that land." JOHNSON. "Nay, madam, it is not a preference of the land to its owner; it is the preference of a family to an individual. Here is an establishment in a country, which is of importance for ages, not only to the chief, but to his people; an establishment which extends upwards and down. wards; that this should be destroyed by one idle fellow is a sad thing. Entails are good, because it is good to preserve in a country serieses of men, to whom the people are accustomed to look up as to their leaders. But I am for leaving a quantity of land in commerce, to excite industry, and keep money in the country; for if no land were to be bought in the country, there would be no encouragement to acquire wealth, because a family could not be founded there; or if it were acquired, it must be carried away to another country where land may be bought and although the land in every country will remain the same, and be as fertile where there is no money, as where there is, yet all that portion of the happiness of civil life, which is produced by money circulating in a country, would be lost." BosWELL. "Then, sir, would it be for the advantage of a country that all its lands were sold at once?" JOHNSON. "So far, sir, as money produces good, it would be an advantage; for then that country would have as much money circulating in it as it is worth. But to be sure this would be counterbalanced by advantages attending a total change of proprietors." BoswELL. "I think that the power of entailing should be limited thus: there should be one-third, or perhaps one-half, of the land of a country kept free for commerce; and the proportion allowed to be entailed should be

parcelled out so that no family could entail above a certain quantity. Let a family, according to the ability of its representatives, be richer or poorer in different generations, or always rich if its representatives be always wise; but let its absolute permanency be moderate. In this way we should be certain of there being always a number of established roots; and as, in the course of nature, there is in every age an extinction of some families, there would be continual openings for men ambitious of perpetuity to plant a stock in the entailed ground." JOHNSON. " Why, sir, mankind will be better able to regulate the system of entails, when the evil of too much land being locked up by them is felt, than we can do at present, when it is not felt."

He thus discoursed upon supposed obligation in settling estates: "Where a man gets the unlimited property of an estate, there is no obligation upon him in justice to leave it to one person rather than to another. There is a motive of preference from kindness, and this kindness is generally entertained for the nearest relation. If I owe a particular man a sum of money, I am obliged to let that man have the next money I get, and cannot in justice let another have it; but if I owe money to no man, I may dispose of what I get as I please. There is not a debitum justitiæ to a man's next heir; there is only a debitum caritatis. It is plain, then, that I have morally a choice, according to my liking. If I have a brother in want, he has a claim from affection to my assistance: but if I have also a brother in want, whom I like better, he has a preferable claim. The right of an heir at law is only this; that he is to have the succession to an estate, in case no other

person is appointed to it by the owner. His right is merely preferable to that of the king."

When talking of the power of riches, Johnson exclaimed, "If I were a man of a great estate, I would drive all the rascals whom I did not like out of the county, at an election."

Boswell asked him, how far he thought wealth should be employed in hospitality. JOHNSON. "You are to consider that ancient hospitality, of which we hear so much, was in an uncommercial country, when men being idle, were glad to be entertained at rich men's tables: but in a commercial country, a busy country, time becomes precious, and therefore hospitality is not so much valued. No doubt there is still room for a certain degree of it; and a man has a satisfaction in seeing his friends eating and drinking around him: but promiscuous hospitality is not the way to gain real influence. You must help some people at table before others; you must ask some people how they like their wine oftener than others you therefore offend more people than you please. You are like the French statesman, who said, when he granted a favour, J'ai fait dix mécontents et un ingrat. Besides, sir, being entertained ever so well at a man's table, impresses no lasting regard or esteem. No, sir, the way to make sure of power and influence is, by lending money confidentially to your neighbours at a small interest, or perhaps at no interest at all, and having their bonds in your possession." BoswELL. May not a man, sir, employ his riches to advantage, in educating young men of merit ?" JOHNSON. "Yes, sir, if they fall in your way: but if it be understood that you patronize young men of merit, you will

be harassed with solicitations. You will have numbers forced upon you, who have no merit; some will force them upon you from mistaken partiality, and some from downright interested motives, without a scruple; and you will be disgraced. Were I a rich man, I would propagate all kinds of trees that will grow in the open air. A green-house is childish. I would introduce foreign animals into the country; for instance, the rein-deer."*

Observing some beggars in the street as they walked along, Boswell said to him, "I suppose there is no civilized country in the world where the misery of want in the lowest classes of the people is 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."

No. XI.

NATIONS.

JOHNSON Scouted the idea of nations having any peculiar characteristics. He said, "there is no permanent natural character; it varies according to circumstances. Alexander swept the great India: now the Turks sweep Greece."

He was of opinion that the English nation cultivated both their soil and their reason better than

*This project has since been realized. Sir Henry Liddell, who made a spirited tour into Lapland, brought two rein-deer to his estate in Northumberland, where they bred; but the race has unfortunately perished.

any other people; but admitted that the French, though not the highest, perhaps, in any department of literature, yet in every department were very high. Intellectual pre-eminence, he observed, was the highest superiority; and that every nation derived their highest reputation from the splendour and dignity of their writers. Voltaire, he said, was a good narrator, and that his principal merit consisted in a happy selection and arrangement of circumstances. Speaking of the French novels, compared with Richardson's, he said, they might be pretty baubles but a wren was not an eagle. In a Latin conversation with the Pere Boscovitch, at the house of Mrs. Cholmondeley, he maintained the superiority of sir Isaac Newton over all foreign philosophers, with a dignity and eloquence that surprised that learned foreigner.* It being observed to him, that a rage for every thing English prevailed much in France, after Lord Chatham's glo rious war; he said, he did not wonder at it; for that we had drubbed those fellows into a proper reverence for us, and that their national petulance required periodical chastisement.

He observed, "The great in France live very magnificently, but the rest very miserably. There is no happy middle state as in England. The shops of Paris are mean; the meat in the markets is such

• In a discourse, by sir William Jones, addressed to the Asiatic Society, February 25, 1778, is the following passage: "One of the most sagacious men in this age, who continues, I hope, to improve and adorn it, Samuel Johnson, remarked in my hearing, that if Newton had flourished in ancient Greece, he would have been worshipped as a divinity."Malone.