{1} “Not yet _recorded_,” I say; for there is one celebrated man of the
present day, who, if all be true which is reported of him, has greatly
exceeded me in quantity.
{2} A third exception might perhaps have been added; and my reason for
not adding that exception is chiefly because it was only in his
juvenile efforts that the writer whom I allude to expressly addressed
hints to philosophical themes; his riper powers having been all
dedicated (on very excusable and very intelligible grounds, under the
present direction of the popular mind in England) to criticism and the
Fine Arts. This reason apart, however, I doubt whether he is not rather
to be considered an acute thinker than a subtle one. It is, besides, a
great drawback on his mastery over philosophical subjects that he has
obviously not had the advantage of a regular scholastic education: he
has not read Plato in his youth (which most likely was only his
misfortune), but neither has he read Kant in his manhood (which is his
fault).
{3} I disclaim any allusion to _existing_ professors, of whom indeed I
know only one.
{4} To this same Jew, by the way, some eighteen months afterwards, I
applied again on the same business; and, dating at that time from a
respectable college, I was fortunate enough to gain his serious
attention to my proposals. My necessities had not arisen from any
extravagance or youthful levities (these my habits and the nature of my
pleasures raised me far above), but simply from the vindictive malice
of my guardian, who, when he found himself no longer able to prevent me
from going to the university, had, as a parting token of his good
nature, refused to sign an order for granting me a shilling beyond the
allowance made to me at school—viz., £100 per annum. Upon this sum it
was in my time barely possible to have lived in college, and not
possible to a man who, though above the paltry affectation of
ostentatious disregard for money, and without any expensive tastes,
confided nevertheless rather too much in servants, and did not delight
in the petty details of minute economy. I soon, therefore, became
embarrassed, and at length, after a most voluminous negotiation with
the Jew (some parts of which, if I had leisure to rehearse them, would
greatly amuse my readers), I was put in possession of the sum I asked
for, on the “regular” terms of paying the Jew seventeen and a half per
cent. by way of annuity on all the money furnished; Israel, on his
part, graciously resuming no more than about ninety guineas of the said
money, on account of an attorney’s bill (for what services, to whom
rendered, and when, whether at the siege of Jerusalem, at the building
of the second Temple, or on some earlier occasion, I have not yet been
able to discover). How many perches this bill measured I really forget;
but I still keep it in a cabinet of natural curiosities, and some time
or other I believe I shall present it to the British Museum.
{5} The Bristol mail is the best appointed in the Kingdom, owing to the
double advantages of an unusually good road and of an extra sum for the
expenses subscribed by the Bristol merchants.
{6} It will be objected that many men, of the highest rank and wealth,
have in our own day, as well as throughout our history, been amongst
the foremost in courting danger in battle. True; but this is not the
case supposed; long familiarity with power has to them deadened its
effect and its attractions.
{7} Φιλον υπνη θελyητρον επικουρον νοσον.
{8} ηδυ δουλευμα. EURIP. Orest.
{9} αναξανδρων ’Αyαμεμνων.
{10} ομμα θεισ’ ειτω πεπλων. The scholar will know that throughout this
passage I refer to the early scenes of the Orestes; one of the most
beautiful exhibitions of the domestic affections which even the dramas
of Euripides can furnish. To the English reader it may be necessary to
say that the situation at the opening of the drama is that of a brother
attended only by his sister during the demoniacal possession of a
suffering conscience (or, in the mythology of the play, haunted by the
Furies), and in circumstances of immediate danger from enemies, and of
desertion or cold regard from nominal friends.
{11} _Evanesced_: this way of going off the stage of life appears to
have been well known in the 17th century, but at that time to have been
considered a peculiar privilege of blood-royal, and by no means to be
allowed to druggists. For about the year 1686 a poet of rather ominous
name (and who, by-the-bye, did ample justice to his name), viz., Mr.
_Flat-man_, in speaking of the death of Charles II. expresses his
surprise that any prince should commit so absurd an act as dying,
because, says he,
“Kings should disdain to die, and only _disappear_.”
They should _abscond_, that is, into the other world.
{12} Of this, however, the learned appear latterly to have doubted; for
in a pirated edition of Buchan’s _Domestic Medicine_, which I once saw
in the hands of a farmer’s wife, who was studying it for the benefit of
her health, the Doctor was made to say—“Be particularly careful never
to take above five-and-twenty _ounces_ of laudanum at once;” the true
reading being probably five-and-twenty _drops_, which are held equal to
about one grain of crude opium.
{13} Amongst the great herd of travellers, &c., who show sufficiently
by their stupidity that they never held any intercourse with opium, I
must caution my readers specially against the brilliant author of
_Anastasius_. This gentleman, whose wit would lead one to presume him
an opium-eater, has made it impossible to consider him in that
character, from the grievous misrepresentation which he gives of its
effects at pp. 215-17 of vol. i. Upon consideration it must appear such
to the author himself, for, waiving the errors I have insisted on in
the text, which (and others) are adopted in the fullest manner, he will
himself admit that an old gentleman “with a snow-white beard,” who eats
“ample doses of opium,” and is yet able to deliver what is meant and
received as very weighty counsel on the bad effects of that practice,
is but an indifferent evidence that opium either kills people
prematurely or sends them into a madhouse. But for my part, I see into
this old gentleman and his motives: the fact is, he was enamoured of
“the little golden receptacle of the pernicious drug” which Anastasius
carried about him; and no way of obtaining it so safe and so feasible
occurred as that of frightening its owner out of his wits (which, by
the bye, are none of the strongest). This commentary throws a new light
upon the case, and greatly improves it as a story; for the old
gentleman’s speech, considered as a lecture on pharmacy, is highly
absurd; but considered as a hoax on Anastasius, it reads excellently.
{14} I have not the book at this moment to consult; but I think the
passage begins—“And even that tavern music, which makes one man merry,
another mad, in me strikes a deep fit of devotion,” &c.
{15} A handsome newsroom, of which I was very politely made free in
passing through Manchester by several gentlemen of that place, is
called, I think, _The Porch_; whence I, who am a stranger in
Manchester, inferred that the subscribers meant to profess themselves
followers of Zeno. But I have been since assured that this is a
mistake.
{16} I here reckon twenty-five drops of laudanum as equivalent to one
grain of opium, which, I believe, is the common estimate. However, as
both may be considered variable quantities (the crude opium varying
much in strength, and the tincture still more), I suppose that no
infinitesimal accuracy can be had in such a calculation. Teaspoons vary
as much in size as opium in strength. Small ones hold about 100 drops;
so that 8,000 drops are about eighty times a teaspoonful. The reader
sees how much I kept within Dr. Buchan’s indulgent allowance.
{17} This, however, is not a necessary conclusion; the varieties of
effect produced by opium on different constitutions are infinite. A
London magistrate (Harriott’s _Struggles through Life_, vol. iii. p.
391, third edition) has recorded that, on the first occasion of his
trying laudanum for the gout he took _forty_ drops, the next night
_sixty_, and on the fifth night _eighty_, without any effect whatever;
and this at an advanced age. I have an anecdote from a country surgeon,
however, which sinks Mr. Harriott’s case into a trifle; and in my
projected medical treatise on opium, which I will publish provided the
College of Surgeons will pay me for enlightening their benighted
understandings upon this subject, I will relate it; but it is far too
good a story to be published gratis.
{18} See the common accounts in any Eastern traveller or voyager of the
frantic excesses committed by Malays who have taken opium, or are
reduced to desperation by ill-luck at gambling.
{19} The reader must remember what I here mean by _thinking_, because
else this would be a very presumptuous expression. England, of late,
has been rich to excess in fine thinkers, in the departments of
creative and combining thought; but there is a sad dearth of masculine
thinkers in any analytic path. A Scotchman of eminent name has lately
told us that he is obliged to quit even mathematics for want of
encouragement.
{20} William Lithgow. His book (Travels, &c.) is ill and pedantically
written; but the account of his own sufferings on the rack at Malaga is
overpoweringly affecting.
{21} In saying this I mean no disrespect to the individual house, as
the reader will understand when I tell him that, with the exception of
one or two princely mansions, and some few inferior ones that have been
coated with Roman cement, I am not acquainted with any house in this
mountainous district which is wholly waterproof. The architecture of
books, I flatter myself, is conducted on just principles in this
country; but for any other architecture, it is in a barbarous state,
and what is worse, in a retrograde state.
{22} On which last notice I would remark that mine was _too_ rapid, and
the suffering therefore needlessly aggravated; or rather, perhaps, it
was not sufficiently continuous and equably graduated. But that the
reader may judge for himself, and above all that the Opium-eater, who
is preparing to retire from business, may have every sort of
information before him, I subjoin my diary:—
First Week Second Week
Drops of Laud. Drops of Laud.
Mond. June 24 ... 130 Mond. July 1 ... 80
25 ... 140 2 ... 80
26 ... 130 3 ... 90
27 ... 80 4 ... 100
28 ... 80 5 ... 80
29 ... 80 6 ... 80
30 ... 80 7 ... 80
Third Week Fourth Week
Mond. July 8 ... 300 Mond. July 15 ... 76
9 ... 50 16 ... 73.5
10 } 17 ... 73.5
11 } Hiatus in 18 ... 70
12 } MS. 19 ... 240
13 } 20 ... 80
14 ... 76 21 ... 350
Fifth Week
Mond. July 22 ... 60
23 ... none.
24 ... none.
25 ... none.
26 ... 200
27 ... none.
What mean these abrupt relapses, the reader will ask perhaps, to such
numbers as 300, 350, &c.? The _impulse_ to these relapses was mere
infirmity of purpose; the _motive_, where any motive blended with this
impulse, was either the principle, of “_reculer pour mieux sauter_;”
(for under the torpor of a large dose, which lasted for a day or two, a
less quantity satisfied the stomach, which on awakening found itself
partly accustomed to this new ration); or else it was this
principle—that of sufferings otherwise equal, those will be borne best
which meet with a mood of anger. Now, whenever I ascended to my large
dose I was furiously incensed on the following day, and could then have
borne anything.