It was rather worse weather than any that we had yet. At breakfast Dr.
Johnson said, 'Some cunning men choose fools for their wives, thinking
to manage them, but they always fail. There is a spaniel fool and a mule
fool. The spaniel fool may be made to do by beating. The mule fool will
neither do by words or blows; and the spaniel fool often turns mule at
last: and suppose a fool to be made do pretty well, you must have the
continual trouble of making her do. Depend upon it, no woman is the
worse for sense and knowledge.[623]' Whether afterwards he meant merely
to say a polite thing, or to give his opinion, I could not be sure; but
he added, 'Men know that women are an over-match for them, and therefore
they choose the weakest or most ignorant. If they did not think so, they
never could be afraid of women knowing as much as themselves.'[624] In
justice to the sex, I think it but candid to acknowledge, that, in a
subsequent conversation, he told me that he was serious in what he
had said.
He came to my room this morning before breakfast, to read my Journal,
which he has done all along. He often before said, 'I take great delight
in reading it.' To-day he said, 'You improve: it grows better and
better.' I observed, there was a danger of my getting a habit of writing
in a slovenly manner. 'Sir,' said he, 'it is not written in a slovenly
manner. It might be printed, were the subject fit for printing[625].'
While Mr. Beaton preached to us in the dining-room, Dr. Johnson sat in
his own room, where I saw lying before him a volume of Lord Bacon's
works, _The Decay of Christian Piety_, Monboddo's _Origin of Language_,
and Sterne's _Sermons_[626]. He asked me to-day how it happened that we
were so little together: I told him, my Journal took up much time. Yet,
on reflection, it appeared strange to me, that although I will run from
one end of London to another to pass an hour with him, I should omit to
seize any spare time to be in his company, when I am settled in the same
house with him. But my Journal is really a task of much time and labour,
and he forbids me to contract it.
I omitted to mention, in its place, that Dr. Johnson told Mr. M'Queen
that he had found the belief of the second sight universal in Sky,
except among the clergy, who seemed determined against it. I took the
liberty to observe to Mr. M'Queen, that the clergy were actuated by a
kind of vanity. 'The world, (say they,) takes us to be credulous men in
a remote corner. We'll shew them that we are more enlightened than they
think.' The worthy man said, that his disbelief of it was from his not
finding sufficient evidence; but I could perceive that he was prejudiced
against it[627].
After dinner to-day, we talked of the extraordinary fact of Lady
Grange's being sent to St. Kilda, and confined there for several years,
without any means of relief[628]. Dr. Johnson said, if M'Leod would let
it be known that he had such a place for naughty ladies, he might make
it a very profitable island. We had, in the course of our tour, heard of
St. Kilda poetry. Dr. Johnson observed, 'it must be very poor, because
they have very few images.' BOSWELL. 'There may be a poetical genius
shewn in combining these, and in making poetry of them.' JOHNSON. 'Sir,
a man cannot make fire but in proportion as he has fuel. He cannot coin
guineas but in proportion as he has gold.' At tea he talked of his
intending to go to Italy in 1775. M'Leod said, he would like Paris
better. JOHNSON. 'No, Sir; there are none of the French literati now
alive, to visit whom I would cross a sea. I can find in Buffon's book
all that he can say[629].'
After supper he said, 'I am sorry that prize-fighting is gone out[630];
every art should be preserved, and the art of defence is surely
important. It is absurd that our soldiers should have swords, and not be
taught the use of them. Prize-fighting made people accustomed not to be
alarmed at seeing their own blood, or feeling a little pain from a
wound. I think the heavy _glaymore_ was an ill-contrived weapon. A man
could only strike once with it. It employed both his hands, and he must
of course be soon fatigued with wielding it; so that if his antagonist
could only keep playing a while, he was sure of him. I would fight with
a dirk against Rorie More's sword. I could ward off a blow with a dirk,
and then run in upon my enemy. When within that heavy sword, I have him;
he is quite helpless, and I could stab him at my leisure, like a calf.
It is thought by sensible military men, that the English do not enough
avail themselves of their superior strength of body against the French;
for that must always have a great advantage in pushing with bayonets. I
have heard an officer say, that if women could be made to stand, they
would do as well as men in a mere interchange of bullets from a
distance: but, if a body of men should come close up to them, then to be
sure they must be overcome; now, (said he,) in the same manner the
weaker-bodied French must be overcome by our strong soldiers.'
The subject of duelling was introduced[631] JOHNSON. 'There is no case
in England where one or other of the combatants _must_ die: if you have
overcome your adversary by disarming him, that is sufficient, though you
should not kill him; your honour, or the honour of your family, is
restored, as much as it can be by a duel. It is cowardly to force your
antagonist to renew the combat, when you know that you have the
advantage of him by superior skill. You might just as well go and cut
his throat while he is asleep in his bed. When a duel begins, it is
supposed there may be an equality; because it is not always skill that
prevails. It depends much on presence of mind; nay on accidents. The
wind may be in a man's face. He may fall. Many such things may decide
the superiority. A man is sufficiently punished, by being called out,
and subjected to the risk that is in a duel.' But on my suggesting that
the injured person is equally subjected to risk, he fairly owned he
could not explain the rationality of duelling.