part which depends on the imagination is very well supplied, as you will find when you read the paper; for descriptions of life, there is now a treaty almost made with an authour and an authouress; and the province of criticism and literature they are very desirous to assign to the commentator on Virgil. "I hope this proposal will not be rejected, and that the next post will bring us your compliance. I speak as one of the fraternity, though I have no part in the paper, beyond now and then a motto; but two of the writers are my particular friends, and I hope the pleasure of seeing a third united to them will not be denied to, dear sir, your most obedient and most humble servant, "SAM JOHNSON.] The consequence of this letter was, Dr. Warton's enriching the collection with several admirable essays. Ed. [And here, though a little out of the order of date, may be introduced Doctor Johnson's letter to Dr. Warton on the conclusion of the Adventurer. Life of Dr. Warton, p. 219. "8 March, 1754. "DEAR SIR,-I cannot but congratulate you upon the conclusion of a work, in which you have borne so great a part with so much reputation. I immediately determined that your name should be mentioned, but the paper having been some time written, Mr. Hawkesworth, I suppose, did not care to disorder its text, and therefore put your eulogy in a note. He and every other man mentions your papers of Criticism with great commendation, though not with greater than they deserve. "But how little can we venture to exult in any intellectual powers or literary attainments, when we consider the condition of poor Collins. I knew him a few years ago full of hopes and full of projects, versed in many languages, high in fancy, and strong in retention. This busy and forcible mind is now under the government of those who lately would not have been able to comprehend the least and most narrow of its designs. What do you hear of him? are there hopes of his recovery? or is he to pass the remainder of his life in misery and degradation? perhaps with complete consciousness of his calamity. "You have flattered us, dear sir, for some time with hopes of seeing you; when you come you will find your reputation increased, and with it the kindness of those [Mr. Malone here added a long note, surmising that this author and authoress were Henry Fielding and his sister; but he produces no proof, and seems to admit, that even if they were the persons meant, they never contributed.—ED.] friends who do not envy you; for success always produces either love or hatred. I enter my name among those that love, and love you more and more in proportion, as by writing more you are more known; and believe, that as you continue to diffuse among us your integrity and learning, I shall be still with greater esteem and affection, dear sir, your most obedient and most humble servant, "SAM. JOHNSON."] Johnson's saying "I have no part in the paper, beyond now and then a motto," may seem inconsistent with his being the authour of the papers marked T. But he had, at this time, written only one number2; This 2 The authour, I conceive, is here in an errour. He had before stated, that Johnson began to write in "The Adventurer" on April 10th (when No. 45 was published), above a month after the date of his letter to Dr. Warton. The two papers published previously with the signature T, and subscribed MYSARGYRUS (No. 34 and 41), who contributed also the papers signed A. were written, I believe, by Bonnel Thornton, information I received several years ago; but do not precisely remember from whom I derived it. I believe, however, my informer was Dr. Warton. With respect to No. 39, on Sleep, which our authour has ascribed to Johnson (see p. 107), even if it were written by him, it would not be inconsistent with his statement to Dr. Warton; for it appeared on March 20th, near a fortnight after the date of Johnson's letter to that gentleman. But on considering it attentively, though the style bears a strong resemblance to that of Johnson, I believe it was written by his friend, Dr. Bathurst, and perhaps touched in a few places by Johnson. Mr. Boswell has observed, that this paper not only has the general texture and colour of his style, but the authours with whom he was peculiarly conversant are readily introduced in it, in cursory allusion." Now the authours mentioned in that paper are Fontenelle, MilBarretier, Statius, Cowley, and Sir Thomas ton, Ramazzini, Madlle. Scuderi, Swift, Homer, Browne. With many of these, doubtless, Johnson was particularly conversant; but I doubt whether he would have characterised the expres sion quoted from Swift as elegant; and with the works of Ramazzini it is very improbable that he should have been acquainted. Ramazzini was a celebrated physician, who died at Padua, in 1714, at the age of 81; with whose writings Dr. Bathurst may be supposed to have been conversant. also with respect to Cowley Johnson, without doubt, had read his Latin poem on plants; but Bathurst's profession probably led him to read it with more attention than his friend had given to it; and Cowley's eulogy on the POPPY would more readily occur to the naturalist and the physician, than to a more general reader. I believe, however, that the last paragraph of the paper on Sleep, in which Sir Thomas Browne is quoted, to show the propriety of prayer, before we lie down to rest, was added by Johnson. MALONE. So [There is a great confusion and, as it seems, and besides, even at any after period, he might have used the same expression, considering it as a point of honour not to own them; for Mrs. Williams told me that," as he had given those Essays to Dr. Bathurst, who sold them at two guineas each, he never would own them; nay, he used to say he did not write them: but the fact was, that he dictated them while Bathurst wrote." I read to him Mrs. Williams's account; he smiled and said nothing. I am not quite satisfied with the casuistry by which the productions of one person are thus passed upon the world for the productions of another. I allow that not only knowledge, but powers and qualities of mind may be communicated; but the actual effect of individual exertion never can be transferred, with truth, to any other than its own original cause. One person's several errors in Mr. Boswell's and Mr. Malone's account of Johnson's share in the Adventurer, but it may be confidently asserted, on the evidence of Dr. Warton, and on Johnson's own confession to Miss Boothby (Letters, p. 48), that he wrote all those marked with the signature T. of which No. 39 on Sleep is one. The only difficulty is, that on the 8th March he tells Dr. Warton that he had " no part in the paper," and that one of the letters of Mysargyrus, marked T., was published on the 3d: but Johnson, whether he gave some of these essays to Dr. Bathurst or not, probably did not consider himself as having, by the writing one letter, a part,—that is, a proprietary or responsible part,-in the paper; and even if the letters principally in question had not had the mark T., the pedantic signature Mysargyrus would have been enough to lead us to Almost all suspect that they were Johnson's. the names, whether of men or women, affixed to the letters in the Rambler and Idler are of the same class.-ED.] [Mr. Boswell's reprehension of this casuistry seems just and candid. A man may undoubtedly sell the works of his mind as well as of his hands, but in neither case can falsehood (which might become fraud) be justified. Dollond would have had a perfect right to present a friend with one of his instruments to be sold to that friend's advantage, but he would not have been justifiable in allowing another maker to use his name. If a publisher had, on the strength of these papers in the Adventurer, offered Dr. Bathurst a large price for a literary work, could Johnson have But after possibly acquiesced in such a mistake? all, it seems doubtful that Johnson did give up all his share of the profits of the Adventurer to Dr. Bathurst, who, as Hawkins says, wrote the papers marked A. Johnson was at this period in great pecuniary distress-greater, we may supMr. pose, than Bathurst was likely to be in. Chalmers treats lightly Dr. Johnson's seeming acquiescence in Mrs. Williams's statement: " Dr. Johnson," says he, "probably smiled to see his friend puzzling himself with a difficulty which a plain question could in a moment have removed." -Brit. Ess. vol. xxiii. p. 32.-ED.] child may be made the child of another person by adoption, as among the Romans, or by the ancient Jewish mode of a wife having children borne to her upon her knees, by her handmaid. But these were children in a different sense from that of nature. It was clearly understood that they were not of the blood of their nominal parents. So in literary children, an authour may give the profits and fame of his composition to another man, but cannot make that other the real authour. A Highland gentleman, a younger branch of a family, once consulted me if he could not validly purchase the chieftainship of his family from the chief, who was willing to sell it. I told him it was impossible for him to acquire, by purchase, a right to be a different person from what he really was; for that the right of chieftainship attached to the blood of primogeniture, and, therefore, was incapable of being transferred. I added, that though Esau sold his birthright, or the advantages belonging to it, he still remained the first-born of his parents; and that whatever agreement a chief might make with any of the clan, the heralds'-office could not admit of the metamorphosis, or with any decency attest that the younger was the elder; but I did not convince the worthy gentleman. Johnson's papers in the Adventurer are very similar to those of the Rambler2; but being rather more varied in their subjects, and being mixed with essays by other writers, upon topicks more generally attractive than even the most elegant ethical discourses, the sale of the work, at first, was more extensive. Without meaning, however, to depreciate the Adventurer, I must observe, that as the value of the Rambler came, in the progress of time, to be better known, it grew upon the publick estimation, and that its sale has far exceeded that of any other periodical papers since the reign of Queen Anne. In one of the books of his diary I find the following entry: 66 Apr. 3, 1753. I began the second vol. of my Dictionary, room being left in the first for Preface, Grammar, and History, none of them yet begun. "O God, who hast hitherto supported enable me to proceed in this labour, me, 2 Dr. Johnson lowered and somewhat disguised his style, in writing the Adventurers, in order that his papers might pass for those of Dr. Bathurst to whom he consigned the profits. This was Hawkesworth's opinion.-BURNEY. [This seems very improbable; it is much more likely that, observing and feeling that a lighter style was better suited to such essays, he, with his natural good sense, fell a little into the easier manner of his colleagues. See ante, p. 102, n. -ED.] "DEAR SIR, I return you my sincerest thanks for the volumes of your new work'; but it is a kind of tyrannical kindness to give only so much at a time, as makes more longed for; but that will probably be thought, even of the whole, when you have given it. "I have no objection but to the preface, in which you first mention the letters as fallen by some chance into your hands, and afterwards mention your health as such, that you almost despaired of going through your plan. If you were to require my opinion which part should be changed, I should be inclined to the suppression of that part which seems to disclaim the composition. What is modesty, if it deserts from truth? Of what use is the disguise by which nothing is concealed? "You must forgive this, because it is meant well. "I thank you once more, dear sir, for your books; but cannot I prevail this time for an index?-such I wished, and shall wish, to Clarissa 2. Suppose that in one volume an accurate index was made to the three works-but while I am writing an objection arises such an index to the three would look like the preclusion of a fourth, to which I will never contribute; for if I cannot benefit mankind, I hope never to injure them. I am, sir, your most obliged and most humble servant, "SAM. JOHNSON."] He this year favoured Mrs. Lenox with a Dedication to the Earl of Orrery, of her "Shakspeare Illustrated 3." [Sir Charles Grandison, which was originally published in successive volumes. This relates to the sixth and seventh volumes.-ED.] 2 Richardson adopted Johnson's hint; for in 1755 he published in octavo, "A Collection of the Moral and Instructive Sentiments, Maxims, Cautions, and Reflections, contained in the Histories of Pamela, Clarissa, and Sir Charles Grandison, digested under proper heads." It is remarkable, that both to this book, and to the first two volumes of Clarissa, is prefixed a Preface by a friend. The "friend," in this latter instance, was the celebrated Dr. Warburton.—MALONE. 3 [Dr. Warton, in a letter to his brother, 7th June, 1753, says, "I want to see Charlotte Lennox's book," upon which Mr. Wooll adds the following note: "This eminently learned lady translated the Enchiridion of Epictetus, and the Greek Theatre of Le Père Brumoy."-Life of W. p. 217. Poor Mrs. Lennox had no claim In 1754 I can trace nothing published by him, except his numbers of the Adventurer, and "The Life of Edward Cave," in the Gentleman's Magazine for February. In biography there can be no question that he excelled, beyond all who have attempted that species of composition; upon which, indeed, he set the highest value. To the minute selection of characteristical circumstances, for which the ancients were remarkable, he added a philosophical research, and the most perspicuous and energetick language. Cave was certainly a man of estimable qualities, and was eminently diligent and successful in his own business, which, doubtless, entitled him to respect. But he was peculiarly fortunate in being recorded by Johnson; who, of the narrow life of a printer and publisher, without any digres sion or adventitious circumstances, has made an interesting and agreeable narrative. The Dictionary, we may believe, afforded Johnson full occupation this year. As it approached to its conclusion, he probably worked with redoubled vigour, as seamen increase their exertions and alacrity when they have a near prospect of their haven. Lord Chesterfield, to whom Johnson had paid the high compliment of addressing to his lordship the Plan of his Dictionary, had behaved to him in such a manner as to excite his contempt and indignation. The world has been for many years amused with a story confidently told, and as confidently repeated with additional circumstances, that a sudden disgust was taken by Johnson upon occasion of his having been one day kept long in waiting in his lordship's antechamber, for which the reason assigned was, that he had company with him; and that at last, when the door opened, out walked Colley Cibber; and that Johnson was so violently provoked when he found for whom he had been so long excluded, that he went away to the title of "an eminently learned lady." She did not translate Epictetus; and her translation from the French of Brumoy was not published till 1759. It was probably her abovementioned book on Shakspeare that Dr. Warton was desirous of seeing in 1753.-ED.] [This is not Johnson's appropriate praise; and indeed his want of attention to details is his greatest if not his only fault as a biographer. In the whole Life of Savage there is not one date: and no one, from his Life of Cave, would have imagined that Cave had been invited to meet the Prince and Princess of Wales at a country-house. Several details and corrections of errors, with which he was furnished for his Lives of the Poets, were wholly neglected. But in truth Mr. Boswell himself has, more than any other writer, contributed to create the public taste for biographical details; "the minute selection of characteristic circumstances," was neither the style of Johnson, nor the fashion of his day.-ED.] in a passion, and never would return. I the reason why he resolved to have no conremember having mentioned this story to nexion with him. When the Dictionary George Lord Lyttelton, who told me he was upon the eve of publication, Lord Cheswas very intimate with Lord Chesterfield; terfield, who, it is said, had flattered himand holding it as a well-known truth, de- self with expectations that Johnson would fended Lord Chesterfield by saying, that dedicate the work to him, attempted, in a "Cibber, who had been introduced familiar- courtly manner, to soothe and insinuate ly by the back-stairs, had probably not been himself with the sage, conscious, as it should there above ten minutes"" It may seem seem, of the cold indifference with which he strange even to entertain a doubt concern- | had treated its learned authour; and furing a story so long and so widely current, ther attempted to conciliate him, by writing and thus implicitly adopted, if not sanction- two papers in "The World," in recomed, by the authority which I have men-mendation of the work; and it must be contioned; but Johnson himself assured me, that there was not the least foundation for it. He told me, that there never was any particular incident which produced a quarrel between Lord Chesterfield and him; but that his lordship's continued neglect 2 was [Hawkins, who lived much with Johnson, about this period, attributes the breach between him and Lord Chesterfield to the offence taken by Johnson at being kept waiting during a visit of Cibber's; and Johnson himself, in his celebrated letter, seems to give colour to this latter opinion. He says: "It is seven years since I waited in your outer rooms, or was repulsed from your door, during which I have pushed my work to the verge of publication without one act of assistance, one word of encouragement, or one smile of favour; the expressions," waited in your outer rooms" and repulsed from your door" certainly gave colour to "the long current and implicitly adopted story' as told by Hawkins, and sanctioned by Lord Lyttelton. In all this affair, Johnson's account, as given by Boswell, is involved in inconsistencies, which seem to prove that his pride, or his waywardness, had taken of fence at what he afterwards felt, in his own heart, to be no adequate cause of animosity.-ED.] 2 [Why was it to be expected that Lord Chesterfield should cultivate his private acquaintance? that he did not do so, was a loss to his lordship; and the "amour propre " of Johnson might be (as, indeed, it probably was) offended at that neglect, but surely it was no ground for the kind of charge which is made against his lordship. But even this neglect of Johnson's acquaintance is not without some excuse. Johnson's personal manners and habits, even at a later and more polished period of his life, would probably not have been much to Lord Chesterfield's taste; but it must be remembered, that Johnson's introduction to Lord Chesterfield did not take place till his lordship was past fifty, and he was soon after attacked by a disease which estranged him from society. The neglect lasted, it is charged, from 1748 to 1755 the following extracts of his private letters to his most intimate friends will prove that during that period Lord Chesterfield may be excused for not cultivating Johnson's society : 20th January, 1749." My old disorder in my head hindered me from acknowledging your former letters." 30th June, 1752.-" I am here in my hermitage, very deaf, and consequently alone; but I fessed, that they contain some studied compliments, so finely turned, that if there had been no previous offence, it is probable that Johnson would have been highly delighted. Praise, in general, was pleasing to him; but am less dejected than most people in my situ ation would be." 11th Nov. 1752.-"The waters have done my head some good, but not enough to refit me for social life." 16th Feb. 1753.-" I grow deafer, and consequently more isolé' from society every day." 10th Oct. 1753.-"I belong no more to s0cial life, which, when I quitted busy publick life, I flattered myself would be the comfort of my declining age." 16th Nov. 1753.-"I give up all hopes of cure. I know my place and form my plan accordingly, for I strike society out of it." 7th Feb. 1754." At my age, and with my shattered constitution, freedom from pain is the best I can expect." 1st March, 1754.-"I am too much isolé, too much secluded either from the busy or the beau monde, to give you any account of either." 25th Sept. 1754.-" In truth, all the infirmities of an age still more advanced than mine crowd upon me. In this situation you will easily suppose that I have no pleasant hours." 10th July, 1755.-" My deafness is extremely increased, and daily increasing, and cuts me wholly off from the society of others, and my other complaints deny me the society of myself." Johnson, perhaps, knew nothing of all this, and imagined that Lord Chesterfield declined his acquaintance on some opinion derogatory to his personal pretensions. Mr. Tyers however, who knew Johnson early and more familiarly than the other biographers, suggests a more precise and probable ground for Johnson's animosity than Boswell gives, by hinting that Johnson expected some pecuniary assistance from Lord Chesterfield. He says, "It does not appear that Lord Chesterfield showed any substantial proofs of approbation to our philologer. A small present Johnson would have disdained, and he was not of a temper to put up with the affront of a disappointment. He revenged himself in a letter to his lordship written with great acrimony. Lord Chesterfield indeed commends and recommends Mr. Johnson's Dictionary in two or three numbers of the World: but not words alone please him.'"-Biog. Sketch. p. 7.-ED.] fied. by praise from a man of rank and elegant | bute to the farther spreading of our language accomplishments, he was peculiarly grati- in other countries. Learners were discouraged, by finding no standard to resort to; and, consequently, thought it incapable of any. They will now be undeceived and encouraged." His lordship says, "I think the publick in general, and the republick of letters in particular, are greatly obliged to Mr. Johnson, for having undertaken and executed so great and desirable a work. Perfection is not to be expected from man: but if we are to judge by the various works of Johnson already published, we have good reason to believe, that he will bring this as near to perfection as any man could do. The plan of it, which he published some years ago, seems to me to be a proof of it. Nothing can be more rationally imagined, or more accurately and elegantly expressed. I therefore recommend the previous perusal of it to all those who intend to buy the Dictionary, and who, I suppose, are all those who can afford it. * "It must be owned, that our language is, at present, in a state of anarchy, and hitherto, perhaps, it may not have been the worse for it. During our free and open trade, many words and expressions have been imported, adopted, and naturalized from other languages, which have greatly enriched our own. Let it still preserve what real strength and beauty it may have borrowed from others; but let it not, like the Tarpeian maid, be overwhelmed and crushed by unnecessary ornaments. The time for discrimination seems to be now come. Toleration, adoption, and naturalization have run their lengths. Good order and authority are now necessary. But where shall we find them, and at the same time, the obedience due to them? We must have recourse to the old Roman expedient in times of confusion, and choose a dictator. Upon this principle I give my vote for Mr. Johnson, to fill that great and arduous post; and I hereby declare that I make a total surrender of all my rights and privileges in the English language, as a free-born British subject, to the said Mr. Johnson, during the term of his dictatorship. Nay more, I will not only obey him like an old Roman, as my dictator, but, like a modern Roman, I will implicitly believe in him as my pope, and hold him to be infallible while in the chair, but no longer. More than this he cannot well require; for, I presume, that obedience can never be expected, when there is neither terrour to enforce, nor interest to invite it. "But a Grammar, a Dictionary, and a History of our Language, through its sev eral stages, were still wanting at home, and importunately called for from abroad. Mr. Johnson's labours will now, I dare say, very fully supply that want, and greatly contri This courtly device failed of its effect. Johnson, who thought that "all was false and hollow," despised the honeyed words, and was even indignant that Lord Chesterfield should, for a moment, imagine that he could be the dupe of such an artifice1. His expression to me concerning Lord Chesterfield, upon this occasion, was, "Sir, after making great professions, he had, for many years, taken no notice of me; but when my Dictionary was coming out, he fell a scribbling in The World' about it. Upon which, I wrote him a letter expressed in civil terms, but such as might show him that I did not mind what he said or wrote, and that I had done with him." This is that celebrated letter of which so much has been said, and about which curiosity has been so long excited, without being gratified. I for many years solicited Johnson to favour me with a copy of it, that so excellent a composition might not be lost to posterity. He delayed from time to time to give it to me 2; till at last, in 1781, when we were on a visit at Mr. Dilly's, at Southill in Bedfordshire, he was pleased to dictate it to me from memory. He afterwards found among his papers a copy of it, which he had dictated to Mr. Baretti, with its title and corrections, in his own hand-writing. This he gave to Mr. Langton; adding that if it were to me into print, he wished it to be from that copy. By Mr. Langton's kindness, I am enabled to enrich my work with a perfect transcript of what the world has so eagerly desired to see. "TO THE EARL OF CHESTERFIELD. "MY LORD, I have been lately informed, by the proprietor of The World,' that two [It does not appear that there was any thing like "device" or "artifice."-ED.] 2 Dr. Johnson appeared to have had a remarkable delicacy with respect to the circulation of this letter; for Dr. Douglas, bishop of Salisbury, informs me, that having many years ago pressed him to be allowed to read it to the second Lord Hardwicke, who was very desirous to hear it (promising at the same time, that no copy of it should be taken), Johnson seemed much pleased that it had attracted the attention of a nobleman of such respectable character; but after pausing some time, declined to comply with the request, dog too much already;" or words to that saying, with a smile, "No Sir; I have hurt the purpose. -BOSWELL. [This admission favours the editor's opinion that Johnson, when the first ebullition of temper had subsided, felt that he had been unreasonably violent.-Er.] |