It happened that Foote was at Paris at the same time with Dr. Johnson, and his description of my friend while there was abundantly ludicrous. He told me, that the French were quite astonished at his figure and manner, and at his dress, which he obstinately continued exactly as in London; -his brown clothes, black stockings, and plain shirt. He mentioned, that an Irish gentleman said to Johnson, "Sir, you have not seen the best French players." JOHNPlayers, sir! I look on them as no better than creatures set upon tables and joint stools, to make faces and produce laughter, like dancing dogs." "But, sir, you will allow that some players are better than others?" JOHNSON. 66 Yes, sir, as some dogs dance better than others." Reyn. [In the same spirit, but of more Recoll. vehemence and greater injustice, were his statements to Sir Joshua and Miss Reynolds, who has noted them in her Recollections. SON. 66 the same colour coat 2." A GENTLEMAN. "Had you any acquaintance in Paris?" JOHNSON. "No, I did not stay long enough to make any 3. I spoke only Latin, and I could not have much conversation. There is no good in letting the French have a superiority over you every word you speak. Baretti was sometimes displeased with us for not liking the French." MISS REYNOLDS. "Perhaps he had a kind of partiality for that country, because it was in the way to Italy, and perhaps their manners resembled the Italians." JOHNSON."No. He was the showman, and we did not like his show; that was all."] While Johnson was in France, he was generally very resolute in speaking Latin. It was a maxim with him that a man should not let himself down by speaking a language which he speaks imperfectly. Indeed, we must have often observed how in Johnson gave of the stupidity of the French in the 2 ["On telling Mr. Baretti of the proof that management of their horse-races; that all the jockeys wore the same colour coat, &c., he said that was 'like Johnson's remarks-He could not see.' But it was observed that he could inquire: JOHNSON. “The French, sir, are a very silly people. They have no common life. Nothing but the two ends, beggary and nobility. Sir, they are made up in every thing of two extremes. They have no common sense, they have no common man-'yes,' and it was by the answers he received ners, no common learning-gross ignorance, that he was misled, for he asked what did the first or les belles lettres." A LADY. [Mrs. jockey wear? answer, green; what the second? Thrale]. "Indeed, even in their dress-green; what the third? green, which was true; their frippery finery, and their beggarly coarse linen. They had, I thought, no politeness; their civilities never indicated more good-will than the talk of a parrot, indiscriminately using the same set of superlative phrases, "à la merveille!” to every one alike. They really seemed to have no expressions for sincerity and truth." JOHNSON. "They are much behind-hand, stupid, ignorant creatures. At Fontainbleau I saw a horse-race-every thing was wrong; the heaviest weight was put upon the weakest horse, and all the jockeys wore French have a clear air and a fruitful soil; but their mode of common life is gross and incommodious, and disgusting. I am come home convinced that no improvement of general use is to be found among them."-MALONE. 1 Mr. Foote seems to have embellished a little in saying that Johnson did not alter his dress at Paris; as in his journal is a memorandum about white stockings, wig, and hat. In another place we are told that "during his travels in France he was furnished with a French-made wig of handsome construction." That Johnson was not inattentive to his appearance is certain, from a circumstance related by Mr. Steevens, and inserted by Mr. Boswell, between June 15 and June 22, 1784.-J. BLAKEWAY. Mr. Blakeway's observation is further confirmed by a note in Johnson's diary (quoted by Sir John Hawkins, "Life of Johnson," p. 517), by which it appears that he had laid out thirty pounds in clothes for his French journey.-MALONE. but, then, the greens were all different greens,and very easily distinguished.-Johnson was perpetually making mistakes; so, on going to Fontainbleau, when we were about three-fourths of the way, he exclaimed with amazement, that now we were between Paris and the King of France's coming from thence, or even one going thither! court, and yet we had not met one carriage On which all the company in the coach burst out a laughing, and immediately cried out, 'Look, look, there is a coach gone by, there is a chariot, there is a postchaise!" I dare say we saw a hundred carriages, at least, that were going to or coming from Fontainbleau."-Baretti in Miss Reynolds's Recollections. It should be added, however, that Miss Reynolds thought that Baretti returned from this tour with some dislike of Johnson, and Johnson not without some coolness towards Baretti, on account, as Baretti said, of Madame du Bocage having paid more attention to him than to Johnson; but this latter assertion could not be true, for Johnson, in his letter to Mr. Levet (ante, p. 9), speaks highly and cordially of Baretti many days after the supposed offence. Miss Reynolds adds that the final rupture between Johnson and Baretti was occasioned by "a most audacious falsehood that the latter told Johnson, that he had beaten Omiah at chess, at Sir Joshua's; for the reverse was the fact." This produced contradiction, dispute, and a violent quarrel, which never was completely made up.-ED.] 3 [This accounts (not quite satisfactorily, perhaps, in a moral view) for the violent prejudices and consequent misrepresentations which his conversation on his return exhibited. - ED.] feriour, how much like a child a man appears, who speaks a broken tongue. When Sir Joshua Reynolds, at one of the dinners of the royal academy, presented him to a Frenchman of great distinction, he would not deign to speak French, but talked Latin, though his excellency did not understand it, owing, perhaps, to Johnson's English pronunciation: yet upon another occasion he was observed to speak French to a Frenchman of high rank, who spoke English; and being asked the reason, with some expression of surprise, he answered, "because I think my French is as good as his English." Though Johnson understood French perfectly, he could not speak it readily, as I have observed at his first interview with General Paoli, in 1769; yet he wrote it, I imagine, pretty well, as appears from some of his letters in Mrs. Piozzi's collection, of which I shall transcribe one: "A MADAME LA COMTESSE DE "16th May, 1771. "Oui, madame, le moment est arrivé, et il faut que je parte. Mais pourquoi faut il partir? Est ce que je m'ennuye? Je m'ennuyerai ailleurs. Est ce que je cherche ou quelque plaisir, ou quelque soulagement? Je ne cherche rien, je n'espere rien. Aller voir ce que j'ai vû, etre un peu rejoué 2, un peu degouté, me resouvenir que la vie se passe, et qu'elle se passe en vain, me plaindre de moi, m'endurcir aux dehors; voici le tout de ce qu'on compte pour les delices de l'année. Que Dieu vous donne, madame, tous les agrémens de la vie, avec un esprit qui peut en jour sans s'y livrer trop 3." He spoke Latin with wonderful fluency and elegance. When Pere Boscovich 4 was 1 [See ante, vol. i. p. 44, where it is conjectured that this note was addressed to Madame de Boufflers, which the editor now sees reason to doubt. The date in Mrs. Piozzi's collection, where it first appeared, was 16th May, 1771. In Mr. Boswell's first edition it became 16th July, 1771; and in all the later editions, by a more elaborate error, 16th July, 1775. These two latter dates are manifest mistakes. Madame de Boufflers' visit was in 1769, and in the May of 1771 Johnson was in London, without any intention of leaving it-so that the editor is wholly at a loss to guess to whom or on what occasion the letter was written. Perhaps it was an exercise.-ED.] 2 [This letter, notwithstanding some faults, is very tolerable French; rejoué is probably a printer's error for rejoui, and peut should be puisse.-ED.] 3 [Here followed the anecdote relative to Madame de Boufflers, transferred to v. i. p. 88. -ED.] [See ante, vol. i. p. 170. Boscovich was a in England, Johnson dined in company with him at Sir Joshua Reynolds's, and at Dr. Douglas's, now Bishop of Salisbury. Upon both occasions that celebrated foreigner expressed his astonishment at Johnson's Latin conversation. [The conversation at Mur. Dr. Douglas's was at first mostly in Life, p. French. Johnson, though thorough- 91. ly versed in that language, and a professed admirer of Boileau and La Bruyere, did not understand its pronunciation, nor could he speak it himself with propriety. For the rest of the evening the talk was in Latin. Boscovich had a ready current flow of that flimsy phraseology with which a priest may travel through Italy, Spain, and Germany. Johnson scorned what he called colloquial barbarisms. It was his pride to speak his best. He went on, after a little practice, with as much facility as if it was his native tongue. One sentence Mr. Murphy remembered. Observing that Fontenelle at first opposed the Newtonian philosophy, and embraced it afterwards, his words were: Fontinellus, ni fallor, in extremâ senectute, fuit transfuga ad castra Newtoniana 5.] When at Paris, Johnson thus characterised Voltaire to Freron the journalist: "Vir est acerrimi ingenii et paucarum literarum.” "TO DR. SAMUEL JOHNSON. "Edinburgh, 5th Dec. 1775. "MY DEAR SIR,-Mr. Alexander Maclean, the young laird of Col, being to set out to-morrow for London, I give him this letter to introduce him to your acquaintance. The kindness which you and I experienced from his brother, whose unfortunate death we sincerely lament, will make us always desirous to show attention to any branch of the family. Indeed, you have so much of the true Highland cordiality, that I am sure you would have thought me to blame if I jesuit, born at Ragusa in 1711, who first introduced the Newtonian philosophy into Italy. He visited London in 1760, and was there elected into the Royal Society. He died in 1787.-ED.] 5 [This phrase seems rather too pompous for the occasion. Johnson had probably in his mind a passage in Seneca, quoted in Menagiana (v. ii. p. 46), "Sénéque voulant dire qu'il profitait de ce qu'il y avait de bon dans les auteurs dit, 'Solon sæpe in aliena castra transire; non tanquam transfuga, sed tanquam explorator ;" and this is rendered the more probable because in the same volume of the Menagiana, and within a few pages of each other, are found two other Latin quotations, which Johnson has made use of, the one from Thuanus, "Fami non famæ scribere existimatus Xylandrus." See ante, vol. i. p. 83, n. The other from J. C. Scaliger, "Homo ex alieno ingenio poeta, ex suo tantum ver sificator:" which is the motto Johnson prefixed to his version of the Messiah: ante, v. i. p. 21.ED.] had neglected to recommend to you this Hebridean prince, in whose island we were hos pitably entertained. I ever am, with respectful attachment, my dear sir, your most obliged and most humble servant, "JAMES BOSWELL." Mr. Maclean returned with the most agreeable accounts of the polite attention with which he was received by Dr. John son, In the course of the year Dr. Burney informs me that "he very frequently met Dr. Johnson at Mr. Thrale's, at Streatham, where they had many long conversations, often sitting up as long as the fire and candles lasted, and much longer than the patience of the servants subsisted." A few of Johnson's sayings, which that gentleman recollects, shall here be inserted. "I never take a nap after dinner Burney. but when I have had a bad night, and then the nap takes me." "The writer of an epitaph should not be considered as saying nothing but what is strictly true. Allowance must be made for some degree of exaggerated praise. In lapidary inscriptions a man is not upon oath." "There is now less flogging in our great schools than formerly, but then less is learned there; so that what the boys get at one end they lose at the other." "More is learned in publick than in private schools, from emulation; there is the collision of mind with mind, or the radiation of many minds pointing to one centre. Though few boys make their own exercises, yet if a good exercise is given up, out of a great number of boys, it is made by somebody.' "I hate by-roads in education. Education is as well known, and has long been as well known as ever it can be. Endeavouring to make children prematurely wise is useless labour. Suppose they have more knowledge at five or six years old than other children, what use can be made of it? It will be lost before it is wanted, and the waste of so much time and labour of the teacher can never be repaid. Too much is expected from precocity, and too little performed. Miss I was an instance of early cultivation, but in what did it terminate? In marrying a little presbyterian parson, who keeps an infant boardingschool, so that all her employment now is, 'To suckle fools, and chronicle small beer.' She tells the children, This is a cat, and that is a dog, with four legs, and a tail; see there! you are much better than a cat or a 1 [Miss Letitia Aiken, who married Mr. Barauld, and published "Easy Lessons for Children.-ED.] "15th Dec. 1775. Montag. MSS. "MADAM, Having, after my return from a little ramble to France, passed some time in the country, I did not hear, till I was told by Miss Reynolds, that you were in town; and when I did hear it, I heard likewise that you were ill. To have you detained among us by sickness is to enjoy your presence at too dear a rate. I suffer myself to be flattered with hope that only half the intelligence is now true, and that you are now so well as to be able to leave us, and so kind as not to be willing. -I am, madam, your most humble servant, “SAM. JOHNSON."] ["DR. JOHNSON TO MRS. MONTagu. "17th Dec. 1775. "MADAM,-All that the esteem Montag and reverence of mankind can give MSS. you has been long in your possession, and the little that I can add to the voice of nations will not inuch exalt; of that litt.e, however, you are, I hope, very certain. "I wonder, madam, if you remember 2 [See ante. v. i. p. 152, and vol. i. p. 405, Col in the Hebrides? The brother and ["DR. JOHNSON TO MRS. MONTagu. "Thursday, 21st Dec. 1775. Montag. "MADAM,-I know not when any MSS. letter has given me so much pleasure or vexation as that which I had yesterday the honour of receiving. That you, madam, should wish for my company is surely a sufficient reason for being pleased;-that I should delay twice, what I had so little right to expect even once, has so bad an appearance, that I can only hope to have it thought that I am ashamed. "You have kindly allowed me to name a day. Will you be pleased, madam, to accept of me any day after Tuesday? Till I am favoured with your answer, or despair of so much condescension, I shall suffer no engagement to fasten itself upon me.-I am, madam, your most obliged and most humble servant, "SAM. JOHNSON."] Not having heard from him for a longer time than I supposed he would be silent, I wrote to him Dec. 18, not in good spirits: "Sometimes I have been afraid that the cold which has gone over Europe this year like a sort of pestilence has seized you severely sometimes my imagination, which is upon occasions prolifick of evil, hath figured that you may have somehow taken offence at some part of my conduct." "TO JAMES BOSWELL, ESQ. "23d Dec. 1775. 66 Young Col brought me your letter. He is a very pleasing youth. I took him two days ago to the Mitre, and we dined together. I was as civil as I had the means of being. "I have had a letter from Rasay, acknowledging, with great appearance of satisfaction, the insertion in the Edinburg paper. I am very glad that it was done. "My compliments to Mrs. Boswell, who does not love me; and of all the rest, I need only send them to those that do; and I am afraid it will give you very little trouble to distribute them.—I am, my dear, dear sir, your affectionate humble servant, "SAM. JOHNSON." ["DR. JOHNSON TO MR. GRANGER 2. (About 1775, but has no date., "SIR,-When I returned from the country I found your letter and would very gladly have done what you desire, had it been in my power. Mr. Farmer is, I am confident, mistaken in supposing that he gave me any such pamphlet or cut. should as soon have suspected myself, as Mr. Farmer, of forgetfulness; but that I do not know, except from your letter, the name of Arthur O'Toole, nor recollect that I ever heard of it before. I think it impossible that I should have suffered such a total obliteration from my mind of any thing which was ever there. This at least is certain; that I do not know of any such pamphlet; and equally certain I desire you to think it, that if I had it, you should imhumble servant, "SAM. JOHNSON."] "DEAR SIR,-Never dream of any offence. How should you offend me? I consider your friendship as a possession, which I intend to hold till you take it from me, and to lament if ever by my fault Imediately receive it from, sir, your most should lose it. However, when such suspicions find their way into your mind, always give them vent; I shall make haste to disperse them; but hinder their first ingress if you can. Consider such thoughts as morbid. "Such illness as may excuse my omission to Lord Hailes, I cannot honestly plead. I have been hindered, I know not how, by a succession of petty obstructions. I hope to mend immediately, and to send next post to his lordship. Mr. Thrale would have written to you if I had omitted; he sends his compliments, and wishes to see you. "You and your lady will now have no more wrangling about feudal inheritance. In 1776, Johnson wrote, so far as I can discover, nothing for the publick: but that his mind was still ardent, and fraught with generous wishes to attain to still higher degrees of literary excellence, is proved by his private notes of this year, which I shall insert in their proper place. 1 Joseph Ritter, a Bohemian, who was in my service many years, and attended Dr. Johnson and me in our tour to the Hebrides. After having left me for some time, he had now returned to me.--Boswell. 2 [The author of the "Biographical History of England."-ED.] "TO JAMES BOSWELL, ESQ. "10th January, 1776. “DEAR SIR,—I have at last sent you all Lord Hailes's papers. While I was in France, I looked very often into Henault; but Lord Hailes, in my opinion, leaves him far and far behind. Why I did not despatch so short a perusal sooner, when I look back, I am utterly unable to discover; but human moments are stolen away by a thousand petty impediments which leave no trace behind them. I have been afflicted, through the whole Christmas, with the general disorder, of which the worst effect was a cough, which is now much mitigated, though the country, on which I look from a window at Streatham, is now covered with a deep Mrs. Williams is very ill: every body snow. else is as usual. At this time was in agitation a matter of great consequence to me and my family, which I should not obtrude upon the world, were it not that the part which Dr. Johnson's friendship for me made him take in it was the occasion of an exertion of his abili ties, which it would be injustice to conceal. That what he wrote upon the subject may be understood, it is necessary to give a state of the question, which I shall do as briefly as I can. In the year 1504, the barony or manour of Auchinleck (pronounced Affleck) in Ayrshire, which belonged to a family of the same name with the lands, having fallen to the crown by forfeiture, James the Fourth, King of Scotland, granted it to Thomas Boswell, a branch of an ancient family in the county of Fife, styling him in the charter, "dilecto familiari nostro;" and assigning as the cause of the grant," pro bono et fideli servitio nobis præstito." Thomas Boswell was slain in battle, fighting along with his sovereign, at the fatal field of Flodden, In 1513. From this very honourable founder of [No doubt an advertisement of apology to Rasay.-ED.] our family, the estate was transmitted, in a direct series of heirs-male, to David Boswell, my father's great-grand uncle, who had no sons, but four daughters, who were all respectably married, the eldest to Lord Cathcart. David Boswell, being resolute in the military feudal principle of continuing the male succession, passed by his daughters, and settled the estate on his nephew by his next brother, who approved of the deed, and renounced any pretensions which he might possibly have, in preference to his son. But the estate having been burthened with large portions to the daughters, and other debts, it was necessary for the nephew to sell a considerable part of it, and what remained was still much encumbered. The frugality of the nephew preserved, and, in some degree, relieved the estate. His son, my grand-father, an eminent lawyer, not only re-purchased a great part of what had been sold, but acquired other lands; and my father, who was one of the judges of Scotland, and had added considerably to the estate, now signified his inclinalaw 2, to secure it to his family in perpetuity tion to take the privilege allowed by our by an entail, which, on account of his mar riage articles, could not be done without my consent. In the plan of entailing the estate, I heartily concurred with him, though I was the first to be restrained by it; but we unhappily differed as to the series of heirs which should be established, or, in the language of our law, called to the succession. My father had declared a predilection for heirsgeneral, that is, males and females indiscriminately. He was willing, however, that all males descending from his grand-father should be preferred to females; but would not extend that privilege to males deriving their descent from a higher source. I, on the other hand, had a zealous partiality for heirs-male, however remote, which I maintained by arguments, which appeared to me to have considerable weight 3. And 2 Acts of Parliament of Scotland, 1685, cap. 22.-BOSWELL. 3 As first, the opinion of some distinguished naturalists, that our species is transmitted through males only, the female being all along no more than a nidus, or nurse, as Mother Earth is to plants of every sort; which notion seems to be confirmed by that text of Scripture, "He was yet in the loins of his FATHER, when Melchisedeck met him" (Heb. vii. 10), and consequently, that a man's grandson by a daughter, instead of being his surest descendant, as is vulgarly said, has, in reality, no connexion whatever with his blood. And, secondly, independent of this theory (which, if true, should completely exclude heirs-general), that if the preference of a male to a female, without regard to primogeniture) as a |