_'He was the most charitable of mortals, without being what we call an_
active friend. _Admirable at giving counsel; no man saw his way so
clearly; but he_ would not stir a finger _for the assistance of those to
whom he was willing enough to give advice.'_ And again on the same page,
_'If you wanted a slight favour, you must apply to people of other
dispositions; for_ not a step would Johnson move _to obtain a man a vote
in a society, to repay a compliment which might be useful or pleasing,
to write a letter of request, &c., or to obtain a hundred pounds a year
more for a friend who, perhaps, had already two or three. No force could
urge him to diligence, no importunity could conquer his resolution to
stand still.'_
It is amazing that one who had such opportunities of knowing Dr.
Johnson, should appear so little acquainted with his real character. I
am sorry this lady does not advert, that she herself contradicts the
assertion of his being obstinately defective in the _petites morales_,
in the little endearing charities of social life, in conferring smaller
favours; for she says[1062],--
'Dr. Johnson _was liberal enough in granting literary assistance to
others, I think; and innumerable are the Prefaces, Sermons, Lectures,
and Dedications which he used to make for people who begged of him._'
I am certain that a _more active friend_ has rarely been found in any
age[1063]. This work, which I fondly hope will rescue his memory from
obloquy, contains a thousand instances of his benevolent exertions in
almost every way that can be conceived; and particularly in employing
his pen with a generous readiness for those to whom its aid could be
useful. Indeed his obliging activity in doing little offices of
kindness, both by letters and personal application, was one of the most
remarkable features in his character; and for the truth of this I can
appeal to a number of his respectable friends: Sir Joshua Reynolds, Mr.
Langton, Mr. Hamilton, Mr. Burke, Mr. Windham, Mr. Malone, the Bishop of
Dromore, Sir William Scott, Sir Robert Chambers. And can Mrs. Thrale
forget the advertisements which he wrote for her husband at the time of
his election contest[1064]; the epitaphs on him and her mother[1065];
the playful and even trifling verses, for the amusement of her and her
daughters; his corresponding with her children[1066], and entering into
their minute concerns[1067], which shews him in the most amiable light?
She relates[1068],--
That Mr. Ch-lm-ley unexpectedly rode up to Mr. Thrale's carriage, in
which Mr. Thrale and she, and Dr. Johnson were travelling; that he paid
them all his proper compliments, but observing that Dr. Johnson, who was
reading, did not see him, _'tapt him gently on the shoulder. "'Tis_ Mr.
Ch-lm-ley;" _says my husband. "Well, Sir--and what if it is_ Mr.
Ch-lm-ley;" _says the other, sternly, just lifting his eyes a moment
from his book, and returning to it again, with renewed avidity.'_
This surely conveys a notion of Johnson, as if he had been grossly rude
to Mr. Cholmondeley[1069], a gentleman whom he always loved and
esteemed. If, therefore, there was an absolute necessity for mentioning
the story at all, it might have been thought that her tenderness for Dr.
Johnson's character would have disposed her to state any thing that
could soften it. Why then is there a total silence as to what Mr.
Cholmondeley told her?--that Johnson, who had known him from his
earliest years, having been made sensible of what had doubtless a
strange appearance, took occasion, when he afterwards met him, to make a
very courteous and kind apology. There is another little circumstance
which I cannot but remark. Her book was published in 1785, she had then
in her possession a letter from Dr. Johnson, dated in 1777[1070], which
begins thus:--'Cholmondeley's story shocks me, if it be true, which I
can hardly think, for I am utterly unconscious of it: I am very sorry,
and very much ashamed[1071].' Why then publish the anecdote? Or if she
did, why not add the circumstances, with which she was well acquainted!