"DEAR SIR,
"I congratulate you and Lady Rothes[427] on your little man, and hope you will all be many years happy together.
"Poor Miss Langton can have little part in the joy of her family. She this day called her aunt Langton to receive the sacrament with her; and made me talk yesterday on such subjects as suit her condition. It will probably be her _viatic.u.m_. I surely need not mention again that she wishes to see her mother. I am, Sir,
"Your most humble servant,
"SAM. JOHNSON."
"March 14, 1772."
On the 21st of March, I was happy to find myself again in my friend"s study, and was glad to see my old acquaintance, Mr. Francis Barber, who was now returned home[428]. Dr. Johnson received me with a hearty welcome; saying, "I am glad you are come, and glad you are come upon such an errand:" (alluding to the cause of the schoolmaster.) BOSWELL. "I hope, Sir, he will be in no danger. It is a very delicate matter to interfere between a master and his scholars: nor do I see how you can fix the degree of severity that a master may use." JOHNSON. "Why, Sir, till you can fix the degree of obstinacy and negligence of the scholars, you cannot fix the degree of severity of the master. Severity must be continued until obstinacy be subdued, and negligence be cured." He mentioned the severity of Hunter, his own Master[429]. "Sir, (said I,) Hunter is a Scotch name: so it should seem this schoolmaster who beat you so severely was a Scotchman. I can now account for your prejudice against the Scotch." JOHNSON. "Sir, he was not Scotch; and abating his brutality, he was a very good master[430]."
We talked of his two political pamphlets, _The False Alarm_, and _Thoughts concerning Falkland"s Islands_. JOHNSON. "Well, Sir, which of them did you think the best?" BOSWELL. "I liked the second best."
JOHNSON. "Why, Sir, I liked the first best; and Beattie liked the first best. Sir, there is a subtlety of disquisition in the first, that is worth all the fire of the second." BOSWELL. "Pray, Sir, is it true that Lord North paid you a visit, and that you got two hundred a year in addition to your pension?" JOHNSON. "No, Sir. Except what I had from the bookseller, I did not get a farthing by them[431]. And, between you and me, I believe Lord North is no friend to me." BOSWELL. "How so, Sir?"
JOHNSON. "Why, Sir, you cannot account for the fancies of men. Well, how does Lord Elibank? and how does Lord Monboddo?" BOSWELL. "Very well, Sir. Lord Monboddo still maintains the superiority of the savage life[432]." JOHNSON. "What strange narrowness of mind now is that, to think the things we have not known, are better than the things which we have known." BOSWELL. "Why, Sir, that is a common prejudice." JOHNSON.
"Yes, Sir, but a common prejudice should not be found in one whose trade it is to rectify errour."
A gentleman having come in who was to go as a mate in the ship along with Mr. Banks and Dr. Solander, Dr. Johnson asked what were the names of the ships destined for the expedition. The gentleman answered, they were once to be called the Drake and the Ralegh, but now they were to be called the Resolution and the Adventure[433]. JOHNSON. "Much better; for had the Ralegh[434] returned without going round the world, it would have been ridiculous. To give them the names of the Drake and the Ralegh was laying a trap for satire." BOSWELL. "Had not you some desire to go upon this expedition, Sir?" JOHNSON. "Why yes, but I soon laid it aside. Sir, there is very little of intellectual, in the course. Besides, I see but at a small distance. So it was not worth my while to go to see birds fly, which I should not have seen fly; and fishes swim, which I should not have seen swim."
The gentleman being gone, and Dr. Johnson having left the room for some time, a debate arose between the Reverend Mr. Stockdale and Mrs.
Desmoulins, whether Mr. Banks and Dr. Solander were ent.i.tled to any share of glory from their expedition. When Dr. Johnson returned to us, I told him the subject of their dispute. JOHNSON. "Why, Sir, it was properly for botany that they went out: I believe they thought only of culling of simples[435]."
I thanked him for showing civilities to Beattie. "Sir, (said he,) I should thank _you_. We all love Beattie. Mrs. Thrale says, if ever she has another husband, she"ll have Beattie. He sunk upon us[436] that he was married; else we should have shewn his lady more civilities. She is a very fine woman. But how can you shew civilities to a non-ent.i.ty? I did not think he had been married. Nay, I did not think about it one way or other; but he did not tell us of his lady till late."
He then spoke of St. Kilda[437], the most remote of the Hebrides. I told him, I thought of buying it. JOHNSON. "Pray do, Sir. We will go and pa.s.s a winter amid the blasts there. We shall have fine fish, and we will take some dried tongues with us, and some books. We will have a strong built vessel, and some Orkney men to navigate her. We must build a tolerable house: but we may carry with us a wooden house ready made, and requiring nothing but to be put up. Consider, Sir, by buying St. Kilda, you may keep the people from falling into worse hands. We must give them a clergyman, and he shall be one of Beattie"s choosing. He shall be educated at Marischal College. I"ll be your Lord Chancellor, or what you please." BOSWELL. "Are you serious, Sir, in advising me to buy St.
Kilda? for if you should advise me to go to j.a.pan, I believe I should do it." JOHNSON. "Why yes, Sir, I am serious." BOSWELL. "Why then, I"ll see what can be done."
I gave him an account of the two parties in the Church of Scotland, those for supporting the rights of patrons, independent of the people, and those against it. JOHNSON. "It should be settled one way or other. I cannot wish well to a popular election of the clergy, when I consider that it occasions such animosities, such unworthy courting of the people, such slanders between the contending parties, and other disadvantages. It is enough to allow the people to remonstrate against the nomination of a minister for solid reasons." (I suppose he meant heresy or immorality.)
He was engaged to dine abroad, and asked me to return to him in the evening, at nine, which I accordingly did.
We drank tea with Mrs. Williams, who told us a story of second sight[438], which happened in Wales where she was born. He listened to it very attentively, and said he should be glad to have some instances of that faculty well authenticated. His elevated wish for more and more evidence for spirit[439], in opposition to the groveling belief of materialism, led him to a love of such mysterious disquisitions. He again[440] justly observed, that we could have no certainty of the truth of supernatural appearances, unless something was told us which we could not know by ordinary means, or something done which could not be done but by supernatural power; that Pharaoh in reason and justice required such evidence from Moses; nay, that our Saviour said, "If I had not done among them the works which none other man did, they had not had sin[441]."
He had said in the morning, that Macaulay"s _History of St. Kilda_, was very well written, except some foppery about liberty and slavery. I mentioned to him that Macaulay told me, he was advised to leave out of his book the wonderful story that upon the approach of a stranger all the inhabitants catch cold[442]; but that it had been so well authenticated, he determined to retain it. JOHNSON. "Sir, to leave things out of a book, merely because people tell you they will not be believed, is meanness. Macaulay acted with more magnanimity."
We talked of the Roman Catholick religion, and how little difference there was in essential matters between ours and it. JOHNSON. "True, Sir; all denominations of Christians have really little difference in point of doctrine, though they may differ widely in external forms. There is a prodigious difference between the external form of one of your Presbyterian churches in Scotland, and a church in Italy; yet the doctrine taught is essentially the same[443]."
I mentioned the pet.i.tion to Parliament for removing the subscription to the Thirty-nine Articles[444]. JOHNSON. "It was soon thrown out. Sir, they talk of not making boys at the University subscribe to what they do not understand[445]; but they ought to consider, that our Universities were founded to bring up members for the Church of England, and we must not supply our enemies with arms from our a.r.s.enal. No, Sir, the meaning of subscribing is, not that they fully understand all the articles, but that they will adhere to the Church of England[446]. Now take it in this way, and suppose that they should only subscribe their adherence to the Church of England, there would be still the same difficulty; for still the young men would be subscribing to what they do not understand. For if you should ask them, what do you mean by the Church of England? Do you know in what it differs from the Presbyterian Church? from the Romish Church? from the Greek Church? from the Coptick Church? they could not tell you. So, Sir, it comes to the same thing." BOSWELL. "But, would it not be sufficient to subscribe the Bible[447]?" JOHNSON. "Why no, Sir; for all sects will subscribe the Bible; nay, the Mahometans will subscribe the Bible; for the Mahometans acknowledge JESUS CHRIST, as well as Moses, but maintain that G.o.d sent Mahomet as a still greater prophet than either."
I mentioned the motion which had been made in the House of Commons, to abolish the fast of the 30th of January[448]. JOHNSON. "Why, Sir, I could have wished that it had been a temporary act, perhaps, to have expired with the century. I am against abolishing it; because that would be declaring it wrong to establish it; but I should have no objection to make an act, continuing it for another century, and then letting it expire."
He disapproved of the Royal Marriage Bill; "Because (said he) I would not have the people think that the validity of marriage depends on the will of man, or that the right of a King depends on the will of man. I should not have been against making the marriage of any of the royal family without the approbation of King and Parliament, highly criminal[449]."
In the morning we had talked of old families, and the respect due to them. JOHNSON. "Sir, you have a right to that kind of respect, and are arguing for yourself. I am for supporting the principle, and am disinterested in doing it, as I have no such right[450]." BOSWELL. "Why, Sir, it is one more incitement to a man to do well." JOHNSON. "Yes, Sir, and it is a matter of opinion, very necessary to keep society together.
What is it but opinion, by which we have a respect for authority, that prevents us, who are the rabble, from rising up and pulling down you who are gentlemen from your places, and saying "We will be gentlemen in our turn"? Now, Sir, that respect for authority is much more easily granted to a man whose father has had it, than to an upstart[451], and so Society is more easily supported." BOSWELL. "Perhaps, Sir, it might be done by the respect belonging to office, as among the Romans, where the dress, the toga, inspired reverence." JOHNSON. "Why, we know very little about the Romans. But, surely, it is much easier to respect a man who has always had respect, than to respect a man who we know was last year no better than ourselves, and will be no better next year. In republicks there is not a respect for authority, but a fear of power." BOSWELL. "At present, Sir, I think riches seem to gain most respect." JOHNSON. "No, Sir, riches do not gain hearty respect; they only procure external attention. A very rich man, from low beginnings, may buy his election in a borough; but, _caeteris paribus_, a man of family will be preferred.
People will prefer a man for whose father their fathers have voted, though they should get no more money, or even less. That shows that the respect for family is not merely fanciful, but has an actual operation.
If gentlemen of family would allow the rich upstarts to spend their money profusely, which they are ready enough to do, and not vie with them in expence, the upstarts would soon be at an end, and the gentlemen would remain: but if the gentlemen will vie in expence with the upstarts, which is very foolish, they must be ruined."
I gave him an account of the excellent mimickry of a friend of mine in Scotland[452]; observing, at the same time, that some people thought it a very mean thing. JOHNSON. "Why, Sir, it is making a very mean use of a man"s powers. But to be a good mimick, requires great powers; great acuteness of observation, great retention of what is observed, and great pliancy of organs, to represent what is observed. I remember a lady of quality in this town, Lady ---- ----, who was a wonderful mimick, and used to make me laugh immoderately. I have heard she is now gone mad."
BOSWELL. "It is amazing how a mimick can not only give you the gestures and voice of a person whom he represents; but even what a person would say on any particular subject." JOHNSON. "Why, Sir, you are to consider that the manner and some particular phrases of a person do much to impress you with an idea of him, and you are not sure that he would say what the mimick says in his character." BOSWELL. "I don"t think Foote[453]
a good mimick, Sir." JOHNSON. "No, Sir; his imitations are not like. He gives you something different from himself, but not the character which he means to a.s.sume. He goes out of himself, without going into other people. He cannot take off any person unless he is strongly marked, such as George Faulkner[454]. He is like a painter, who can draw the portrait of a man who has a wen upon his face, and who, therefore, is easily known. If a man hops upon one leg, Foote can hop upon one leg[455]. But he has not that nice discrimination which your friend seems to possess.
Foote is, however, very entertaining, with a kind of conversation between wit and buffoonery[456]."
On Monday, March 23, I found him busy, preparing a fourth edition of his folio Dictionary. Mr. Peyton, one of his original amanuenses, was writing for him. I put him in mind of a meaning of the word _side_, which he had omitted, viz. relationship; as father"s side, mother"s side. He inserted it. I asked him if _humiliating_ was a good word. He said, he had seen it frequently used, but he did not know it to be legitimate English. He would not admit _civilization_, but only _civility_[457]. With great deference to him, I thought _civilization_, from _to civilize_ better in the sense opposed to _barbarity_, than _civility_; as it is better to have a distinct word for each sense, than one word with two senses, which _civility_ is, in his way of using it.
He seemed also to be intent on some sort of chymical operation. I was entertained by observing how he contrived to send Mr. Peyton on an errand, without seeming to degrade him. "Mr. Peyton,--Mr. Peyton, will you be so good as to take a walk to Temple-Bar? You will there see a chymist"s shop; at which you will be pleased to buy for me an ounce of oil of vitriol; not spirit of vitriol, but oil of vitriol. It will cost three half-pence." Peyton immediately went, and returned with it, and told him it cost but a penny.
I then reminded him of the schoolmaster"s cause, and proposed to read to him the printed papers concerning it. "No, Sir, (said he,) I can read quicker than I can hear." So he read them to himself.
After he had read for some time, we were interrupted by the entrance of Mr. Kristrom, a Swede, who was tutor to some young gentlemen in the city. He told me, that there was a very good History of Sweden, by Daline. Having at that time an intention of writing the history of that country[458], I asked Dr. Johnson whether one might write a history of Sweden, without going thither. "Yes, Sir, (said he,) one for common use."
We talked of languages. Johnson observed, that Leibnitz had made some progress in a work, tracing all languages up to the Hebrew. "Why, Sir, (said he,) you would not imagine that the French _jour_, day, is derived from the Latin _dies_, and yet nothing is more certain; and the intermediate steps are very clear. From _dies_, comes _diurnus_. _Diu_ is, by inaccurate ears, or inaccurate p.r.o.nunciation, easily confounded with _giu_; then the Italians form a substantive of the ablative of an adjective, and thence _giurno_, or, as they make it, _giorno_; which is readily contracted into _giour_, or _jour_" He observed, that the Bohemian language was true Sclavonick. The Swede said, it had some similarity with the German. JOHNSON. "Why, Sir, to be sure, such parts of Sclavonia as confine with Germany, will borrow German words; and such parts as confine with Tartary will borrow Tartar words."
He said, he never had it properly ascertained that the Scotch Highlanders and the Irish understood each other[459]. I told him that my cousin Colonel Graham, of the Royal Highlanders, whom I met at Drogheda[460], told me they did. JOHNSON. "Sir, if the Highlanders understood Irish, why translate the New Testament into Erse, as was done lately at Edinburgh, when there is an Irish translation?" BOSWELL.
"Although the Erse and Irish are both dialects of the same language, there may be a good deal of diversity between them, as between the different dialects in Italy."--The Swede went away, and Mr. Johnson continued his reading of the papers. I said, "I am afraid, Sir, it is troublesome." "Why, Sir, (said he,) I do not take much delight in it; but I"ll go through it."
We went to the Mitre, and dined in the room where he and I first supped together. He gave me great hopes of my cause. "Sir, (said he,) the government of a schoolmaster is somewhat of the nature of military government; that is to say, it must be arbitrary, it must be exercised by the will of one man, according to particular circ.u.mstances. You must shew some learning upon this occasion. You must shew, that a schoolmaster has a prescriptive right to beat; and that an action of a.s.sault and battery cannot be admitted against him, unless there is some great excess, some barbarity. This man has maimed none of his boys. They are all left with the full exercise of their corporeal faculties. In our schools in England, many boys have been maimed; yet I never heard of an action against a schoolmaster on that account. Puffendorf, I think, maintains the right of a schoolmaster to beat his scholars[461]."
On Sat.u.r.day, March 27, I introduced to him Sir Alexander Macdonald[462], with whom he had expressed a wish to be acquainted. He received him very courteously.
Sir Alexander observed, that the Chancellors in England are chosen from views much inferiour to the office, being chosen from temporary political views. JOHNSON. "Why, Sir, in such a government as ours, no man is appointed to an office because he is the fittest for it, nor hardly in any other government; because there are so many connections and dependencies to be studied[463]. A despotick prince may choose a man to an office, merely because he is the fittest for it. The King of Prussia may do it." SIR A. "I think, Sir, almost all great lawyers, such at least as have written upon law, have known only law, and nothing else." JOHNSON. "Why no, Sir; Judge Hale was a great lawyer, and wrote upon law; and yet he knew a great many other things, and has written upon other things. Selden too." SIR A. "Very true, Sir; and Lord Bacon.
But was not Lord c.o.ke a mere lawyer?" JOHNSON. "Why, I am afraid he was; but he would have taken it very ill if you had told him so. He would have prosecuted you for scandal." BOSWELL. "Lord Mansfield is not a mere lawyer." JOHNSON. "No, Sir. I never was in Lord Mansfield"s company; but Lord Mansfield was distinguished at the University. Lord Mansfield, when he first came to town, "drank champagne with the wits," as Prior says[464]. He was the friend of Pope[465]." SIR A. "Barristers, I believe, are not so abusive now as they were formerly. I fancy they had less law long ago, and so were obliged to take to abuse, to fill up the time. Now they have such a number of precedents, they have no occasion for abuse."
JOHNSON. "Nay, Sir, they had more law long ago than they have now. As to precedents, to be sure they will increase in course of time; but the more precedents there are, the less occasion is there for law; that is to say, the less occasion is there for investigating principles." SIR A.
"I have been correcting several Scotch accents[466] in my friend Boswell.
I doubt, Sir, if any Scotchman ever attains to a perfect English p.r.o.nunciation." JOHNSON. "Why, Sir, few of them do, because they do not persevere after acquiring a certain degree of it. But, Sir, there can be no doubt that they may attain to a perfect English p.r.o.nunciation, if they will. We find how near they come to it; and certainly, a man who conquers nineteen parts of the Scottish accent, may conquer the twentieth. But, Sir, when a man has got the better of nine tenths he grows weary, he relaxes his diligence, he finds he has corrected his accent so far as not to be disagreeable, and he no longer desires his friends to tell him when he is wrong; nor does he choose to be told.
Sir, when people watch me narrowly, and I do not watch myself, they will find me out to be of a particular county[467]. In the same manner, Dunning[468] may be found out to be a Devonshire man. So most Scotchmen may be found out. But, Sir, little aberrations are of no disadvantage. I never catched Mallet in a Scotch accent[469]; and yet Mallet, I suppose, was past five-and-twenty before he came to London."
Upon another occasion I talked to him on this subject, having myself taken some pains to improve my p.r.o.nunciation, by the aid of the late Mr.
Love[470], of Drury-lane theatre, when he was a player at Edinburgh, and also of old Mr. Sheridan. Johnson said to me, "Sir, your p.r.o.nunciation is not offensive." With this concession I was pretty well satisfied; and let me give my countrymen of North-Britain an advice not to aim at absolute perfection in this respect; not to speak _High English_, as we are apt to call what is far removed from the _Scotch_, but which is by no means _good English_, and makes, "the fools who use it[471]," truly ridiculous[472]. Good English is plain, easy, and smooth in the mouth of an unaffected English Gentleman. A studied and fact.i.tious p.r.o.nunciation, which requires perpetual attention and imposes perpetual constraint, is exceedingly disgusting. A small intermixture of provincial peculiarities may, perhaps, have an agreeable effect, as the notes of different birds concur in the harmony of the grove, and please more than if they were all exactly alike. I could name some gentlemen of Ireland, to whom a slight proportion of the accent and recitative of that country is an advantage. The same observation will apply to the gentlemen of Scotland.
I do not mean that we should speak as broad as a certain prosperous member of Parliament from that country[473]; though it has been well observed, that "it has been of no small use to him; as it rouses the attention of the House by its uncommonness; and is equal to tropes and figures in a good English speaker." I would give as an instance of what I mean to recommend to my countrymen, the p.r.o.nunciation of the late Sir Gilbert Elliot[474]; and may I presume to add that of the present Earl of Marchmont[475], who told me, with great good humour, that the master of a shop in London, where he was not known, said to him, "I suppose, Sir, you are an American." "Why so, Sir?" (said his Lordship.) "Because, Sir, (replied the shopkeeper,) you speak neither English nor Scotch, but something different from both, which I conclude is the language of America."
BOSWELL. "It may be of use, Sir, to have a Dictionary to ascertain the p.r.o.nunciation." JOHNSON. "Why, Sir, my Dictionary shows you the accents of words, if you can but remember them." BOSWELL. "But, Sir, we want marks to ascertain the p.r.o.nunciation of the vowels. Sheridan, I believe, has finished such a work." JOHNSON. "Why, Sir, consider how much easier it is to learn a language by the ear, than by any marks. Sheridan"s Dictionary may do very well; but you cannot always carry it about with you: and, when you want the word, you have not the Dictionary. It is like a man who has a sword that will not draw. It is an admirable sword, to be sure: but while your enemy is cutting your throat, you are unable to use it. Besides, Sir, what ent.i.tles Sheridan to fix the p.r.o.nunciation of English? He has, in the first place, the disadvantage of being an Irishman: and if he says he will fix it after the example of the best company, why they differ among themselves. I remember an instance: when I published the Plan for my Dictionary, Lord Chesterfield told me that the word _great_ should be p.r.o.nounced so as to rhyme to _state_; and Sir William Yonge sent me word that it should be p.r.o.nounced so as to rhyme to _seat_, and that none but an Irishman would p.r.o.nounce it _grait_[476].
Now here were two men of the highest rank, the one, the best speaker in the House of Lords, the other, the best speaker in the House of Commons, differing entirely."
I again visited him at night. Finding him in a very good humour, I ventured to lead him to the subject of our situation in a future state, having much curiosity to know his notions on that point. JOHNSON. "Why, Sir, the happiness of an unembodied spirit will consist in a consciousness of the favour of G.o.d, in the contemplation of truth, and in the possession of felicitating ideas." BOSWELL. "But, Sir, is there any harm in our forming to ourselves conjectures as to the particulars of our happiness, though the scripture has said but very little on the subject? "We know not what we shall be."" JOHNSON. "Sir, there is no harm. What philosophy suggests to us on this topick is probable: what scripture tells us is certain. Dr. Henry More[477] has carried it as far as philosophy can. You may buy both his theological and philosophical works in two volumes folio, for about eight shillings." BOSWELL. "One of the most pleasing thoughts is, that we shall see our friends again."
JOHNSON. "Yes, Sir; but you must consider, that when we are become purely rational, many of our friendships will be cut off. Many friendships are formed by a community of sensual pleasures: all these will be cut off. We form many friendships with bad men, because they have agreeable qualities, and they can be useful to us; but, after death, they can no longer be of use to us. We form many friendships by mistake, imagining people to be different from what they really are.
After death, we shall see every one in a true light. Then, Sir, they talk of our meeting our relations: but then all relationship is dissolved; and we shall have no regard for one person more than another, but for their real value. However, we shall either have the satisfaction of meeting our friends, or be satisfied without meeting them[478]."
BOSWELL. "Yet, Sir, we see in scripture, that Dives still retained an anxious concern about his brethren." JOHNSON. "Why, Sir, we must either suppose that pa.s.sage to be metaphorical, or hold with many divines, and all the Purgatorians that departed souls do not all at once arrive at the utmost perfection of which they are capable." BOSWELL. "I think, Sir, that is a very rational supposition." JOHNSON. "Why, yes, Sir; but we do not know it is a true one. There is no harm in believing it: but you must not compel others to make it an article of faith; for it is not revealed." BOSWELL. "Do you think, Sir, it is wrong in a man who holds the doctrine of purgatory, to pray for the souls of his deceased friends?" JOHNSON. "Why, no, Sir[479]." BOSWELL. "I have been told, that in the Liturgy of the Episcopal Church of Scotland, there was a form of prayer for the dead." JOHNSON. "Sir, it is not in the liturgy which Laud framed for the Episcopal Church of Scotland: if there is a liturgy older than that, I should be glad to see it." BOSWELL. "As to our employment in a future state, the sacred writings say little. The Revelation, however, of St. John gives us many ideas, and particularly mentions musick[480]." JOHNSON. "Why, Sir, ideas must be given you by means of something which you know[481]: and as to musick there are some philosophers and divines who have maintained that we shall not be spiritualized to such a degree, but that something of matter, very much refined, will remain. In that case, musick may make a part of our future felicity."
BOSWELL. "I do not know whether there are any well-attested stories of the appearance of ghosts. You know there is a famous story of the appearance of Mrs. Veal, prefixed to _Drelincourt on Death_." JOHNSON.
"I believe, Sir, that is given up. I believe the woman declared upon her death-bed that it was a lie[482]." BOSWELL. "This objection is made against the truth of ghosts appearing: that if they are in a state of happiness, it would be a punishment to them to return to this world; and if they are in a state of misery, it would be giving them a respite."
JOHNSON. "Why, Sir, as the happiness or misery of embodied spirits does not depend upon place, but is intellectual, we cannot say that they are less happy or less miserable by appearing upon earth."
We went down between twelve and one to Mrs. Williams"s room, and drank tea. I mentioned that we were to have the remains of Mr. Gray, in prose and verse, published by Mr. Mason[483]. JOHNSON. "I think we have had enough of Gray. I see they have published a splendid edition of Akenside"s works. One bad ode may be suffered; but a number of them together makes one sick[484]." BOSWELL. "Akenside"s distinguished poem is his _Pleasures of Imagination_: but for my part, I never could admire it so much as most people do." JOHNSON. "Sir, I could not read it through."
BOSWELL. "I have read it through; but I did not find any great power in it."
I mentioned Elwal, the heretick, whose trial Sir John Pringle[485] had given me to read. JOHNSON. "Sir, Mr. Elwal was, I think, an ironmonger at Wolverhampton; and he had a mind to make himself famous, by being the founder of a new sect, which he wished much should be called _Elwallians_. He held, that every thing in the Old Testament that was not typical, was to be of perpetual observance; and so he wore a ribband in the plaits of his coat, and he also wore a beard. I remember I had the honour of dining in company with Mr. Elwal. There was one Barter, a miller, who wrote against him; and you had the controversy between Mr.
ELWAL and Mr. BARTER. To try to make himself distinguished, he wrote a letter to King George the Second, challenging him to dispute with him, in which he said, "George, if you be afraid to come by yourself, to dispute with a poor old man, you may bring a thousand of your _black_-guards with you; and if you should still be afraid, you may bring a thousand of your _red_-guards." The letter had something of the impudence of Junius to our present King. But the men of Wolverhampton were not so inflammable as the Common-Council of London[486]; so Mr. Elwal failed in his scheme of making himself a man of great consequence[487]."