54 Johnson and the graces. [A.D. 1776. a woman sitting in company to put out her legs before her as most men do, we should be tempted to kick them in.' No man was a more attentive and nice observer of behaviour in those in whose company he happened to be, than Johnson; or, however strange it may seem to many, had a higher estimation of its refinements'. Lord Eliot informs me, that one day when Johnson and he were at dinner at a gentleman's house in London, upon Lord Chesterfield's Letters being mentioned, Johnson surprized the company by this sentence: 'Every man of any education would rather be called a rascal, than accused of deficiency in the graces.' Mr. Gibbon, who was present, turned to a lady who knew Johnson well, and lived much with him, and in his quaint manner, tapping his box, addressed her thus: Don't you think, Madam, (looking towards Johnson,) that among all your acquaintance, you could find one exception?' acquiesce2. The lady smiled, and seemed to 1 'We were talking of Dr. Barnard, the Provost of Eton. "He was the only man," says Mr. Johnson quite seriously, "that did justice to my good breeding; and you may observe that I am well-bred to a degree of needless scrupulosity. No man," continued he, not observing the amazement of his hearers, "no man is so cautious not to interrupt another; no man thinks it so necessary to appear attentive when others are speaking; no man so steadily refuses preference to himself, or so willingly bestows it on another, as I do; no man holds so strongly as I do the necessity of ceremony, and the ill effects which follow the breach of it; yet people think me rude; but Barnard did me justice." Piozzi's Anec. p. 36. On p. 258, Mrs. Piozzi writes:No one was indeed so attentive not to offend in all such sort of things as Dr. Johnson; nor so careful to maintain the ceremonies of life; and though he told Mr. Thrale once, that he had never sought to please till past thirty years old, con sidering the matter as hopeless, he had been always studious not to make enemies by apparent preference of himself.' See Boswell's Hebrides, Oct. 27, 1773, where Johnson said: Sir, I look upon myself as a very polite man.' 2 The younger Colman in his boyhood met Johnson and Gibbon. 'Johnson was in his rusty brown and his black worsteads, and Gibbon in a suit of flowered velvet, with a bag and sword. He condescended, once or twice in the course of the evening, to talk with me ;—the great historian was light and playful, suiting his matter to the capacity of the boy; but it was done more sua [sic]; still his mannerism prevailed; still he tapped his snuff-box; still he smirked, and smiled, and rounded his periods with the same air of good-breeding, as if he were conversing with men. His mouth, mellifluous as Plato's, was a round hole, nearly in the centre of his visage.' Random Records, i. 121. 'I read Aetat. 67.] Two notes on HAMLET. 55 'I read (said he,) Sharpe's letters on Italy over again, when I was at Bath. There is a great deal of matter in them'.' 'Mrs. Williams was angry that Thrale's family did not send regularly to her every time they heard from me while I was in the Hebrides. Little people are apt to be jealous but they should not be jealous; for they ought to consider, that superiour attention will necessarily be paid to superiour fortune or rank. Two persons may have equal merit, and on that account may have an equal claim to attention; but one of them may have also fortune and rank, and so may have a double claim.' Talking of his notes on Shakspeare, he said, 'I despise those who do not see that I am right in the passage where as is repeated, and “asses of great charge" introduced. That on "To be, or not to be," is disputable".' A gentleman, whom I found sitting with him one morning, said, that in his opinion the character of an infidel was more detestable than that of a man notoriously guilty of an atrocious crime. I differed from him, because we are surer of the odiousness of the one, than of the errour of the other. JOHNSON. 'Sir, I agree with him; for the infidel would be guilty of any crime. if he were inclined to it.' 'Many things which are false are transmitted from book to book, and gain credit in the world. One of these is the cry against the evil of luxury. Now the truth is, that luxury Samuel Sharp's Letters from Italy were published in 1766. See ante, ii. 57, note 2, for Baretti's reply to them. It may be observed, that Mr. Malone, in his very valuable edition of Shakspeare, has fully vindicated Dr. Johnson from the idle censures which the first of these notes has given rise to. The interpretation of the other passage, which Dr. Johnson allows to be disputable, he has clearly shown to be erroneous. BosWELL. The first note is on the line in Hamlet, act v. sc. 2— 'And many such like as's of great charge.' Johnson says:-'A quibble is intended between as the conditional particle, and ass the beast of burthen.' 'To be, or not to be, that is the is thus paraphrased by Johnson :'Before I can form any rational scheme of action under this pressure of distress, it is necessary to decide whether, after our present state, we are to be or not to be.' produces 56 The benefits of luxury. [A.D. 1776. produces much good'. Take the luxury of buildings in London. Does it not produce real advantage in the conveniency and elegance of accommodation, and this all from the exertion of industry? People will tell you, with a melancholy face, how many builders are in gaol. It is plain they are in gaol, not for building; for rents are not fallen.—A man gives half a guinea for a dish of green peas. How much gardening does this occasion? how many labourers must the competition to have such things early in the market, keep in employment? You will hear it said, very gravely, Why was not the half-guinea, thus spent in luxury, given to the poor? To how many might it have afforded a good meal. Alas! has it not gone to the industrious poor, whom it is better to support than the idle poor? You are much surer that you are doing good when you pay money to those who work, as the recompence of their labour, than when you give money merely in charity. Suppose the ancient luxury of a dish of peacock's brains were to be revived, how many carcases would be left to the poor at a cheap rate and as to the rout that is made about people who are ruined by extravagance, it is no matter to the nation that some individuals suffer. When so much general productive exertion is the consequence of luxury, the nation does not care though there are debtors in gaol; nay, they would not care though their creditors were there too?!?' The uncommon vivacity of General Oglethorpe's mind, and variety of knowledge, having sometimes made his conversation 'See post, March 30, April 14 and 15, 1778, and Boswell's Hebrides, Oct. 25. 2 Wesley wrote on Jan. 21, 1767 (Journal, iii. 263):—‘I had a conversation with an ingenious man who proved to a demonstration that it was the duty of every man that could to be "clothed in purple and fine linen," and to "fare sumptuously every day;" and that he would do abundantly more good hereby than he could do by "feeding the hungry and clothing the naked." O the depth of human understanding! What may not a man believe if he will?' Much the same argument Johnson, thirty-three years earlier, had introduced in one of his Debates (Works, xi. 349). He makes one of the speakers say -- Our expenses are not all equally destructive; some, though the method of raising them be vexatious and oppressive, do not much impoverish the nation, because they are refunded by the extravagance and luxury of those who are retained in the pay of the court.' See post, March 23, 1783. The whole argument is nothing but Mandeville's doctrine of 'private vices, public benefits.' See post, April 15, 1778. seem Aetat. 67.] Sir Robert Walpole's talk. 57 seem too desultory, Johnson observed, Oglethorpe, Sir, never completes what he has to say.' He on the same account made a similar remark on Patrick Lord Elibank: 'Sir, there is nothing conclusive in his talk'.' When I complained of having dined at a splendid table without hearing one sentence of conversation worthy of being remembered, he said, 'Sir, there seldom is any such conversation.' BOSWELL. Why then meet at table?' JOHNSON. 'Why to eat and drink together, and to promote kindness; and, Sir, this is better done when there is no solid conversation; for when there is, people differ in opinion, and get into bad humour, or some of the company who are not capable of such conversation, are left out, and feel themselves uneasy. It was for this reason, Sir Robert Walpole said, he always talked bawdy at his table, because in that all could join?.' Being irritated by hearing a gentleman3 ask Mr. Levett a variety of questions concerning him, when he was sitting by, he broke out,'Sir, you have but two topicks, yourself and me. I am sick of both.' 'A man, (said he,) should not talk of himself, nor much of any particular person. He should take care not to be made a proverb; and, therefore, should avoid having any one topick of which people can say, "We shall hear him upon it." There was a Dr. Oldfield, who was always talking of the Duke of Marlborough. He came into a coffeehouse one day, and told that his Grace had spoken in the House of Lords for half an hour. Did he indeed speak for half an hour?' (said Belchier, the surgeon,)-'Yes.'-'And what did he say of Dr. Oldfield ?'-Nothing.'-'Why then, Sir, he was very 2 See ante, iii. 24. * Johnson no doubt refers to Walpole in the following passage (Works, viii. 137):—‘Of one particular person, who has been at one time so popular as to be generally esteemed, and at another so formidable as to be universally detested, Mr. Savage observed that his acquisitions had been small, or that his capacity was narrow, and that the whole range of his mind was from obscenity to politicks, and from politicks to obscenity.' This passage is a curious comment Of social pleasure, ill-exchanged Epilogue to the Satires, i. 29. 3 Most likely Boswell himself. See ante, March 25, 1776, and post, April 10, 1778, for Johnson's dislike of questioning. See also ante, ii. 84, note 3. ungrateful; 58 A contested election case. [A.D. 1776. ungrateful; for Dr. Oldfield could not have spoken for a quarter of an hour, without saying something of him.' 'Every man is to take existence on the terms on which it is given to him'. To some men it is given on condition of not taking liberties, which other men may take without much harm. One may drink wine, and be nothing the worse for it; on another, wine may have effects so inflammatory as to injure him both in body and mind, and perhaps, make him commit something for which he may deserve to be hanged.' 'Lord Hailes's Annals of Scotland have not that painted form which is the taste of this age; but it is a book which will always sell, it has such a stability of dates, such a certainty of facts, and such a punctuality of citation. I never before read Scotch history with certainty.' I asked him whether he would advise me to read the Bible with a commentary, and what commentaries he would recommend. JOHNSON. To be sure, Sir, I would have you read the Bible with a commentary; and I would recommend Lowth and Patrick on the Old Testament, and Hammond on the New.' During my stay in London this spring, I solicited his attention to another law case, in which I was engaged. In the course of a contested election for the Borough of Dumfermline, which I attended as one of my friend Colonel (afterwards Sir Archibald) Campbell's counsel; one of his political agents, who was charged with having been unfaithful to his employer, and having deserted to the opposite party for a pecuniary reward— attacked very rudely in a news-paper the Reverend Mr. James Thomson, one of the ministers of that place, on account of a supposed allusion to him in one of his sermons. Upon this the minister, on a subsequent Sunday, arraigned him by name from the pulpit with some severity; and the agent, after the sermon was over, rose up and asked the minister aloud, 'What bribe he had received for telling so many lies from the chair of verity. I was present at this very extraordinary scene. The See ante, April 14, 1775. 2 See ante, May 12, 1774. 3 A Gallicism, which has it appears, with so many others, become vernacular in Scotland. The French call a pulpit, la chaire de vérité. CROKER. person |