to decry, will ever be received with that deference which time will restore to him from all. The "Lives of the Poets" has led the way to several subsequent editions on an improved and extended scale.

Lord Macaulay, criticising JOHNSON'S Life of Savage, says: "JOHNSON reprinted it nearly as it had appeared in 1744. Whoever, after reading that life, will turn to the other lives, will be struck by the difference of style. Since JOHNSON had been at ease in his circumstances, he had written little and had talked much. When, therefore, he, after the lapse of years, resumed his pen, the mannerism which he had contracted while he was in the constant habit of elaborate composition, was less perceptible than formerly, and his diction frequently had a colloquial ease which it formerly wanted. The improvement that may be discerned by a skilful critic in the 'Journey to the Hebrides,' and in the Lives of the Poets' is so obvious, that it cannot escape the notice of the most careless

reader."

With all due deference to Macaulay, we cannot

but think that he has not given the true cause of the difference of JOHNSON'S style. His mode of living might partially affect his style; but that will not account for the difference of his style between the publication of his "Journey to the Western Islands," which was published at the beginning of 1777, and the "Lives of the Poets," the first four volumes of which he published in the summer of 1777. The change spoken of by Macaulay is a marked one, for that which could only be detected in the "Journey to the Hebrides" by a skilful critic, in the "Lives of the Poets" is so obvious, that it cannot escape the notice of the most careless reader. The reason he assigns is quite inadequate to cause the result effected. We opine the true explanation is this, that JOHNSON was always master of two widely different styles. This will be manifest if any one of our readers takes the trouble to compare his Life of Drake with the parliamentary reports, both of which were written by him at the same time. We are convinced that his style was influenced not by his manner of living so much as by the nature of the subject about

which he was writing. When he wrote the "Rambler" he used a didactic style, as became a grave and serious moralist. His own words are"Difference of thought will produce difference of language." Again, JOHNSON not merely considered the nature of the subject, but also the importance of it. Well he knew that the publication of his "Journey" would set agoing the pens of innumerable critics, and that the literary world in general was waiting to hear his observations on men and manners of a primitive nation, against which he had such a prejudice, therefore he used an important style, which he did not use in the "Lives." His original intention was only to write a few pages of preface to each poet, and therefore he used a more easy and playful style, which undoubtedly was his best. If he had written the "Rambler" at three score and ten, it would have been exactly in the same style, and if he had written the "Lives" at the time he wrote the "Rambler," the style would have been exactly as it is now.

It is sad to note that JOHNSON received only three hundred guineas for that great work, out of which,

as Malone informs us, the publishers cleared about six thousand pounds. The profession of author is at all times a precarious occupation; but it was peculiarly so in JOHNSON'S time. Private patronage in literature was passing away; indeed, as we said before, JOHNSON himself rang its death knell, but as yet it was in a transition state. With him hard was the struggle, but his was the victory.

In the year 1762, shortly after George III. had ascended the throne, his counsellors, who, like Caiphas of old, were men of expediency, thought it wise and prudent to open up brighter prospects for men of literary merit. This recommendation of the Bute Government was speedily put into effect by a pension of three hundred pounds a year being given to JOHNSON, then the most eminent literary man in Europe.

Sometimes Judgeships and Secretaryships are given to stop the eloquent mouth, and to paralyze the fluent pen; but to the honour of JOHNSON be it known, that although poor and needy, he would not touch his country's gold until Lord

Bute made it distinct and clear that the gift came without conditions; that it was given for what he had already done, not for anything they expected him to do. No doubt Government knew that should occasion arise the mighty pen of JOHNSON, "the last of the Tories," would be wielded on the side of loyalty and authority, as afterwards it really was. Says Carlyle: "If England has escaped the blood-bath of a French Revolution; and may yet in virtue of this delay, and of the experience it has given, work out her deliverance calmly into a new era, let SAMUEL JOHNSON, beyond all contemporary or succeeding men, have the praise for it."

JOHNSON has now reached a new epoch in his life. He is no longer to live as Roger Ascham says the wits do, "Men know not how, and at last die obscurely, men mark not where." He now stands before us the JOHNSON of history, past his prime; almost done with his literary work; rich in purse and rich in friends. In further delineating JOHNSON'S character, we shall now consider him, in connection with some of his more illustrious friends,