The Life of Samuel Johnson

by James Boswell

  Soon after this time I had an opportunity of seeing, by means of one of his friends,1086 a proof that his talents, as well as his obliging service to authours, were ready as ever. He had revised The Village, an admirable poem, by the Reverend Mr. Crabbe. Its sentiments as to the false notions of rustick happiness and rustick virtue were quite congenial with his own; and he had taken the trouble not only to suggest slight corrections and variations, but to furnish some lines, when he thought he could give the writer’s meaning better than in the words of the manuscript.a

  On Sunday, March 30, I found him at home in the evening, and had the pleasure to meet with Dr. Brocklesby, whose reading, and knowledge of life, and good spirits, supply him with a never-failing source of conversation. He mentioned a respectable gentleman,1087 who became extremely penurious near the close of his life. Johnson said there must have been a degree of madness about him. ‘Not at all, Sir, (said Dr. Brocklesby,) his judgement was entire.’ Unluckily, however, he mentioned that although he had a fortune of twenty-seven thousand pounds, he denied himself many comforts, from an apprehension that he could not afford them. ‘Nay, Sir, (cried Johnson,) when the judgement is so disturbed that a man cannot count, that is pretty well.’

  I shall here insert a few of Johnson’s sayings, without the formality of dates, as they have no reference to any particular time or place.

  ‘The more a man extends and varies his acquaintance the better.’ This, however, was meant with a just restriction; for, he on another occasion said to me, ‘Sir, a man may be so much of every thing, that he is nothing of any thing.’

  ‘Raising the wages of day-labourers is wrong; for it does not make them live better, but only makes them idler, and idleness is a very bad thing for human nature.’

  ‘It is a very good custom to keep a journal for a man’s own use; he may write upon a card a day all that is necessary to be written, after he has had experience of life. At first there is a great deal to be written, because there is a great deal of novelty; but when once a man has settled his opinions, there is seldom much to be set down.’

  ‘There is nothing wonderful in the journal which we see Swift kept in London, for it contains slight topicks, and it might soon be written.’

  I praised the accuracy of an account-book of a lady whom I mentioned.1088 Johnson. ‘Keeping accounts, Sir, is of no use when a man is spending his own money, and has nobody to whom he is to account. You won’t eat less beef to-day, because you have written down what it cost yesterday.’ I mentioned another lady1089 who thought as he did, so that her husband could not get her to keep an account of the expence of the family, as she thought it enough that she never exceeded the sum allowed her. Johnson. ‘Sir, it is fit she should keep an account, because her husband wishes it; but I do not see its use.’ I maintained that keeping an account has this advantage, that it satisfies a man that his money has not been lost or stolen, which he might sometimes be apt to imagine, were there no written state of his expence; and besides, a calculation of œconomy so as not to exceed one’s income, cannot be made without a view of the different articles in figures, that one may see how to retrench in some particulars less necessary than others. This he did not attempt to answer.

  Talking of an acquaintance of ours,1090 whose narratives, which abounded in curious and interesting topicks, were unhappily found to be very fabulous; I mentioned Lord Mansfield’s having said to me, ‘Suppose we believe one half of what he tells.’ JOHNSON. ‘Ay: but we don’t know which half to believe. By his lying we lose not only our reverence for him, but all comfort in his conversation.’ BOSWELL. ‘May we not take it as amusing fiction?’ JOHNSON. ‘Sir, the misfortune is, that you will insensibly believe as much of it as you incline to believe.’

  It is remarkable, that notwithstanding their congeniality in politicks, he never was acquainted with a late eminent noble judge,1091 whom I have heard speak of him as a writer, with great respect. Johnson, I know not upon what degree of investigation, entertained no exalted opinion of his Lordship’s intellectual character. Talking of him to me one day, he said, ‘It is wonderful, Sir, with how little real superiority of mind men can make an eminent figure in publick life.’ He expressed himself to the same purpose concerning another law-Lord,1092 who, it seems, once took a fancy to associate with the wits of London; but with so little success, that Foote said, ‘What can he mean by coming among us? He is not only dull himself, but the cause of dullness in others.’ Trying him by the test of his colloquial powers, Johnson had found him very defective. He once said to Sir Joshua Reynolds, ‘This man now has been ten years about town, and has made nothing of it;’ meaning as a companion.a He said to me, ‘I never heard any thing from him in company that was at all striking; and depend upon it, Sir, it is when you come close to a man in conversation, that you discover what his real abilities are; to make a speech in a publick assembly is a knack. Now I honour Thurlow, Sir; Thurlow is a fine fellow; he fairly puts his mind to yours.’

  After repeating to him some of his pointed, lively sayings, I said, ‘It is a pity, Sir, you don’t always remember your own good things, that you may have a laugh when you will.’ JOHNSON. ‘Nay, Sir, it is better that I forget them, that I may be reminded of them, and have a laugh on their being brought to my recollection.’

  When I recalled to him his having said as we sailed upon Loch-lomond, ‘That if he wore any thing fine, it should be very fine;’ I observed that all his thoughts were upon a great scale. Johnson. ‘Depend upon it, Sir, every man will have as fine a thing as he can get; as a large diamond for his ring.’ BOSWELL. ‘Pardon me, Sir: a man of a narrow mind will not think of it, a slight trinket will satisfy him:

  “Nec sufferre queat majoris pondera gemmce.” ‘1093

  I told him I should send him some Essays which I had written,1094 which I hoped he would be so good as to read, and pick out the good ones. Johnson. ‘Nay, Sir, send me only the good ones; don’t make me pick them.’

  I heard him once say, ‘Though the proverb Nullum numen abest, si sit prudentia,1095 does not always prove true, we may be certain of the converse of it, Nullum numen adest, si sit imprudentia.,1096

  Once, when Mr. Seward was going to Bath, and asked his commands, he said, ‘Tell Dr. Harrington that I wish he would publish another volume of the Nugte antiqu&;a1097 It is a very pretty book.’ Mr. Seward seconded this wish, and recommended to Dr. Harrington to dedicate it to Johnson, and take for his motto, what Catullus says to Cornelius Nepos: –

  ‘–––––– namque tu solebas,

  Meas esse aliquid putare nugas.’1098

  As a small proof of his kindliness and delicacy of feeling, the following circumstance may be mentioned: One evening when we were in the street together, and I told him I was going to sup at Mr. Beauclerk’s, he said, ‘I’ll go with you.’ After having walked part of the way, seeming to recollect something, he suddenly stopped and said, I cannot go, – but I do not love Beauclerk the less.’

  On the frame of his portrait, Mr. Beauclerk had inscribed, –

  ‘–––––– Ingenium ingens

  Inculto latet hoc sub corpore.’1099

  After Mr. Beauclerk’s death, when it became Mr. Langton’s property, he made the inscription be defaced. Johnson said complacently, ‘It was kind in you to take it off;’ and then after a short pause, added, ‘and not unkind in him to put it on.’

  He said, ‘How few of his friends’ houses would a man choose to be at when he is sick.’ He mentioned one or two. I recollect only Thrale’s.

  He observed, ‘There is a wicked inclination in most people to suppose an old man decayed in his intellects. If a young or middle-aged man, when leaving a company, does not recollect where he laid his hat, it is nothing; but if the same inattention is discovered in an old man, people will shrug up their shoulders, and say, “His memory is going.”’

  When I once talked to him of some of the sayings which every body repeats, but nobody knows where to find, such as Quos DEUS vult perdere, prius d
ementat;1100 he told me that he was once offered ten guineas to point out from whence Semel insanivimus omnes1101 was taken. He could not do it; but many years afterwards met with it by chance in Johannes Baptista Mantuanus.1102

  I am very sorry that I did not take a note of an eloquent argument in which he maintained that the situation of Prince of Wales was the happiest of any person’s in the kingdom, even beyond that of the Sovereign. I recollect only – the enjoyment of hope, – the high superiority of rank, without the anxious cares of government, – and a great degree of power, both from natural influence wisely used, and from the sanguine expectations of those who look forward to the chance of future favour.

  Sir Joshua Reynolds communicated to me the following particulars: –

  Johnson thought the poems published as translations from Ossian had so little merit, that he said, ‘Sir, a man might write such stuff for ever, if he would abandon his mind to it.’

  He said, ‘A man should pass a part of his time with the laughers, by which means any thing ridiculous or particular about him might be presented to his view, and corrected.’ I observed, he must have been a bold laugher who would have ventured to tell Dr. Johnson of any of his particularities.a

  Having observed the vain ostentatious importance of many people in quoting the authority of Dukes and Lords, as having been in their company, he said, he went to the other extreme, and did not mention his authority when he should have done it, had it not been that of a Duke or a Lord.

  Dr. Goldsmith said once to Dr. Johnson, that he wished for some additional members to the LITERARY CLUB, to give it an agreeable variety; for (said he,) there can now be nothing new among us; we have travelled over one another’s minds. Johnson seemed a little angry, and said, ‘Sir, you have not travelled over my mind, I promise you.’ Sir Joshua, however, thought Goldsmith right; observing, that ‘when people have lived a great deal together, they know what each of them will say on every subject. A new understanding, therefore, is desirable; because though it may only furnish the same sense upon a question which would have been furnished by those with whom we are accustomed to live, yet this sense will have a different colouring; and colouring is of much effect in every thing else as well as in painting.’

  Johnson used to say that he made it a constant rule to talk as well as he could both as to sentiment and expression, by which means, what had been originally effort became familiar and easy. The consequence of this, Sir Joshua observed, was, that his common conversation in all companies was such as to secure him universal attention, as something above the usual colloquial style was expected.

  Yet, though Johnson had this habit in company, when another mode was necessary, in order to investigate truth, he could descend to a language intelligible to the meanest capacity. An instance of this was witnessed by Sir Joshua Reynolds, when they were present at an examination of a little blackguard boy, by Mr. Saunders Welch, the late Westminster Justice. Welch, who imagined that he was exalting himself in Dr. Johnson’s eyes by using big words, spoke in a manner that was utterly unintelligible to the boy; Dr. Johnson perceiving it, addressed himself to the boy, and changed the pompous phraseology into colloquial language. Sir Joshua Reynolds, who was much amused by this procedure, which seemed a kind of reversing of what might have been expected from the two men, took notice of it to Dr. Johnson, as they walked away by themselves. Johnson said, that it was continually the case; and that he was always obliged to translate the Justice’s swelling diction, (smiling,) so as that his meaning might be understood by the vulgar, from whom information was to be obtained.

  Sir Joshua once observed to him, that he had talked above the capacity of some people with whom they had been in company together. ‘No matter, Sir, (said Johnson;) they consider it as a compliment to be talked to, as if they were wiser than they are. So true is this, Sir, that Baxter made it a rule in every sermon that he preached, to say something that was above the capacity of his audience.a

  Johnson’s dexterity in retort, when he seemed to be driven to an extremity by his adversary, was very remarkable. Of his power in this respect, our common friend, Mr. Windham, of Norfolk, has been pleased to furnish me with an eminent instance. However unfavourable to Scotland, he uniformly gave liberal praise to George Buchanan, as a writer. In a conversation concerning the literary merits of the two countries, in which Buchanan was introduced, a Scotchman, imagining that on this ground he should have an undoubted triumph over him, exclaimed, ‘Ah, Dr. Johnson, what would you have said of Buchanan, had he been an Englishman?’ ‘Why, Sir, (said Johnson, after a little pause,) I should not have said of Buchanan, had he been an Englishman, what I will now say of him as a Scotchman, – that he was the only man of genius his country ever produced.’

  And this brings to my recollection another instance of the same nature. I once reminded him that when Dr. Adam Smith was expatiating on the beauty of Glasgow, he had cut him short by saying, ‘Pray, Sir, have you ever seen Brentford?’ and I took the liberty to add, ‘My dear Sir, surely that was shocking.’ ‘Why, then, Sir, (he replied,) you have never seen Brentford.’

  Though his usual phrase for conversation was talk, yet he made a distinction; for when he once told me that he dined the day before at a friend’s house, with ‘a very pretty company;’ and I asked him if there was good conversation, he answered, ‘No, Sir; we had talk enough, but no conversation; there was nothing discussed.’

  Talking of the success of the Scotch in London, he imputed it in a considerable degree to their spirit of nationality. ‘You know, Sir, (said he,) that no Scotchman publishes a book, or has a play brought upon the stage, but there are five hundred people ready to applaud him.’

  He gave much praise to his friend Dr. Burney’s elegant and entertaining travels, and told Mr. Seward that he had them in his eye, when writing his Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland.

  Such was his sensibility, and so much was he affected by pathetick poetry, that, when he was reading Dr. Beattie’s Hermit in my presence, it brought tears into his eyes.

  He disapproved much of mingling real facts with fiction. On this account he censured a book entitled Love and Madness.1103

  Mr. Hoole told him, he was born in Moorfields, and had received part of his early instruction in Grub-street. ‘Sir, (said Johnson, smiling,) you have been regularly educated.’ Having asked who was his instructor, and Mr. Hoole having answered, ‘My uncle, Sir, who was a taylor;’ Johnson, recollecting himself, said, ‘Sir, I knew him; we called him the metaphysical taylor. He was of a club in Old-street, with me and George Psalmanazar, and some others: but pray, Sir, was he a good taylor?’ Mr. Hoole having answered that he believed he was too mathematical, and used to draw squares and triangles on his shop-board, so that he did not excel in the cut of a coat; – ‘I am sorry for it (said Johnson,) for I would have every man to be master of his own business.’

  In pleasant reference to himself and Mr. Hoole, as brother authors, he often said, ‘Let you and I, Sir, go together, and eat a beef-steak in Grub-street.’

  Sir William Chambers, that great Architecta, whose works shew a sublimity of genius, and who is esteemed by all who know him for his social, hospitable, and generous qualities, submitted the manuscript of his Chinese Architecture to Dr. Johnson’s perusal. Johnson was much pleased with it, and said, ‘It wants no addition nor correction, but a few lines of introduction; which he furnished, and Sir William adopted.a

  He said to Sir William Scott, ‘The age is running mad after innovation; all the business of the world is to be done in a new way; men are to be hanged in a new way; Tyburn itself is not safe from the fury of innovation.’ It having been argued that this was an improvement, – ‘No, Sir, (said he, eagerly,) it is not an improvement: they object that the old method drew together a number of spectators. Sir, executions are intended to draw spectators. If they do not draw spectators they don’t answer their purpose. The old method was most satisfactory to all parties; the publick was gratified by a procession; the criminal wa
s supported by it. Why is all this to be swept away?’ I perfectly agree with Dr. Johnson upon this head, and am persuaded that executions now, the solemn procession being discontinued, have not nearly the effect which they formerly had. Magistrates both in London, and elsewhere, have, I am afraid, in this, had too much regard to their own ease.

  Of Dr. Hurd, Bishop of Worcester, Johnson said to a friend. ‘Hurd, Sir, is one of a set of men who account for every thing systematically; for instance, it has been a fashion to wear scarlet breeches; these men would tell you, that according to causes and effects, no other wear could at that time have been chosen.’ He however, said of him at another time to the same gentleman, ‘Hurd, Sir, is a man whose acquaintance is a valuable acquisition.’

  That learned and ingenious Prelate, it is well known, published at one period of his life Moral and Political Dialogues, with a woefully whiggish cast. Afterwards, his Lordship having thought better, came to see his errour, and republished the work with a more constitutional spirit. Johnson, however, was unwilling to allow him full credit for his political conversion. I remember when his Lordship declined the honour of being Archbishop of Canterbury, Johnson said, ‘I am glad he did not go to Lambeth; for, after all, I fear he is a Whig in his heart.’

  Johnson’s attention to precision and clearness in expression was very remarkable. He disapproved of parentheses; and I believe in all his voluminous writings, not half a dozen of them will be found. He never used the phrases the former and the latter, having observed, that they often occasioned obscurity; he therefore contrived to construct his sentences so as not to have occasion for them, and would even rather repeat the same words, in order to avoid them. Nothing is more common than to mistake surnames when we hear them carelessly uttered for the first time. To prevent this, he used not only to pronounce them slowly and distinctly, but to take the trouble of spelling them; a practice which I have often followed; and which I wish were general.