Junius ceased to write under this signature in the Public Advertiser, when he was extremely embarrassed in his circumstances.Eighthly, She also says, that during the same year (1772) Junius's Letters were republished in a book, with a dedication, preface, and notes, which publication seemed to relieve Mr. Boyd's mind from a burden; and that, after that publication, he never was at so much pains to conceal from her the contents of the letter which he occasionally transmitted to the Public Advertiser-Ninthly, She moreover says, that on the very day whereon the above-mentioned edition of Junius's Letters was published, he brought home with him a copy of the same book, and presented it to her with the kindest animation in his face; and that, in looking over the pages, she was much struck at seeing some anecdotes of Lord Irnham, Miss Davis, and Mr. Nisbet, one of her guardians, which she had communicated in confidence to Mr. Boyd, and which she knew had been very studiously kept secret by the parties concerned.*Tenthly, She finally says, that she repeatedly told Mr. Boyd that she had strong suspicions he was Junius; but, to all she said on that subject, he was totally silent." p. 62-65.)

The whole of this detail is merely circumstantial, and although Mr. Chalmers seems to think it conclusive, he must allow us to say that we by no means concur in his opinion. At the time Junius was producing his letters Boyd was probably also a writer, under various signatures, in the newspapers on the same side of the question, though none of his compositions have been since avowed; and most of the facts above stated are perfectly reconcileable with the interest he must feel for a brother politician, at that time making so important a figure in the world: the disguising of his hand was, perhaps, a necessary expedient, especially if like Chatterton, he wrote at the same moment on both sides of the question; and when he told Mrs. Boyd with animation that Junius was announced for to-morrow, it might only proceed from the curiosity the letters of that concealed individual excited more especially in Boyd, who was a professed admirer, and even imitator of his style: the same obvious remark will apply equally to the edition of the letters of Junius, which he brought home on their publication. In short, it may be fairly asked, whether if Boyd were in truth the author of the Letters of Junius, his wife must not necessarily have become acquainted with many more important particulars than the scanty gleanings

"Those anecdotes were introduced into, and upon, Junius's Letter, No. LXVII, dated the 27th of November, 1771, being the last letter ad dressed to the Duke of Grafton."

from which Mr. Chalmers draws his inference? The following additional piece of evidence deserves a place from its singularity.

"We are now arrived at the last step of this concatenation of evidence. When the Jury has heard all the previous circumstances of a criminal case, what remains for their decision when the confession of the culprit is laid before them? Mons. Bonnecarrère, late minister-plenipotentiary, director-general of the foreign department, under Louis XVI, being sent on a confidential mission to India, became acquainted with Hugh Boyd, at Madras, in 1785: and going afterwards to Calcutta, Bonnecarrère, instead of being treated as a spy, was received into the house of Sir John Macpherson, with all the good-nature and genuine hospitality which is so natural to that admirable man. Here Hugh Boyd joined him, during the same year; when the familiarity between Bonnecarrère and Boyd was carried up to friendship. It was in this residence, and on that occasion, that Hugh Boyd made a confidential declaration to Bonnecarrère, on conditian that he should not reveal the secret to the Governor-General of Bengal, nor to any one else, during_Boyd's life, 'that he was the real author of Junius's letters.' M. Bonnecarrère seems to have acted honourably towards Boyd. He kept this secret, which was so important to Boyd, till he was assured that the author of Junias was no more, and could neither be injured by his unfaithfulness, nor vexed by his garrulity. He made the first mention of the secret to the respectable character, in whose hospitable mansion the interesting trust was reposed in him. M. Bonnecarrère has recently published a solemn declaration of the same fact in le Journal des Débats. But I do not perceive that he has added any material fact, in addition to the important secret which he revealed in 1802 + to Sir John Macpherson; except giving a sort of narrative of the manner in which he became acquainted with Boyd, and the mode how their acquaintance, by various attentions, was carried up to friendship." (p. 70-71.)

What reliance is to be placed upon the memory of M.) Bonnecarrère, or upon the declaration of Boyd we know not: the date assigned is 1785, about twelve years after the appearance of the last of the Letters of Junius, when all exertions to discover the author had failed. We do not see any reason for casting an imputation upon the veracity of Boyd, excepting that he does not seem to have possessed much steady principle, and, as a party writer, it was his interest to make himself appear to the foreigner of as great importance as possible. It is worth adding, that Lord Macartney, who had many opportunities of observing and estimating the talents of Boyd, was constantly of opinion against the hypothesis of Mr. Chalmers, notwithstanding

all the evidence supplied, and chiefly upon the ground that nothing could be produced written by Boyd before the appearance of the Letters of Junius, to shew that he was capable of being their author. This preliminary and, we think, fatal objection, Mr. Chalmers answers by quoting eight lines written by Boyd, in or about 1768, upon the death of Sterne: he admits that this is the only specimen of his candidate's composition that he can furnish before 1770, but with a sort of ludicrous gravity he adds, "I submit the above stanzas as superior to any of the epistles of Junius." That may be, but where is the resemblance, or how will he institute a comparison? the reader will be curious to see these verses and we subjoin them.

"And is no friendly mourner near!
The last sad office to assume;
O'er his cold grave to drop a tear,

Or 'pluck the nettle from his tomb?'

"Forgive me, STERNE, if from thy line,
The sympathetic hint I drew;

The feeling heart must copy thine,

The tender mourner think like you." (p. 77.)

Can Mr. Chalmers mean seriously to contend that these lines warrant the inference, that the writer of them was competent to the production of the Letters of Junius ?

ART. VI.-The Life of Raffaello Sanzio Da Urbino: By the Author of the Life of Michael Angelo. And the Characters of the most celebrated Painters of Italy. By Sir JOSHUA REYNOLDS. 8vo. pp. 230. London. Murray.

1816.

THIS is unfortunately a handsome little volume; having the external form of an original work it has been laid before us officially, and we do not, therefore, feel ourselves at liberty to lay it aside altogether without notice, though it appears to belong in part to two kinds of books, each of which is allowed to pass unnoticed by all critics and reviewers: we were, indeed, not suffered to remain long in uncertainty concerning the character of this publication,--for thus says the preface

"This Biographical Tract is published as a means of directing the public attention to the highest excellence in Historical Painting, and to point out what ought to be expected from the great Works of CRIT. REV. VOL. V. Feb. 1817.

X

Raffaello in the Vatican, by those who now have an opportunity of enlarging their views by visiting Italy and Rome.

"That this small Book might be rendered still more useful, the Characters of the most celebrated Painters of Italy, by Sir Joshua Reynolds, are added; which, as far as they extend, will be a sure guide; for what he says of Michael Angelo, might be truly said of himself, that he was the bright luminary from whom Painting borrowed a new lustre, and under whose hands it assumed a new appearance, and became another and a superior art." (p. v—vi.)

In fact, nearly half the volume is reprint, in a convenient shape, of Sir Joshua Reynolds's judgment concerning the great masters of painting. At the same time, the professed object of the book is to serve as a sort of guide or manual, or companion for travellers to Rome. Books of this latter description are very general; there is not a city in England which has not its guide to the cathedral at least, generally printed very humbly and at a humble price,—a book which every traveller is anxious to procure while he is viewing the curiosities of the place, and generally leaves behind him there. And, since the Peace, numerous guides to Paris, Italy, Holland, Waterloo, &c. &c. have appeared; we did not expect to meet with the name of any respectable publisher to such a book; nor that a gentleman would confess himself its foster-father who could refer to a work of respectability as proceeding from himself.

Rome is richly furnished with publications of a higher description than those we have mentioned, but comprehending the same objects; and it contains a body of men well bred and well instructed, whose profession it is to assist the traveller in enlarging his views in that glorious and unparalleled city. We must add, however, that we would sooner trust the traveller to the lowest lacquai de place which the city affords, than to a Cicerone, who should commence his instructions by reminding the English visitor that, however respectable such artists as Raphael and Michael Angelo were, still painting was an inferior art under their hands, compared with what it became under the hands of the late President of the English Royal Academy!!!

That a gentleman who has devoted time and labour in the practice of any one of the fine arts, who has been led to dwell with the intense contemplation of a critical biographer, on the works of one of the great heroes of art, who has resided, during some of the most susceptible years of his life, in that wonderful spot, in which are crowded together more memorials of human greatness, more monuments

of the most sublime and perfect exercise of human intellect and genius, than all Europe besides can produce; that after all this he can so appreciate what he has had such means of comprehending and feeling, may serve to console those who have not had the happiness of enjoying the privilege of one pilgrimage to the eternal city. We are utterly at a loss to conceive in what sense painting is a superior art as it is exercised by Sir Joshua Reynolds. We mean no disrespect to a man whose memory ought to be protected by his countryman, for he was the acknowledged chief of his brother artists in his own age, but we protest against an hyperbole of praise which, if it could pass into a national judgment, would render us objects of derision to the well educated in all Europe. The fact undoubtedly is, that with the great men already named, and their cotemporaries, painting rose at once to an heighth, the contemplation of which has filled posterity with admiration and wonder; and that it was consecrated to the noblest uses to which any art can be applied; or perverted, a rigid protestant, with iconoclastic propensities, might exclaim. We do not mean to argue this question. It may be true, that the pernicious errors of the Roman Catholic Church have been fostered by the charm thrown over some of its peculiar sentiments by their great painters. The excessive reverence, utterly unwarranted by scripture, paid to the person of the Madonna is justified to the eye-and through the eye to the heart, by that astonishing series of paintings by Raphael alone, (to say nothing of the other great painters), each of which expresses, with the most fascinating and pathetic beauty, some one of the fine features of that mysterious combination of womanly graces. Braun, in his "Life and Works of Raphael," published at Wiesbaden, 1815, has, with a care and exactness, which our author ought to have copied, as he was resolved to do something, enumerated about forty Madonnas by Raphael. The greater number exhibit her in the subordinate character of the virginmother-the mother worshipping her child; while several of his more elaborate and perfect works represent her as the queen of heaven, resplendent in the glory of an appalling beauty.

Such is the high excellence of these works-such their overwhelming charm, that if the power of reasoning is not taken away in their presence, the desire to exercise it is lost, and the understanding soon tolerates what the heart excuses. The doctrine of the immaculate conception (surely