It has been observed and wondered at, that Mr. Charles Fox never talked with any freedom in the presence of Dr. Johnson, though it is well known, and I myself can witness, that his conversation is various, fluent, and exceedingly agreeable. Johnson’s own experience, however, of that gentleman’s reserve was a sufficient reason for his going on thus: ‘Fox never talks in private company; not from any determination not to talk, but because he has not the first motion. A man who is used to the applause of the House of Commons, has no wish for that of a private company. A man accustomed to throw for a thousand pounds, if set down to throw for sixpence, would not be at the pains to count his dice. Burke’s talk is the ebullition of his mind; he does not talk from a desire of distinction, but because his mind is full.
He thus curiously characterised one of our old acquaintance: ‘ —— is a good man, Sir; but he is a vain man and a liar. He, however, only tells lies of vanity; of victories, for instance, in conversation, which never happened.’ This alluded to a story which I had repeated from that gentleman, to entertain Johnson with its wild bravado: ‘This Johnson, Sir, (said he,) whom you are all afraid of will shrink, if you come close to him in argument and roar as loud as he. He once maintained the paradox, that there is no beauty but in utility. “Sir, (said I,) what say you to the peacock’s tail, which is one of the most beautiful objects in nature, but would have as much utility if its feathers were all of one colour.” He felt what I thus produced, and had recourse to his usual expedient, ridicule; exclaiming, “A peacock has a tail, and a fox has a tail;” and then he burst out into a laugh. “Well, Sir, (said I, with a strong voice, looking him full in the face,) you have unkennelled your fox; pursue him if you dare.” He had not a word to say, Sir.’ Johnson told me, that this was a fiction from beginning to end.
After musing for some time, he said, ‘I wonder how I should have any enemies; for I do harm to nobody.’ BOSWELL. ‘In the first place, Sir, you will be pleased to recollect, that you set out with attacking the Scotch; so you got a whole nation for your enemies.’ JOHNSON. ‘Why, I own, that by my definition of oats I meant to vex them.’ BOSWELL. ‘Pray, Sir, can you trace the cause of your antipathy to the Scotch.’ JOHNSON. ‘I cannot, Sir.’ BOSWELL. ‘Old Mr. Sheridan says, it was because they sold Charles the First.’ JOHNSON. ‘Then, Sir, old Mr. Sheridan has found out a very good reason.’
Surely the most obstinate and sulky nationality, the most determined aversion to this great and good man, must be cured, when he is seen thus playing with one of his prejudices, of which he candidly admitted that he could not tell the reason. It was, however, probably owing to his having had in his view the worst part of the Scottish nation, the needy adventurers, many of whom he thought were advanced above their merits by means which he did not approve. Had he in his early life been in Scotland, and seen the worthy, sensible, independent gentlemen, who live rationally and hospitably at home, he never could have entertained such unfavourable and unjust notions of his fellow-subjects. And accordingly we find, that when he did visit Scotland, in the latter period of his life, he was fully sensible of all that it deserved, as I have already pointed out, when speaking of his Journey to the Western Islands.
Next day, Saturday, March 22, I found him still at Mrs. Thrale’s, but he told me that he was to go to his own house in the afternoon. He was better, but I perceived he was but an unruly patient, for Sir Lucas Pepys, who visited him, while I was with him said, ‘If you were tractable, Sir, I should prescribe for you.’
I related to him a remark which a respectable friend had made to me, upon the then state of Government, when those who had been long in opposition had attained to power, as it was supposed, against the inclination of the Sovereign. ‘You need not be uneasy (said this gentleman) about the King. He laughs at them all; he plays them one against another.’ JOHNSON. ‘Don’t think so, Sir. The King is as much oppressed as a man can be. If he plays them one against another, he wins nothing.’
I had paid a visit to General Oglethorpe in the morning, and was told by him that Dr. Johnson saw company on Saturday evenings, and he would meet me at Johnson’s that night. When I mentioned this to Johnson, not doubting that it would please him, as he had a great value for Oglethorpe, the fretfulness of his disease unexpectedly shewed itself; his anger suddenly kindled, and he said, with vehemence, ‘Did not you tell him not to come? Am I to be hunted in this manner?’ I satisfied him that I could not divine that the visit would not be convenient, and that I certainly could not take it upon me of my own accord to forbid the General.
I found Dr. Johnson in the evening in Mrs. Williams’s room, at tea and coffee with her and Mrs. Desmoulins, who were also both ill; it was a sad scene, and he was not in very good humour. He said of a performance that had lately come out, ‘Sir, if you should search all the madhouses in England, you would not find ten men who would write so, and think it sense.’
I was glad when General Oglethorpe’s arrival was announced, and we left the ladies. Dr. Johnson attended him in the parlour, and was as courteous as ever. The General said he was busy reading the writers of the middle age. Johnson said they were very curious. OGLETHORPE. ‘The House of Commons has usurped the power of the nation’s money, and used it tyrannically. Government is now carried on by corrupt influence, instead of the inherent right in the King.’ JOHNSON. ‘Sir, the want of inherent right in the King occasions all this disturbance. What we did at the Revolution was necessary: but it broke our constitution.’ OGLETHORPE. ‘My father did not think it necessary.’
On Sunday, March 23, I breakfasted with Dr. Johnson, who seemed much relieved, having taken opium the night before. He however protested against it, as a remedy that should be given with the utmost reluctance, and only in extreme necessity. I mentioned how commonly it was used in Turkey, and that therefore it could not be so pernicious as he apprehended. He grew warm and said, ‘Turks take opium, and Christians take opium; but Russel, in his Account of Aleppo, tells us, that it is as disgraceful in Turkey to take too much opium, as it is with us to get drunk. Sir, it is amazing how things are exaggerated. A gentleman was lately telling in a company where I was present, that in France as soon as a man of fashion marries, he takes an opera girl into keeping; and this he mentioned as a general custom. ‘Pray, Sir, (said I,) how many opera girls may there be?’ He answered, ‘About fourscore.’ Well then, Sir, (said I,) you see there can be no more than fourscore men of fashion who can do this.’
Mrs. Desmoulins made tea; and she and I talked before him upon a topick which he had once borne patiently from me when we were by ourselves, — his not complaining of the world, because he was not called to some great office, nor had attained to great wealth. He flew into a violent passion, I confess with some justice, and commanded us to have done. ‘Nobody, (said he) has a right to talk in this manner, to bring before a man his own character, and the events of his life, when he does not choose it should be done. I never have sought the world; the world was not to seek me. It is rather wonderful that so much has been done for me. All the complaints which are made of the world are unjust. I never knew a man of merit neglected: it was generally by his own fault that he failed of success. A man may hide his head in a hole: he may go into the country, and publish a book now and then, which nobody reads, and then complain he is neglected. There is no reason why any person should exert himself for a man who has written a good book: he has not written it for any individual. I may as well make a present to the postman who brings me a letter. When patronage was limited, an authour expected to find a Maecenas, and complained if he did not find one. Why should he complain? This Maecenas has others as good as he, or others who have got the start of him.’ BOSWELL. ‘But surely, Sir, you will allow that there are men of merit at the bar, who never get practice.’ JOHNSON. ‘Sir, you are sure that practice is got from an opinion that the person employed deserves it best; so that if a man of merit at the bar does not get practice, it is from errour, not from injustice. He is not neglected. A horse that is brought to
market may not be bought, though he is a very good horse: but that is from ignorance, not from intention.’
There was in this discourse much novelty, ingenuity, and discrimination, such as is seldom to be found. Yet I cannot help thinking that men of merit, who have no success in life, may be forgiven for lamenting, if they are not allowed to complain. They may consider it as hard that their merit should not have its suitable distinction. Though there is no intentional injustice towards them on the part of the world, their merit not having been perceived, they may yet repine against fortune, or fate, or by whatever name they choose to call the supposed mythological power of Destiny. It has, however, occurred to me, as a consolatory thought, that men of merit should consider thus:-How much harder would it be if the same persons had both all the merit and all the prosperity. Would not this be a miserable distribution for the poor dunces? Would men of merit exchange their intellectual superiority, and the enjoyments arising from it, for external distinction and the pleasures of wealth? If they would not, let them not envy others, who are poor where they are rich, a compensation which is made to them. Let them look inwards and be satisfied; recollecting with conscious pride what Virgil finely says of the Corycius Senex, and which I have, in another place, with truth and sincerity applied to Mr. Burke: —
‘Regum aequabat opes animis536.’
On the subject of the right employment of wealth, Johnson observed, ‘A man cannot make a bad use of his money, so far as regards Society, if he does not hoard it; for if he either spends it or lends it out, Society has the benefit. It is in general better to spend money than to give it away; for industry is more promoted by spending money than by giving it away. A man who spends his money is sure he is doing good with it: he is not so sure when he gives it away. A man who spends ten thousand a year will do more good than a man who spends two thousand and gives away eight.’
In the evening I came to him again. He was somewhat fretful from his illness. A gentleman asked him, whether he had been abroad to-day. ‘Don’t talk so childishly, (said he.) You may as well ask if I hanged myself to-day.’ I mentioned politicks. JOHNSON. ‘Sir, I’d as soon have a man to break my bones as talk to me of publick affairs, internal or external. I have lived to see things all as bad as they can be.’
Having mentioned his friend the second Lord Southwell, he said, ‘Lord Southwell was the highest-bred man without insolence that I ever was in company with; the most qualified I ever saw. Lord Orrery was not dignified: Lord Chesterfield was, but he was insolent. Lord —— is a man of coarse manners, but a man of abilities and information. I don’t say he is a man I would set at the head of a nation, though perhaps he may be as good as the next Prime Minister that comes; but he is a man to be at the head of a Club; I don’t say our CLUB; for there’s no such Club.’ BOSWELL. ‘But, Sir, was he not once a factious man?’ JOHNSON. ‘O yes, Sir; as factious a fellow as could be found: one who was for sinking us all into the mob.’ BOSWELL. ‘How then, Sir, did he get into favour with the King?’ JOHNSON. ‘Because, Sir, I suppose he promised the King to do whatever the King pleased.’
He said, ‘Goldsmith’s blundering speech to Lord Shelburne, which has been so often mentioned, and which he really did make to him, was only a blunder in emphasis: “I wonder they should call your Lordship Malagrida, for Malagrida was a very good man;” meant, I wonder they should use Malagrida as a term of reproach.’
Soon after this time I had an opportunity of seeing, by means of one of his friends, 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.
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, 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. 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 lady 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 beside, a calculation of oeconomy 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, 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, 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, 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;’ me
aning as a companion. 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 up 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:
“Nee sufferre queat majoris pondera gemmae561.”’
I told him I should send him some Essays which I had written, 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, does not always prove true, we may be certain of the converse of it, Nullum numen adest, si sit imprudentia.’
Complete Works of Samuel Johnson Page 804
