In the pleasant task of commentating and illustrating this great work it is often forgotten there are two performers in the piece, the Doctor and "James Boswell, Esq.," and that a large portion of the interest is excited by the latter. It is admitted that the entertainment supplied is owing to the vivacity and happy dramatic arrangement of the biographer. It is to his personal view of events, as well as his selection and ordering of what he observed and collected, that the unique narrative owes its attraction. Had Boswell died before he was able to cast his materials into the shape of a narrative, and had some other "eminent hand" employed them for a well-written life of the sage, we can conceive at once what the result would have been. It would have now ranked among the numerous "Lives and Times" that have come down to us, and as a laborious and meritorious work. It is the figure of Boswell moving everywhere in the shadow of his idol-his naive and natural comments, his amusing speculations, his revelation of his own character and absurdities, that lends his memoir its charm.

Hence we talk of "students" of Boswell's "Life," and find so many scholars, critics, men of letters, drawn by a sort of fascination to supply their commentaries. Even any one who should go through this edition, noting the variations in the text, will find an entertainment quite apart from what is furnished by the narrative itself. He will see Boswell's vanity displayed, as well as his inordinate belief in the "sacredness" of his text, as his seeming ignorance of what made him ridiculous; his little passions of envy and malice; with those other acts and oddities which have often seriously raised the question whether he was really an inspired idiot or a man of sense and wisdom. We certainly owe it to his foolishness that he was so outspoken, and put in print, without restraint as to names or persons, so many things that must have excited annoyance and given pain. There was no attempt at delicacy. Where he found himself, on a rare occasion, compelled to suppress the name under the disguise of "an eminent person," or "a literary friend of his,” the person thus dealt with could be readily identified.

But though suffered to take his course without being inconvenienced, he found himself obliged for various reasons to make alterations in his great work, having embroiled himself with various persons who clamoured loudly against the too open statements that affected their reputation. For it does seem as though Mr. Boswell had been guided in his revelations by a sort of graduated measure, such as fear of consequences; he

was indifferent when the persons were weak, as in the case of women and parsons, or of those whom he disliked and despised, as rivals or competitors in the task he had on hand, and whom he hated with a feverish jealousy (in which case he might presume they were weaker than he was); or in the case of those who were dead and could make no sign. In most cases he kept these considerations before his eyes, and in many instances this "canny" view was borne out by the event. There are many of these little exhibitions through the work, but one detailed specimen will be found highly characteristic. Bishop Percy, it will be recollected, figures a good deal in the Boswellian conversations. The Bishop, with a sagacious mistrust that he would not appear with dignity in the chronicle, while kindly sending Boswell a vast number of communications, requested that his name might not be mentioned in the work. Boswell replied, flatly refusing to comply with the request, declaring that it was a duty he owed "to the authenticity of his book, to its respectability, and to the credit of his illustrious friend, to "--and the reader will wonder what was the shape of this sacred obligation-" to introduce as many names of eminent persons as I can." "Believe me, my lord," he goes on, 'you are not the only Bishop in the number of great men with which my pages are graced. I am quite resolute in this matter." The Prelate had no redress. There was something, indeed, ungracious in the gusto with which Boswell recorded Johnson's speeches and sneers at the expense of his episcopal friend, such as that about the "History of the Grey Rat." But the warm discussion on Pennantone of the most dramatic in the book, and evidently recorded with an amazing accuracy, shows that Boswell possessed a dull niaiserie utterly inconsistent with the faithful acumen and accuracy which admirers have claimed for him. Annoyed at the attack on his connection and patron the Duke of Northumberland, the Bishop had retorted by a reflection on Johnson's failing eyesight, which had nearly brought about an open rupture. As it was, rude language had been used. However, a few words of good-natured explanation, and all was made up. Unfortunately the Bishop had been indiscreet enough to confide to Boswell that he "was uneasy at what had passed," for a person had witnessed the scene, a friend of the Duke of Northumberland, who would, of course, report how contemptuously the friend of Johnson had been treated. On this

*This I borrow and abridge from a work or my own, already published, Croker's Boswell and Boswell, p. 235.

very natural speech the busybody proceeded to work, and, as I said, exhibits his mind and its processes to posterity in a fashion incredibly stupid and "fussy." We can imagine the Bishop's feelings as he read the opening words. "There was a man," he was made to say, "who had recently been admitted into the confidence of the Northumberland family, to whom he hoped to appear more respectable by showing him how intimate he was with the great Dr. Johnson, and now the gentleman would go away with an impression much to his disadvantage, as if Johnson treated him with disregard, which might do him an essential injury." So sycophantic and candid a confession of motives is rarely found. It is evident a warm remonstrance and even contradiction followed, for we find in the later editions "the gentleman recently admitted, &c.," becomes merely "acquainted with the Northumberland family," the "essential injury" that might follow is omitted. And the "great Dr. Johnson," which suggests the idea that Percy had been boasting in the country of his intimacy, was toned down to "Dr. Johnson." Boswell reported this to Johnson-who remarked that "this only came of stratagem "-a fresh indirect reflection on the Bishop; he proceeded to speak of Dr. Percy "in the handsomest terms "-or "manner," as Boswell chose to alter it later:

"Then, sir,” said I, "may I be allowed to suggest a mode by which you may effectually counteract any unfavourable report of what passed? I will write a letter to you upon the subject of the unlucky contest of that day, and you will be kind enough to put in writing, as an answer to that letter, what you have now said, and as Lord Percy is to dine with us at General Paoli's soon, I will take an opportunity to read the correspondence in his lordship's presence." This friendly scheme was accordingly carried into execution without Dr. Percy's knowledge. ". . . I contrived that Lord Percy should hear the correspondence. Our friend Percy was raised higher in the estimation of those by whom he wished most to be regarded."

The passage in italics must again have given offence: for "our friend" Boswell later shaped it: "Thus every unfavourable impression was obviated that could possibly have been made on those by whom," &c. Naturally Dr. Percy was grateful and pleased at the idea, and its being so successfully carried out. But the meddling Boswell did not show him. the letter to which Johnson's letter was an answer; and which he had read out :-"My dear Sir, I beg leave to address you in behalf of our

friend Dr. Percy, who was much hurt by what you said to him that day we dined at his house. . . . Percy is sensible that you did not mean to injure him; but he is vexed to think that your behaviour to him on that occasion may be interpreted as a proof that he is despised by you, which I know is not the case. Earl Percy is to dine with General Paoli nex! Friday; and I should be sincerely glad to have it in my power to satisfy his lordship how well you think of Dr. Percy, who, I find, apprehends thai your good opinion of him may be of very essential consequence; and who assures me that he has the highest respect and the warmest affection for you." It was bad to read this in the "Life," but what will be said when we find that Mr. Boswell actually read it aloud at the dinner in presence of Lord Percy: for he uses the phrase, "read the correspondence," thrice to Johnson: but when writing to Percy he takes care to say that he only "read Johnson's answer". Finally, at the close of his characteristic episode he adds a kind of disclaimer to this effect :-"Though the Bishop of Dromore kindly answered the letters which I wrote to him, relative to Dr. Johnson's early history; yet, in justice to him, I think it proper to add, that the account of the foregoing conversation, and the subsequent transaction, as well as of some other conversations in which he is mentioned, has been given to the public without previous communication with his lordship." The meaning of which is to convey the idea that the Bishop was no party to the publication of portions of this little history: though Boswell was so dull as not to see that he was making his friend ridiculous.

That the Bishop's remonstrances on the way he was mentioned in the work were rather "tart," is evident from a passage or two later introduced by Boswell. In the amusing passage about Dr. Grainger and his heroic introduction of "Let's sing of Rats!" (changed from mia, as more dignified), Percy had originally furnished a defence of his friend-which Boswell had introduced in a note. In his second edition, Boswell maliciously supplies the following from his recollection :-"Dr. Johnson said to me, 'Percy, sir, was angry with me for laughing at his "Sugar Cane:" for he had a mind to make a great thing of Grainger's rats'— and adds this comment to the Bishop's original defence of his friend; 'the above was written by the Bishop when he had not the poem itself to recur to; and though the account given of it was true at one period, yet, as Dr. Grainger afterwards altered the passage in question, the remarks in the text do not now apply to the printed poem."" No wonder

Dr. Percy wrote to his friend Anderson: "Boswell's ludicrous account of the 'Sugar Cane' deserves no attention." Indeed, Percy's disgust at his treatment is shown in what he says of the account of the manner of writing the dictionary, "as given by Mr. Boswell, is confused and erroneous, and a moment's reflection will convince every person of judgment, could not be correct."

What shows a radical weakness of character in Boswell is this idea that his reports would be accepted, as matter of course, by those who figured unpleasantly in them. "One of them," he writes of a Presbyterian minister, "though a man of sincere good powers, discovered a narrowness of information, &c. He talked before Johnson of fat Bishops and drowsy Deans. . . . Dr. Johnson was so highly incensed, that he said to him: Sir, you know no more of our church than a Hottentot.' I was sorry that he brought this on himself." Yet in the first edition the name of this divine is given-Mr. Dunn, Boswell's own parish minister, with whom they were dining. So with the case of young Mr. Tytler, who was described "with his forehead ready brased," and giving a picture of an offensive and forward young man, who was set down by Johnson, This Boswell had to amend into "one gentleman in company expressing his opinion," &c. The treatment of Sir A. Macdonald-and the rather degrading amende which Boswell had to make-is shown at length by Mr. Croker.

An interesting question next arises-What was the method adopted by Boswell in his system of reporting, and, how did he manipulate his notes. He himself explains to us that "though I did not write what is called stenography, or shorthand, in appropriate characters devised for the purpose, I had a method of my own of writing half words and leaving out some altogether, so as yet to keep the substance and language of any discourse which I had heard so much in view, that I could give it very completely soon after I had taken it down."

One of his notebooks came into Lord Houghton's possession, who states that it contains "several sheets filled with anecdotes and observations of the most various character, written without order, and generally without dates. At the end are inserted many scraps of paper and backs of letters, on which Boswell has jotted down memoranda of stories and reflections."

This record, however, seems to have been different from the one in which he entered his notes of Johnson's conversations. In fact, there is