Etat. 59.

1768. fince "The Provoked Husband," and that there had not been of late any fuch character exhibited on the stage as that of Croaker. I observed it was the Sufpirius of his Rambler. He faid, Goldfmith had owned he had borrowed it from thence. "Sir, (continued he,) there is all the difference in the world between characters of nature and characters of manners; and there is the difference between the characters of Fielding and those of Richardfon. Characters of manners are very entertaining; but they are to be understood, by a more fuperficial obferver, than characters of nature, where a man must dive into the receffes of the hu man heart."

It always appeared to me that he estimated the compofitions of Richardfon too highly, and that he had an unreasonable prejudice against Fielding. In comparing thofe two writers, he used this expreffion; that there was as great a difference between them as between a man who knew how a watch was made, and a man who could tell the hour by looking on the dial-plate." This was a fhort and figurative state of his diftinction between drawing characters of nature and characters only of manners. But I cannot help being of opinion, that the neat watches of Fielding are as well conftructed as the large clocks of Richardfon, and that his dial-plates are brighter. Fielding's characters, though they do not expand themselves fo widely in differtation, are as juft pictures of human nature, and I will venture to say, have more striking features, and nicer touches of the pencil; and though Johnson ufed to quote with approbation a

1768.

faying of Richardfon's, "that the virtues of Fielding's heroes were the vices of a truly good man," I will Liat. 59% venture to add, that the moral tendency of Fielding's writings, though it does not encourage a strained and rarely poffible virtue, is ever favourable to honour and honesty, and cherishes the benevolent and generous affections. He who is as good as Fielding would make him, is an amiable member of fociety, and may be led on by more regulated inftructors, to a higher ftate of ethical perfection.

Johnfon proceeded: "Even Sir Francis Wronghead is a character of manners, though drawn with great humour." He then repeated, very happily, all Sir Francis's credulous account to Manly of his being with "the great man," and fecuring a place. I asked him if the "Sufpicious Hufband" did not furnish a well-drawn character, that of Ranger. JOHNSON. "No, Sir; Ranger is juft a rake, a mere rake, and a lively young fellow, but no character."

The great Douglas Caufe was at this time a very general fubject of difcuffion. I found he had not ftudied it with much attention, but had only heard parts of it occafionally. He, however, talked of it, and faid, "I am of opinion that pofitive proof of fraud fhould not be required of the plaintiff, but that the Judges fhould decide according as probability fhall appear to preponderate, granting to the defendant the prefumption of filiation to be ftrong in his favour. And I think too, that a good deal of weight fhould be allowed to the dying declarations, because they were fpontaneous. There

is

1768.

Etat. 59.

is a great difference between what is faid without our being urged to it, and what is faid from a kind of compulfion. If I praise a man's book without being asked my opinion of it, that is honest praise, to which one may truft. But if an authour afks me if I like his book, and I give him fomething like praise, it must not be taken as my real opinion."

"I have not been troubled for a long time with authours defiring my opinion of their works. I ufed once to be fadly plagued with a man who wrote verfes, but who literally had no other notion of a verse, but that it confifted of ten fyllables. Lay your knife and your fork across your plate, was to him a verfe:

Lay your knife and your fork, across your plate.

As he wrote a great number of verses, he sometimes by chance made good ones, though he did not know it."

He renewed his promife of coming to Scotland, and going with me to the Hebrides, but said he would now content himself with feeing one or two of the most curious of them. He faid "Macaulay, who writes the account of St. Kilda, fet out with a prejudice against prejudices, and wanted to be a fmart modern thinker; and yet he affirms for a truth, that when a fhip arrives there all the inhabitants are seized with a cold.”

Dr. John Campbell the celebrated writer, took a great deal of pains to afcertain this fact, and attempted to account for it on physical principles,

from

from the effect of effluvia from human bodies. Johnfon at another time praifed Macaulay for his

magnanimity," in afferting this wonderful ftory, because it was well attefted'. A Lady of Norfolk, by a letter to my friend Dr. Burney, has favoured me with the following folution: "Now for the explication of this feeming myftery, which is fo very obvious as, for that reafon, to have escaped the penetration of Dr. Johnfon and his friend, as well as that of the authour. Reading the book with my ingenious friend, the late Reverend Mr. Chriftian of Darking-after ruminating a little,

The caufe (fays he) is a natural one. The fituation of St. Kilda renders a North-East Wind indifpenfibly neceffary before a ftranger can land. The wind, not the ftranger, occafions an epidemic cold!' If I am not mistaken, Mr. Macaulay is dead; if living this folution might please him, as I hope it will Mr. Bofwell, in return for the many agreeable hours his Works have afforded us."

Johnfon expatiated on the advantages of Oxford for learning. "There is here, Sir, (said he,) such a progreffive emulation. The ftudents are anxious to appear well to their tutors; the tutors are anxious to have their pupils appear well in the college; the colleges are anxious to have their students appear well in the University; and there are excellent rules of difcipline in every college. That the rules are fometimes ill obferved, may be true; but is nothing against the fyftem. The members of an Univerfity may, for a feafon, be unmindful of their duty. I am arguing for the excellency of the inftitution."

3 See Vol. II. of this Work, p. 6.

Of

1768.

Ætat. 59.

1768.

Etat. 59.

Of Guthrie he faid, "Sir, he is a man of parts: He has no great regular fund of knowledge; but by reading fo long, and writing fo long, he no doubt has picked up a good deal.”

He faid he had lately been a long while at Lichfield, but had grown very weary before he left it. BOSWELL. "I wonder at that, Sir; it is your native place." JOHNSON. "Why fo is Scotland your native place."

His prejudice againft Scotland appeared remarkably ftrong at this time. When I talked of our advancement in literature, "Sir, (faid he,) you have learnt a little from us, and you think yourselves very great men. Hume would never have written History, had not Voltaire written it before him. He is an echo of Voltaire." BOSWELL. "But, Sir, we have Lord Kames." JOHNSON. "You have Lord Kames. Keep him; ha, ha, ha! We don't envy you him. Do you ever fee Dr. Robertfon?" BOSWELL. "Yes, Sir." JOHNSON. "Does the dog talk of me?" BOSWELL. Indeed, Sir, he does, and loves you." Thinking that I now had him in a corner, and being folicitous for the literary fame of my country, I preffed him for his opinion on the merit of Dr. Robertson's History of Scotland. But, to my furprize, he escaped."Sir, I love Robertson, and I won't talk of his book."

It is but juftice both to him and Dr. Robertfon to add, that though he indulged himself in this fally of wit, he had too good tafte not to be fully fenfible of the merits of that admirable work.

An