Chapter XIV: Appendix

Those who have never examined the claims advanced in favor of Philip Francis, may be benefited by this Appendix. I think it will herein be made out, that his case has been founded on spurious and unauthenticated records. The case may be stated as follows:

On March 3, 1772, there was published, under the supervision of Junius, a _genuine_ edition of the Letters. In his Preface, he states: "The encouragement given to a _multitude_ of _spurious_ mangled publications of the Letters of Junius persuades me that a complete edition, corrected and improved by the author, will be favorably received.... This edition contains _all_ the letters of Junius, Philo Junius," etc.

Forty years after this edition was published, when Mr. H. S. Woodfall, the publisher, was dead, his son issued a new edition, in which he collected from the files of the Advertiser what he supposed to be other letters of Junius, and classed them as Miscellaneous Letters. This new edition, which is called Woodfall's, was first published in 1812. Upon the heel of this edition, John Taylor published his "Junius Identified," supporting his claims in favor of Francis nearly or quite altogether on the Miscellaneous Letters. Till then the claims of Francis were never brought forward. I now proceed to show that these Miscellaneous Letters are not all genuine.

1. They show in many instances internal evidence of fraud. Private Note No. 61 is as follows:

"SUNDAY, May 3, 1772.

"I am in no manner of hurry about the books. I hope the sale has
answered. I think it will always be a saleable book. The inclosed
is fact, and I wish it could be printed to-morrow. It is not worth
announcing. The proceedings of this wretch are unaccountable.
There must be some mystery in it, which I hope will soon be
discovered, to his confusion. Next to the Duke of Grafton, I
verily believe that the blackest heart in the kingdom belongs to
Lord Barrington."

The above note accompanied a letter signed _Scotus_, published in the Advertiser, May 4, 1772. Now, mark! The private note which accompanied this letter of _Scotus_ says: "_This is fact._" And the letter of _Scotus_ opens as follows: "To Lord Barrington: My lord, _I am a Scotchman_," etc. He then goes on, without dignity or grace, to talk bluntly to Lord Barrington, and with an egotistical defense of the Scotch. He says: "There is courage at least in _our_ composition." "For the future, my lord, be more sparing of your reflections on the Scotch." This letter and the note accompanying it are yet in existence in the original, and are called genuine. Now, that they are forgeries is quite evident from the whole spirit of Junius in regard to the Scotch. In