Mr Scott came to breakfast, at which I introduced to Dr Johnson, and
him, my friend Sir William Forbes, now of Pitsligo; a man of whom too
much good cannot be said; who, with distinguished abilities and
application in his profession of a banker, is at once a good
companion, and a good Christian; which I think is saying enough. Yet
it is but justice to record, that once, when he was in a dangerous
illness, he was watched with the anxious apprehension of a general
calamity; day and night his house was beset with affectionate
inquiries; and, upon his recovery, Te deum was the universal chorus
from the hearts of his countrymen.
Mr Johnson was pleased with my daughter Veronica,[Footnote: "The
saint's name of Veronica was introduced into our family through my
great grandmother Veronica, Countess of Kincardine, a Dutch lady of
the noble house of Sommelsdyck, of which there is a full account in
Bayle's Dictionary. The family had once a princely right in Surinam.
The governour of that settlement was appointed by the States General,
the town of Amsterdam, and Sommelsdyck. The States General have
acquired Sommelsdyck's right; but the family has still great dignity
and opulence, and by intermarriages is connected with many other noble
families. When I was at the Hague, I was received with all the
affection of kindred. The present Sommelsdyck has an important charge
in the Republick, and is as worthy a man as lives. He has honoured me
with his correspondence for these twenty years. My great grandfather,
the husband of Countess Veronica, was Alexander, Earl of Kincardine,
that eminent Royalist whose character is given by Burnet in his
History of his own Times. From him the blood of Bruce flows in my
veins. Of such ancestry who would not be proud? And, as Nihil est,
nisi hoc sciat alter, is peculiarly true of genealogy, who would not
be glad to seize a fair opportunity to let it be known "] then a child
of about four months old. She had the appearance of listening to him.
His motions seemed to her to be intended for her amusement; and when
he stopped, she fluttered, and made a little infantine noise, and a
kind of signal for him to begin again. She would be held close to him;
which was a proof, from simple nature, that his figure was not horrid.
Her fondness for him endeared her still more to me, and I declared she
should have five hundred pounds of additional fortune.
We talked of the practice of the law. William Forbes said, he thought
an honest lawyer should never undertake a cause which he was satisfied
was not a just one. 'Sir,' said Mr Johnson, 'a lawyer has no business
with the justice or injustice of the cause which he undertakes, unless
his client asks his opinion, and then he is bound to give it honestly.
The justice or injustice of the cause is to be decided by the judge.
Consider, sir; what is the purpose of courts of justice? It is, that
every man may have his cause fairly tried, by men appointed to try
causes. A lawyer is not to tell what he knows to be a lie: he is not
to produce what he knows to be a false deed; but he is not to usurp
the province of the jury and of the judge, and determine what shall be
the effect of evidence--what shall be the result of legal argument. As
it rarely happens that a man is fit to plead his own cause, lawyers
are a class of the community, who, by study and experience, have
acquired the art and power of arranging evidence, and of applying to
the points of issue what the law has settled. A lawyer is to do for
his client all that his client might fairly do for himself, if he
could. If, by a superiority of attention, of knowledge, of skill, and
a better method of communication, he has the advantage of his
adversary, it is an advantage to which he is entitled. There must
always be some advantage, on one side or other; and it is better that
advantage should be had by talents, than by chance. If lawyers were to
undertake no causes till they were sure they were just, a man might be
precluded altogether from a trial of his claim, though, were it
judicially examined, it might be found a very just claim.' This was
sound practical doctrine, and rationally repressed a too refined
scrupulosity of conscience.
Emigration was at this time a common topick of discourse. Dr Johnson
regretted it as hurtful to human happiness: 'For,' said he, 'it
spreads mankind which weakens the defence of a nation, and lessens the
comfort of living. Men, thinly scattered, make a shift, but a bad
shift, without many things. A smith is ten miles off: they'll do
without a nail or a staple. A taylor is far from them: they'll botch
their own clothes. It is being concentrated which produces high
convenience.'
Sir William Forbes, Mr Scott, and I, accompanied Mr Johnson to the
chapel, founded by Lord Chief Baron Smith, for the Service of the
Church of England. The Reverend Mr Carre, the senior clergyman,
preached from these words, 'Because the Lord reigneth, let the earth
be glad.' I was sorry to think Mr Johnson did not attend to the
sermon, Mr Carre's low voice not being strong enough to reach his
hearing. A selection of Mr Carre's sermons has, since his death, been
published by Sir William Forbes, and the world has acknowledged their
uncommon merit. I am well assured Lord Mansfield has pronounced them
to be excellent.
Here I obtained a promise from Lord Chief Baron Orde, that he would
dine at my house next day. I presented Mr Johnson to his Lordship, who
politely said to him, 'I have not the honour of knowing you; but I
hope for it, and to see you at my house. I am to wait on you
tomorrow.' This respectable English judge will be long remembered in
Scotland, where he built an elegant house, and lived in it
magnificently. His own ample fortune, with the addition of his salary,
enabled him to be splendidly hospitable. It may be fortunate for an
individual amongst ourselves to be Lord Chief Baron; and a most worthy
man now has the office; but, in my opinion, it is better for Scotland
in general, that some of our publick employments should be filled by
gentlemen of distinction from the south side of the Tweed, as we have
the benefit of promotion in England. Such an interchange would make a
beneficial mixture of manners, and render our union more complete.
Lord Chief Baron Orde was on good terms with us all, in a narrow
country filled with jarring interests and keen parties; and, though I
well knew his opinion to be the same with my own, he kept himself
aloof at a very critical period indeed, when the Douglas cause shook
the sacred security of birthright in Scotland to its foundation; a
cause, which had it happened before the Union, when there was no
appeal to a British House of Lords, would have left the great fortress
of honours and of property in ruins.
When we got home, Dr Johnson desired to see my books. He took down
Ogden's Sermons on Prayer, on which I set a very high value, having
been much edified by them, and he retired with them to his room. He
did not stay long, but soon joined us in the drawing room. I presented
to him Mr Robert Arbuthnot, a relation of the celebrated Dr Arbuthnot,
and a man of literature and taste. To him we were obliged for a
previous recommendation, which secured us a very agreeable reception
at St Andrews, and which Dr Johnson, in his Journey, ascribes to 'some
invisible friend'.
Of Dr Beattie, Mr Johnson said, 'Sir, he has written like a man
conscious of the truth, and feeling his own strength. Treating your
adversary with respect, is giving him an advantage to which he is not
entitled. The greatest part of men cannot judge of reasoning, and are
impressed by character; so that, if you allow your adversary a
respectable character, they will think, that though you differ from
him, you may be in the wrong. Sir, treating your adversary with
respect, is striking soft in a battle. And as to Hume--a man who has
so much conceit as to tell all mankind that they have been bubbled for
ages, and he is the wise man who sees better than they--a man who has
so little scrupulosity as to venture to oppose those principles which
have been thought necessary to human happiness--is he to be surprised
if another man comes and laughs at him? If he is the great man he
thinks himself, all this cannot hurt him: it is like throwing peas
against a rock.' He added 'something much too rough', both as to Mr
Hume's head and heart, which I suppress. Violence is, in my opinion,
not suitable to the Christian cause. Besides, I always lived on good
terms with Mr Hume, though I have frankly told him, I was not clear
that it was right in me to keep company with him, 'But', said I, 'how
much better are you than your books!' He was cheerful, obliging, and
instructive; he was charitable to the poor; and many an agreeable hour
have I passed with him: I have preserved some entertaining and
interesting memoirs of him, particularly when he knew himself to be
dying, which I may some time or other communicate to the world. I
shall not, however, extol him so very highly as Dr Adam Smith does,
who says, in a letter to Mr Strahan the printer (not a confidential
letter to his friend, but a letter which is published [Footnote: This
letter, though shattered by the sharp shot of Dr Horne of Oxford's
wit, in the character of 'One of the People called Christians', is
still prefixed to Mr Home's excellent History of England, like a poor
invalid on the piquet guard, or like a list of quack medicines sold by
the same bookseller, by whom a work of whatever nature is published;
for it has no connection with his History, let it have what it may
with what are called his Philosophical Works. A worthy friend of mine
in London was lately consulted by a lady of quality, of most
distinguished merit, what was the best History of England for her son
to read. My friend recommended Hume's. But, upon recollecting that its
usher was a superlative panegyrick on one, who endeavoured to sap the
credit of our holy religion, he revoked his recommendation. I am
really sorry for this ostentatious alliance; because I admire The
Theory of Moral Sentiments, and value the greatest part of An Inquiry
into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. Why should such a
writer be so forgetful of human comfort, as to give any countenance to
that dreary infidelity which would make us poor indeed!'] with all
formality): 'Upon the whole, I have always considered him, both in his
life time and since his death, as approaching as nearly to the idea of
a perfectly wise and virtuous man as perhaps the nature of human
frailty will permit.' Let Dr Smith consider: Was not Mr Hume blest
with good health, good spirits, good friends, a competent and
increasing fortune? And had he not also a perpetual feast of fame?
But, as a learned friend has observed to me, 'What trials did he
undergo, to prove the perfection of his virtue? Did he ever experience
any great instance of adversity?' When I read this sentence, delivered
by my old Professor of Moral Philosophy, I could not help exclaiming
with the Psalmist, 'Surely I have now more understanding than my
teachers!'
While we were talking, there came a note to me from Dr William
Robertson.
Dear Sir,
I have been expecting every day to hear from you, of Dr Johnson's
arrival. Pray, what do you know about his motions? I long to take him
by the hand. I write this from the college, where I have only this
scrap of paper. Ever yours,
W.R.
Sunday.
It pleased me to find Dr Robertson thus eager to meet Dr Johnson. I
was glad I could answer, that he was come: and I begged Dr Robertson
might be with us as soon as he could. Sir William Forbes, Mr Scott, Mr
Arbuthnot, and another gentleman dined with us. 'Come, Dr Johnson,'
said I, 'it is commonly thought that our veal in Scotland is not good.
But here is some which I believe you will like.' There was no catching
him: JOHNSON. 'Why, sir, what is commonly thought, I should take to be
true. YOUR veal may be good; but that will only be an exception to the
general opinion; not a proof against it.'
Dr Robertson, according to the custom of Edinburgh at that time, dined
in the interval between the forenoon and afternoon service, which was
then later than now; so we had not the pleasure of his company till
dinner was over, when he came and drank wine with us. And then began
some animated dialogue, of which here follows a pretty full note.
We talked of Mr Burke. Dr Johnson said, he had great variety of
knowledge, store of imagery, copiousness of language. ROBERTSON. 'He
has wit too.' JOHNSON. 'No, sir; he never succeeds there. 'Tis low;
'tis conceit. I used to say. Burke never once made a good joke.
[Footnote: This was one of the points upon which Dr Johnson was
strangely heterodox. For, surely, Mr Burke, with his other remarkable
qualities, is also distinguished for his wit, and for wit of all kinds
too; not merely that power of language which Pope chooses to
denominate wit.
True wit is Nature to advantage drest;
What oft was thought, but ne'er so well exprest.
but surprising allusions, brilliant sallies of vivacity, and pleasant
conceits. His speeches in Parliament are strewed with them. Take, for
instance, the variety which he has given in his wide range, yet exact
detail, when exhibiting his Reform Bill. And his conversation abounds
in wit. Let me put down a specimen. I told him, I had seen, at a blue
stocking assembly, a number of ladies sitting round a worthy and tall
friend of ours, listening to his literature. 'Ay,' said he, 'like
maids round a May-pole.' I told him, I had found a perfect definition
of human nature, as distinguished from the animal. An ancient
philosopher said, man was a 'two-legged animal without feathers', upon
which his rival sage had a cock plucked bare, and set him down in the
school before all the disciples, as a 'Philosophick Man'. Dr Franklin
said, man was 'a tool-making animal', which is very well; for no
animal but man makes a thing, by means of which he can make another
thing. But this applies to very few of the species. My definition of
man is, 'a Cooking Animal'. The beasts have memory, judgment and all
the faculties and passions of our mind, in a certain degree; but no
beast is a cook. The trick of the monkey using the cat's paw to roast
a chestnut is only a piece of shrewd malice in that turpissima bestia,
which humbles us so sadly by its similarity to us. Man alone can dress
a good dish; and every man whatever is more or less a cook, in
seasoning what he himself eats. 'Your definition is good,' said Mr
Burke, 'and I now see the full force of the common proverb. "There is
REASON in roasting of eggs".' When Mr Wilkes, in his days of
tumultuous opposition, was borne upon the shoulders of the mob. Mr
Burke (as Mr Wilkes told me himself, with classical admiration,)
applied to him what Horace says of Pindar,
... numerisque fertur
LEGE solutis.
Sir Joshua Reynolds, who agrees with me entirely as to Mr Burke's
fertility of wit said, that this was 'dignifying a pun'. He also
observed, that he has often heard Burke say, in the course of an
evening, ten good things, each of which would have served a noted wit
(whom he named) to live upon for a twelvemonth.
I find, since the former edition, that some persons have objected to
the instances which I have given of Mr Burke's wit, as not doing
justice to my very ingenious friend; the specimens produced having, it
is alleged, more of conceit than real wit and being merely sportive
sallies of the moment, not justifying the encomium which they think
with me, he undoubtedly merits. I was well aware, how hazardous it was
to exhibit particular instances of wit, which is of so airy and
spiritual a nature as often to elude the hand that attempts to grasp
it. The excellence and efficacy of a bon mot depend frequently so much
on the occasion on which it is spoken, on the particular manner of the
speaker, on the person of whom it is applied, the previous
introduction, and a thousand minute particulars which cannot be easily
enumerated, that it is always dangerous to detach a witty saying from
the group to which it belongs, and to see it before the eye of the
spectator, divested of those concomitant circumstances, which gave it
animation, mellowness, and relief. I ventured, however, at all hazards
to put down the first instances that occurred to me, as proofs of Mr
Burke's lively and brilliant fancy; but am very sensible that his
numerous friends could have suggested many of a superior quality.
Indeed, the being in company with him, for a single day, is sufficient
to shew that what I have asserted is well founded; and it was only
necessary to have appealed to all who know him intimately, for a
complete refutation of the heterodox opinion entertained by Dr Johnson
on this subject. HE allowed Mr Burke, as the reader will find
hereafter, to be a man of consummate and unrivalled abilities in every
light except that now under consideration; and the variety of his
allusions, and splendour of his imagery, have made such an impression
on ALL THE REST of the world, that superficial observers are apt to
overlook his other merits, and to suppose that wit is his chief and
most prominent excellence; when in fact it is only one of the many
talents that he possesses, which are so various and extraordinary,
that it is very difficult to ascertain precisely the rank and value of
each.] What I most envy Burke for, is, his being constantly the same.
He is never what we call humdrum; never unwilling to begin to talk,
nor in haste to leave off.' BOSWELL. 'Yet he can listen.' JOHNSON.
'No; I cannot say he is good at that. So desirous is he to talk, that,
if one is speaking at this end of the table, he'll speak to somebody
at the other end. Burke, sir, is such a man, that if you met him for
the first time in the street where you were stopped by a drove of
oxen, and you and he stepped aside to take shelter but for five
minutes, he'd talk to you in such a manner, that, when you parted, you
would say, this is an extraordinary man. Now, you may be long enough
with me, without finding any thing extraordinary.' He said, he
believed Burke was intended for the law; but either had not money
enough to follow it, or had not diligence enough. He said, he could
not understand how a man could apply to one thing, and not to another.
Robertson said, one man had more judgment, another more imagination.
JOHNSON. 'No, sir; it is only, one man has more mind than another. He
may direct it differently; he may, by accident, see the success of one
kind of study, and take a desire to excel in it. I am persuaded that,
had Sir Isaac Newton applied to poetry, he would have made a very fine
epick poem. I could as easily apply to law as to tragick poetry.'
BOSWELL. 'Yet, sir, you did apply to tragick poetry, not to law.'
JOHNSON. 'Because, sir, I had not money to study law. Sir, the man who
has vigour, may walk to the east, just as well as to the west, if he
happens to turn his head that way.' BOSWELL. 'But, sir, 'tis like
walking up and down a hill; one man will naturally do the one better
than the other. A hare will run up a hill best, from her fore-legs
being short; a dog down.' JOHNSON. 'Nay, sir; that is from mechanical
powers. If you make mind mechanical, you may argue in that manner. One
mind is a vice, and holds fast; there's a good memory. Another is a
file; and he is a disputant, a controversialist. Another is a razor;
and he is sarcastical.' We talked of Whitefield. He said, he was at
the same college with him, and knew him 'before he began to be better
than other people' (smiling); that he believed he sincerely meant
well, but had a mixture of politicks and ostentation: whereas Wesley
thought of religion only. [Footnote: That cannot be said now, after
the flagrant part which Mr John Wesley took against our American
brethren, when, in his own name, he threw amongst his enthusiastic
flock, the very individual combustibles of Dr Johnson's Taxation no
Tyranny: and after the intolerant spirit which he manifested against
our fellow Christians of the Roman Catholick Communion, for which that
able champion, Father O'Leary, has given him so hearty a drubbing. But
I should think myself very unworthy, if I did not at the same time
acknowledge Mr John Wesley's merit, as a veteran 'Soldier of Jesus
Christ', who has, I do believe, 'turned many from darkness into light,
and from the power of Satan to the living God'.] Robertson said,
Whitefield had strong natural eloquence, which, if cultivated, would
have done great things. JOHNSON. 'Why, sir, I take it, he was at the
height of what his abilities could do, and was sensible of it. He had
the ordinary advantages of education; but he chose to pursue that
oratory which is for the mob.' BOSWELL. 'He had great effect on the
passions.' JOHNSON. 'Why, sir, I don't think so. He could not
represent a succession of pathetick images. He vociferated, and made
an impression. THERE, again, was a mind like a hammer.' Dr Johnson now
said, a certain eminent political friend of ours was wrong, in his
maxim of sticking to a certain set of MEN on all occasions. 'I can see
that a man may do right to stick to a PARTY,' said he;' that is to
say, he is a WHIG, or he is a TORY, and he thinks one of those parties
upon the whole the best, and that to make it prevail, it must be
generally supported, though, in particulars, it may be wrong. He takes
its faggot of principles, in which there are fewer rotten sticks than
in the other, though some rotten sticks to be sure; and they cannot
well be separated. But, to bind one's self to one man, or one set of
men (who may be right to-day and wrong to-morrow), without any general
preference of system, I must disapprove.' [Footnote: If due attention
were paid to this observation, there would be more virtue, even in
politicks. What Dr Johnson justly condemned, has, I am sorry to say,
greatly increased in the present reign. At the distance of four years
from this conversation, 21st February 1777, My Lord Archbishop of
York, in his 'Sermon before the Society for the Propagation of the
Gospel in Foreign Parts', thus indignantly describes the then state of
parties: 'Parties once had a PRINCIPLE belonging to them, absurd
perhaps, and indefensible, but still carrying a notion of DUTY, by
which honest minds might easily be caught.
'But they are now COMBINATIONS OF INDIVIDUALS, who, instead of being
the sons and servants of the community, make a league for advancing
their PRIVATE INTERESTS. It is their business to hold high the notion
of POLITICAL HONOUR. I believe and trust, it is not injurious to say,
that such a bond is no better than that by which the lowest and
wickedest combinations are held together; and that it denotes the last
stage of political depravity.'
To find a thought, which just shewed itself to us from the mind of
JOHNSON, thus appearing again at such a distance of time, and without
any communication between them, enlarged to full growth in the mind of
MARKHAM, is a curious object of philosophical contemplation. That two
such great and luminous minds should have been so dark in one
corner--that THEY should have held it to be 'wicked rebellion in the
British subjects established in America, to resist the abject
condition of holding all their property at the mercy of British
subjects remaining at home, while their allegiance to our common Lord
the King was to be preserved inviolate'--is a striking proof to me,
either that 'He who fitteth in Heaven', scorns the loftiness of human
pride, or that the evil spirit, whose personal existence I strongly
believe, and even in this age am confirmed in that belief by a Fell,
nay, by a Hurd, has more power than some choose to allow.]
He told us of Cooke, who translated Hesiod, and lived twenty years on
a translation of Plautus, for which he was always taking
subscriptions; and that he presented Foote to a club, in the following
singular manner: 'This is the nephew of the gentleman who was lately
hung in chains for murdering his brother.'
In the evening I introduced to Mr Johnson [Footnote: It may be
observed, that I sometimes call my great friend, MR Johnson, sometimes
DR Johnson, though he had at this time a doctor's degree from Trinity
College, Dublin. The University of Oxford afterwards conferred it upon
him by a diploma, in very honourable terms. It was some time before I
could bring myself to call him Doctor; but as he has been long known
by that title, I shall give it to him in the rest of this Journal.]
two good friends of mine, Mr William Nairne, advocate, and Mr Hamilton
of Sundrum, my neighbour in the country, both of whom supped with us.
I have preserved nothing of what passed, except that Dr Johnson
displayed another of his heterodox opinions--a contempt of tragick
acting. He said, 'the action of all players in tragedy is bad. It
should be a man's study to repress those signs of emotion and passion,
as they are called.' He was of a directly contrary opinion to that of
Fielding, in his Tom Jones; who makes Partridge say, of Garrick, 'why,
I could act as well as he myself. I am sure, if I had seen a ghost, I
should have looked in the very same manner, and done just as he did.'
For, when I asked him, 'Would not you, sir, start as Mr Garrick does,
if you saw a ghost?' He answered, 'I hope not. If I did, I should
frighten the ghost.'