compliment was well received, and in a few months afterwards Boswell
was relieved of all apprehensions respecting his inheritance. By his
father he was consulted as to the provisions of a deed of entail. He
solicited counsel from Dr. Johnson[58] and Lord Hailes on a point
respecting which he and his father disagreed. Lord Auchinleck proposed
that in the series of heirs to be established under the entail, all
males descending from his grandfather should be preferred to females,
but he would not extend that privilege to males deriving their descent
from a higher source. Boswell, on the other hand, desired that heirs
male, however remote, should be preferred. As both Dr. Johnson and Lord
Hailes supported the view of Lord Auchinleck, and Boswell at length
acquiesced in his father’s wishes, the entail, a document extending to
thirty-seven folio pages, was executed at Edinburgh on the 7th August,
1776. The instrument proceeds thus:—[59]
“I ALEXANDER BOSWEL of Auchinleck Esquire one of the Senators of the
College of Justice considering that having long intended to make
a full settlement of my estate, but which I have put off a long
time, not having fallen upon a plan which gave me satisfaction,
notwithstanding I have seen a multiplicity of settlements, I am
now come to the resolution to execute what follows, which though
it appears to me better calculated to answer the ends of a family
settlement, and to be more free from objections than others I have
seen, I am conscious is not exempt from faults, for I see them. But
when one is providing for futurity it is impossible to obviate all
inconveniences. I have, however, chose this form as appearing to me
subject to the fewest. The Settlement I am to make is a Taillie or
Deed of Entail intended to be perpetual, which notwithstanding the
prejudices of the ignorant and dissipated part of mankind to the
contrary I have always approved of, if properly devised. My motive
to it is not the preservation of my name and memory, for I know that
after death our places here know us no more. But my motives are that
the strength of the happy constitution with which this kingdom is
blest, depends in a great measure upon there being kept up a proper
number of Gentlemen’s families of independent fortunes. It was this
which at first introduced the right of primogeniture amongst us, a
right well adapted to the good of the younger, as well as the eldest,
as it prevents estates crumbling down by division into morsels. It
enables the several successive heirs to educate their whole children
properly, and thereby fit them for different employments, so that
these families are useful nurseries. On the other hand a danger
arises from an accumulation of different estates into the hands
of overgrown rich men. Again the estate which I have, though not
great, is sufficient for answering all the reasonable expenses of a
gentleman’s family and is situate in an agreeable country with the
people of which I and my worthy predecessors have had the happiness to
live in great friendship, which I hope shall always be the case with
those that succeed me; and the place of residence has many uncommon
beauties and conveniences, which several considerations would make
any wise man careful to preserve such an estate. But as an heir may
happen to get it who by weakness or extravagance would soon put an end
to it, I cannot think any wise man will condemn me if while I allow
the heirs of Taillie every power which a man of judgment would wish to
exercise, I restrain them only from acting foolishly. If a person saw
his next heir a weak foolish and extravagant person he would justly
be censured if in place of giving his estate to his other children,
or bestowing it upon some worthy friend who would make a proper use
of it, he let it drop into the hands of a person who had nothing to
recommend him but the legal character of an heir who directly on his
succession would let it fly. I say he would justly be censured for
this unless he laid that unhappy heir under proper restraints. And
if this would be an advisable precaution to follow where the person
is seen, it must be equally so whenever an heir happens to exist of
that unhappy disposition at any period however remote, for no time can
come when any reasonable man can think it would be beneficial to allow
a person to act foolishly, do therefore hereby,—with the special
advice and consent of James Boswell, Esquire, Advocate, younger of
Auchinleck my eldest son, and under these impressions and in the hope
and belief that I have fallen on a method of preventing children
from being independent of their parents and of securing a proper
provision for younger children, not only at first, which is all that
is commonly done, but in all future times, the want of which appeared
to me the most solid objection to Taillies—give, grant, and dispose
heretably and Irredeemably to myself and the heirs male procreated
and to be procreated of my body whom failing the lands of Auchinleck
to Dr. John Boswell physician in Edinburgh my brother german and the
heirs male lawfully procreated or to be procreated of his body, whom
failing to Claude Boswell of Balmuto Esquire advocate, only son of
the deceast John Boswell of Balmuto who was the only brother of the
deceast Mr. James Boswell of Auchinleck advocate my father and the
heirs male lawfully procreated or to be procreated of the body of the
said Claude Boswell, whom failing to the heirs whatsoever lawfully
procreated or to be procreated of my body, whom failing, to my own
nearest heirs whatsoever descended of the body of Thomas Boswell of
Auchinleck my predecessor, whom all failing to my own nearest heirs
and assignies whatsoever—the eldest heir female and the descendants
of her body always excluding heirs portioners and succeeding still
without division, throughout the whole course of succession of heirs
whatsoever as well as heirs of provision.”
After excluding from the succession all fatuous persons, and regulating
annuities for females and younger children, Lord Auchinleck proceeds to
guard against the extinction of the family name.
“It is hereby,” he adds, “specially provided and declared That in case
any of the heirs male of my body who shall succeed to my said lands
and estate shall also succeed to a peerage or to any other estate
entailed under such conditions as may restrain the heir from carrying
my name and arms then and in every such case the person so succeeding
to the said peerage or other such entailed estate when he is possessed
of my said estate or succeeding to my estate when having right to
such peerage or possessed of such other entailed estate shall forfeit
all right and title to my said lands and estate and that not only
for himself but also for his apparent heir and for all the apparent
heirs of such an apparent heir in a direct line downwards whether in a
nearer or remoter degree and my said estate shall devolve and belong
to the next heir of Taillie though descending of the body of the
person excluded or of his apparent heir in the same manner as if the
person excluded and all the apparent heirs in the said peerage were
naturally dead.”
On Friday, the 15th March, 1776, Boswell arrived in London. Four days
thereafter he accompanied Dr. Johnson, first to Oxford and afterwards
to Lichfield. At Oxford they had agreeable intercourse with Dr.
Wetherell, Master of University College; Dr. Adams, Master of Pembroke
College; Dr. Bentham, Professor of Divinity; Mr. Thomas Warton, and
Dr. Horne, Bishop of Norwich. _En route_ for Lichfield they paused at
Birmingham, to visit Dr. Johnson’s schoolfellow, Mr. Hector. Boswell
improved the occasion by visiting, at Soho, Mr. Matthew Boulton, the
celebrated mechanician, and partner of James Watt. Finding Mr. Boulton
at the head of seven hundred mechanics, he describes him as “an iron
chief,” and a “father to his tribe.” At Lichfield he was introduced
to Mrs. Lucy Porter, Dr. Johnson’s step-daughter, “an old maid, of
simple manners,” living on a fortune of £10,000 bequeathed to her by
her brother, a captain in the navy. On Friday, the 29th March, the
travellers returned to London.
Good Friday, which fell on the 5th of April, Boswell spent with Dr.
Johnson. They worshipped together morning and evening in St. Clement’s
Church. On Easter Sunday Boswell attended morning service in St. Paul’s
Cathedral, and in the evening accompanied Dr. Johnson to his pew in St.
Clement’s.
In the preceding January the brothers Daniel and Robert Perreau were
hanged for forgery. They were convicted on the evidence of Margaret
Caroline Rudd, who cohabited with one of them, and who, to save her
own life, proved informer. This woman possessed uncommon powers of
fascination, and it was believed that she had duped the brothers into
the crime for which they suffered. Like other great criminals, Mrs.
Rudd had acquired a temporary celebrity, and on this account Boswell
determined to visit her. He carried out his intention, and confessed
himself charmed by Mrs. Rudd’s conversation and manners. Under the
plea that he would interest Mrs. Boswell, he made a full record of
Mrs. Rudd’s conversation, transmitting the MS. to Mr. Temple, that he
and his patron, Lord Lisburne, might “enjoy” its perusal. To his many
whims and vagaries in the past Mr. Temple had submitted with more than
befitting good nature, but the celebration of Mrs. Rudd was beyond
his endurance. He denounced the interview, and the record of it; and
Boswell, satisfied that he had been imprudent for once, took back his
MS.
Writing to Mr. Temple on the 28th April he remarks that he “must eat
commons in the Inner Temple this week and next, to make out another
term, that he may still be approximating to the English Bar.” He then
proceeds:—
“I don’t know but you have spoken too highly of Gibbon’s book; the
Dean of Derry,[60] who is of our club, as well as Gibbon, talks of
answering it. I think it is right that as fast as infidel wasps or
venomous insects, whether creeping or flying, are hatched, they should
be crushed. Murphy says he has read thirty pages of Smith’s ‘Wealth,’
but says he shall read no more. Smith too is now of our club. _It has
lost its select merit._ He has gone to Scotland at the request of
David Hume, who is said to be dying. General Paoli had a pretty remark
when I told him of this: “Ah! je suis fâché qu’il soit détrompé si
tôt.”
In a subsequent letter Boswell describes Gibbon as “an ugly, affected,
disgusting fellow,” adding, “he poisons our Literary Club to me.”
Gibbon was elected a member of the club in March, 1774. With an
agreeable presence and elegant manners his conversational powers were
of a high order. His religious sentiments being obnoxious to Dr.
Johnson led to Boswell’s personal dislike. Dr. Adam Smith was admitted
to the club on the 24th December, 1775. He and Dr. Johnson had been at
variance, but the quarrel was made up. Doubtless in connection with
this controversy Boswell thought meet to censure the philosopher and
his work. That a literary club which had added to its membership Edward
Gibbon and Adam Smith should thereby have lost “its select merit,”
reads strangely, even as a _dictum_ of James Boswell.
Boswell’s personal habits remained much the same. He informed
Mr. Temple that his “promise under the solemn yew” had not been
“religiously kept.” He had lately given “his word of honour” to General
Paoli that “he would not taste fermented liquor for a year.” He adds,
“I have kept the promise now about three weeks; I was really growing a
drunkard.”
At the end of April Boswell proceeded to Bath, and there joined Dr.
Johnson at the residence of the Thrales. He accompanied Dr. Johnson
to Bristol, where they inspected the church of St. Mary, Redcliff,
and discoursed on the genius and errors of Chatterton. Returning to
London, Boswell realized a project on which he had set his heart—that
of bringing together Dr. Johnson and Mr. Wilkes. On this subject he
writes:—
“My desire of being acquainted with celebrated men of every
description had made me much about the same time obtain an
introduction to Dr. Samuel Johnson and to John Wilkes, Esq. Two men
more different could perhaps not be selected out of all mankind. They
had even attacked one another with some asperity in their writings;
yet I lived in habits of friendship with both. I could fully relish
the excellence of each, for I have ever delighted in that intellectual
chemistry which can separate good qualities from evil in the same
person.”
Boswell contrived a meeting between Dr. Johnson and Mr. Wilkes by the
exercise of considerable craft. Having been invited to meet Mr. Wilkes
at the table of Mr. Edward Dilly, he bore a message from that gentleman
to Dr. Johnson, requesting him to join the party. In conveying it he
played on the Doctor’s “spirit of contradiction.” Having repeated Mr.
Dilly’s message without reference to the other guests, the following
conversation ensued:—
_Johnson_: “Sir, I am obliged to Mr. Dilly; I will wait upon him.”
_Boswell_: “Provided, sir, I suppose, that the company which he is to
have is agreeable to you?”
_Johnson_: “What do you mean, sir? What do you take me for? Do you
think I am so ignorant of the world as to imagine that I am to
prescribe to a gentleman what company he is to have at his table?”
_Boswell_: “I beg your pardon, sir, for wishing to prevent you from
meeting people whom you might not like. Perhaps he may have some of
what he calls his patriotic friends with him.”
_Johnson_: “Well, sir, and what then? What care I for his patriotic
friends? Poh!”
_Boswell_: “I should not be surprised to find Jack Wilkes there.”
_Johnson_: “And if Jack Wilkes should be there, what is that to me,
sir? My dear friend, let us have no more of this. I am sorry to be
angry with you, but it is treating me strangely to talk to me as if I
could not meet any company whatever occasionally.”[61]
Johnson and Wilkes met not unpleasantly, and Boswell had his triumph.
In May he returned to Edinburgh. Before leaving London he repeated
to Dr. Johnson his former promise that he would devote a portion of
his time to reading. Johnson despatched to him at Edinburgh several
boxes of books, thereby relieving his collection of supernumerary
volumes, and by placing on the books a marketable value discharging
a debt which he owed on the Hebridean journey. After an interval
Boswell reported that owing to a renewed attack of melancholy the boxes
remained unopened. Johnson in these words administered reproof:
“To hear that you have not opened your boxes of books is very
offensive. The examination and arrangement of so many volumes might
have afforded you an amusement very seasonable at present, and useful
for the whole of life. I am, I confess, very angry that you manage
yourself so ill.”
Boswell opened the boxes, and found what he describes as “truly a
numerous and miscellaneous stall library thrown together at random.” It
was not further disturbed.
Boswell’s melancholy did not proceed from any constitutional disorder.
He was involved in debt, and his creditors were importunate. His father
was again appealed to, and the liabilities were discharged. Rejoicing
in his deliverance he communicated the good news to Dr. Johnson. On the
16th November the Doctor thus conveyed his congratulations:—
“I had great pleasure in hearing that you are at last on good
terms with your father. Cultivate his kindness by all honest and
manly means. Life is but short: no time can be afforded but for
the indulgence of real sorrow, or contest upon questions seriously
momentous. Let us not throw away any of our days upon useless
resentment, or contend who shall hold out longest in stubborn
malignity. It is best not to be angry, and best, in the next place, to
be quickly reconciled. May you and your father pass the remainder of
your time in reciprocal benevolence!”
In December Mrs. Boswell presented her husband with a second son, who
was christened David. A delicate child, he survived only a few months.
Writing to Dr. Johnson on the 8th July, 1777, Boswell claims merit
in having refrained from visiting London since the spring of 1776,
and proposes that the Doctor should meet him at Carlisle, and from
thence complete his tour of the English cathedrals. To this proposal
Johnson did not accede, but the friends agreed to meet in September at
Ashbourne, in the hospitable residence of Dr. Taylor. At this meeting
Boswell intimated his desire to obtain a permanent residence in London
as an English barrister. This scheme Dr. Johnson warmly disapproved,
and entreated his companion to be satisfied with his prospective
advantages as a Scottish landowner.
In his more important legal causes Boswell had recourse to Dr.
Johnson’s assistance. At Ashbourne he asked help in a case of
importance. Joseph Knight, a negro, having been brought to Jamaica
in the usual course of the slave trade, was purchased by a Scottish
gentleman in the island, who afterwards returned to Scotland. Soon
after his arrival Knight claimed his freedom, and brought an action
to enforce it.[62] The case was now pending, and Boswell induced Dr.
Johnson to dictate an argument on the negro’s behalf. In recording it
he is careful to add that he was personally an upholder of the slave
trade. He writes:—
“I record Dr. Johnson’s argument fairly upon this particular case;
where, perhaps, he was in the right. But I beg leave to enter my most
solemn protest against his general doctrine with respect to the slave
trade. For I will resolutely say that his unfavourable notion of it
was owing to prejudice and imperfect or false information. The wild
and dangerous attempt which has for some time been persisted in to
obtain an Act of our Legislature to abolish so very important and
necessary a branch of commercial interest must have been crushed at
once, had not the insignificance of the zealots, who vainly took the
lead in it, made the vast body of planters, merchants, and others,
whose immense properties are involved in that trade, reasonably
enough suppose that there could be no danger. The encouragement which
the attempt has received excites my wonder and indignation; and though
some men of superior abilities have supported it, whether from a love
of temporary popularity when prosperous, or a love of general mischief
when desperate, my opinion is unshaken. To abolish a _status_ which
in all ages God has sanctioned and man has continued, would not only
be robbery to an innumerable class of our fellow-subjects, but it
would be extreme cruelty to the African savages, a portion of whom
it saves from massacre, or intolerable bondage in their own country,
and introduces into a much happier state of life, especially now
when their passage to the West Indies, and their treatment there, is
humanely regulated. To abolish that trade would be to—
“——Shut the gates of mercy on mankind.”
The political success of Edmund Burke induced Boswell to indicate his
readiness to co-operate with him in regard to the American colonies. To
Mr. Burke he wrote as follows:—
“_Edinburgh, March 3, 1778._
“DEAR SIR,—Upon my honour I began a letter to you some time ago,
and did not finish it because I imagined you were then near your
_apotheosis_, as poor Goldsmith said upon a former occasion, when he
thought your party was coming into administration; and being one of
your old Barons of Scotland, my pride could not brook the appearance
of paying my court to a minister amongst the crowd of interested
expectants on his accession. At present I take it for granted that
I need be under no such apprehension, and therefore I resume the
indulgence of my inclination. This may be perhaps a singular method
of beginning a correspondence; and in one sense may not be very
complimentative. But I can sincerely assure you, dear sir, that I feel
and mean a genuine compliment to Mr. Burke himself. It is generally
thought no meanness to solicit the notice and favour of a man in
power; and surely it is much less a meanness to endeavour by honest
means to have the honour and pleasure of being on an agreeable
footing with a man of superior knowledge, abilities, and genius.
“I have to thank you for the obligations which you have already
conferred upon me by the welcome which I have, upon repeated
occasions, experienced under your roof. When I was last in London
you gave me a general invitation, which I value more than a Treasury
warrant:—an invitation to ‘the feast of reason,’ and, what I like
still more, ‘the flow of soul,’ which you dispense with liberal and
elegant abundance, is, in my estimation, a privilege of enjoying
certain felicity; and we know that riches and honour are desirable
only as means to felicity, and that they often fail of the end.
“Most heartily do I rejoice that our present ministers have at last
yielded to conciliation. For amidst all the sanguinary zeal of my
countrymen I have professed myself a friend to our fellow-subjects in
America, so far as they claim an exemption from being taxed by the
representatives of the King’s British subjects. I do not perfectly
agree with you; for I deny the Declaratory Act, and I am a warm Tory
in its true constitutional sense. I wish I were a commissioner, or one
of the secretaries of the commission for the grand treaty. I am to be
in London this spring, and if his Majesty should ask me what I would
choose, my answer will be, to assist in the compact between Britain
and America. May I beg to hear from you, and in the meantime to have
my compliments made acceptable to Mrs. Burke?—I am, dear sir, your
most obedient, humble servant,
“JAMES BOSWELL.”[63]
On the 18th March Boswell arrived in London, and at once renewed his
intercourse with Dr. Johnson. They spent Good Friday together, Boswell
accompanying the lexicographer to morning and evening service in St.
Clement’s Church. Next evening, while taking tea with him, Boswell
severely experienced Dr. Johnson’s resentment. The narrative we
present in his own words:—
“We talked of a gentleman (Mr. Langton) who was running out his
fortune in London, and I said, ‘We must get him out of it. All his
friends must quarrel with him, and that will soon drive him away.’
_Johnson_: ‘Nay, sir, we’ll send you to him; if your company does
not drive a man out of his house, nothing will.’ This was a horrible
shock, for which there was no visible cause. I afterwards asked him
why he had said so harsh a thing. _Johnson_: ‘Because, sir, you made
me angry about the Americans.’ _Boswell_: ‘But why did you not take
your revenge directly?’ _Johnson_ (_smiling_): ‘Because, sir, I had
nothing ready. A man cannot strike till he has his weapons.’ This,”
adds Boswell, “was a candid and pleasant confession.”[64]
Dr. Johnson made a second attack a fortnight afterwards, which
Boswell endured with less patience. On the 2nd May they met at Sir
Joshua Reynolds’. The wits of Queen Anne’s reign were talked of, when
Boswell exclaimed, “How delightful it must have been to have lived
in the society of Pope, Swift, Arbuthnot, Gay, and Bolingbroke! We
have no such society in our days.” Sir Joshua answered, “I think, Mr.
Boswell, you might be satisfied with your great friend’s conversation.”
“Nay, sir, Mr. Boswell is right,” said Johnson, “every man wishes
for preferment, and if Boswell had lived in those days he would
have obtained promotion.” “How so, sir?” asked Sir Joshua. “Why,
sir,” said Johnson, “he would have had a high place in the Dunciad.”
Boswell felt so much hurt that, contrary to his custom, he omits the
conversation.[65] He refers to the occurrence in these terms:—
“On Saturday, May 2, I dined with him at Sir Joshua Reynolds’s, when
there was a very large company, and a great deal of conversation;
but owing to some circumstance, which I cannot now recollect, I have
no record of any part of it, except that there were several people
there by no means of the Johnsonian school, so that less attention was
paid to him than usual, which put him out of humour, and upon some
imaginary offence from me, he attacked me with such rudeness that I
was vexed and angry, because it gave those persons an opportunity of
enlarging upon his supposed ferocity, and ill-treatment of his best
friends. I was so much hurt, and had my pride so much roused, that I
kept away from him for a week, and perhaps might have kept away much
longer, nay, gone to Scotland without seeing him again, had we not
fortunately met and been reconciled.”