ÆäÀÌÁö À̹ÌÁö
PDF
ePub

ficial knowledge, and some facility in criticism and composition; and by aiming at the style of Johnson, whom he long regarded as "his guide, philosopher, and friend," he gave a good degree of strength and dignity to his own. It is known that the work was undertaken with Johnson's concurrence and approval, and presently he came to be actively engaged in it.

The first number of "The Adventurer" was issued on the 7th of November, 1752, and, like its predecessor, it made its appearance in semi-weekly numbers. The principal contributors, besides Hawkesworth, who, in addition to the general editorial supervision, wrote nearly one half of the essays-and Johnson, whose pieces are supposed to amount to about thirtywere Dr. Bathurst, who wrote several of the earlier numbers; Bonnel Thornton, who had been among the first publicly to recognize the excellence of "The Rambler," which he did in a miscellany called "The Student," of which he was then editor; and Dr. Joseph Warton. The connection of Warton with "The Adventurer" was procured by Johnson, with the design of obtaining from him such critical essays as it was known he was capable of producing, and which could not fail greatly to enhance the value of the publication.

The design and general form of "The Adventurer" being the same with those of "The Rambler," that work may seem to be little more than a continuation of this. But though the two works have many features in common, they are equally clearly distinguished by strongly marked differences. Their diversity of authorship necessarily gave greater variety of style and modes of thought to "The Adventurer's" essays than could have been attained from a single mind. The range of subjects was also larger than in the preceding work; and, instead of confining themselves to the grave themes that almost exclusively occupy "The Rambler," the writers of "The Adventurer" frequently indulged their readers with portraits of character, narratives, and essays of wit, humor, and pleasantry. Compared with "The Rambler," "The Adventurer" has less solemn dignity; its style is not so grave, its morality is less rigid, and its religious character is almost wholly wanting; while it has more variety, is more sprightly, and altogether has less of

[graphic]

*

DR. JOSEPH WARTON.

the magisterial tone of the teacher, and more of the manner of a companion and friend. The critical papers in "The Adventurer," for which it was indebted chiefly to the Reverend Dr. Warton, constitute a feature of real excellence that finds but a poor counterpart in "The Rambler." Even Johnson's own papers in "The Adventurer," though generally similar to those in "The Rambler," are less elevated and solemn, and also much more varied in style and purpose.

The immediate success of this new candidate for public favor, as might be presumed, was greater than that attained by its stately predecessor; and though many of its essays relate to matters of less permanent interest, yet they are even now read with both pleasure and profit.

For the year 1753 Johnson's history presents very few points of interest. He toiled at his "Dictionary," and occasionally wrote an essay for the "Adventurer;" and that is about all that can be said of his occupations: his domestic affairs will be noticed in another place. Nearly the same account must be given of the next year, only omitting the "Adventurer," and substituting the "Life of Cave." That earliest of Johnson's patrons of the trade died during the latter part of the former year; and in the February number of the Gentleman's Magazine appeared his biography, the same that is still found in the collected works of its author. That work is a remarkable instance of the power of genius, to elevate and ennoble a subject in itself quite common, and without the elements of greatness. Cave, no doubt, possessed many good qualities, as well as some characteristic foibles; but in neither was there anything to dis

tinguish him from thousands of others. He was a diligent and moderately-successful man of business; he had lived as other men in similar circumstances live, and had died as other men die, and one would ask what could be made of the biography of such a one? Yet did Johnson make of it a considerably extensive and really valuable piece of biography; and so gave to fame a name that otherwise would not have survived his own generation.

But a more important epoch in Johnson's history was now at hand. His great philological work, which had been upon his hands for nearly seven years, was rapidly approaching its completion; and as the author began to see the end of his labors he increased his diligence, from the impatience resulting from hopes almost realized but still deferred. Another motive may also have added to his haste and impatience. He had contracted with the booksellers to do the job for fifteen hundred and seventy-five pounds, out of which he was to meet all expenses incidental to the preparation of the work; and he was to be paid as it advanced. Of this sum, a considerable proportion was paid to assistants, and for books of reference and stationery; so that now the whole amount was exhausted, though the work was not yet finished.

It has been noticed, that when the "Plan of the Dictionary" was issued in 1747, it was addressed to Lord Chesterfield. In the accompanying address Johnson consented to solicit for the proposed work the patronage of that nobleman, who was then one of his majesty's Secretaries of State. The tone of delicate but decided flattery there used, is so unlike the hardy independent style in which he usually turned over his productions to public criticism, as to suggest the suspicion that large expectations were entertained as to the advantages likely to result from the solicited patronage. It should be remembered that during all this period Johnson was miserably poor; that he was compelled in whatever he did to make "provision for the day that was passing over him." The "Dictionary" he considered as "a work devoted especially to the honor and advantage of the whole nation; and one in which the nation might be said to have a kind of property." It is not strange, therefore, that the starving author, while

thus toiling for the public advantage, should think that since one of the king's ministers had become patron to the work, the favor of the government, in a substantial form, should be extended to him. This expectation induced him to depart from his usual course, and evidently at some sacrifice of feeling, to solicit one of the great to consent to be recognized as his patron.

To those who view the subject from a distance, and know the characters of the men and their circumstances, it is not a matter of surprise that the attempted coalition was not successful. How far the attempt was carried is not certainly known; but probably further than either of the parties subsequently wished to confess. It is known that Chesterfield highly appreciated the flattering distinction shown to him, and that Johnson paid several visits to his lordship's mansion, and, worst of all, that Chesterfield gave, and Johnson accepted, ten pounds from his patron. But the union was a forced and unnatural one, and was destined from the first to result in mutual disgust and alienation.

Among the celebrated "Letters" of Lord Chesterfield, which, though not published till some years later, were written about this time, is one containing what is commonly known as the character of “a respectable Hottentot," of which portrait Johnson was by many believed to have been the original. Though a base caricature, the points of likeness are well chosen, and, perhaps, according to Chesterfield's notions of things, not overdrawn.

"There is a man," writes his lordship," whose moral character, deep learning, and superior parts, I acknowledge, admire, and respect; but whom it is so impossible for me to love, that I am almost in a fever whenever I am in his

company. His figure (without being deformed) seems made to disgrace or ridicule the common structure of the human body. His legs and arms are never in the position which, according to the situation of his body, they ought to be in; but constantly employed in committing acts of hostility upon the graces. He throws anywhere but down his throat whatever he means to drink, and only mangles what he means to carve. Inattentive to all the regards thing. He disputes with heat and indiscrimof social life, he mistimes and misplaces everyinately, mindless of the rank, character, or situation of those with whom he disputes. Absolutely ignorant of the several gradations of familiarity and respect, he is exactly the same and, therefore, by a necessary consequence, abto his superiors, his equals, and his inferiors; surd to two of the three. Is it possible to

love such a man? The utmost I can do for him is, to consider him a respectable Hottentot."

Whether the separation took place silently through mutual antipathy, or violently, is not certainly determined, though the current tradition has favored the latter. Sir John Hawkins, who is good authority in all matters of fact relative to this portion of Johnson's history, and who, in this particular, is seconded by Lord Lyttleton, attributes the breach to an offense taken by Johnson at what he deemed a personal slight from his lordship. Johnson having called on Chesterfield one morning, was kept waiting a long time in an outer room for his noble host to be sufficiently disengaged to receive him; but when the door opened, out walked Colley Cibber, a person for whom Johnson had the most intense contempt; when, enraged to find that it was for such a one that he had been kept at a distance, he hastily left the place, and never came again. This account is certainly made probable by a remark in Johnson's letter to Chesterfield, given below; though Boswell tells us that Johnson gave him to understand that the statement was not well-founded. It is hardly to be supposed that a transaction of this kind would be orally transmitted with entire accuracy

in all its details; but the balance of evidence is certainly in favor of the substantial truthfulness of Sir John's statement. Nor is this at all inconsistent with Johnson's declaration "that there never was any particular incident that produced a quarrel between Lord Chesterfield and him; but that his lordship's continual neglect was the reason why he resolved to have no connection with him."

is it at all strange, considering the characters and relations of the two persons, that Chesterfield treated Johnson with "continual neglect." He could not do otherwise, without carrying out beyond the usual limits of its tyranny the fashionable hypocrisy that his lordship dignified with the style of the rules of politeness. It is also due to Chesterfield that it should be known, that during most of the period in which Johnson supposed himself to be purposely neglected, though he probably knew nothing of it, his patron was prostrated by disease, or excluded from society by deafness and other growing infirmities. When it became generally known that the "Dictionary" was nearly ready for publication, Chesterfield published in a weekly paper called "The World" two letters calling public attention to the expected publication, and saying many fine things of the fitness of the author for his work, and, therefore, as to what might be expected of the work itself.

"I think the public in general, and the republic of letters in particular," he remarked, "are greatly obliged to Mr. Johnson for having undertaken and executed so great and desirable a work. Perfection is not to be expected from any man; but if we are to judge by the various works of Johnson already published. we have good reason to believe that he will bring this as near to perfection as any man could do. The Plan of it, which was published some years ago, seems to me to be proof of it.

[ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors]

"It must be owned that our language is, at present, in a state of anarchy, and, hitherto, perhaps, it may not have been the worse for it. The time for discrimination seems to be now come. Toleration, adoption, and naturalization, have run their

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

lengths. Good order and authority are now necessary. But where shall we find them, and at the same time the obedience due to them? We must have recourse to the old Roman expedient in times of confusion, and choose a dictator. Upon this principle I give my vote for Mr. Johnson to fill the great and arduous post; and I hereby declare that I make a total surrender of all my rights and privileges in the English language as a free-born British subject to the said Mr. Johnson during the time of his dictatorship."

That Chesterfield was sincere in all he then said there is no cause to doubt, sim

Though but little can be said in defense of Lord Chesterfield's character, yet in this quarrel the fault seems not to have been all on one side. His lordship had made no definite promises, nor attempted to excite hopes that he did not afterward answer to; nor was he responsible for the large expectations entertained by Johnson and his employers. Had the government seen fit to give him a competent main-ply because he had no motives to be insintenance while occupied with a work of so much public interest, the act would have been both just and judicious; but such acts are too uncommon to make the neglect of them any occasion of complaint against individual kings or ministers. Nor

cere. That he was disinterested is, however, not to be supposed, for disinterestedness was not an element of his character. He no doubt believed all he said about the probable excellence of the forth-coming work, and was not unwilling that the au

[graphic][merged small][merged small][merged small]

him from his relation of dependence, and left him free to pursue his course alone. He had submitted in sullen silence to neglect, and had battled bravely against the whole haggard train of poverty, without the loss of self-respect; but he could not now endure this patronizing condescension of his lordship. For once his wounded pride got the better of his judgment. He addressed a private letter to his noble friend-such a one as only insulted greatness in distress could address to supercilious meanness, strutting in empty show and swelling with vanity. Probably he afterward regretted this step; but having uttered nothing more than he fully believed, neither his pride nor his love of truth would permit him to retract any part of it. His own account of the matter, when the whole had become an old story, was :-" After making great professions, he had, for many years, taken no notice of me; but when my 'Dictionary' was coming out, he fell a scribbling in The World' about it. 6 Upon which, I wrote him a letter expressed in civil terms, but such as might show him that I did not mind what he said or wrote, and that I had done with him."

The letter itself is so highly characteristic, and so intrinsically valuable, that no biography of its writer would be complete without it. It is therefore given in full:

"TO THE RIGHT HON. THE EARL OF CHESTERFIELD. February 7, 1775.

“MY LORD,—I have been lately informed by the proprietor of The World,' that two papers, in which my Dictionary' is recommended to the public, were written by your lordship. To be so distinguished is an honor which, being very little accustomed to favors from the great, I know not well how to receive, or in what terms to acknowledge.

"When, upon some slight encouragement, I first visited your lordship, I was overpowered, like the rest of mankind, by the enchantment of your address, and could not forbear to wish that I might boast myself Le vainqueur du vainqueur de la terre; that I might obtain that regard for which I saw the world contending; but I found my attendance so little encouraged that neither pride nor modesty would suffer me to continue it. When I had once addressed your lordship in public, I had exhausted all the art of pleasing which a retired and uncourtly scholar can possess. I had done all that I could; and no man is well-pleased to have his all neglected, be it ever so little.

"Seven years, my lord, have now passed since I waited in your outward rooms, or was repulsed from your door; during which time I have been pushing on my work through diffi

[blocks in formation]

The notice which

"Is not a patron, my lord, one who looks with unconcern on a man struggling for life in the water, and when he has reached ground, encumbers him with help? you have been pleased to take of my labors, had it been early, had been kind; but it has been delayed till I am indifferent, and cannot enjoy it; till I am solitary, and cannot impart it;t till I am known, and do not want it. I hope it gations where no benefit has been received, or to is no very cynical asperity, not to confess oblibe unwilling that the public should consider me as owing that to a patron which Providence has enabled me to do for myself.

"Having carried on my work thus far with so little obligation to any favorer of learning, I shall not be disappointed though I should conclude it, if less be possible, with less; for I have been long_wakened from that dream of hope in which I once boasted myself with so

much exultation.

"My lord, your lordship's most humble,
"Most obedient servant,
"SAM. JOHNSON."‡

Several minor points in this letter require a passing notice. The reader will perceive what amount of evidence it affords in favor of Hawkins's account of the immediate occasion of the rupture between the parties; something equivalent to this was necessary to justify the statement in an offensive form, "I waited in your outward rooms, or was repulsed from your door." The suspicion that pecuniary assistance was expected is greatly strengthened by the complaint that he had not received "one act of assistance."

Nor

The following note is subjoined by Mr. Langton: Dr. Johnson, when he gave me this copy of his letter, desired that I would annex to it his information to me, that whereas it is said in the letter that no assistance has been received,' he did once receive from Lord Chesterfield the sum of ten pounds; but as that was so inconsiderable a sum, he thought the mention of it could not properly find a place in a letter of the kind that this was."-Boswell.

In this passage Dr. Johnson evidently alludes to the loss of his wife. We find the same tender recollection recurring to his mind upon innumerable occasions; and, perhaps, no man ever more forcibly felt the truth of the sentiment so elegantly expressed by my friend Mr. Malone, in his Prologue to Mr. Jephson's tragedy of "Julia:"

"Vain-wealth, and fame, and fortune's fostering care, If no fond breast the splendid blessings share; And, each day's bustling pageantry once past, There, only there, our bliss is found at last."-Boswell. Upon comparing this copy with that which Dr. Johnson dictated to me from recollection, the variations are found to be so slight that this must be added to the many other proofs which he gave of the wonderful extent and accuracy of his memory. To gratify the curious in composition, I have deposited both the copies in the British Museum.-Boswell.

« ÀÌÀü°è¼Ó »