DEATH OF LORD ROSSMORE.

Strictures on Dr. Johnson—His biographer, Boswell—False definitions and

erroneous ethics—Superstition—Supernatural appearances—Theological

argument of the author in favour of his peculiar faith—Original poetry

by Miss T * * *—The author purchases Lady Mayo’s demesne, County

Wicklow—Terrific and cultivated scenery contrasted—Description of the

Golden Belt of Ireland and the beauties of the above-mentioned

county—Lord Rossmore—His character—Supernatural incident of a most

extraordinary nature, vouched by living witnesses, and attendant on

the sudden death of his Lordship.

It is not pleasant to differ essentially from the general opinions of

the world, and nothing but a firm belief that we are right can bear us

up in so doing. I feel my own fallibility poignantly, when I venture to

remark upon the celebrated personage yclept “the great moralist of

England.”

To criticise the labours of that giant of literature I am unequal: to

detract from his ethics is not my object. But it surely savours not of

treason to avow that parts of his Lexicon I condemn, and much of his

philosophy I dissent from.

It is fortunate for the sake of truth that Boswell became Johnson’s

biographer; for, as the idolaters of China devoutly attach a full

proportion of bad qualities to the object of their adoration, so in like

manner has “Bozzy” shown no want of candour as to the Doctor’s failings;

and if he had reflected on the unkind constructions of this wicked

world, his eulogiums would probably have been rendered less fulsome, and

his biography yet more correct.—It could not be more entertaining.

The English language had been advancing gradually in its own jog-trot

way from the days of Bayley to those of Johnson: it travelled over a

plain smooth surface and on a gentle ascent. Every body formerly

appeared to understand each other tolerably well: words were then very

intelligible, and women, in general, found no difficulty in pronouncing

them. But the great lexicographer soon convinced the British people (the

Irish are out of the question) that they had been reading, writing, and

spouting in a starved, contracted tongue, and that the magnificent

_dapimibominus’s_ of the Grecian language were ready in polysyllables to

relieve that wretched poverty under which ours had so long languished.

This noble revolution in letters has made a progress so rapid, that I

found in one essay of a Magazine, a few months ago, no fewer than twenty

words which required me to make as many references to our great Lexicon.

Nobody can deny the miraculous labour which that work must have

required: yet now, when enthusiasm has somewhat abated, and no danger

exists of being clapper-clawed by the Doctor himself, some ungrateful

English grammarians have presumed to assert that, under the gaberdine of

so great an authority, any body is lawfully entitled to coin any

_English_ word he chooses out of any foreign language he thinks proper;

and that we may thus tune up our vocabulary to the key of a _lingua

franca_, an assemblage of all tongues, sounds, and idioms, dead or

living. It has also been asserted, since his decease, that the Doctor’s

logic is frequently false both in premises and conclusion, his ethics

erroneous, his philosophy often unintelligible, and his diction

generally bombastic. However, there are so many able and idle gentlemen

of law, physic, and divinity, amply educated, with pens stuck behind

their ears ready for action, who are much better skilled in the art and

practice of criticism than I am, that I shall content myself with

commenting on one solitary word out of forty thousand, which word not

only bears strongly on my own tenets and faith, but also affects one of

the most extraordinary occurrences of my life.

This comprehensive and important word, (which has upon occasion

puzzled me more than any other in the English language,) is

“_superstition_:”—whereof one of the definitions given by the Doctor,

in his Lexicon, appears to be rather inconsiderate, namely,—“religion

without morality.”—Now, I freely and fully admit that I am

_superstitious_, yet I think it is rather severe and somewhat singular

in the Doctor to admit my religion and extinguish my morality, which I

always considered as marching hand in hand—or, in truth, I thought the

latter should go foremost.

When Dr. Johnson began to learn his own ideas of morality does not

appear (certainly not from his friend Savage):—I suppose not until he

got an honorary degree from the pedants of Oxford. Collegiate degrees in

general, however, work no great reformation, I am inclined to believe,

in morality; at least I am certain that when I became a Doctor of Laws I

did not feel my morals in the least improved by my diploma. I wish the

candid Boswell had mentioned the precise epocha of the Doctor’s

reformation (for he admits him to have been a _little_ wild in his

youth); and then we might have judged under what state of mind he gave

the strange definition of “_religion_ without _morality_.”

For myself, I consider _faith_, grounded on the phenomena of _Nature_,

not the faith of sectarianism or fanaticism, as the true source and

foundation of morality;—and morality as the true source and foundation

of religion.

No human demonstration can cope with that presented by the face of

Nature. What proof so infallible as that the sun produces light and heat

and vegetation?[23]—that the tides ebb and flow—that the thunder

rolls—that the lightning flashes—that the planets shine?[24] Who can

gaze on the vast orb of day without feeling that it is the visible

demonstration of a superior Being, convincing our reason and our senses,

and even the scanty reason of illiterate savages?

-----

Footnote 23:

The following lines are by Miss M. Tylden, the young poetess whom I

have before mentioned, and shall again allude to more fully. In my

humble opinion, there are not fourteen consecutive lines in the

English language superior in true sublimity both of thought and

language:

The sun is in the empire of his light,

Throned in the mighty solitude of heaven:

He seems the visible Omnipotent

Dwelling in glory:—his high sanctuary

Do the eyes worship, and, thereon as if

Impiety to gaze, the senses reel,

Drunk with the spirit of his deep refulgence.

Circle of glory!—Diadem of heaven!

Cast in the mould of bright eternity,

And bodying forth the attributes of Him

Who made thee of this visible world supreme;

And thou becamest a wonder and a praise,—

A worship—yea, a _pure idolatry_!

The image of the glories of our God.

I look upon the _personification_ of _God_ to be the excess of

blasphemy.

Footnote 24:

The reader may deem it curious to compare the two following

stanzas—the first graced with the great name of Mr. Addison; the

second the performance of my accomplished young friend, and extracted

from her common-place book, without any opportunity given for

revision.—She is ignorant that I have published a line of hers.

Personal sketches of his own times, Vol. 2 (of 3) · 第 81 / 126 题