pen of a political writer is able to produce such important effects? A little calm reflection might have shewn you, that national calamities do not arise from the description, but from the real character and conduct of ministers. To have supported your assertion, you should have proved that the present ministry are unquestionably the best and brightest characters of the kingdom: and that, if the affections of the colonies have been alienated, if Corsica* has been shamefully abandoned, if commerce languishes, if public credit is threatened with a new debt, and your own Manilla ransom most dishonourably given upt, it has all been owing to the

• Corsica, in modern times, was first subjugated by the Genoese, who made use of so much insolence and oppression, as to induce the natives to throw off the yoke, and endeavour to recover their independence. The contest was long and severe, and the Corsicans were reduced to beggary in the generous struggle. Nieuhoff and Paoli chiefly figured as leaders of the Corsicans, the first of whom was actually elected king, but could not maintain his throne against the invaders. The Corsicans applied to many foreign courts for assistance, and among the rest to Great Britain; and Lord Shelburne (afterwards Marquis of Lansdown) was one of the warmest supporters of their cause, and most desirous, when in administration, to engage in it. But his colleagues opposed him, and the cause of Corsica was abandoned, though the citizens of London contributed largely to its support. Yet the Genoese could not totally subdue it; and in consequence they sold it to France to be subdued by the French arms: and the tyranny which was at first exercised over it by the Genoese, it was now doomed to suffer from the French. Reader, mark the result!-Corsica is at this moment reaping an ample revenge: for through the medium of Bonaparte she is now loading both France and Genoa with as severe a tyranny as her. self ever submitted to from either. EDIT.

† In the preceding war with Spain, Sir William (then Col. Draper) had commanded an expedition against the Spanish settlements in the Philippine Isles. It succeeded completely; and the capital of Manilla was taken by assault. Yet the generous conquerors, instead of plundering the city, consented to accept for the value of the spoil, bills drawn upon the Spanish government adequate to its supposed amount. These bills the Spanish government undertook to pay, but dishonourably forfeited its word on their becoming due. Sir William Draper, on his return from India, repeatedly pressed the English minister to interpose upon the subject, on behalf of himself and his fellow-soldiers. The English minister however did not interpose: Draper was personally rewarded by an election into the order of the Bath, in conjunction with certain pecuniary emoluments referred to in this correspondence; while his colleague, Admiral Cornish, together with the soldiers and sailors under their commands were suffered to live and die altogether without redress. EDIT.

malice of political writers, who will not suffer the best and brightest of characters (meaning still the present ministry) to take a single right step for the honour or interest of the nation. But it seems you were a little tender of coming to particulars. Your conscience insinuated to you, that it would be prudent to leave the characters of Grafton, North, Hillsborough, Weymouth, and Mansfield, to shift for themselves; and truly, Sir William, the part you have undertaken is at least as much as you are equal to.

Without disputing Lord Granby's courage, we are yet to learn in what articles of military knowledge nature has been so very liberal to his mind. If you have served with him, you ought to have pointed out some instances of able disposition and well-concerted enterprize, which might fairly be attributed to his capacity as a general. It is you, Sir William, who make your friend appear aukward and ridiculous, by giving him a laced suit of tawdry qualifications, which nature never intended him to wear.

You say, he has acquired nothing but honour in the field. Is the Ordnance nothing? Are the Blues nothing? Is the command of the army, with all the patronage annexed to it, nothing? Where he got these nothings I know not; but you at least ought to have told us where he deserved them.

As to his bounty, compassion, &c. it would have been but little to the purpose, though you had proved all that you have asserted. I meddle with nothing but his character as commander in chief; and though I acquit him of the baseness of selling commissions, I still assert that his military cares have never extended beyond the disposal of vacancies; and I am justified by the complaints of the whole army, when I say that, in this distribution, he consults nothing but parliamentary interests, or the gratification of his immediate dependants. As to his servile submission to the reigning ministry, let me ask, whether he did not desert the cause of the whole army, when he suffered Sir Jeffery Amherst to be sacrificed*, and what share he had in recalling that officer to

* See upon this subject our author's Miscellaneous Letters subscribed Lucius, and particularly that of Atticus, Letter LI. EDIT.

the service? Did he not betray the just interests of the army, in permitting Lord Percy to have a regiment? And does he not at this moment give up all character and dignity as a gentleman, in receding from his own repeated declarations in favour of Mr. Wilkes?

In the two next articles I think we are agreed. You candidly admit, that he often makes such promises as it is a virtue in him to violate, and that no man is more assiduous to provide for his relations at the public expence. I did not urge the last as an absolute vice in his disposition, but to prove that a careless disinterested spirit is no part of his character; and as to the other, I desire it may be remembered, that I never descended to the indecency of inquiring into his convivial hours. It is you, Sir William Draper, who have taken pains to represent your friend in the character of a drunken landlord, who deals out his promises as liberally as his liquor, and will suffer no man to leave his table either sorrowful or sober. None but an intimate friend, who must frequently have seen him in these unhappy, disgraceful moments, could have described him so well.

The last charge, of the neglect of the army, is indeed the most material of all. I am sorry to tell you, Sir William, that, in this article, your first fact is false; and as there is nothing more painful to me than to give a direct contradiction to a gentleman of your appearance, I could wish that, in your future publications, you would pay a greater attention to the truth of your premises, before you suffer your genius to hurry you to a conclusion. Lord Ligonier did not deliver the army (which you, in classical language, are pleased to call a palladium) into Lord Granby's hands. It was taken from him much against his inclination, some two or three years before Lord Granby was commander in chief. As to the state of the army, I should be glad to know where you have received your intelligence. Was it in the rooms at Bath, or at your retreat at Clifton? The reports of reviewing generals comprehend only a few regiments in England, which, as they are immediately under the royal inspection, are perhaps in some tolerable order. But do you know any

thing of the troops in the West-Indies, the Mediterranean, and North America, to say nothing of a whole army absolutely ruined in Ireland? Inquire a little into facts, Sir William, before you publish your next panegyric upon Lord Granby, and believe me, you will find there is a fault at head-quarters, which even the acknowledged care and abilities of the adjutant-general cannot correct.*

Permit me now, Sir William, to address myself personally to you, by way of thanks for the honour of your correspondence. You are by no means undeserving of notice; and it may be of consequence even to Lord Granby to have it determined, whether or no the man who has praised him so lavishly, be himself deserving of praise. When you returned to Europe, you zealously undertook the cause of that gallant army, by whose bravery at Manilla your own fortune had been established. You complained, you threatened, you even appealed to the public in print. By what accident did it happen, that in the midst of all this bustle, and all these clamours for justice to your injured troops, the name of the Manilla ransom was suddenly buried in a profound, and, since that time, an uninterrupted silence? Did the ministry suggest any motives to you, strong enough to tempt a man of honour, to desert and betray the cause of his fellow-soldiers? Was it that blushing ribband, which is now the perpetual ornament of your person? Or was it that regiment, which you afterwards (a thing unprecedented among soldiers) sold to colonel Gisborne? Or was it that government, the full pay of which you are contented to hold, with the half-pay of an Irish colonel? And do you now, after a retreat not very like that of Scipio, presume to intrude yourself, unthought-of, uncalled-for, upon the patience of the public? Are your flatteries of the commander in chief directed to another regiment, which you may again dispose of on the same honourable terms? We know your prudence, Sir William, and I should be sorry to stop your preferment.

JUNIUS.

* Adjutant General Harvey. EDIT.

VOL. I.

G

LETTER TV.

TO THE PRINTER OF THE PUBLIC ADVERTISER

SIR,

17 February. 1766.

I RECEIVED JUNIUS's favour last night; he is dietermined to keep his advantage by the help of his mask; it is an exce lent protection, it has saved many a man from an untimely end. But whenever he will be honest enough to lay it asite, avow himself, and produce the face which has so long lunked behind it, the world will be able to judge of his motives for writing such infamous invectives. His real name will discover his freedom and independency, or his servility to 2 faction. Disappointed ambition, resentment for defeated hopes, and desire of revenge, assume but too often the ap pearance of public spirit; but be his designs wicked or charitable, JUNIUS should learn that it is possible to condemn measures, without a barbarous and criminal outrage against men. JUNIUS delights to mangle carcases with a hatchet; his language and instrument have a great connexion with Claremarket, and, to do him justice, he handles his weapon most admirably. One would imagine he had been taught to throw it by the savages of America. It is therefore high time for me to step in once more to shield my friend from this merciless weapon, although I may be wounded in the attempt. But I soust first ask JUNIUS, by what forced analogy and construction the moments of convivial mirth are made to signify isdecency, a violation of engagements, a drunken landlord, and a desire that every one in company should be drunk likewise*? He must have culled all the flowers of St. Giles's and Billingsgate to have produced such a piece of

• Whether such a conclusion were forced or natural from Sir William's description of his friend, JusTUS, it seems, was not the only person who deduced it, if we may judge from a dispute the Knight of the Bath was involved in upon this very subject, with two other invisible correspondents, of whom the one signed himself Neocles, and the other the Ghost, and who wrote in the same newspaper (The Public Advertiser). To the Arst correspondent, Sir William replies as follows.

SIR,