of me before



life.” He mentioned to me this day many circumstances, which I wrote down when I went home, and have interwoven in the former part of this narrative.

On Tuesday, April 13th, he and Dr. Goldsmith and I dined at general Oglethorpe's. Goldsmith expatiated on the common topick, that the race of our people was degenerated, and that this was owing to luxury. JOHNSON. “ Sir, in the first place, I doubt the fact. I believe there are as many tall men in England now, as ever there were, But, secondly, supposing the stature of our people to be diminished, that is not owing to luxury; for, sir, consider to how very small a proportion of our people luxury can reach. Our soldiery, surely, are not luxurious, who live on sixpence a day; and the same remark will apply to almost all the other classes. Luxury, so far as it reaches the poor, will do good to the race of people ; it will strengthen and multipy them. Sir, no nation was ever hurt by luxury; for, as I said before, it can reach but to a very few. I admit that the great increase of commerce and manufactures hurts the military spirit of a people; because it produces a competition for something else than martial honours,-a competition for riches. It also hurts the bodies of the people ; for you will observe, there is no man who works at any particular trade, but you may know him from his appearance to do so. One part or other of his body being more used than the rest, he is in some degree deformed: but, sir, that is not luxury. A tailor sits cross-legged; but that is not luxury." GOLDSMITH. “ Come, you're just going to the same place by another road.” Johnson. “ Nay, sir, I say that is not luxury. Let us take a walk from Charing-cross to Whitechapel, through, I suppose, the greatest series of shops in the world, what is there in any of these shops, (if you except gin-shops,) that can do any human being any harm ?” GOLDSMITH. Well, sir, I'll accept your challenge. The very next shop to Northumberland-house is a pickleshop.” JOHNSON. “ Well, sir; do we not know that a

maid can, in one afternoon, make pickles sufficient to serve a whole family for a year? nay, that five pickle-shops can serve all the kingdom? Besides, sir, there is no harm done to any body by the making of pickles, or the eating of pickles.”

We drank tea with the ladies; and Goldsmith sung Tovey Lumpkin's song in his comedy, She Stoops to Conquer, and a very pretty one, to an Irish tunes, which he had designed for Miss Hardcastle ; but as Mrs. Bulkeley, who played the part, could not sing, it was left out. He afterwards wrote it down for me, by which means it was preserved, and now appears amongst his poems. Dr. Johnson, in his way home, stopped at my lodgings in Piccadilly, and sat with me, drinking tea a second time, till a late hour.

I told him that Mrs. Macaulay said, she wondered how he could reconcile his political principles with his moral; his notions of inequality and subordination with wishing well to the happiness of all mankind, who might live so agreeably, had they all their portions of land, and none to domineer over another. JOHNSON. Why, sir, I reeoncile my principles very well, because mankind are happier in a state of inequality and subordination. Were they to be in this pretty.state of equality, they would soon degenerate into brutes ;—they would become Monboddo's nation;—their tails would grow. Sir, all would be losers, were all to work for all :-they would have no intellectual improvement. All intellectual improvement arises from leisure; all leisure arises from one working for another.”

Talking of the family of Stuart, he said, “ It should seem that the family at present on the throne has now established as good a right as the former family, by the long consent of the people; and that to disturb this right might be considered as culpable. At the same time I own,

that it is a very difficult question, when considered with respect

$ The Humours of Ballamagairy.

to the house of Stuart. To oblige people to take oaths as to the disputed right, is wrong. I know not whether I could take them: but I do not blame those who do.” So conscientious and so delicate was he upon this subject, which has occasioned so much clamour against him.

Talking of law cases, he said, “ The English reports, in general, are very poor: only the half of what has been said is taken down ; and of that half, much is mistaken. Whereas, in Scotland, the arguments on each side are deliberately put in writing, to be considered by the court. I think a collection of your cases upon subjects of importance, with the opinions of the judges upon them, would be valuable.”

On Thursday, April 15th, I dined with him and Dr. Goldsmith at general Paoli's. We found there signor Martinelli, of Florence, author of a history of England in Italian, printed at London.

I spoke of Allan Ramsay's Gentle Shepherd, in the Scottish dialect, as the best pastoral that had ever been written; not only abounding with beautiful rural imagery, and just and pleasing sentiments, but being a real picture of manners; and I offered to teach Dr. Johnson to understand it. “No, sir,” said he, “I won't learn it. You shall retain your superiority by my not knowing it.”

This brought on a question, whether one man is lessened by another's acquiring an equal degree of knowledge with him. Johnson asserted the affirmative. I maintained, that the position might be true in those kinds of knowledge which produce wisdom, power, and force, so as to enable one man to have the government of others ; but that a man is not in any degree lessened by others knowing as well as he what ends in mere pleasure:eating fine fruits, drinking delicious wines, reading exquisite poetry.

The general observed, that Martinelli was a whig. JOHNSON. “I am sorry for it. It shows the spirit of the times : he is obliged to temporise.” BOSWELL. “I rather think, sir, that toryism prevails in this reign.” Johnson. “I know not why you should think so, sir. You see your friend lord Lyttelton, a nobleman, is obliged in his history to write the most vulgar wbiggism.

An animated debate took place, whether Martinelli should continue bis history of England to the present day. GOLDSMITH. “ To, be sure he should.” JOHNSON. “No, sir; he would give great offence. He would have to tell of almost all the living great what they do not wish told.” GOLDSMITH. “ It may, perhaps, be necessary for a native to be more cautious; but a foreigner who comes among us without prejudice, may be considered as holding the place of a judge, and may speak his mind freely." JOHNSON. “Sir, a foreigner, when he sends a work from the press, ought to be on his guard against catching the errour and mistaken enthusiasm of the people among whom he happens to be.” GoldSMITH. “Sir, he wants only to sell his history, and to tell truth; one an honest, the other a laudable motive." JOHNSON. “Sir, they are both laudable motives. It is laudable in a man to wish to live by his labours; but he should write so as he may live by them, not so as he may be knocked on the head. I would advise him to be at Calais before he publishes his history of the present age. A foreigner who attaches himself to a political party in this country, is in the worst state that can be imagined: he is looked upon as a mere intermeddler. A native may do it from interest.” BOSWELL. “Or principle.” GOLDSMITH. “There are people who tell a hundred political lies every day, and are not hurt by it. Surely, then, one may tell truth with safety.” JOHNSON.

Why, sir, in the first place, he who tells a hundred lies has disarmed the force of his lies. But besides; a man had rather have a hundred lies told of him, than one truth which he does not wish should be told." GOLDSMITH. For my part, I'd tell truth, and shame the devil.” Johnson, “Yes, sir ; but the devil will be angry. I wish to shame the devil as much as you do, but I should choose to be out of the reach of his claws." GOLDSMITH. His claws can do you no harm when you have the shield of truth."

It having been observed that there was little hospitality in London; Johnson. “ Nay, sir, any man who has a name, or who has the power of pleasing, will be very generally invited in London. The man Sterne, I have been told, has had engagements for three months.” GOLDSMITH. And a very dull fellow.” JOHNSON. “ Why no, sir.”

Martinelli told us, that for several years he lived much with Charles Townshend, and that he ventured to tell him he was a bad joker. JOHNSON. “Why, sir, thus much I can say upon the subject. One day he and a few more agreed to go and dine in the country, and each of them was to bring a friend in his carriage with him. Charles Townshend asked Fitzherbert to go with him, but told him, 'You must find somebody to bring you back; I can only carry you there.' Fitzherbert did not much like this arrangement. He however consented, observing sarcastically, It will do very well; for then the same jokes will serve you in returning as in going.”

An eminent publick character being mentioned; JOHNson. “I remember being present when he showed himself to be so corrupted, or at least something so different from what I think right, as to maintain that a member of parliament should go along with his party right or wrong. Now, sir, this is so remote from native virtue, from scholastick virtue, that a good man must have undergone a great change before he can reconcile himself to such a doctrine. It is maintaining that you may lie to the publick; for you lie when you call that right which you think wrong, or the reverse. A friend of ours, who is too much an echo of that gentleman, observed, that a man who does not stick uniformly to a party, is only waiting to be bought. Why then, said I, he is only waiting to be what that gentleman is already.”

We talked of the king's coming to see Goldsmith's new play.--"I wish he would,” said Goldsmith; adding, how


« VorigeDoorgaan »