(raising my voice, and shaking my head) you should have given us your travels in France. I am sure I am right, and there's an end on't."

Boswell said to him, that it was certainly true, as his friend Dempster had observed in his letter to him upon the subject, that a great part of what was in his Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland, had been in his mind before he left London. JOHNSON. "Why yes, sir, the topics were; and books of travels will be good in proportion to what a man has previously in his mind, his knowing what to observe, his power of contrasting one mode of life with another. As the Spanish proverb says, 'He, who would bring home the wealth of the Indies, must carry the wealth of the Indies with him.' So it is in travelling; a man must carry knowledge with him, if he would bring home knowledge." BOSWELL. "The proverb, I suppose, sir, means, he must carry a large stock with him to trade with." JOHNSON. "Yes, sir."

A gentleman having come in who was to go as a mate in the ship along with Mr. Banks and Dr. Solander, Dr. Johnson asked what were the names of the ships destined for the expedition. The gentleman answered, they were once to be called the Drake and the Raleigh, but now they were to be called the Resolution and the Adventure. JOHNSON. "Much better; for had the Raleigh returned without going round the world, it would have been ridi culous. To give them the names of the Drake and the Raleigh, was laying a trap for satire." Bos WELL. "Had not you some desire to go upon this expedition, sir?" JOHNSON. "Why yes, but I soon laid it aside. Sir, there is very little of intellectual

in the course

so it was not

besides, I see but at a small distance: worth my while to go to see birds fly, which I should not have seen fly; and fishes swim, which I should not have seen swim."

No. XVIII.

LAW.

BOSWELL mentioned that a gay friend had advised him against being a lawyer, because he would be excelled by plodding block heads. JOHNSON. "Why, sir, in the formulary and statutary part of law, a plodding blockhead may excel; but, in the ingenious and rational part of it, a plodding blockhead can never excel."

Sir Alexander Macdonald observed to him, "I think, sir, almost all great lawyers, snch at least as have written upon law, have known only law, and nothing else." JOHNSON. "Why, no, sir; Judge Hale was a great lawyer, and wrote upon law, and yet he knew a great many other things, and has written upon other things. Selden too." SIR A. "Very true, sir, and Lord Bacon. But was not Lord Coke a mere lawyer?" JOHNSON. "Why, I am afraid he was; but he would have taken it very ill if you had told him so; he would have prosecuted yon for scandal." BOSWELL. "Lord Mansfield is not a mere lawyer." JOHNSON. "No, sir, I never was in Lord Mansfield's company; but Lord Mansfield was distinguished at the university. Lord Mansfield, when he first came to town, drank Champagne with the wits, as Prior says. He was

the friend of Pope." SIR A. "Barristers, I believe, are not so abusive now as they were formerly. I fancy they had less law long ago, and so were obliged, to take to abuse, to fill up the time. Now they have such a number of precedents, they have no occasion for abuse." JOHNSON." Nay, sir, they had more law long ago than they have now. As to precedents, to be sure they will increase in course of time; but the more precedents there are, the less occasion is there for law; that is to say, the less occasion is there for investigating principles."

66

Boswell asked him, whether, as a moralist, he did not think, that the practice of the law, in some degree, hurt the fine feeling of honesty. JOHNSON. Why no, sir, if you act properly. You are not to deceive your clients with false representations of your opinion you are not to tell lies to a judge." BOSWELL. "But what do you think of supporting a cause which you know to be bad?" JOHNSON. "Sir, you do not know it to be good or bad, till the judge determines it. I have said, that you are to state facts fairly; so that your thinking, or what you call knowing, a cause to be bad, must be from reasoning, must be from your supposing your arguments to be weak and inconclusive. But, sir, that is not enough. An argument, which does not convince yourself, may convince the judge to whom you urge it and if it does convince him, why, then, sir, you are wrong, and he is right. It is his business to judge; and you are not to be confident in your own opinion, that a cause is bad, but to say all you çan for your client, and then hear the judge's opinion." BOSWELL. "But, sir, does not affecting a warmth when you have no warmth, and appear

ing to be clearly of one opinion, when you are in reality of another-does not such dissimulation impair one's honesty? Is there not some danger, that a lawyer may put on the same mask in common life, in the intercourse with his friends?" JOHNSON. "Why, no, sir; every body knows you are paid for affecting warmth for your client; and it is therefore properly no dissimulation. The moment you come from the bar, you resume your usual behaviour. Sir, a man will no more carry the artifice of the bar into the common intercourse of society, than a man who is paid for tumbling upon his hands will continue to tumble when he should walk on his feet."

Speaking of the inward light, to which some me. thodists pretended, he said, it was a principle utterly incompatible with social or civil security. "If a man," said he, "pretends to a principle of which I can know nothing, nay, not so much as that he has it, but only that he pretends to it; how can I tell what that person may be prompted to do? When a person professes to be governed by a written ascertained law, I can then know where to find him.”

Talking of law cases, he said, "The English reports, in general, are very poor: only the half of what has been said is taken down, and of that half much is mistaken; whereas, in Scotlaud, the arguments on each side are deliberately put in writing, to be considered by the court. I think, a collection of your cases upon subjects of importance, with the opinions of the judges upon them, would be valuable."

Of Mr. Andrew Stuart's Letters to Lord Mansfield, 7 on the celebrated Douglas cause, Boswell said to him, 66 May it not be doubted, sir, whether it be proper

to publish letters, arraigning the ultimate decision of an important cause by the supreme judicature of the nation." JOHNSON. "No, sir, I do not think it was wrong to publish these letters. If they are thought to do harm, why not answer them? But they will do no harm: if Mr. Douglas be indeed the son of Lady Jane, he cannot be hurt; if he be not her son, and yet has the great estate of the family of Douglas, he may well submit to have a pamphlet against him by Andrew Stuart. Sir, I think such a publication does good, as it does good to show us the possibilities of human life. And, sir, you will not say, that the Douglas cause was a cause of easy decision, when it divided your court as much as it could do, to be determined at all. When your judges are seven and seven, the casting vote of the president must be given on one side or other; no matter for my argument on which: one or the other must be taken; as when I am to move, there is no matter which leg I move first. And then, sir, it was otherwise determined here. No, sir, a more dubious determination of any question cannot be imagined.”

Another time they talked of a book, in which an eminent judge was arraigned before the bar of the public, as having pronounced an unjust decision in a great cause. Dr. Johnson maintained, that this publication would not give any uneasiness to the judge. "For," said he, "either he acted honestly, or he meant to do injustice. If he acted honestly, his own conciousness will protect him; if he meant to do injustice, he will be glad to see the man who attacks him, so much vexed."

Boswell and Johnson got into an argument, whether the judges who went to India might with pro

VOL. I.

I