often drew. I have frequently thought that if he had made out what the French call une catalogue raisonnée of all the people who had passed under his observation, it would have afforded a very rich fund of instruction and entertainment. The suddenness with which his accounts of some of them started out in conversation, was not less pleasing than surprising. I remember he once observed to me, “ It is wonderful, Sir, what is to be found in London. The most literary conversation that I ever enjoyed was at the table of Jack Ellis, a moneyscrivener behind the Royal Exchange, with whom I at one period used to dine generally once a week.”l

Volumes would be required to contain a list of his numerous and various acquaintance, none of whom he ever forgot; and could describe and discriminate them all with precision and vivacity. He associated with persons the most widely different in manners, abilities, rank, and accomplishments. He was at once the companion of the brilliant Colonel Forrester of the Guards, who wrote The Polite Philosopher,” and of the awkward and uncouth Robert Levett; of Lord Thurlow, and Mr. Sastres, the Italian master; and has dined one day with the beautiful, gay, and fascinating Lady Craven, and the next with good Mrs. Gardiner, the tallowchandler, on Snow-hill.

On my expressing my wonder at his discovering so much of the knowledge peculiar different professions, he told me, "I learnt what

MR. ELLIS.

2

I know of law chiefly from Mr. Ballow,' a very able man. I learnt some too from Chambers; but was not so teachable then. One is not willing to be taught by a young man.” When I expressed a wish to know more about Mr. Ballow, Johnson said, “ Sir, I have seen him but once these twenty years. The tide of life has driven us different ways." I was sorry at the time to hear this ; but whoever quits the creeks of private connections, and fairly gets into the great ocean of London, will by imperceptible degrees, unavoidably experience such cessations of acquaintance.

“My knowledge of physic,” he added, “ I learnt from Dr. James, whom I helped in writing the proposals for his Dictionary, and also a little in the Dictionary itself. I also learnt from Dr. Lawrence, but was then grown more stubborn.”

A curious incident happened to day, while Mr. Thrale and I sat with him. Francis announced that a large packet was brought to him from the post-office, said to have come from Lisbon, and it was charged 71. 108. He would not receive it, supposing it to be some trick, nor did he even look at it. But, upon inquiry afterwards, he found it was a real packet for him, from that very friend in the East Indies of whom he had been speaking; and the ship which carried it having come from Portugal, this packet, with others, had been put into the post-office at Lisbon.

I mentioned a new gaming club, of which Mr. Beauclerk had given me an account, where the members played to a desperate extent. JOHNSON: “Depend upon it, Sir, this is mere talk. Who is ruined by gaming? You will not find six instances in an age. There is a strange rout made about deep play: whereas you have many more people ruined by adventurous trade, and yet we do not hear such an outcry against it.” THRALE: “There may be few people absolutely ruined by deep play; but very many are much hurt in their circumstances by it.” JOHNSON: “Yes, Sir, and so are very many by other kinds of expense.” I had heard him talk once before in the same manner ; and at Oxford he said, “ he wished he had learned to play at cards.” The truth, however, is, that he loved to display his ingenuity in argument; and, therefore, would sometimes in conversation maintain opinions which he was sen

sible were wrong, but in supporting which, his reasoning and wit would be most conspicuous. He would begin thus: “Why, Sir, as to the good or evil of card-playing—” “Now,” said Garrick,“he is thinking which side he shall take.” He appeared to have a pleasure in contradiction, especially when any opinion whatever was delivered with an air of confidence; so that there was hardly any topic, if not one of the great truths of Religion and Morality, that he might not have been incited to argue, either for or against. Lord Elibank' had the highest admiration of his powers. He once observed to me, “Whatever opinions Johnson maintains, I will not say that he convinces me; but he never fails to show me that he has good reasons for it.” I have heard Johnson pay

his lordship this high compliment: “I never was in Lord Elibank's company without learning something."

We sat together till it was too late for the afternoon service. Thrale said he had come with intention to go to church with us. We went at seven to evening prayers at St. Clement's church, after having drunk coffee ; an indulgence, which I understood Johnson yielded to on this occasion, in compliment to Thrale.

On Sunday, April 7, Easter-day, after having been at St. Paul's cathedral, I came to Dr. Johnson, according to my usual custom. It seemed to me, that there was always something peculiarly mild and placid in his manner upon this holy festival, the commemoration of the most joyful event in the history of our world, the resurrection of our LORD and Saviour, who, having triumphed over death and the grave, proclaimed immortality to mankind.

I repeated to him an argument of a lady of my acquaintance, who maintained that her husband's having been guilty of numberless infidelities, released her from conjugal obligations, because they were reciprocal. JOHNSON : “This is miserable stuff, Sir. To the contract of marriage, besides the man and wife, there is a third party-Society; and, if it be considered as a vow,-GOD: and therefore it cannot be dissolved by their consent alone. Laws are not made for particular cases, but for men in general. A woman may be unhappy with her husband; but she cannot be freed from him without the approbation of the civil and ecclesiastical power.

A man may be unhappy, because he is not so rich as another; but he is not to seize upon another's property with his own hand.” BOSWELL: “But, Sir, this lady does not want that the contract should be dissolved; she only argues that she may indulge herself in gallantries with equal freedom as her husband does, provided she takes care not to introduce a spurious issue into his family. You know, Sir, what Macrobius has told of Julia.”2 JOHNSON : “This lady of yours, Sir, I think, is very fit for a brothel.”

Mr. Macbean, author of the “Dictionary of Ancient Geography," came in. He mentioned that he had been forty years absent from Scotland; “Ah, Boswell !” said Johnson, smiling, “what would you give to be forty years from Scotland ?” I said, “I should not like to be so long absent from the seat of my ancestors.” This gentleman, Mrs. Williams, and Mr. Levett dined with us.

Dr. Johnson made a remark, which both Mr. Macbean and I thought new. It was this : that “the law against usury is for the protection of creditors as well as debtors ; for, if there were no such check, people would be apt, from the temptation of great interest, to lend to desperate persons, by whom they would lose their money. Accordingly there are instances of ladies being ruined, by having injudiciously sunk their fortunes for high annuities, which, after a few years, ceased to be paid, in consequence of the ruined circumstances of the borrower."

Mrs. Williams was very peevish ; and I wondered at Johnson's patience with her now, as I had often done on similar occasions. The truth is, that his humane consideration of the forlorn and indigent state in which this lady was left by her father, induced him to treat her with the utmost tenderness, and even to be desirous of procuring her amusement, so as sometimes to incommode many of his friends, by carrying her with him to their houses, where, from her manner of eating, in consequence of her blindnesss, she could not but offend the delicacy of persons of nice sensations.

After coffee, we went to afternoon service in St. Clement's church. Observing some beggars in the street as we walked along, I said to him I supposed there was no civilised country in the world where the misery of want in the lowest classes of the people was prevented. JOHNSON : “I believe, Sir, there is not; but it is better that some should be unhappy, than that none should be happy, which would be the case in a general state of equality.”

When the service was ended I went home with him, and we sat quietly by ourselves. He recommended Dr. Cheyne's books. I said, I thought Cheyne had been reckoned whimsical.—“So he was,” said he, “in some things; but there is no end of objections. There are few books to which some objection or other may not be made.” He added, “I would not have you read anything else of Cheyne, but his book on Health, and his English Malady.'"

Upon the question whether a man who had been guilty of vicious actions would do well to force himself into solitude and sadness ? JOHNSON : “No, Sir, unless it prevent him from being vicious again. With some people, gloomy penitence is only madness turned upside down.

1

A man may be gloomy, till, in order to be relieved from gloom, he has recourse again to criminal indulgences.”

On Wednesday, April 10, I dined with him at Mr. Thrale's, where were Mr, Murphy and some other company. Before dinner, Dr. Johnson and I passed some time by ourselves. I was sorry to find it was now resolved that the proposed journey to Italy should not take place this year. He said, “I am disappointed, to be sure ; but it is not a great disappointment.” I wondered to see him bear, with a philosophical calmness, what would have made most people peevish and fretful. I perceived, however, that he had so warmly cherished the hope of enjoying classical scenes, that he could not easily part with the scheme ; for he said, “I shall probably contrive to get to Italy some other way. But I won't mention it to Mr. and Mrs. Thrale, as it might vex them." I suggested that going to Italy might have done Mr. and Mrs. Thrale good. JOHNSON : “I rather believe not, Sir. While grief is fresh, every attempt to divert only irritates. You must wait till grief be digested, and then amusement will dissipate the remains of it.”

At dinner, Mr. Murphy entertained us with the history of Mr. Joseph Simpson, a schoolfellow of Dr. Johnson's, a barrister-at-law, of good parts, but who fell into a dissipated course of life, incompatible with that success in his profession which he once had, and would otherwise have deservedly maintained ; yet he still preserved a dignity in his deportment. He wrote a tragedy on the story of Leonidas, entitled, “ The Patriot.” He read it to a company of lawyers, who found so many faults that he wrote it over again; so then there were two tragedies on the same subject and with the same title. Dr. Johnson told us, that one of them was still in his possession. This very piece was, after his death, published by some person who had been about him, and, for the sake of a little hasty profit, was fallaciously advertised, so as to make it be believed to have been written by Johnson himself.

I said, I disliked the custom which some people had of bringing their children into company, because it in a manner forced us to pay foolish compliments to please their parents. JOHNSON : “You are right, Sir. We may be excused for not caring much about other people's children, for there are many who care very little about their own children. It may be observed, that men who, from being engaged in business, or from their course of life in whatever way, seldom see their children, do not care much about them. I myself should not have had much fondness for a child of my own.” Mrs. THRALE : “Nay, Sir, how can you talk so ?” JOHNSON : “At least, I never wished to have a child.”

Mr. Murphy mentioned Dr. Johnson's having a design to publish an edition of Cowley. Johnson said, he did not know but he should; and he expressed his disapprobation of Dr. Hurd, for having published a mutilated edition under the title of“ Select Works of Abraham Cowley."