John Cannon, ed. The Letters of Junius. Pp. xxxiii, 643. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1978. $49.50

• Published date: 01 January 1979
• Date: 01 January 1979
• Author: Francesco Cordasco
• DOI: 10.1177/000271627944100128
• Subject Matter: Articles

209

with

his

prejudices.

He

points

out,

for

example,

that

Farraday

investigated

the

Haswell

mine

disaster

at

the

home

secre-

tary’s

request,

and

concluded

that

it

was

an

unavoidable

accident,

thus

convert-

ing

a

&dquo;highly

charged

political

issue&dquo;

into

a

&dquo;technical

difficulty.&dquo;

But

Far-

raday

had

missed

the

essential

problem.

According

to

the

author,

&dquo;the

cause

of

mine

disasters

was

not

simply

a

dysfunc-

tion

in

the

Davy

lamp,

but

an

industrial

economy

based

on

profit

and

produc-

tion&dquo;

(p.

175).

Unfortunately,

Berman

gives

little

documentation

for

this

thesis,

which

seems

either

unprovable

or

in

historical

terms

not

very

meaningful.

For

what

industrial

economy,

whether

pro-

moted

by

private

capital

or

state

capital,

has

not

been

based

on

profit

and

pro-

duction ?

For

the

most

part,

Berman

sticks

to

his

major

thesis

and

does

not

allow

such

biases

to

intrude.

The

result

is

a

sound,

scholarly,

and

very

interesting

work.

FRANKLIN

B.

WICKWIRE

University

of

Massachusetts

Amherst

JOHN

CANNON,

ed.

The

Letters

of Junius

.

Pp.

xxxiii,

643.

Oxford:

Clarendon

Press,

1978.

$49.50.

&dquo;Junius&dquo;

was

a

pseudonym

for

the

writer

of

a

series

of

letters

opposing

King

George

III

and

the

policies

of

the

ministries

of

the

Duke

of

Grafton

and

Lord

North.

The

first

Junius

letter

ap-

peared

on

January

21,

1769

in

the

Public

Advertiser,

a

London

daily

news-

paper

published

by

Henry

Sampson

Woodfall.

Although

the

&dquo;acme

of

audac-

ity&dquo;

was

reached

in

the

famous

letter

to

King

George

III

of

December

19,

1769,

the

series

did

not

come

to

an

end

until

January

21,

1772.

The

Letters

of

Junius

have

survived

as

an

English

classic

and

owe

their

influence

to

three

factors:

(1)

the

high

Whig

philosophy

espoused

in

the

Letters-the

freedom

of

the

press-

and

their

attacks

on

Tory

policies

and

politicians

of

the

times;

(2)

the

literary

power

of

the

Letters,

possibly

the

most

effective

use

of

slanderous

polemic

ever

employed

in

English

political

contro-

versy ;

and

(3)

the

mystery

surrounding

their

authorship.

Cannon

(University

of

Newcastle-

Upon-Tyne)

has

produced

a

sumptuous

edition

of

the

Letters:

it

is

meticulously

edited,

the

most

complete

edition

as

yet

to

appear,

and

the

first

new

edition

of

the

Letters

since

C.

W.

Everett’s

edition

of

1927.

It

is

an

auspicious

event

in

the

huge

literature

(cf.,

F.

Cordasco,

A

Junius

Bibliography,

rev.

ed.,

1974)

which

surrounds

Junius

and

his

cele-

brated

Letters

since

it

affirms

the

con-

tinuing

importance

of

the

Letters

for

the

study

of the

political,

social,

and

intel-

lectual

history

of

18th

century

England.

No

expense

has

been

spared

by

the

pub-

lisher,

and

the

volume

is

an

excellent

example

of

the

superb

typography

of the

distinguished

Oxford

imprint

which

in

1978

celebrates

the

quincentenary

of

its

founding.

Cannon

has

based

his

edition

on

the

collected

edition

of

the

Letters

author-

ized

and

prepared

for

the

press

by

Junius,

which

Woodfall

published

in

1772;

he

has

not

chosen

to

use

the

text

of the

Letters

as

originally

printed

in

the

Public

Advertiser

&dquo;since

the

author

added

many

important

explana-

tory

footnotes,

expanded

obscure

ref-

erences,

and

corrected

certain

misprints

and

faults

of

style.&dquo;

Yet,

it

should

be

noted

that

a

set

of

the

Public

Advertiser

letters

exists

and

is

deposited

in

the

London

Library

(14

St.

James

Square,

S.

W.

1),

and

is

complete

for

the

criti-

cal

years

(1769-1772)

of

the

Junius

corpus.

Also,

Cannon

has

included

necessary

and

valuable

appendices:

private

Letters

between

Junius

and

Henry

Sampson

Woodfall;

private

Let-

ters

between

Junius

and

John

Wilkes;

private

Letters

to

Lord

Chatham

and

George

Grenville;

additional

and

false

Junius

Letters;

miscellaneous

Letters;

comparison

of

the

1772

Collected

Edi-

tion

with

the

Letters

as

First

Printed

in

the

Public

Advertiser;

a

List

of

Signals

to

Junius

in

the

Public

Advertiser;

a

Note

on

Authorship.

Cannon’s

&dquo;A

Note

on

Authorship&dquo;

must

be

read

with

caution;

he

is

not

in-

correct

in

observing

that

&dquo;I

do

not

doubt

that

my

conclusions

will

appear

to

some

readers

woefully

wrong-headed.&dquo;

The

note

is

not

without

value

in

pro-