1762-1763. Æt. 51-52.
The Publication of the History anterior to the Accession of
the Tudors--Completion of the History--Inquiry how far it is a
complete History--Hume's Intention to write an Ecclesiastical
History--Opinions of Townsend and others on his History--
Appreciation of the Fine Arts--Hume's House in James's Court--
Its subsequent occupation by Boswell and Johnson--Conduct
of David Mallet--Hume's Projects--The Douglas Cause--
Correspondence with Reid.
In 1762 there was published, in two quarto volumes, the "History of
England, from the Invasion of Julius Cæsar, to the Accession of Henry
VII." The farther back we proceed from those periods of which a full
narrative of historical events is preserved by contemporary chroniclers,
into those more obscure ages when even the lines of kings are hardly
preserved, and fragments of laws, or of long obsolete literature, and
antiquarian relics, are the historian's only guide, the less
satisfactory is Hume's history, when compared with other historical
works. The earliest part is thus the least valuable. He had here,
however, to encounter difficulties which we are only at this day able to
estimate, in the absence of those materials which the industry of
antiquaries has lately brought to light, to so great an extent, as
almost necessarily to supersede Hume's "History of England" during the
early ages, as a source of historical knowledge.[121:1]
But both in this and the other departments of his work, we are bound to
estimate Hume, as we do great workmen in all departments of mental
labour, not by the state of his science at the present day, but by that
in which he found it. To comprehend how far it may be practicable for
any one mind to create a full and satisfactory history of the island of
Great Britain, without having the advantage of the previous labours of
many minds, occupied in elucidating the details of the various branches
of knowledge with which he has to deal, let us cast a casual glance at
the prominent topics which must be fully discussed in such a History, if
it be a satisfactory work.
The historian should be master of every scrap of information contained
in Greek or Roman authors, about the connexion of the people of the
ancient world with our island. In the works of Cæsar and Tacitus this
will be a simple matter; but scattered about among the productions of
the Panegyrists, and in other such obscure quarters, there are many
important incidental notices, which will not be so easily found or so
satisfactorily interpreted. To this the investigator must add more
recondite stores of knowledge, collected from etymological
investigations among the roots of languages--Celtic and Teutonic. He
must study Strabo, Ptolemy, and the other geographers; and interpreting
the information collected from them, and the incidents derived from the
other sources above alluded to, with his etymological inquiries, he must
endeavour to solve the vexed questions about the migration of
races--whether the Cimbri were pure Celts? whether the Welsh are the
descendants of that race? whether the Caledonii, with whom Agricola
fought, were Celts? who and what were those mysterious people, called
the Picts?
There must be some criticism, however unsatisfactory it may be, on the
worship anterior to the introduction of Christianity, and on the
vestiges of that and of other early customs supposed to be supplied by
the remnants of ancient masonry and engineering, with which our island
abounds. The historian must next be able to show what is truly known,
and what is not, regarding the inroads of the Teutonic tribes, and must
be able to fathom the learning of the German antiquaries on this
department of history. Here the early literature of Ireland, of which so
much has lately been printed by O'Conor and others, and the relics of
Scandinavian metrical histories, will widen the inquiry, while they
render it more satisfactory.
Having got these settlers from the Teutonic tribes, the Saxons as they
are generally called, established in the island, the peculiar internal
policy, national character, and literature of Britain, begin to assume
a shape under the eye of the historian, and to gather round them their
distinctive attributes as he proceeds. He will soon have to deal with
the birth of laws and customs, which, modelled to the progress of an
increasing population and civilisation, are still in daily practice.
From this epoch downwards, he has to watch the changes of the national
literature. Observing it in its purely Anglo-Saxon period, he must
estimate the extent to which it was altered by the adoption of
Norman-French as a court language, while Anglo-Saxon still continued to
be the tongue of the common people; and mark the continued existence of
this fundamental Teutonic speech, and its action upon the language of
the court, until the former became the established literary language of
the day, the latter merely imparting to it one of its characteristic
features. Thus tracing these elements from their respective sources down
to the days of Chaucer, the influence of the revival of classical
learning upon modern language and thought must find a place, and English
literature must be described in its progress towards and arrival at full
manhood. Along with this inquiry, there should be an ancillary
investigation into the causes why the language and literature of the
Scottish lowlands have so long differed from those of England, though
both springing from the same root.
Returning to the Anglo-Saxon period, another and more laborious inquiry
opens in the department of the laws and public institutions. There must
be a search after those which were peculiar to the Anglo-Saxons; and in
dealing with authorities posterior to the conquest, the historian must
carefully sift them, that he may ascertain the extent to which any law
or custom was undoubtedly Anglo-Saxon. After having ascertained how
much of the spirit of feudal institutions had tinged the purely Saxon
usages, he must next follow the progress of feudalism abroad, and fully
explain the effect produced on Britain by its full grown importation at
the era of the Conquest. In conjunction with this large inquiry, the
jurisprudence of Rome must be kept in view; first, as some relics of it
in municipal institutions, and otherwise, may have been associated with
the very earliest forms of internal organization in modern Europe; and
secondly, after its letter had been buried for centuries, as it was
resuscitated by the civilians and canonists, and brought in array
against the common law of England, and amalgamated with the feudal
system in Scotland. From these elements the history of Parliament and of
municipal bodies, the prerogatives of the crown, and the rights and
privileges of the subject, together with the practical administration of
the law, ought all to be developed in their origin and growth. The state
of knowledge and of opinion among the people at large, on political
matters, and particularly on the manner in which they are governed,
should form a part of this constitutional inquiry.
The history of religion should occupy a conspicuous place in the
historian's studies. In the folios of the Bollandists, no inconsiderable
portion of the scanty records of the civil history of the period are to
be found. A full and patient study of the Roman Catholic creed and
polity in their rise and development, is necessary for the effectual
employment of the knowledge thus acquired; and it is needless to say how
many other creeds and systems must be studied by the historian of
Britain. By observing its mere results on the outward history of a
people, the inquirer will never know the real influence of any system of
religious tenets. A brief survey shows us the outward demonstrations.
But to be acquainted with the character of the internal impulses of any
religious creed, to see how the fire glows and radiates within the bosom
of the votary, we must study the vital elements of the creed itself with
industry and with zeal.
The language and literature of the country have already been alluded to.
The state of the arts at different times must be carefully watched and
explained. To accomplish this task, the historian should possess a wide
knowledge of the principles and practice of art: not that conventional
knowledge which teaches him how to distinguish from all that are below
them those efforts which are entitled to the approbation of the
fastidious, but the catholic spirit, which enables the mind fully to
estimate progress before perfection is reached.
All the departments of the historian's knowledge are more or less
blended with each other. From the sixth century downwards, for several
ages, the coinage of the realm only marks the state of the arts or
serves to adjust disputed chronologies: gradually, however, the
historian feels it becoming involved with more complex elements
connected with the state of society, and at last the great question of
the currency and the monetary system of the country has to be grappled
with. Here the whole field of political economy is opened up. It is
needless to say, that the historian, especially he who treats of a
people in any degree civilized, must be thoroughly imbued with political
economy.
The state of manufactures and of the sciences should not be neglected. A
history of Britain during the nineteenth century, containing no account
of the triumphs of the steam engine, or of the progress of railway
engineering, would give a very imperfect view of the living progress of
the nation. The history of the early period would be more satisfactory,
if it informed us when the pump and the potter's wheel were first used
in Britain. Closely akin to this subject is the progress of agriculture,
which, however, is a matter simpler and more easy of attainment than
many of the historian's other objects of inquiry.
In truth, it may be safely said, that every circumstance that can be
discovered concerning the particular country, and every thing, whether
animate or inanimate that is on its surface, comes within the compass of
its history, using that word in the sense of merely civil
history,--unless in so far as it belongs to what is natural history. And
yet even from this science civil history has many lights to receive.
Human physiology is intimately connected with the elucidations of the
historian; and it would appear that, in regard to the influence of
political institutions on the physical as well as the moral state of
races of men, we are still only on the threshold of knowledge. Here the
physiologist, and the recorder of political events, who heretofore have
travelled on different roads, may some day or other find a common object
of exertion, and may tell us, by their united labours, why the race that
inhabited ancient Egypt, from being the most inventive, should have been
among the most supine of people; why the Chinese should have passed
through an epoch of active discovery, and should have thenceforth,
unlike the rest of the world, neither forgotten nor improved the fruits
of their original enterprise; why the Celts, once the nurses of European
learning, should, at a later time, have appeared as if doomed to retire
before the ardent genius of the Teutonic race; and why this race, after
being long inferior to other branches of the Caucasian family, should
appear, with British enterprise and German thought, likely to absorb
the faculties of the rest of mankind.
The historian must not wholly neglect other natural productions. The
inferior animals and the vegetable kingdom are intimately connected with
the fate of the human beings who are the immediate object of his
labours. With geology he may appear to have comparatively little
concern; yet the marble of Greece, and the coal and iron of Britain,
have had no little influence on the destinies of these nations.
Hume did so much towards the completion of that circle of knowledge with
which the historian has to deal, that he was the first to add to a mere
narrative of events, an inquiry into the progress of the people, and of
their arts, literature, manners, and general social condition. This
attempt was so original, that, as it embodied in some measure the theory
developed in Voltaire's "Essai sur les Moeurs," first published in 1756,
when the first volume of the "History of the Stuarts" had been two years
before the public, it was supposed that Hume might have borrowed the
idea from some fragments of that work which had been surreptitiously
printed with the title "Abrégé de l'Histoire Universelle." There seems
to be no room, however, for such a supposition. Hume's own "Political
Discourses" are as close an approach to this method of inquiry as the
work of Voltaire; and if we look for such productions of other writers
as may have led him into this train of thought, it would be more just to
name Bacon and Montesquieu.[129:1] The works of such authors as Guizot
and Hallam may teach us that much had to be added to Hume's system of
historical composition, to render it perfect; but they do so in the same
manner as the last steam engine shows us how many improvements have been
made on the inventions of Watt.
* * * * *
We now resume the correspondence with Millar. The letter immediately
following, puts beyond a doubt, what had only been partially believed,
that Hume had, at one time, expressed an intention of writing an
ecclesiastical history. Of the manner in which he would have executed
such a task, opinions will widely vary.
HUME _to_ ANDREW MILLAR.
"_Edinburgh, 15th March, 1762._
"DEAR SIR,--I am very glad that you are in so good a way, and that you
think so soon of making a new edition. I am running over both the
ancient history and the Tudors, and shall send you them up by the wagon
as soon as they are corrected. Please tell Mr. Strahan, to keep
carefully this copy I send up, as well as that which I left of the
Stuarts; for if you intend to print an octavo edition next summer, it
will be better to do it from these copies which are corrected, than from
the new edition, where there will necessarily be some errors of the
press.
"I give you full authority to contradict the report, that I am writing
or intend to write an ecclesiastical history; I have no such intention;
and I believe never shall. I am beginning to love peace very much, and
resolve to be more cautious than formerly in creating myself enemies.
But in contradicting this report, you will be so good as not to impeach
Mr. Mallet's veracity; for 'tis certain I said to Lord Chesterfield
(from whom Mr. Mallet first had it) that I had entertained such a
thought; but my saying so proceeded less from any serious purpose, than
from a view of trying how far such an idea would be relished by his
lordship.
"I have not laid aside thoughts of continuing my History to the period
after the Revolution. It is not amiss to be idle a little time; but it
is probable I shall tire of that kind of life: and if I then find that
the public desires to see more of me, and that the great will not shut
up their papers from me, I shall set to work in earnest.
"I never thought that Lord Kames' Elements would be a popular book; but
I hoped, that, as you engage for no copy money, it would certainly
defray the charge of paper and print; and on that footing alone I
recommended it to you. I find the author's expectations raised up to a
vast pitch, and indeed there are some parts of the work ingenious and
curious; but it is too abtruse and crabbed ever to take with the public.
As to the advice you desire me to give him, it is certainly very
salutary; but I fancy neither I nor any other of his friends will ever
venture to mention it. The admonitions, which come from you, are
commonly the most effectual; and if this book do not sell, I think it
were not amiss, that you tell him the plain truth without disguise or
circumlocution. I find the booksellers here have sold off all their
share of my Essays, and are desirous of another edition, which, however,
I told them, I believed you was not ready for. I desire to be informed
two or three months before you put it to the press: because I intend to
make some considerable alterations on some parts of them.
"I hope Mrs. Millar intends to pay us a visit next summer, and that you
will be of the party. Please make my most sincere respects to her. I am,
dear Sir," &c.[132:1]
HUME _to_ ANDREW MILLAR.
"_8th April, 1762._
"I shall answer your story of Charles Townsend very fully, by another
story of the same gentleman. Three years ago, when I was in London, I
was told by a friend, that Mr. Townsend said, that my History of the
Stuarts (the only one then published,) was full of gross blunders in the
facts: he had consulted all the authentic documents, particularly the
journals of the House of Commons, and found it so. When I made light of
this information, as knowing somewhat of Mr. Townsend's hasty manner of
speaking, my friend said, that I ought not so much to neglect the
matter; because Mr. Townsend had told him that Mr. Dyson, clerk to the
House of Commons, a man of knowledge and solidity, had made to him the
same observation. I was a little surprised and alarmed at this; and I
went to Mr. Elliot, whom I desired to speak to Mr. Dyson, and to tell
him that there was nothing in the world I desired so much as to be
informed of my errors, and that he would oblige me extremely by pointing
out those mistakes. Mr. Dyson replied, that he had never in his life
spoke of the matter to Mr. Townsend; and that though he differed from me
in my reasonings and views of the constitution, he had observed no
blunders in facts, except one with regard to the dispensing power:
which, by the bye, was the one also remarked to me by the Speaker, and
which I corrected in the second edition. It was not an error with regard
to the reign of James Second, but with regard to that of King William,
which I had not sufficiently examined. I assure you there is not a
quotation that I did not see with mine own eyes, except two or three at
most, which I took from Tyrrel or Brady, because I had not the books
referred to. That there is no mistake in such a number of references,
would be rash or even absurd to affirm: that the printer also has not
sometimes made mistakes in the name of the author or in the number of
the page quoted, is what I dare not aver: for I only compared the sheet
now and then with my manuscript, and was contented to be as correct as
possible in the text. I knew that these mistakes could neither be
frequent nor material. But if people, finding a few here and there,
point them out, and give them as a specimen of the whole, I know no
remedy for this malice, but to allow them to go on. Men of candour will
judge otherwise without scrutiny: and men of diligence and industry will
find that the case is otherwise, upon scrutiny.[133:1]
"I have heard of Charles Townsend's extolling and decrying me
alternately, according as the humour bites; and all the world knows this
to be his character. He is perhaps angry with me at present, because I
did not wait of him when I was in London. It is strange, that great men
in England should slight and neglect men of letters when they pay court
to them, and rail at them when they do not. I have a regard to Mr.
Townsend as a man of parts, I believe of very great parts; but I attach
myself to no great man, and visit none of them but such as happen to be
my friends, and particular acquaintance. I wish they would consider me
as equally independent with themselves, or more so. However, there is no
necessity of enraging Mr. Townsend farther by the story I told you in
the first paragraph; and therefore I would not have you communicate it
to any body, except a very particular friend whom you can trust. You may
read the second paragraph to every body."[134:1]
In the following letter to Millar, we find him professing his ignorance
of the practical application of the fine arts in engraving. Although he
has written on the philosophy of taste, we find no traces in his
writings of what the Germans have denominated the aesthetic; no sense of
an internal emotion arising from the contemplation of works of art. In
his travels, he had an opportunity of seeing many fine pictures, but he
never mentions one; and it does not appear, from any incident in his
life, or allusion in his letters, which I can remember, that he had ever
really admired a picture or a statue.[134:2]
HUME _to_ ANDREW MILLAR.
"_Edinburgh, 17th May, 1762._
"I like much better your publishing in volumes than in numbers. Though
this last method has been often practised, it has somewhat of a quackish
air, which you have always avoided, as well as myself. I know not what
to do for frontispieces; I have no manner of skill myself in designing,
and am not able to point out the most proper subjects, nor the method of
executing them. On the whole, I think it an expense which may be spared;
but if you continue in the resolution of having some such ornament, I
could write a letter to Allan Ramsay, who, I hope, would take the pains
of directing the engraver. As to my head, I think that also a
superfluous expense; and as there is no picture of me in London, I know
not how it can be executed: with submission to you, would it not be
better to throw these charges on the paper and print? I do not imagine,
because these ornaments have helped off the sale of Smollett's History,
that mine would be the better for them.[135:1] These arts are seldom
practised twice with the same success.
"I do not lose view of my design to continue my History, at least for
two reigns more; but I question whether party prejudices with regard to
me, are as yet sufficiently subsided, to enable me to carry on that
work, without meeting with repulses and disgusts from those who have the
materials in their power, which must serve for the foundation of my
narrative: a little farther time will, I hope, operate that
effect."[135:2]
He concludes this letter by saying, "I remove my house this week to
James's Court."
Entering a low gateway which pierces the line of lofty houses along the
Lawnmarket, one finds oneself in a square court, surrounded by houses,
which have now evidently fallen to the lot of humbler inhabitants than
those for whom they were erected. These spaces, walled off by the
intervening houses from the main street, were in the Scottish
metropolis, like the similar edifices of the French nobility, frequently
designed with the view of protecting those who dwelt within the gate
from the unwelcome intrusion of either legal or illegal force. But it is
probable that James's Court scarcely dates back to times so lawless, and
that it was built early in the eighteenth century. The plan of a closed
court was, perhaps, adopted as a means of enabling a small community to
have the civic functions of lighting and cleaning performed more
accurately than they were then administered to the inhabitants at large.
Entering one of the doors opposite the main entrance, the stranger is
sometimes led by a friend, wishing to afford him an agreeable surprise,
down flight after flight of the steps of a stone staircase, and when he
imagines he is descending so far into the bowels of the earth, he
emerges on the edge of a cheerful crowded thoroughfare, connecting
together the Old and New Town; the latter of which lies spread before
him, a contrast to the gloom from which he has emerged. When he looks up
to the building containing the upright street through which he has
descended, he sees that vast pile of tall houses standing at the head of
the Mound, which creates astonishment in every visiter of Edinburgh.
This vast fabric is built on the declivity of a hill, and thus one
entering on the level of the Lawnmarket, is at the height of several
stories from the ground on the side next the New Town. In Hume's day, a
lake lay not many yards from the base of the building; and the whole
space now occupied by the streets and squares of the New Town, was open
ground, covered with woodland in those places where it did not consist
of agricultural ground or barren heath. A full view of the surrounding
country must have been possessed by every floor in this mass of
buildings. I have ascertained that by ascending the western of the two
stairs facing the entry of James's Court, to the height of three
stories, we arrive at the door of David Hume's house, which, of the two
doors on that landing-place, is the one towards the left.[137:1]
Of the first impression made on a stranger, at that period, when
entering such a house, a vivid description is given by Sir Walter Scott
in "Guy Mannering;" and in Counsellor Pleydell's library, with its
collection of books and the prospect from the window, we have probably
an accurate picture of the room in which Hume spent his studious hours
when he was in his own house in Edinburgh.
When Boswell describes the veritable locality of the house in which he
did actually receive the illustrious Dr. Johnson, he tells us at the
same time that it was in James's Court. Hume had then left his house,
and it appears that James Boswell became his tenant.[137:2] One cannot
therefore resist the conclusion, that the house thus consecrated, was
the very one which had been occupied by Hume. Would Boswell communicate
such a fact, or tell what manner of man was the landlord of the
habitation into which he had, under the guise of hospitality, entrapped
the arch-intolerant?[138:1] Who shall appreciate the mental conflict
which Boswell may have experienced on this occasion! On the one side he
would have to consider, whether it would not be more candid to let the
appalling truth be known. But would Johnson have been able to "sleep o'
nights" in such a house? The dilemma might not have been so easily
solved as the dinner with Wilkes.
Hume's house was, during his absence in France, occupied by Dr. Blair;
so that the old flat, three stories up from the entrance in James's
Court, had in its day sheltered inmates of no common eminence.
HUME _to_ ANDREW MILLAR.
"_Edinburgh, 22d Nov. 1762._
"DEAR SIR,--As yours of the 16th of last month did not require any
immediate reply, I have used the freedom to delay answering it. I am
glad to find your two new editions so well advanced: I hope they will be
successful. Some people tell me, that, as the two volumes last published
do not shock any party prejudices, they have been better received than
the former, and procure a good reception for the whole. If I should see
them make any farther progress, it would be the best encouragement for
me to proceed in writing the more recent history. I am far from losing
sight of that project; but it is better not to begin it, till matters
are more ripe for the execution, and till I find, that every one would
frankly concur in opening their cabinets, and allowing me the use of all
papers which may be necessary for my purpose. I had a letter from Mr.
Mallet lately, by which I find, that he will no longer be an obstacle in
my way; for he tells me that his History of the Duke of Marlborough is
ready for the press; which is more than I or most people expected.
"Lord Marischal wrote me lately, that the celebrated Rousseau had taken
shelter with him at Neufchâtel; but that he had thoughts of coming to
England, and desired to know of me, if he could make an edition of his
works by which he could gain a little money for his subsistence, as he
was not interested. He wished also, that I could recommend him to a
bookseller. You have told me, that you do not care to deal in French
books; but if he should publish any new work, might he not have a
translation of it ready to be published at the same time with the
original? And would not you be willing to deal with him in that shape? I
should think him very fortunate, if he were in your hands. I beg my
compliments to Mrs. Millar, who, I hope, is at Bath, more for her
amusement than her health. I am, dear sir, yours sincerely.
"P.S.--As your edition on royal paper is not numerous, I shall only
desire three copies of it to be sent me, and shall reserve the other
three for the octavo edition. Be so good therefore as to embark three
copies in any parcel you send to Edinburgh. The peace will now make the
intercourse of trade more open between us. The mention of peace reminds
me to thank you for your assistance in making out my subscription last
year, which is likely to turn out so much to my advantage. The stocks
are now very high; but I suppose will not come to their full height this
twelvemonth, and till then I fancy you will not think it prudent in me
to sell out."[140:1]
That Mallet had his History of the Duke of Marlborough ready for press,
was, as Hume gently says, more than he or most people expected. However,
Mallet seems to have convinced him that it really was the case; and his
success in carrying conviction to the prince of sceptics, is a brilliant
instance of that mingled cunning and impudence by which he had made
himself a great man. The literary history of the life of Marlborough is
well known. The duchess had left £1000 to Glover and Mallet, as a fee
for a life to be written by them jointly. Glover gave up his share of
the labour and its reward, and Mallet obtained the £1000. The service he
gave in return, consisted entirely in the labour of convincing the
world, by hints and skilfully mysterious announcements, that he had made
considerable progress in the work, though he died without having
commenced it; and if this systematic deception had been the service for
which he was paid, it would have been admitted that he had done his
duty.[141:1] The following letter is a memorable instance of the manner
in which Mallet conducted his operations; and it shows at the same time
his infinitely lofty notion of his own position. He had managed to be a
great author among the aristocracy, and to be a great aristocrat among
authors; and the air of calm superiority which he adopts towards Hume
is not the least remarkable feature in the production.
DAVID MALLET _to_ HUME.[142:1]
DEAR SIR,--I have done at last, what nothing but the greatest
regard for the writer, and the truest friendship for the man,
could have made me submit to; I have gone over both your
volumes again, with the eye and attention of a mere
grammarian. The task of looking after verbal mistakes, or
errors against the idiom of a tongue, though not unnecessary,
is trivial, and disgusting in the greatest decree; but your
work, and you, deserved it of me: and I could not have
forgiven myself had I not treated yours as I hope and expect
you will do mine.
I have not been idle; though I give no account of my progress
to one in a hundred I converse with; as it contains several
particulars of the reigns of the two brothers, Charles and
James, the most interesting though the least known parts of
King William's, and embraces the whole of Queen Anne's reign,
together with some anecdotes relative to her successor,--it
will swell into two quarto volumes. I am resolved, too, that
the translation, which will be done here by an excellent hand
under my own eye, shall appear at the same time the original
does. These are some of the causes that occasion the
complaints I have been teased with: and there are many others,
that would make no figure on paper, though they are
unavoidable and consume much irretrievable time. But what is
well done is done soon; and, as I have not you in my way, I
should not feel the least uneasiness, if all our other
complete historians should write the same period twenty times
over. My work, both in matter and form, would still be new. If
you are upon the undertaking, which you desired might remain a
secret, I dare assure you, that besides the merit of accuracy
and impartiality, it will have all the charm of novelty; for
such a work, on a rational and philosophical plan, is a
thing, as Milton has it, unattempted yet in prose or rhime.
Adieu. I am, dear sir, most faithfully yours.
D. MALLET.[143:1]
The following letter is a not less curious revelation of Mallet's
proceedings.
HUME _to_ ANDREW MILLAR.
"_Edinburgh, 21st April, 1763._
"DEAR SIR,--I had a letter from Mr. Mallett, in which he tells me, that
he has run over carefully the two volumes of my History last published,
and has wrote all his remarks, as well on the language as matter, on the
margin. He said, that he would find an opportunity to send them to me. I
replied to him, that I was extremely obliged to him, (as I certainly
am,) and that if he sent them to you, you would soon find an opportunity
of conveying them to me. I wish you would speak to him on that subject,
as you have occasion to meet with him, and would send the books
carefully to me by the first parcel you send to Edinburgh. I should
desire you also to give him a new copy in place of this which he has
sacrificed; but if there be only a word here and there, I can efface
them, after transcribing them into my own copy, and can afterwards
restore the book as good as ever.
"In the same letter, he complains much of a report, that I was writing
the English History since the revolution: which he says he cannot
believe, because it would be a very invidious task to him. I answered
him, that by his former letter I imagined his History was just ready for
the press; that I had not wrote a line of the History of that period;
but if I undertake it, one great inducement would be the hopes of
seeing his volumes published before me; by which means, I could hope
for much light and great materials; that as he was near twenty years
advanced before me, it was ridiculous to fear that I could overtake him;
and that I was glad of the report he mentioned, if it would prove a spur
to his industry. I find Mr. Mallet would fain be like the dog in the
manger, neither eat himself nor allow others to eat. I should have a
breach with him, and might expect all ill offices from him, if I pursue
my plan; but this would be a frivolous consideration, where his anger
would be so ill-founded. As soon as the octavo edition of my History is
finished, please send me a copy of it. I should be pleased to run it
over; and make an errata to it. I am," &c.[144:1]
The following letter to Elliot shows the zeal with which Hume carried on
that systematic removal from his works of all passages tending to favour
popular rights, which has been already alluded to.
HUME _to_ GILBERT ELLIOT _of Minto_.
"_Edinburgh, 12th March, 1763._
"DEAR SIR,--In this new edition I have corrected several mistakes and
oversights, which had chiefly proceeded from the plaguy prejudices of
Whiggism, with which I was too much infected when I began this work. I
corrected some of these mistakes in a former edition; but being resolved
to add to this edition the quotations of authorities for the reigns of
James I. and Charles I., I was obliged to run over again the most
considerable authors who had treated of these reigns; and I happily
discovered some more mistakes, which I have now corrected. As I began
the History with these two reigns, I now find that they, above all the
rest, have been corrupted with Whig rancour, and that I really deserved
the name of a party writer, and boasted without any foundation of my
impartiality: but if you now do me the honour to give this part of my
work a second perusal, I am persuaded that you will no longer throw on
me this reproachful epithet, and will acquit me of all propensity to
Whiggism. If you still continue to upbraid me, I shall be obliged to
retaliate on you, and cry, _Whig vous même_.
"In page 33, vol. v. you will find a full justification of the
impositions laid on by James I. without authority of parliament: in p.
113, 114, 389, a justification of persecuting the Puritans: in p. 180, a
justification of Charles I. for levying tonnage and poundage without
consent of parliament: in p. 100, I acquit James I. of prevarication,
with which I had before rashly charged him. This last mistake indeed was
innocent, and I can easily account for it. I had read Buckingham's
narrative in Rushworth and Franklyn, the two opposite collectors: I saw
what I thought the same paper in the Parliamentary History; but I did
not attend to a line at the bottom, in which it is said, that the paper
is taken from the records more full, than in the preceding collection:
when I read it lately, I found the article here quoted, so that this
blunder proceeded not from any spirit of Whiggery.
"I now justify James II. more explicitly in his exercise of the
dispensing power, which was intimately interwoven with the constitution
and monarchy--see vol. vi. p. 393-394, 395-400. In vol. iv. p. 322-323,
I mention a very remarkable vein of tyranny, or exertion of arbitrary
power, practised in that period,[146:1] and which came to my knowledge
since the first publication of that volume.
"There are many other improvements and alterations throughout the whole;
and I am glad that Millar has of himself made you an offer of this
edition. Without flattering you I must say, that there is nobody whom I
more desire to see my writings as correct as I can make them; and I was
thinking to desire Mr. Millar to make you this offer.
"But there is no end of correcting. In this new edition, vol. v. p. 205,
I have inserted a pretty curious story of Sir George Markham, which I
took from Lord Lansdowne, whom I esteemed safe authority for a Whig
story: but I have since been shown Hobart's Reports, which is infinitely
more authentic than Lord Lansdowne; and the story is there told so
entirely, as to justify the King and the Star-chamber, so that you may
still reproach me that the villanous leaven is not entirely purged
off.[146:2]
"I am engaged in no work at present; but if I tire of idleness, or more
properly speaking, of reading for amusement, I may probably continue my
History. My only discouragement is, that I cannot hope to finish this
work in my closet, but must apply to the great for papers and
intelligence, a thing I mortally abhor.
"Is it not hard and tyrannical in you, more hard and tyrannical than
any act of the Stuarts, not to allow me to publish my Dialogues? Pray,
do you not think that a proper dedication may atone for what is
exceptionable in them? I am become much of my friend Corbyn Morrice's
mind, who says, that he writes all his books for the sake of the
dedications.
"I am very glad to hear from Lord Minto, that you intend to pass a great
part of the ensuing summer in this country. Though you be now become a
great man, I doubt not but I should receive very much satisfaction from
your society and conversation; that is, if I be not jostled out by
suitors who press in upon me.
"Meanwhile, I am, dear sir, your affectionate friend and
servant."[147:1]
He writes to Millar, on 10th March, 1763, "I am in a good measure idle
at present: but if I tire of this way of life, I shall certainly
continue my History, and have no thoughts of any other work. But in this
state of affairs, I suppose your people of rank and quality would throw
the door in my face, because I am a Scotsman."[147:2]
And again at a later date:
HUME _to_ ANDREW MILLAR.
"_Edinburgh, 28th March, 1763._
"I never lose view of the project of continuing my History. I may
perhaps very soon gather silently together the books which will enable
me to sketch out the reigns of King William and Queen Anne, and shall
finish them afterwards, together with that of George I., in London. But
to tell you the truth, I have an aversion to appear in that capital
till I see that more justice is done to me with regard to the preceding
volumes. The languishing sale of this edition makes me conjecture that
the time is not yet come; and the general rage against the Scots is an
additional discouragement. I think the Scotch minister is obliged to
make me some compensation for this.
"I am told that Mr. Ralph is dead, who had certainly made a large
collection of books and pamphlets for his work. I should be glad to know
into whose hands they are fallen, and would purchase them if they could
be got at a reasonable price.
"I hear Dr. Armstrong has sent you over a most violent renunciation of
Wilkes's friendship.[148:1] Wilkes is indeed very blamable in indulging
himself so much in national reflections; which are low, vulgar, and
ungenerous, and come with a bad grace from him, who conversed so much
with our countrymen. My compliments to Mrs. Millar, who, I hope, will
favour me with a visit this summer. I am, dear sir, yours
sincerely."[148:2]
On the same day he writes to Adam Smith:
"I set up a chaise in May next, which will give me the liberty of
travelling about; and you may be sure a journey to Glasgow will be one
of the first I shall undertake. I intend to require, with great
strictness, an account how you have been employing your leisure, and I
desire you to be ready for that purpose. Wo be to you if the balance be
against you! Your friends here will also expect that I should bring you
with me."[149:1]
A few letters written at this time to his friends, on the subject of the
arrears of half-pay due for his services as judge-advocate,[149:2]
afford the following passages of general interest. To Oswald he says, on
3d April--
"I shall add, that it is the only thing in my life I ever asked, it is
the only thing I ever shall ask, and consequently, it is the only thing
I ever shall obtain. Those who assist me in procuring it do me a great
favour, and I very willingly stand obliged to my friends for their good
offices: but of the government and ministry, I ask it as my due. I
imagined that after Lord Bute's consent was obtained, all difficulties
had been surmounted."[149:3]
To another correspondent he says,--
"To tell you the truth, dear Crawford, I made it a rule from the
beginning of my life never to seek a favour of any man; and this humour,
which, if you be very indulgent to me, you will call modesty, if less
so, pride, I was unwilling to relinquish, after having maintained it
through my youth, and during more difficult circumstances than those in
which I am at present placed."[149:4]
Hume, like every Scotsman of his day, who concerned himself with any
thing beyond his own domestic circle, took a deep interest in the
progress of the Douglas cause. It is difficult, at the present day, to
conceive the excitement which this litigation between private parties
occasioned in the public mind. Men about to meet each other in company,
used to lay an injunction on themselves not to open their lips on the
subject, so fruitful was it in debates and brawls; and yet too often
found that their prudence was no match for their enthusiasm. Hume
adopted the view that the alleged children of Lady Jane Douglas were
spurious. The Court of Session decided in favour of this opinion by a
majority of one; but their decision was afterwards reversed by the House
of Lords. The reversal occasioned many severe animadversions on Lord
Mansfield, both by Hume and his friends.
HUME _to_ ADAM SMITH.
"_Edinburgh, 21st July, 1763._
"DEAR SMITH,--To-day is the grand question decided by our judges,
whether they will admit of any farther proof with regard to the Douglas
affair, or whether they will rest contented with the proofs already
produced. Their partiality is palpable and astonishing; yet few people
think that they will dare to refuse inquiring into facts so remarkable
and so strongly attested. They are at present sitting, but I hope to
tell you the issue in a postscript. Our friend Johnstone[150:1] has
wrote the most super-excellentest paper in the world, which he has
promised to send to you this evening in franks. Please to deliver the
enclosed to Colonel Barré. I am," &c.[150:2]
We have already found one distinguished fellow-countryman of Hume
controversially attacking his works. But another and greater critic was
soon to appear. Dr. Thomas Reid was preparing for the press his "Inquiry
into the Human Mind," which he published in 1764. His was the greatest
mind which set itself in opposition to Hume's system, in British
literature; and he was great, because he examined the works of the
sceptical philosopher, not in the temper of a wrangler or partisan, but
in the honest spirit of an investigator, who is bound either to believe
in the arguments he is examining, or to set against them a system which
will satisfy his own mind, and the minds of other honest thinkers. Reid
was born in 1710, and he was exactly a year older than Hume, for the
birth-day of both was on the 26th of April.[151:1] The philosopher of
common sense, thus brought the accumulated thought and learning of
advanced years to bear on a series of works which the sceptic had
commenced in early youth. There is something in Reid's method of laying
down his principles, and explaining their application, that disinclines
the reader to allow him the palm of original genius, and suggests the
idea that he is a personification of the natural sagacity and useful
industry of his countrymen. But this feeling arises more from his hatred
of such apparent paradoxes as Hume loved, from his courting rather than
avoiding what is familiar and intelligible, and from the titles he gave
to his books, than from deficiency of true originality. Whether his
merit lay in his genius or his industry, he raised a new fabric of
philosophy out of part of those fragments to which the sceptic had
reduced previous systems. The term "common sense," which he used to
characterize his system, had been long employed in philosophy; and if
_bon sens_ may be held its equivalent, it is to be found in the
preliminary dissertation of a French translation of Hume's miscellaneous
essays, published in the same year as Reid's Inquiry.[152:1] Here, and
occasionally by Reid, it is used in its popular sense, expressing
philosophical opinions derived from the general notions of mankind. In
this sense it is an application of induction to mental operations. It
views the opinions of men at large as so many experimental facts, which,
as in the case of the physical operations of nature, may be subjected to
the rules of induction. Hume himself held that mental phenomena are as
regular, and as capable of having laws of nature applied to them, as
physical phenomena. But even if he were right, there is a disturbing
influence at force in the circumstance, that, as the operation of
induction is itself a phenomenon of the same class with those professed
to be subjected to its observation, the philosopher is apt to embody in
his writings the intuitions, if they may be so termed, of his own mind,
instead of giving such an accurate transcript of the results of external
observation as the physical inquirer is generally enabled to present.
Indeed, it is in promulgating the convictions of his own mind as a
metaphysical thinker, more than in his avowed project of inducting from
the common phenomena of the every-day world, that Reid's writings are
most valuable. In the one case he has told us how far Hume's philosophy
is at variance with the general opinions of mankind; in which he is met
by the comprehensive argument, that Hume may, nevertheless, be right,
and the rest of mankind wrong. But in travelling beyond his avowed
object he certainly has anticipated many of those metaphysical
arguments, on which the basis of the sceptical philosophy has been
attacked; and the world has, perhaps, yet to learn how far the great
system of the German philosophers is under obligations to this powerful
thinker.[153:1]
Before he put his "Inquiry into the Human Mind," to press, Reid desired,
through Blair's interposition, to subject the manuscript to Hume's
inspection. Fearing that this work might too closely follow the
Warburton school, Hume met the application with the rather petulant
remark: "I wish that the parsons would confine themselves to their old
occupation of worrying one another, and leave philosophers to argue with
temper, moderation, and good manners." But, after inspecting the
manuscript, he thus addressed its author:
By Dr. Blair's means, I have been favoured with the perusal of
your performance, which I have read with great pleasure and
attention. It is certainly very rare that a piece so deeply
philosophical is wrote with so much spirit, and affords so
much entertainment to the reader; though I must still regret
the disadvantages under which I read it, as I never had the
whole performance at once before me, and could not be able
fully to compare one part with another. To this reason,
chiefly, I ascribed some obscurities, which, in spite of your
short analysis, or abstract, still seem to hang over your
system; for I must do you the justice to own that, when I
enter into your ideas, no man appears to express himself with
greater perspicuity than you do; a talent which, above all
others, is requisite in that species of literature which you
have cultivated. There are some objections, which I would
willingly propose, to the chapter "Of sight," did I not
suspect that they proceed from my not sufficiently
understanding it; and I am the more confirmed in this
suspicion, as Dr. Blair tells me that the former objections I
made, had been derived chiefly from that cause. I shall
therefore forbear till the whole can be before me, and shall
not at present propose any further difficulties to your
reasonings. I shall only say that, if you have been able to
clear up these abstruse and important subjects, instead of
being mortified, I shall be so vain as to pretend to a share
of the praise; and shall think that my errors, by having at
least some coherence, had led you to make a more strict review
of my principles, which were the common ones, and to perceive
their futility.
As I was desirous to be of some use to you, I kept a watchful
eye all along over your style; but it is really so correct,
and so good English, that I found not any thing worth the
remarking. There is only one passage in this chapter, where
you make use of the phrase, _hinder to do_, instead of _hinder
from doing_, which is the English one; but I could not find
the passage when I sought for it. You may judge how
unexceptionable the whole appeared to me, when I could remark
so small a blemish. I beg my compliments to my friendly
adversaries, Dr. Campbell, and Dr. Gerard, and also to Dr.
Gregory, whom I suspect to be of the same disposition, though
he has not openly declared himself such.[154:1]
This letter called forth the following answer, valuable as an
acknowledgment of the services which the Scottish school of philosophy
owed to Hume.
DR. REID _to_ HUME.
_King's College, 18th March, 1763._
SIR,--On Monday last, Mr. John Farquhar brought me your letter
of February 25th, enclosed in one from Dr. Blair. I thought
myself very happy in having the means of obtaining at
second-hand, through the friendship of Dr. Blair, your opinion
of my performance: and you have been pleased to communicate
it directly in so polite and friendly a manner, as merits
great acknowledgments on my part. Your keeping a watchful eye
over my style, with a view to be of use to me, is an instance
of candour and generosity to an antagonist, which would affect
me very sensibly, although I had no personal concern in it,
and I shall always be proud to follow so amiable an example.
Your judgment of the style, indeed, gives me great
consolation, as I was very diffident of myself in regard to
English, and have been indebted to Drs. Campbell and Gerard
for many corrections of that kind.
In attempting to throw some new light upon these abstruse
subjects, I wish to preserve the due mean betwixt confidence
and despair. But whether I have any success in this attempt or
not, I shall always avow myself your disciple in metaphysics.
I have learned more from your writings in this kind, than from
all others put together. Your system appears to me not only
coherent in all its parts, but likewise justly deduced from
principles commonly received among philosophers; principles
which I never thought of calling in question, until the
conclusions you draw from them in the "Treatise of Human
Nature" made me suspect them. If these principles are solid,
your system must stand; and whether they are or not, can
better be judged after you have brought to light the whole
system that grows out of them, than when the greater part of
it was wrapped up in clouds and darkness. I agree with you,
therefore, that if this system shall ever be demolished, you
have a just claim to a great share of the praise, both because
you have made it a distinct and determinate mark to be aimed
at, and have furnished proper artillery for the purpose.
When you have seen the whole of my performance, I shall take
it as a very great favour to have your opinion upon it, from
which I make no doubt of receiving light, whether I receive
conviction or no. Your friendly adversaries, Drs. Campbell and
Gerard, as well as Dr. Gregory, return their compliments to
you respectfully. A little philosophical society here, of
which all the three are members, is much indebted to you for
its entertainment. Your company would, although we are all
good Christians, be more acceptable than that of St.
Athanasius; and since we cannot have you upon the bench, you
are brought oftener than any other man to the bar, accused and
defended with great zeal, but without bitterness. If you write
no more in morals, politics, or metaphysics, I am afraid we
shall be at a loss for subjects. I am, respectfully, sir, your
most obliged humble servant.
THOMAS REID.[156:1]
FOOTNOTES:
[121:1] The works prepared by the Record Commission, whether it be true
or not that it has failed to fulfil the services expected from so large
an expenditure of the public money, present the sources of British
history on a very different scale from that in which they appeared
before Hume; and if he had lived in the present day, he would not have
attempted to write the history of the first fourteen centuries in less
than three years; or, attempting it, would have palpably overlooked
materials which, in his own time, he could not have found access to.
Among such sources may be viewed, Domesday Book, the Rotuli Hundredorum,
the many records of the various courts of justice, the "Parliamentary
writs, or writs of military summons, together with the records and
muniments relating to the suit and service due and performed to the
king's high court of parliament and the councils of the realm, as
affording evidence of attendance given at parliaments and councils;" the
remains of Anglo-Saxon legislation, collected under the name of "Ancient
laws and institutions of England," and the "Ancient laws and institutes
of Wales."
To these must be added the many antiquarian labours of private
individuals or societies, such as the county histories, the works
circulated by the numerous book clubs, and the inquiries into the early
ecclesiastical history, which the controversies on church polity, for
which this age is becoming peculiar, have excited. The publication of
charters and other documents connected with private rights has opened a
means of becoming acquainted with contemporary habits and institutions,
slow certainly but sure. Besides his labours in the Record Commission,
Sir Francis Palgrave has excavated much curious but not attractive
matter, of which the world will never know the value till some Hume
shall arise to give it shape and symmetry.
It has been a usual practice to rank those who, by such critical
inquiries, ascertain the truth regarding minute historical propositions,
in the category of "harmless drudges." But perhaps the character has
been applied to the really useful workers in this field, as inaptly as
it was appropriated by Dr. Johnson to the race of Lexicographers, in a
moment of bitter cynicism. Antiquarianism, archæology, palæology, or
whatever name it may receive, is a field in which there are many paltry
workers; and these are sometimes, from adventitious circumstances,
conspicuous enough to give a tone in popular estimation to the science.
Dates are but one, and perhaps an inferior branch, of the subject; yet
the labours of Petau, of Antine Durand and Clemencet the authors of the
"Art de vérifier les dates," of Newton, Hailes, and Nicolas, would be
enough to vindicate the dignity of this species of inquiry. It is,
indeed, an essential one to history; and where it has been vaguely or
unscientifically applied, the foundations of historical speculation are
rotten. The prevalent failing of antiquaries is the inability to
distinguish the important from the trifling; to perceive that the labour
which might be necessary to fix the era of the restoration of the study
of the civil law in Europe, would be ill bestowed on an inquiry into the
foundation of some inconsiderable rectorship, or the birth of some
undistinguished landed proprietor. But there is perhaps as much
worthless historical Speculation as trifling Antiquarianism extant in
literature. But it does not follow in either case, from the defects of
the injudicious, that the able and accomplished followers of the subject
were ill employed. A late and signal instance may be adduced of the
intimate connexion of the speculative and the minute departments of
history. Dr. Allen, in his "Inquiry into the rise and progress of the
royal prerogative," maintaining that the older kings of England did not
perform public acts until they had taken the coronation oath of fidelity
to the people, found that there was just one exception, in the case of
Richard II. which disconcerted his theory. It was subsequently shown by
Sir Harris Nicolas, in his "Chronology of History," that in "Rymer's
Fœdera," and other public documents, the regnal years of that reign had
been by mistake antedated a year.
But while it does not follow that the one occupation is less dignified
than the other, it is pretty clear that they cannot, to any great
extent, be both followed by the same person. The limits of human
capacity, and the shortness of human life, seem to forbid such an union;
for literature has produced no one who unites the qualities of a Camden,
a Mabillon, and a Montfouçon, with those of a Hume and a Montesquieu,
though Gibbon and Niebuhr have perhaps come nearest to the union. Mr.
D'Israeli says, (Curiosities of Literature, ii. 182,) "The time has
perhaps arrived, when antiquaries may begin to be philosophers, and
philosophers antiquaries. The unhappy separation of erudition from
philosophy, and of philosophy from erudition, has hitherto thrown
impediments in the progress of the human mind, and the history of man."
But unless that author has himself achieved the united title, by showing
that James I. was a man of great mind, and by characterizing political
economy as a mere "confusion of words," the combination appears not to
have yet been accomplished; and indeed the simple physical impossibility
of the same person who brings the fabric to perfection, having time to
produce the raw materials, seems to render it necessary that in all such
histories as that which Hume undertook, the antiquary shall precede the
historian.
[129:1] It does not appear that even the surreptitious fragments of
Voltaire's work were printed earlier than the year in which the first
volume of the "History of the Stuarts" was published--1754. In the
Essai, Voltaire thus contrasts Hume's sagacity as an historian with the
propagators of monkish legends. "Les moines Frédegaire et Aimoin le
disent: mais ces moines, sont-ils des De Thou et des Humes?" Edit. 1785,
vol. i. p. 235.
[132:1] MS. R.S.E.
[133:1] It must be observed, that this method of referring to
authorities and collating them, is, even by Hume's account of it, one
which a scrupulous investigator would call slovenly. The admission of
any authorities at second hand is, to the extent to which it may be
carried, a breach of the historian's duty. To make sure that he had
rightly estimated their meaning on a first perusal, he should have
collated all his references in proof.
[134:1] MS. R.S.E.
[134:2] In a letter to Millar, dated 8th October, 1763, he says, on the
occasion of receiving a copy of a series of engravings, which have not
yet been surpassed, "I have been obliged to Mr. Strange for a present of
all his prints. He is a very worthy man, whom I value much, and
therefore I desire you would send him a copy of this new edition of my
History."
[135:1] In a letter to Millar, of 6th April, 1758, (MS. R.S.E.) he thus
alludes to Smollett's work: "I am afraid the extraordinary run upon Dr.
Smollett, has a little hurt your sales; but these things are only
temporary."
[135:2] MS. R.S.E.
[137:1] Information communicated by Joseph Grant, Esq.
[137:2] This is shown by a paper of no great importance in itself, among
the MSS. R.S.E. It is simply a document of instructions for defending an
action against Hume, by a builder for repairs. It is in his own hand,
and begins,--
"At Whitsunday last, Mr. Boswell, advocate, left Mr. Hume's house in
James's Court; and Lady Wallace, dowager, came to it. Mrs. Boswell at
that time sent for Adam Gillies, mason, to repair some plaister which
was broken. Having by this means got access to the house, he went about
and teased Lady Wallace, by telling her that many other things needed
repairs. She frequently bid him let her alone, for she saw no occasion
to trouble the landlord for any thing. Notwithstanding this, he came to
Mr. Hume, and told him that the stone pavement in the kitchen, under the
coal bunker, was all shattered, and must be repaired; and that he was
sent by Lady Wallace to tell him so. Mr. Hume having entire trust in
Lady Wallace's discretion, gave him orders to repair that pavement of
the bunker. Gillies brought him in an account for many other repairs on
the pavement of the kitchen. Mr. Hume told him that he had exceeded his
orders; and that he would not pay him till he should see Lady Wallace,
who was at that time in the country. When she came to town, she told Mr.
Hume the fact, and that Gillies had come to him, not only without her
orders but contrary to them. At the same time, Mrs. Boswell, who had
lived two years in the house, told him, that when she left it, she saw
nothing in the kitchen pavement which needed repairs. Mr. Hume therefore
refused to pay Gillies for any thing, except for the plaister, and also
for whitening the kitchen, for which he had orders. This is the cause
before the court."
[138:1] It is supposed to have been of Hume that, when some one, in Mrs.
Piozzi's presence, observed, that he had the _lumières_, Johnson said,
"Just enough to light him to hell." Boswell mentions his having uttered
a remark about Hume, too gross to be committed to paper. It is said
that, when in Hume's presence, a mutual friend offered to make Johnson
acquainted with him, the author of the "Rambler" roared out, "No, sir."
[140:1] MS. R.S.E.
[141:1] It is pretty well known, that he managed to persuade Garrick
that a niche would be found, in the life of the first commander of his
day, for the first dramatist of the succeeding generation. The manager
immediately asked if Mallet had given up writing for the stage:
fortunately he discovered that he had not; he had a manuscript play in
his pocket.
With Mrs. Mallet, who was in all respects worthy of her husband, Hume
had some acquaintance; but he does not appear to have had much respect
for her. Lord Charlemont says, "I never saw him so much displeased, or
so much disconcerted, as by the petulance of Mrs. Mallet, the conceited
wife of Bolingbroke's editor. This lady, who was not acquainted with
Hume, meeting him one night at an assembly, boldly accosted him in these
words, 'Mr. Hume, give me leave to introduce myself to you; we Deists
ought to know each other.' 'Madam,' replied he, 'I am no Deist; I do not
style myself so, neither do I desire to be known by that
appellation.'"--_Hardy's Memoir of Charlemont_, p. 122.
[142:1] This letter is not dated. It may be questioned whether it be
either the one referred to in the preceding, or in the following letter
by Hume.
[143:1] MS. R.S.E.
[144:1] MS. R.S.E.
[146:1] The alteration of the customs duties by the authority of the
crown.
[146:2] The case of Sir George Markham, who was fined £10,000 in the
Star-chamber, for rudeness to a peer, is not stated in the first
edition. In the latest editions, the case is stated as it had been set
down on Lansdowne's authority, and there is merely a note mentioning
that Hobart gives a different account of it. See Hobart, p. 120.
[147:1] Minto MSS.
[147:2] MS. R.S.E.
[148:1] The quarrel between Wilkes and Armstrong excited much interest.
They had been close friends, and Wilkes had advanced money to Armstrong
in his need. The latter had ventured to pass a slight sarcasm on
Churchill, who returned it ten-fold, taking Wilkes to his assistance,
who abused Armstrong among the other Scots, in some letters in _The
Public Advertiser_. A very amusing and dramatic dialogue between them
will be found in _The Gentleman's Magazine_ for 1782.
[148:2] MS. R.S.E.
[149:1] MS. R.S.E.
[149:2] See Vol. I. p. 221.
[149:3] Memorials of Oswald, p. 79.
[149:4] Scroll MS. R.S.E.
[150:1] William Johnstone of Westerhall, afterwards Sir William
Pulteney.
[150:2] MS. R.S.E.
[151:1] Stewart's Life of Reid. It is not stated whether the date is
estimated by the old or the new style. Hume's birth-day is old style.
[152:1] Oeuvres Philosophiques de M. D. Hume, &c., 4 vols. 12mo, 1764.
[153:1] When are the public to be in possession of Sir William
Hamilton's edition of Reid? I have had the privilege of seeing the proof
sheets of this work, so far as it had proceeded, before ill health had,
for a time, interrupted the labours of the professor of logic. The
quantity of learning and deep thought concentrated in the commentary, is
such as, perhaps, but one man in this country could have brought
together; and the natural feeling suggested on the perusal was, regret
that so much of these qualities had been expended in notes and
illustrative essays, instead of being published in a separate work.
[154:1] Stewart's Life of Reid.
[156:1] MS. R.S.E.