Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

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'.'

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.' 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, and so

[ocr errors]

21st Feb. after a debate, the thanks were ordered to be expunged from the journals; and on the 2d March, Mr. Fred. Montague moved for leave to bring in a bill to repeal the observance of that day altogether. This motion was rejected by 125 to 97.-ED.]

[It is not very easy to understand Dr. Johnson's objection as above stated. Does not the validity of all marriages "depend on the will of man," that is, are there not in all civilized nations certain legal formula and conditions requisite to constitute a marriage? If all human institutions are to be disregarded, what is marriage? And as to the indefeasible rights of kings, see Johnson's opinions, unte, vol. i. p. 438-445; and finally, if it be competent to the legislature to make an act highly criminal, does not that imply a competency to forbid it altogether?-ED.]

society is more easily supported." BOSWELL. "Per-
haps, sir, it might be done by the respect belonging
to office, as among the Romans, where the dress, the
toga, inspired reverence." JOHNSON.
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 no 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, cæteris 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.
shows that the respect for family is not merely fan-
ciful, 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 expense, the upstarts
would soon be at an end, and the gentlemen would
remain; but if the gentlemen will vie in expense
with the upstarts, which is very foolish, they must
be ruined."

That

[Indeed, though a man of obscure birth himself, Piozzi. Dr. Johnson's partiality to people of family was visible P. 236. on every occasion; his zeal for subordination warm even to bigotry; his hatred to innovation, and reverence for the old feudal times, apparent, whenever any possible manner of showing them occurred.]

I gave him an account of the excellent mimickry of a friend of mine in Scotland; observing, at the same time, that some people thought it a very mean

VOL. II.

L

thing. JOHNSON. " Why, sir, it is making a very mean use of 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

1, 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 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 assume. 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. 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. 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."

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

[The melancholy circumstance stated as to the lady, induces the editor to refrain from attempting to fill up this blank.-ED.]

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. 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.

[Of the death of this poor labourer in literature, of whom Mrs. Piozzi says that he had considerable talents, and knew many modern languages, Johnson gave himself the following pathetic account, in a letter to that lady:

"TO MRS. THRALE.

"1st April, 1776. "Poor Peyton expired this morning. He probably-during many years, for which he sat starving by the bed of a wife, not only useless but almost motionless, condemned by poverty to personal attendance, and by the necessity of such attendance chained down to poverty-he probably thought often how lightly he should tread the path of life without his burthen. Of this thought the admission was unavoidable, and the indulgence might be forgiven to frailty and distress. His wife died at last, and be

Letters,

vol. i.

p. 312.

Letters, fore she was buried, he was seized by a fever, and is now going vol. i. to the grave.

P. 312.

"Such miscarriages, when they happen to those on whom many eyes are fixed, fill histories and tragedies; and tears have been shed for the sufferings, and wonder excited by the fortitude of those who neither did nor suffered more than Peyton."]

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 Dalin. Having at that time an intention of writing the history of that country, I asked Dr. Johnson whether one might write a history of Sweden without going thither. "Yes, sir," said he, "one for

[merged small][ocr errors]

66

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 pronunciation, 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."

« AnteriorContinuar »