 together with the elegance of his deport- 
 ment, as well as the infinuating politenefs 
 of his addrefs, foon procured him an intro- 
 duction 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 *5 
 
 du&ion into the gay circles of fafhionable 
 Jife ; nor was he long unnoticed in the lite- 
 rary fphere. He became acquainted with 
 Goldfmith, Doftor Armftrong, and David 
 Garrick, who had then reached the fummit 
 of their fame, and with whom he ever af- 
 terwards continued in habits of intimacy. 
 About this time he alfo became acquainted 
 with the celebrated Mrs. Macauley, to whofe 
 hufband he was related. Charmed with his 
 wit and talents, fhe frequently invited him 
 to her houfe, and there he had conftant 
 opportunities of mixing in the converfation 
 of the moll diftinguifhed geniufes of the age. 
 In fafhionable fociety he was firfl noticed 
 by Lord Effingham, Lord Verney, and Sir 
 Francis Delaval, and afterwards by the old 
 Duke of Ancafter, and the Earl of Afh- 
 burnham. His great {kill at the game of 
 chefs, added to his other acquirements, 
 made the two lafi-mentioned noblemen 
 court his company with the utmoft folici- 
 tude ; and through them he was elefted a 
 member of the well-known chefs-club to 
 which they belonged, and of which he foon 
 became the next belt player to Count Bruhl, 
 
 the 
 
i6 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 the Saxon Envoy. He was fo great a 
 favourite of the old Dukes, that he was 
 always afked to the fplendid and fump- 
 tuous dinners, which his Grace took fuch 
 delight in giving. At one of thefe en- 
 tertainments, he chanced to fit next to 
 Soame Jenyns, with whofe converfation 
 he was fo much gratified, that when the 
 reft; of the company adjourned at an early 
 hour to the chefs-room, as it was the Dukes 
 cuftom, he whifpered to Jenyns, that a bot- 
 tle of old port might tend as much to irjake 
 them better known to each other, as a game 
 at chefs : — Jenyns readily took the hint, 
 and the evening was fpent very much to 
 their mutual fatisfaftion. 
 
 Yet this mode of life did not (educe him 
 from his books. He cultivated politicks 
 and polite literature with the utmoft affidu- 
 ity : and if he bellowed not an equal atten- 
 tion on the feverer ftudies of the law, it is 
 to be attributed partly to the livelinefs of 
 his fancy, and partly to the necelfity he was 
 under of providing for the day that was 
 palling over him, rather than to any want 
 of application. 
 
 The 
 
HUGH BOYD. 1/ 
 
 The inborn generality of his mind, to- 
 gether with his exquifite fenfibility, prompt- 
 ed him to afts of benevolence, which his 
 fcanty and precarious income was ill fuited 
 to fupply ; and before he had been a year 
 in London, he was involved in pecuniary 
 entanglements, from which, alas ! he was 
 never at any period of his life to be entirely 
 releafed. The perplexed hate of his mind, 
 however, foured not the fweetnefs of his 
 difpofition, nor clouded his wonted gaiety. 
 All his forrows were locked fall in his breaft, 
 and no one could difcover, either by his 
 countenance, or his manners, that he labour- 
 ed under the fmalleft uneafmefs. 
 
 This happy fuavity of temper, joined to 
 his dignified urbanity and chaftened hu- 
 mour, rendered him an univerfal favourite 
 among the fair fex. Nor was he unmindful 
 of their admiration. He paid his addreffes 
 to Mifs Morphy, a young lady altogether 
 worthy of his noble mind, and after an ac- 
 quaintance of one year and feme weeks, he 
 married her in December 1 767. By this 
 marriage his circumftances were made fome- 
 what eafier, as Mifs Morphy polfeffed a 
 
 b handfome 
 
iB 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 handfome competency, and as her good fenfe 
 and many amiable qualities often availed to 
 moderate, if not to reftrain thofe extrava- 
 gancies to which he was unfortunately fo 
 prone. 
 
 Through his marriage he became known 
 to the three Mr. Nefbets, who were Mrs. 
 Boyd’s guardians, and to their nephew the 
 prefent Mr. John Nefbet, member for Gatton, 
 as well as to the late Mr. Robert Cooper Lee. 
 To the two laft-mentioned gentlemen, Mr. 
 Boyd was under the greateft obligations, 
 and the aftive friendfliip which they on all 
 occafions manifefted for him, deferves the 
 higheft praife. 
 
 About this period he alfo fell into the 
 acquaintance of the late Mr. JohnStuart, 
 of Hampftead, a gentleman who poffelfed a 
 mind congenial to his own, whofe ardent 
 and difmterefled friendlhip knew no bounds 
 but virtue and honour, and whofe affeflion 
 for him continued to glow with undiminifhed 
 warmth to the laft moment of his life *. 
 
 Perhaps 
 
 * The talents, no lefs than the virtuesof Mr. Stuart, 
 would have entitled him to my particular praife, if grati- 
 tude 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 2 9 
 
 Perhaps there never was a friendfhip 
 more durable and fincere, than that which 
 
 fubfifted 
 
 tude for his friendly attentions towards me did not call 
 forth the warmed tribute of my heart. 
 
 He was defeended from the refpedfable family of Sir 
 Simeon Stuart, who were a branch of the royal Item of 
 the Stuarts, and who came to England with James the 
 Firft, and fettled in Northamptonfhire, in which county 
 his father redded, and he was born. He was fent to 
 fchool at Northampton, and afterwards ftudied phyfic at 
 Edinburgh, where he took his degree as Doflor of Medi- 
 cine. On his return to England, he was appointed one of 
 the phyfi clans to the army in Canada, under General 
 Wolfe, and was prefent at the battle of Quebec. He had 
 lived on terms of f riendlhip with that diftinguifhed general, 
 and his regard for him was fo ftrong, that he never talked 
 of his eminent abilities, and early, but glorious death, 
 without tears in his eyes. Upon the conclufion of the 
 war in 1763, he fettled at Philadelphia in the line of his 
 profefllon, and entered into partnerfhip with Mr. Lauchlin 
 Macleane, who was afterwards fecretary to Lord Shel- 
 burne. In this bufinefs they were very fuccefsful, and 
 would have acquired an immenfe fortune, if an affair of 
 gallantry betweenMacleane and one of their fair patients, had 
 not obliged them to make a precipitate retreat acrofs the 
 Atlantic. On their arrival in England they kept houfe 
 together in London, and lived for fome time in a very 
 fplendid ftyle : but Macleane, who w T as not yet fatisfied, 
 gambled both in the Alley and in St. James’s-ftreet, and 
 not only fpent his own fortune, but fo feverely injured 
 
 b 2 Mr, 
 
20 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 fubfifted between thefe two accomplifhed 
 men. 
 
 In 
 
 Mr. Stuart’s, as to render it neceffary for him to retrench 
 his expences, and totally alter his mode of life. About 
 this time he travelled into France for the recovery of his 
 health, and while at Paris, he became acquainted with 
 David Hume and Adam Smith, who then refided there, 
 and who introduced him to the celebrated Literary Society 
 of which Voltaire and D’Alembert w ; ere the moft diffin- 
 guifhed members. On his return to England he fell into 
 the acquaintance of Mr. Laurence Sullivan, who fo often 
 filled the chair at the India Houfe ; and through his in- 
 tereft was much employed in Indian affairs. He now re- 
 linquifhed his original profeflion ; and having flill a hand- 
 fome fortune, he took a houfe at Hampftead, with about 
 fix acres of ground adjoining to it, w'hich he formed into 
 a garden, and laid out with exquifite tafle. To this place 
 he was extremely attached, and here he chiefly refided 
 during the remainder of his life, enjoying the fociety of 
 friends refpeHable for their underftanding. learning, and 
 virtues, and living with a degree of complacency and 
 happinefs which human frailty very rarely attains. In 
 December 1798, he was feized wfith a fevere complaint in 
 his lungs, which, after a few w 7 eeks, proved fatal, and he 
 died in the beginning ot January following, in the 65th 
 year of age. 
 
 He was a man of a tall and graceful figure, dignified in 
 his deportment, and elegant in his mien ; of a countenance 
 open, animated, and cheerful, uncommonly engaging 
 when relaxed by gaiety, pleafant even when overcaft 
 
 by 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 21 
 
 In the fummer of 1768, Mr. Boyd went 
 to Ireland for a few months, on fome pri- 
 vate 
 
 by care. Thofe who knew him fifty years ago, ufed to 
 fay he was the handfomeft man they had ever feen ; and 
 though age and ficknefs had enfeebled his conftitution, the 
 alteration which they had made in his appearance was 
 wonderfully flight. 
 
 He poffefTed a vigorous and highly cultivated under- 
 ftanding, a quick and accurate difcernment, a found and 
 difcriminating judgment, a lively fancy, a tenacious me- 
 mory, and a refined tafte. His acquirements were very 
 extenfive and various. He was equally (killed in the 
 phyfical and moral fciences, in abftrufe learning, and in 
 the fine arts. In moft fubje&s he was deeply read, of 
 every one he had a general knowledge. Having mixt 
 much with the world, he had attained great proficiency in 
 the important ftudy of human life, and his obfervations on 
 men and manners, though fometimes fevere, were, for the 
 moft part, juft, ftriking, and forcible. His converfation 
 was at once pleating and inftrudtive, and he ufed to relate 
 anecdotes, of which he had an inexhauftible llore, with a 
 peculiar felicity and eafe. His manners were polifhed, 
 affable, and infinuating, and though his temper was fome- 
 what irritable, yet was his difpofition mild and placable, 
 and his heart fufceptible of the utmoft tendernefs. He 
 uniformly praftifed the moft prompt and liberal charity, 
 regulated by an enlightened prudence, and a dignified 
 oeconomy. In his mode of life he was alike diftant from 
 extravagance and parfimony ; he was too confiderate to fall 
 into the one, too generous not to defpife the other. It 
 
 was 
 
22 
 
 L"I F £ O I 
 
 vate bufinefs. During his ftay in Dublin, 
 he was conftantly in the company of Mr. 
 Flood, who, on that, as on every other 
 occafion, fhewed him the greateft poffible 
 attention, and who thought fo highly of 
 his abilities, that he every where talked of 
 him as a prodigy of genius. 
 
 At this period political parties ran very 
 high in Ireland, and the newfpapers were 
 filled with controverfies, in which men of 
 the firfl; talents in the kingdom were en- 
 gaged. One evening, while Mr. Flood fat 
 at his own table, after dinner, entertaining a 
 large company, of which Mr . Boyd was one 9 
 he received an anonymous note, enclofing 
 a letter on the date of parties, figned Sin- 
 dercombe. The note contained a requeft, 
 that Mr. Flood w 7 ould perufe the enclofed 
 letter, and that if it met his approbation, he 
 
 was his chief ambition to maintain independence, to be of 
 ufe to his friends, and to relieve indigent merit wherever 
 he met it. And at the clofe of his long and well-fpent 
 life, it appeared to me, that his virtuous ambition was 
 completely fatisfied. CareiTed by his friends, admired by 
 his acquaintance, and beloved by his fervants and depend- 
 ents, his death was deeply regretted by all who knew him, 
 and his memory lives in their eftimation. 
 
 would 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 23 
 
 would get it publifhed. Mr. Flood read it 
 to the company, who declared, with one 
 burft of applaufe, that it fhould be fent im- 
 mediately to the printer. It confequently 
 appeared in a morning paper*, and pro- 
 duced 
 
 * Notwithftanding my molt diligent inquiries, I have 
 not been able to find the particular Paper in which this 
 letter appeared ; and I have confequentlylfpoken of its 
 merits from the opinion of others. 
 
 Thofe who were not particularly converfant with opr 
 hidory during the commonwealth, were at a lofs to dif- 
 cover what the author alluded to, by adopting the figna- 
 ture of Sindercombe> and Boyd ufed to (hew great anxiety 
 to explain it to them, whenever the fubjedl was talked of. 
 Sindercombe was a perfon who had undertaken to murder 
 Oliver Cromwell, but who was prevented from exe- 
 cuting his purpofe by feveral unaccountable accidents. 
 At lad Cromwell difeovered him, and he was tried, 
 convifted, and condemned; but the voice of the people 
 was raifed fo high in his favour, that the Protestor deemed 
 it prudent to difpatch him privately, and he was found 
 dead in his bed on the morning which had been appointed 
 for his execution. Cromwell artfully gave it out, that 
 Sindercombe had poifoned himfelf, left the people fhould 
 take the alarm : but it appears evident, from the concur- 
 rent teftimony of the mod refpedtable writers of that time, 
 that Cromwell had given Barkjlead pofitive orders to 
 fmother him in bed. Hume treats this fubjedt rather 
 Wore lightly than it deferves, and gives credit to the dory 
 
 of 
 
24 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 duced a very ftrong fenfation on the public 
 mind, as well from the clear and forcible 
 
 reafoning 
 
 o-f the poifon. The famous Colonel Titus, in his fpirited 
 little pamphlet, intitled Killing no Murder , beftows the fol- 
 lowing eulogium on Sindercombe. 
 
 “ The brave Sindercombe has fhewn as great a mind, as 
 any old Rome could boaft ot ; and had he lived there, his 
 name had been regiftered with Brutus and Cato, and he had 
 his ftatues as well as they. 
 
 “ But I will not have fo finifter an opinion of ourfelves (as 
 little generofity as flavery hath left us) as to think fo great 
 a virtue can want its monuments even among us. Certain- 
 ly in every virtuous mind, there are ftatues reared to Sin- 
 dercombe. W henever we read the elegies of thofe that have 
 died for their country ; when we admire thofe great exam- 
 ples of magnanimity, that have tired tyrants cruelties; 
 when we extol their conftancy, whom' neither bribe nor 
 terrors could make betray their friends, it is then we eredl 
 Sindercombe ftatues, and grave him monuments ; where 
 all that can be faid of a great and noble mind, we juftly 
 make an epitaph for him : and though the tyrant caufed 
 him to be fmothered, left the people fnould hinder an 
 open murder, yet he never will be able to fmother his 
 memory, or his own villany. His poifon was but a poor 
 and common device, to impofe only on thofe that under- 
 ftood not tyrants pra&ices, and are unacquainted (if any 
 be) with his cruelties and lalfehoods. He may, therefore, 
 if he pleafe, take away the ftake from Sindercombe’ s grave, 
 and if he have a mind it fhould be known how he died, 
 let him fend thither the pillows and feather beds with 
 
 which 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 2 5 
 
 reafoning it contained, as from the uncom- 
 mon beauty and energy of its ftyle. Every 
 endeavour was made, without effedl, to dis- 
 cover the author. That Flood fufpefted 
 Mr. Boyd is extremely probable; but I 
 know not that he ever hinted fuch a fufpi- 
 cion to any one. Mrs. Boyd always thought 
 that Sindercombe was her hufbands pro- 
 duftion, from feveral drcumftances which 
 no one elfe polfelfed the means of obferving ; 
 and many years afterwards, fhe was fatisfied 
 that her donje&ure was founded in faft: 
 though Mr. Boyd himfelf, never, either 
 acknowledged or denied, that he was the 
 author. This doubtlefs was his firft attempt 
 at preferring that fecrecy in his political 
 writings, in which he was always fo fuccefs- 
 ful, as well as his firft eflay in that fpecies of 
 literary compofition, in which he afterwards 
 fo much excelled. 
 
 which Barkjlcad and his hangman {mothered him. But 
 to conclude, let not this monfter think himfelf the more 
 fecure that he has fuppreffed one great fpirit, he may be 
 confident that longus pojl ilium fequiiur ordo idem petentium 
 dpcus,” 
 
 A few 
 
2 6 
 
 - LIFE OF 
 
 A few days fubfequent to the publication 
 of Sindercombe, Mr. Boyd returned to 
 London; and in the autumn of 1768, he 
 took a houfe in Great Marlborough-ftreet, 
 in which he lived for fome years in a very 
 genteel ftyle, though he never had yet 
 been fet free from the pecuniary encum- 
 brances with which, fince the death of his 
 father, he had been conftantly harrafled. 
 About this time, however, he received fome 
 fmall addition to his income, by the death 
 of his coufm Adam Boyd. His grandfather 
 Boyd, had, in his will, bequeathed to him, 
 failing of his coufm, a freehold eftate, in* the 
 county of Antrim, on the condition, en- 
 joined in the ftrifteft manner, of changing 
 his name from Macauley to Boyd. In con- 
 formity, therefore, with the will of his grand- 
 father, he now adopted the name of Boyd, 
 and became pofleffed of this eftate, the grofs 
 rental of which amounted to £600 per arm . ; 
 but the feveral annuities with which it was 
 burthened, together with the litigations to 
 which fome of them gave rife, reduced that 
 fum to a mere trifle, and the eftate being 
 
 entailed 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 on 
 
 z / 
 
 entailed to the heirs male of his body, he 
 could neither fell any part of it, nor even 
 grant a fingle fecurity upon it, in order to 
 liquidate thofe debts that were in the firft 
 inftance contracted by the unfortunate 
 neceffities, and peculiar hardfhips of his early 
 youth. 
 
 Yet thefe were matters which gave him 
 hardly any concern. He was ever more 
 anxious about the affairs of his friends, than 
 his own : and he has frequently plunged 
 himfelf 'into difficulties, to fave the credit, 
 or to relieve the diftrefs of the man he 
 loved. A mind fo conflituted, was not to 
 be ruffled by ordinary adverfities ; and 
 bleffed beyond moft men in the matrimonial 
 connection he had formed, he enjoyed the 
 utmoft ferenity amidit the florms of life, 
 and the greateft content and happinefs, not- 
 withftanding the vexations and embarrafl- 
 ments by which he was furrounded. 
 
 It was this tranquil and eafy temper, no 
 lefs than his fanguine conflitution, that en- 
 abled him to call into aftion all the fpirit 
 and vigour of his mind, whenever he 
 thought proper to exert them, and at the 
 
 fame 
 
28 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 fame time to bedow the mod watchful at- 
 tention and pertinacious diligence, on what- 
 ever bufmefs he was induced to undertake. 
 But his early attachment to politicks be- 
 came every day more drong, and neither 
 the hope of emolument, nor the earned en- 
 treaties of his friends, could incite him to 
 purfue the law profedionally, though he had 
 attained confiderable knowledge both of its 
 principles and praftice. He, therefore, de- 
 dicated his whole time to politicks and lite- 
 rature ; and towards the latter end of the 
 year 1768, he commenced a correfpondence 
 with the daily paper, entitled the Publick 
 Advertifer , at that time condufted by Mr. 
 Henry S amp son Wood fall, which he 
 kept up with the greateft caution, and the 
 mod impenetrable fecrecy, for three years 
 and fome months. The nature and pur- 
 port of this correfpondence he never dif- 
 clofed to any one of his friends, not even 
 to Mrs. Boyd; and he died in podedion of 
 his fecret. Mrs. Boyd, however, has long 
 been convinced, from a variety of drong 
 concurring circumdances, that this fecret 
 was nothing lefs than his being the writer 
 
 of 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 29 
 
 of thofe celebrated Letters which appeared 
 in the Publick Advertifer , under the figna- 
 ture of Ju n 1 u s, during the years 1 769, 1770, 
 1771, and in January 1772. 
 
 This being a matter, not only of great 
 importance to Mr. Boyd as a writer, but 
 alfo, of no fmali curiofity in the Hiftory of 
 Englifh Literature, I have thought it in- 
 cumbent on me to fathom it with the utmoft 
 attention, to inveftigate every channel oi 
 intelligence connefted with it, and finally, 
 to afcertain whether the fuppofition, that 
 he was the author of the letters of Junius , 
 be founded in truth. The fum of my inqui- 
 ries impreffes me with the firmed conviftion 
 that Mr. Boyd was, in reality, the writer of 
 thofe letters ; for although there be no di- 
 re£t pofitive proof, yet are the internal, as 
 well as circumftantial evidence fo firong, 
 that no candid man of tafte or judgment 
 will deny me the conclufion I have drawn. 
 
 This fubjeft has already been noticed by 
 Mr. Almon, in his “ Biographical, Litera- 
 ry, and Political Anecdotes, 55 and it has been 
 (lightly touched upon in the Preface to a 
 former edition of Mr. Boyd’s Life. Since 
 
 the 
 
3 o 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 the publication of thefe works, Mr. George 
 Chalmers * has informed the public, that 
 “ he has collefted documents f which com- 
 pletely fatisfy him that Mr. Boyd was the 
 author of Junius;'' and this declaration of 
 Mr. Chalmers gave rife to a J controverfy 
 in the newfpapers which has attracted fome 
 attention. 
 
 Thofe who have maintained that Mr. 
 Boyd was not the writer of the letters fign- 
 ed Junius , have produced only one argu- 
 ment in fupport of their opinion, which has 
 even the fainteft colour of plaulibility. 
 They affirm, that his abilities and informa- 
 tion were altogether unequal to the talk of 
 compofing thofe letters, and that his effays in 
 the “ Indian Obferver,” are every way fo 
 inferior to them, that it is not to be believed 
 they could both have been written by the 
 fame perfon. In the firft inftance, there- 
 fore, I (hall meet them upon their own 
 
 * See the Poftfcript to his c< Supplemental Apology.” 
 t 1 underhand it is Mr. Chalmers’s intention fpcedily 
 to publifh thefe documents. 
 
 J For an account of this controverfy, fee the Appendix 
 to the Life. 
 
 ground. 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 3 1 
 
 ground, and from internal evidence fatisfac- 
 torily eftablifh the fa£t, that he was fully 
 capable of writing the letters of Junius . 
 And as to the inferiority of his papers in 
 the “ Indian Obferver,” admitting that in- 
 feriority, for the fake of argument, in a 
 much wider latitude than truth obliges me 
 to grant, it is yet merely a vulgar error to 
 fuppofe, that becaufe a man has once writ- 
 ten well, he can never, under any circum- 
 flances, write ill; and that becaufe a great 
 genius has written with peculiar beauty and 
 energy on one particular fubjeft, he muff 
 of neceflity always difplay, at leaft an obvi- 
 ous refemblance of the like excellence, in 
 all his fubfequent produftions. Such a fup- 
 pofition, though fomewhat plaufible, is in 
 faft, utterly fallacious, and can be entertain- 
 ed only by thofe who have a very fuper- 
 ficial knowledge of the conftitution of the 
 human mind, as well as a limited acquaint- 
 ance with literature. It is a fophifm, which 
 a due inquiry into the philofophy of criti- 
 cifm, and an examination of the different 
 writings of fome eminent men, would very 
 fully expofe, but which, in the prefent in- 
 
 ftance 5 
 
 3 
 
# 
 
 32 LIFE OF 
 
 fiance, I think I cannot more fatisfaclorily 
 refute, than in the nervous language of 
 Doftor Johnfon. “ There are, 5 ’ fays he, 
 “ many poflible caufes of that inequality 
 which w^e may Jo frequently obferve in 
 <c the performances of the fame man, from 
 “ the influence of which no ability or induf- 
 “ try is fufficiently fecured, and which have 
 “ fo often fullied the fplendourof genius, that 
 “ the w r it, as v/ell as the conqueror, may be 
 “ properly cautioned not to indulge his pride 
 “ with too early triumphs, but to defer to 
 “ the end of his life, his eflimate of happinefs. 
 “ ****** Though we fuppofe that a man 
 “ by his fortune can avoid the neceflity of 
 “ dependence, and by his fpirit can repel 
 the ufurpations of patronage, yet he may 
 “ eafily, by writing long , happen to write 
 “ ill . There i? a general fucceflion of 
 
 “ events, in w r hich contraries are produced 
 “ by periodical viciflitudes ; labour and 
 “ care are rewarded by fuccefs, fuccefs pro- 
 “ duces confidence, confidence relaxes in- 
 " duftry, and negligence ruins that reputa- 
 “ tion which accuracy had raifed. 
 
 “ He 
 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 33 
 
 u He that happens not to be lulled by 
 sc praife into fupinenefs, may be animated 
 ,c by it to undertakings above his ftrength, 
 “ or incited to fancy himfelf alike qualified 
 “ for every kind of compofition, and able 
 “ to comply with the publick tafte through 
 “ all its variations. By fome opinion like 
 “ this, many men have been engaged at an 
 “ advanced age, in attempts which they 
 “ had not time to complete, and after a few 
 “ weak efforts, funk into the grave with 
 “ vexation to fee the rifing generation gain 
 “ ground upon them. From thefe failures 
 “ the higheft genius is not exempt ; that 
 “ judgment which appears fo penetrating, 
 6C when it is employed on the works of 
 ** others, very often fails where interefl: or 
 “ paffion can exert their power. We are 
 “ blinded in examining our own labours by 
 “ innumerable prejudices. Our juvenile 
 <f compofitions pleafe us, becaufe they bring 
 “ to our minds the remembrance of youth ; 
 <f our later performances we are ready to 
 “ efteem, becaufe we are unwilling to think 
 “ we have made no improvement ; what flows 
 “ eafily from the pen charms us, becaufe 
 
 c “ we 
 
34 
 
 LIFE GF 
 
 “ we read with pleafure that which flatters 
 “ our opinion of our own powers ; what 
 66 was compofed with great ftruggles of the 
 <£ mind we do not eafily rejeft, becaufe we 
 “ cannot bear that fo much labour fhould 
 ££ be fruitlefs. But, the reader has none of 
 “ thefe prepoffeffions, and wonders that the 
 C£ author is fo unlike hunfelf * without con- 
 ££ fidering that the fame foil will, with 
 ££ different culture , afford different pro - 
 ££ dufls 
 
 To demonflrate the truth of thefe obfer- 
 vations, many examples might be adduced ; 
 but I know of none more firiking than 
 that which is afforded in the writings of 
 Mr. Boyd, now prefented to the publick. 
 Every one who compares the letters of the 
 Whig, or Freeholder , with the effays in the 
 Indian Obferver , mult not only be fatisfied 
 that the fame man, on different fubje&s, and 
 in a different fituation, has written in ftyles 
 totally diflimilar, but alfo that the author of 
 thefe produftions poffeffed very uncommon 
 abilities, as well as great powers of lan- 
 guage and compofition. Thus the only 
 
 * See the Rambler , No. 21. 
 
 argument 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 35 
 
 argument of thofe, who have aflerted that 
 Mr. Boyd was not Junius , entirely falls to 
 the ground ; and they muft now take up a 
 pofition which they will find ftill lefs tena- 
 ble, and contend that the letters of the 
 Freeholder and Whig , are fo unlike thofe of 
 Junius , that they cannot be the produftions 
 of the fame mind. 
 
 I believe every man of fenfe and obferva- 
 tion who has read the letters of Junius with 
 critical attention, and who will carefully 
 compare them with the Freeholder , will at 
 once admit, that in both, the principles and 
 opinions, the mode of reafoning, the ftyle, 
 and the fpirit, are, with a few trifling excep- 
 tions, fo exaftly alike, that they muft either 
 have been written by the fame author, or 
 that the Freeholder is the beft imitation of 
 Junius that has yet appeared. I fhall, how- 
 ever, endeavour to (hew, that the fimilarity 
 between Mr. Boyds political writings, pub- 
 lifhed in this volume, and the letters of Ju- 
 nius , did not proceed from a vain defire to 
 imitate, but from a natural partiality to that 
 caft of thought and ftrufture of language, 
 which he had chofen for the difcuflion of 
 
 c ?. 
 
 
LIFE OF 
 
 36 
 
 political fubjeCls, of which he had fuccefs- 
 fully tried the effeCt on the publick mind, 
 and to which, therefore, he was induced to 
 adhere. At the fame time I do not fay it 
 v/as an abfolute habit of the mind which he 
 was unable to difguife ; for when it fuited 
 his fuhjeft and purpofe, he could not only 
 difguife his general ftyle, butalfo reach per- 
 fection in the particular one he adopted. 
 Of this we have an eminent and finking 
 inflance in the Preface * to his AbJlraLls 
 from Lord Chatham's Speeches , wherein he 
 has defcribed the eloquence of that great 
 man with a claffical force, animation, and 
 fublimity, which partake of the exalted 
 theme, and which, perhaps, have not been 
 often fur pa{Ted. Yet is the ftyle of this 
 
 compofition altogether fo different from 
 that of the Freeholder, or Junius , that the 
 raofi difeerning critic, will, I believe, be 
 unable to difeover any refemblance between 
 them. But to enable the reader the more 
 readily to form a judgment on this point, I 
 beg leave to contraft the following paffages 
 from the Freeholder and the Preface . 
 
 page 547, of this volume. 
 
 Free- 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 37 
 
 Freeholder. 
 
 4 4 We are no longer funk 
 in the dead repofe of defpo- 
 tifm and long parliaments. 
 — Thofe llagnations oi cor- 
 ruption and filth, fhall no 
 more poifon the land. “ Al- 
 ba nautis ftella refuljit . ” The 
 returning day-flar of the 
 conftitution again illumi- 
 nates the political herni- 
 fphere; and, in fulnefs of 
 fplendour, difplays the glo- 
 rious moment which reftores 
 to us our original rights. 
 The power which we dele- 
 gated, and the trull which 
 we conferred, revert to us. 
 The conllitution regene- 
 rates. And the new birth 
 infpires new vigour. As the 
 giant received renovation 
 'of ftrength from touching 
 his mother earth, fo the 
 rights of the people acquire 
 new fpring and force, when 
 brought back to their origi- 
 nal and parent fource, the 
 people’s voice.” 
 
 ****** “ Such, my friends, 
 are the invaluable bleflings 
 now within our grafp. Such 
 are the tranfcendant rewards 
 now prefented to us by the 
 oppoitunity of an eleflion. 
 Power now returns to its 
 genuine centre, the will ot 
 the people. It is theirs, 
 and only theirs, again to 
 put it in action, and to pre- 
 fcribe its operations. The 
 vital blood ebbs back to 
 the heart of the conftitu- 
 tion. 
 
 Preface, &c. 
 
 “ But the candourand im- 
 agination of the reader muff 
 fupply another deficiency in 
 our reprefeptation of Lord 
 Chatha m’s o rato ry , more 
 aflfe&ing our purpole of ex- 
 hibiting its true likenefs, 
 than the partial imperfec- 
 tion we have mentioned. 
 Thofe who have been wir- 
 nefies to the wonders of his 
 eloquence — who have lis- 
 tened to the mufick of his 
 voice, or trembled at its 
 majefly — who have feen the 
 perfuafivegracefulnefsof his 
 aflion, or have felt its force; 
 — thofe who have caught the 
 flame of eloquence from his 
 eye — who have rejoiced in 
 the glories of his counte- 
 nance, or flirunk from his 
 frowns, — will remember the 
 refiftlefs power with which 
 he imprefled conviction. In 
 thefe Iketches of his original 
 genius, they will read what 
 they have heretofore heard ; 
 and their memory wall give 
 due aCtion to the picture, by 
 refiguring to their minds, 
 what they have with admi- 
 ration feen. But to thofe 
 who never heard nor faw 
 this accomphfhed orator, 
 the utmoll effort of imagi- 
 nation will be neceflary to 
 form a juft idea of that com- 
 binationot excellence, which 
 gave perfection to his elo- 
 quence : — h is elevated afpeet 
 commanding the awe and 
 nmuf 
 
Freeholder. 
 
 tion*. Let us imitate the wif- 
 dom of nature, and we fhall 
 attain its fuccefsful effe£ls. 
 Let us give the vital ftreams 
 again to flow, through their 
 conflitutional channels. So 
 lhall the health of the whole 
 body be reftored, and its 
 Arength eflablifhed. Every 
 part ol it fhall revive -and 
 flourifh ; and .the ghafl.lv 
 countenance of poverty and 
 fervitude (hall brighten in- 
 to the fmile of happinefs, 
 and the triumph ol liber- 
 
 * This appears to have been a fa- 
 vourite figure of Mr. Boyd’s. In 
 the Indian Obferver he applies it no 
 lefs .appi'y than ii; the prefent in- 
 ftan In talking of the circula- 
 tioi . of commerce, he fays, “ The 
 “rich ft :ams that have flowed 
 “ through the arteries of protected 
 “ trade, return through the grateful 
 “ Vti, to fuppo he fource from 
 “whence they ifl . . " And it is 
 
 peculiarly de‘ ving of obfervation, 
 that this metaphor is ufed . no other 
 •author except junim,'* ho inexhorti, g 
 the kingdom at large to follow the 
 examp which the city of London had 
 given them, by petitioning the King 
 todiflolve tn: parliameiu, obferves, 
 “ That the noble fpirk of the me- 
 “ tropolis is the iife-blood of the 
 “ ftate, collefted at the heart ; from 
 “ that point it circulates with health 
 “ and vigour through every artery 
 “ of the conftitution.” 
 
 Preface, &c. 
 
 mut? attention of all who 
 beheld him : whilfl a certain 
 grace in his manner, con- 
 feious of all the dignities 
 of his fituation, of the fo- 
 lemn feene he a£!ed in, as 
 well as his own exalted cha- 
 ra&er, Teemed to acknow- 
 ledge and repay the refpedt 
 he received: — his venerable 
 form bowed with infirmity 
 and age ; but animated by a 
 mind which nothing could 
 fubdue : — his fpirit Alining 
 through him, arming his eye 
 with lightning, and cloth- 
 ing his lips with thunder ; 
 — or if milder topicks offer- 
 ed, harmonizing his counte- 
 nance in fmiles, and his 
 voice in foftnefs ; for the 
 compafs of his powers was 
 infinite. As no idea was 
 too vaft, no imagination too 
 fublime, for the grandeur 
 and majefty of his manner ; 
 fo no fancy was too playful, 
 nor any allufion too conhc, 
 for the eafe and gaiety with 
 which he could accommo- 
 date to the occafion. But 
 the character of his oratory 
 was dignity: this prefided 
 throughout ; giving force, 
 becaufe fecuring refpefet, 
 even to his Tallies of plea- 
 fantry. This elevated the 
 moft familiar language, and 
 .gave novelty and grace to 
 the moft familiar allufions; 
 fo that, in his hand, even the 
 crutch became a weapon of 
 oratory . — Telum Oratons 
 
 Thus 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 39 
 
 Thus we perceive, that Mr. Boyd could 
 rife into eloquence and dignity in two very 
 different ftyles, and that he could infufe into 
 each that generous ardour which its fubjeft in- 
 fpired. In the Freeholder is to be obferved the 
 fameftru&ure of the fentences, the fame tran- 
 fitions, the fame fertility and happinefs of allu- 
 fion, the fame chafte application of meta- 
 phors, and the fame method of introducing 
 them ; the fame concife vigour, the fame bril- 
 liant animation, and above all, the fame terfe 
 phrafeology which are the chara&eriftick 
 features of Junius's ftyle. On the other 
 hand, we admire in the Preface , the eafe and 
 amplification of the periods, the fpirit with 
 which they are kept up, the rapid flow of 
 the fentiments, the copious energy of the 
 language, the boldnefs, yet correftnefs of 
 the figures, the critical accuracy of the dif- 
 crimination, and finally, the claflica! beauty 
 and elegance of the defcription. In both 
 are difplayed very confiderable genius, ex- 
 quifite tafte, and great facility of compofi- 
 tion — and it will be found on a perufal of 
 his political writings, that thefe qualities pre- 
 dominate throughout the whole of them. 
 
 But 
 
40 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 But in order to fhew in the ftrongefi point 
 of view, the affinity between the reafoning and 
 compofition of thofe writings and the letters 
 of Junius , I fhall cite a few paffages from 
 both, and point out the model on which 
 their general ftyle was undoubtedly formed. 
 It is, however, necelfary to premife one or 
 two fafts, concerning the time and care 
 which were beftowed on the produftions of 
 Junius , and the hurry or negligence with 
 which the other papers were written. Be- 
 fides, the internal evidence which the letters 
 of Junius themfelves afford of their being 
 compofed with great labour and attention, 
 we have his own declaration to that effect, 
 expreffed in pretty plain terms. In his fe- 
 cond letter in reply to Mr. Horne, he afks, 
 Ctf Is there no merit in dedicating my life to 
 “ the information of my fellow-fubjefts ?” 
 #■*##** (e j s * here no labour in the compo- 
 “ Jition of thefe letters ? Mr. Horne, I fear, 
 cc is partial to me, and meafures the facility 
 “ of my writings, by the fluency of his own.” 
 Now it is a pofitive fafl:, that the papers of 
 the Freeholder, on the contrary, were writ- 
 ten 
 
HUGH 30 YD. 
 
 ten in the moft hurried manner, on the very 
 fpur of the occafion they were defigned to 
 ferve, and in the mid ft of all the confufion, 
 diftipation, and riot, incident to an Irifh 
 eie6tion ; and it is alfo a faft equally well 
 authenticated, that the letters of Democratic 
 cus, and of the Whig , were compofed without 
 the fmalleft preparation, ftudy, or attention: 
 for after the month of January 1772, he 
 never wrote for the publick with any 
 care, nor even with his accuftomed fe- 
 crecy. The articles which he fent from 
 time to time to Mr. Woodfall and Mr. 
 Almon, were written merely to gratify his 
 ruling paftion for politicks, and not with a 
 view to arreft the publick attention : they 
 coft him little time, and lefs labour. Thefe 
 writings are, therefore, by confequence, lefs 
 polifhed than the letters of Junius, and in 
 thefe he has almoft wholly abftained from that 
 pungency of farcafm and bitternefs of per- 
 fonal fatire, which, together with the replies 
 that they provoked, were unqueftionably the 
 true caufes of the unexampled popularity of 
 thofe letters. But the fame political princi- 
 ples. 
 
4 ^ 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 pies, the fame bold fentiments of liberty, 
 and precifely the fame opinions of publick 
 meafures and publick men, to which Junius 
 invariably adhered, will be found uniformly 
 avowed, and ftrenuoufly maintained in the 
 Freeholder , Democraticus , and the Whig. 
 And here I mull remind the reader, that 
 confiftency of opinion was Junius's greateft 
 boaft. In his reply to Mr. Horne already 
 quoted, he fays, — “ But he (Mr. Horne) 
 “ afferts that he has traced me through a 
 “ variety of fignatures. To make the dif- 
 “ covery of any importance to his purpofe, 
 “ he (hould have proved, either that the 
 “ fiftitious character of Junius has not been 
 “ confiftentJy fupported, or, that the author 
 “ has maintained different principles under 
 " different fignatures. I cannot recal to my 
 “ memory the numberlefs trifles I have writ - 
 £< ten; but I rely on the confcioufnefs of 
 “ my own integrity, and defy him to fix any 
 iS colourable charge of incon/iflency upon 
 “ me.” 
 
 That this uniformity of principles is fled- 
 faftly preferved in the political letters now 
 
 publifhed. 
 
HUGH BOYD. 43 
 
 publifhed, will be heft proved by a compa- 
 nion of the following paffages. 
 
 Freeholder. 
 
 Let me in the firft place 
 conjure you never to lofe 
 fight of rhe great, fundamen- 
 tal principle, that You are 
 the origin of power. Govern- 
 ment was conftituted by and 
 for the people. This is the 
 voice of reafon ? nd the right 
 of humanity: and applies in 
 theory to all the nations of 
 the world. But it is our pe- 
 culiar felicity to realize the 
 fpeculation, and to feel its 
 aftual bleflings. — We are 
 de fafio, as well as de jure , 
 free. 
 
 Junius. 
 
 The powerof King, Lords, 
 and Commons, is not an ar- 
 bitrary power. They are 
 the truftees, not the owners 
 of the eftate. The fee -fimple 
 is in us. They cannot ali- 
 enate, they cannot wafte . 
 When we fay that the legif- 
 lature is fupreme, we mean 
 that it is the higheft power 
 known to the conftitution ; 
 that it is the higheft in 
 comparifon with the other 
 fubordinate powers eftabiifh- 
 ed by the laws. 
 
 So far we find the fundamental principles 
 of civil government laid down by Junius and 
 the Freeholder , are ex a 61:1 y the fame : and in 
 another place the Freeholder further fays, — 
 “ Remember, my friends, that in the rao- 
 “ ment of ele6lion, you (land forth the im- 
 “ mediate guardians of your country.” — 
 
 “ To her you owe an original, unalienable , 
 “ eternal duty. You are, therefore, abfo- 
 “ lutely, and unconditionally, free. Except 
 “ in the fenfe, in which Omnipotence itfelf 
 “ is limited ; by wifdom and virtue .” 
 
 With 
 
44 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 With regard to the difpute between 
 Great Britain and the American Colonies, 
 Junius and the Freeholder exprefs themfelves 
 in the following terms. 
 
 Freeholder. 
 
 **** I maintain the in- 
 nocence of America as to 
 independent views ; which 
 if the now entertains, we 
 can only blame our own in- 
 fatuation that has compelled 
 her. The point of view l 
 with to take, is the ftate of 
 America previous to the re- 
 peal of the ftamp-a£l. She 
 was then, according to the 
 language of parliamentary 
 journals, “ in outrageous re- 
 bellion.” To reftore the 
 happinefs and connexion of 
 both countries, a repeal of 
 that a was propofed **** 
 It was reftored , and would 
 have been effablifhed, but 
 for our fatal relap fe into our 
 former folly. About two 
 years afterwards, the at- 
 tempt at internal taxation 
 was revived ; and what was 
 perhaps (fill more vexatious, 
 was continued, at a memo- 
 rable period which foon fol- 
 lowed, though Lord Hilfbo- 
 rough had, in the name of all 
 the minifters, exprefsly de- 
 claimed it, in his publick 
 letter to the Colonies. The 
 violence and folly which 
 have ever fince difgraced 
 our 
 
 Junju s. 
 
 A feries of inconfiftent 
 meafures has alienated the 
 Colonies from their duty as 
 fubjefts, and from their na- 
 tural affection to their com- 
 mon country.**** — Under 
 one adminiffration the 
 ffamp-a6t is made ; underw- 
 rite fecond it is repealed ; 
 under the third, in fpite of 
 all experience, a new mode 
 of taxing the colonies is in- 
 vented, and a queffion re- 
 vived which ought to have 
 been buried in oblivion. In 
 thefe circumftances a new 
 office is effablifhed for the 
 bufmefs of the plantations, 
 and the Earl of Hiilborough 
 is called forth at a raoft cri- 
 tical feafon to govern Ame- 
 rica.**** Since that period 
 they (meaning the Colonies) 
 have been driven into ex- 
 ceffes little fhort of rebel- 
 lion. Petitions have been 
 hindered from reaching the 
 throne ; and the continu- 
 ance of one of the principal 
 affembhes reffed upon an ar- 
 bitrary condition, which, 
 conffdering the temper they 
 were in, it was impoffible 
 they Ihould comply with ; 
 
HUGH BOYD, 
 
 45 
 
 Freeholder. 
 
 our councils and our arms, 
 are not to our prefeni pur- 
 pofe ; which is only to prove 
 the peaceful and obedient 
 difpofition of America, from 
 which (he was driver: by 
 the revival of our oppref- 
 fions. 
 
 Junius. 
 
 and which would have 
 availed nothing as to the 
 general queftion, if it had 
 been complied with. 
 
 Thefe extra&s fufficiently fnew, the con- 
 formity of opinion between Junius and the 
 Freeholder to the fafts they have Rated. 
 Let us fee how well their opinions and lan- 
 guage tally upon a very material point in the 
 
 American queRion. 
 
 Freeholder. 
 
 It is particularly obfer- 
 vable that the Colonies only 
 complain of the arbitrary 
 practice of univerfal taxa- 
 tion, and not of the general 
 principle . For in all their 
 applications, either to King 
 or Parliament, they never 
 require the repeal of the De- 
 claratory Aft, which efta- 
 blifhes that principle : but 
 it intends it, however, as 
 all principles ought to be 
 intended, to be afted upon 
 with equity and moderation. 
 The fupreme power and 
 right of Great Britain is 
 there declared, in all cafes 
 whatever. And it may be 
 
 Junius. 
 
 Junius confiders the right 
 of taxing the Colonies by 
 an aft of the Britifh Legifla- 
 ture, as a fpeculative right 
 merely, never to be exerted , 
 nor ever to be renounced. To 
 hisjudgmentit appears plain, 
 that the general reafonings 
 which were employed againft 
 that power, went direftly to 
 our whole legiflative right; 
 and that one part of it could 
 not be yielded to fuch argu- 
 ments, without a virtual fur- 
 render of all the reft, 
 
 This 
 
46 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 Freeholder. 
 
 admitted to exifl in all cafes , 
 either external or internal. But 
 the Declaratory A£t does 
 not, cannot fay , that it equal- 
 ly exifts at all times, and for 
 all purpfes. 
 
 This is a point upon which there was 
 much contrariety of opinion among the mod 
 hrenuous oppofers of the American war. 
 Lord Chatham confidered the Britifh 
 legiflature as not fupreme over the colonies 
 in the fame fenfe in which it is fupreme 
 over the mother-country. Mr. Burke 
 and the Rockingham party fupported the 
 entire fupremacy of the imperial legiflature 
 of Great Britain, as hated in the Declaratorv 
 A61, while they condemned the exercife of 
 that fupremacy for the purpofe of internal 
 taxation ; and fome other gentlemen of great 
 talents pofitively denied the exigence of any 
 fpeculative right whatever in the Britifh 
 parliament to levy taxes in the colonies. 
 The diftinftion, hated with fo much preci- 
 fion, by Junius, is fomewhat peculiar ; it 
 was hrongly combated at the time ; and as 
 far as I have had an opportunity of examining 
 
 the 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 47 
 
 the different fpeeches and writings on this 
 fubjeft, I have not found it excittly main- 
 tained any where elfe but in the Freeholder . 
 The Freeholder fpecifically declares, that 
 the right to tax the Colonies exifts in all 
 cafes either external or internal , but that it 
 does not exift for all purpofes , and fhould 
 never be arbitrarily exercifed . This is, in 
 other words, the very diftin&ion made by 
 Junius . The fpirit of the two paffages 
 above quoted is precifely the fame. 
 
 Upon another queftion of the utmoft deli- 
 cacy, Junius delivered an opinion which was 
 then, and is now extremely unpopular, 
 which excited a great deal of clamour among 
 thofe who ftyled themfelves the friends of 
 the People , but to which the Freeholder im- 
 plicitly fubfcribes. “ I have a claim , 35 fays 
 Junius , “ to the candid interpretation of 
 “ my country, when I acknowledge an in- 
 “ voluntary compulfive alfent, to one very 
 " unpopular opinion. I lament the unhappy 
 u neceffity, whenever it arifes, of providing 
 “ for the fafety of the (late, by a temporary in- 
 “ vafionof the perfonal liberty of the fubjeft. 
 a Would to God! it were prafticable to 
 
 reconcile 
 
LIFE OF 
 
 4 3 
 
 44 reconcile thefe important ©bjefls, in every 
 “ poflible fituation of publick affairs ! I 
 44 regard the legal liberty of the meaneft 
 44 man in Britain as much as my own, and 
 44 would defend it with the fame zeal. I 
 
 4 
 
 44 know we muff hand or fall together. But 
 44 I never can doubt that the community has 
 44 a right to command , as well as to purchafe 
 44 the fervice of its members. I fee that right 
 44 founded originally upon a neceffity which 
 “fuperfedes all argument . I fee it eftablifh- 
 44 ed by ufage immemorial, and admitted by 
 44 more than a tacit affent of the legiflature.. 
 44 I conclude there is no remedy in the na- 
 44 ture of things for the crrievance com- 
 44 plained of ; for, if there were, it mud 
 64 long fince have been redreffed. Though 
 44 numberlefs opportunities have prefented 
 44 themfelves, highly favourable to publick 
 44 liberty, no fuccefsful attempt has ever 
 44 been made for the relief of the fubjeft in 
 44 this article. Yet it has been felt and 
 44 complained of, ever fince England had a 
 44 navy. The conditions which conftitute this 
 44 right, mu ft be taken together, feparately 
 44 they have little weight. It is not fair to 
 44 argue from any abufe in the execution, 
 
 44 to 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 49 
 
 * c to the illegality of the power ; much lefs 
 is a conclufion to be drawn from the navy 
 “ tot he land fervice. The only cafe in 
 which the King can have a right to arm 
 “ his fubjefts in general* is that of a foreign 
 “ force being aftually landed on our coaft. 
 “ Whenever that cafe happens, no true 
 cc Englifhman will inquire, whether the 
 “ King’s right to compel him to defend his 
 “ country, be the cuftom of England, or a 
 “ part of the legiflature. With regard to 
 the prefs for feamen, it does not follow 
 “ that the fymptoms may not be foftened, 
 “ although the diftemper cannot be cured. 
 “ Let bounties be increafed as far as the 
 “ publick purfe can fupport them. Still 
 “ they have a limit ; and when every rea- 
 fonable expence is incurred, it will be 
 “ found in fa<3, that the fpur of the prefs is 
 “ wanted to give operation to the bounty.” 
 — I have been induced to cite this paffage 
 at full length, on account of its intrinfick 
 good fenfe, and found policy. In the Free- 
 holder this opinion is upheld in fewer words, 
 but with as much force and clearnefs. Talk- 
 ing of the rights of the executive govern- 
 or ment. 
 
5 ° 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 ment, it is obferved, “ That a right may 
 “ lofe its nature, and become the mod odious 
 " wrong, by unjuft exertions. The King, 
 “ for inftance, may have a right to prefs his 
 “ fubje&s, or & particular part of them, into 
 “ the fea-fervice . And the moft conftitu- 
 “ tional lawyers decide Jo. But even the 
 “ moft hardened lawyer would blufh to af- 
 “ fert, and the tameft flave would rife to 
 “ refill:, a perpetual, unneceftary, and op- 
 “ preftive abufe of it. *” 
 
 Thus it is manifeft that the Freeholder 
 entirely coincides with "Junius , in every po- 
 litical principle, as well as on every politi- 
 cal queftion, which it fuited his particular 
 purpofe to mention, or difcufs. His ob- 
 fervations are, for the moft part, confined 
 to the main fubjeft of his letters, the right 
 of free election ; and on that important to- 
 pick, he not only agrees with Junius, but 
 takes from him the mottos for his two firft 
 papers, and with admirable finefle com- 
 mences his firft one with the follow- 
 ing feafonable panegyrick. — “The great 
 “ writer whofe words I have placed at the 
 
 * See the Preface to the Freeholder , p. 18, of this vol. 
 
 “ head 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 5 1 
 
 % head of my paper, is juftly acknowledged 
 " to excel in fplendour of imagery, and in 
 “ ftrength of di&ion. But his excellence 
 “ extends to points {till more important. 
 “ No writer has inveftigated with fuch fa- 
 “ gacity, nor with fuch clearnefs pointed 
 “ out the true nature of our admirable 
 “ conftitution. The wifdom and learning 
 “ of Locke had afcertained fome great 
 “ fundamental maxims, which conftituted, 
 “ or at leaft contributed to form the bafis 
 “ of our liberties. But it remained for the 
 “ fucceeding addrefs and eloquence of Juni- 
 “ us , to encounter and to fubdue, at leaft 
 “ in the fields of argument, the more re- 
 “ fined corruptions of later times.” It may, 
 at firft fight, feem irreconcileable with that 
 modefty which Mr. Boyd poffefied, to be- 
 llow fuch high praife on his own produc- 
 tions. But if we inquire a little into the 
 motives of human a£lion, as well as into 
 the peculiar circumftances of the cafe before 
 us, we fhall be fatisfied, that the above en- 
 comium is no way inconfiftent with any of 
 the qualities of his mind, and was in itfelf 
 at once judicious and neceftary. 
 
 d 2 Modefty 
 

 LIFE OF 
 
 Modefty has been beautifully called, es the 
 “ grace of all the other virtues,” and undoubt- 
 edly in proper time and place it is both be- 
 coming and falutary. When it arifes from 
 a native meeknefs of difpofition, it gives a 
 pleafing hue to the bloom of genius, as well 
 as an infmuating foftnefs to the countenance 
 of virtue. This true modefty is perfeftly 
 compatible with that ingenuous pride which 
 proceeds from a confcioufnefs of our own 
 
 X 
 
 talents and integrity, and which difdains 
 the ridiculous affeftation of forbearing to 
 fpeak of ourfelves, as we think and feel we 
 deferve, more efpecially when we conceive 
 the doing fo will be produftive of a publick 
 benefit. But mankind are fo much accuf- 
 tomed to that falfe modefty which is made 
 up of unmanly diffidence, vanity, and hy- 
 pocrify, that we are extremely apt to attri- 
 bute to arrogance, that which flows from 
 the moft generous motives ; and to re- 
 proach a man for felf-fufficiency, becaufe 
 he has had the franknefs to avow his opinion 
 of his own merits. In truth, there is often 
 much more vanity in concealing, than in 
 openly afferting our own claims to publick 
 
 applaufe : 
 
I 
 
 HUGH BOYD. 53 
 
 applaufe : for as men, who are poflefied 
 of fhining abilities, feldom under-rate them 
 in their own eftimation, and as well-earned 
 praife is generally grateful to the mind, 
 there is furely lefs oftentation in a candid 
 and dignified acknowledgment of the opi- 
 nion we entertain of our own endowments, 
 than in the drained prudery too commonly 
 pra&ifed, of talking humbly of them, and 
 of affefting not to deferve thofe praifes, for 
 which, at the fame moment, our hearts are 
 fecretly panting. The man who is prompt- 
 ed to great undertakings by a generous 
 ambition, and who is guided in his purfuits 
 by a love of glory and truth, ought not to 
 confider it in any degree inconfiftent with 
 real humility, to tell the world what he 
 thinks of himfelf. So thought and fo aid- 
 ed* the illuftrious Hume, whofe amiable 
 and unafluming manners were as much 
 efteemed in private life, as his great talents 
 have been admired by all mankind. And 
 it was upon thefe principles that Mr. Boyd 
 aided, when he made Junius praife his own 
 
 * See Hume’s Life of himfelf, prefixed to the ill vol. 
 «f his Hiftory. 
 
 produidions 
 
54 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 produflions in the following terms. “ When 
 “ kings and minifters are forgotten, when 
 “ the force and direftion of perfonal fatire 
 “ are no longer underftood, and when mea- 
 “ fures are only felt in their remotefl confe- 
 “ quences, this book will, I believe, be found 
 <c to contain principles worthy to be tranf- 
 “ mitted to poflerity.” ******* This is 
 “ not the language of vanity. If I am a 
 “ vain man, my gratification lies within a 
 “ very narrow circle. I am the foie depof - 
 “ tory of my own fecret , and it fhall perifi 
 “ with me? — In another place he fays — 
 “ * * without meaning an indecent compa- 
 “ rifon, I may venture to foretel, that the 
 “ Bible and Junius will be read, when 
 cc the commentaries of the Jefuits are for- 
 “ gotten.” 
 
 But the eulogium on Junius in the Free- 
 holder > may be defended on other grounds. 
 He was well perfuaded of the efficacy of 
 commencing thofe letters, which were ad- 
 drefled to the freeholders of the county of 
 Antrim, by openly profeffing the fame prin- 
 ciples and opinions with the mod popular 
 political writer of the age : and *it the fame 
 
 time 
 
 0 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 55 
 
 time he no doubt conceived that his high 
 praife of Junius would do away the fuf- 
 picion, to which the fimilitude of his ftyle 
 and fentiments, to thofe of the letters under 
 that fignature might very poflibly give rife. 
 The aftonifhing impreflion which his letters 
 made on the minds of the people of Antrim, 
 fully evinced both the utility and prudence 
 of the plan he adopted. They were uni- 
 verfally admired ; and the Freeholder was 
 called a fecond Junius , by the moll compe- 
 tent judges. Very diligent inquiries were 
 made to find out the author ; but as he 
 was in this inftance aifo the “foie depoftory 
 “ of his own fecretf he was not difcovered 
 till many years afterwards, when a fheet of 
 the manufcript which the printer had neg- 
 lefted to deftroy was accidentally found, and 
 in which fome of Mr. Boyd’s friends de- 
 te£ied the hand-writing, although it was very 
 much difguifed. He then acknowledged to 
 Mrs. Boyd, that he had written the Free- 
 holder. 
 
 With regard to publick chara&ers, he 
 has principally confined himfelf in the Free- 
 holder, to the three gentlemen who flood 
 
 candidates 
 
LIFE OF 
 
 5 6 
 
 candidates for the county of Antrim, at the 
 general election in 1776; but his mode of 
 examining the claims of each of thefe can- 
 didates, fo much refembles the general man- 
 ner of Junius , as well as the call: of his lan- 
 guage, that I muft point out two or three 
 paffages to the particular notice of the 
 reader. He begins by quoting from Black- 
 stone, “that no lord of parliament hath 
 “ any right to interfere in the election of com - 
 " moners” — “ This,” fays he, “ is the law 
 “ of the land. Remember it, my coun- 
 “ trymen! revere it : maintain it. It is the 
 “ grand barrier of the conftitution. While 
 “ it ftands firm, you remain fafely and in- 
 “ vincibly intrenched in your own privi- 
 <c leges. But if ever you furrender it to 
 cc the enemy, you are irretrievably ruined. 
 £C The democratick eftate will be annihi- 
 f£ lated out of the conftitution : and you will 
 be melted down into a vile vaffalage ; the 
 “ devoted prey and plunder of your defpo- 
 “ tick conquerors.” The three candidates 
 were the Hon. Henry Seymour Conway, 
 the Hon. Hugh Skeffington, and James 
 Wilfon, efq. Of the firft he obferves, “ that 
 
 “ he 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 57 
 
 “ he refutes in England; fixed there by con- 
 “ nexion, by inclination, and by duty. His 
 “ father is an Englifh Earl, Lord Chamber- 
 “ lain to his Majefty’s houfehold, and unalie- 
 “ nably oMached to the court. Pofieffed of 
 “ an ample fortune in Ireland, he remem- 
 “ bers that country only in the large remit- 
 “ tances which he draws from her exhaufted 
 " bofom : unlefs indeed his attention be reviv- 
 “ ed at the polite period of oftennial conde- 
 fcenfiont.” ****#« Befides he is indif- 
 penfibly fattened to England, by his feat 
 “ in the Britifh Houfe of Commons. * * * * 
 " How then can he reprefent our county in 
 “ an Irifh parliament. He is not only, not 
 “ an inhabitant of this place, and therefore an 
 “ unconfiitutional candidate, but he is an ac- 
 “ tual abfenteefrom this kingdom, and there- 
 “ fore an impqjjible Teprefentative. The ob- 
 “ jeftion is infuperable. It is not an intricate 
 u deduftion of argument, to which perhaps 
 “ fpecious fophiftry might be oppofed. It 
 
 t The length of this pafTage prevents me from quoting 
 the whole of it : But the reader is referred to pages 44, 
 45, and 46, of this volume. 
 
 “ is 
 
LIFE OF 
 
 58 
 
 <c is an unanfwerable point of fa£t. He 
 “ cannot rep refen t you.” 
 
 Of Mr. Skeffington he fays, “ It is ob- 
 “ vious that I ftudy to fpeak gently of 
 “ this gentleman. Content with a negative 
 <c argument againft his fufficiency, I do not 
 “ alledge pofitive charges of betraying truft. 
 “ I do not refer to venal majorities, blank 
 “ lifts, and the obedient aye, or ?io , — the ut- 
 te moft eloquence and fervice of fome repre- 
 “ fentatives : I fpeak not of uniform devo- 
 “ tion to the court , and to courtly connexions: 
 “ I only fubmit to my countrymen, that in- 
 “ dependent of fuch pojitive guilt 9 their duty 
 as freeholders obliges them to rejeft a can- 
 “ didate, who is obvioufly, and totally defti- 
 * s tute of all requiftte qualifications. 
 
 €s Permit me, in fome meafure to atone to 
 fC my own feelings, for the difagreeable ne- 
 “ ceffity of thefe publick truths, by a juft 
 “ tribute to the private charafter of this 
 “ gentleman. As far as my knowledge of it 
 reaches, I gladly bear teftimony to its be- 
 “ ing amiable, good-humoured, and friend- 
 ly. Nay, there is a fpecies of delicacy in 
 
 “ it. 
 
 ee 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 59 
 
 “ it, which reflects fome honour on him as 
 “ a man ; accompanied, alas ! with an in- 
 “ firmity of mind which difgraces him as a 
 “ fenator. For I have good authority to 
 “ fay, that he laments the fervitude of his 
 “ fituation. We all know too well that he 
 “ cannot (hake it off. He has fenfibility to 
 “ feel the chain ; without the fpirit, the en« 
 “ terprize of mind, that fhould caft it away, 
 “ and dare to be free.” 
 
 “ Refleft now, my countrymen ! — No- 
 “ thing can be wanting to your free exer- 
 ts lion of your privileges, and vindication of 
 “ your rights, on this great occafion ; if 
 “ you give it deep and due attention. You 
 (f will then be convinced that your grandeft 
 “ happinefs, the true fummum bonum , which 
 ■■ the ancients puzzled for in vain, your li- 
 (e berty, is at flake. Founded as it is, in 
 * 6 every virtue, you will confefs it paramount 
 “ to every blefling. To point out the path 
 “ that leads to this glorious objeft, Ihall be 
 “ the more pleafing bufinefs of my fucceed- 
 “ ing letters. Long enough have our eyes 
 “ ached over this barren profpetl : where no 
 (c verdure of virtue quickens— no publick fer- 
 
 (e vice 
 
6o 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 “ vice is feen to bloffom *. We will with 
 Cf pleafure turn our view and our choice 
 to a more fertile foil, pregnant with the 
 “ richeft feeds ; which wait only for the cul- 
 “ tivaticm of our favour to ripen into the 
 “ happieft harveft.” 
 
 After recommending Mr. Wilfon to the 
 freeholders of Antrim, as the only conftitu- 
 tional candidate of the three gentlemen who 
 have been named, he proceeds to obferve, 
 “ * * t j lat j n ilfon’s addrefs, two points 
 
 “ ftand remarkably confpicuous ; the inde- 
 “ pendent teft, which he propofes to take 
 “ on the day of eleftion ; and the plan which 
 “ he fuggefts, to colleft the fenfe of his con- 
 <c ftituents, for the regulation of his parlia- 
 “ mentary conduft. Thefe are eminent 
 <c features, and demand the niceft attention 
 “ of the political phyliognomift, who wilhes 
 
 * This is precifely the fame figure, with which Junius 
 begins his letter to Lord Camden. 
 
 “ My Lord, 
 
 “ I turn with pleafure from that barren wafte , in 
 “ which no falutary plant takes root — no verdure quick - 
 / * l ens, to a charafter, fertile, as I willingly believe, in 
 every great and good qualification.” 
 
 See Junius’s Letter to Lord Camden. 
 
 “ to 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 6 1 
 
 66 to trace the true lines of liberty, and to 
 “ afcertain the genuine fon of the conftitu- 
 “ tion.” 
 
 “ Parliamentary tefts were always proper. 
 “ Even in the purer days of ancient liberty, 
 “ it was not unwife to enforce , by additional 
 “ obligations, the faithfulnefs of the fervant. 
 “ It would never be thought unreafonable, 
 “ or ungenerous, to require from the agent, 
 “ at lead a promife that he would aft faith- 
 “ fully for his employer. But what was 
 “ right and-reafonable, in the mod virtuous 
 “ days, modern degeneracy has made abfo- 
 “ lutely neceffary. For, it is notorious, 
 “ that not only the fubftance of patriotism 
 “ is melting away, but its very name and 
 “ memory are falling into obloquy and con- 
 “ tempt. This noble quality, the fublimeft 
 Cf of moral virtues, as it approaches to the 
 “ facred nature of religion herfelf, fo mud 
 “ it expeft to fhare her abufe, and fuffer her 
 “ misfortune. Hypocrites are daily deteft- 
 “ ed, who do not blufh to proftitute the 
 “ facred charafter of both. Mifcreants are 
 “ daily heard, who deny the exiftence of 
 w either ; and who do not tremble to vilify 
 
 “ and 
 
62 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 “ and betray their God and their country. —-In 
 " this fhamelefs ftate of publick profligacy, it 
 “ is neceflary to adopt every caution, to im- 
 “ pofe every fan&ion, to infill on every fe- 
 cc curity, for the fidelity of their reprefenta- 
 “ tive. The honefl candidate for any truft, 
 Cf never objefls, will rather anxioufly defire, 
 “ to undertake in the moft folemn manner, 
 “ for the honefl; execution of it. For fuch 
 cf an undertaking only anticipates in a 
 “ profpedt pleafing to the mind, the courfe 
 cC of its own integrity. The virtuous man’s 
 es promife is a draught on the bank of truth. 
 “ He makes it with confidence, for he knows 
 “ it will be paid with honour. Thofe only 
 “ hefitate to offer the fame fund as a fecurity, 
 “ who are confcious that they have no cor- 
 “ refpondence with it.” 
 
 Such are the moft prominent paffages in 
 the Freeholder ; and I cannot doubt that 
 every man of tafte will admit, they bear an 
 obvious refemblance to the letters of Juni- 
 us , both in matter and ftyle. But as there 
 are many points difcufled, and many pub- 
 lick characters attacked, by Junius , that are 
 not even mentioned in the Freeholder, I (hall 
 
 make 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 63 
 
 make a few extrafts from the letters ot De- 
 mo craticus, and of the Whig , to {hew how ex- 
 aftly Mr. Boyds political fentiments corre- 
 fpond with thofe of Junius , in every parti- 
 cular inftance. 
 
 The letters of Democraticus appeared in 
 the Publick Advertifer, in the year 1 779. Mr. 
 Boyd fent them to Mr. Woodfall, in his 
 ordinary hand- writing, and he did not con- 
 ceal from Mrs. Boyd that he was the author 
 of them. They were com po fed in the molt 
 carelefs and hurried manner, like common 
 paragraphs for newfpapers ; and many of 
 them were committed to paper late at night, 
 after he had returned home greatly fatigued 
 from having attended a long debate in 
 one of the houfes of parliament. Under 
 thefe circumftances, to fay nothing of the 
 numberlefs difficulties by which, at this pe- 
 riod of his life, much more than at any other, 
 he was unceafingly teazed and perplexed, it 
 will not, I prefume, be denied, that it required 
 a mind of great natural ftrength, as well as 
 one long practifed in the habits of literary 
 compofition, to have produced thefe letters. 
 As to their ftyle, though it be in general of 
 
 a different 
 
 3 
 
LIFE OF 
 
 64 
 
 a different mould from that of Junius , yet 
 in fome particular parts there is fo evident 
 a likenefs between them, that it is hardly 
 credible it could have efcaped the obferva- 
 tion of Mr. Henry Sampfon Woodfall 
 For to me, at leaf!, it appears perfeftly clear, 
 that the writer of Democratic us, in thofe paf- 
 fages of his letters that have an affinity to the 
 compcfitions of Junius , has through hurry 
 and inattention lapfed into a flyle to which 
 he had been long accuftomed, but which he 
 was defirous to avoid. I fhall, however, 
 leave the publick to judge for themfelves. 
 
 As the letters of Democraticus are chiefly 
 addreffed to Lord North, it is neceffary 
 to remind the reader of the particular ex- 
 preffions in which Junius has delivered his 
 fentiments concerning the publick conduft 
 of that nobleman. In a letter to the Duke 
 of Grafton, dated February 14th, 1770, 
 fhortly after his Grace had refigned his feat 
 in the cabinet, he obferves — “ The palm of 
 
 # I fhall prefently {hew, that there is fome reafon to 
 fufpeft Mr. Woodfall did obferve this likenefs, as well 
 as one or two other circumftances which tend to prove 
 that Mr. Boyd was Junius” 
 
 " minifterial 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 65 
 
 “ minifterial firmnefs is now transferred to 
 “ Lord North. He tells us fo himfelf, and 
 “ with the plenitude of the ore rotundo* ; 
 “ and I am ready enough to believe, that, 
 “ while he can keep his place ) he will not 
 ct eafdy be perfuaded to r/efign it. Your 
 “ Grace was the firm minifter of yefterday ; 
 “ Lord North is the firm minifter of to-day. 
 “ To-morrow, perhaps, his Majefly, in his 
 “ wifdom, may give us a rival for you both. 
 “ You are too well acquainted with the tem- 
 <c per of your late allies, to think it poffible 
 “ that Lord North fhould be permitted to 
 “ govern this country. If we may believe 
 “ common fame, they have (hewn him their 
 “ fuperiority already. His Majefty is in- 
 “ deed too gracious to infult his fubjefts by 
 “ choofing his firft minifter from among the 
 “ domefticks of the Duke of Bedford; 
 “ that would have been too grofs an outrage 
 “ to the two kingdoms. Their purpofe, 
 cc however, is fufficiently anfwered by pufii- 
 “ ing forward this unhappy figure , and fore- 
 
 # This eloquent perfon has got as far as the discipline of 
 Demofthenes. He cohftantly fpeaks with pebbles in his 
 mouth to improve his articulation. Junius. 
 
 in g 
 
 e 
 
LIFE OF 
 
 65 
 
 “ ing him to bear the odium of meafures 
 “ which they in reality direffi. Without im- 
 “ mediately appearing to govern, they pof- 
 “ fefs the power, and dijlribute the emolu- 
 ee merits of government as they think pro- 
 “ per.” In another letter to the Duke of 
 Grafton, he fays, ef to them who know Lord 
 North, it is unneceffary to fay, that he 
 was mean and low enough to fubmit to 
 " you.” And in his letter to Lord North 
 himfelf, after reprobating in fevere terms 
 the appointment of Lieut. Colonel Lut- 
 trell, to the poll of adjutant general to 
 the army in Ireland, he concludes by telling 
 his Lordfhip — “ As for you , my Lord, who, 
 e - perhaps, are no more than the blind un- 
 £i happy inftrument of Lord Bute, and her 
 *'* Royal Highnefs the Princefs of Wales, 
 be .afiured that you (hall be called upon to 
 anfwer for the advice which has been 
 given, and either difcover your accomplices , 
 “ or fall a facrifice to their fecurity.” 
 
 After Lord North had been ten years in 
 office, Democraticus entertained the very 
 fame opinion of him ; and he expreffes it 
 in language equally explicit, and if poffible 
 
 more 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 67 
 
 more contemptuous and bold. — “ The dil- 
 grace and ruin of the prefent moment / 5 
 fays he, “ we owe to his Lordfhip, and his 
 accomplices in office. This, they may de- 
 cf ny ; for what will they not deny or 
 ff affert ? But their country challenges them 
 “ to the proof. It is a truth demonftrable 
 cc in argument. His Lordfhip has been 
 “ ten years in power ; in offiice at leafi : for 
 “ I am aware of the defence under which 
 “ his friends would fhelter him ; and will 
 “ admit to him every reafonable degree of 
 “ injignificance 9 as to his honour, both as a 
 “ minijler and a man. But he has not been 
 “ fiijficiently contemptible to be fafe. He 
 “ has had power enough to ruin his coun- 
 “ try. All its refources have been at 
 6< the command of adminiftration. Never 
 “ was government fo ftrongly fupported. 
 " The publick purfe has been poured into 
 “ their coffers, almoft without queftion, or 
 <c account. The publick fword was placed 
 “ in their hand without controul, and fharp- 
 “ ened at their pleafure ; and the flag of 
 u England was committed to their care un- 
 “ ftained. Monflrous majorities in parlia- 
 
 e 2 “ meat 
 
68 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 ££ raent obeyed their mandates ; and even 
 ££ the people, till their late bitter experience, 
 ££ were deluded, and inflamed into a kind of 
 ££ concurrence in their violences. Such was 
 £; the fulnefs of power intrufted to our mi- 
 « nifters.” ***** * * *■* ££ You, my Lord, 
 ££ and the exclufive partners of your gratifi- 
 C£ cation?, have the exclufive praife of all 
 “ ourprefent fituation. And if minifters can 
 ££ yet be refponfible in this finking country, 
 ££ you and your afTociat.es have an exclufive 
 “ title to publick vengeance ” In another let- 
 ter, perfonally addrefled to Lord North, he 
 oberves, £; If any doubt could remain on the 
 ££ fate of fuch a miniller, left to himfelf, the 
 ££ hiftory of your militia will remove it. 
 ££ Let us gratefully recolleft the political 
 ££ juflice of that feene, in which you fo fuc- 
 ££ cefsfullv plotted your own tragi-comic 
 * cataflrophe. It is almoft too ludicrous 
 '•*' to be gravely treated ; and yet it may be 
 ££ too ferious in its confequences for ridicule 
 ££ or contempt . It is impoflible not to laugh 
 u at Faljlajf \ buffeted by his own friends, 
 ££ and outwitted in his own knavery ; but 
 ££ indignation checks our mirth, when we 
 
 ££ remember 
 
HUGH BOYD, 69 
 
 ** remember that the fat man has mijled the 
 “prince, anti pillaged the exchequer ” 
 
 It is obfervable, that this paffage is pecu- 
 liarly in the ftyle of Junius ; and perhaps 
 there is not even in the moil highly finifhed 
 of the letters under that fignature, a more 
 happy or appropriate allufion. But there 
 are {till a few more paragraphs in thofe let- 
 ters, which, though not exaftly in the lan- 
 guage, are fo much in the fpirit of Junius , 
 that I mu ft beg leave to point them out. 
 
 In his letter to Lord North, already 
 quoted, Democraticus obferves, “ In times 
 “ of rebellion, it was in common obfervation, 
 “ that the traitor was hated, though the 
 “ treafon was loved. You, my Lord, per- 
 “ haps ftand acquitted from crimes fo ex- 
 c; alted. But levelling the argument to 
 “ your official fituation, it may be prudent 
 to confider that the tools of power are 
 “ firft defpifed, and at laft thrown aftde, by 
 “ thofe who have employed them. Recol- 
 “ left, my Lord, and feel, if you can, the 
 cC real relation in which you ftand to a 
 “ great connexion of power , under which you 
 “ have been prime minifter. The degree 
 
 of 
 

 JO LITE OF 
 
 C£ of refpedt that you receive from the dig- 
 <£ nity of the lord prefident, cannot now be 
 * £ ambiguous even to your infenfibility. 
 
 6i Lord Weymouth tells the fecret every 
 ££ evening. Mr. Rigby entertains the Houfe 
 ££ of Commons with it ; and no wonder that 
 ££ he thinks it an excellent joke ; for he 
 ££ gets both the laugh and the vote on his 
 ££ fide. But, indeed, my Lord, your per- 
 ££ fonal eflimation feems alike in all. * * * 
 ££ * * From numberlefs inftances of infigni- 
 ££ ficance, and of danger, confequently, in 
 ££ which you hand, when left to your own 
 ££ weaknefs, I have felefted the defeat of 
 ££ your militia, and your confeffed impo- 
 ££ tence of every national refource, becaufe 
 ££ it is the moft inftant in its confequence. 
 ££ I would warn you in fober fmcerity of 
 ££ your imminent peril. You have not quite 
 ££ benumbed the country. The people of 
 4i England have feeling, my Lord , if they have 
 “ not forefight . The hour of trial , perhaps of 
 ££ ruin , is at hand It^ will be recollefted 
 in what terms Junius talks of Lord Wey- 
 mouth and Mr. Rigby in various parts of 
 his letters ; and it will be found, that they 
 
 are 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 71 
 
 arc always mentioned by Mr. Boyd in lan- 
 guage nearly fimilar. Of Mr. Wedder- 
 burne Junius obferves, “ that there is fome- 
 “ thing about him which even treachery. 
 “ cannot trujl And in another place he 
 fays of him, cc to facrifice a refpefted cha^ 
 “ rafter, and to renounce the elieem of 
 “ fociety, requires more than Mr. Wedder- 
 “ burne’s refolution : and though in him it 
 e( was rather a profeffion than a defertion 
 “ of his principles ( I /peak tenderly of this 
 “ gentleman, for, when treachery is inquefion , 
 “ I think we fiould make allowances for a 
 “ Scotchman ) yet we have feen him in the 
 “ Houfe of Commons overwhelmed with 
 te confufion, and almoft bereft of his facul- 
 “ ties.” Democraticus talks of him in terms 
 more guarded, but not on that account the 
 lefs fevere. Speaking of Lord North, he 
 afks, “ Did his Lordfhip referve his defence 
 “ for this day, when again, perhaps, the 
 “ charge (hall be urged again ft him ? Or 
 « will he continue contumacious at his 
 <e peril f Even the found clifcretion of Mr. 
 61 Wedderburne will difgrace its definition, 
 fC and will hefitate at the tyrannous and 
 
 “ traitorous 
 
*7 ■? 
 / 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 44 traitorous profcription of the beft and 
 44 braved * men of our fervice, though his 
 44 nature was amply indulged in their ground- 
 44 lefs and malicious profecution 
 
 In another letter Democraticus refle&s 
 upon the charafter of Lord Sandwich, in 
 the warmed language of indignation and 
 reproach. Addreffing himfelf to Lord 
 North, he fays, 44 Self-defence, my Lord, 
 44 may be the law of art, as it is of na- 
 44 ture. We will not wonder, therefore, 
 44 that you and your friends fhould drain 
 44 every artifice to ruin the nobled honour, 
 44 and the mod approved virtue in the king- 
 44 dom ; becaufe that virtue is too pure, and 
 44 that honour too illudrious, to mix with 
 44 meanncfs , malice , and difgrace; becaufe 
 44 thofe honourable and injured men will 
 44 not ferve their country, while you prefide 
 44 at the treafury ; while your afleffor holds 
 44 the department that was American, and 
 44 continues his baleful influence with the 
 44 ghods of the departed colonies ; and 
 44 while the j lain of office t, that reproach 
 
 * He here alludes to the trial of Admiral Keppel. 
 
 t Meaning my Lord Sandwich. 
 
 “ and 
 
 \ 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 73 
 
 c; and (ligma of every thing decent in private 
 “life, or dignified in publick conduct, ufurps 
 “ the care of the British Flag.” Junius’s 
 fentiments with regard to this noble Lord, 
 are fufficiently explained in one of his let- 
 ters to the Duke of Grafton, wherein he 
 obferves, “ We can eafiiy account for your 
 “ violating your engagements with men of 
 “ honour ; but why fhould you betray your 
 “ natural connexions ? Why feparate your- 
 felf from Lord Sandwich, Lord Gow^er, 
 ■“ and Mr. Rigby ? With all the fafhion- 
 “ able indulgence of the times, this country 
 “ does not abound in charafters like theirs ; 
 “ and you may find it a very difficult mat- 
 Cf ter to recruit the black catalogue of your 
 “ friends ” — No man, I fhould imagine, can 
 read the above paffages attentively, with- 
 out being forcibly ftruck with the fimilitude 
 of their fentiments, fpirit, and manner. But, 
 I ffiall now proceed to fiiew, in a few ex- 
 trafts from the letters of the Whig, not only 
 that Mr. Boyd s principles were the fame as 
 thofe of Junius , but alfo that he harboured 
 in his mind the fame peculiarity of political 
 attachments and antipathies, as well as the 
 
 fame 
 
74 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 fame daring fpirit ; and if the Whig be more 
 diffufe in his llyle, and lefs keen in his fatire, 
 than Junius , his language is at leaft equally 
 nervous and elegant, and his reproaches 
 equally dignified and fevere. 
 
 The letters of the Whig appeared in Mr. 
 Almon’s paper, the London C our ant, in the 
 winter of 1779, and in the fpring of 1780. 
 Mr. Boyd confeffed to Mrs. Boyd, that he 
 was the author of them ; nor did he keep 
 the fecret from Mr. Almon, who had long 
 before that period been fully convinced, 
 from feveral ftrong circumftances*, that he 
 was in reality the writer of Juniuss letters. 
 Some part of the MSS. of the Whig is ftill 
 extant, and I have feen it : — it is written in 
 Mr. Boyds ordinary hand-writing, though 
 perhaps in fomewhat of a larger letter, and 
 it bears every appearance of having been 
 executed in great hafte. In fa6l, he com- 
 pofed the letters of the Whig , nearly in the 
 fame negligent manner that he did thofe of 
 the Freeholder , and of Democraticus : and 
 they exhibit the fame range of mind, to- 
 
 * See Mr. Almon’s Letter on this fubjeft, in the Ap- 
 pendix to the Life. 
 
 gether 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 75 
 
 gether with the like eafe and peifpicuity of 
 diftion. 
 
 The opinion of Junius , with regard to 
 our conftitutional maxim, that the King can 
 do no wrong, is well known. But let us 
 compare the language in which he has deli- 
 vered it, with that of the Whig, on this deli- 
 cate fubjeft. 
 
 Whic. 
 
 When it is truly faid, 
 that the King can do no wrong , 
 the office is intended,, and 
 not the perfon ; and this 
 true conftruftion is the per- 
 fect praife of our admirable 
 confitution. The King ol 
 England can do no wrong; 
 for it is not the office of the 
 King to do any thing. The 
 cautious wifdom of our 
 policy will not permit the 
 King to aft. ***** The 
 office of King being thus 
 conlidered, I truft with due 
 refpeft ; for I think it re- 
 ceives the higheft, when de- 
 fined as part of the confti- 
 tution; it remains to remind 
 dhe perfon appointed to that 
 office, that he is a man ; — 
 that in his perfonal capacity 
 he may, he mull do wrong; 
 for error is elfential to hu- 
 manity. It remains to de- 
 monftrateto him, that who- 
 ever confounds his perfon 
 with his office, is a fatal ene- 
 my 
 
 Junius. 
 
 If it be really a part of 
 our conftitution, and not a 
 mere diflum of the law, that 
 the King can do no wrong, it is 
 not the only initance, in the 
 wlfeft of human injiitittiom , 
 where theory is at variance 
 with pradtice. That the 
 Sovereign of this country is 
 not amenable to any form 
 of trial known to the laws, 
 is unqueftionable. But ex- 
 emption from punifhment is 
 a fingular privilege annexed 
 to the royal character, and 
 no way excludes the pffibi- 
 liiy of defe ruing it. How 
 long., and to what extent, a 
 King of England may be 
 protected by the forms, 
 when he violates the fpirit 
 of the conflitution, deferves 
 to be conlidered. A miftake 
 in this matter proved fatal to 
 Charles and his Jon. 
 
 In another place, he fays. 
 The doftrine inculcated by 
 our laws, thattkeKing can do no 
 wrong , 
 
76 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 Whig. Junius. 
 
 my to both ; for that they wrongs is admitted without 
 are fo perfectly diftinCf in relu&ance. We feparate 
 their nature, attributes, and the amiable good-natured 
 interefts, that the abufe of prince from the folly and 
 one is expiable only by the treachery of his fervants, 
 punilhment of the other, and the private virtues of 
 The conftitution will not the man from the vices of 
 admit that the King did his government. Were it 
 wrong; and the law fays not for this diftin&ion, I 
 that the King never dies : but know not whether your Ma- 
 Charies Stuart was an obfti- jeftf s condition , or that of the 
 nate tyrant ; and Charles Englifh nation , would dejerve 
 Stuart loft his head . moft to be lamented. 
 
 Thus we find that the opinions of Junius 
 and the Whig, on this queftion, moft per- 
 feftly agree ; and it is obfervable that the 
 Whig explains himfelf with the greateft free- 
 dom of the two. 
 
 Junius's antipathy to the Scotch is too 
 generally known, to render it any way necef- 
 fary for me to cite the various paffages in 
 his letters, in which it is exprefled. Every 
 perfon will obferve the ftriking fimilarity 
 between the following extraft from a letter 
 of the Whigs, and thofe parts of Junius s 
 writings, wherein the Scotch are mentioned. 
 In the Whig's letter to Lord Thu flow, after 
 having fpoken of Lord North, and Lord 
 Hilfborough, with great bitternefs and afpe- 
 
 rity 3 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 77 
 
 rity, he fays, I afk pardon from my reader 
 “ for defcending to fuch mifery ; rendered 
 " worthy of publick notice only from your 
 “ fmgular fupport. No nobleman, except 
 “ your Lordfhip, has (looped to it ; no 
 “ Englifhman, except yourfelf, has fo in- 
 “ fulted his country. Even in the Houfe 
 “ of Commons, none but Scotch lawyers 
 “ were found hardy enough on that day , to in - 
 “ fult this kingdom. And even they , with all 
 
 ss the fervility of their country , and venality 
 “ of their profejfion, (Mr. Adam, indeed, 
 “ is but a. young praditioner) were forced to 
 “ confefs the fluggifhnefs of Lord North. 
 cc They did not pofl from Scotland , to ap~ 
 Cf plaud the minifler, whofe irrefolution has 
 “ renewed rebellion in their kirk , and whofe 
 continued power will add depopulation and 
 “ famine to their country. No, my Lord, 
 they were too difcreet. They croffed the 
 Tweed according to the diflinfiion fuggeft- 
 “ ed by their countryman, and pretty Readily 
 " adopted fince, — not to defend mini- 
 “Jlers, but fupport government. And the 
 “ doftrine is now eflablifhed in praftice by 
 “ an immediate proficient from Lord Mans- 
 
 " field’s 
 
LIFE OF 
 
 78 
 
 “ field’s fchool ; — that the only mode of fup- 
 “ porting government, is to flander the peo- 
 66 pie ; to demonftrate, that we have neither 
 “ virtue, talents, nor fpirit among us ; that 
 cc we ought, therefore, to endure difgrace 
 “ and defeat as our neceffary lot, and hew 
 our wood, and draw our water, without 
 “ repining. 5 ’ 
 
 “ The exclujive infamy of fuch auxiliaries, 
 were itfelf fufficient to drag down the dig- 
 “ nity of any chara&er. Firmer fame, even 
 than yours, if it rifqued fuch ruin, could 
 ic not efcape it. When the Lord High 
 Chancellor of England defcends from his 
 tc prefiding feat in the affembly of the no- 
 bles, to mix with impudent mercenaries , in 
 “ a caufe which every man of honour (brinks 
 ** from, he forfeits every reputation, and his 
 glory will let more rapidly than it rofe. 
 “ Defcent and fall , which, with the fpirits of 
 “ Milton, we thought adverfe, at leaft to 
 “ the magnanimity of his charafter, will grow 
 “ natural, neceffary, and inflant to its abafe- 
 “ ment. He finks for ever.” In feveral 
 other parts of thefe letters, the Whig fpeaks 
 of the Scotch in fimilar terms of reproach ; 
 
 but 
 
\ 
 
 HUGH BOYD. jg 
 
 but particularly in his letter addrefied to 
 the Majority of the Houfe of Commons, 
 who divided with minifliers againft Sir 
 George Sa ville’s motion for a lift of all 
 the fubfifting penfions granted by the crown, 
 he obferves, — “ England will fee, that thofe, 
 tf and almoft only thofe, who either hold 
 “ places under the crown, receive penfions 
 “ from the minifter, or have invaded us 
 “ from the northern part of the ijland , are 
 “ the perfons who confpire againft the pro - 
 te perty and Liberty of the people” He then 
 proceeds to point out to them, the danger- 
 ous and dreadful confequences that may 
 probably follow a too obftinate adherence 
 to the corrupt and pernicious counfels of 
 Lord North ; and concludes by exhorting 
 them to afiert the dignity of their ftation, 
 and to throw off their fervile dependence on 
 minifters. — “ Break, 5 ’ fays he, the difgrace- 
 “ ful chains, that' have fo long bound you to 
 “ an abandoned adminiftration ; and retain 
 “ from the forgivenefs of the people, what you 
 “ cannot longer withhold from their indig- 
 “ nation. Not the gifts, but the givers, have 
 “ dif graced you. Your places, yoxxx penfions, 
 
 “ even 
 
8o 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 “ even the country offome oj you, cannot juft- 
 44 ]y fubjeft you to pojitive reproach . It is 
 
 “ only as they have inclined and debafed you 
 C£ into infamous fervility , that they have 
 “ grown,' proverbial in the contempt of inan- 
 t£ kind. But in prudence, if not in honour, 
 ££ 4 ajjumethe virtue if you have it not ; nor 
 44 longer devote yourfelves. to common ruin 
 “ with the falling edifice of corruption. It 
 ££ .{hakes already to its foundation ; the 
 ££ breath of the people will level it for 
 “ ever.” 
 
 Thefe cenfures of the Scotch, it may be 
 faid, are nothing more than the popular 
 language of the times in which they were 
 written ; and that therefore their refein- 
 blance to the fentiments of Junius on this 
 fubjeft, furnifhes no argument in the pre- 
 fent difcuftion. But, it is not fo much to 
 the parity of particular fentiments or phrafes, 
 as to the famenefs of the general fpirit by 
 which they are animated, that I wifh to .fix 
 the readers attention. The hoftility of 
 Junius towards the Scotch, proceeded no 
 lefs from an utter abhorrence of the politi- 
 cal principles upon which the leading men 
 
 of 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 8x 
 
 of that nation then a&ed* than from an en- 
 tire conviction* that if thofe principles were 
 permitted to take root in England* they 
 would ultimately branch out* and grow 
 above the legal liberties of the people. 
 Whether or not his opinion was well found- 
 ed* it is no way incumbent on me to in- 
 quire ; I only mean to ftate, that it is mani- 
 fed from the fpirit of the remarks made on 
 the national charafter of the Scotch* both 
 by "Junius and the Whig , that at lead much 
 of their apparent enmity arofe from a defire 
 to rouze the indignation and point the ha- 
 tred of the people againfi the toryifm intro- 
 duced into his Majedy’s councils by Lord 
 Bute and Lord Mansfield* and to keep alive 
 in the breads of Englifhmen, that watchful 
 jealoufy of their rulers* which is effential 
 to the confervation of publick freedom. 
 But the juftnefs of tliefe obfervations will 
 be bed proved by comparing the fpirit 
 of the following pafiage from Junius * with 
 that of thofe of the Whig above quoted. In 
 Junius's fird letter to Lord Mansfield* he fays* 
 — “ Permit me to begin with paying a juft 
 cc tribute to Scotch fincerity wherever I find 
 
 V.'OY” ./ 
 
 “ It. 
 
82 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 “ it. I own I am not apt to confide in the 
 *• profeffions of gentlemen of that country ; 
 €t and when they fmile, I feel an involuntary 
 “ emotion to guard myfelf againft mifchief. 
 *’ e With this general opinion of an ancient 
 “ nation, I always thought it much to your 
 “ Lordfhip s honour, that in your earlier 
 days you were but little infe&ed with the 
 “ prudence of your country.” * * * * “ The 
 “ liberal fpirit of youth prevailed over your 
 “ native difcrction” — * * * * There was 
 
 “ fomething generous in your attachment to 
 “ the banijhed Houfe of Stuart . We lament 
 “ the miftakes of a good man, and do not 
 begin to deleft him until he affedls to re- 
 nounce his principles. Why did you not 
 u adhere to the loyalty you once profefled? 
 u Why did you not follow the example of 
 “ your worthy brother * ? With him you 
 might have Jhared in the honour of the 
 <c Pretender’s confidence ; with him you 
 “ might have preferved the integrity of 
 
 * This man was always a rank Jacobite. Lord Ravenf- 
 worth produced the moft fatisfa<5fory evidence of his 
 having frequently drank the Pretender’s health on his 
 knees. Junius . 
 
 “ your 
 
 1 
 
HUGH BOYD, 
 
 83 
 
 ** your charafter; and England, I think, 
 “ might have /pared you without regret . 
 “ Your friends will fay, perhaps, that al- 
 “ though you deferted the fortune of your 
 tfc liege Lord, you have firmly adhered to the 
 “ principles which drove his father from the 
 “ throne ; that, without openly fupporting 
 “ the perfon, you have done effential fer- 
 “ vice to the caufe ; and confoled your [elf 
 “ for the lofs of a favourite family , by re- 
 “ viving and efablijhing the maxims of his 
 “ government. This is the way in which a 
 “ Scotchman's underftanding corrects the 
 “ errors of his heart. My Lord, I acknow- 
 “ ledge the truth of the defence, and can 
 trace it through all your conduft. I fee 
 “ through your whole life one uniform plan 
 “ to enlarge the power of the crown , at the 
 “ expence of the liberty of the fubjeEl. To 
 “ this objeft your thoughts, words, and ac- 
 “ tions, have been conftantly dire&ed.” It 
 were needlefs to quote this palfage any fur- 
 ther. The conformity of its fpirit to that 
 of the farcafms of the Whig, on Lord Mans- 
 field and the Scotch, muft already be fuffi- 
 ciently evident. 
 
 /« 
 
 With 
 
LIFE OF 
 
 84 
 
 With regard to Lord Bute, it is well 
 known that Junius heaps reproaches upon 
 him with abundant liberality. In a note to 
 the moil celebrated of all his letters, after 
 defcribmg the manner in which the King 
 was placed under the care of Lord Bute, he 
 o'bferves, — “ That was the falient point 
 “ from which all the mifchiefs and difgraces 
 4S of the prefent reign took life and mo- 
 
 tion . :5 The Whig expreifes the fame fen- 
 timent, by a figure equally illuftrative. 
 <c The early exclufion of Mr. Pitt, and in- 
 “ troduftion of the Earl of Bute, were the 
 u firll bitter waters of that fatal fountain 
 “ which has almoft deluged the rights and 
 tC powder of the people . 59 
 
 Every one will recolleft, that Junius was 
 an enemy to feptennial, arid an advocate for 
 triennial parliaments. In his letter to Mr. 
 Wilkes, he entered at large into the fub- 
 je£l, and exprefsly declared himfelf to that 
 effeft. On this queition the Whig curforily, 
 but forcibly obferves, that the “ opportu- 
 44 nities and temptations to defpotifm, feem- 
 “ ed to have attained their full maturity, at 
 , fii the commencement of the prefent reign. 
 
 “ The 
 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 “■ The feptennial a£t of fuicide, abhorrent cer- 
 Cf tainly from the popular nature of par- 
 ** liament, and deflrudlive of its due vide - 
 “ pendence on the crown, had long been 
 “ perpetrated.” 
 
 Speaking of the popularity with which 
 his Majefty afcended the throne, Junius 
 and the Whig have exprelfed the fame fen- 
 timents, in language very much alike. 
 
 Whig. 
 
 The time of his Majefty’s 
 afcenlion to the throne, was 
 full of fuch peculiar circum- 
 ftances of popularity, as 
 gave unlimited, becaufe un- 
 fufpefted, power. Into that 
 aufpicious moment was 
 crowded all the promife of 
 his youth, founded in the 
 fond memory of all the vir- 
 tues of his ancellors ; of his 
 youth riling, as it feemed, 
 to renew the race of glory 
 that they had run, even up 
 to the recent goal ot uni- 
 verfal conquelt. Nature 
 and fortune confpired to 
 give the young monarch of 
 that day an empire the beft 
 and moll permanent that 
 monarchs can enjoy, if they 
 wifh to maintain it, — an ab- 
 folute power in the hearts 
 of his fubjedls. 
 
 Junius. 
 
 You afcended the throne 
 with a declared, and, I doubt 
 not, a fincere refolution of 
 giving univerfal fatisfa&ion 
 to your fubjeffs. You 
 found them pleafed with 
 the novelty of a young 
 prince, whofe countenance 
 promifed even more than 
 his words ; and loyal to 
 you not only from principle 
 but palhon. It was not a 
 cold profeffion of allegiance 
 to the firlf magiftrate, but a 
 partial animated attachment 
 to a favourite prince, the 
 native of their country. 
 They did not wait to exa- 
 mine your conduft, nor to 
 be determined by experi- 
 ence, but gave you a gene- 
 rous credit for the future 
 bleflings of your reign, and 
 paid you in advance the 
 dearefl tribute of their af~ 
 fedlions. 
 
86 
 
 LIFE or 
 
 Many other parallel paffages might be 
 pointed out in the Whig and Junius, were I 
 not fearful of fatiguing the patience of my 
 readers, by increafing thefe citations which, 
 perhaps, they already think too numerous. 
 But there are two more paragraphs in the 
 letters of the Whig, which fo peculiarly re- 
 ferable the general fpirit and manner of 
 Junius, that I fhould deem it unpardonable 
 not to notice them. Talking of the changes 
 which corruption and mifgovernment have 
 introduced into the Britifh conftitution, he 
 fays, — “The Britifh conftitution hath chang- 
 “ ed its form, and is lofing its fpirit. Some 
 " magick has metamorphofed the ancient 
 te pyramid into the deformity of a Chinefe 
 u pagoda. The beautiful ftrength of its 
 “ order is gone ; and we now tremble for 
 sc the narrowed bafe ; oppreffed by the mid- 
 “ die ; with monfters at the top !” 
 
 In another letter, wherein he reprobates 
 the fervility of minifters, and the corruptions 
 of the court, he fays, — “ Weaknefs alone 
 u were not a fufficient qualification for a 
 
 “ modern minifter He muft be aHively 
 
 “ contemptible if he expeft honour at court. 
 
 a # # * * Oc~ 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 87 
 
 a**** Occafions are ftudioufly contrived 
 “ to bend and fubdue the fpirits of men : 
 " and thofe are advanced the higheji in the 
 “ Jcrvice , who have belt learned the dijcipline 
 “ °J difgrace. There (hould be little won- 
 te der that commanders in fuch a fervice are 
 fought for from the ranks !' — 
 
 “ I trufl: I have now fully demonftrated, 
 that Mr. Boyd’s political principles, opi- 
 nions, and fentiments, were precifely the 
 fame as thofe of Junius ; and that his politi- 
 cal writings bear a more ftriking refemblance 
 to the general ftyle and fpirit of the cele- 
 brated letters under that fignature, than any 
 other compofitions which have hitherto been 
 prefented to the publick. It remains, how- 
 ever, to fnew, that this refemblance did not 
 proceed from a ftudied imitation, but from a 
 predile&ion for that call of thought, and of 
 language to which his mind had been long 
 accuflomed. To make adiftinclion of this na- 
 ture, in general, perhaps requires one of the 
 niceft and molt refined operations of critical 
 tafte ; but in the particular inftance before 
 us, it is to be determined by a few plain 
 fa6ls, and by an argument fo fimple and 
 
 pbvious^ 
 
88 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 obvious, that I doubt not it will be intelli- 
 gible and fatisfadiory to every underftand- 
 ino\ 
 
 It has been very generally imagined that 
 the ftyle of Junius is perfectly original ; 
 that it was formed upon no model ; and 
 that in the ftrufture of it the author was 
 indebted to no matter. But an examination 
 of the ftyle, manner, and fpirit, of two 
 performances, that in the time of Junius 
 were rather fcarce, and that are ftill little 
 known but by name, will inconteftibly prove 
 the utter fallacy of fuch a fuppofition. One 
 of thefe performances, which I have already 
 had occafion to quote, is intitled, Killing no 
 Murder*. It was written by the famous Co- 
 lonel Titus, while in clofe confinement in 
 the Tower, by the order of Cromwell. 
 It is a remonftrance to the people of Eng- 
 land againft the tamenefs with which they 
 fubmitted to the ufurpation of the Prote&or ; 
 and its main argument is defigned to fhew, 
 that fo far from being a crime, it would be 
 
 * In 1792, this pamphlet was reprinted for Ridgeway, 
 with a dedication to the late Emprefs of Rufiia ! ! 
 
 . . , an 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 89 
 
 an aft of heroick virtue to murder him by 
 whatever means the nature of circumftances 
 might render the mo ft effeftual. It com- 
 mences widi a dedication to Cromwell, 
 which is no lefs remarkable for its unexam- 
 pled boldnefs, than for a claffical ftrength 
 and elegance of diftion, very uncommon in 
 the age in which it was written, and that 
 would do honour to the more polifhed pe- 
 riods of Englifh literature. 
 
 The other performance is Lord Boling- 
 broke’s political letters, which he originally 
 publifhed in the Craftsman under the figna- 
 ture of Caleb D’ Anvers, and fome of which, 
 together with his letters on the Hiftory of 
 England, and his dedication to Lord Ox- 
 ford, are now to be found in Vo/. II. of his 
 Mifcellaneous Works. 
 
 From thefe produftions, but efpecially 
 Lord Bolingbrokes, the writer of the letters 
 of Junius unqueftionably formed his ftyle : 
 and it is a faft, as curious in itfelf, as it is in- 
 terefting in this difeuftion, that both Colonel 
 Titus’s traft, and Lord Bolingbrokes letters, 
 were fo familiar to Mr. Boyd, that he could 
 almoft repeat the whole of them. Of Killing 
 
 no 
 
go 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 7io Murder he had* when I knew him, a 
 copy of the original edition, upon which he 
 fet a great value ; and the dedication to 
 Cromwell, as well as feveral other parts of 
 that performance, he has very frequently 
 repeated to me. Of Lord Bolingbroke s 
 letters on the Kiflory of England I have of- 
 ten heard him exprefs his high admiration ; 
 but the philofophical works of that noble- 
 man he always reprobated in the feverell 
 terms. When thefe circumftances are com- 
 bined with the fa£t, that the letters of the 
 Freeholder and Whig have in many paffages 
 a peculiar affinity both to the reafoning and 
 manner of Lord Bolingbroke’s writings, we 
 muff conclude in argument, that it was up- 
 on thofe writings Mr. Boyd modelled his 
 political ftyle ; and that therefore the lan- 
 guage of Junius , and that of the Freeholder 
 and Whig, were caft in the fame mould. 
 But in order to fubftantiate the truth of 
 this inference, I {hall cite one or two paf- 
 fages, both from Colonel Titus and Lord 
 Bolingbroke. 
 
 It is neceffary to premife that, in Colonel 
 Titus’s performance, it is the dignified ani- 
 mation 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 9* 
 
 mation and energy of the language, rather 
 than the ftrufture of the fentences, which 
 Mr. Boyd has imitated. Of this, the reader 
 will be enabled to judge, from the manner 
 in which the dedication to Cromwell com- 
 mences. 
 
 cc May it pleafe your Highnefs , 
 fC How I have fpent fome hours of the 
 “ leifure your Highnefs has been pleafed to 
 a give me, this following paper will give 
 “ your Highnefs an account ; how you will 
 “ pleafe to interpret it, I cannot tell ; but I 
 " can with confidence fay, my intention in 
 “ it is, to procure your Highnefs that juftice 
 “ nobody yet does you, and to let the peo- 
 “ pie fee the longer they defer it, the greater 
 “ injury they do both themfelves and you. To 
 u your Highnefs juftly belongs the honour 
 “ of dying for the people ; and it cannot 
 €s chufe but be an unfpeakable confolation 
 “ to you in the laft moments of your life, 
 “ to confider, with how much benefit to 
 “ the world you are like to leave it. It is 
 “ then only, my Lord, the titles you now 
 “ ufurp will be truly yours. You will then 
 “ be indeed the deliverer of your country, 
 
 “ and 
 
92 LIFE OF 
 
 “ and free it from a bondage little inferior 
 “ to that from which Moses delivered his. 
 cs — You will then be that true reformer 
 (t w’hich you would now be thought ; re- 
 c< ligion {hall be then reftored, liberty affert- 
 “ ed, and parliaments have thofe privileges 
 (e they have fought for. We (hall then 
 “ hope that other laws will have place, be- 
 (i fides thofe of the fword, and that juftice 
 “ {hall be otherwife defined than the will 
 “ and pleafure of the ftrongeft ; and we fhall 
 te then hope; men will keep oaths again, 
 se and not have the neceffity of being falfe 
 “ and perfidious to preferve themfelves, and 
 “ be like their rulers. All this we hope 
 (e from your Highnefs’s happy expiration, 
 “ who are the true father of your country ; 
 “ for while you live, w T e can call nothing 
 “ ours — and it is from your death we hope 
 <c for our inheritances : — Let this confidera- 
 “ tion arm and fortify your Highnefs s mind 
 “ aeainft the fears of death, and the terrors 
 tc of your evil confcience, that the good you 
 *•' will do by your death, will fomewhat ba- 
 “ lance the evils of your life.” — The fame 
 fpirit is kept up throughout the remainder 
 
 of 
 
 t 
 
HUGH BOYD. 93 
 
 of the dedication, which is in every refpeft 
 equally admirable. 
 
 After the dedication follows an addrefs to 
 the officers and foldiers of the army, in which 
 the following paffage is deferving of notice 
 in this inveftigation. 
 
 “ Could ever England have thought to have 
 feen that army, that was never mentioned 
 “ without the titles of religious, zealous, 
 “ faithful, courageous, — the fence of her 
 “ liberty at home, — the terror of her ene- 
 “ mies abroad, become her gaolers ? Not 
 cC her guard, but her opprelfors ? Not her 
 “ foldiers, but a tyrant’s executioners, draw- 
 “ ing to blocks and gibbets all that dare be 
 <c honefter than themfelves ? This you do, 
 “ and this you are ; nor can you ever re- 
 “ deem your own honour, the trull and 
 love of your country, the eftimation of 
 “ brave men, or the prayers of good, if you 
 let not fpeedily the world fee you have 
 “ been deceived ; which they will then only 
 “ believe, when they fee your vengeance on 
 “ the faithlefs head that did it. This, if you 
 “ defer too long to do, you will find too 
 w late to attempt ; and your repentance will 
 
 “ neither 
 
94 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 ** neither vindicate you, nor help us. To 
 C( let you fee you may do this as a lawful 
 a£lion, and' to perfuade you to it as a 
 cf glorious one, is the principal intent of 
 this following paper ; which, whatever 
 “ effefts it hath upon you, I fhall not abfo- 
 “ lutely fail of mv ends ; for if it excites 
 “ not your virtue and courage, it will yet 
 iC e^probrate your cowardice and bafenefs.” 
 The whole of the pamphlet is written in 
 the fame ardent and nervous language: but, 
 there is one fentence in particular, fo much 
 in the general ftyle of Junius , that I think 
 ;t material to cite it. Talking of the virtue 
 of murdering a tyrant, and enforcing the 
 necelfity of putting Cromwell to death, he 
 fays — ■“ This firebrand, I would have any 
 <£ way extinguifhed ; this ulcer, I would 
 <c have had any hand to lance ; and I can- 
 “ not doubt but God will fuddenly fanclify 
 cc fome hand to do it, and bring down that 
 “ bloody and deceitful man, who lives not 
 “ only to the mifery, but the infamy of our 
 “ nation.” 
 
 Throughout the whole of thefe paffages, 
 the fpirit of Junius may be traced : but 
 
 in 
 
95 
 
 HUGH BOYD. 
 
 in the following extrafils from the aforefaid 
 letters of Lord Bolingbroke, we (hall im- 
 mediately perceive the form and type of 
 Junius 9 s compofition. 
 
 The Dedication to Lord Oxford con- 
 tains fome ftriking paffages in which the 
 critical phifiognomift will obferve the fea- 
 tures of Junius. The dignified air and 
 manner with which it begins, merits peculi- 
 ar notice. 
 
 “ My Lord,” 
 
 w Of the whole legion once in your pay, 
 “ perhaps not one writer continues in your 
 u fervice ; as they followed you for the 
 “ loaves and fifties only, their zeal failed 
 “ with their appointments, and they found 
 it necelfary to take up fome other trade.” 
 
 “ But though, like them , my Lord , I at- 
 “ tended your meridian , I Jhall not like them 
 “ forfake you at your decline ; on the con- 
 “ trary, I am ftill as much at your devotion 
 * e as ever, and it is notorious, you have 
 “ now as much to bellow as I expefiled 
 then. 
 
 “ As therefore I make my approach with 
 “ the fame fincerity, I depend on the fame 
 
 “ reception 
 
LIFE OF 
 
 reception; more efpecialiy when I far- 
 “ ther affure you, that if I happen to be 
 f< the longed liver, I will be as juft to your 
 “ memory, as I have been to your admini- 
 “ fixation.” 
 
 In another paragraph he proceeds to fay. 
 The old jingle of honor es mutant mores , 
 “ you have the glory, my Lord, to be an il- 
 “ luftrious exception to ; however enlarged 
 “ with ftyle and titles, you continue to be 
 “ within the very fame; and thereby fhew 
 “ the eminent infignificancy of fuch vani- 
 “ ties. 
 
 “ That you condefcended to accept of them f 
 “ will ever to fome be matter of wonder ; ihat 
 “ you condefcended to folicit them will never 
 sc perhaps be believed . Why fhould a man 
 “ who defpifed the effence, be fond of the 
 “ name ? And that you always had the 
 “ magnanimity to be above opinion, is ma- 
 “ nifeft by every aftion of your life. 
 
 <c But what labyrinth is there fo intri- 
 “ cate, that if you follow the thread, may 
 not be explored ? A peerage was the 
 “ only means, a quietus was the end: you 
 “ had performed your voyage, your bark 
 
 (e 
 
 was 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 97 
 
 u was crazy, the ftorm was up, and the 
 cc firfl port welcome. While the helm was 
 C( worth holding, you held it; when only an 
 (s incumbrance, you refigned it ; equally 
 “ pleafed with your own efcape, that your 
 “ enemies fucceeded to the danger, and 
 “ that your own crew continued to navi- 
 Cf gate the veffel as before.” 
 
 o 
 
 In the preface to the letters, the follow- 
 ing paffage is obfervable. “ If ever a tell 
 44 for the trial of fpirits can be neeeffary, it 
 cc is now; if ever thofe of liberty and fac- 
 “ tion ought to be diflinguifhed from each 
 “ other, it is now; if ever it is incumbent 
 on the people to know what truth is, and 
 “ to follow it, it is now. 
 
 “ Hitherto, perhaps, liberty like oil hath 
 “ only covered the furface, while the vine- 
 ce gar of faction hath corroded the confli- 
 tution underneath, though good hath re- 
 “ fulted from both; for even faflion muft 
 be at firfl popular, and popularity can- 
 " not be acquired without the evidence of 
 “ fome good deeds, which like Abraham’s 
 faith, may hold the place of righteouf- 
 “ nefs. 
 
 8 
 
 46 There 
 
93 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 “ There is a time, when faflions by the 
 * £ vehemence of their own fermentation, 
 “ ftun and difable one another; and this is 
 *•* the time when plain fenfe, and downright 
 ** honefly, have the only chance to get 
 u uppermofl, and introduce reformation. 
 
 “ Perhaps that time is now ; perhaps 
 “ party leaders of all kinds are equally in 
 •'* difgrace ; and the publick may be grown 
 l ' wife enough to judge of the tree by its 
 ,<r fruits.” *******“ Let but one great, 
 “ brave, difmterefied, adlive man arife, and 
 he will be received, followed and almoft 
 ‘‘ adored as the guardian genius of thefe 
 w kingdoms. Without a foundation of fo- 
 lid virtue and publick fpirit, the nobleft 
 * k accomplifhments lofe their importance; 
 “ with it common fenfe grows venerable, 
 • £ and the dove triumphs over the ferpent.” 
 Many paifages fimilar to thefe might be 
 cited both from the letters on the Hiftory 
 of England, and from thofe of Caleb D\An~ 
 vers ; but, I truft, I have fufficiently illuf- 
 trated and confirmed my propofition, — that 
 both the ftyle of Junius , and that of Mr. 
 Boyd’s political writings now publifhed, 
 
 were 
 
HUGH BOYD. 99 
 
 were formed in the mould of thefe letters of 
 Bolingbroke’s, and that they have imbibed 
 the fpirit of Colonel Titus’s produdtion. 
 And taking this along with the faft already 
 ftated, that Mr. Boyd had fo much fa- 
 miliarized his mind to the writings of thofe 
 authors that he had almoft the whole of 
 them by heart; and remembering at the 
 fame time that he is the only writer hither- 
 to known, who at once refembles Boling- 
 broke, Colonel Titus, and Junius , — the 
 fair and natural prefumption is, that Mr, 
 Boyd was in reality the author of Junius. 
 
 But it may be contended, that Boyd was 
 only an induftrious imitator of thofe wri- 
 ters ; and that though Junius copied Bo- 
 lingbroke, it does not follow, becaufe Boyd’s 
 ftyle refembles theirs, that he therefore was 
 Junius : — for another perfon might have 
 admired Bolingbroke’s letters as much as 
 Boyd did, and have thought proper to 
 model his ftyle by them. To this, I an- 
 fwer, that to imitate the ftyle of a great 
 writer fuccefsfully, that is, both in matter 
 and language, requires not only a geifius 
 nearly equal to the original, but alfo much 
 time and labour. Now, though I think 
 
 g 2 Mr, 
 
100 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 Mr. Boyd’s genius was equal to any literary 
 undertaking of this nature, however ardu- 
 ous, yet the fa£t is, that the hurry and con- 
 fufion in which the letters of the Freeholder , 
 in particular, were written, precluded the 
 poflibility of any ftudy or labour in the 
 compofition of them: and in truth they 
 carry the ftrongeft internal evidence along 
 with them, both that the author mu ft have 
 been habituated to the ftyle in which he 
 writes, and that he mull have fent them to 
 the prefs, as he fays himfelf, without “ cor- 
 
 refiion or even revifal*.” — As to the objec- 
 tion, that another perfon might have imitated 
 Bolingbroke, as well as Boyd, it is plaufible 
 enough, but certainly of no weight in this 
 difcuffion, unlefs the perfon could be named, 
 and his avowed writings produced. I am 
 therefore authorized to conclude, that when 
 Mr. Boyd publilhed the Freeholder , he was 
 an experienced writer, who had long be- 
 fore that time formed his ftyle from the 
 political letters of Bolingbroke; and that 
 Junius is the only writer befides, who has 
 made thofe letters his model. 
 
 * See the Advert ifement to the Reader prefixed to the 
 Freeholder* 
 
 Thus 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 101 
 
 Thus I have eftablifhed the truth of two 
 fa6ls, which may be confidered as effential 
 preliminaries in this inveftigation ; namely, 
 that Mr. Boyds talents were fully compe- 
 tent to the talk of writing the letters of Junius, 
 and that his avowed political writings bear, 
 in every refpeft, fo obvious a fimilitude 
 to thofe letters, that we mu ft prefume they 
 were written by the fame hand. 
 
 But as it has been attempted to run down 
 Mr. Boyds abilities ; as the publick have 
 been repeatedly told that I have over-rated 
 them; and as I have been called upon to 
 produce the teftimonies of more competent 
 and lefs partial judges than myfelf, in fup- 
 port of my opinion, — I am defirous that 
 my jirjl fad, that he was qualified to have 
 written the letters of Junius , fhould not 
 reft wholly, even upon the ftrong in- 
 ternal evidence which I have adduced to 
 prove it. For, I am perfectly well aware, 
 that this kind of evidence, even upon a point 
 like this, where it is undoubtedly the moft 
 unexceptionable that can be given, does not 
 always enforce conviftion, unlefs it be fup- 
 ported by collateral aid. 
 
 Before it can be accurately determined 
 
 whether 
 
102 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 whether Mr. Boyds capacity was equal to 
 the talk of com poling the letters of Junius , 
 it is neceffary to examine the merits of thofe 
 letters, and to afcertain, what in reality were 
 the qualifications requifite for the author of 
 them to have poflefled. 
 
 The fame of Junius's letters has now out- 
 lived the memory of the particular occur- 
 rences, which gave them birth. The in- 
 tereft in them is no longer kept up by the 
 effervefcence of party zeal, or the enthufiafm 
 of publick liberty : for the parties they 
 praifed, or cenfured, are now no more, and 
 the genuine fpirit of liberty, from a variety 
 of caufes, has become fiat and infipid. Yet 
 are thofe letters ftill read by all defcriptions 
 of people throughout the country ; — they 
 are confidered merely as literary compofi- 
 tions, and as fuch they are univerfally ad- 
 mired. Their fame, therefore, mu ft in a 
 great meafure depend on their own excel- 
 lence; and it behoves us to inquire what 
 that excellence confifts in. 
 
 I (hall not, I truft, be underftood as de- 
 tra£iing from the true merit of Junius , when 
 I apply to his writings in general, what was 
 faid of them by Mr, Horne Tooke, — mate - 
 
 nem 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 IO3 
 
 riem fuperabat opus . It is the exquiftte 
 
 beauty of his workmanfhip, rather than the 
 value of his materials, that deferves the ap- 
 plaufe of mankind. His letters undoubtedly 
 abound with fir iking thoughts, juft obferva- 
 tions, noble fentiments, and comprehenftve 
 views ; but they no where difplay much 
 folidity of argument, or depth of reflection : 
 on the contrary, his reafoning, though 
 often ingenious, is more fpecious than 
 conclufive ; and his remarks, though often 
 accurate, are often more dazzling than 
 profound. His chief excellencies then will 
 be found to confift, in the clearnefs of his 
 conceptions, in the precifion with which 
 every fa£t is ftated, and idea exprefled, in 
 the nervous clofenefs and captivating ele- 
 gance of his ftyle, in the Attic fpirit and 
 poignancy of his fatire, in the admirable fe- 
 licity of his illuftrations, and in the rich, but 
 lively and chaPce colouring with which every 
 thing is touched and adorned 
 
 If 
 
 * Of Junius it may be truly faid, “ Nullum quod tetegit 
 
 ** non ornavit .* ** Nor fhall I be deterred from bellowing 
 this juft praife on his ftyle, on account of the trivial errors 
 which Mr. Chalmers has pointed out, and cenfured. “ Such 
 
 violations of rules merely fofttive become the comprehen- 
 
 “ fives. 
 
If this be admitted to be a juft character 
 of juniuss writings, it follows as a necef- 
 fary confequence, that he who compofed 
 them, required not to have been gifted with 
 any other endowments, than an enlarged, 
 vigorous, and fubtle underftanding, a quick 
 apprehenfion, a fertile imagination, a very 
 confiderable knowledge of claflical learning 
 and civil hiftory, a general acquaintance 
 with the moral fciences, particularly that 
 of jurifprudence, and of the conftitution 
 and laws of England, a thorough infight in* 
 to human life and manners, a perfe£t inti- 
 macy with party politicks, as well as with 
 the private and publick hiftories of eminent 
 men, and diftinguifhed families, and above 
 all, a ftrong and retentive memory, ever 
 ready to call up in the mind all the informa- 
 tion it had received, a correct judgment to 
 employ it fuccefsfully, and a refined tafte to 
 polifh and beautify the whole. Every compe- 
 tent judge who perfectly knew Mr. Boyd, will, 
 I am fure, allow, that he poficfled all thofe 
 endowments ,in a verv eminent decree. But 
 in order to convince the publick, that my 
 opinion of his abilities is not fingular, I beg 
 
 “ five genius of Boyd, and fuch cenfures are fuitable to the 
 minute and (lender criticifm of Chalmers .** i 
 
 leave 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 IO5 
 
 leave to cite the following paragraph of a 
 note, which I received from the celebrated 
 Mr. Grattan, in the courfe of laft fum- 
 mer. cc Mr. Boyds underitanding,” fays 
 he, “ was very conhderable, his memory 
 i( aitonilhing, and his literary powers very 
 “ great ; but, whether he thought proper to 
 “ give them the flyle and call of Juniuss 
 “ compofition, is what Mr. Grattan cannot 
 “ pofiiblv undertake to fay. Mr. Grattan 
 “ wifhes every fuccefs to Mr. Campbell’s 
 “ work, as it is the account of a perfon 
 te (whether Junius or not) whofe life and 
 “ talents were an ornament to letters, and 
 “ whofe death an irretrievable lofs.” 
 
 May 1 6 th, 17 99. 
 
 The opinion entertained of Mr. Boyd’s 
 talents, as well as of the letters of the Free- 
 holder, by his friends in Ireland, may be 
 collefted from the following extrafl of an 
 addrefs to the freeholders of the county of 
 Antrim, publifhed in the Belfaft News Let- 
 ter, fome years after he had gone to India. 
 
 “ I conclude, my countrymen, in the 
 * € words of a man” (Mr. Boyd) cc whofe 
 fs fer vices to you can never be suffi- 
 
 ** CIENTLY 
 
10 6 LIFE OF 
 
 ciently praised: — Who pointed out 
 
 “ IN LANGUAGE WHICH WILL BE RE- 
 MEMBERED WHILE THERE IS GRATI- 
 ‘ c TUDE LEFT IN HIS NATIVE COUNTRY* 
 
 (S the glorious moment which reftored you 
 <c to your original rights. In a period lefs 
 ominous to freedom than the prefent, he 
 €s left this country when he thought he could 
 “ no longer ferve it. He looked for an- 
 “ other, and became a citizen of the world. 
 
 If afked where that lay P He might, like 
 <e Anaxagoras, have pointed to the heavens. 
 * e Had he journeyed to the weft inftead of 
 “ the eaft, he might there have found a 
 <c region more congenial to his noble mind. 
 te Whatever perils he has encountered, — 
 se whatever hardfhips he has fuffered, — and 
 “ I fear difappointment and difafter have 
 “ been his lot, — could he now contemplate 
 “ through the opaque veil of Afiatick def- 
 “ potifm, the fituation of his native country; 
 
 even at this diftance he would addrefs a 
 S4, ‘ prayer to the God who rules the univerfe, 
 “ for the confervation of its liberties. ’’ 
 Almoft all the literary friends that Mr. 
 Boyd had in England, are now dead; but 
 
 it 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 1 07 
 
 it is a pofitive fa6l, the truth of which, if 
 called in queftion, I can fatisfa&orily prove, 
 that Mr. Edmund Burke, and his brother Mr. 
 Richard Burke, that Sir Jofhua Reynolds, 
 Mr. Wilkes, Doctor Armftrong, Mr. Serjeant 
 Adair, Mr. Lauchlin Macleane, Mr. David 
 Garrick, andJDoftor Goldfmith, all entertain- 
 ed the very higheft opinion of the uncommon 
 powers of Mr. Boyd’s mind. And the late 
 Mr. John Stuart, of Hampftead, of whom 
 I have already given a particular account, 
 has frequently declared to me, “ that Boyd 
 “ polfeffed a clearer underftanding, a more 
 “ fertile imagination, and a more ready and 
 “ refined wit, than any other man he ever 
 “ knew : — that he thought his talents fupe- 
 “ rior to the abilities difplayed in the letters 
 “ of Junius ; but that he could eafily be- 
 “ lieve him to have been the author of thofe 
 letters, if he were once aflured, that 
 “ Woodfall was not indemnified againft the 
 “ pecuniary penalties, which he was liable 
 “ to incur as the publilher of them * : for,” 
 
 faid 
 
 * This obje&ion is now completely done away, by the 
 declaration which Mr.William Woodfall recently made in 
 
 the 
 
 l 
 
LIFE OF 
 
 108 
 
 faid Mr. Stuart, “ if an indemnity of that 
 kind had been required, you know our 
 ** friend Boyd had it not to offer.” 
 
 With Mr. Edmund Burke, Mr. Boyd 
 was long in habits of the clofeft intimacy. 
 He was firft introduced to him by their 
 common friend the late Governor Patter- 
 son, of the Ifland of St. John’s. Mr. 
 Burke admired him fo much upon their 
 firft acquaintance, that he immediately in- 
 vited him to Beaconsfield, where he paffed 
 fome time, and whither afterwards he often 
 went. Mr. Burke, his brother Richard, 
 and his coufin William Burke, alfo vifited 
 frequently at Mr. Boyd’s houfe. But the 
 great confidence that Edmund Burke placed 
 in Boyd’s political fagacity and talents, is 
 beft proved by the following fa6l, which came 
 within my own knowledge. From the year 
 1788 till 1793, both Edmund Burke and his 
 fon kept up a conftant correfpondence with 
 Boyd, although during that time he was at 
 
 the publick papers, by the authority of his brother Mr. 
 H. S. Woodfall : — namely, “ that the printer of the Pub- 
 “ lick Advert ifer never ajked for any indemnity, nor was any 
 4t offered him ” 
 
 fo 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 109 
 
 fo great a diftance from them *. Some of 
 Mr. Burke’s letters I have feen. The fub- 
 jedl of them was the French Revolution ; 
 and they were written in his befl ftyle, and 
 with that fpirit of philofophy which per- 
 vades all his writings. He alfo wrote to him 
 on the affairs of India ; but thefe letters, 
 for whatever reafon, Boyd thought proper 
 to deftroy. The letters which he received 
 from young Burke were chiefly on the af- 
 fairs of Ireland, particularly as they related 
 to the emancipation of the Catholicks : and 
 on all thofe fubjedis Boyd, with a few 
 inconfiderable exceptions, agreed with the 
 Burkes.. 
 
 The only one of Mr. Boyd’s old and very 
 intimate literary friends, befides Mr. Grat- 
 tan, who is ftill living, is the learned Mr. 
 Francis Hargrave; and he has told 
 me, “ that he always thought Mr. Boyd’s 
 “ abilities were of the very firfl: rate, and 
 cc that he held his literary endowments in the 
 “ highefl: eftimation.” 
 
 Mr. Boyd was likewife acquainted with 
 Mr. Richard B, Sheridan. He ufed fome- 
 
 * Mr. Boyd was then at Madras. He went to India 
 
 in 1781. 
 
 times 
 
110 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 times to meet him at Mr. Strafford 
 Canning’s, and at a club at the Globe 
 Tavern in Fleet-ftreet : and I have reafon 
 to believe that Mr. Sheridan conceived a 
 high opinion of his wit and talents. In 
 fhort, every perfon of tafte and judgment 
 who knew Mr. Boyd, confidered him as a 
 very extraordinary man, and as one endowed 
 with the mod brilliant parts and extenfive 
 acquirements. 
 
 Yet, it may be faid, that Mr. Boyd was 
 too young to have been the author of Ju- 
 nius's letters ; for, that at the age of twenty 
 three he cannot be fuppofed to have 
 gained the political experience, and the 
 knowledge of the world, which they every 
 where difplay. This objection is more 
 plaufible than folid ; and is moreover abun- 
 dantly refuted by fome eminent examples 
 of the like prematurity of mind. 
 
 The name of Congreve will occur to 
 every reader acquainted with literary hifto- 
 ry, as an inftance of one who had attained 
 
 * This was Mr, Boyd’s age, when the letters of Junius 
 commenced. 
 
 at 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 Ill 
 
 at a very early age an extenfive knowledge 
 of life and manners. This extraordinary 
 man had written his three beft comedies, 
 and the tragedy of the Mourning Bride, be- 
 fore he had paffed his twenty-fifth year. 
 ce Among all the efforts of early genius,” 
 fays Doftor Johnfon, " which literary hif- 
 “ tory records, I doubt whether any one 
 “ can be produced, that more furpaffes the 
 “ common limits of nature than the plays 
 “ of Congreve.” — But, Congreve was not a 
 politician. In the political world, how- 
 ever, there are examples equally {hiking. 
 The two greateft orators of the prefent day, 
 Mr. Fox, and Mr. Pitt, came into parlia- 
 ment at the age of twenty two f : and 
 
 the friends of thefe gentlemen will allow, 
 that at no period of their political lives, 
 have they ever exhibited ftronger proofs of 
 fagacity, knowledge, and eloquence than 
 •when they firft commenced their career. 
 Mr. Fox, before he reached his twenty- 
 fixth year, was the leader of a party the 
 
 t It has indeed been faid that Mr. Fox was not of age 
 when he procured a feat in parliament, 
 
 moll 
 
112 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 moft illuftrious for talents of every kind, 
 that was ever known in England; and the 
 wonderful ability and addrefs with which 
 he managed that party, beft fhews how 
 deeply he had fearched into the human 
 heart, how perfectly he underftood the 
 motives, paffions, and weakneiTes of men, 
 and how attentively he had obferved the 
 habits and p raft ices of the world. Mr. 
 Pitt formed a party at the fame age, 
 which he has held together ever fince ; 
 while he attended to the various interefts, 
 and condufted the affairs of the Britifh 
 empire. 
 
 It is not my intention to inflitute any 
 comparifon between the talents of thefe 
 great men, and thofe of Junius. I only 
 mention their early attainments, in order 
 to {hew that very young men, may aft or 
 write like very experienced politicians ; — 
 for, the Scripture faith truly — “ that wij 
 <c dom is the grey hair unto men!' 
 
 Of Mr. Boyds great proficiency at 
 fchool, I have already given an account: 
 And his early knowledge of mankind, and 
 of political affairs, will appear the lefs fur- 
 
 prifing, 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 113 
 
 prifing, when it is known that his father had 
 made a praftiee of bringing him into compa- 
 ny at eight years old ; that he encouraged by 
 every means in his power, his fon s propen- 
 fity to mix with fociety, and to liften to 
 the converfation and obferve the manners of 
 men ; and that feeing his turn for politicks, 
 he bellowed the greateft pains in inftilling 
 into his youthful mind the genuine princi- 
 pled of freedom, in inftru6ling him in the 
 fcience of civil government, and in im- 
 pelling him with juft notions of the ex- 
 cellence of the Britilh conftitution. How 
 well his father was qualified to do all this, 
 has been (hewn, upon the teftimony of 
 Dean Swift : and when we couple fuch 
 circumftances with the fa6l, that almoft 
 every man, in Dublin, diftinguifhed either 
 for his rank or talents, ufed to vifit at Mr. 
 Macauley’s houfe, — I trull the caufes of the 
 prematurity of Mr. Boyds mind, will ap- 
 pear fufficiently explained. 
 
 Upon the whole, combining the concur- 
 rent opinions of the diftinguilhed charac- 
 ters who have been named, as to Mr. Boyd s 
 intellectual powers and literary qualifica- 
 - h *ions. 
 
ii 4 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 tions, with the flrong internal evidence in 
 proof of them, which the feleftions I fyave 
 made from his political writings afford, it 
 mufl, upon every principle of fair reafoning 
 be concluded, that he was a man of genius and 
 knowledge, — of confiderable fagacity and 
 great acutenefs ; — and that he was an able 
 politician, as well as a maflerly and elegant 
 writer : and, therefore, according to my 
 idea of the qualities that conflitute the ex- 
 cellence of Junius’s, letters, which the bell 
 judges will, I believe, admit to be correfi, 
 I am amply juflified in laying it down as an 
 indubitable truth, that Mr. Boyds talents 
 were fully adequate to the talk of writing 
 thofe celebrated epiflles. 
 
 But, it may ftill be contended, that 
 though Mr. Boyd was gifted with great abi- 
 lities, he did not poffefs fufficient means of 
 information with refpeft to the interior po- 
 liticks of the cabinet, and the private lives 
 of men in power, to have written the let- 
 ters of Junius ; — for, that the author of 
 thofe produftions mull have been intimate- 
 ly connefted with government, as well as in 
 the conftant habit of affociating with the 
 2 hrft 
 
HUGH BOYD. H5 
 
 firii circles of rank and fafhion. To this I 
 anfwer, — That a ftriftfcrutiny of thofe letters 
 will convince every man of found fenfe, that 
 they contain no political information what- 
 ever, but fuch, as a perfon of Mr. Boyd’s pe- 
 netration and tenacious memory might very 
 eafily have acquired, from the converfation 
 of thofe very gentlemen, with whom, as it 
 has been ftated, he lived on terms of famili- 
 arity and friendfhip. And to thofe who im- 
 agine that the writer of Juniuss letters 
 mu ft of neceflity have mixed much with 
 people of rank and fafhion, I reply, that it 
 is a faft well known to Mr. Boyd’s relations, 
 that not only during the time of Junius, 
 but throughout his whole life, he kept com- 
 pany with the higheft orders of fociety, and 
 was familiarly acquainted with feveral fami- 
 lies of diftinftion. It is alfo an equally well 
 authenticated faft, that when Junius was 
 making fo much noife in the world, Boyd 
 made a conftant practice of attending the 
 levees and drawing-rooms at St. James’s. 
 He w r ent to them as a man of fafhion ; and 
 with his inquifitive mind, infinuating ad- 
 drcfs, prompt apprehenfion, and wonderful 
 h 2 memory. 
 
ii 6 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 memory, we cannot doubt that he colle&ed 
 a vaft deal of curious information, both of 
 a publick and private mature. In truth, no 
 man knew the politicks of the day better 
 than Mr. Boyd ; and there was not a fa- 
 mily of any confequence, either in Great 
 Britain or Ireland, with whofe hiftory he 
 was not thoroughly acquainted. 
 
 I (hall, however, endeavour more parti- 
 cularly to point out the channels through 
 which he received his political information. 
 Thofe who are beft acquainted with the 
 hiftory of the Duke of Grafton's adminiftra- 
 tion, know perfectly well, how very pofli- 
 ble it was, in the time of Junius , to obtain 
 intelligence of what pafled in the cabinet, 
 without being any w r ay connefted with it ; 
 and it is well known that few men had more 
 early notice of what pafted there than Mr. 
 Wilkes, with whom Boyd conftantly affo- 
 ciated. But he had yet another channel of 
 information, more fure at leaft, if not more 
 dire6l, than this one. 
 
 The late Mr. Lauchlin Macleane, who 
 was fecretary to Lord Shelburne, (now 
 Marquis of Lanfdown) when his Lordfhip 
 
 was 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 ll 7 
 
 was fecretary of ftate^ was Mr. Boyd’s par- 
 ticular friend. They firfl: became known to 
 each other in Dublin, in the year 1764. 
 On Macleane’s return from America, they 
 met in London, and renewed their acquaint- 
 ance. Boyd then got very intimate with 
 Harry Macleane, Lauchlin’s younger bro- 
 ther ; and he took a warm intereft in what- 
 ever concerned them or their family. 
 Both the Macleanes were men of abilities, 
 but Lauchlin pofleffed an uncommon de- 
 gree of fagacity and penetration, and to ufe 
 the .words of Johnfon, “ he knew the mind 
 “ of man, from the depth of ftratagem to the 
 * e furface of affe&ation.” During the time 
 he was in office, Boyd was regularly inform- 
 ed of all the fecret tranfaftions of that mon- 
 grel adminiftration, of which Lord Shel- 
 burne was then a member. When the 
 Duke of Grafton compelled that noble Lord 
 to relinquifh his place, it is well known that 
 Macleane was difmiffed along with him. A 
 few months fubfequent to their difmiffion, 
 the letters of Junius commenced. At this 
 period Boyd conftantly alfociated with the 
 Macleanes. With Lauchlin he ufed fre- 
 quently 
 
1 1 s 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 quently to dine ; and Harry called on him al~ 
 mod every day to communicate the political 
 news* which he and his brother had employ- 
 ed their mod ftrenuous induftry to colleCti 
 
 From his old friend Mr. Grattan alfo, 
 who lived in London in the time of Junius , 
 he may be fuppofed to have received much 
 affiftance in obtaining information refpefi- 
 ing fecret politicks ; and during the years 
 1769 and 1770, while Boyd lived in Marl- 
 borough-ftreet, he and Mr. Grattan were 
 perpetually together. 
 
 With regard to the affairs of Ireland, he 
 had feveral fources of intelligence ; but it 
 was chiefly through his friend Mr. Flood he 
 received his earliefl information. 
 
 It were fuperfluous to ftate any thing fur- 
 ther on this part of the inveftigation : for it 
 mud be evident to every candid mind, that 
 there is no kind of knowledge m Junius s let- 
 ters, which Mr. Boyd did not poffefs ; and 
 that he was in fa& amply qualified in every 
 refpeft, to have been the author of fuch 
 productions. 
 
 There are, however, one or two things 
 which it feems requifite to account for, be- 
 fore 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 119 
 
 Fore I ftate the circumftances in proof of 
 Boyd having a&ually written the letters of 
 Junius . 
 
 It has been afked, what could have in- 
 duced the author of Junius to conceal his 
 name, after the fame which his papers 
 acquired, was firmly eftablifhed in the pub- 
 lick opinion, and after the animofity of thofe 
 whom he attacked may be fuppofed to have 
 fubfided? Nothing certainly is more ex- 
 traordinary than that difpofition of mind, 
 which in the author of Junius enabled him 
 to liften to the applaufe of his admirers, 
 and to the cenfures of his enemies, with 
 equal indifference, and never once to be 
 betrayed by flattery, or thrown off his guard 
 by provocation ; to keep his fecret even from 
 her to whom he confided every thing elfe; fi- 
 lently to fuffer the praifes which he had earned 
 by his abilities, induftry, and labour, to be 
 bellowed upon others, to be fatisfied with 
 the felf-gratification and confcioufnefs of 
 having gathered thofe laurels which he daily 
 faw fo many great men willing to accept, 
 and finally to refufe to his memory that 
 honour which an admiring world was 
 
 felicitous 
 
120 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 felicitous to beftow. That this difpofition 
 of mind belonged, in a peculiar manner, to 
 Mr. Boyd, thofe who thoroughly knew him, 
 and who had pried into the deepeft receffes 
 of his heart, will not hefitate to acknow- 
 ledge. For, in truth, few men united fo 
 much ardour of mind, with fo much gentle- 
 nefs of manners ; fo much generofity of 
 heart, with fo much evennefs of temper ; 
 fo much fecrecy and refelution, with fo 
 much franknefs and eafe ; fo much noble 
 pride, with fo little idle vanity ; and fuch 
 high palfionsi, with a command over them 
 fo entire, that fuperficial obfervers of; his 
 habits have abfurdly imagined he had no 
 paffions at all. What his motive was for 
 carrying his fecret with him to the grave, it 
 is impoffible to determine, and therefore 
 ufelefs to. inquire ; but it is probable, that 
 having once found it neceffary, in order to 
 check inquiries concerning Junius, to tell 
 the world that he was the foie depojitoxy 
 of his own fecret , and that it Jhould fierijh 
 with him , he deemed it improper to retrafcf 
 his declaration. His motive for not avow- 
 ing himfelf before he left. England, is eafily 
 
 explained. 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 121 
 
 explained. He was involved in the great- 
 eft embarraflments, and looked for aftift- 
 ance from men in power, who he knew 
 would not only withdraw their patronage, 
 but become his moll inveterate enemies, if 
 they had the fmalleft fufpicion of his being 
 the writer of Junius's letters ; while on the 
 other hand, he had little to expert from 
 fuch friends, as the knowledge of the fafi 
 might poflibiy have procured him. And 
 after he went to India, it would have been 
 fomething more than imprudence to have 
 avowed he was Junius . 
 
 Every reader will recoiled that Junius 
 had very few political friends ; for he at- 
 tacked either openly,, or indirectly, .all par- 
 ties, but the Grenvilles. Of, Lord Chat- 
 ham, indeed, he always fpeaks in the higheft 
 terms, to fay nothing of his beautiful pane- 
 gyrick on him ; but there are fome of his 
 Lordfhip’s meafures and opinions, wdiich he 
 unequivocally objefis to. The Rocking- 
 ham party he frequently cenfu res, though 
 in the mod refpeftfql terms, and though he 
 praifes, “ the mild, but determined integrity 
 of Lord Rockingham.” But Lord Tern- 
 
 pie, 
 
122 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 pie and his brother Mr. Grenville he never 
 mentions, except in the warmeft language 
 of approbation : and it is a pofitive fact 
 that Mr. Boyd always fpoke of them in a 
 fimilar manner, perhaps, from an expecta- 
 tion of being patronized by Lord Temple, 
 as Mr. Almon fuppofes*; or it may be 
 from a conviction that they richly merited 
 the applaufe of every man who fought 
 only to promote the true interefts, and to 
 uphold the legal liberties, of England. 
 
 With regard to thofe whofe characters 
 Junius moft feverely attacks, I have already 
 {hewn that Mr. Boyd entertained the fame 
 opinion of them ; and in that opinion I am 
 firmly perfuaded he was confirmed from a 
 fincere belief, (whether juft or not I do not 
 pretend to determine), that it was founded 
 in the ftriCieft veracity, and that therefore 
 he conceived he was doing a fignal fervice 
 to his country by expofing their private 
 vices together with their publick crimes to 
 the contempt and indignation of every ho- 
 neft heart. He knew that when civil focie- 
 
 * See Mr. Almon’s fecond Letter, in the Appendix to 
 the Lite. 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 423 
 
 ty arrives at a high pitch of refinement, the 
 corruption and degeneracy which ever ac- 
 company its progrefs, render general fatire 
 of but little avail ; becaufe men whofe 
 fenfes are dulled by luxury and venality 
 cannot be touched by any general cen- 
 fures ; fuch corre&ives however ftrong 
 they do not feel ; nothing but the fight 
 of their own deformity can fhame them 
 into righteoufnefs I will not fay, that 
 
 Junius 
 
 * On this point it is obferved by Junius, in his reply t 9 
 one of Sir William Draper’s letters, “that meafures , and 
 “ not men, is the common cant of affe&ed moderation; a 
 €< bafe counterfeit language, fabricated by knaves and 
 “ made current among fools. Such gentle cenfure is not 
 “ fitted to the prefent degenerate ftate of fociety. What 
 “ does it avail to expofe the abfurd contrivance and per- 
 “ nicious tendency of meafures, if the man who advifes 
 “ or executes them be fuffered, not only to efcape with 
 “ impunity, but even to preferve his power, and infult us 
 “ with the favour of his fovereign.” He then quotes a 
 letter of Mr. Pope’s to Doflor Arbuthnot, wherein Pope, 
 fays, “To reform and not to challife, 1 am afraid is im- 
 u poflible; and that the befl: precepts, as well as the bed 
 “ laws, would prove of fmall ufe, if there were no exam > 
 u pies to enforce them. To attack vices in the abflra£l 
 “ without touching perfons, may be fafe fighting, indeed, 
 “ but it is fighting with lhadows. My greateft comfort 
 
 “ and 
 
124 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 Junius has always drawn his piftures faith- 
 fully, much lefs will I contend that they are 
 not often too highly coloured ; but I am 
 fully fatisfied that he, for the moll part, be- 
 lieved them to be juft reprefentations of the 
 originals. I know that he is miftaken in 
 fame of his ftatements, and I think fome 
 of his afperities and farcafms highly blame- 
 able ; but I am neverthelefs convinced that 
 his intentions were always pure, and that 
 his chief motives were, a truly noble zeal in 
 the caule of liberty, and a generous ambi- 
 tion of railing the literary reputation of his 
 letters, and of being ranked, under the fig- 
 nature he adopted, among the firft political 
 fatirifts, of any age or nation. 
 
 His determined and unrelenting hoftili- 
 ty to the Duke of Grafton, has, however, 
 been fuppofed to have arifen from fome 
 private motive; and the fuppofition is cer- 
 tainly juftified by the bitternefs of his re- 
 marks upon his Grace’s conduft. But, the 
 
 ° and encouragement to proceed has been to fee, that 
 4 ‘ thofe who have no fhame, and no fear of any thing elfe, 
 “ have appeared touched by my fatires.” 
 
 _ !■ y i , i ..... r . r i 4.* » 
 
 • V '• . . ; • . 
 
 motive 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 125 
 
 motive is eafily pointed out. I have al- 
 ready noticed the friendfhip that fubfifted 
 between Mr. Boyd and the Macleanes, and 
 the warm intereft he took in their affairs. 
 Now, it is a faft, that after Mr. Lauchlin Mac- 
 leane.was difmiffed, by the Duke of Grafton, 
 from the office of under fecretary of flate, 
 he conceived a mortal hatred for his Grace, 
 and indulged his refentment by painting 
 him in the blackeft colours. From this 
 circumftance, I infer, that Mr. Boyd form- 
 ed his opinion of the noble Duke’s condu£l 
 from the reprefentations of Mr. Macleane 
 and his brother ; that his friendfhip for 
 them, together with the conviftion that the 
 meafures of his Graces adminiftration were 
 inconfiflent with the true principles of the 
 conftitution, and ruinous to the empire, in- 
 duced him to hold him up to the nation 
 as a Weak and dangerous minifter ; and 
 that his conflant habit of converfing with 
 them on the fubjeft had fharpened and 
 envenomed the point of his fatire. 
 
 Such are the motives which may be fup- 
 pofed to have influenced Mr. Boyd in writ- 
 ing die letters of Junius . And having now 
 
 fhewn. 
 
126 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 fhewn, that he was not only qualified in 
 every refpedt to have been the writer of 
 thofe letters, but alfo that his other political 
 writings refemble them fo exa£Uy, as to 
 afford the flrongeft prefumptive proof, that 
 they are the compofitions of the fame per- 
 fon, — I (hall proceed to Rate the fafls and 
 circumftances, which in conjunftion with 
 the internal evidence that has been adduc- 
 ed, have fully convinced me, and will, I 
 think, convince every unbiaffed mind, that 
 he was in reality the author of Junius . 
 For, in this inveftigation, pofitive evidence 
 cannot reafonably be expefted; as Junius 
 has declared to the world, “ that he was 
 “ the fok depofitory of his fecret,” and 
 “ that it (hould perijh with him,” and as 
 Mr. H. S. Woodfall has lately permitted 
 his brother to acknowledge for him, that 
 he does not know who was the author of 
 Junius The only evidence, therefore, 
 
 of 
 
 * Mr. William Woodfall in one of his letters, which 
 appeared laft autumn in the Morning Chronicle , tells the 
 publick, “ that the writer of Junius promifed his brother 9 
 * that be would one da y let him into his fecret f and that when 
 
 l. that 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 127 
 
 of which Mr. H. S. Woodfall can be 
 pofleffed, is the manufcript of Junius , 
 which if he has got, he does not choofe to 
 produce, becaufe he perfectly well knows , 
 that there is Jome fimilitude between it, and 
 the common hand-writing of Mr. Boyd, 
 and becaufe from thence he apprehends 
 that if it were compared with Mr. Boyd’s 
 difguifed hand, fome proofs of which Mrs. 
 Boyd has in her pofleffion, the refemblance 
 would appear too ftriking, to admit of a 
 doubt, that the manufcript of Junius was 
 written by Mr. Boyd. But Mr. H. S. 
 Woodfall has informed me, that he did not 
 preferve the MSS. of Junius* \ and as I 
 have certainly no right to queftion the 
 truth of this declaration, I truft the publick 
 
 that day comes , he will expofe all our errors ! ! — Junius 
 then, in Mr. Woodfall’s opinion, is Hill living: but, 
 what fignifies the opinion of Mr. Woodfall on this fub- 
 je£l, when he does not acquaint us with the grounds on 
 which he has formed it ; and when he confeffes he docs 
 not know who was the ivriter of Junius . 
 
 * This he told me, in the courfe of a converfation I had 
 with him on the fubjeft, at his own houfe, at Chelfea, in 
 May 1798* — Mr. William Woodfall, and a young lady, 
 were prefent. 
 
 Will 
 
128 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 will be fatisfied with the opinion of thofe 
 who had opportunities of examining 
 Junius's hand writing, and who muft be 
 perfectly difinterefled in the prefent difcuf- 
 fion. 
 
 With regard to Mr. H. S. Woodfall 
 having faid, 66 that he did not believe Mr. 
 “ Boyd was Junius*” I (hall only ob- 
 ferve, that his belief in this matter is of 
 little confequence, as he has doubtlefs very 
 fufficient reckons for wifhing to keep the 
 publick in the dark refpefting the author 
 of Junius , and as I prefume he will not 
 upon his honour deny, that he once 
 thought Mr. Boyd was that very perfon, 
 nor that he did not notice in the letters of 
 Democraticus, feme of the charafteriftical 
 features of Junius's compofition. The fol- 
 lowing' anecdote will at once refrefh Mr. 
 
 Cj 
 
 Woodfall’s memory, and juftify the forego- 
 ing obfervations. 
 
 * In the Preface to the former edition of Mr. Boyd's 
 Life, I Hated, that Mr. H. S. Woodfall had declared to 
 me, that he did not believe Mr. Boyd was the author of 
 
 'Junius. 
 
 / 
 
 In 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 129 
 
 In the year 1780, when Mr. Almons pa- 
 per, entitled the London Courant, was in 
 agitation, the late Mr. Stratford Canning, 
 (uncle to the prefent under fecretary of 
 flate) by defire of many diftinguifhed per- 
 fonages, folicited Mr. Boyd to conduft it, — 
 which he refufed, promifing, however, to 
 write for it. A few days after he had made 
 this promife, walking the flreet with a 
 friend or two, they met Mr. H. S. Wood- 
 fall, flopped, and entered into converfation, 
 which turning upon the new paper, Wood- 
 fall looked Mr. Boyd full in the face, and 
 then faid, — Almon expefls to overfet all 
 “ the other papers, for he fays Junius is to 
 cc write for the Courant The gentlemen 
 who were prefent on the occafion, were 
 (truck fo forcibly with the impreffive man- 
 ner in which Woodfall fpoke, that they 
 were convinced, he confidently believed 
 Mr. Boyd to be the author of Junius. 
 
 Thus every reader will know what weight 
 to give to the late declaration of Mr. H. S. 
 Woodfall on this fubjeft; and thus have I 
 endeavoured to clear my argument from an 
 
 i objection 
 
130 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 objection of fome apparent, though not of 
 any real, ftrength. 
 
 As moft of the fafts which I am now go- 
 ing to fubmit to the publick, reft on the 
 teftimony of Mrs. Boyd, it is very eflential 
 to mention, that fhe is living, and that every 
 one who has any knowledge of her charafter 
 will admit, that fhe is in every refpeft the 
 very beft evidence that can be wifhed for, 
 in a difcuflion of this kind. And I can with 
 truth affirm, that with regard to the contro- 
 verfy about the author of Junius's letters, 
 fhe is entirely free from that partiality by 
 which (he may be fuppofed to be influenced, 
 though her reverence for truth obliges her 
 to avow, that fhe is convinced Mr. Boyd 
 muft have been the real writer of thofe 
 papers. 
 
 In the latter end of the year 1768, the 
 author of Junius's letters commenced his 
 correfpondence with the Publick Advertifer ; 
 and on the 21ft of January 1769, the fir ft 
 letter under the fignature of Junius ap- 
 peared in that paper. During the years 
 1769 and 1770, he alfo wrote occafionally 
 
 in 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 *3* 
 
 in the fame paper under the fignatures of 
 Lucius and Brutus, and he fometimes fent 
 communications to Mr. H. S. WoodfalJ, 
 without any fignature at all. The letters 
 under the fignature of Philo Junius, he has 
 himfelf acknowledged were his own pro- 
 ductions. He likewife wrote private letters 
 to fome diftinguifhed perfons, under the 
 fignature of Junius , which were tranfmitted 
 to them through Mr. H. S. Woodfall. 
 
 Now it is a certain fact, that Mr. Boyd 
 commenced his correfpondence with the 
 Publick Advertiser, precifely at the fame 
 period of time with Junius . In the winter 
 of 1768, he fent feveral letters to Mr. 
 Woodfall ; the contents of which he kept 
 a fecret from Mrs. Boyd. In the beginning 
 of January 1760, he was at great pains in 
 accuftoming himfelf to difguife his hand- 
 writing. He ufed frequently in the courfe 
 of a forenoon, to come from his ftudy, in 
 which he had locked himfelf up, into the 
 parlour; and (hewing Mrs. Boyd fome flips 
 
 * See the Preface to Junius , in page 1, of Woodfall! 
 edition. 
 
 Z2 
 
132 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 of paper on which he had written, would 
 afk her, whether fhe thought he had dif- 
 guifed his hand ? She told him, that he 
 had difguifed it fo completely, that none 
 but thofe who were very well acquainted with 
 his common hand would fufpeft the writing 
 to be his. 
 
 When the controverfy between Sir Wil- 
 liam Draper and Junius took place in the 
 month of February 1769, and when the 
 letters of Junius thereby became the con- 
 flant converfation in all the literary, politi- 
 cal, and fafhionable circles in London, Mr. 
 Boyd evinced the greatejl anxiety , about 
 the letters which he was at that time writing 
 for the Publick Advertifer , and he praftifed 
 a peculiar fecrecy, both with regard to their 
 contents, and to the mode of tranfmitting 
 them to Mr. Woodfall. In the courfe of 
 the controverfy, Mrs. Boyd begged of him 
 to take in the Publick Advertifer , as fhe was 
 defirous to read the letters of Junius as they 
 came out; but this requefi , notwithfanding 
 her repeated entreaties , he thought it prudent 
 to decline : and it was not till two years 
 afterwards/ that by mere dint of importunity , 
 
 fhe 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 m 
 
 fhe overcame his fcruples, and prevailed on 
 him to take in that paper. Yet hehimfelf 
 always manifefted much folicitude to fee the 
 letters of Junius ; and frequently, on the 
 day after he had fent a letter to Woodfall, 
 he would walk out pretty early, and upon 
 returning home to dinner, tell Mrs. Boyd 
 with an animated countenance , That Junius 
 “ was announced for to-morrow 
 
 With Sir William Draper, and every 
 thing that concerned him, Mr. Boyd was 
 well acquainted : and he often fpoke to 
 
 Mrs. Boyd about Sir William’s controverfy 
 with Junius , obferving, that the Knight 
 richly merited the lafhing he received, and 
 that he had compelled Junius to fay more 
 of Lord Granby’s charafter than he origi- 
 nally wifhed, — for, that Junius refpefted 
 Lord Granby 
 
 In the fummer of 1769, when the letters 
 of PhiLo-Junius firft appeared, Mr. Boyd 
 repeatedly told Mrs. Boyd, in confidence , 
 
 * When the letters of Junius were publifhed in vo- 
 lumes, the very fame obfervations appeared in a note to 
 Junius 1 s reply to* Sir William Draper’s letter of the 27th 
 February 1769. 
 
 that 
 
*34 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 that Ihe might rely upon it they were written 
 by Junius himfelf, for that it was neceffary 
 to make the publick fuppofe he had an 
 auxiliary 
 
 During the autumn and winter of 1769, 
 Mr. Boyd continued to fend letters to the 
 Publick Advertifer , almoft every week, fu- 
 perfcribed in his difguifed hand,, and with 
 the aforefaid fecrecy. And at this time, he 
 ufed eagerly to feek opportunities of intro- 
 ducing the fubjeft of Junius, in his private 
 conventions with Mrs. Boyd. He would 
 afk her opinion of different letters, and de- 
 fire her to point out the paffages in them 
 fhe mod admired ; and he always feemed 
 gratified with her remarks; upon them, whe- 
 ther of cenfure, or praife. “ In fhort,” 
 fays Mrs. Boyd, in a letter to me, in which 
 fhe has detailed thofe converfations, “ what* 
 iS ever fubjefl our private converfations be- 
 
 gan with, we always ended with Junius ; 
 “ and it is not credible that a perfon, wholly 
 * e unconcerned with that production, could 
 
 * This, it ha^ been already, ftated, tyrned out to be 
 ftri 6tly true. 
 
 have 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 135 
 
 “ have fhewn, for fo many years, fuch an 
 “ extraordinary degree of intereft about it.” 
 This circumftance is greatly ftrengthened 
 by the fa6l, that Mrs. Boyd was the only 
 perfon in whofe prefence he ever betrayed 
 any of thofe fymptoms of paternal regard 
 for the letters of Junius , which have been 
 mentioned ; and that in company with his 
 literary friends , particularly with Mr , Wilkes, 
 he talked of Junius with the mod perfeft 
 indifference. 
 
 On the 19th of December 1769, Junius's 
 letter to a Great Personage, made its 
 appearance, and fet the whole town in a 
 ferment. Minifters fpared no expence, no 
 trouble, no fecret arts, no means whatever 
 that either their ingenuity could fuggeft, or 
 the publick purfe fupply, to difcover the 
 author. Treafury fpies were ftationed in 
 every place where there was the fmalleft 
 likelihood of gaining intelligence refpefling 
 him ; and every exertion was made to inter- 
 cept his correfpondence with Woodfall, 
 whofe office, at the corner of Ivy-lane, was 
 for that purpofe clofely watched, 
 
 Mr, 
 
LIFE O? 
 
 *3 6 
 
 Mr. Boyd at this time carried on his con- 
 refpondence with the Publick Advertiser, 
 with a caution fo dudied, and a feerecy fo 
 impenetrable, as to furprife Mrs. Boyd, and 
 make a lading impreffion on her mind. 
 After writing in his ftudy for feveral days 
 together, he would afk Mrs. Boyd to take a 
 walk with him, often in the dufk of the even- 
 ing, and fometimes at night ; and after hav- 
 ing conduced her to fome by-way, or un- 
 frequented dreet, would flop, as if fuddenly 
 recollefting himfelf, and faying, “ he had a 
 “ letter to j end to Wood fall ” took a large 
 packet from his pocket, and put it into a 
 remote penny pod-office. At other times 
 he would give it to Mrs. Boyd, and defire 
 her to carry it to the corner of Ivy-lane, 
 and put it into Woodfall’s letter-box. When 
 they returned hoirie, Mrs. Boyd often, hint- 
 ed to him, that die fufpefted he was Junius , 
 to which he made no reply, but would in- 
 genioudy change the converfation. Once 
 or twice, when he was afking her opinion of 
 fome favourite pajfages in Junius , die has 
 told him, that fhe widied he zoas Junius , at 
 
 which 
 
KUuH BOYD. I37 
 
 which he would firde, and only fay^~ 
 Cf Should you?” — ^Unfortunately , 55 fays Mrs. 
 Boyd, in a letter to me, “ I always added., 
 “that if he was, adually Junius , I fhould 
 ** never forgive him, for keeping the fecret 
 “ from me; and this I imagine was one 
 “ ftrong reafon for his not difclofmg it tQ 
 me, after ail the buflle about Junius had 
 fubfided . 55 “ Sometimes , 55 continues Mrs. 
 Boyd, “ on going to dinner, or fupper, and 
 “ finding him writing in his ftudy, I have 
 “ gone to the defk, afking queflions, on 
 “ which he would immediately cover his 
 “ writings , and fay fomething lively about 
 ■ e female curiofity. Sometimes he wrote 
 “ under other fignatures, and would afk me to 
 9e copy what he had compofed,and which were 
 " fent in my hand-writing to WoodfalL In 
 “ particular, I copied a letter addreffed to Sir 
 “ Fletcher Norton, on his being chofen 
 (C Speaker of the Houfe of Commons 
 This took place in the month of March 
 
 * This letter, together with feveral others of Mr. 
 Boyd’s that appeared at different times in Mr. Woodfall’s 
 paper, fhall be prefented to the publick in the courfe q£ 
 this year, as a third volume to thefe works. 
 
 3 77 °* 
 
LIFE OF 
 
 138 
 
 1770. Throughout the remainder of that 
 year, and during the fpring of 1771, Mr, 
 Boyd continued to write, with the moft unre- 
 mitting diligence and fecrecy, and to tranfmit 
 what he had written to Mr. Woodfall, by the 
 fame methods that I have already men- 
 tioned. 
 
 In April 1771, he was under the neceffity 
 of going to Ireland, for ten days, on very 
 urgent bufmefs. Yet, his correfpondence 
 with Mr. Woodfall was of too much im- 
 portance to be neglefted : for, in that fhort 
 fpace of time he fent Mrs. Boyd three large 
 packets , with the mojl particular injunSli&ns , 
 to put them immediately into W oodfalls 
 letter-box. 
 
 In the month of June 1771, he took ahoufe 
 at Kenton-Green, nearHarrow. In the courfe 
 of this fummer, it is well known that the con- 
 troverfy took place between Mr. Horne and 
 Junius . Refpefting that controverfy, Mr. 
 Boyd manifefled the utmoft eagernefs ; and 
 while it lafted, he ufed, for feveral days to- 
 gether, to lock himfelf up in his ftudy im- 
 mediately after breakfaft, and never make 
 his appearance again until dinner was an- 
 nounced, 
 
HUGH BOYD. I39 
 
 nounced. When he had finifhed what he 
 was writing he would wall into London 
 with it, and walk bach the fame day *. In 
 talking .o Mrs. Boyd about Mr. Horne’s 
 long letter to Junius, he confeffed “ that 
 “ Mr. H. was an ingenious and able rea- 
 “ fonCr, but that Junius, notwithftanding 
 “ this, had the better of him,” obferving at 
 the fame time, that Junius's exprelfion that 
 cs Mr . Wilkes Jhould be fupported while he 
 “ was a thorn in the Kings fide” was both 
 very unguarded and unfortunate. 
 
 In the beginning of November 1771, 
 Mr. Boyd borrowed from a neighbour of 
 his at Kenton-Green, a great many folio 
 books of law, and ftate trials, which he ufed 
 daily to examine with the molt fedulous 
 attention, and from which he made feverat 
 extra£is, for the purpofe, Mrs. Boyd thinks, 
 of fupporting the charge that Junius had 
 too haftily made againfl Lord Mansfield, 
 on account of his Lordfhip having bailed 
 Mr. Jo hn Eyre. It is neceflfary here to 
 remind the reader, that Junius in a fhort 
 
 * Mr. Boyd was a great walker. He would often 
 Walk thirty miles in a day, without being fatigued. 
 
 1 letter 
 
140 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 letter to Lord Mansfield, dated the 2d No- 
 vember 1771, concludes in the following 
 words. “ If ever Mr. Eyre fhould be 
 *' brought to trial, we (hall hear what you 
 u have to fay for yourfelf ; and I pledge my- 
 “ f elf before God and my country, in proper 
 " time and place, to make good my charge 
 ie againft you. 5 ’ — About eight days after the 
 publication of this letter, the following 
 notice appeared in the Publick Adver- 
 tifer . 
 
 November the gth, 1771. 
 
 “ Junius engages to make good his charge 
 “ againft Lord Chief JuJlice Mansfield , fome 
 time before the meeting of parliament, in 
 “ order that the Houfe of Commons may, 
 if they think proper, make it one article 
 in the impeachment of the faid Lord Chief 
 “ JuJlice 
 
 Now between the date of this notice, and 
 the 21ft of January 1772, the only letter 
 from Junius which appeared in the Publick 
 Advertifier , was a fhort one to the Duke of 
 Grafton, and the laft one indeed that he ever 
 addreffed to his Grace. It is dated the 27th 
 November 1771. From this time till the 
 
 20th 
 
HUGH BOYD, 
 
 141 
 
 20th of January following, Mr. Boyd’s whole 
 time was occupied in examining the law 
 books and (late trials above mentioned, and 
 in writing with his ufual fecrecy for the Pub- 
 lick Advertifer. Junius's elaborate letter to 
 Lord Mansfield, in which he ftrove hard to 
 make good his charge agdinjl him , is dated the 
 21ft January 1772 : about three weeks after 
 the publication of this letter Mr. Boyd went 
 to Ireland ; and Junius ceafed to write 
 under that fignature for the Publick Adver- 
 tifer. 
 
 The abrupt manner in which Junius con- 
 cluded his letters, occafioned much obferva- 
 tion at the time, and many a plaufible con- 
 jefture has been made concerning it. The 
 general opinion, however, was, that he 
 had either died, or quitted the country ; and 
 hence one or two gentlemen have beenfup- 
 pofed to have written thofe letters, who, I 
 believe, never in their lives wrote a line for 
 Mr. Woodfall’s paper. But, when we know 
 that Mr. Boyd was Junius , the matter is 
 eafily accounted for. On his return from 
 Ireland in March 1772, he found his friend 
 Mr. Lauchlin Macleane had made an amica- 
 ble 
 
142 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 ble adjuftment. of his differences with the 
 Duke of Grafton, and had gone over to the 
 miniflry ; he was therefore induced to de- 
 cline all further hofliiity towards his Grace, 
 and to abandon his intention, as it is con- 
 veyed in Junius s laft letter to him, of at- 
 tacking him again upon the fale of the patent 
 to Mr. Hine. And it is obfervable, that 
 though Mr. Boyd, in his political writings 
 now publifhed, pointedly attacks all the 
 other perfons who are fatirized by Junius, 
 he never once mentions the name of Graf- 
 ton. Befides this motive for his difcontinu- 
 ing to write under the fignature of Junius , 
 there was another which, perhaps, operated 
 ftill more powerfully on his mind. In the 
 beginning of 1772, his pecuniary misfor- 
 tunes and difficulties crowded upon him from 
 every quarter; and this circumflance, to- 
 gether with his being obliged at this period 
 to go frequently to Ireland, abfolutely dif- 
 abled him from bellowing that time and at- 
 tention on his literary purfuits, which he 
 had fo fuccefsfully employed during the 
 three preceding years, and without which 
 he felt he could neither fupport with his 
 
 wonted 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 *43 
 
 wonted vigour, fo arduous a conteft, nor 
 preferve that feerecy which he was well 
 aware his perfonal fafety required. And 
 doubtlefs he alfo confidered that by conti- 
 nuing to write as Junius he might, from 
 thofe caufes, poffibly lower, but could not, 
 under fuch circumflances, eafily heighten 
 the reputation which his talents had gained 
 to that fignature. 
 
 Still, however, he carried on his corre- 
 fpondence with Woodfall during fome part 
 of the year 1772, with the fame caution he 
 had before obferved. But, after the letters 
 of Junius were publifhed colleftively for 
 Woodfall with the Dedication, Preface, and 
 Notes by the author, he feemed as if his 
 mind had been relieved from a burden, and 
 he never again was at fo much pains to con- 
 ceal from Mrs. Boyd the contents of the 
 letters he occafionally tranfmitted to the 
 Publick Advertifer . 
 
 On the very day that the above men- 
 tioned edition of Junius was publifhed, he 
 brought home a copy of the work, and 
 prefented it to Mrs. Boyd, with an anima- 
 tion in his countenance that befpoke a kind 
 
 of 
 
144 
 
 LIFE Ot* 
 
 of regard far it, which none but its author 
 could be fuppofed to have felt. In look- 
 ing over the letters Mrs. Boyd was much 
 ftruck, with finding an anecdote related in 
 one of the notes, relative to Lord Irnham 
 and one of her guardians, which (he had in 
 confidence communicated to Mr . Boyd , and 
 
 r 
 
 which {he knew had been very ftudioufly 
 kept fecret by the parties concerned.- This 
 note was added to the lafl letter which 
 Junius addreffed to the Duke of Grafton; 
 and in order that the reader may the more 
 clearly comprehend the circumftance it re- 
 cords, I beg leave to cite it verbatim. 
 “ There is a certain family in this country, 5 ' 
 fays Junius , “ on which nature feems to 
 have entailed an hereditary bafenefs of dif- 
 “ pofition. As far as their hiftory has been 
 <£ known the fon has regularly improved 
 “ upon the vices of his fathet, and has 
 “ taken care to tranfmit them pure and 
 <c undiminilhed into the bofom of his fuc- 
 celfor. In the fenate tlieir abilities - have 
 “ confined them to thofe humble fordid fer- 
 “ vices, in which the .fcavengers of the mi- 
 ££ niftry are ufually employed. But in the 
 
 a 
 
 memoirs 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 H5 
 
 tc memoirs of private treachery they ftand 
 firft and unrivalled. The following ftory 
 “ will ferve to illuflrate the character of 
 “ this refpe liable family, and to convince 
 “ the world, that the prefent poffeffor has 
 “ as clear a title to the infamy of his an- 
 “ ceftors as he has to their eftate. It de- 
 “ ferves to be recorded for the curiofity of 
 “ the fa£t, and (hould be given to the pub- 
 (i lick as a warning to every honeft mem* 
 “ ber of fociety. 
 
 “ The prefent Lord Irnham, who is now 
 (( in the decline of life, lately Cultivated the 
 “ acquaintance of a younger brother of a fa- 
 “ mily with which he had lived in fome degree 
 of intimacy and friendfhip. The young 
 “ man had long been the dupe of a moft 
 * € unhappy attachment to a common profti- 
 u tute His friends and relations forelaw 
 fe the confequences of this connexion, and 
 “ did every thing that depended on them to 
 “ fave him from ruin. But he had a friend 
 " in Lord Irnham, whofe advice rendered 
 all their endeavours ineffectual. This 
 
 * The noted Polly DaVis. 
 
 k 
 
 “ hoary 
 
LIFE OF 
 
 146 
 
 ft hoary letcher not contented with the en- 
 “ joyment of his friend’s miftrefs, was bafe 
 u enough to take advantage of the paffions 
 “ and folly of the young man, and pcrfuad- 
 fc ed him to marry her. He defcended even 
 “ to perform the office of father to the 
 “ proftitute. He gave her to his friend 
 u who was on the point of leaving the king- 
 “ dom, and the next night lay with her 
 
 himfelf.” 
 
 “ Whether the depravity of the human 
 “ heart can produce any thing more bafe 
 Cf and deteftable than this faft, muff be left 
 “ undetermined until the fon Jhall arrive at 
 6t his fathers age and experience ” 
 
 The family herein alluded to, (the name 
 I forbear to mention) confifted of three bro- 
 thers, who were Mrs. Boyd’s guardians, and 
 in whofe welfare and happinefs ffie and Mr. 
 Boyd were by confequence much interefted. 
 It was the youngeff of the three who was Lord 
 Irnham’s particular friend, and whofe friend- 
 ffiip his Lordfhip fo faithfully and honour- 
 ably requited. The noble Lord, however, had 
 yet decency enough to conceal the circum- 
 ftance of the marriage from the cenforious 
 
 eve 
 
HUGH BOYD. l/fl 
 
 eye of the publick ; and he therefore ex- 
 acted a promife from the parties, never to 
 mention the particulars of it to any one. 
 But the brothers of the unfortunate young 
 man fufpe&ing what had happened, impor- 
 tuned him fo clofely about it, that he at laft 
 confefled the whole of the tranfafiion, and 
 minutely related to them every thing con- 
 cerning it. Yet they fuppreffed their re- 
 fentment towards Lord Irnham, becaufe 
 they could not make the matter publick* 
 without expofing the weaknefs of their bro- 
 ther *. and for this reafon, they adopted 
 every poflible precaution to prevent the 
 ftory from going beyond the family. Ne- 
 verthelefs, Mrs. Boyd having been always 
 confidered as one of the family, it was not 
 concealed from her ; and (lie told it in con- 
 fidence to Mr* Boyd, with precifely the 
 fame minutenefs with which it is detailed in 
 the note above quoted, a fhort time before 
 the authors edition of Junius was publifhed. 
 Shocked at the infamous conduft of Lord 
 Irnham, and feeling for the unhappy fitu- 
 ation of the young man himfelf, no lefs 
 than for the difhonour which had been put 
 
 k 2 upon 
 
LIFE OF 
 
 148 
 
 upon a family with which Mrs. Boyd was 
 fo intimately connected* he was naturally 
 deftrous of refenting the injury his Lord- 
 fhip had done them* and he well knew that 
 his pen was the only weapon* by which a 
 heart like his Lordfhips could be rendered 
 fore. 
 
 If then we confider* that it was not only 
 Lordlrnham’s intereft*but his with, to bury 
 the ftory in oblivion, that it was peculiarly 
 the intereft of Mifs Davis to conform to 
 his wifhes*. and that in fa£t his Lordfhip 
 was fo well convinced of Junius having re- 
 ceived his information from the other par- 
 ty* that he fent the young man a challenge , 
 — it amounts* I think* to a moral certainty, 
 that the ftory was communicated to Junius , 
 by the family themfelves: and, therefore, 
 calling to mind all the foregoing evidence 
 in proof of Mr. Boyd having been the au- 
 thor of Junius , and at the fame time cou- 
 pling the eircumftance of Mrs. Boyd hav- 
 ing minutely related to him all the particu- 
 lars of this ftory, with the faft* that fhe was 
 the only perfon not immediately living in 
 the family to whom thefe particulars were 
 
 told,, 
 
told, and with the motive, as above ex- 
 plained, for his making them publick, — it 
 mud at leajl be admitted, that there is the 
 very flrongeft probability, of his having 
 written the note in queftion. 
 
 There are yet fome other circutnftances, 
 which I conceive it to be of importance to 
 date. — When the information was filed 
 againft Mr. Almon, for having fold fome 
 of the monthly magazines, into which 
 Junius's addrefs to His Majefty had been 
 copied, Mr. Boyd (hewed great anxiety 
 about him, but did not however attend his 
 trial, for a reafon which I think Mr. Almon 
 has fatisfaftorily explained in his firft letter 
 to me on this fubjeft*. But when Mr. 
 Woodfall’s trial commenced, a few weeks 
 afterwards, he attended it with the utmoft 
 folicitudef. 
 
 In Junius's Dedication, the author ob- 
 ferves, — C£ that the King may poffiblv be 
 
 * See the Appendix to the Life. 
 
 t Mr. Boyd ufed to relate, that whenWoodfall afked Sii 
 John Day, (then Mr. Day), his opinion of his cafe, the 
 learned gentleman replied, “ There was only a hair’s 
 breadth between it and treafon, but that it was a horfe 
 
 hair." 
 
 advifed 
 
150 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 “ advifed to diffolve the prefent parliament 
 * s a year or two before it expires of courfe, 
 ** and precipitate a new election, in hopes 
 ** of taking the nation by furprife.” — Now 
 Mr. Boyd went over to Ireland in Septem- 
 ber 1774, and on the goth of that month a 
 proclamation was very fuddenly and unex- 
 pededly iffued for diffolving the parlia- 
 ment ; upon which he immediately wrote 
 to Mrs. Boyd, triumphantly reminding 
 her, that "Junius had predifted the diffoju- 
 tion. 
 
 From this period, until the year in which 
 he left England for India, he ufed occafion- 
 ally to converfe with Mrs. Boyd refpefting 
 Junius ; and in thofe converfations he al- 
 ways alked her to point out to him the 
 paffages fhe moft admired. A few weeks 
 before he embarked for India with Lord 
 Macartney, he burnt, with his own hands, 
 feveral large bundles of manufcript papers, 
 which, fince the time that Junius ceafed to 
 write, he had kept carefully locked up ; and 
 he was fo very particular in deflroying 
 them, that he hood over the fire, until they 
 were entirely confumed, taking the greatefi; 
 
 poffible 
 
HUGH BOYD, I5I 
 
 poflible care, that not even the frnalleft 
 Aired of them fhould efcape the flames. 
 
 Some years after Mr. Boyd had gone to 
 India, a paragraph * appeared in a morn- 
 ing paper, entitled the General Advertifer , 
 purporting, ‘ 6 that Junius had certainly ac- 
 companied Lord Macartney to Madras, that 
 “ he poflefled the mod retentive memory, 
 “ and that he was an Iriftiman.” When Mrs. 
 Boyd faw this paragraph, (he knew it al- 
 luded to Mr. Boyd, and fearful, left the dis- 
 covery of his having written the letters of 
 Junius , might be prejudicial to his profpe&s 
 in India, {he fent a friend to the printer of 
 the General} t Advertifer , to requeft he would 
 not in future infert in his paper aay para- 
 graph alluding to Mr. Boyd. And at the 
 fame time Ihe wrote to Mr. Boyd, enclofmg 
 him this paragraph, and urging him, if what 
 it ftated was not true , to contradift it with- 
 out delay ; as he muft be fenfible, if fuch a 
 report gained credit, it would materially in- 
 jure his beft intereft. But, to this requeft, 
 though fhe frequently re-urged it to him, 
 
 * See this paragraph in Mr. Almon’s firft letter in the 
 Appendix. 
 
 (be 
 
152 _ L ! F £ OF 
 
 Hie never obtained a reply. He anfwered 
 all the other parts of her letters ; but that 
 which related to Junius he conftantly paffed 
 over in filence. Can it then be believed, 
 that if he were not Junius , he would have 
 perfifled in not attending to Mrs. Boyd’s 
 earned intreaties, when they fo forcibly ap- 
 pealed to his feelings ? If he were not 
 Junius , by what motive could he have been 
 afluated, in remaining deaf to a folicitation, 
 at once proper and neceffary, and coming 
 from her to whom he never in his life denied 
 any thing elfe P If he were not Junius , 
 furely he would have either complied with 
 her requeft, or treated the above mentioned 
 paragraph with ridicule. It may indeed be 
 faid, that he only wifhed to gratify an idle 
 vanity, by endeavouring to make her be- 
 lieve he was Junius ; but vanity is ever 
 too aftive and reftlefs, to confine itfelf with- 
 in fo narrow a circle : had he been defirous 
 of being looked upon as the author of 
 Junius , his vanity would infallibly have 
 prompted him to hmt his wifhes to others, 
 as well as to Mrs. Boyd. Befides, his mind 
 was tar above that little fordid felfifhnefs, 
 
 which 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 153 
 
 which induces fome men fecretly to wifh, 
 that they might be confidered by their 
 friends as the authors of fuch anonymous 
 writings as have attained celebrity. In truth, 
 he was always defirous to conceal, even from 
 Mrs. Boyd, that he had written thofe per- 
 formances which we now know to be his, 
 but which he never acknowledged, until the 
 proofs againft him were too ftrong to be 
 denied. Even the love of fame, that fine 
 incentive of generous minds, could not be- 
 tray him into an oflentatious difplay of vir- 
 tue, nor induce him to praQife thofe arts 
 that court applaufe*. 
 
 Such are the circumftances which reft 
 upon the evidence of Mrs. Boyd ; and 
 from this plain ftatement of them, the truth 
 of the following fads, which are efi'entiai 
 to the point at iffue, appears to be fully 
 eftablifhed. 
 
 lft. That Mr. Boyd kept up a conftant 
 correfpondence with Mr. Henry Sampfon 
 Woodfall, during the three fucceffive vears 
 
 7 o J 
 
 # Ne famam quidem, cui etiam fepi boni indulgent, 
 oftentanda virtute, aut per artem Tacit, in Vita 
 
 Agricola, 
 
 in 
 
*54 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 in which the letters figned Junius' appeared 
 in his paper, intitled the Publick Advertifer • 
 2d. That almoft the whole of Mr. Boyds 
 time and attention, during thofe years, were 
 occupied in that correfpondence. 
 
 gd. That both before the commencement, 
 and during the continuance of that corre- 
 fpondence, Mr. Boyd took great pains in 
 accuftoming himfelf to difguife his hand- 
 writing. 
 
 4th. That from the time the firfi: letter 
 under the fignature of Junius appeared, 
 until the author of Junius publifhed the 
 whole of his letters in volumes, th e numerous 
 letters which Mr. Boyd fent to WoodfalJ, 
 were written with the mod impenetrable 
 fecrecy ; that thofe letters were fuperfcribed 
 in his difguifed hand-writing; and that they 
 were conveyed to Woodfalls office, very 
 often by Mrs. Boyd herfelf, and always 
 with a caution and fcrupuloufnefs, propor- 
 tioned to the degree of aftivity with which 
 government at different periods endeavour- 
 ed to difcover the writer of Junius . 
 
 5th. That at the precife time Junius dif- 
 continued to write, Mr. Boyd likewife ceaf- 
 
 ed 
 
HUGH BOYD. I55 
 
 ed to write for the Publick Advert Jer, with 
 that conftancy* fecrecy, and attention which 
 from the very week , that Junius began to 
 correfpond with it, he had invariably ob- 
 ferved. 
 
 6th. That the anecdote refpe&ing Lord 
 Irnham and Polly Davis, which is related 
 in a note to one of Junius's letters, mnft 
 have been written by Mr. Boyd. 
 
 7 th. That he always {hewed, when in 
 company with Mrs. Boyd, a degree of anx- 
 iety and care about the writings of Junius , 
 which no one but the author himfelf can be 
 fuppofed to have felt ; though in the pre- 
 fence of every other perfon he liftened 
 to whatever was faid about Junius with the 
 greateft apparent indifference. 
 
 8th. That Mrs. Boyd repeatedly told 
 him, fhe had ftrong fufpicions he was Ju- 
 nius ; but that to all (he faid on that fubjeft 
 he was totally filent. 
 
 This is the fum of Mrs. Boyd’s evi- 
 dence ; and the only part of it which feems 
 to require explanation, is that which relates 
 to Mr. Boyd having carried on his corre- 
 
 fpondence 
 
LIFE OF 
 
 I56 
 
 fpondence with Woodfall in a difguifed hand- 
 writing. 
 
 We are extremely apt to imagine, that a 
 difguifed hand-writing muft neceffarily be 
 a cramped one, or muft at leaft fhew fome 
 diftinguiihing mark, by which a perfon who 
 is in the conftant habit of examining a va- 
 riety of manufcripts, {hall know it to be 
 feigned, although he ftiould not be acquaint- 
 ed with the writer’s ufual hand-writing. But 
 this notion is, furely, very fanciful and erro- 
 neous : for, in the firft place, it is not true, 
 that a difguifed hand-writing has always a 
 cramped appearance ; — being an attainment 
 which can be acquired only through con- 
 ftant practice, practice will render it eafy, 
 and eafe will of courfe free it from every 
 thing like labour or reftraint : and, in the 
 next place, before any perfon can determine 
 whether or not a hand- writing be difguifed, 
 it is abfolutely neceflary, either to be fami- 
 liarly acquainted with the writer’s common 
 hand-writing, or to have an opportunity of 
 attentively comparing the one with the 
 other. Now, with refpe£i to the cafe in 
 
 queftion. 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 *57 
 
 queftion, the faft is, that Mr. Boyd’s dif- 
 guifed hand-writing has not any ftriking pe- 
 culiarity dijlinffi from his common hand- 
 writing ; there is nothing in the one, which 
 would attraft the notice of a perfon who 
 had not been in the conflant habit of feeing 
 the other ; — but, a perfon who had been in 
 that habit, would immediately difeern the 
 refemblance between them ; or a perfon of 
 penetration, to whom the difguifed hand- 
 writing had once been familiar, would, 
 upon a clofe infpeftion of the common 
 one, be fatisfied, that they were very much 
 alike. 
 
 The following evidence, fully jufiifies 
 this account of Mr. Boyd’s hand-writing, 
 and at the fame time proves that the 
 manufeript of Junius ftrongly refembled 
 it. 
 
 Mr. Almon was very familiarly acquainted 
 with Mr. Boyd’s common hand-writing, at 
 the time of the original publication of 
 Junius s letters ; and he declares that at that 
 period he had an opportunity of feeing the 
 manufeript of Junius, which to him ap- 
 
LIFE OF 
 
 158 
 
 peared to have a ftrong fimilitude to Mr. 
 Boyd’s hand-writing 
 
 Mr. T. Bur Tore, of Gate-ftreet, Lin- 
 coln s-inn-fields, a very refpeftable mafter- 
 printer, has declared to me in the prefence 
 of another gentleman, — that he was a jour- 
 neyman printer in Mr. H. S. W oodfall’s 
 office, at the time of the original publication 
 of Junius's letters ; that he was one of the 
 compofitors employed on thofe letters; and 
 that he ufed frequently to remark to his 
 fellow-journeymen, how much the hand- 
 writing of Junius refembled his own ; — and 
 he moreover told me, that if he faw the 
 hand-writing again, he was confident he 
 ffiould know it. I then fhewed him fome 
 of Mr. Boyd’s difguijed hand-writing, which 
 he inftantly faid, “ he fincerely believed to 
 “ be the fame hand as the manufcript of 
 “Junius:” I alfo compared Mr. Burton’s 
 own hand-writing with Mr. Boyd’s, to which 
 it certainly bears an obvious affinity. Con- 
 fidering Mr. Burton’s evidence of fome im~ 
 
 # For the detail of this evidence, fee Mr. Almon’s firft 
 letter in the Appendix to the Life. 
 
 portancej 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 l 59 
 
 porta nee, I have examined him twice very 
 clofely on the fubjefi, and have found him 
 perfeftly confiftent and accurate. 
 
 The evidence of Mr. Almon, and Mr. 
 Burton, in itfelf very ftrong, is corroborated 
 by the teflimony of Wood fall’s foreman, 
 who fuperintended the printing of the letters 
 of Junius, and who fays he has a perfett re- 
 collection of the manufeript of thofe letters, 
 and that it rcfembled the hand-writing of 
 Mr. Boyd. 
 
 Upon the whole, therefore, it appears clear, 
 that the manufeript of Junius bore fuch a 
 refemblance to Mr. Boyd’s common hand- 
 writing, as that thofe, but thofe only who 
 
 were 
 
 * Mr. William Woodfall has pubiickly declared, u that 
 4t his brother Mr. H. S. Woodfall (hewed him the whole 
 of the letters of Junius t in manufeript, and that they did 
 “ not bear the appearance of being written in a difguifed 
 hand/’ But to have made his declaration of any im- 
 portance in this inveftigation, he fhould have proved that 
 the common hand-writing of Mr. Boyd had been familiar 
 to, him, before he faw that of Junius , and that they bore 
 no refemblance to each other. Now the faff is, that Mr, 
 iV. JVoodfall knew very little either of Mr. Boyd, or his 
 hand-writing ; and that he is-eonfequentlv incompetent to 
 determine, whether or not the MSS. of Junius was Mr. Boyd’s 
 
 ' difguifed 
 
i6o 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 were very familiarly acquainted with the 
 one, would, upon an examination of the 
 other,' fufpeft that they were both written 
 by the fame perfon. And the evidence of 
 Mr. Burton of itfelf affords a ftrong proba- 
 bility, that the letters of Junius were writ- 
 ten in Mr. Boyd s difguifed hand. 
 
 That the author of Junius did in fa£i 
 difguife his hand-writing, mud be evident 
 to every man of obfervation. Would a 
 man of his acknowledged fagacity, have 
 voluntarily placed himfelf at the mercy of 
 Mr. Woodfall, by carrying on an important 
 correfpondence with him in his ordinary 
 hand-writing, which it was neceffary for his 
 perfonal fafety to conceal ? Would a per- 
 fon fo well acquainted with mankind as he 
 was, have put fuch implicit confidence in 
 Mr. Woodfall, as to carry on that corre- 
 
 difguifed hand-writing. His declaration then only proves, 
 that the MSS. of Junius refembled the difguifed hand of 
 Mr. Boyd, inafmuch as that there was nothing in it fo pe- 
 culiar as to attract the notice even of a perfon who was 
 accuftomed to examine different manufcripts. For his ex- 
 preflion, ‘ 4 that it did not bear the appearance of being dif- 
 “ gni/edf mull mean, that the hand-writing in qucflion 
 had no Jhiking peculiarity., 
 
 fpondence 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 i6i 
 
 fpondence in the fame hand- writing in which 
 he tranfa&ed his private bufinefs, and there- 
 by to furnifh him with a key to that fecret 
 which it was his avowed intention never to 
 divulge ? If Junius had written his let- 
 ters in his common hand, would he not 
 have expofed himfelf to unnecelfary ha- 
 zard? By writing his letters in his common 
 hand, would he not have run a great rifque 
 of being detefted, if any perfon well ac- 
 quainted with it had chanced to have feen 
 the manufcript of Junius , or if Mr. Wood- 
 fall, or any of his printers had chanced to 
 have met with any of his private letters or 
 cards ? How can it be imagined, that 
 Junius was a man of fo little forefight, as 
 to run thefe rifques, when, by difguifing his 
 hand-writing he could completely fecure 
 himfelf from them, and even from being 
 fufpefted on account of his manufcript, — 
 except fome one Ihould chance to fee it* 
 to whom his common hand-writing was per- 
 fectly familiar ? — Now the fa£t upon this 
 point, fatisfa&oriiy fhews, that the author 
 of Junius would certainly have laid him- 
 felf open to dete&ion, if by writing his letters 
 
 l in 
 
l6 2 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 in his common hand, he had imprudently 
 relied on the caution and fecrecy of Mr. 
 Woodfall : for, Mr. Woodfall not only 
 
 made a praftice of (hewing the manufcript 
 of Junius to his brother, and fome other 
 of his friends, but alfo of reading it, before 
 publication, to people with whom he was 
 very (lightly acquainted : and in one in- 
 ftance in particular, he took one of Junir 
 us’s letters from his pocket, which he faid 
 he had jujl received , and placing it on the ta- 
 ble of a tavern , at a meeting compojed of 
 Book fellers, and Printers of News-papers, 
 read it aloud to the company *. 
 
 The lafi: evidence which I (hall bring 
 forward, is that of Mr. Henry Sampfon 
 Woodfall himfelf ; as his negative teftimony 
 in this queftion, is not wholly unworthy of 
 observation, 
 
 I have already ftated, that Mr. H. S. 
 Woodfall has permitted his brother to con- 
 fefs for him, that he never did, nor does not 
 now , know who in reality was the author of 
 Junius ; that it appears, he at one time fuf- 
 
 * See this circumftance detailed, and its truth eftablifh- 
 ed in Mr. Almon’s firft letter in the Appendix. 
 
 pe&ed 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 163 
 
 pe&ed Mr. Boyd to be that very perfon; 
 and that he has now an evident intereft in 
 concealing his fufpicions from the world. 
 Thefe are fafls unqueftionable; and which, 
 therefore, I have too great a refpeft for 
 Mr. H. S. Woodfall’s chara&er, to fuppofe 
 he would upon his honour deny. 
 
 In the beginning of May 1798, I wrote 
 to Mr. H. S. Woodfall, informing him, that 
 I was authorized by Mrs. Boyd, to colleft 
 arid publifh Mr. Boyd’s political writings, 
 and that I fhould therefore be greatly 
 obliged to him, for his opinion with regard 
 to Mr. Almon’s affertion that Mr. Boyd 
 was the real author of Junius. To this re- 
 queft I received no written anfwer ; but in 
 the courfe of a few days Mr.-H. S. Wood- 
 fall called at my apartments in Leicefter- 
 fquare, when I chanced to be from home. 
 I then called on him at his houfe at Chel- 
 fea, when he dillin&ly told me in the pre- 
 fence of Mr. William Woodfall and a 
 young lady, “ that he did not beU&Se 
 “ Mr. Boyd was the author of Junius ; 
 *' c although he was certainly a man of great 
 " abilities” I allied him, if Mr. Boyd had 
 / 2 at 
 
LIFE OF 
 
 164 
 
 at any time fent letters to the Publick Ad ~ 
 vertifer ? He replied “ that Mr. Boyd had 
 “ fent him feveral communications on the 
 “ affairs of India, in 177 6, or 1777; but 
 <f that he did not recolletl he had ever fent 
 “ him any letters for the Publick Advertifer, 
 <c before thofe years , or that he had ever writ - 
 “ ten on any other fubjetts , than fuch as re - 
 £C lated to India ” To this I made no an- 
 fwer; but proceeded to afk him, if he had 
 preferved any of the manufeript of Junius? 
 He faid he had not . I afked him, if he 
 thought Mr. W. G. Hamilton was the au- 
 thor of Junius ? He faid, cc No, mojl ajf 'ur - 
 “ edly he was not ; and® as to the ftory about 
 
 Hamilton quoting Junius to the Duke 
 “ of Richmond, he knew it to be a mifeon- 
 “ ception.” — Such was the firfl: converfation 
 I had with Mr. H. S. Woodfall refpefting 
 Mr. Boyd ; and I have related it verbatim> as 
 I took it down on paper a few minutes af- 
 ter I left his houfe. 
 
 Nothing further paffed between us, till 
 tjie beginning of March 1799, when I 
 again wrote to Mr. H. S. Woodfall, telling 
 him, that as I knew it to be a faft, that Mr. 
 
 Boyd 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 I65 
 
 Boyd had kept up a conftant and uninter- 
 rupted correfpondence with the Publick Ad- 
 vertifer from January 17 69, till the fpring 
 of 1772, and that as I was authorized by 
 Mrs. Boyd to requeft he would point out 
 any one of the numerous letters which Mr. 
 Boyd had tranfmitted to him during that 
 period, I begged he would favour me by 
 doing fo. He returned a polite verbal an- 
 fwer by my fervant, faying I might rely on 
 hearing from him in the courfe of ten days. 
 After having waited upwards of two 
 months for his anfwer, I called ori him on 
 the 10th of May 1799, at his houfe at 
 Chelfea, in company with a friend of mine, 
 whom I had purpofely brought along with 
 me, and upon whofe accuracy in recolleft- 
 ing what fhould pafs between Mr. Wood- 
 fall and me, I could place the moft implicit 
 reliance. 
 
 We found Mr. Woodfall alone: he feem- 
 ed not a little difconcerted at our vifit; and 
 immediately told me “ that he could recol- 
 “ left nothing whatever , of any letters fent 
 “ by Mr. Boyd to him, during the years 
 “1769, 1770, 1771, and part of 1772; 
 
 that 
 
LIFE OF 
 
 166 
 
 “ that Mr. Boyd was unquejlionably a very 
 “ able writer , though at the fame time he 
 “ could not give in to the idea of his hav- 
 
 ing written the letters of Junius I 
 waved the dirett queftion about Junius, 
 and told him “ I only wifhed him to point 
 “ out to me any one of the letters which 
 
 Mr. Boyd fent to him in the courfe of 
 ee the years above mentioned.” He repeat- 
 ed, €e that he had no recollection whatever of 
 se any fuch letters We then withdrew, 
 fully fatisfied that Woodfall had more 
 knowledge of the letters I inquired for. 
 than he chofe to avow. 
 
 Thus then Mr. H. S. Woodfall declines 
 to give any account whatever of that long 
 and clofe correfpondence between him and 
 Mr. Boyd, which I have incontrovertibly 
 proved to have commenced and ended pre - 
 cifely at the fame points of time , with that 
 which fubfifted between him and Junius . 
 Mr. Woodfall has indeed permitted his bro- 
 ther to declare for him “ That it is con- 
 trary to all cuftom to break into the confi - 
 
 * See Mr. William Woodfall’s letter, in the Morning 
 Chronicle, of the 16th of Auguft 1799. 
 
 dcntial 
 
HUGH BOYD, 
 
 167 
 
 dential fecrecy of a News-paper printer; and 
 that I ought not therefore to be furprifed, 
 that he never anfwered queftions, the avow- 
 ed objeCt of which was, to invite him to be- 
 tray the confidence Mr. Boyd had placed in 
 kirn ” — What is this but a pretty plain ad- 
 miffion of the faCt, that the letters which he 
 thinks (Mr. H. S. Woodfall has faid he did 
 not know that Mr. Boyd had written for the 
 Publick Advertifer before 1776) Mr. Boyd 
 wrote during the years 17 69, 1770, 1771, 
 and part of 1772, and which appeared in 
 the Publick Advertifer , in thofe years, were 
 not intended by him to be acknowledged 
 as his own productions, and that he (Mr 0 
 Woodfall) confiders it would be betraying 
 the confidence repofed in him, to point out 
 to the publick the letters in queftion. 
 This conduft on the part of Mr. H. S. 
 Woodfall I am not at all difpofed to blame, 
 I am fure I did not with him to deviate 
 from what he conceived to be his duty, 
 much lefs to betray any thing which he 
 thought himfelf bound to conceal. I knew 
 he had very fujficient motives for being re- 
 ferved with refpeCt to the author of Junius, 
 
 and 
 
l68 LIFE OF 
 
 and I did not, therefore, imagine he would 
 have told me the purport of that feries of 
 letters which were fecretly tranfmitted to 
 him in the above mentioned years, more 
 efpecially when I allured him, that there 
 was pojitive evidence of Mr. Boyd having 
 written them. In truth, Mr. H. S. Wood- 
 fall has acknowledged as much concerning 
 them as I expefled, if not as much as I 
 could have defired; and his acknowledge- 
 ments, together with Mrs. Boyd’s evidence, 
 have brought the general queflion within a 
 very narrow compafs. For, as it is now 
 afcertained beyond all doubt, that Mr. 
 Boyd wrote a continued feries of letters* 
 with the greatefl poffible fecreey, for the 
 Publick Advertifer , during the years 1769, 
 1770, 1771, and part of 1772, it remains 
 only to determine what thofe letters were, 
 and under what fignatures they appeared. 
 Now the fa6l is, that there was no other wri- 
 ter but Junius , who fent gratuitous contri- 
 butions to the Publick Advertifer uninter- 
 ruptedly and fecretly during the whole of 
 thofe three fucceffive years. Flow this faft 
 came to my knowledge it is no way necef- 
 
 fary 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 169 
 
 fary to inform the publick, becaufe Mr. H. 
 S. Woodfall will not — cannot, in truth, 
 deny it. As Junius , therefore, was the only 
 writer who fent letters to the Publick Ad - 
 vertifcr within the period of time above 
 ftated, and according to the manner herein 
 defcribed; and as it has been proved that 
 Mr. Boyd did conftantly fend letters to the 
 Publick Advertifer , during the whole of that 
 time, and exaftly according to that manner, 
 it inevitably follows, that the letters which 
 Mr. Boyd tranfmitted to that paper, in the 
 courfe of that time, were thofe very letters 
 which then appeared in it, ur>der the figna- 
 tures of Junius and Philo- Junius, of Lucius 
 and Brutus . 
 
 Such then is the detail of the whole of 
 the evidence in this inveftigation. Let the 
 reader weigh well the fafts that have been 
 eftablifhed. In one view, let it be copfh 
 dered that Mr. Boyd was perfeftly qualified 
 in every refpeft to have been the writer of 
 the letters of Junius ; — that his avowed po- 
 litical writings bear fo ftriking a fimilitude 
 to thofe letters, not only in the principles 
 they inculcate, in the opinions they fupport, 
 
 and 
 
170 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 and in the characters they praife or cenfure, 
 but alfo in the energy and elegance of their 
 ftyle, and in the ftrength and refinement of 
 their fpirit— that it muft be prefumed they 
 are the compofitions of the fame mind ; — 
 that his motives in writing the letters of 
 Junius, and in concealing from the world 
 that he was the author of them, were per- 
 fectly confiftent with the political principles 
 he profeffed, as well as with the political 
 connexions he had formed ; — that he actu- 
 ally kept up an uninterrupted correfpon- 
 dence with the Publick Advcrtifer during 
 the three fucceffive years that Junius wrote 
 for that paper ; — that he carried on that 
 correfpondence with the moft impenetrable 
 fecrecy ; — that the letters which he fent to 
 the Publick Advertifer were fuperfcribed in 
 a difguifed hand, and were conveyed to Mr. 
 H. S. Woodfall’s office often by Mrs. Boyd 
 herfelf, and always with the moft extraor- 
 dinary degree of caution ; — that he at all 
 times manifefted to Mrs. Boyd, but to her 
 only, an intereft and anxiety about the let- 
 ters of Junius , which no one but the author 
 of them can be fuppofed to have felt ; — that 
 
 often, 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 171 
 
 often, when Mrs. Boyd told him, (he ftrong- 
 ly fufpe&ed he was Junius , he invariably 
 evaded the queftion ; — that when it was re- 
 ported in a publick paper, that he was 
 Junius , though he knew that fiich a report 
 might very materially injure his profpe&s 
 in life, and though Mrs. Boyd moft earneftly 
 urged him to contradift it, he never took 
 the fmalleft notice of it, and obferved the 
 moft cautious filence with regard to all fhe 
 faid on the fubjeft. In addition to thefe 
 ftrong prefumptive proofs, let it alfo be 
 conlidered, that the refemblance between 
 Mr. Boyds difguifed and common hand- 
 writing, though not difcernible by perfons 
 who were little acquainted with them, was 
 perfeftly obvious to thofe to whom either 
 the one or the other was familiar ; that Mr. 
 Almon, who was in the conftant habit of fee- 
 ing Mr. Boyd’s common hand-writing, and 
 who faw the manufcript of Junius , pofitively 
 declares there was a ftrong fimilitude be- 
 tween them ; that on the other hand, the 
 perfon who fuperintended the printing of 
 the letters of Junius , who was confequently 
 familiarized with the hand in which they 
 
 were 
 
1 7.2 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 were written, and to whom Mr. Boyd’s com- 
 mon hand-writing has been {hewn, declares 
 there is a ftrikin^ likenefs between them ; — 
 that a refpe&able printer, who was employed 
 in printing the letters of Junius, declares that 
 the manufcript of thofe letters, and the dif- 
 guifed hand of Mr. Boyd appear to him to 
 have been written by the fame perfon : but 
 above all let it be confidered, that Mr. 
 Boyd mufl in fad have written , that anec- 
 dote related by Junius refpefting Lord 
 Irnham; — that he in fa£i commenced and 
 ended his correfpondence with the Publick 
 Advertifer 9 which he carried on with fuck 
 fecrecy 9 and without interruption , precifely at 
 the fame points of time at which Junius began 
 and ceafed to write for that paper ; and 
 finally as Junius was in fad the only writer 
 who wrote for the Publick Advertifer , fecretly 
 and uninterruptedly , during the whole of the 
 period that has been fated , Mr. Boyd and 
 Junius muft confequently have been one 
 and the fame perfon. Let all thefe fafts 
 be duly weighed, and let the reader bear in 
 mind the evidence that has been adduced, 
 as well as the arguments that have been 
 8 urged 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 m 
 
 urged in fupport of them, together with the 
 declaration of Junius , that he was the fote 
 depository of his own fecret, and that it Jhoidd 
 perijh with him, and with the confeffion of 
 Mr. H. S. Woodfall, that he does not know 
 zvho Junius was , and with the faff that no 
 well-founded objeftion has been made to 
 the affertion that Mr. Boyd was the un- 
 doubted author of Junius , although two 
 years have now elapfed fince it was firft 
 broached ; and laftly, with the equally im- 
 portant faft, that all the other perfons to 
 whom the letters of Junius have been attri- 
 buted, are now dead, and that not a fingle 
 circumftance has come to light, to juftify the 
 furmifes upon which the belief of their 
 having written Junius altogether retted. 
 Let the whole be calmly and maturely taken 
 into the readers view, and I confidently 
 trutt that he will pronounce with me, that 
 Hugh Boyd, and Hugh Boyd only, 
 
 WAS THE REAL AUTHOR OF JUNIUS. 
 
 It remains, to fay a few words relative to 
 thofe to whom the letters of Junius have 
 at different times been afcribed ; in order 
 to (hew that the fuppofitions which have 
 
 been 
 
174 life of 
 
 been entertained as to their having written 
 »thofe letters, are not only unfupported by 
 any onefatt, but are, in truth, highly im- 
 probable. 
 
 Were I to enumerate all the perfons 
 whom vague conjeflure has occafionally 
 named, as the probable authors of Junius , 
 I fhould fill, at leafl, a couple of pages to 
 very little purpofe. I fhall, therefore, con- 
 fine myfelf to thofe only, whofe talents, 
 opinions, and connexions, gave a plaufible 
 colour to the rumours, that they had writ- 
 ten the letters of Junius . 
 
 Thofe letters have been attributed to 
 Lord Sackville, to Lord George Germain, 
 to Mr. John Dunning, to Mr. Richard 
 Burke, to Mr. W. G. Hamilton, to Mr. 
 Edmund Burke, and, by a few people, to 
 the learned Mr. Samuel Dyer. Of thefe 
 gentlemen, the three laft mentioned are 
 the only ones refpefting whom I conceive 
 it neceflary to make any obfervation. 
 
 Mr. W. G. Hamilton was unqueftionably 
 a man of confiderable abilities, nor do I 
 doubt, that he was fully capable of writing 
 the letters of Junius, and I know his poli- 
 tical 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 *75 
 
 tical principles and opinions differed very 
 little from thofe which they invariaby main- 
 tain. But the only circumftance which 
 gave rife to the fuppofition of his being 
 Junius , was his having quoted, in conver- 
 fation with the Duke of Richmond, a paf- 
 fage from one of Junius's letters, before it 
 appeared in the Pub lick Advertifer. For the 
 exa£i truth of this circumftance I cannot 
 take it upon me to vouch. I have, how- 
 ever, good reafon to believe, that Mr. Ha- 
 milton had more than once heard a letter of 
 Junius's read to him before it was publifhed, 
 which fufficiently explains the feeming myf~ 
 tery, refpefling the quotation he made to the 
 Duke of Richmond. Thofe who may not 
 be fatisfied with this explanation, will at leaft 
 give credit to Mr. Hamilton’s own words ; 
 and it is a pofitive faft, that he folcmnly de- 
 clared on his death-bed, — u That he was not 
 “ the author of Junius T 
 
 With regard to the fuppofition that Mr. 
 Burke was Junius , it would be needlefs to 
 fay much. A thorough knowledge of the 
 charafteriftick qualities of his great mind, 
 and of his incomparable writings, as well as 
 
 of 
 
Life of 
 
 176 
 
 of thofe of the letters of Junius , were alone 
 fufficient to convince every judicious reader, 
 that he was not the writer of thofe perform- 
 ances. Of Mr. Burke s unrivalled talents, it 
 has been well obferved by the moft eloquent 
 philofopher, and one of the firft writers of 
 the prefent day, that he was “ a writer who 
 fC was admired by all mankind for his elo- 
 u quence, but who is, if poflible, fiill more 
 cc admired by all competent judges for his 
 4t philofophy ; a writer of whom I may juft- 
 “ ly fay, that he was gr avissimus et de- 
 
 “ C END I ET INTELLIGENT AUCTOR ET 
 te magister This chara&er may with 
 perfeft truth be given to every thing that 
 Mr. Burke has written. Throughout all 
 his various produftions, the fober dignity 
 of true philofophy prevails over every other 
 excellence, brightening the drieft details 
 with the dear light of reafon, and controul- 
 ing the loftieft flights of imagination with 
 the fovereign majefly of wifdom. Junius , 
 though often grave, is never profound; 
 
 * See Mr. Mackintosh’s admirable Difcourfe on the 
 Study of the Law of Nature and Nations, introdu&ory 
 to a courfe of leOures on that Lienee. 
 
 though 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 though he often prefents moral and politi- 
 cal truths in the mod alluring drefs, he 
 never examines their eflence; though his 
 precepts are often wife* his fentiments noble* 
 and his obfervations acute* he never pene- 
 trates beyond the furface of things ; his pre- 
 vailing excellencies are the precifion and 
 clearnefs of his reafoning* the vigour* pun- 
 gency, and terfenefs of his ftyle. In his 
 argument he always confines himfelf to the 
 point at iffue, and even in his declamations 
 he feldom digreffes. Whereas Mr. Burke 
 never wrote on any fubjeft whatever, with* 
 out fearching it to the bottom* examining it 
 thoroughly in all its minuteft bearings* and 
 finally tracing it to its remoteft confe- 
 quences. It may indeed be faid, that Mr, 
 Burke could have reftrained the natural 
 bent of his genius, and that he poffibly 
 thought popular letters* like thofe of Junius , 
 fhould touch only upon thofe fimple and 
 obvious principles by which men are a6iu* 
 ated in common life, and fhould therefore 
 be addrefied to the heart and the arfe&ions* 
 rather than to the underflanding. That he 
 could have adopted any ftyle and manner he 
 ~ . m 
 
LtFE OF 
 
 i 7 8 
 
 thought proper, his admirable imitation of 
 Bolingbroke very fufficiently proves ; but 
 that he fhould have “laboured” incejfantly* 
 for three whole years to write letters of a 
 fort fo different from his other produ&ions, 
 as well as fo inferior to them, in point of 
 genuine and fubftantial merit, and that at a 
 time when he had fuch a multiplicity of 
 important concerns to attend to, appears to 
 me fo very improbable, that, I confefs, I am 
 fomewhat furprifed that his friends fhould 
 ever have given the fmalleft degree of cre- 
 dit to the report ; more efpecially as the 
 opinion of Junius on two material queftions, 
 was totally different from that which Mr. 
 Burke and the Rockingham party ftrenu- 
 oufly fupportedf. 
 
 If any thing be yet wanting to fhew the 
 improbability of Mr. Burke having written 
 
 * I have already Ihewn, that Junius himfelf acknow- 
 ledges the labour which the compofition of his letters had 
 coft him. 
 
 t Mr. Burke was, throughout his whole life, a decided 
 and firm fupporter of the feptennial a ; — whereas Junius 
 was a zealous advocate for triennial parliaments. Mr. 
 Grenville’s Colonial Laws were approved of by Junius t 
 but J evenly condemned by Mr. Burke. 
 
 the 
 
HUGH BOYD. 179 
 
 the letters of Junius, let it be recollefted 
 that he himfelf fftontaneoujly declared to 
 Do61or Johnfon, “ that he had no concern 
 “ whatever in thofe letters 
 
 The conjefture that Mr. Samuel Dyer 
 was the writer of Junius's letters, is, I think, 
 {till lefs plaufible than that which has been 
 entertained refpefling Mr. Hamilton or Mr. 
 Burke. 
 
 Mr. Dyer was a citizen of London. He 
 was the fon of a refpeftable jeweller in 
 Cheapfide, who having acquired a compe- 
 tent fortune, liberally employed it in the 
 education of his children. The father be- 
 ing himfelf a zealous diflenter, intended his 
 fon Samuel for the diffenting miniftry; and 
 for that purpofe placed him at Dr. Dod- 
 deridge’s academy at Northampton. He 
 was afterwards fent to the college of Glaf- 
 gow under the immediate care of the cele- 
 brated Dr. Hutchefon, and he completed 
 his {Indies at Leyden, under the famous 
 Schultens. 
 
 Mr. Dyer was eminently qualified to 
 fhine in the profefiion for which his father 
 
 t See BofwelFs Life of Jobnfon. 
 
 m 2 intended 
 
i8o 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 intended him ; but having in the courfe of 
 his philofophical purfuits, become a fcep- 
 tick in religion, he relinquifhed all thoughts 
 of afcending the pulpit, and launched at 
 once into all the pleafures and diffipa- 
 tions of London. Being, however, a man 
 of great talents, and of very extenfive 
 learning, as well as of a refined tafte in lite- 
 rature, he neglefted not to cultivate the ac- 
 quaintance of thofe whofe minds were con- 
 genial to his own. He foon became 
 known to Do£lor Johnfon, Mr. Burke, and 
 Sir Jofhua Reynolds, with the former of 
 whom, he lived for fome years on terms of 
 great intimacy; and it is related by Haw- 
 kins and Bofwell, that the Doctor always 
 looked up to him, on philofophical fub- 
 je6ts*. He feems to have been confidered 
 by Johnfon as a profound metaphyfician, 
 and as a man deeply read in every branch 
 
 * Johnfon, in his Life of Watts, quotes the opinion of 
 Mr. Dyer, refpe&ing Watts's metaphyfical difquifitions. 
 M It was obferved,” fays he, — “ by the late learned Mr. 
 €t Dyer, that Watts confounded the idea of J "pace with that 
 (t of empty J face , and did not confider that though fpace 
 6i might be without matter, yet matter being extended 
 4 ‘ could not be without fpac£.” 
 
 of 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 l8l 
 
 of fcholaftick knowledge ; and it is obferv- 
 ed by Hawkins, “ that he converfed very 
 ee ably on mod topics.” But his abilities 
 were rendered ufelefs to himfelf and to the 
 world by an habitual indolence, which his 
 diffipated courfe of life originally brought 
 on, in which it was his delight to indulge, 
 and which neither the felicitations of 
 friendlhip, nor the calls of poverty could 
 induce him to ufe any endeavours to con- 
 quer. The fmall patrimony which his fa- 
 ther had left him, being infufhcient to fup- 
 port his expences, he was reduced to the 
 greateft diftrefs ; and Johnfon, in order to 
 procure him fome relief, ftrongly preffed * 
 him to write the Life of Erafmus, but all 
 his perfualions were of no avail, he would 
 not undertake it. He was, however, at laft 
 prevailed on to revife the old tranflation of 
 Plutarch’s Lives, which he executed after 
 many heavy complaints of the labour of 
 the talk, and for which he received from 
 Draper, the partner of Tonfon, the fum of 
 
 * See Hawkins’s Life of Johnfon, from which the 
 greateft part of my information refpediing Mr. Dyer is 
 derived. 
 
 two 
 
1 §2 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 two hundred pounds. By the death of his 
 mother he became poffeffed of 8000I. which 
 he inverted in India ftock ; and offered him- 
 felf as a candidate for a feat in the court of 
 Direfiors. But his profperity was fhort- 
 lived. He entered into engagements for 
 the purchafe and fale of ftock ; and from 
 his total ignorance of bufinefs, he at once 
 injured his reputation and loft the whole of 
 his property. This difafter he did not 
 long furvive; and he died in the utmoft in- 
 digence, “ leaving not,” fays Hawkins, (t in 
 * e money or effe&s fufficient to defray the 
 expence of a decent funeral.” 
 
 How a perfon of this defcription, whom 
 the ftrongeft poffible incitements could 
 never prevail upon to write any thing but 
 a fhort Preface to a tranflation of Plu- 
 tarch’s Lives, fhould have been fufpefted 
 of having written the letters of Junius , 
 might feem a little ftrange, if we did not 
 know from what very flight and trivial cir- 
 cumftances, fufpicions of this nature arife. 
 
 I underftand, however, that Sir Jofhua Rey- 
 nolds fuppofed Mr. Dyer to have been 
 Junius, becaufe he heard Mr. Dyer and 
 
 Mr, 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 183 
 
 Mr. Burke make the fame remarks in con- 
 vention, which he afterwards found in 
 Junius's letters; becaufe Mr. Dyer’s death 
 happened a few months fubfequent to the 
 period at which Junius ceafed to fend let- 
 ters to Mr. Woodfall ; and becaufe Mr. 
 Richard Burke went in great hafte to Mr. 
 Dyer’s apartments, the inftant he heard of 
 his death, and requefted as a very particular 
 favour of his executors, that he might be 
 permitted to deftroy a fealed box of papers 
 belonging to the deceafed, which he faid 
 was of the utmoft importance to him, but 
 could be of no fervice to any one elfe. As 
 thefe circumftances were related to me, 
 merely on report, I cannot pretend to fay 
 whether they are authentic or not ; but if 
 they had any influence with Sir Jofhua, he 
 mull furely have been unacquainted with 
 the true charafter of Mr. Dyer, which pre- 
 cludes the belief of Mr. Burke and his bro- 
 ther having conne&ed themfelves with him 
 in a literary undertaking, which required 
 fuch unremitting attention, as that of the 
 letters of Junius . 
 
 I hope 
 
LIFE OF 
 
 184 
 
 I hope the reader is fully fatisfied, that 
 neither Mr. W. G, Hamilton, Mr. Edmund 
 Burke, nor Mr. Samuel Dyer, had any con- 
 cern whatever, in compofing the letters of 
 Junius ; and that the fa£l of Hugh Boyd 
 having been the true and only author of 
 thofe produ&ions, will by confequence ap- 
 pear the more evident. And I now clofe 
 this inveftigation, with the entire confciouf- 
 nefs that every part of the evidence which 
 I have brought forward, is founded in the 
 ftrifteft veracity ; and with the firm convic- 
 tion, that the fafts eftablifhed by that evi- 
 dence will bear me out in the conclufion I 
 have drawn. 
 
 IT has been already mentioned that Mr. 
 Boyd took a houfe at Kenton-Green, near 
 Harrow, in the fummer of 1771. At this 
 place he refided for upwards of five years, 
 both with a view to avoid the expences of 
 a town life, and to be near the fons of a 
 deceafed filler, who were, during that pe- 
 riod, at Harrow fchool. For thefe youths 
 
 he 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 185 
 
 he fhewed all the tendernefs, anxiety, and 
 provident care of a father. He never 
 miffed an opportunity of having them at 
 his table, when he had company calculated 
 either to improve their minds, or to afford 
 them innocent amufement : and he was par- 
 ticularly attentive, in preventing them from 
 coming to his houfe, when he had parties 
 with him who were either too jovial in 
 their pleafures, or too free in their conver- 
 fation, — forgetting not the admonition of 
 Juvenal — 
 
 Nil diilu foedum, vifuque hxc limina tangat, 
 
 Intra quae puer eft. 
 
 Maxima debetur puero reverentia. 
 
 Some months after the letters of Junius 
 were publifhed colle&ively, Boyd met Sir 
 William Draper at the tennis-court, where 
 their acquaintance was originally formed in 
 the year 1769, and where (being both great 
 tennis-players) they ufed often to meet, the 
 converfation turning upon Junius , Sir Wil- 
 liam obferved, that though Junius had 
 “ treated him with extreme feverity, he now 
 “ looked upon him as a very honeft fellow, 
 €( — that he freely forgave him for the bitter- 
 
 nefs 
 
 1 
 
i86 
 
 LIFE. OF 
 
 “ nefs of his cenfures, and that there was no 
 “ man with whom he would more gladly 
 “ drink a bottle of old Burgundy *” Boyd 
 took no notice of the obfervation; but after 
 playing at tennis till a late hour, he pro- 
 pofed to Sir William, that they fhould dine 
 together at a favourite tavern. The Knight 
 readily confented to the propofal ; and he 
 enjoyed his Burgundy, while Boyd had the 
 inward fatisfaftion of doing juflice to his 
 candour, as well as to his wifhes. 
 
 Mr. Boyd at this time ufed to be much 
 in the fociety of Armftrong and Goldfmith, 
 efpecially with the latter, whofe ill ftate of 
 health had induced him to take a country 
 lodging at the Hide, on the Edgware-road, 
 about three miles diflant from Kenton- 
 Green. Goldfmith often walked acrofs the 
 fields to Mr. Boyd’s, and would pafs feveral 
 days with him. Their converfation, as may 
 be readily expefted, was always on literary 
 and critical topicks ; and Goldfmith ufed to 
 inform Boyd of the different works he had 
 
 * This was Sir William’s favourite wine. The be- 
 witching /miles of Burgundy , had an irrefiftible influence on 
 his heart. 
 
 in 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 187 
 
 in contemplation, and to relate to him all 
 that paffed at the celebrated Literary Club , 
 in Gerrard-ftreet. On thefe occafions, Boyd 
 obferved, “ that his friend Goldfmith never 
 “ committed any of thofe abfurdities, nor 
 “ betrayed any of that idle and clumfy af- 
 “ feftation of wit, which too frequently ren- 
 “ dered him the fport of Richard Burke, 
 “ Garrick, and the other wicked wags at the 
 “ Club Goldfmith ufed to criticife Popes 
 epiftolary ftyle ; and once that he dined at 
 Boyd’s, he condemned it in fevere terms, 
 and gave a fpecimen of what a familiar 
 letter fhould be. • 
 
 A few months before Goldfmith’s death, 
 Boyd having heard from Richard Burke, 
 that little Noll , as they ufed to call him, had 
 been feverely attacked at the Club, and that 
 he meditated a poetical reply, immediately 
 went to him, in order to diffuade him from 
 an attempt, in which he conceived there was 
 little chance of his fucceeding. He found 
 
 * Goldfmith had no talent for repartee : yet he could 
 not divert himfelf of that ridiculous notion, too prevalent 
 in the learned world, — that when a man of genius is in 
 company, it is necejjary he fhould be a wit. 
 
 him 
 
1 88 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 him bufily employed in giving the laft polifh 
 to fome parts of his well-known and admi- 
 mirable poem of Retaliation , which the 
 Doftor read to him in great triumph, re- 
 queuing his opinion as to its merits. Boyd 
 told him that he thought the aggreffors ex- 
 tremely reprehenfible, and that they were 
 entitled to no quarter ; but fearful left the 
 feverity with which he had drawn the cha- 
 rafters of the Burkes, would not only put 
 an end to the friendftiip which fubfifted be- 
 tween them and Goldftnith, but likewife 
 difturb the harmony which prevailed in the 
 Club, induced him to foften feveral expref- 
 fions, and intirely to eaft anew the charafter 
 of William Burke. As Goldfmith had an 
 high opinion of Boyd s critical tafte, he was 
 much pleafed with the emendations lie had 
 fuggefted; and he begged of him to call 
 again in a few days, when the poem fhould 
 be completed, that he might fubmit the re- 
 mainder of it to his perufal, and that they 
 might read the whole of it over attentively 
 together. But Goldfmith did not live to % 
 carry his plan into execution. He died, un- 
 expectedly, of a nervous fever ; and when 
 
 his 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 l8g 
 
 his friend Boyd, who had not heard even 
 of his illnefs, called on him at the appointed 
 time, a Angular circumftance occurred. He 
 inquired of the maid-fervant who, opened the 
 door at Goldfmith’s lodgings, whether the 
 Do&or was at home? (he anfwered, yes . — . 
 He allied, if he might fee him? and (he 
 made the fame reply ; upon which he ran 
 up flairs, when on entering his apartment 
 he was fhocked beyond defcription, at fee- 
 ing poor Goldfmith extended in his coffin. 
 
 This event took place in March 1774. 
 In the courfe of this year Boyd paid greater 
 attention than he had yet done to the ftudy 
 of the law ; and though he difliked the 
 prafiice of that profeffion, his pecuniary ne- 
 ceflities, together with the advices of his 
 friends. Teemed for a while to prevail over 
 his natural inclination. Nevertheiefs, he 
 did not withdraw himfelf, either from the 
 literary, or fafhionable circles with which 
 he had been aecuftomed to affociate ; and 
 his ardour for politicks ftill continued una- 
 bated. He conftantly attended the Houfes 
 of Parliament, but merely for his own gra- 
 tification 
 
igo 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 tification and amufement : and the day after 
 an important debate, he ufed to write down, 
 intirely from memory, the fpeeches of thofe 
 great men, whofe political opinions accorded 
 with his own, and w^hofe eloquence he moft 
 admired. Some of thofe fpeeches he occa- 
 fionally publifhed ; and the extraordinary 
 accuracy with which they were reported, 
 aftonifhed all who had heard thejn. There 
 was, in particular, one fpeech of Lord Cam- 
 den's in the Houfe of Lords, on the difpute 
 with the American Colonies, of which, when 
 it was publifhed, Mr. Burke, who had heard 
 it, declared in Boyd's prefence , that not only 
 the fentiments, but the expreffions were fo 
 exaft in every part, that his Lordfhip mull 
 have written it himfelf. He was afterwards 
 informed that Boyd had reported it. 
 
 Mr. Boyd was fuch an enthufiaft in poli- 
 ticks, that he aft u ally facrificed both his 
 private pleafures and perfonal convenience, 
 in attending the proceedings in parliament. 
 At a particular time, when the orders of the 
 Houfe of Commons were extremely ftrifi, 
 in excluding all ftrangers, except Irifh 
 
 mem- 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 members he attempted to gain admittance, 
 by palling for one ; but the door-keeper 
 
 knew 
 
 * Before the year 1770, ftrangers were feldom or ever 
 admitted into the gallery of theHoufe of Commons; and 
 no regular accounts of the proceedings in Parliament 
 were fufrered to be printed in the newfpapers until the 
 year following, when a circumftance occurred that in- 
 duced Parliament to comply with the wifhes ot the people, 
 by allowing their debates to be publilhed in the daily 
 papers. The Printer of the London Evening P oft, having 
 been ordered to attend at the bar of the Houfe of Com- 
 mons, for a breach of privilege, in having printed a report 
 of their proceedings, he pofitively refufed to obey their 
 fummons, upon which they fent a meffenger to take him 
 into cuftody. But the Printer, forefeeing what would 
 happen, applied to Mr. Wilkes, then an alderman of 
 London, to afford him his protection, in cafe the melfen- 
 ger fhould attempt to take him by force. As it was ex- 
 pedfed, the melfenger infilled on taking the Printer into 
 cuftody; the Printer charged him with an alfault, and a 
 conftable inftantly appeared, who took the meffenger to 
 the Manfton- houfe, before the Lord- Mayor, (Crofby) Al- 
 derman Oliver, and Mr. Wilkes, who would have com- 
 mitted him without hefitation, had he not been bailed by 
 the Deputy Serjeant at Arms. The Houfe of Commons, 
 in confequence of this, fent the Lord- Mayor and Aider- 
 man Oliver to the Tower, not chufing to touch Mr. 
 tVilkes ; but finding the fpirit of the people rife high 
 againft their proceedings, they deemed it prudent to re- 
 leafe the Lord- Mayor and Oliver, to give up the conteft, 
 
 and 
 
192 
 
 LIFE QF 
 
 knew him too well to be deceived by the 
 ftratagem, and refufed to let him enter the 
 Houfe. Boyd, as it was his cuftom, endea- 
 voured to (often the man into compliance, 
 when George Dempster, (then one of 
 the Dire&ors of the Eaft-India Company) 
 happening to pafs at the time, and over- 
 hearing what was faid, rebuked the door- 
 keeper, and aiked Boyd his name. Having 
 gone too far to recede, he replied, Wilfon , 
 member for Antrim , which name Mr. 
 Dempfter gave to the Speaker, and then 
 ufhered Boyd i*p to the gallery, where he 
 of courfe remained unmolefted. The next 
 morning he went to breakfaft at Mr. Lauch- 
 lin Macleane’s, where he had hardly fat 
 down, when Mr. Dempfter was announced; 
 and fearful of being difcovered, he thought 
 it prudent to make a precipitate retreat, to 
 the no fmall furprife of Macleane, who 
 knew’ nothing of the circumftance that had 
 taken place the preceding evening. Boyd 
 and Dempfter afterwards became acquainted. 
 
 and in future to fufFer their debates to be publilhed. 
 See a particular Account of this Affair in Mr. Almon’s Lite- 
 rary, Biographical, and Political Anecdotes. 
 
 Yet 
 
HtfOtl BOYD, 
 
 *93 
 
 Yet he was not fo much occupied with 
 politicks, as to neg!e6i the elegant purfuits 
 of polite literature, or the tender duties of 
 private friendfhip. He had formed an in- 
 timate acquaintance with Mr. Hartson, 
 (author of the tragedy of the Countefs of 
 Salifbury, a piece which ftill holds its place 
 on the fiage) a young man of fine parts, 
 great accomplifhments, and amiable man- 
 ners ; and who, before the age of thirty, 
 had made the tour of Europe three times. 
 Being of a confumptive habit, and at this 
 time in extreme ill health, Mr. Boyd in- 
 vited him to his houfe at Kenton-Green, 
 that he might have the benefit of change of 
 air : but his malady was too far advanced to 
 admit of any cure; and neither the power 
 of medicine, nor the foothing, but cheerful 
 friendfhip of Boyd, could afford him any 
 effectual relief. After living many weeks at 
 Kenton-Green, Mr. Hartfon returned to 
 town, and died in a few days, without leaving 
 any other effefts, than r few manufcript 
 poems and plays, to GriFfin the book- 
 feller, whom he had appointed his executor, 
 and to whom he had probably been indebt- 
 
 n ed. 
 
1 94 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 ed. Boyd knowing Hartfon’s diftreffed cir- 
 cumftances, called on Griffin the moment 
 he heard of his death, and generoufly offered 
 his fervices. Griffin begged he would order 
 and manage the funeral, which he did, and 
 for which Griffin afterwards refufed to pay, 
 fcandaloufly, if not falfely, pleading in ex- 
 cufe, that the manufcripts were of no value. 
 Boyds friendfhip for the deceafed, would 
 have amply compenfated in his mind for the 
 lofs he had thus fuftained, if his own wants 
 had not been already fo numerous, and at 
 the fame time fo rapidly increafing. For 
 this was not the only inflance in which he 
 met with ftill heavier Ioffes, through his ar- 
 dent and unbounded generofity, through 
 his love of literature, and his admiration of 
 genius : and Once or twice, indeed, by al- 
 lowing artful, needy, and falfe friends to 
 take advantage of the eahnefs and modera- 
 tion of his temper, he reduced himfelf to the 
 greateft diftrefs, in order to refcue them 
 from that doom, the utmoft rigours of 
 which, their bafe and ffiamelefs ingratitude 
 fubfequently proved them to have de- 
 ferved. 
 
 On 
 
HUGH £ OVD. 
 
 1 95 
 
 On all thofe occafions, however, he had 
 many real friends, whofe prompt and aftive 
 kindnefs foon extricated him from his diffi- 
 culties. 
 
 With his friend Mr. Stuart, of Hamp- 
 head, he ufed at this period, very conftant- 
 ly, to affociate; and at his cheerful and hof- 
 pitable table he enjoyed the fociety of his 
 old friends Lauchlin Macleane and the ex- 
 cellent Doftor Armftrong, together with 
 many other gentlemen, diftinguifhed for 
 their genius and learning. Thefe literary, 
 parties, after paffing fome days at Hamp- 
 Head, would often, at the fuggeftion of Arm- 
 ftrong, remove their fittings to the Devil- 
 Tavern, in Fleet-ftreet, a houfe much noted 
 as the refort of the wits of thofe days, where 
 they concluded their claffick revels, with the 
 fame fpirit and harmony with which they 
 had commenced them. 
 
 Mr. Stuart told me, that Armftrong and 
 Boyd ufed to have long critical difcuffions 
 about the ftyle of Junius, which the Doftor 
 always cenfured, as being too affefted and 
 fententious, and which Boyd invariably, but 
 calmly, defended, as being the beft adapted 
 n 2 to 
 
LIFE OF 
 
 196 
 
 to the fubjecl to which it was applied. Yet 
 I have often heard him exprefs his high opi- 
 nion of Armftrongs exadl critical difcrimi- 
 nation, and fine tafte; though on political 
 fubjefts he faid they never agreed, as the 
 Do6tor was a {launch Tory, — but he ufed 
 to add, — he was a liberal Tory . 
 
 It was his praftice, however, to avoid 
 politicks as much as poffible in private 
 company, and he was always particularly 
 cautious in what he faid of publick charac- 
 ters/; — but for Lord Chatham’s abilities and 
 virtues, his veneration was fo high, that he 
 could not fupprefs his indignation, when he 
 heard any attempt made to lower them. 
 
 In January 1775, he publifhed the firftof 
 thofe fpeeches of Lord Chatham’s, which 
 are inferred in this volume, fits Lordfhip 
 delivered it on the 20th of that month, on 
 Lord Dartmouth’s motion for an addrefs to 
 his Majefty, “ befeeching him to opemaway 
 “ towards the fettlement of the troubles in 
 “ America.” Of this fpeech, the wonderful 
 powers of his memory, together with his 
 having long accuftomed his mind to Lord 
 Chatham’s “ peculiar energy of ftyle and 
 
 fentiment,” 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 197 
 
 “ fentiment,” enabled him to retain the moft 
 perfeft recolleflion ; and Lord Temple, and 
 many others who heard it, ufed to fay, 
 that Mr. Boyds report was verbatim as it 
 was fpoken : but it is, if poffible, ftill more 
 extraordinary, that after eighteen years had 
 elapfed, I have heard him repeat the greateft 
 part of it. Mr. Boyds mode of writing 
 down fpeeches from memory, was altogether 
 peculiar, and therefore deferves to be re- 
 corded. He never took any notes of the 
 fpeeches he had heard ; but after attending 
 a long debate in parliament, he would fup 
 at a tavern with fome friends, return home 
 at two or three in the morning, go to bed 
 dire&ly, rife about feven, and write down 
 fuch fpeeches as he had moft admired in the 
 courfe of the debate, without once looking 
 at any of the newfpaper reports, to facilitate 
 his recolleftion. This is an abfolute faft, 
 which many of his friends have often wit- 
 nefted. 
 
 It may perhaps be afked, how a man of 
 fuch uncommon abilities, never got any 
 publick employment in this country ? And 
 how he came to be overlooked by his friends 
 
 3 
 
 ID 
 
LIFE OF 
 
 198 
 
 in high life ? But thofe who beft know the 
 road to preferment, will eafily refolve thefe 
 queftions, when they are informed, that 
 there was nothing he fo much difliked, as 
 foliciting favours from the great; and that 
 there was nothing fo repugnant to his feel- 
 ings, as the idea of being politically con- 
 nefted with men whom he defpifed. And 
 evehy man of the world knows full w'ell, by 
 what flow degrees, unafluming genius, or 
 indigent virtue, obtain the patronage of t^g 
 powerful and the rich. — 
 
 Haud facile emergunt, quorum virtutibus obftac 
 Res angufta domi. — 
 
 Yet, though Boyd was fo little anxious, 
 it may be fo blameably carelefs, about the 
 advancement of his own private fortune, he 
 was indefatigably zealous in promoting the 
 views of his friends, and the interefts of his 
 country ; no man ever loved the one with 
 more fincerity, or the other with greater 
 ardour. 
 
 Nor in attending to thefe home-felt con- 
 cerns, did he overlook the lefler duties of 
 humanity. Every aftion of his life, be- 
 
 fpoke 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 3 99 
 
 fpoke the benevolence of his mind. Po- 
 verty never came to his houfe unaided, vim 
 
 J * 
 
 tue unhonoured, nor vice unreproved. 
 
 The following anecdote will place, in a 
 confpicuous point of view, the mild cou- 
 rage, the manly tendernefs, and the digni- 
 fied liberality that marked his charafter. 
 
 He was walking alone one day, acrofs 
 Kilburn-Fields, on his way from Kenton- 
 Green to Hampftead, when he was flopped 
 by a footpad, with a crape over his face. 
 The manner in which the footpad accofted 
 him, induced Boyd to fuppofe it his firft 
 offence ; and inftead of being difconcerted 
 or alarmed at the piftol which he had pre- 
 fented at his breaft, he harangued him in 
 gentle but ftrong terms on the impropriety 
 of his conduft, till the man, fenfibly touched 
 with his language, withdrew the piftol. 
 Boyd then gave him his money, but endea- 
 voured to difluade the man from taking his 
 watch, as it was a prefent from a particular 
 friend, which would be of little value to 
 him, and by which he would run the rifque 
 of being detefted. The footpad, how- 
 ever, pleaded the extreme poverty of his 
 
 family, 
 
200 
 
 UF£ OF 
 
 family, and Boyd at lafl: gave him the watch, 
 together with a folemn injunction regarding 
 his future conduCt. 
 
 On giving notice fome days afterwards, 
 at Fielding’s office, he found the man was a 
 new offender, as he had conjeCtured ; not- 
 withftanding which, he foon forgot the ad- 
 vice that he had given him, committed other 
 robberies, and was at lafl taken up, tried, 
 and condemned, as Mr. Boyd had foretold, 
 by the evidence of the pawnbroker with 
 whom he had pawmed the watch. 
 
 The dread of approaching death at laft 
 foftened the unhappy culprit into repentance 
 and contrition, and called forcibly into his 
 recollection Mr. Boyds injunction, which 
 he had difregarded ; but having (till fome 
 hopes in that tendernefs which had been 
 before expreffed for him, he fent his wife to 
 Mr. Boyd, who fell on her knees, begging 
 him to fave her hufband, as he had been a 
 man of good character, whom nothing but 
 the miferies of his family could have tempted 
 to go on the highway, and who fincerely 
 intended, when he had procured a fum of 
 money fufficient to relieve him from his 
 
 misfortunes. 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 201 
 
 misfortunes, to return to his bufinefs of car- 
 penter in W oolwich-yard, whither (he re- 
 ferred Mr. Boyd for a character of her huf- 
 band, and whither he immediately went. 
 The character he got of the man was excel- 
 lent ; and he brought away a petition in his 
 favour, ligned by the curate, and fome of 
 the principal workmen in the yard. Two 
 friends of Mr. Boyd’s, Mr. Glenn y and 
 Mr. John Bowman, joined him in his ex- 
 ertions to fave this unfortunate man, and 
 were no lefs afliduous about the matter than 
 himfelf. Boyd wrote to Sir John Day, 
 who fent him a letter to Sir George 
 Womb well, from whom he procured an in- 
 troductory letter to Lord Sandwich. He 
 loft not a moment in calling on his Lord- 
 fhip ; but finding he had gone to Woolwich, 
 Boyd purfued him thither, was defired to 
 call the next day in town, which he did, 
 when his Lordfhip received him with great 
 politenefs, promifed to intercede for the de- 
 fired pardon, and accordingly obtained it. 
 Boyd then, accompanied by his friend Mr, 
 Glenny, vifited the man in Newgate-cells, 
 who manifefted great forrow for his crime, 
 
 and 
 
202 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 and abundant gratitude towards his bene- 
 faftor. Boyd returned from the cell, deep- 
 ly impreffed with the horror of the fcene 
 he had witneffed. 
 
 The footpad, however, was pardoned, 
 but not reclaimed. In the courfe of a few 
 years, he betook himfelf to his former prac- 
 tices; was firfl condemned to the hulks for 
 burglary, and at lajl hanged for having been 
 concerned in robbing the dock-yard at 
 Portfmouth ; — affording a firiking example 
 of the inefficacy of clemency towards the 
 prevention of crimes, in thofe who have 
 once been initiated in the praftices of vice, 
 and of the difficulty of bringing back to the 
 ways of honefty, he who has once been im- 
 mured in the cells of New r gate. 
 
 Shortly after this event, an affair hap- 
 pened, which for a wdiile greatly interefted 
 the publick mind, and which gave Mr. Boyd 
 another opportunity of exercifing his hu- 
 manity. 
 
 In the month of June 1775, the famous 
 trial of the two brothers Robert and 
 D aniel Perreau, for forgery, com- 
 menced at the Seffions-houfe in the Old- 
 
 Bailey, 
 
HUGH BOYD'. 
 
 203 
 
 Bailey. They were indicied for being con- 
 cerned in forging feveral bonds and notes 
 in the name of Mr. Adair, the agent. It 
 were tedious to enter into the particulars of 
 this curious cafe, which will be found very 
 fully detailed in Dodjleys Annual Regijler , 
 Vol. 20 tk. It is fufficient to date here, that 
 Mrs. Rudd, the miftrefs of Daniel Perreau* 
 a woman of exquifite charms, but of great 
 art and wickednefs, was, by her own con- 
 feffion, the perfon who forged the bonds ; 
 but the jury, being fully fatisfied of the 
 Perreaus being privy to the forgery, or that 
 they at leaft had connived at it, brought in 
 their verdift, “ Guilty of publifhing and 
 “ uttering the bond, knowing it to be 
 “ forged.” — Though thefe unfortunate young 
 men were found guilty, they were not men- 
 tioned in any report to his Majefty, till the 
 month of December following, probably, 
 becaufe fome doubts had arifen on the le- 
 gality of trying Mrs. Rudd, who claimed the 
 privilege of having become Kings evidence, 
 notwithftanding her not having been called 
 upon at the trial. This queftion involved 
 points of fo much importance, that it was 
 
 deemed 
 
204 
 
 LIFE OP 
 
 deemed requifite to take the opinion of the 
 twelve Judges upon it, who after fome de- 
 liberation determined, that Mrs. Rudd was 
 not intitled to the advantages of Kings 
 evidence. She was accordingly tried, and 
 for want of fufficient evidence, acquitted. 
 Her trial lafted from nine in the morning 
 till near eight in the evening : and when 
 the jury brought in their virdift of Not guilty, 
 the audience teftified their approbation by 
 the loudeft applaufes that were ever known 
 in a court of juftice ; excited, Ifhould ima- 
 gine, rather from a fympathy with the fuf- 
 ferings of penitent beauty, than from a con- 
 viction of her innocence : for it is_ a faS, 
 that many circumftances of unheard-of de- 
 ception came to light, after her acquittal. 
 Thefe circumftances induced Mr. Boyd, as 
 well as many others who had attended the 
 trials, to believe the Ferreaus were innocent ; 
 and their dignified firmnefs, and pious refig- 
 nation, had fo great an effeft on Boyd, 
 that he warmly inter efted himfelf in their 
 favour. 
 
 A inoft moving petition was p re fen ted 
 to her Majefty, in favour of Robert Perreau, 
 
 by 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 205 
 
 by his wife and three children, in deep 
 mourning, and another in his favour like- 
 wife by feventy-eight capital bankers and 
 merchants of the city of London. Refpefl- 
 ing thefe petitions, the Privy-Council were 
 divided in opinion ; and Lord Suffolk was 
 faid to be in favour of the petitioners:. 
 To that noble Lord, therefore, Mr. Boyd 
 addrelfed feveral letters: on this afflifting 
 fubjedt, which appeared in the Pub lick Ad - 
 vertifer , which are written with his ufual 
 force and elegance, and which were much 
 noticed and admired at the time. Yet not- 
 withstanding all that was urged in extenu- 
 ation of the mifconduft, if not in proof of 
 the abfolute innocence of the unhappy cul- 
 prits* -they were included in the next report 
 to his MajefLy, and ordered for execution 
 on Wednefday the 27th of January 177-6. 
 They, accordingly fuffered death at Tyburn 
 on that day with calm and manly fortitude, 
 and after the moffc Iblemn affirmations con- 
 tained 'in two papers, which each delivered 
 to the Ordinary, that they were intirely 
 innocent of the crime for which they 
 died a 
 
 Mr. 
 
20 6 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 Mr. Boyd's regret and difappointment at 
 this melancholy cataftrophe, feemed propor- 
 tioned to the ftrenuous zeal with which he 
 had endeavoured to avert it. 
 
 In the courfe of the year 1 775, he had 
 vifited Cambridge, where he had an oppor- 
 tunity of enlarging his acquaintance with 
 men of fcience and literature; and where 
 he received from St. John’s College the de- 
 gree in A. M. adeundem , as being a Matter 
 of Arts of Trinity College, Dublin. He 
 here became acquainted with the prefent 
 Marquis of Abercorn, with whom he 
 afterwards lived on terms of great inti- 
 macy. 
 
 In January 1776, he was called to the 
 bar, where, however, he never pra&ifed, 
 as well for the caufes which I have before 
 explained, as on account of the many ex- 
 trinfick difficulties which were thrown in 
 his way. But politicks ftill continued to 
 occupy a great part of his attention. 
 
 He went to Ireland in the fpring of 17 76, 
 for the exprefs purpofe of attending the 
 general eleftion, as well as of giving his 
 vote in the county of Antrim, to his friend 
 
 Mr. 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 207 
 
 Mr. Wilfon, and of managing the canvafs 
 on his fide. Previous to the ele6tion, he 
 publifhed the Freeholder , of which I have 
 already given an account, and which had 
 fuch an aftoniffiing influence on the ele£tors 
 of Antrim, that he found little difficulty in 
 carrying the caufe of his friend, notwith- 
 ftanding the weighty and Jlerling arguments 
 of the oppofite party. 
 
 Mr. Wilfon and the prefent Lord Henry 
 Seymour Conway, were chofen for the 
 county, and Mr. Skeffington was thrown 
 out. The conteft was conduced with pe- 
 culiar difcretion : and it was remarked at 
 the time, that it was the only county-elec- 
 tion in that part of Ireland, which had ever 
 been concluded without a duel ; and which 
 was attributed to the mild and polilhed 
 manners of Lord H. S. (then Mr.) Conway, 
 and of Mr. Boyd, who after oppofing each 
 other the whole day, with the utmoft ar- 
 dour and animation, would retire from the 
 conteft in perfeft good fellowfhip. 
 
 On Mr. Boyd’s return to London, he 
 found parties in parliament running high, 
 
 and 
 
/ 
 
 208 life of 
 
 and the politicians without doors in a fer- 
 ment, refpefiing the memorable Declara- 
 tion, by the reprefentatives of the United 
 States of America, in general Congrefs af- 
 fembled, wherein they aftigned their reafons 
 for withdrawing their allegiance to his Ma- 
 jefty. He loft no time in fending a few 
 letters to the Publick Advertifer , on that im- 
 portant fubjecl ; which, however, he wrote 
 with little care, owing to the multiplicity of 
 private affairs in which he was then engaged. 
 He alfo drew up a fpirited manifefto in the 
 name of General Washington, which 
 was inferted in the Publick Advertifer , 
 which attrafted a vaft deal of attention, 
 and which was for fome time believed 
 to be genuine. Thofe who are converfant 
 in the party politicks of that time, will 
 remember this manifefto, as well as the 
 credit, which, for a while, it obtained with 
 the publick. 
 
 In the beginning of 1777, he gave up his 
 country refidence at Kenton-Green, and 
 took a houfe in Norfolk-ftreet in the Strand. 
 And about this time, at the particular defire 
 
 of 
 
HUGH BOYD. 209 
 
 of his friends Mr. Lauchlin Macleane* and 
 Mr. Stuart, he wrote one or two letters re- 
 lative to the difpute between the Eaft-India 
 Company and Mahommed Alii Khaan, the 
 Nabob of Arcot, which he fent to Mr. Wood- 
 fall, and which appeared in the Publick 
 Advertifer. Thefe letters are written in a 
 plain eafy ftyle, fetting forth in a perfpicu- 
 ous and forcible manner, the claims of his 
 Highnefs the Nabob, but occafionally throw- 
 ing farcaftick reflections on the conduft of 
 fome gentlemen then at Madras, who had 
 borne a confiderable {hare in the bufinefs 
 alluded to, as well as of the odium which 
 was attached to it. He likewife wrote a 
 pamphlet +, explanatory of the conduCt of 
 the Nabob, both as it regarded the depofi- 
 tion of the Rajah of Tanjore, and the im- 
 prifonment of Lord Pigot J, Governor 
 
 of 
 
 * Mr. Macleane was the Nabob’s accredited- agent in 
 England. 
 
 t This pamphlet I have not yet been able to find : but 
 Mr. Stuart informed me it was a very ingenious and mat- 
 ter ly performance. 
 
 X On the 24th of Auguft 1776, Lord Pigot was arrefled, 
 with circumftances of peculiar violence, by order of 
 
 0 Meffrs, 
 
210 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 of Madras ; (hewing his Highnefs’s right of 
 fovereignty over the former, whom he con- 
 lidered as his vaflal, and exonerating him 
 from the charge of having been concerned 
 in the hoftile proceedings of the Council at 
 Madras againft the latter. 
 
 Soon after this Mr. Macleane went to 
 India, for the purpofe of accommodating 
 matters between the Company and the Na- 
 bob, and of bringing his Highnefs’s debts 
 into a train of liquidation. Before his de- 
 parture, he made fome arrangements with 
 Boyd, in refpeft to the means of fupporting 
 the Nabob’s caufe in this country, and of 
 keeping alive the publick intereft concern- 
 ing it : and he found himfelf under fo many 
 
 MefTrs. George Stratton, Henry Brooke, Charles Floyer, 
 and George Mackay, then members of the council at 
 Madras, and confined under a military force in his own 
 government , in which degrading fituation he died, after a 
 rigorous imprifonmcnt of nine months, and a fhort time 
 before the order of the Court of Dire&ors for his releafe. 
 arrived at the Prefidency. See the particulars of this extra- 
 ordinary tranfaftion, impartially , though not fully , nor 
 altogether accurately detailed , in Dodjley's Annual Regijltr , 
 V f oL 20 , and an authentic k Account of Lord Pigot's Death in 
 Vol. 21, of the fame Work, 
 
 obligations 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 211 
 
 obligations to Boyd, that he faithfully 
 promifed him he would, upon his return 
 from India, affift in clearing him from all 
 his pecuniary difficulties. This promife did 
 great honour to Macleane’s heart, and I 
 doubt not he would gladly have fulfilled it ; 
 but he never again faw him. The ffiip on 
 which he had embarked at Madras for Eng- 
 land, was never heard of, after fhe left 
 the Cape of Good Hope, and muft confe- 
 quently have foundered at fea. 
 
 The attention which Boyd thus paid to 
 Indian politicks, did not, however, occupy 
 any great part of his time ; for he neglefted 
 not his ufual amufements. 
 
 As he now refided in town, he conftantly 
 frequented the chefs club, and during this 
 year affociated very much with his old friends 
 the Duke of Ancafter, the Earl of Affiburn- 
 ham, and Count Bruhl. 
 
 At this period, too, he was more in the 
 fociety of the Burkes, than he had hereto- 
 fore been ; as he not only was much at their 
 own hou fes, but alfo met them at Sir Joffiua 
 Reynolds’s, to whofe literary parties he was 
 often invited, and by whom, as I have be- 
 
 o 2 fore 
 
212 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 fore ftated, he was greatly admired. At Sir 
 Jofhua’s he once or twice met Johnfon ; 
 and notwithflanding the Doftor’s toryifm, 
 and his fevere attack on Junius , no man 
 held his genius and virtues in greater reve- 
 rence than Boyd ; which circumftance, in 
 my mind, fuffieiently accounts for the filence 
 of Junius , refpefting Johnfon’s animadver- 
 fions on his writings. 
 
 Boyd’s fine tafte in Painting peculiarly 
 recommended him to the notice of Sir 
 Jofhua Reynolds, who ufed to have fre- 
 quent converfations with him on the fub- 
 jefit, and who ufed to afk his opinion of the 
 pieces on which his own mafterly pencil 
 was employed. And his difcriminating 
 judgment in this delightful art, the following 
 anecdote will ferve to fhew. 
 
 He went once with a party to Audley- 
 End, the feat of Sir John Griffin, to fee a 
 colleftion of very fine paintings, and parti- 
 cularly fome figures of Venus, in different 
 attitudes, by an eminent artift. On view- 
 ing the firfi, he obferved, “ that there was 
 “ an extraordinary degree of animation in 
 “ the countenance,” adding, “ that the Ve- 
 
 3 
 
 nuss 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 
 “ nus’s of fancy generally wanted that qua- 
 “ lity. 5> On examining the other figures of 
 the goddefs, he made the fame remark ; when 
 the condu£lor told him with a fmile, — “ You 
 “ are very right, Sir, — the dairy-maid, a 
 “ beautiful young woman, fat for ail thofe 
 “ piftures.” — The Painter fell in love with 
 his Venus, and carried her off with him. 
 
 Nor was Mr. Boyd’s tafte in literary com- 
 pofition lefs exquifite, than in painting. At 
 the memorable trial of the unhappy Dodd, 
 he was fo much ftruck with the eloquence 
 of his defence, and fo much perfuaded that 
 it muft have been written by Johnfon, that 
 when he returned home, he committed it to 
 paper. A few days afterwards it was pub- 
 lished, with a notification of its being the 
 compofition of Dr. Johnfon ; and when the 
 original was compared with Boyd’s report, 
 from memory, they were found to be word 
 for word the fame . A more convincing 
 proof of an acute difcernment, a refined 
 tafte, and a moft tenacious memory, will not, 
 I believe, be found in the whole range of 
 biographical hiftory. 
 
 He 
 
214 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 He was extremely fond, as I have (hewn, 
 of being prefent at all interefting trials ; but 
 he never allowed that amufement to inter- 
 fere with his attendance in the Houfes of 
 Parliament ; for the love of politicks (till 
 fwayed his mind. 
 
 On November the 20th, 1777, he attended 
 the debate in the Houfe of Lords, at the 
 opening of the feflion ; and when he went 
 home, he wrote down Lord Chatham’s 
 celebrated fpeech on that occafion, toge- 
 ther with the noble Earl’s reply to Lord 
 Suffolk, which, however, he did not publifh 
 till the year 1 779. 
 
 He was alfo below the bar of the Houfe 
 of Lords, on that memorable day in 
 1778, when the wifefl statesman, and, 
 perhaps, the moil accomplifhed orator, 
 either of ancient or modern times, made 
 his dying exertions, in fupport of the free- 
 dom, the honour, and the glory of his 
 country, and whofe voice was no more 
 
 heard in the fenate-houfe Mud immortali - 
 
 tate dignum ingenium, ilia humanitas , ilia 
 virtus CraJJi morte extinda fubitaejl , vix die- 
 bus decern pojl eum diem , qui hoc et fuperiore 
 
 libro 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 215 
 
 libro continetur * Ilia tanquam cycnea fuit 
 divini hominis 'vox, et oratio, quam quaji ex - 
 peElantes, poji ejus interitum , veniebamus in 
 curiam , ut vejiigium illud ipfum , in quo ille 
 pojlremum injlitijjet, contueremur *. 
 
 When Lord Chatham fainted, the Houfe 
 was thrown into the utmoft confufion. Af- 
 fiftance was called for from behind the bar, 
 and Mr. Boyd immediately offered his fer- 
 vices, which, however, were not afterwards 
 required. The noble Earl was conveyed to 
 his feat at Hayes in Kent, and expired on 
 the 11th of May. 
 
 In 1 779, Mr. Boyd publifhed his Genuine 
 Abjlra&s of the aforefaid Speeches of the 
 Earl of Chatham, with a Preface and Notes. 
 They were printed in the form of an oUavo 
 pamphlet, for J. Dodfley. Before the 
 pamphlet was put to prefs, he apologized 
 to his old acquaintance Mr. Almon, for not 
 giving it to him ; — faying, “ that as he (Mr. 
 Almon) had been perfonally known to 
 Lord Chatham, the publication by him 
 
 * Cip. de Or M. lib. in. f. 1, 
 
 might 
 
21 6 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 might feem to infinuate it was with the con- 
 currence of his Lordfhip’s friends, which 
 not heing the faft, his delicacy would not 
 permit to be inferred. 5 ' 
 
 The fame year he was recommended by 
 Mr. Stuart and Mr. James Macpherfon 
 to the five depoferst of Lord Pigot, not 
 only to plead their caufe in Weftminfter- 
 Hall A but alfo to write a pamphlet to endea- 
 
 * The Tranflator of the celebrated Poems of Ossian, 
 and at this time agent to the Nabob of Arc©t. 
 
 + On the 16th of April 1779, Admiral Pigot, brother to 
 the unfortunate nobleman in queftion, moved, in the Houfe 
 of Commons, an Addrefs to his Majefty, praying “that 
 “_he would be gracioufly pleafed to give dire&ions to his 
 “ Attorney General to profecute the five depofersof Lord 
 “ Pigot,” whofe names have been already mentioned. 
 Mr. Stratton, the principal perfon concerned in that 
 affair, being a Member of the Houfe, and prefent in his 
 place on the occafion, entered into a long. vindication of 
 his own, and of his colleague’s condufcf, which, however, 
 did not fatisfy the Houfe, and the Admiral’s motion was 
 carried without a divifion. Mr. Stratton and his friends 
 w£re accordingly profecuted. The trial came on in the 
 Court of King’s Bench, before Lord Mansfield, on the 20th 
 of December 1779, at nine in the morning, and lafted till 
 feven the next morning, when the jury returned their 
 verdift guilty. They were, however, fentenced only 
 to pay a trifling fine. 
 
 vour 
 
HUGH BOYD. 217 
 
 vour to efface the odium which had been 
 thrown upon their chara&ers. But Mr. 
 Dunning, being their leading Counfel, they 
 thought it unneceffary to employ any one 
 elfe : and owing to a particular circum- 
 ftance, which it is not material to relate, 
 Boyd declined writing the pamphlet. 
 
 But he had now a profpeft of procuring a 
 fituation, which would have opened the road 
 to his ambition, and for which his great abi- 
 lities were peculiarly well fuited. Governor 
 Patterfon and Mr. Flood ufed their utmoft 
 intereft to get him appointed under-fecretary 
 of ftate, in Lord George Germaine’s depart- 
 ment ; and for that purpofe, he was recom- 
 mended in the ftrongeft terms to his Lord- 
 fhip, by a friend who had great influence 
 with him. Neverthelefs, all the efforts that 
 were made in his favour, proved unfuccefs- 
 ful, owing to fome hidden cavfe *, of which, 
 as I know not the exaft truth, I (hall not at- 
 tempt to develop. The failure of this bufinefs 
 
 * This caufe, I ftrongly fufpeft, will be explained, 
 when Mr. Chalmers publifhes his document s, in proof of 
 Mr. Boyd having written the letters of Junius . 
 
 gave 
 
2l8 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 gave infinitely more' concern to his friends, 
 than to himfelf ; for as his political fenti- 
 ments differed widely from thofe of the ad- 
 miniftration, it was with the greateft diffi- 
 culty Mr. Flood perfuaded him to agree to 
 the application being made; but the deplo- 
 rable condition of his affairs, and the hopes 
 of ferving his family, at laft induced him to 
 yield to his friends intreaties. 
 
 After this affair dropped, he fent feveral 
 letters to the Publick Advertijer figned De - 
 mocraticus , fome of which I have inferted 
 in this coJle&ion of his writings, and have 
 already fpoken of much at large. 
 
 In the winter of 1779, and the fpring of 
 1780, he wrote the letters of the Whig , which 
 he addreffedto the People of England, 
 and which, as has been ftated, appeared in 
 Mr. Almon’s morning paper, intitled, the 
 London Courant. Thefe were his laft politi- 
 cal produfiions which merit any attention ; 
 but he afterwards publifhed, in the fame pa^ 
 per, a few letters figned Kitty Backpinch , 
 in ridicule of the Scotch, which, although 
 they would be uninterefting now, furnifhed a 
 vaft deal of amufement at the time. 
 
 Having, 
 
HUGH BOYD, 
 
 219 
 
 Having, by fome accident, fnapt the muf- 
 culus plant aris of his leg, he was defired by 
 his friend John Hunter, to recline daily 
 on a fopha; and although he was in extreme 
 pain, it was in this fituation that he wrote 
 thofe humorous letters. After his reco- 
 very, he dined at Mr. Lee’s, where there 
 was a hoft of Scotchmen at table. The con- 
 verfation turned upon Kitty Backpinch’s 
 epiftles, which occafioned much laughing 
 and many pleafantries. Several conjeftures 
 were made about the author, but the fufpi- 
 cion never fell upon Boyd, who profeffed 
 himfelf equally anxious with the reft of the 
 company to difcover the wicked wit that had 
 taken fo many liberties with his friends . 
 
 He ftill continued to be a conftant attend- 
 ant in the houfes of parliament. In the 
 gallery of the Houfe of Commons he 
 often fat near Mr. Pitt, the prefent Chan- 
 cellor of the Exchequer, before 
 that Right Hon. gentleman became a mem- 
 ber of the houfe. They at laft got well ac- 
 quainted ; and once, after a long debate on 
 the affairs of Ireland, they retired together 
 to a late dinner, and over their wine jointly 
 
 committed 
 
220 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 N 
 
 committed to paper the fubftance of the 
 debate, and tranfmitted it to Ireland. When 
 the bill was called for, Boyd chanced not 
 to have cafh enough about him to pay his 
 fhare, and Mr. Pitt lent him a few {hillings 
 to make up the deficiency. 
 
 Of thefe favourite amufements, however, 
 he was now obliged to take leave. The 
 exigencies of his fituation engroffed all his 
 attention ; and the experience of the incon- 
 veniencies he fuffered from them, determin- 
 ed him to attach himfelf to fome fixed pur- 
 fuit, whereby he might be enabled to repair 
 his fortune. With this view he got his in- 
 timate friend Mr. Lawrence Sullivan to re- 
 commend him to Lord Macartney; and on 
 his Lordfhip’s nomination to the govern- 
 ment of Madras, he appointed him his 
 fecond fecretary. 
 
 With this appointment, he left England, 
 (though with much relu&ance) embarked for 
 India with Lord Macartney’s fuite, and ar- 
 rived at Madras in the autumn of the 
 year 1781. 
 
 After his arrival at that fettlement, he de- 
 voted his leifure hours very feduloufly to 
 
 the 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 221 
 
 the fludy of eaftern politicks, in which he 
 was not long in attaining coniiderable know- 
 ledge. 
 
 An opportunity foon occurred to call 
 that knowledge into aftion. A powerful 
 confederacy was at this time formed againft 
 the Britifh poffeffions in India, which aimed 
 at nothing lefs than their total deftruftion, 
 and which theaftive genius of a Hastings, 
 and the dauntlefs heroifm of a Coote, per- 
 haps could have alone fubdued. 
 
 Thus fituated, a plan was propofed, and 
 fpeedily adopted, by the government of 
 Madras, of forming an alliance with a 
 people, with whofe manners and country 
 we were very {lightly acquainted ; but from 
 whom much afliftance might be derived, 
 in reducing the power of a great com- 
 mercial rival, with whom we were then at 
 war. 
 
 The Dutch had long remained in un- 
 difturbed poffeffion of the trade of the ifland 
 of Ceylon ; but the time was now arrived 
 when they had to encounter in an enemy an 
 intelligent and adventurous rival, and when 
 all that energy was required to be called 
 
 forth. 
 
LIFE OF 
 
 212 
 
 forth, which in their better days repelled the 
 arms of Spanifh tyranny. 
 
 After the reduction of Negapatam, and 
 the fall of the other Dutch fettlements on 
 the Coaft of Coromandel, an expedition was 
 planned and executed againft Trincomallce, 
 in Ceylon, under the direftion of Admiral 
 Sir Edward Hughes. 
 
 Mr. Boyd accompanied this expedition, 
 being deputed, by the Governor in Council 
 of Madras, on a fpecial million to the King 
 of Candy. He embarked on board the 
 Admiral’s (hip, the Superb, and was on 
 Ihore at the ftorming of Trincomalle'e , a few 
 days fubfequent to which he fet out on his 
 ernbalfy to Candy. 
 
 A particular account of this miffion will 
 be found in Mr. Boyd’s Journal *, which is 
 
 now 
 
 * This Journal was written by Mr. Boyd, during his 
 embafiy, and the copy of it which is now pub lifted, to- 
 gether with the letters contained in the Appendix to the 
 Embafiy, were tranfmitted by him to Mrs. Boyd, when 
 he was a prifoner in the ifle of Bourbon, and have by her 
 been carefully preferved fince that time. The account I 
 gave of this Embafiy in a former edition of Mr. Boyd’s 
 Life, is in fomc parts inaccurate, owing to my not having, 
 
 when 
 
H'tJGH BOYD. 
 
 223 
 
 now printed for the firft time, and inferted 
 in the fecond volume of thefe works, to- 
 gether with a Preface, that comprifes an 
 hiftorical account of Ceylon, and that points 
 out the importance of Mr. Boyd’s embafly, 
 as well as the ability with which it was 
 conduced. 
 
 The objeft of this embaffy was to con- 
 clude a treaty of alliance between the Go- 
 vernment of Madras and the King of Candy, 
 by which the latter was to be required, not 
 only to fupply the Britifh troops in Ceylon, 
 with the effential article of provifions, butalfo 
 to fend a powerful army to co-operate with 
 the Ensdilh in the redu&ion of Columbo • 
 
 O 
 
 The King of Candy, after much perfuafion, 
 agreed to fupply the Englifh with provi- 
 
 when I wrote that account, any other information con- 
 cerning it, than what I had collefled from fome cafua! 
 converfations with Mr. Boyd on the fubjeft. One or two 
 of thofe inaccuracies it may be neceffary to point out. It 
 ftated, that Mr. Boyd had only an efcort of an havildav 
 and twelve fepoys, and that he was only twelve days on 
 his journey from Trincomallee to Candy ; whereas it appears 
 from his own account, that he had a whole company of 
 fepoys, commanded by a Britifti officer, and that he was 
 exadUy one month between Trincomallee and Candy . 
 
 fions. 
 
224 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 (ions, but he pofitively refufed to take any 
 part in the war againft the Dutch, or to con- 
 clude a treaty of alliance, except with an am- 
 baflador comrniflioned by theKing of England 
 himfelf. It was in vain that Mr. Boyd re- 
 prefented to his Highnefs, that the Governor 
 of Madras was the reprefen tat ive of the 
 King of England, in India, that he confe- 
 quently had full powers to negotiate with 
 foreign ftates, and that he had in faff con- 
 cluded treaties with many other princes in 
 Hinduftan. The Candian monarch remain- 
 ed inflexible, and Mr. Boyd was at laft 
 obliged to depart from his court, without 
 having obtained the moft material purpofe 
 of his million. 
 
 On his return to Trine omal lee, he hired a 
 fmall veflel to carry him to Madras, with all 
 poflible expedition ; the frigate that had been 
 appointed by the Admiral to carry him thi- 
 ther, having put to fea. This proved an un- 
 lucky circumftance to Mr. Boyd; for the 
 day after his departure from Trincomallee , he 
 Jell in with the French fleet, commanded by 
 Monf. de Suffrein, was made prifoner, and 
 fent on board La Fine frigate. The Captain 
 
 of 
 
HUGH BOYD. 22 $ 
 
 of this (hip was a polite companionable man, 
 and (hewed him great refpeft and kindnefs. 
 Such manners, under misfortune, are pecu- 
 liarly conciliating. 
 
 The morning after his capture, the lively 
 Frenchman told him, with a fmile, that the 
 Englifli fleet was in fight, and that their fitu- 
 ations might probably be foon reverfed. 
 
 Les armes font journalieres ” faid he, with 
 much vivacity, and giving him his hand, 
 — “ a quelquc chofe malheur eft bon mon 
 arniT — but fortune was unkind to his pri- 
 foner. 
 
 The fleets engaged, and the a£Hdn, as is 
 well known, lafted till night. La Fine, by 
 fome mifmanagement, got into the Englifli 
 lin£, and fell fo clofe on board the Ifis, a fifty 
 gun (hip, that the French commander 
 thought it folly to attempt getting off, and 
 hailed that he had (truck ; upon which fe- 
 veral Englifli prifoners went on board the 
 Ifis, but Mr. Boyd, being rather indifpofed, 
 declined quitting the Frenchman till the 
 morning ; in the mean time, however, a frefli 
 breeze fprung up, and before the Ifis, in her. 
 difabled condition, could take poffeffion of 
 
 p * her 
 
 s 
 
226 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 her prize, the frigate took the advantage, 
 and got clear off. Mr. Boyd remonftrated 
 againlt this proceeding of the French cap- 
 tain’s in terms fo pointed and ftrong, that 
 he was ordered into clofe confinement. The 
 next day, the French captain releafed him, 
 apologized for the manner in which he had 
 treated him, and endeavoured to extenuate 
 the impropriety of his conduft towards the 
 Ifis. 
 
 When La Fine arrived at the ifland of 
 Mauritius , Mr. Boyd was made a clofe pri- 
 foner, and was kept there feveral months. 
 He was afterwards fent to the ifle of Bourbon , 
 (for what reafon he never could learn) where 
 he lived at the Governor’s table, and was 
 treated with the utmoft kindnefs and libe- 
 rality. 
 
 Captivated with that generofity and po~ 
 litenefs for which the people of this ifland 
 are peculiarly diftinguilhed, he felt not the 
 inconveniences, much lefs the hardfhips, of 
 imprifonment. Such focieties he was born 
 to animate, felicitate, and delight : in them 
 he gave grace to learning, cheerfulnefs to 
 wifdom, and elegance to wit. 
 
 But 
 
< 
 
 HUGH BOYD. 22/ 
 
 But the liberality of the Governor put a 
 period to the pleafures which he enjoyed in 
 this beautiful ifland: he offered Mr. Boyd 
 his parole, which refpeft for his fituation 
 obliged him, however reluftantly, to ac- 
 cept. 
 
 On his return to Madras, he folicited Lord 
 Macartney for an appointment, by which he 
 could advance his fortune ; but his Lord- 
 fhip having none at his immediate difpofal, 
 Mr. Boyd went for a few months to Cal- 
 cutta, where he lived on terms of intimacy 
 with Sir John Macpherson, then Go- 
 vernor of Bengal, and where his talents, wit, 
 and humour, together with the fuperlative 
 fprightlinefs of his convivial qualities, will be 
 long remembered with pleafure. 
 
 His flay at Calcutta was fhorter than he 
 intended. Being appointed mafter-attend- 
 ant at Madras, he was recalled to that pre- 
 fidency. The duties of this fituation were 
 ill fuited to the delicacy of his mind ; but 
 as the emoluments appertaining to it were 
 fo great as to open to him the profpeft of 
 ultimate wealth, he cheerfully overlooked 
 every lelfer confideration. Nor was this 
 p 2 profpeft 
 
I * 
 
 228 LIFE OF 
 
 profpeft fo diflant, or the avenue that 
 led to it fo difagreeable as may be fup- 
 pofed ; though Prudence, unqueftionably, 
 was the only guide that could conduft him 
 through it : but, alas ! with her he was ever 
 at variance, for he affociated too conftantly 
 with Senfibility, to relifh much the cold 
 counfels of Prudence; yet is it to be lamented, 
 that Prudence did not find an early entrance 
 into his breaft, that with her protefting 
 fhield, (he might have covered, from the 
 rude ravages of precarious fortune, the fine 
 polifh of virtuous fenfibility. 
 
 Ke now lived in his ufual ftyle, the orna- 
 ment of general fociety, and the life of every 
 company. 
 
 During the My fore war, which terminated 
 in 1792, he condufted a paper, intitled, the 
 Madras Courier : it was very juftly admired 
 for precifion in detail, and tafte and judg- 
 ment in fele&ion. 
 
 In June 1793, he firft conceived the idea 
 of publifhing periodical effays on morals and 
 literature. At this time I accidentally be- 
 came acquainted with him. “ I was then 
 " only not a boy and the manly dignity 
 
 of 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 22 9 
 
 of his countenance, the fafcinating courtefy 
 of his, addrefs, the rich eloquence of his lan- 
 guage, the variety of his knowledge, and the 
 facility with which he communicated infor- 
 mation, at once commanded my refpeft and 
 admiration. We often met, and our con- 
 verfations chiefly took a literary turn. He 
 liftened to my opinions, however much they 
 differed from his own, with the kindefl con- 
 defcenfion, and anfwered them with a frank- 
 nefs that befpoke the generofity of his mind. 
 A gradual increafe of mutual fondnefs, foon 
 grew into friendfhip ; — a friendfhip not to be 
 impaired by place, fortune, or calamity, nor 
 ever effaced from my mind. 
 
 “ If e’er from me thy loved memorial part, 
 tc May (hame afflidt my alienated heart. 
 
 “ Oh, if fometimes thy fpotlefs form defcend, 
 
 “To me, thy aid, thou guardian Genius, lend! 
 
 “ When rage mifguides me, or when fear alarms, 
 
 “ When pain diftrelTes, or when pleafure charms, 
 
 “ In filent whifp’rings purer thoughts impart, 
 
 “ And turn from ill a frail and feeble heart ; 
 
 “ Lead through the paths, thy virtue trod before, 
 
 “ Till blifs fhall join, nor death can part us more.” 
 
 I was now his inmate, and feldom or ever 
 abfent from his company. His acquaint- 
 ance* 
 
LIFE OF 
 
 230 
 
 a nee formed the whole fociety of Madras, 
 and to that little circle he gave peculiar 
 grace. Every man of judgment admired, 
 and every man of fenfibility loved him. If 
 there were thofe that fnarled at his irregula- 
 rities, they were at lead foothed by his gen- 
 tlenefs ; and if at times they had the bold- 
 nefs to bite, they had not often the refolution 
 to continue the conflift : for churlilh cen- 
 fure is always impotent when oppofed to 
 humour and mildnefs. 
 
 His plan for the “ Indian Obferver” was 
 made known to the publick fome time in 
 Auguft 17933 and foon obtained a very libe- 
 ral encouragement. The novelty of the 
 attempt in that country, excited univerfal 
 curioiity, which it was known the great ta- 
 lents of the Conduftor were well qualified 
 to gratify. In the courfe of a month, the 
 fubfeription amounted to four hundred 
 names. 
 
 The work was now to commence ; but 
 Mr. Boyd very properly judging it would 
 give greater fatisfaftion by appearing 
 through the channel of a weekly paper, in 
 which the politician and merchant, if they 
 
 relifhed 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 23I 
 
 relifhed not the literary treat, might refort 
 to more homely repafts, propofed this mode 
 to his friends, by whom it was highly ap- 
 proved. 
 
 This paper he intitled the Hircarrah 
 the firft number of which appeared on the 
 9th of September 17933 and which, before 
 the publication of the fecond, procured 
 nearly one hundred additional fubfcribers. 
 The Obferver was now in high repute, and 
 the Boeviad race of India, (for there are 
 thofe fdngfters there as well as in other 
 countries) were all on wing — Braining their 
 lungs to heave the cumbrous load ! 
 
 Scribimus inclufi , numeros ille, hie pede liber y 
 
 Grande aliquid quod pulmo aninue pralargus anhelet f . 
 
 The Obferver with confiftent dignity Rea- 
 dily advanced in his purfuit, gratified by the 
 voice of publick approbation, and undif- 
 turbed by thofe literary reptiles whom the 
 rays of his genius had called forth into a 
 momentary exiftence. 
 
 In February 1794, Mr. Boyd advertifed 
 propofals for publifhing by fubfeription his 
 
 * An Hircarrah fignifies a meflenger. + Perf. Sat. I. 
 
 Embaffy 
 
232 mfe pf 
 
 Embaffy to Candy, with particulars of that 
 country, and of the iflands of Mauritius and 
 Bourbon , in two volumes 8vo. The fub- 
 fcription did not increafe fo rapidly as might 
 have been expe&ed. It was certainly a 
 work from which the world ^would have de- 
 rived much entertainment and information. 
 The tardinels of the publick damped the 
 ardour with w r hich he had embraced the 
 projeft ; and he delayed taking up his pen 
 till a fufficient fum w T as fubfcribed to bear 
 the charges of the prefs. But in September 
 following, urged by fome friends, he refolved 
 to begin, and partly on that account clofed 
 the Obferver , with a poflfcript, in which 
 there is a conditional promife to renew the 
 effays at a future period, and to print, in a 
 colleftive form, thofe that had appeared. 
 
 He now undertook the w T ork with zeal, 
 and confidently hoped to finifh it wdthin fix 
 months; but this hope was never realized, 
 he was feized with a fever which carried him 
 to his grave. 
 
 The thread of this narrative has now 
 brought me to an awful, affiifting, and in- 
 terefting fcene, of which, though I w r as my- 
 
 felf 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 233 
 
 felf a melancholy fpeftator, I would much 
 rather decline the defcription ; but reve- 
 rence for truth, and juftice to the memory 
 of my departed friend, oblige me to dif- 
 clofe it. 
 
 That prodigality of all worldly benefits, 
 and perpetual careleffnefs of pecuniary con- 
 fiderations, which mifguided the early years 
 of Mr. Boyd, attended him to that bed of 
 ficknefs, on which, whatever were his crimes, 
 or whatever his failings, he was to make a 
 final expiation. Though imprudence mufl 
 be acknowledged to be a great defeft, yet 
 that mind can boaft of little liberality, which 
 magnifies it to a crime : mod men, never- 
 thelefs, by judging of charafters from ap- 
 pearances in common life, and by being unr 
 acquainted with the latent fprings of human 
 afiion, are apt indifcriminately to confider 
 continued imprudence in the light of fraud. 
 
 Mr. Boyd, who had attentively fludied 
 the great volume of life, muft have known 
 the truth of this obfervation ; but perhaps 
 he never experienced it until the approach 
 of his diffolution. 
 
 Bleffed 
 
234 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 Bleffed with a vigorous conftitution and 
 an even flow of fpirits, he paffed through a 
 chequered and buftling life without having, 
 till now, been confined with anv feiious ill- 
 
 J 
 
 nefs. The fever therefore, which, from its 
 beginning, preyed upon his vitals, he felt 
 with an anguifh, imbittered by refleftion on 
 the embarraffment of his affairs, and exaf- 
 perated by the calls of difappointed credi- 
 tors. Yet his mind, fuperior to misfortune, 
 difdained the language of forrow ; and his 
 heart, warmed by the recolle£tion of bene- 
 volent aftions, folaced itfelf in the exercife 
 of religious duties. 
 
 Some days previous to his death, during 
 a paroxyfm of his fever, I was called to 
 take my laft farewell, — to tear myfelf from 
 that bofom in which my affeftions had fo 
 long repofed ! My friend was extended on 
 his bed, his once expreflive vifage pale and 
 emaciated, his eyes hollow and languid, and 
 his voice feeble and low. He ftretched out 
 his hand to receive me, and only whifpered 
 he was ill ; — but the big tear that rolled down 
 his ftill animated countenance, was more 
 . intelligible 
 
HUGH BOYD. 235 
 
 intelligible than all the figures of lan- 
 guage. 
 
 This is a fcene in which friendfhip difco- 
 vers every fecret goodnefs, and at the fame 
 time finds palliations for every fault ; in 
 which power lofes all its influence, and rival- 
 fhip all its envy ; in which diflipation and 
 folly tremble, and vice and impiety ftand 
 appalled. " Whoever would know how 
 “ much piety and virtue furpafs all external 
 “ good, might here have feen them weighed 
 “ againft each other ; where all that gives 
 “ motion to the aftive, and elevation to the 
 “ eminent ; all that fparkles in the eye of 
 “ hope, or pants in the bofom of fufpicion, 
 “ at once became duft in the balance, with- 
 “ out weight and without regard.” But it 
 did not fall to my lot to attend him in his 
 laft hour. His life was prolonged for a few 
 days more, and he expired in the arms of a 
 virtuous and enlightened friend, whom he 
 had always regarded with tendernefs, and 
 whofe abilities he had always admired. 
 With this friend I was fitting in the fick 
 room, (the laft time I ever fat in it) when 
 hidden! y raifing himfelf in his bed, he called 
 
 us 
 
LIFE .OF 
 
 236 
 
 us near him, and with a tremulous voice, 
 though with a compofure and clear nefs, fel- 
 dom attainable in fuch fituations, fpoke the 
 following lines : 
 
 In life’s gay flow, when all obey 
 
 The fprightly notes of Pleafure’s call ; 
 
 Can then the faithful mirror fay, 
 
 I (hew a juft original? 
 
 In fcenes of pow’r, of pomp, and place, 
 
 Where proud Ambition’s vot’ries bow; 
 
 Can there the mirror’s fhining face, 
 
 Of life a true refemblance (hew ? 
 
 No! *tis not where Ambition’s hand 
 Sweeps o’er the polifh roughly warm ; 
 
 Nor w r herekeen Pleafure’s fighs demand 
 Her flatt’ring images to form, 
 
 5 Tis there, where with Reflexion’s aid, 
 
 And purified by Pain, 
 
 Man contemplates his fickly bed, — 
 
 The mirror then fhines plain! 
 
 He would have proceeded, but his feel- 
 inss were unable to bear thofe reflections 
 which he had already conjured up. He 
 burft into a flood of tears, and reclined again 
 
 As 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 237 
 
 As his fate approached, he told the friend 
 to whom I have above alluded, that fome 
 friends had abandoned him : — yet, though 
 he felt this defection with the keeneft regret, 
 no expreffion of refentment, no emotion of 
 anger, not even a look of unkindnefs, fullied 
 the purity of his dying fentiments ; but in 
 forgiving his enemies, and in offering up his 
 prayers to the Almighty, for his kindred, 
 his friends, his country, and all mankind, 
 with intire refignation, and the moft perfeft 
 calmnefs, he breathed his lafl ! — Thus ended 
 the life of this great and extraordinary man, 
 at once remarkable for the moft brilliant 
 talents, and the moft exalted virtues, — -for 
 the misfortunes which obfcured the one, 
 and for the follies which furrounded the 
 other. 
 
 His death happened on the 19th of Gclo- 
 ber 1794, in the forty-eighth year of 
 his age ; and he was interred, the day fol- 
 lowing, in the New Burying Ground at 
 Madras. 
 
 Among the number who mourn the lofs 
 of Mr. Boyd, are his widow, a fon and 
 daughter, who by all accounts fhew that the 
 
 genius 
 
LIFE OF 
 
 238 
 
 genius of their father furvives ; his brother* 
 Alexander Macaulay, Efq. who lives on the 
 family eftate in the county of Antrim, and 
 who is married to a lifter of the prefent 
 Lord Vifcount Gosford ; and his filler, 
 Mrs. Godley, a lady of great accomplilh- 
 ments, and many virtues. 
 
 The perfon of Mr. Boyd was tall and 
 graceful, formed with the moll exa£l fym- 
 metry ; his mien noble and elevated ; 
 his countenance animated and command- 
 ing, and his deportment exceedingly ele- 
 gant. 
 
 He pofiefled great ftrength and agility of 
 body, and was particularly fond of all ath- 
 letick exercifes, in many of which he ex- 
 celled. 
 
 In the hours of mirth and conviviality he 
 was too delirous of difplaying his fuperiority 
 in trifles ; and ufed at times to relax his dig- 
 nity, and Ihew his Ikill at a trick. But in 
 thofe praftices he was guided much by his 
 company ; for it was one of his maxims, 
 2 “ that 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 239 
 
 that a man fhould always endeavour to 
 adapt his converfation and manners to 
 “ the prevailing tafte of his company, pro- 
 “ vided the doing fo did not violate the rules 
 “ of morality or decorum.” 
 
 In focial life he pofiefled, in an eminent 
 degree, thofe qualities which give confidence 
 to fellowfhip, and zeal to benevolence ; 
 which give incitement to charity, and a6H- 
 vity to friendfhip. His manners were fo 
 captivating, that they at once interefted 
 every affe£tion of the heart. His pleafantry 
 and humour extorted fmiles from the in- 
 flexible mifanthrope, and infufed cheerfui- 
 nefs into the breafts of the difconfolate. 
 The perfuafive mildnefs of his language 
 conciliated the boifterous, and fubdued the 
 rude. But in the praftice of thefe virtues 
 he was not unaccompanied by the neigh- 
 bouring paflions. Regular men were dif- 
 pleafed with his deviation from order, and 
 prudent men were offended with his total 
 negleft of economy. His boundlefs pro- 
 fufion was generally condemned, and his 
 munificence often got the name of in- 
 juftice. 
 
 Yet. 
 
£ 4 ° 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 Yet if his generofity gave that in charity* 
 which juflice demanded as a right, the un- 
 deferving, at leaft, never (hared in the dona- 
 tion : for wifdom, which feemed to have 
 forfaken him in the common affairs of life, 
 direfted his mind in its more exalted opera- 
 tions, and always guided him in his chari- 
 table diftributions. Though from diftrefs, 
 in whatever form it appeared, he never 
 could withhold immediate relief, yet to vice 
 or idlenefs he never deliberately gave encou- 
 ragement. Under his roof, where every 
 man who wanted a home, found a ready 
 admittance, hofpitality was by confequence 
 fometimes mifapplied ; which although his 
 penetration foon perceived, his exceffive de- 
 licacy and politenefs would not allow him to 
 remedy. Let not, therefore, thofe immenfe 
 fums of money which he lavifhed away, 
 be intirely placed to the account of his own 
 extravagance ; for they were at times aug- 
 mented by the folly or fordidnefs of others, 
 and, in a few inftances, by thofe vultures of 
 office, who prey on the unfufpefting can- 
 dour and generofity of their mafter’s difpo- 
 fition. 
 
 In 
 
HUGH BOYD, 
 
 24!' 
 
 In his friendly attachments he was lefs 
 frequently midaken ; for he founded them 
 on the broad bafis of difintereded principle. 
 Difference of fentiment, didrud, and jea- 
 loufy, the mod formidable enemies to friend- 
 (hip, found no place in his bread: there, all 
 was equable, fmooth, and gentle. 
 
 The warmth of affe&ion which he bore 
 his friends, feemed at times to border on 
 prejudice; and he was too apt to hide their 
 blemidies, by magnifying their perfeftions : 
 yet, if his applaufes were fometimes unqua- 
 lified, his cenfures were always fparing. Of 
 him it may be faid, in the words of that great 
 datefman and orator* whofe eloquence and 
 
 * X 
 
 patriotifm have been fo long the pride of his 
 country, and the admiration of Europe, — 
 " that his enmities were placable — his friend- 
 <c {hips eternal 
 
 In private company Mr. Boyd never in- 
 dulged in perfonal ridicule. Scandal he 
 defpifed with becoming dignity : he always 
 endeavoured to difle every petty whifper of 
 malevolence; and in his converfation he' 
 
 “ Amicitia ftmfiterna, inlfnicltia placabllts 
 
 was 
 
! 
 
 242 LIFE OF 
 
 was fo particularly cautious and correQ;, that 
 I do not remember ever to have heard him 
 infinuate, much lefs openly exprefs, any 
 thing injurious to a private chara&er. 
 
 Entering early into life with a mind dif- 
 curfive and powerful, and a judgment pe- 
 netrating, definite, and clear, he attained a 
 very extenfive and accurate ^knowledge of 
 mankind; which important advantage, aided 
 by a vivid imagination, embellifhed with all 
 the graces of learning, gave him a pre-emi- 
 nence in familiar coriverfation, that cannot 
 eafily be equalled, and has been feldom fur* 
 paffed. 
 
 He could accommodate himfelf to every 
 company and to every mind, and poffefled 
 the rare quality of diffufing pleafure where- 
 ever he appeared. In mixt fociety, the 
 quicknefs of his apprehenfion allowed no- 
 thing to efcape his notice : his mind was 
 always prefent, and his whole powers ready 
 at every call. He could vary his fubjefts 
 with the utmoft promptitude, and examine 
 each with equal precifion ; — with the ferious 
 he could be moral ; with the ftudious he 
 could be learned ; with the polite he could 
 
 be 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 be elegant ; with the gay he could be witty ; 
 with the frolickfome he could be humor- 
 ous ; and with the unlettered he could be 
 plain. 
 
 At his convivial board his wit fparkled 
 with every glafs, and his jocularity flowed 
 as plentifully as his wine ; but it was the 
 charms of the one, rather than the excel- 
 lence of the other, that allured his guefts, 
 and detained them till a late hour ; for even 
 his meals were a feaft for the underftand- 
 ing *. 
 
 On thefe occafions, he, at times, became 
 a keen polerhick, and engaged warmly in 
 literary and political difputes : but his argu- 
 mentative powers were not commenfurate 
 with his other qualifications. His imagina- 
 tion was greater than his judgment ; and his 
 reafoning, therefore, though dextrous and 
 fpecious, had little folidity or depth. His 
 hearers, however, were always delighted, if 
 not always convinced. 
 
 In the warmth of difputation, he occa - 
 fionally fhewed fome flight degree of arn> 
 
 * Ut voluptates quoque ftudiis condiantur. Pliny. 
 
 ? 2 
 
 gance. 
 
§44 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 gance. To maintain a favourite pofition, 
 he would pour forth a torrent of learning, 
 and dare the confutation of his antagonift : 
 and in fcrutinizing publick charafters he 
 was, perhaps, too much influenced by his 
 feelings. Yet in the heat of difcuflion, he 
 was always agreeable: he never foiled his 
 lips with the breath of animofity, far lefs 
 with the meannefs of perfonal allufion. 
 The fuavity of his manners he preferved 
 inviolate. In his converfation, there was no 
 violence, no harfhnefs, no afperity ; nothing 
 loud, nor coarfe, nor rude ; all was mild, 
 and eafy, and elegant. 
 
 When argument at any time ran high, 
 or tended to produce any ferious difcord, 
 he would ingenioufly change the converfa- 
 tion by a humorous fally ; and if any angry 
 difputant Ihould not yet be difpofed to yield, 
 he would with admirable quicknefs turn his 
 fyllogifms into an epigram, and tell him 
 with an irrenftible pleafantry, " Now, my 
 “ friend, do indulge us with an armiftice.” In 
 turning thofe epigrams he was often parti- 
 cularly happy ; and although he was too fond 
 of interlarding them with puns, which, like 
 
 other 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 245 
 
 other puns, were frequently infpid, yet they 
 feldom failed to excite applaufe, and pro- 
 mote cheerfulnefs. 
 
 In female fociety, he preferved his mer- 
 riment with delicacy, and his wit with 
 gracefulnefs, without lofing its point. Of 
 th z Belle Ajfembtie, he was an ardent admirer, 
 and he joined the fprightly circle with fre- 
 quent delight : but the licentioufnefs of the 
 drawing-room he unrefervedly condemned. 
 That reftlefs propenfity to game — that Ca - 
 coethes aleatorium , which renders morbid 
 every generous principle in youth, and 
 pollutes the hoary honours of age ; which 
 .difgraces the faireft forms, and corrupts the 
 pureft hearts. — found an enemy in Boyd, 
 who, though goaded by a wild extravagance, 
 had never been driven into its fnares. He 
 admoniihed its deluded votaries, not lefs by 
 precept *, than example. 
 
 Of his intelleftual elements, his imagina- 
 tion was the mod powerful and aftive. His 
 
 * Whoever wifhes to know his deteftation of this vice, 
 will find the fubjeft treated in a very mafterly and ele- 
 gant manner, in the ninth number 0! the Indian Ohferver , 
 Vol. II. page 152, of thefe works. 
 
 2 
 
 genius 
 
LIFE OF 
 
 246 
 
 genius bold,afpiring, and adventurous, form* 
 ed conceptions beyond the bounds of fub- 
 iunary nature ; and his judgment was only 
 not vigorous, when it endeavoured to re- 
 ftrain his fancy. His mind in all its opera- 
 tions was aflifted by a curiofity perpetually 
 awake, and a comprehenfive capacity of ob- 
 fervation ; — by an intuitive perception, a te- 
 nacious memory, and an underftanding that 
 could affociate the remote and the familiar 
 '—the beautiful and the grand. 
 
 But thediftinguifhing qualities of his mind, 
 were memory, clearnefs, and perfpicacity. 
 What he had once heard, or read, he never 
 forgot. He could repeat all the paflages 
 that he mod admired, and thefe were of 
 courfe very numerous, in the writings of 
 Demofthenes and Cicero, of Thucydides 
 and Tacitus, of Bacon, Machiavel, and 
 Montefquieu. In poetry, his favourite au- 
 thors were Homer and Milton, and he could 
 repeat feveral books of the Iliad, and of 
 Paradife Loft, from the beginning to the 
 end. The fpeeches that he had heard in 
 parliament, or in the courts of law, he al- 
 ways remembered, not only in fubftance, 
 
 but 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 247 
 
 but in the very form and phrafe in which 
 they were fpoken. And even in familiar 
 converfation, whatever interefted his mind, 
 never again efcaped it. 
 
 The ftrength of his memory, and the 
 clearnefs of his underftanding were fuch, 
 that he could make arithmetical calculations 
 of conliderable length and intricacy intirely 
 in his mind : without taking down a Angle 
 unit, he could in a (hort fpace of time mul- 
 tiply nine given figures, by other nine, and 
 give the produft ; and in the fame manner 
 fie could, in the courfe of an hour, refolve 
 any queftion in the Rule of Three , or in 
 Vulgar Fradions . In playing at his favour- 
 ite game of chefs, he would walk about the 
 room, and while he was converfing with 
 feeming attention on other fubjefts, ditiate 
 the moves to another perfon, from being 
 told the fituation of his adverfary’s pieces, 
 and the moves he had made, without once 
 looking at the board himfelf. 
 
 Yet, notwithftanding thefe uncommon 
 inftances of a piercing and vigorous intel- 
 left, notwithftanding the logical precifion 
 and arrangement of his thoughts, he pof- 
 
 fefled 
 
LIFE OF 
 
 248 
 
 felled not that ftrong reflefting faculty by 
 which the human mind is enabled to invef- 
 tigate the whole procefs of its own opera- 
 tions, to follow up the chain of abftraft 
 reafoning, and to explore the fources of 
 metaphylical truths. But his mind had an 
 extenfive grafp. He contemplated the uni- 
 verfe with the poetick eye of philofophy, 
 and embraced at once all the various orga- 
 nizations, not only of the moral, but the 
 material world. 
 
 His learning, like his genius, was more 
 fplendid than profound. He feafted on all 
 the fruits, but had not thoroughly cultivated 
 the foil of the literary garden. He had 
 • made a general fu'rvey of every region of 
 human knowledge ; but his particular re- 
 fearches were confined to claffica! learning, 
 morals, and politicks. 
 
 With the belles lettres, and with the lite- 
 rary and civil hiftories of every age and 
 nation, he was familiarly acquainted. He 
 read the clafficks, both of ancient and mo- 
 dern Europe, in their original drefs. In the 
 Latin and French languages he was emi- 
 nently fkilful ; and his knowledge of Greek 
 
 was 
 
 4 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 249 
 
 was fo confiderable, that one would have 
 imagined he had been all his life a re- 
 clufe fcholar, rather than a man of the 
 world. 
 
 Endowed with a tafte, by nature moft 
 exquifitely delicate, and refined by the ele- 
 gancies of the Attick fchool, he was nice in 
 polite criticifm, without being faftidious, 
 and fevere in philology, without being pe- 
 dantick. 
 
 Of the ftage he was an enthufiaftick ad- 
 mirer, and on dramatick poetry, as well as 
 on dramatick reprefentations, a critick of 
 great acumen, judgment, and tafte. On 
 this fubjeft, his opinions were not formed 
 from the polifhed models of the Grecian, 
 ftill lefs from the forced correftnefs of the 
 Parifian ftage ; they were drawn from the 
 originals of nature, as reprefented in the 
 diverfified fcenery of the immortal genius 
 of Britain. 
 
 To talents fo polifhed, wit fo refined, 
 learning fo amplified, and tafte fo chaftened, 
 had Mr. Boyd applied himfelf to the cul- 
 tivation of dramatick poetry, he would, 
 doubtlefs, have added ornaments to the 
 
 Englifli 
 
250 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 Englifh ftage, which, with its declining ele- 
 gance and morality, could have alone de- 
 cayed. 
 
 HAVING already faid fo much re- 
 fpefling Mr. Boyd’s political writings, I 
 fhould not now offer another word on the 
 fubje6f of them, but that I conceive it 
 neceffary to expofe the abfurdity, if not the 
 malignity, of Mr. Chalmers’s attempt, to 
 calumniate the memory of my friend. 
 
 Mr. Chalmers has told the publick, 
 “ that Mr. Boyd was an United Irish- 
 man, by birth, by habit , and by practice” 
 To have eftablifhed the truth of this affer- 
 tion, it was in the firft place requifite for him 
 to prove, that a Republican conspiracy 
 actually exijled in Ireland at the time of 
 Mr. Boyd's birth, that is, in Oftober 1746; 
 and in the next place, it was effential to 
 {hew, that Mr. Boyd’s political principles, 
 opinions, and connexions, were the fame as 
 thofe of an United Irifhman. Now, with re- 
 gard to a republican confpiracy in Ireland, 
 
 in 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 2 5 l 
 
 in the year 1746, I believe it never did exift, 
 except in the imagination of Mr. Chalmers ; 
 for it is an undeniable fa6i, that no mention 
 is made by any cotemporary writer, of any 
 fuch confpiracy. And as to the idea of 
 tracing the origin of the recent rebellion in 
 Ireland, to fome petty Catholick plot that 
 may have happened fifty years ago, it is too 
 ridiculous to merit a fingie obfervation. 
 
 With regard to Mr. Boyd’s political con- 
 nexions, the reader already knows, that 
 they were of the firft refpeftability in the 
 kingdom, not only for their rank and ta- 
 lents, but for their fteady loyalty to his 
 Majefty’s family, and their confequent at- 
 tachment to the genuine principles of the 
 Britifh conftitution. Thefe principles are 
 fteadfaftly maintained throughout the whole 
 of Mr. Boyd’s writings, and though there 
 are a few infulated expreffions in Junius , 
 which may be thought feditious, and which, 
 therefore, I am very far from defending, I 
 do believe that Junius was a much fincerer, 
 and furely he was a more able friend to 
 the Crown of England, than Mr. George 
 Chalmers! ! He who truly loves his King, 
 
 mull 
 
LIFE OF 
 
 252 
 
 mud firfl love his Country. No man 
 can really regard the rights of the one, 
 who does not cherifh the liberties of the 
 other. 
 
 But Mr. Boyd, fo far from having afted 
 upon the principles of an United Irijhman , 
 was in fa6t a profeffed enemy to a republi- 
 can form of government. Let him fpeak 
 for himfelf — u I can more readily admire,’* 
 fays Junius , “ the liberal fpirit and inte- 
 “ grity, than the found judgment of any 
 man, who prefers a republican form of 
 government, in this , or in any other empire 
 “ of equal extent ’ to a monarchy , fo qualified 
 cs and limited as ours . I am convinced , that 
 “ neither is it in theory the wifefi fyjlem of 
 government , nor pratiicable in this country . 
 “ Yet, though I hope that the Englifh con- 
 “ ftitution will for ever preferve its original 
 “ monarchical form, I would have the man- 
 “ ners of the people purely and flriftly re- 
 “ publican. I do not mean the licentious 
 “ fpirit of anarchy and riot. I mean a ge- 
 “ neral attachment to the common weal, 
 <e dillinft from any partial attachment to 
 (< perfons or families ; an implicit fubmijjion 
 
 “ to 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 2 53 
 
 r< to the laws only ; and an affection to the 
 “ magiftrate, proportioned to the integrity 
 “ and wifdom with which he diftributes juftice 
 “ to his people, and adminillers their af~ 
 “ fairs/' 
 
 This I know Mr. Chalmers will not ad- 
 mit to be found conftitutional doftrine, but 
 this I know was the good old-fafhioned 
 doftrine of our anceftors, and that to which 
 England owes all her profperity and glory 
 — all her power and greatnefs. This too 
 was the rational doftrine which Mr. Boyd 
 taught to the people of Ireland, and not, 
 as Mr. Chalmers malicioufly and unjuftly 
 infinuates, thofe wild and dangerous chimeras 
 by which they have been lately deluded. 
 “ Rat I ON A L, — LEGAL LIBERTY,” fays 
 Mr. Boyd, in th t Freeholder, “ and only 
 “ that, is intended to be p railed ; which 
 “ differs as effentially from the rude riot of 
 “ licentioufnefs, as wifdom is diftinft from 
 “ madnefs, or as reafon excels brutality. 
 “ The admirable Milton has well diftin- 
 “ guifhed, where he inveighs againft the 
 “ hypocrites of this virtue in the extreme. 
 “ As the paffage well expofes the falfe pre- 
 
 tenfions 
 
254 
 
 LIFE OF 
 
 <c tenfions to it, and in the fame proportion 
 “ extols the truth, permit me to clofe thefe 
 “ obfervations with it.” 
 
 €t They bawl for Freedom in their fenfelefs mood, 
 
 “ Yet quarrel with the hand that makes them free. 
 
 “ Licence they mean, when they cry Liberty ; 
 
 “ For who loves that, must first be wise and 
 
 a GOOD.” 
 
 In another place he declares — “ I do not 
 “ beat the drum of fadion , nor found the 
 “ trumpet of fedition: for I do mo ft pofitively 
 “ and folemnly protefl myfelf a zealous friend 
 “ to the Constitution as established 
 “ in Church and State.” 
 
 Such is the language in which Mr . 
 Chalmers's United Irijhman addreffes the 
 people of Ireland, and fuch the principles 
 which he inculcated : and if the reader fhould 
 require an expofition of thefe principles, 
 I recommend to him to perufe with atten- 
 tion the fecond letter of the Freeholder , in 
 which he will find an abftraft of the Britifh 
 cOnftitution, not adapted, perhaps, to Mr. 
 Chalmers’s political tafte, but ftriclly con- 
 formable to the theory of our government. 
 
 Refpeft- 
 
HUGH BOYD. 255 
 
 Refpe&ing the Revolution in France, 
 Mr. Boyd faw, at its very commencement, 
 the falfe and deftruftive principles of thofe 
 extravagant fpeculations by which it was 
 effected, and which prefumptuoufly talked 
 of diforganizing and new modelling the whole 
 frame of civil fociety : and he thought them 
 altogether fo inconfiftent with any fyftem 
 of rational and prafticable freedom in any 
 country, that an attempt to realize them in 
 France, would madden the deluded people, 
 produce the mod ferocious anarchy, and 
 inftead of eftablifhing a free government, 
 would ereft a military defpotifm. He alfo 
 thought, that the French poffelfed not that 
 fteadinefs and fobriety of charafter, by which 
 liberty can alone be preferved. In the year 
 1791, he received a letter on this important 
 fubjetl from his friend Mr. Edmund Burke, 
 together with a copy of his celebrated Re- 
 flections, the perufal of which, of courfe, 
 confirmed Mr. Boyds opinions : and of 
 thofe opinions he has fortunately left a fuf- 
 ficient record. 
 
 In the 21ft No. of the Indian Obferver, 
 which was publilhed in January 1794, after 
 
 making 
 
LIFE OF 
 
 256 
 
 making fome obfervations on the powerful 
 effefts of eloquence in the free ftates of 
 antiquity, he fays, — “From thefe premifes, 
 “ the modern eye naturally turns to that 
 “ unhappy country, which for four fatal 
 years has been the theatre of national ca- 
 “ lamity. And he who traces the progrefs 
 “ of that calamitous drama, from the firft 
 “ aft of deposition of royalty in the national 
 “ fenate, to the murderous cataftrophe on 
 “ the national Scaffold, will fee how the 
 “ abufe of popular eloquence prevailed to 
 “ madden the multitude ; and if not intend- 
 “ ed to effeft the final mifchief, as lately has 
 1“ been fuggefled in fome pofthumous proofs, 
 ic yet how fatally powerful it v/as to light a 
 “ flame which could not be extinguished. 
 “ The extraordinary talents of Mirabeau, 
 “ and their omnipotent elfeft in the Affem- 
 “ bly of France, are too well known. And 
 ts though it may be fome confolation to 
 “ thofe, whofe love of human nature revolts 
 “ from the unnatural affociation of the 
 ** blackefl vices with the brighteft abilities, 
 “ to find that his were not the principles 
 
 “ which 
 
HUGH BOYt). 257 
 
 ** which have been fince a£led upon to the 
 “ horror of mankind. 
 
 “ But to turn to the more pleating view 
 “ of the fubjeft, where the fineft talents 
 “ combat on the fide of truth, we have feen 
 “ their triumph in the nobleft caufe, in the 
 
 te CAUSE OF RELIGION, LAW, AND OR- 
 
 fe d e r ; in defence of every facred poll and 
 “ barrier, essential, not alone to the se- 
 “ curity and happiness of mankind, 
 “ but to the very existence of society. 
 “ The fublime comprehenfion of that pene- 
 “ trating genius *, who in the early dawn 
 ffC of democracy, faw the deftruftive princi- 
 pie of general conflagration that was to 
 “ flame in its meridian, gave the alarm to 
 cc the world ; and his warning voice was 
 “ heard. The baleful influence, threatening 
 “ every confine of humanity, was averted ; 
 *•' and the nortentous meteor, confirmed in 
 te its own fires, will pafs away for ever.” 
 
 Thus then it appears that the affertion of 
 Mr. Chalmers is at once vroundlefs and 
 
 o 
 
 abfurd ; and he has, therefore, thought 
 * Mr. Burke. 
 
 r 
 
 it 
 
LIFE OF 
 
 258 
 
 it becoming his chara&er to propagate an 
 idle calumny, to endeavour to revile the 
 memory of one who never injured him, to 
 violate the fan&ity of the tomb, and to 
 rake up the afhes of the dead, to gratify 
 his refentment againfl the living. What 
 morality is this? Is this the man who 
 cenfures the morals of Junius ? Is this 
 the man who complains fo bitterly of the 
 malevolence of Mr. Mathias? Is this 
 the man who is conftantly profeffing his 
 regard for candour and truth ? Is this the 
 man who takes Doctor Johnfon for his mo- 
 del ? Or is it only the Jiyle * of that great 
 man, which he thinks worthy of imitation? 
 
 But with his tafle in morals, or in litera- 
 ture, I have no other concern, than as it 
 regards my friend. Dulnefs may be de- 
 fpifed, though malignity cannot be excufed ; 
 but when we find them united, difguft and 
 indignation rufh irreliftibly on the mind. 
 If, however, I had not judged of his calumny 
 
 * See Chalmers’s Life of Rudiman, a work, which, to 
 any man well acquainted with Johnfon’s ftyle, will afford 
 as much amufement as one of Foote’s bell farces. 
 
 2 
 
 by 
 
HUGH BOYlh 259 
 
 by the rancour which gave it birth, rather 
 than by the manner in which it is expreffed, 
 I fhould have allowed it to die forgotten and 
 unremoved, along with the learned lumber 
 of his Supplemental Apology . ^ 
 
 The other produftions of* Mr. Boyd* 
 which I have prefented to the publick, re- 
 quire little apology or explanation ; they 
 are written with lefs ardour of ftyle and fen- 
 timent, than his political compofitions, but 
 they are neverthelefs highly worthy of pre- 
 fervation, and no way derogatory from his 
 genius. 
 
 The Journal of his EmbafTy to Candy 
 will be found extremely entertaining. It is 
 Written with that unaffected naivete of lan- 
 guage, which is the greateft beauty of fuch 
 a performance; and there is an agreeable 
 and unclouded cheerfulnefs throughout the 
 whole of it, which appears extraordinary 
 amidft the difficulties and fatigue of a toil- 
 fome and vexatious journey ; and which il- 
 luftrates the peculiarity of his genuine hu- 
 mour, as well as of the mild but intrepid 
 r 2 refolution* 
 
LIFE OF 
 
 260 
 
 refolution, that dignified and didinguiflied 
 his chara£ler. 
 
 The few Poems which appear at the end 
 of the fird volume, were the amufements of 
 an idle hour ; and I publifii them merely to 
 fhew the never-failing playfulnefs of his 
 difpofition, as well as the cordial tendernefs 
 of his heart. If they difplay not any thing 
 of that brilliancy and animation which 
 might have been expected from him, they 
 at lead contain very elegant and pleafing 
 lines. 
 
 In his Effays in the Indian Obferver 9 if 
 there be not any novelty of fubjeft, or nice 
 didin&ions in morals and criticifm, they at 
 lead reprefent the pure and immutable prin- 
 ciples of private ethics in a lively and 
 pleafing manner, and enforce the efficacy of 
 virtue and religion with the Ample energy 
 of truth. And when the reader is informed 
 that thefe Effays were generally compofed 
 amidd the budle of bufinefs, or the frolicks 
 of hilarity, without either care or prepara- 
 tion, he will be indulgent to the blemifhes 
 which he may find they contain. 
 
 It 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 26l 
 
 It has indeed been objefted to the Indian 
 Obferver , that he is not fufficiently Afiatick; 
 that his obfervations do not embrace To wide 
 a fphere of life as might have been expefted; 
 for that he fliould have delineated the cha r 
 rafter of the native inhabitants of India. 
 But it fhould be recollected that this was 
 foreign to Mr. Boyd’s purpofe ; which was 
 to inftruft and amufe the Engliffi fociety at 
 Madras, on thofe fubjefts to which he 
 conceived they paid too little attention. His 
 grand objeft was to animate the provinces 
 with the fpirit of the mother-country ; by 
 the inculcation of moral truths, by roufing 
 the paffions on the fide of virtue, by infufing 
 a defire for the purfuits of polite literature, 
 and a tafte for the curiofities of art. He 
 lamented, that in India fo great a portion of 
 time was devoted to the avocation of office, 
 and laudably endeavoured to infpire his 
 countrymen with more elevated fentiments. 
 He told them in the words of Mojiere, 
 
 A de plus hauts objets eleven vos defirs > 
 
 Songez a prendre un gout des plus nobles plaijirs. 
 
 That he has executed his defign with dig- 
 nity, will not, I believe, be denied ; though 
 
 from 
 
262 
 
 JLIFB or 
 
 from negligence on fome fubjeCls, he is lax 
 and undefined. On morals, as on litera- 
 ture, his fentiments are liberal, his tafte is 
 pure, his judgment exaCt, and his diCtiom 
 always perfpicuous, eafy, and elegant. 
 
 Throughout the whole of his writings he 
 may, with a few exceptions, be faid to have 
 preferved the medium fo elegantly defcribed 
 by the Abbe Maury, “ that keeps be- 
 tween the extreme of neglecting applica- 
 tfC tion, which adds to the defeCts of tafte, 
 “ and the excefs of labour, which deadens 
 the tranfports of genius.’’ And in the 
 letters of Junius, as well as in his other poli- 
 tical productions, he has attained that ner- 
 vous fimplicity of language, which is at 
 once familiar without being common, eafy 
 without being feeble, concife without being 
 forced, energetick without conftraint, rapid 
 without irregularity, fpirited without vehe- 
 mence, and fevere without harfhnefs. 
 
 Verba toga fequeris , junfiura calVidus acri. 
 
 Ore teres modico , pollen tes radere mores 
 Do flus & ingenuo culpam defigere ludo *. 
 
 * Perf. Sat. V. 
 
 SUCH 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 263 
 
 SUCH is the Life and Chafer of 
 Hugh Boyd, delineated, I hope, with the 
 integrity of truth, though it may be, I have 
 at times imperceptibly leaned to the fide of 
 friendfhip. If for this I fhould be con- 
 demned by the aufterity of Juftice, I have 
 yet an appeal to Benevolence, from whom I 
 {hall expe£t a milder fentence. But let not 
 even Juftice too rafhly frown, for mature 
 refleftion may foften her decree. 
 
 In eftimating the qualities of Boyd, much 
 candour and confideration is required. It is 
 neceflary to diftinguifh his foibles from thofe 
 of others. Moft men only (hew to the world 
 their fair fides, concealing, under a dazzling 
 varnifh, innumerable faults ; whereas his 
 frailties, however great, appeared open as 
 day, whilft fome of the nobleft virtues, like 
 diamonds in the mine, were impervious to the 
 fight of the fuperficial obferver. If there are 
 thofe who fhould tax the juft nefs of this ob- 
 fervation, and who to his imperfe&ions fhould 
 give a harfher name, let them refleft on the 
 frailties incident to nature, and the muta- 
 bility of their own condition ; let them 
 
 learn. 
 
LIFE. OF 
 
 264 
 
 learn, in the fublime language of Shake- 
 fpeare, the duty of fellowfhip, and the ami- 
 ablenefs of candour. 
 
 How would you be, 
 
 If he who is the top of judgment fiiould 
 But judge you as you are ? Oh ! think on that. 
 
 And mercy will then breathe within your lips, 
 
 Like man new made. 
 
 If in tracing the wanderings of a friends 
 
 o O 
 
 life, I have been led into greater length than 
 I forefaw, I requefi; my readers to examine 
 their own hearts, and if there they find no 
 apology for that fondnefs which deludes 
 reafon, and “ bathes the fpirits in delight/’ 
 in contemplating die genius and virtues of 
 a departed friend, even the eloquent fenfibi- 
 lity of a Jaffier may plead in vain. The 
 firfi; duty of a Biographer is to lay open the 
 lights and (hades of his hero’s character, 
 and by the ftrong effect of fini(hed colour- 
 ing, to encourage the modefty of virtuous 
 indigence, and reprefs the infolence of prof- 
 perous vice. How well I have performed 
 this duty, it remains for \he publick to de- 
 termine. I (hall wait their decifion with 
 
 anxiety, 
 
HUGH BOYD. 
 
 265 
 
 anxiety, but not without confidence : for 
 having contributed my mite to the caufe of 
 Friendfhip, Virtue, and Truth, I (hall at 
 leaft be intitled to the praife of having 
 endeavoured well. 
 
 
 I 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 

 
 
 
 
 a ■ &• nv- 
 
 , 
 
 ■ 
 
 ' 
 
 • ; ; 'V 
 
 
 
 
 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 T O 
 
 THE LIFE, 
 
 A Letter from Mr. J. Almon, to L. D. Campbell, Efq, 
 containing fome flrong circumftantial Proofs of Mr. Boyd 
 having been the real Author of Junius. 
 
 Box-Moor, near Hemel-Hempftead, Herts, 
 December io, 1798. 
 
 Sir, 
 
 h umus % 
 
 My reafons for believing that' the letters figned Ju 
 were written by the late Mr. Hugh Boyd, are founded 
 upon the following circumftances. 
 
 During the autumn of the year 1769, I believe in the 
 month of O&ober, a meeting of the Proprietors of the 
 London Evening Poft was held at the Queen’s-Arms, St. 
 Paul’s Church-yard, a houfe which at that time was much 
 frequented by bookfellers. The perfons prefent were, 
 
 John 
 
z68 
 
 APPENDIX 
 
 John Gretton, Efq. # Mr. Rivington, bookfeller/ i n St. 
 Paul’s Church- yard ; Mr. Longman, bookfeller, in Pater- 
 nofter-row ; Mr. Owen, bookfeller, at Temple-bar ; Mr. 
 Miller, Printer of the London Evening Pojl ; Mr. Wood- 
 fall, Printer of the Publick Advert if er, (in which the letters 
 of Junius w r ere originally publifhed) myfelf, and I think 
 one more. After the bufinefs was over, there was a ge- 
 neral converfation concerning newfpapers, and other to- 
 picks, in the courfe of which fomething was remarked, 
 which caught Mr. Woodfall’s attention, for he immedi- 
 ately faid, that he had a letter from Junius in his pocket, 
 which he had juft received, in which there was a pafiage, 
 or paragraph, that related to the fubjeft w r e were then 
 talking of, and he would read it ; then taking the letter 
 out of his pocket, he read the part he had fpoken of. The 
 letter confifted of three or four fheets (or more) in fmall 
 folio, fuch as we technically call fool’s cap. As the other 
 lheets, which Mr. Woodfall was not reading from, lay 
 upon the table, I faw them in common with the reft of 
 the company, but did not take them into my hands. The 
 moment I faw the hand -writing, I had a Jlrong fufpicion 
 that it was Mr. Boyd’s, whofe hand-writing I knezv , having 
 received feverai letters from him concerning books. I took 
 no notice of the matter at that time. But the next time 
 that Mr. Boyd called on me, for he was in the habit of 
 frequently calling on me in Piccadilly, I faid to him, that 
 I had feen a part of one of Junius' s letters, in manufeript, 
 which I believed was his hand-writing — he changed colour 
 inftantly, and after a fhort paufe, faid, u the fimilitude of 
 “ hand-writing is not a conclufive fuel." — Though thefe 
 words do not acknowledge the truth of the fufpicion, they 
 
 * Now of Belmont-Place, Vauxhall. 
 
 do 
 
TO THE LIFE. 
 
 269 
 
 do not, however, pofitively deny it. Thefe were my firft 
 grounds of fufpicion; whether juftly or not, this letter is 
 defigned to explain. 
 
 About a month, or fix weeks afterwards, Lord Temple 
 alked me, if I knew the writer of the letters figned Junius f 
 I told his Lordlhip that I did not, but that I had my fuf- 
 picions. His Lordfhip faid, he had his fufpicions alfo ; 
 but they did not go to Mr. Burke, yet he had no doubt of 
 the writer being an Irifhman. 
 
 Upon this feemingly indifferent circumfiance, I cannot 
 avoid making two remarks : one is — that every reader of 
 Junius s letters muft have obferved, that the affairs of Ire- 
 land form a very prominent feature in them. The other 
 is — that though all parties were at this time abufing Lord 
 Temple — Lord Rockingham’s friends, becaufe he had re- 
 fufed to accept of the adminiftration, when that noble 
 Lord implored him almoft upon his kr*ees — the minifiry, 
 becaufe he oppofed their meafures — the court, from pure 
 hatred, becaufe he would not be duped by Lord Bute’s 
 machinations : and though thefe parties hated each other, 
 yet they united in the abufe of Lord Temple. Junius 
 joins not with any of thefe parties, refpe&ing Lord Tem- 
 ple. On the contrary, whenever he fpeajts of that noble 
 Lord, it is of his firmnefs, perfeverance, patriotifm, and 
 virtue ; and I can add, from my own knowledge, that 
 whenever Mr. Boyd fpoke of Lord Temple, it was always 
 in fimilar terms. Junius fays of himfelf, “ to write for 
 “ fame, and to be unknown — to fupport the intrigues of 
 “ fa&ion, and to be difowned by every party in the king- 
 “ dom, are contradictions which the minifter muft recon- 
 “ cile, before I forfeit my credit with the publick.” 
 
 On the nineteenth of December 1769, was publifiied 
 Junius's addrefs to the King, for which feveral of the print- 
 ers 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 270 
 
 crs were profecuted, together with myfelf, who had no 
 concern whatever in the printing of it. The cafe was 
 fhortly this : on the firft day of January 1770, fome of the 
 monthly magazines, into which this letter of Junius was 
 copied, were fold by my fervants ; for which aft of felling, 
 in the common courfe of bufinefs, the attorney-general 
 (Mr. De Grey, afterwards Lord Walfingham) filed an in- 
 formation, ex officio* againft me, as a publisher ; although 
 the true publiffier’s name was on the title-page of the ma- 
 gazine, and I had no kind of connexion with it, immedi- 
 ately or remotely, dire&ly or indire&ly, and he might* 
 with the fame juftice, have profecuted all the bookfellers 
 in England, for all of them fell the monthly magazines. 
 
 At the time of ftriking the fpecial jury, which I attend- 
 ed, I obje&ed to thofe gentlemen being on the jury who 
 held places under the crown. Mr. Burrows* at that time 
 matter of the crown office, where the jury was ftruck, 
 faid that my objeflion was frivolous. I replied, that this 
 being a profecution in which the crown was party, I could 
 not think it proper that a fervant of either party fhould be 
 on the jury. He made no anfwer, but went on ; and not- 
 withftanding my utrrioft endeavours, I could not prevent 
 a placeman being foreman of the jury, viz. Mr. Morfe of 
 the war-office. When the bufinefs was over, Mr. Nuthall’s 
 clerk (Nuthall was folicitor to the treafury) came up to 
 me, and faid, “We are certain you know the author, we 
 u only want to come at him ; if you will give us the pro- 
 u per information, 1 am authorized by Mr. Nuthall to 
 “ affure you, that this profecution (hall not go on.” My 
 anfwer was, that 1 did not know the author. The profecu- 
 tion was made as expen five as polfible. The information 
 was extended to one hundred and thirty-feven fheets. My 
 own attorney’s bill exceeded one hundred and forty-nine 
 
 pounds. 
 
TO THE LIFE. 
 
 27I 
 
 pounds. This was diftind from the other heavy ex- 
 pences. The late Sir Herbert Mackworth, who was one 
 of the jury, made a ftrong affidavit in my favour, as did 
 fome other gentlemen : but all was of no avail. A few 
 weeks afterwards, the trials of the real printers and pub. 
 liffiers came on, when they were all acquitted. Several 
 months after thefe acquittals, I was fentenced to pay a 
 fine, and put under an interdiction, or fecurity for good 
 behaviour, in the fum of eight hundred pounds. The 
 bardffiip of this is, that nobody can afcertain what is the 
 precife meaning of this expreffion, il for good behaviour’’ 
 — a breach of it may be any thing the attorney-general 
 pleafes to call fo. I can fay with truth, that there is no 
 man, now alive, who has been fo vindi&ively profecuted 
 and perfecuted, during a long feries of years, as I have 
 been, nor fo unjuftly. 
 
 During the whole time that this profecution was going 
 on, Mr. Boyd never once called upon me ; which I could 
 not help obferving, becaufe before this time, he commonly 
 called twice or thrice a week ; and I thought it not lefs 
 remarkable, that after the profecution was totally at an 
 end, he refumed his former cuftom. 
 
 In the month of January 1772, the lad letter figned 
 Junius was publifhed. A fhort time after, Mr. Boyd left 
 London ; I cannot fay the exa£f date, nor to w hat place 
 he went. But, in your Preface to the Indian ObJerver , in 
 the lad paragraph but one, 'you fay, that the Freeholder , 
 known to be written by Mr. Boyd, was publiffied in Ire- 
 land, (at Belfad) in 1772 *. I have already obferved, 
 that the affairs of Ireland make a prominent feature in 
 Junius' s letters. If the date, therefore, of the lafl of Jun'us 
 
 * This was a miftake. Mr. Boyd went to Ireland in 1772, but 
 did not publifh the Freeholder till 17 76. Ed. 
 
 in 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 in England, and the date of the firj} paper of the Free - 
 holder in Ireland, do not fhew a ftrong improbability of 
 their coming from the fame inkftand, there will not feem 
 any violent impropriety in connedfing them ; as coming 
 from the fame writer. The eulogium on Junius in the Free - 
 holder , may be judicious — to give immediate currency to 
 his new paper. Some modeft people may perhaps imagine, 
 that a capital writer would not praife himfelf. Junius 
 was not fo delicate : witnefs the letters ligned Philo-Junius , 
 avowedly written by himfelf; what are they but eulogi- 
 ums on Junius? and under his own fignature, did he not 
 once fay, that the Bible and Junius would be read, when 
 the Jefuits were forgotteh ? Junius knew the utility of a 
 feafonable eulogium, as well as any man. All men are not 
 alike in apprehenfion and difcernment; it is often necef- 
 fary that fome things fhould be pointed out ; what is la- 
 tent, or not prominent, fhould be made obvious ; and this 
 is bell done by collateral affiftance. Periodical writers 
 have been allowed the ufe of this kind of fupplementary 
 aid, to fupport their credit with the publick. Lord Chef- 
 terfield pra&ifed it, when he wrote in the paper called 
 Common Senfe : and Mr. Wilkes pradtifed it, when he wrote 
 North Briton. 
 
 1 know there are fome perfons, who are not difpofed to 
 give credit to the account of Mr. Boyd being the author 
 of the letters figned Junius; and they found their doubts 
 upon their own opinion of his talents, which they fay w r ere 
 not equal to the abilities difplayed in thofe letters. Every 
 candid perfon will obferve, that this obje&ion refts upon 
 opinion only ; and it may further be obferved, that men, 
 and fometimes great men, differ widely in their opinions 
 upon the talents of writers. Far be it from me to offer an 
 opinion upon the fubjeft ; but I hope I may, without in- 
 curring 
 
TO THE LIFE. 
 
 273 
 
 ctfrring the guilt of prefumption, be allowed to recommend 
 a comparifon between the letters of Junius and the papers 
 avowedly written by Mr. Boyd. Whoever will be at the 
 trouble of reading the Introdu&ion to two Speeches of 
 Lord Chatham, written and taken by Mr. Boyd, will pro- 
 bably fay, that there is not any part of Junius s letters, 
 which excels the language of that introdu&ion, in beauty 
 and fublimity. Of the Whig, alfo written by Mr. Boyd, I 
 have heard very good judges fay, that there are paffages in 
 thofe papers, equal in force and elegance to any thing in 
 the writings of Junius. 
 
 Another objection has been made to the fuppoiition of 
 Mr. Boyd being the author of Junius s letters. It is of a 
 kind lefs rude than the former, but more frivolous. The 
 former was to his talents, this was to his fituation. Thofe 
 who urged the objection, faid — That the letters of Junius 
 mull have been written by a perfon of profound erudition, 
 of high political connexions, and in habits of familiarity 
 amongft the higheft ranks of fociety. 
 
 To Mr. Boyd’s claflical education, no man who knew 
 him, will hefitate to give the fulleft credit to the great 
 extent of it. The reft of the objeflion, if tranflated into 
 plain Englifh, is no more than this ; that the writer of Jani- 
 «j’sletter§ muft have beenagentleman, or nobleman of high 
 birth and fafhion. This is fo childifh, that one need only 
 be acquainted with the maimers of the prefent day, to pro- 
 nounce it filly in the extreme. Do gentlemen, or noble- 
 men, in thefe times, fit down to the laborious exercife of 
 writing a long feries of political letters for the news- 
 papers ? The letters oi Junius continued three years, 
 viz. from January 21, 1769) to January 21, 1772. Mr, 
 Wilkes found it a heavy talk to produce only forty-five 
 numbers of the North Briton; and every one who knew 
 
 s hiiTb 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 274 
 
 him, muft remember how 'often he complained of the 
 weight of it ; though fix of the numbers were not written 
 by him. The writer of Junius's letters muff, unqueftion- 
 ably, during the time of their publication, have refided in 
 London, in the vortex of politicks, at the fountain of in- 
 formation. This is an indifputable faff ; it is proved by the 
 immediate replies given to other writers. Befides thefe, 
 there were, I may almofl fay, an infinite number of other 
 letters, to which he did not affix the fignature of Junius; 
 fome few on mifcellaneous fubjedls, but they were chiefly 
 political, and in fupport of Junius; together with many 
 paragraphs, feveyal ol them particularly temporary. How 
 I know the fa6f is not material. Mr. Woodfall will not, 
 upon his honour, contradiff me. All that I mean to in- 
 fer from it, is, that during the publication of Junius's let- 
 ters, the writer mull have refided on the fpot ; and that 
 no gentlen^m of rank and falhion, would live three fuc- 
 ceffive complete years in London, for the fake of writing 
 political letters, and anfwering anonymous antagonills. 
 
 As to the other part of the objeflion, that Junius muft 
 be a nobleman, or perfon of high confederation, it is an- 
 fwered by the next queftion, Can no man write like a gen- 
 tleman, unlefs he is of high birth, or great fortune? 
 
 But there is another objedfion of more confequence 
 than any of the foregoing. It confifts, it it true, of only 
 a Angle aflertion, but this afiertion is made by Mr. Wood- 
 fall himfelf ; and that gives it weight and importance in 
 this inveftigation. He fays, “ that the letters figned Ju- 
 “ mus were not written by Mr. Boyd.” 
 
 A few weeks after the Biographical^ Literary , and Politi- 
 cal Anecdotes were publifhed, Mr. Woodfall and I met, by 
 accident. He immediately complimented me on the pub- 
 lication, (aid, “ it was a very entertaining work, he had 
 
 “ read 
 
** read it with great pleafure, &c. but there was one thing 
 51 in which I was miftaken, and that was, in fuppofing 
 “ Mr. Boyd to have been the author of Junius s letters j” 
 and then he added, with an emphafis, <£ that Mr. Boyd 
 “ was not the author of them.” Thefe I think were his 
 words. My reply Was, I think in thefe words, “ That I 
 “ had no doubt of Mr. Boyd being the author of thofe 
 “ letters ; that he (Mr. Woodfall) never knew the au- 
 i( thor; and that as he never knew who m?, he could 
 ** not undertake to aflert who was not — the author.” 
 
 I (hall make no comment on this little colloquy. I 
 have put Mr. Woodfall’s words in the full extent of their 
 meaning, and my own I have put in the oppofite fcale. 
 
 I refpe6l Mr. Woodfall’s character as much as any man 
 can ; at the fame time I cannot depart from a confidera- 
 tion of my own. I am not confcious, that throughout 
 the three volumes of the Biographical , Literary , and Politi- 
 cal Anecdotes, there is one untruth. To the bell of my 
 knowledge and belief, every expreflion and affertion, in 
 that work, are founded in the ftri&eft veracity. My only 
 motive in writing thefe volumes was, that as moft of the 
 fa&s they Contain, though very generally known at the 
 time they happened, had not, to my knowledge, been by 
 any perfon committed to paper, they would probably pe- 
 rifh with the few now alive, who are acquainted with 
 them ; and I hope that the talk I thus impofed on my fell, 
 will not be deemed frivolous or invidious. There are 
 many matters left untold, which do not relate fo nearly to 
 the biography, as to the hiflory of our times. They will 
 form a work of more confulerable extent. 1 have devoted 
 my leifure to it for fome years pad; and it has been, and 
 (hall be, my moil anxious delire and care, that no falfe- 
 hood (hall appear in it- 
 
 * % 
 
 There 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 276 
 
 There is one more circumftance, concerning Junius 7 s 
 letters, that is proper to mention. It is of equal import- 
 ance with any one that has been already adduced. It is 
 this. On the fifteenth day of April 1786, there appeared 
 the following paragraph in the General Advertifer. 
 
 “ When Lord Macartney went to Madras, it is well 
 “ known that Junius went with his Lordfhip. He made 
 “ himfelt ufeful to his Lordfhip, by taking fome fpeeches 
 “ at the India-Houfe. No man ever had a better memo- 
 41 ry, or a better knack at taking fpeeches than Junius . 
 “ He was happy in an accurate retention of all flrong ex- 
 ** preiiions. He went to India, becaufe his circumftances 
 were very circumfcribed. Being a Whig in principle, 
 it was not probable that he would differ with General 
 “ Daliing, who was bred under the old Duke of Cumber- 
 “ land : but it is very probable that he will not agree with 
 S.r A. Campbell. He is a native of Ireland, and re- 
 “ ceived his education in the college of Dublin. ” 
 
 Who can infer from this paragraph that Mr. Boyd was 
 the author of Junius s letters ? None but thofe who knew 
 the fa£t. Mr. Boyd was not the only gentleman who went 
 with Lord Macartnev to India; feveral other gentlemen 
 went with his Lordfhip, whole circumftances, perhaps, 
 might not materially differ, and who might have attended 
 the debates at the India-Houfe, as well as Mr. Boyd. 
 The paragraph is not concluftve upon Mr. Boyd ; and 
 none but a perfon, who knew the connexion between 
 Junius and Mr. Boyd, would perceive the allufion. If Mr. 
 Boyd depofited the fecret with any body, who was the moft 
 probable ? — undoubtedly Mrs. Boyd*. 
 
 * It has been already ftated, that Mrs. Boyd was not intruded 
 with the fecret j but her anxiety on this occafion arole from a belief 
 that Mr. Bovd was Junius. Ed. 
 
 At 
 
 V 
 
TO THE LIFE. 
 
 At the time that this paragraph was publifhed, Mrs. 
 Boyd refided at Hampftead. The moment (he faw the 
 paragraph, which was the morning of publication, (lie im- 
 mediately Cent a gentleman to the printer, to requeft that 
 no more paragraphs, alluding to Mr. Boyd, might appear 
 in the paper ; becaufe (he feared, that fuch information 
 might effentially injure Mr. Boyd’s intereft in India. Her 
 requeft was obeyed. Nothing more on the fubje6l was 
 publifhed. A common obferver, would read the para- 
 graph with indifference ; and many of thofe who knew 
 Mr. Boyd, would fcarcely find their attention attached by 
 it. But Mrs. Boyd is alive to the allufion the moment (lie 
 fees it. She under (lands it in all its force, and inftantly 
 wifhes to deprecate its effe£l. Had the allufion been to- 
 tally falfe, perhaps Mrs. Boyd might not have been fo 
 quickly alarmed. Junius s letters had often been afcribed 
 to many perfons, without any of them feeling hurt by the 
 report — becaufe it was falfe. Mr. Boyd was not at that 
 time fufpedled, I believe, by any body, except myfelf. 
 
 I have now vindicated, I hope fufficiently, the account 
 given in the Biographical , Literary , and Political Anrcdotes t 
 of the writer of Junius's letters. 
 
 My fincere opinion is, that thofe letters were written by v 
 the late Mr. Hugh Boyd ; and I (hall continue to be of 
 that opinion, until I am undeceived by fome better autho- 
 rity than any I have vet feen. 
 
 I am, Sir, 
 
 Your obedient fervant, 
 
 ]. ALMON. 
 
 ~i • - 
 
 A CONCISE 
 
278 
 
 APPENDIX 
 
 A concise Account of a foort Controversy, which 
 was carried on through the Medium of the Morning Chro- 
 nicle, in the Month of Auguji 1 79 9 , relative to the ghiefion, 
 — Whether Mr. Hugh Boyd was in Reality the Author 
 of Junius ? 
 
 Th IS controversy having attra&ed the notice of the 
 publick, I think it no lefs due to thofe concerned in it, 
 than to the memory of Mr. Eoyd, to explain the caufe from 
 which it arofe, as well as the motive which induced me to 
 engage in it, and likewife to give an impartial (latement of 
 the leading points on both Tides of the queftion. 
 
 In the beginning of July 1799, Mr. George Chalmers 
 publifhed a book, entitled, A Supplemental Apology for the 
 Believers in the Shakefpeare MSS. together with a PoJifcript t 
 addrefifed to Mr. T. J. Mathias. In this Pojlfcript he 
 takes occafion to give forne account of Mr. Boyd, to de- 
 clare it to be his firm belief, that Mr. Boyd was the author 
 of Junius , and to alfert, that “ he was an United Irijhman , 
 “ hy birthy by habit > and by prafiiceP The laft part ol this 
 flatement of Mr. Chalmers, namely, that Mr. Boyd was 
 an United Iri[hmariy being totally void of all foundation in 
 truth, and being a filly, but malicious attempt to defame his 
 character, I felt myfelf called upon to expofe the fallacy 
 of the affertion, and to Afield the memory of my friend 
 from the poifoned arrows of his flander. I therefore ad- 
 dreffed a letter to the Editor of the Morning Chronicle t to 
 that effedl ; and at the fame time ffated a few leading fadfs 
 in proof of Mr. Boyd having written the letters of Juniusy 
 in order to prevent the publick from being milled on that 
 point, by fome plaufible, but erroneous circumftances re- 
 fpefting it, which had appeared in the True Briton. 
 
 The 
 
TO THE LIFE. 
 
 2 79 
 
 The following is the fubhance of the principal faffs 
 which I Hated in that letter, with regard to Mr. Boyd 
 having written the letters of Junius , viz. 
 
 “ That Mr. Boyd, from his abilities and political con- 
 nexions, was fully qualified for the talk of writing fuch 
 letters.” 
 
 “ That previous to the appearance of Junius's letters, 
 Mr. Boyd had accuftomed himfelf to write in a difguifed 
 hand.’’ 
 
 “That during the whole of the three fucceffive years that 
 Junius wrote in the Publick Advertifer , Mr. Boyd conftant- 
 ly fent letters to that paper, which he wrote with the moll 
 impenetrable fecrecy, which he fuperfcribed in his feigned 
 hand- writing, and which he chiefly employed Mrs. Boyd to 
 carry to Mr. H. S. Woodfall’s letter-box, with the moll 
 fcrupulous caution.” 
 
 “That there wasPOSiTiVE evidence, in contradiftion 
 to what was Hated in the TrueBriton *, that Mr. H.S. Wood- 
 fall never knew that Mr. Boyd had written for the Publick 
 Advertifer , before the year 177 7, until he was requefled by 
 Mr. Boyd’s friends to point out thofe letters, which they 
 knew Mr. Boyd had written for that paper, in the years 
 1769, 1770, 1771, and part of 1772.” 
 
 “ And laflly , that the writer in the TrueBriton , when he 
 faid, “ That Mr. Boyd’s contributions to the Publick Ad~ 
 u vertifer , in the time of Junius, are not to be held in com- 
 (i parifon with the productions of that admirable writer,” 
 cenfured writings which he had never read, and which I 
 defied him or any other man to produce. I gave this defi- 
 ance with a confidence founded on the fact, that no let- 
 
 * It was Hated in the True Briton t u That Mr. Boyd was known 
 ** to have mitten for the Publick Advertifer during the time of Junius.' * 
 
 ters 
 
280 
 
 APPENDIX 
 
 ters of Mr. Boyd’s were publifhed in the Publiik Advertlfer, 
 during the three years above mentioned, except thofe which 
 are fo well known under the fignatures of Junius and Phils* 
 Junius y thofe that appeared under the fignatures of Lucius 
 and Brutus , and thofe that he fent to Mr. PI. S. Woodfall 
 in Mrs. Boyd’s hand-writing. 
 
 Thefe fa6fs had no fooner been publifhed, than Mr . 
 IVilliam IVoodfall ftepped forward to deny their validity, 
 and to juftify the aflertion above quoted of the writer in 
 the True Briton. In his letter, which appeared in the 
 Morning Chronicle of the I2th of Augufi: 1799, which pro- 
 fefifes to be an anfwer to my fads , he alTerts, — “ That no 
 M man living knows more of the conduct of Junius, in the 
 “ management of his correfpondence in all its relations, 
 
 than he does, his brother alone excepted.” 
 
 “ That he knows the whole of the afiertion, that Mr. Boyd 
 “ was the author of the letters figned Junius , to be founSed in 
 “ mifapprehenfion.” 
 
 “ That Mr. Boyd was not capable of compofing fuch 
 u letters ; becaufe his EfiTays, in the Indian Ohferver , are 
 “ greatly inferior to them in point of fiyle and fenti- 
 <$ ment.” 
 
 “ That he (Mr. William Woodfall) can fafely afiert, 
 f< that his brother Mr. H. S. Woodfall, fhewed him every 
 “ one of Junius’s letters in manufeript, previous to publi- 
 “ cation, and that not one of them lore the appearance of 
 “ having been written in a difguifed hand # .” 
 
 “ That 
 
 * What Mr. W. Woodfall obferves here, is perfe&ly true. The 
 MSS. of Junius did not bear the appearance of a difguifed hand- 
 writing, to perfons like Mr. W. Woodfall, who had not feen Mr. 
 Boyd’s common hand-writing. But I have already proved, that 
 thofe who were well acquainted with the one , would upon an in- 
 
 fp e&ioq 
 
TO THE I.1FE. 
 
 28l 
 
 u That Mr. Boyd might pofftbiy have difguifed his hand* 
 writing, fufficiently to efcape the deteftion oi common 
 “ obfervers, but that he could not eafily deceive the acute 
 “ difcernment of anewfpaper printer’s eye.” 
 
 “ That even fuppofing Mr. Boyd could difguife his hand- 
 “ writing, it muft be admitted on all hands, he could not dif- 
 u guife his ftyle, and leaf of all in that mojl extraordinary 
 * € way of writing above his own reach of literary talent. 19 
 
 “ That the writer in the True Briton was, therefore, 
 “ amply juft ified in faying, that Mr. Boyd's contributions to 
 “ the Publick Advertifer , in the time of Junius , were not to be 
 held in comparifon with the productions of that admirable 
 “ writer 
 
 “ That his brother, Mr. H. S. Woodfall — never afked 
 “for any indemnity for publijhing the letters of Junius , nor was 
 “ any offered him.” 
 
 “ And that for all thefe reafons, I had committed a grofs 
 “ error in lending a willing ear to Mr. Almon’s aftertion, 
 “ that Mr. Boyd was the author of Junius; an aftertion which 
 “ he (Mr. William Woodfall) for all thefe reafons , declares 
 “ to be founded in ignorance , and broached in preemption 
 
 Such is Mr. W. Woodfall’s anfwer to my fads refpeff- 
 ing Mr. Boyd, the different parts of which, for the fake of 
 order and concifenefs, I have been obliged to tranfpofe and 
 condenfe : but the author will find', that although his per- 
 
 fpe&ion of the other , difeover a ftrong refemblance between them. 
 And Mr. W. Woodfall muft be fenfible, that as there was n ojlriking 
 peculiarity in the MSS. of Junius , he could not poflibly know, whe- 
 ther it was a feigned hand or not ; for, in order to afeertain whether 
 a hand- writing of that kindbe difguifed, it is necefifaryto be fami- 
 liarly acquainted with the fame writer’s hand in his private letters, 
 or in the common concerns cf life. 
 
 / 
 
 formance/ 
 
282 
 
 APPENDIX 
 
 formance has been dripped of its rhetorical flourijhes , it has 
 loft nothing either of its beauty or Jlrength. 
 
 To this letter of Mr. William Woodfall’s, I thought it 
 neceflary to reply ; becaufe the unqualified aflertions re- 
 fpe&ing Junius , under the iignature of Woodfall , if uncon- 
 tradi&ed, might have carried fome weight with them, al- 
 though they were unfupported by a fingl efadl, or any thing 
 like argument or juft obfervation. 
 
 I went over the fame ground that I had taken in my 
 iir ft letter ; becaufe I only wiftied to fubjlantiate the few 
 iadls 1 had dated, not at that time to prove, that Mr. Boyd 
 was imreality the author of Junius. 
 
 I obferved, “ that as to Mr. W. Woodfall’s aflertion, that 
 64 the manufcript of Junius did not appear to him to be a dif- 
 €l g u \fed hand , I could only fay, it was no way furprifing 
 44 Mr. Boyd fhould have eluded the detection of a news- 
 <i paper printer’s eye, when even the perlpicacity and 
 acutenefs of Mr. W. Woodfall had been fo egregioufly 
 deceived by the hand-writing of Junius . For that to 
 “ fay nothing of the fact itfelf, that all the letters fent to 
 44 the Publick Advertifer, under the fignatures of Junius and 
 ii Philo- Junius, of Lucius and Brutus , were adlually written 
 44 in a difguifed hand, it mull be evident to every man of 
 44 common obfervation, that Junius would have forfeited 
 ii all claim to fagacity, and would infallibly have been dif- 
 “ covered, if he had written his letters in his common 
 hand- writing.” 
 
 “ That with regard to his aflertion, that Mr. Boyd could 
 44 not dfguife his Jlyle , he (Mr. W. Woodfall) muff be ig- 
 44 norant indeed of literary hiftory, if he did not know an 
 u hundred inftances, of men of lefs talents tfian he allowed 
 44 to Mr. Boyd, having deceived the publick by difguifing 
 “ their ftyle.” 
 
 44 That 
 
TO THE LIFE. 
 
 283 
 
 *■ That his affertion, that Mr. Boyd was in the habit of 
 “ correfponding with the Publick Advert if er in the time of Ju- 
 <c nitiSy but not as a ftudioufly concealed writer , was utterly un- 
 “ founded in truth, for that Mr. Henry Sampfon Woodfali 
 <{ had told me, in the prefence of a gentleman whom I had 
 if purpofely brought along with me to his houfe, that he 
 4 ‘ knew not of any contributions of Mr. Boyd’s to the 
 “ Publick Advertifer> in the time of Junius; that he had no 
 i( recolle&ion whatever of any letters of Mr. Boyd’s at 
 “ that time. And I reminded Mr. W. Woodfali, that 
 “ his brother Mr. H. S. Woodfali had exprefsly told me 
 “ in his own (Mr. W. Woodfall’s) prefence — that he did 
 not recollect that Mr. Boyd had ever written for the Publick 
 “ Advertifer before the year 1777, when he had fent hhn fome 
 e( letters on the affairs of India; and that although he could 
 Ci not give in to the idea of his having written Junius , that he 
 et notwithjlanding thought him a very able writer.” 
 
 “ That it clearly appeared, therefore, Mr. H. S. Wood- 
 u fall could give no account whatever of upwards of one 
 “ hundred and fifty letters, which Mr. Boyd had adlually 
 (i fent to the Publick Advertifer , in the time of Junius ; — 
 “ and that as a man of his talents, fentiments, and habits, 
 “ could not be fuppofed to have laboured gratuitoufly' for a 
 “ newfpaper for three fuccefjive years, unlefs his writings 
 “ had received the continued encouragement and applaufe 
 “ of the publick, the fair preemption was, that the letters 
 “ which Mr. Boyd fent to the Publick Advertifer , in a dif- 
 v *' guifed hand, and with fuch fcrupulous caution and fe- 
 lt crecy, are thofe very letters which were publilhed in 
 “that paper, under the fignatures of Junius and Philo- 
 Junius , of Lucius and Brutus.” 
 
 The day after the publication of my fecond letter, there 
 appeared in the Morning Chronic/e a letter from Mr. Almon, 
 
 replying 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 284 
 
 replying in ftroirg, but moderate and refpe&ful terms, to 
 Mr. W. Wood fall's unprovoked and wholly unfupported 
 attack on him, and palling over in total lilence the coarfe- 
 nefs of his language. 
 
 Mr. W. Woodtall, however, had now waxed warm in 
 the caufe he had efpoufed, and he loft not a moment in 
 replying both to Mr. Almon’s letter and mine. On the 
 16th of Auguft, a fecond letter from him appeared in the 
 Morning Chronicle , in which he anfwers Mr. Almon, by 
 fhortly telling him, “ that it is natural for the father of a 
 “ falfehood to protect his offspring: and at the very fame time 
 “ complains bitterly of abvje and jcurrility , as well as of my 
 li angry and arrogant letter*.” 
 
 Mr. W. Wooafall, upon finding my facts were not to 
 be controverted, declined all further difcuffion concerning 
 them ; but faid, 44 that he was convinced on grounds not within 
 “ my reach , that Mr. Boyd was not the author of Junius” 
 Thefe grounds, however, he has not deemed it advifeable 
 to flate to the publick ; and all that he urges in his fecond 
 letter, relative to the point at iflue, amounts merely to 
 this, “ that Mr. Boyd could not have written the letters' 
 u of Junius , becaufe his E flays in the Indian Obferver are 
 “ inferior to thofe performances, and becaufe he (Mr. W. 
 44 Woodfall) is of opinion that the manufeript of Junius 
 44 was not a difgulfed hand.” As both thefe obje&ions 
 have been fully confidered and refuted in Mr. Boyd’s Life, 
 it is unneceflhry to notice them again : but there are one 
 
 * I know not that I was arrogant ; I am fure I was far from be- 
 ing angry. Eut Mr. W. Woodfall was probably aware, that anger, 
 like wine, frees the mind from rellraint, and leads us on to fpeak 
 truth boldly ; and therefore judged of th tftate of my mind, , from the 
 truth of my obfervations. 
 
 or 
 
TO THE LIFE. 285 
 
 or two more observations in Mr. W. Woodfall's letter, 
 which for the fake of impartiality I fhail briefly mention. 
 
 He accufes me of having quoted him unfairly, in the 
 following Sentence, becaufe I omitted the words printed 
 in Italicks , Viz : — “That it mull be admitted on all hands 
 “ that Mr. Boyd could not difguife his Style, and leafi of all 
 “ in that moft extraordinaryway of writing above his own reach 
 “ of literary talent for, fays he, the words in Italicks con- 
 vey the whole force of the argument! ! — Now I certainly did 
 omit thefe words , not .becaufe I wilhed to treat him un- 
 fairly, but becaufe I thought their ab Surdity too obvious 
 to require to be pointed out. Cannot Mr. W. Woodfall 
 perceive that when he fays, “ Mr, Boyd could not write 
 “ above his own reach of literary talent ,” it is moft miferably 
 begging the queftion; as it is taking for granted the very 
 point in difeuffion. The queftion was, Whether Mr. 
 Boyd’s talents were, or w^ere not equal to the talk of wri- 
 ting the letters off uniusd And it was therefore neceflary to 
 have refolved that queftion in the cleareft and moft fatis- 
 faHory manner, before he called cn alt hands to admit that Mr. 
 Boyd, by having written the letters of Junius , would have 
 gone beyond his own reach of literary talent. Mr. W. Wood- 
 fall might have called on thofe, who had p re vi 011 fly agreed 
 with him to allow this ; but to commence an argument 
 with declaring that all fide s mu ft admit , as a matter beyond 
 difpute, the very point which that fame argument is in- 
 tended toleftabhfh, is furely the very acjne of abfurdity. 
 
 Mr. William Woodfall next cbferves, “ That the 
 tl writer of Junius lent feveral private letters to his bro- 
 “ ther, fome of them containing letters to individuals of 
 “ diftinguilhed chara&er, which he requefted his brother 
 “ to convey.” And he then calls upon me to point out the 
 perfons to whom thefe letters were addrefled. Now I 
 
 candidly 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 286 
 
 candidly- confefs I do not exactly know either the addrefs 
 or the purport of atl thofe letters ; nor is fuch a piece of 
 knowledge necefTarily conne&ed with this queftion, which 
 is not to difcover to whom Junius addreffed private letters* 
 but who wrote the letters figned Junius. But, if Mr. 
 Woodfall choofes to point out to whom they were written, 
 I am fully perfuaded they will have a tendency ftill far- 
 ther to confirm the pofitive faff that Mr. Boyd was Ju- 
 nius. 
 
 The lafi: letter which appeared in the Morning Chronicle 
 immediately relating to this controverfy was one from 
 Mr. Almon, wherein he juftly obferves, “that Mr. W. 
 “ Woodfall has left the difpute about the perfon of Juni- 
 “ us precifely where he began it; and has been compelled 
 “ to acknowledge that neither he, nor his brother ever 
 “ knew any thing about the real author of Junius. — And 
 ** that when one obferves Mr. W. Woodfall’s boafting of 
 “ his brother having fhewn him every letter of Junius in 
 “ the manufcript, previous to publication, one cannot help 
 “ faying, that Junius was perfedtly right in keeping them 
 “ both in a flate of total ignorance of him.” 
 
 €t Of twodnterefting faffs concerning Junius y neither of 
 “ the Woodfalls had ever the leaf! information, and I fay 
 “ it with confidence, notwithftanding Mr. Woodfall’s un- 
 founded aflumption: one is the reafon, or caufe of Ju- 
 <( nius attacking the Duke of Grafton in a manner fo 
 pointedly and bitterly. It muft have arifen in fome 
 “ provocation real or imaginary. The other is, Junius 
 “ never attacking the Grenvilles.” 
 
 Such are all the material points * of this controverfy, 
 
 * There are one or two circunrdtances mentioned in Mr. Wm, 
 Woodfail’s letters which having had occafion to quote in the Life 
 of Mr. Boyd, I have not thought it necelTary to repeat here. 
 
 which 
 
TO THE LIFE. 
 
 287 
 
 which it will be found I have ftated with impar- 
 tiality, and from which I (hall leave the reader to draw 
 his own conclufion. 
 
 1 beg leave to clofe this account with the following let- 
 ter from Mr. Almon, which I received a few weeks after 
 the controverfy had ceafed, and w r hich will be found to 
 throw additional light on the general queftion. 
 
 Box-Moor, near Hempftead, Herts, 
 Sept. 2d, 1799, 
 
 Dear Sir, 
 
 Your having poftponed the publication of Mr. Boyd’s 
 Life to another feafon, affords me an opportunity to add a 
 few obfervations to thofe contained in my letter of laft 
 year. 
 
 The principal obje&ion made to Mr. Boyd’s being the 
 writer of the letters figned Junius, is, that his talents 
 were inferior to the cornpofition of thofe papers. This is 
 putting the whole objection into as few words as poffible. 
 There are two things neceffary to fupport this objeftion ; 
 one is, that the perfon who makes it fhould be well ac- 
 quainted with Mr. Boyd’s talents ; and the other is, tha£ 
 he fhould be a good judge of literary cornpofition. 
 
 Of Mr. Boyd’s literary talents I have already fpoken in 
 my letter above mentioned ; and therefore I fhall only 
 add, that Mr. W. Woodfall, who has brought this ob- 
 jection forward into the public prints, knew very little of 
 Mr. Boyd, confequently he does not poffefs the firft qua- 
 lification neceffary to fupport his objection. 
 
 3 In 
 
288 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 In a letter, which he has publifhed in one of the pub- 
 lic prints, dated on the 21ft of laft month, he fays, “ With 
 iC regard to what Mr. Almon fays of the poflible envy I 
 “ might entertain of Mr. Boyd's fuperior capacity as a 
 “ parliamentary debate reporter, I will fairly tell him, 
 6t that I do not believe\that Mr. Boyd pofj'efjed any fuch talent .” 
 Every one of Mr. Boyd’s friends know very well, that 
 he pofifefled this talent in a more eminent degree than any 
 other perfon, hitherto heard of. It was no fecret ; he 
 never concealed it. In his ordinary converfation, he 
 would frequently repeat, with aflonifhing accuracy, whole 
 paffages from fpeeches he had heard in both houfes of 
 parliament. It was impoffible to know Mr. Boyd, and 
 not to know the wonderful powers of his memory. — This 
 is the llrongeft proof Mr. Woodfall could give, that he 
 knew nothing of Mr. Boyd’s talents. 
 
 As to Mr. Wood fall’s judgment on literary compofition, 
 I fhall not difturb it: but I believe that thofe who know 
 him bell, will be inclined to doubt it moft. His pre- 
 tended knowledge of Junius ; or who was not Junius , 
 amounts to nothing. He never knew who was Junius . I 
 faid it before, and I repeat it now 7 . 
 
 My reafons for believing the letters of Junius to have 
 been written by Mr. Boyd, you have in my former letter. 
 But lince fending you that letter, further reafons have oc- 
 curred to me; which I (hall now fubmit to you. 
 
 During the time of the original publication of Junius's 
 letters, it was common amongft perfons ot diftin£tion, to 
 afk each other, w 7 hat could be the caufe of the writer’s fo 
 particularly attacking the Duke of Grafton? — At this time 
 Mr. Boyd relided in London, and lived on the mod friendly- 
 terms of intimacy, and even confidence, with Mr. Harry 
 Macleane, the younger brother of Mr. Lauchlin Macleane, 
 
 who 
 
TO THE LIFE. 289 
 
 who was fecretary to Lord Shelburne, when that noble 
 Lord was fecretary of date. About three months before 
 the publication of thefe letters commenced, Lord Shel- 
 burne was removed from his office of fecretary of ftate, 
 and confequently Mr. Macleane loft his place. This was 
 a great difappointment to Mr. Macleane, who had fair 
 profpe&s. The removal of Lord Shelburne, was the a£l 
 of the Duke of Grafton ; or rather (in our conftitutional 
 language) it was done by the advice of the Duke of Graf- 
 ton, who was then firft lord of the treafury. I fear this 
 will be thought a prefumptuous affertion ; but when a 
 man puts his name to a writing, he fhould be pretty cer- 
 tain, that what he fays is true. Whoever has accefs to the 
 India Papers, will find, in the Minutes of Confultation on 
 the twenty-fecond day of January 1776, 1 A fhort Memo- 
 
 * rial of Services rendered to the Nabob of Arcot, by 
 
 * John Macpherfon, Efq. whom he (the Nabob) fent 
 
 * upon a fecret commiffion to his Majefty’s firft mini- 
 ‘ fter of ftate in 1767.’ The Memorial fets out with 
 faying, “Upon my arrival at the court of Britain to- 
 “ wards the latter end of the year 1768, I found two im- 
 “ portant changes had happened in adminiftration ; the 
 “ Earl of Chatham had retired in fuch a manner from 
 “ power, as convinced the molt intelligent upon thefe fub- 
 “ je£fs, that there was but little profpefl of his ever again 
 “ pofleffing a'lead in adminiftration ; the Earl of Shel- 
 “ burne had been difmiffed, at the injligatlon of the Duke 
 “ of Grafton, from the office of fecretary of ftate*.” 
 
 The 
 
 * This memorial contains feveral curious faffs; and amongft 
 others, the following: 
 
 ‘ I obtained from my friend the Earl of Warwick, a letter of in- 
 trodudlion to his Grace [the Duke of Grafton]. 1 waited upon 
 his Grace, and prefented him with a general date of India, and a plan 
 by which the concerns of that country might be turned to the pub- 
 
 t lick 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 29O 
 
 The dtfmijfion of Lord Shelburne (as it is called in the 
 Memorial) took place in the month of O&ober 1 768, and 
 the firft letter of Junius was publifhed in the month of 
 January 1769. At this time fcarcely a day paffed, that 
 Mr. Harry Macleane did not call upon Mr. Boyd, to de- 
 tail the news and politicks, communicated to him by his 
 brother, with whom Mr. Boyd often dined. At this time 
 Mr. Grattan was alfo in London, and they affociated to- 
 gether in the years 1768, 1769, 1770, and 1771; particu- 
 larly Mr. Grattan and Mr. Boyd, who were always on 
 terms of the clofeft friendfhip. 
 
 Mr. Lauchlin Macleane was patronized by Lord Shel- 
 burne, Mr. Grattan by Lord Charlemont, who brought 
 him into the Irifh parliament; but Mr. Boyd had no pa- 
 tron ; he was folicitous of the friendfhip of Lord Temple, 
 and he would have obtained it, if that noble Lord had 
 lived a little longer. 
 
 lick advantage. The letter [from the Nabob] and credential 
 
 prefents were then presented : the anfwer of the Duke of Grafton, 
 did honour to the beft of kings, and the firft of nations.* 
 
 “ Sir, 
 
 “ It is my fincere difpofition, that the Nabob fhould have every 
 fupport that is confident with the power and interefts of the 
 crown to give. I will gladly receive from you every propofal upon 
 that fubjett, and warmly reprefent them to my Sovereign ; and I 
 defire you to believe, that the Nabob’s intereftruns no rifle from my 
 want of caution ; if you write to him, inform him of my withes for 
 his profperity, and explain to him, that I will not accept his pre- 
 fents, however great nny refpedf for him is; I will have no return 
 for the juft regard I owe him as a man, but my own fenfibility. It 
 is from my fidelity to mymafter, and duty to my country, that I 
 will only ferve him as minifter. ” 
 
 1 Overwhelmed with the noblenefs of this anfwer, I took up the 
 prefents, and offered them in the name of the Nabob to his Grace’s 
 fecretary, Mr. Bradfhaw, who alfo refufed them.’ 
 
 Previous 
 
TO THE LIFE. 
 
 29I 
 
 Previous to the publication of Junius's letters, the 
 Grenvilles were all reconciled to each other, and to Lord 
 Chatham. It was at this time the general opinion of all 
 ranks, that thefe perfons mull fucceed to the higheft de- 
 partments of the date, whenever a change of minifters 
 took place. 
 
 In this lhort narrative, it may be prefumed, that two 
 points are explained, which have often excited furprife ; 
 one is, the apparent, or probable caufe of attacking the 
 Duke of Grafton; the other is, the apparent, or probable 
 motive for fparing the Grenvilles. 
 
 Whether MefTrs. Macleane and Mr. Grattan contribu- 
 ted to the compofition of thefe letters, is a matter only 
 known to themfelves. Perhaps they did not, otherwife 
 than by converfation. Perhaps Mr. Boyd did not choofe 
 to truft them with his fecret, and therefore he might truly 
 fay, ‘‘That he was the sole depofitory of his own fecret, 
 “ and it fhould perilh with him.” If we admit this 
 declaration to be true, and hitherto there has been no rea- 
 fon to doubt it, circumftances are the only proofs which can 
 be offered : and fuch circumftances as have fallen within my 
 knowledge, I have produced. They are fufficient to con- 
 vince me. If any perfon has better proofs, that fome other 
 gentleman was the author ol thofe letters, let him produce 
 them ; but until they are produced, I (hall continue in my 
 prefent opinion. 
 
 I am, 
 
 Sir, 
 
 Your mofl obedient fervant, 
 
 J. ALMON.