diff options
Diffstat (limited to '37764-h')
| -rw-r--r-- | 37764-h/37764-h.htm | 5203 |
1 files changed, 5203 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/37764-h/37764-h.htm b/37764-h/37764-h.htm new file mode 100644 index 0000000..e3f2904 --- /dev/null +++ b/37764-h/37764-h.htm @@ -0,0 +1,5203 @@ +<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" + "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> + +<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> + <head> + <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=iso-8859-1" /> + <title> + The Project Gutenberg eBook of Deformities of Samuel Johnson, Selected from his Works. + </title> + <style type="text/css"> + + p { margin-top: .75em; + text-align: justify; + margin-bottom: .75em; + } + h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6 { + text-align: center; /* all headings centered */ + clear: both; + } + hr { width: 33%; + margin-top: 2em; + margin-bottom: 2em; + margin-left: auto; + margin-right: auto; + clear: both; + } + + table {margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;} + + body{margin-left: 10%; + margin-right: 10%; + } + + .pagenum { /* uncomment the next line for invisible page numbers */ + /* visibility: hidden; */ + position: absolute; + left: 92%; + font-size: smaller; + text-align: right; + } /* page numbers */ + + .rbrace { position: absolute; + text-align: left; + font-size: 180%; + } /* page numbers */ + + .tb { width: 10%; + margin-top: 1em; + margin-bottom: 1em; + margin-left: auto; + margin-right: auto; + clear: both; + } + + .nblockquot{margin-left: 5%; text-indent: -5%;} + .blockquot{margin-left: 5%; margin-right: 10%;} + .sblockquot{font-size: 85%;} + .sidenote {width: 20%; padding-bottom: .5em; padding-top: .5em; + padding-left: .5em; padding-right: .5em; margin-left: 1em; + float: right; clear: right; margin-top: 1em; + font-size: smaller; color: black; background: #eeeeee; border: dashed 1px;} + + .bb {border-bottom: solid 2px;} + .bl {border-left: solid 2px;} + .bt {border-top: solid 2px;} + .br {border-right: solid 2px;} + .bbox {border: solid 2px;} + .notebox {border: solid 2px; padding: 1em; margin-left: 5%; margin-right: 5%; background: #CCCCB2;} + + .center {text-align: center;} + .smcap {font-variant: small-caps;} + .u {text-decoration: underline;} + + .caption {font-weight: bold; text-align: center; font-size: large; margin-top: 2em;} + + .figcenter {margin: auto; text-align: center;} + + .figleft {float: left; clear: left; margin-left: 0; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-top: + 1em; margin-right: 1em; padding: 0; text-align: center;} + + .figright {float: right; clear: right; margin-left: 1em; margin-bottom: 1em; + margin-top: 1em; margin-right: 0; padding: 0; text-align: center;} + + .footnotes {border: dashed 1px;} + .footnote {margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%; font-size: 0.9em; margin-top: 1.25em;} + .footnote .label {position: absolute; right: 84%; text-align: right;} + .fnanchor {vertical-align: super; font-size: .8em; text-decoration: none;} + + .poem {margin-left:20%; margin-right:20%; text-align: left;} + + ins.mycorr {text-decoration: none; border-bottom: thin dotted red;} + </style> + </head> +<body> + + +<pre> + +The Project Gutenberg EBook of Deformities of Samuel Johnson, Selected +from his Works, by Anonymous + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + + +Title: Deformities of Samuel Johnson, Selected from his Works + +Author: Anonymous + +Editor: Gwin J. Kolb + J. E. Congleton + +Release Date: October 16, 2011 [EBook #37764] + +Language: English + +Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1 + +*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK DEFORMITIES OF SAMUEL *** + + + + +Produced by Jon Ingram, Chris Curnow, Joseph Cooper and +the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at +http://www.pgdp.net + + + + + + +</pre> + + +<div class="notebox"> + +<h4>TRANSCRIBER'S NOTES:</h4> + + +<p>The text indicated quotes by repeating the open quote character on + each new line. This has not been followed in this transcription.</p> + +<p>The text used the 'long s', as is common pre-1800. This has been + converted to a standard 's'.</p> + +<p>A number of alterations have been made with the aim of correcting printing +errors, while altering the text as little as possible. They are +shown in the text with <ins class="mycorr" title="like this">mouse-hover popups</ins>. +No attempt has been made to alter spellings, or to modernise punctuation or +grammar.</p> + + +<p>The alphabetical list on pages 71-72 has several entries out of order. +The order has been kept from the text, rather than corrected.</p> + +<p>On page 73 there is a footnote, "Vide Rambler.", with no footnote marker +on the page. This footnote has been placed where it is in the first +edition.</p> + +</div> + + +<hr style="width: 100%;" /> + + +<h3><span class="smcap">The Augustan Reprint Society</span></h3> + +<h1>DEFORMITIES<br /> + +<span class="smcap">of<br /> +Dr</span> SAMUEL JOHNSON.</h1> + +<p> </p> +<h3>SELECTED FROM HIS WORKS.</h3> + +<h4>(1782)</h4> + +<p> </p> +<h3><i>Introduction by</i><br /> +<span class="smcap">Gwin J. Kolb and J. E. Congleton</span></h3> +<p> </p> + +<h5>PUBLICATION NUMBERS 147-148<br /> +<small>WILLIAM ANDREWS CLARK MEMORIAL LIBRARY</small><br /> +<span class="smcap">University of California, Los Angeles</span><br /> +1971 +</h5> + + +<hr style="width: 100%;" /> +<p class="center"> +GENERAL EDITORS<br /> +<br /> +William E. Conway, <i>William Andrews Clark Memorial Library</i><br /> +George Robert Guffey, <i>University of California, Los Angeles</i><br /> +Maximillian E. Novak, <i>University of California, Los Angeles</i><br /> +<br /><br /> +ASSOCIATE EDITOR<br /> +<br /> +David S. Rodes, <i>University of California, Los Angeles</i><br /> +<br /><br /> +ADVISORY EDITORS<br /> +<br /> +Richard C. Boys, <i>University of Michigan</i><br /> +James L. Clifford, <i>Columbia University</i><br /> +Ralph Cohen, <i>University of Virginia</i><br /> +Vinton A. Dearing, <i>University of California, Los Angeles</i><br /> +Arthur Friedman, <i>University of Chicago</i><br /> +Louis A. Landa, <i>Princeton University</i><br /> +Earl Miner, <i>University of California, Los Angeles</i><br /> +Samuel H. Monk, <i>University of Minnesota</i><br /> +Everett T. Moore, <i>University of California, Los Angeles</i><br /> +Lawrence Clark Powell, <i>William Andrews Clark Memorial Library</i><br /> +James Sutherland, <i>University College, London</i><br /> +H. T. Swedenberg, Jr., <i>University of California, Los Angeles</i><br /> +Robert Vosper, <i>William Andrews Clark Memorial Library</i><br /> +Curt A. Zimansky, <i>State University of Iowa</i><br /> +<br /><br /> +CORRESPONDING SECRETARY<br /> +<br /> +Edna C. Davis, <i>William Andrews Clark Memorial Library</i><br /> +<br /><br /> +EDITORIAL ASSISTANT<br /> +<br /> +Lilly Kurahashi, <i>William Andrews Clark Memorial Library</i><br /> +</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 100%;" /> +<p><span class='pagenum'>– i –</span></p> +<h4>INTRODUCTION</h4> + + +<div class="sblockquot"> +<p>During the early part of his literary career, James Thomson +Callender (1758-1803)<a href="#Footnote_1" class="fnanchor">1</a> belittled Samuel Johnson; during the +later, he denigrated Thomas Jefferson. Thus his reputation as a +Scots master of scurrility and a vicious scandalmonger was +earned on both sides of the Atlantic.</p> + +<p>Probably because his anonymous pamphlets about Johnson's +writings—the <i>Deformities of Dr. Samuel Johnson, Selected from +his Works</i> (1782) and <i>A Critical Review of the Works of Dr. Samuel +Johnson</i> (1783)—were not both ascribed to him until 1940, +Callender first came into public notice in 1792, when in Scotland +he published <i>The Political Progress of Britain, or An Impartial +Account of the Principal Abuses in the Government of this Country +from the Revolution in 1688</i>. For these intemperate remarks, +though anonymous, he was indicted in 1793 for sedition. He fled +from Edinburgh and made his way, "with some difficulty," soon +thereafter to Philadelphia.</p> + +<p>During the first several years in Philadelphia, he was reporter +of the Congressional debates for the Philadelphia <i>Gazette</i> +and did some editorial hackwork. He also published the third +edition of the <i>Political Progress</i>, which was favorably noticed +by Jefferson. In 1797 he published <i>The History of the United +States for 1796: Including a Variety of Particulars Relative to the +Federal Government Previous to that Period</i>, which brought the +charge against Alexander Hamilton of "a connection with one +James Reynolds for purpose of improper pecuniary speculation." +Hamilton, after making preliminary preparations for a duel, came +to the conclusion that he would have to sacrifice his private reputation +to clear his public actions. So he calmly wrote, "My +real crime is an amorous connection with his [Reynolds'] wife +for a considerable time, with his privity and connivance, if not +originally brought on by a combination between the husband and +wife with the design to extort money from me."<a href="#Footnote_2" class="fnanchor">2</a></p> + +<p>In <i>The Prospect before Us</i> (1800), written under the secret +patronage of Jefferson, Callender assailed John Adams and<span class='pagenum'>– ii –</span> +lashed through Adams at his predecessor, Washington. Ending +his diatribe, he said, "Take your choice, between Adams, war +and beggery and Jefferson, peace and competency." Because of +his remarks about Adams, he was tried under the Sedition Law, +fined $200, and sent to prison for nine months. While in prison +he wrote two fiery anti-Federalist pamphlets, for which Jefferson +advanced money under ambiguous terms. When Jefferson became +President in 1801, he pardoned Callender (and all others convicted +under the unwise Sedition Law), and Callender's fine was +remitted. But Callender was not satisfied; he wanted Jefferson +to appoint him postmaster of Richmond, Virginia. Jefferson refused, +in spite of the tone of blackmail which now pervaded +Callender's importunities. Soon he turned his political coat and +began editing the most scurrilous anti-Jefferson paper in the +country, the Richmond <i>Recorder</i>, to the infinite delight of the +Federalists, who immediately circulated the periodical far and +wide. Callender accused Jefferson of dishonesty and cowardice, +but pure malice inspired his most injurious charges.</p> + +<div class="blockquot"><p>It is well known that the man, <i>whom it delighted +the people to honor</i>, keeps ... as his concubine, one +of his own slaves. Her name is Sally. The name of +her eldest son is Tom. His features are said to bear +a striking resemblance to those of the president himself.... +By this wench Sally, our President has had +several children. There is not an individual in the +neighborhood of Charlottesville who does not believe +the story; and not a few who <i>know it</i>.... Behold the +favorite! the first born of republicanism! the pinnacle +of all that is good and great! If the friends of Mr. +Jefferson are convinced of his innocence, they will +make an appeal.... If they rest in silence, or if +they content themselves with resting upon a <i>general +denial</i>, they cannot hope for credit. The allegation +is of a nature too <i>black</i> to be suffered to remain in +suspense. We should be glad to hear of its refutation. +We give it to the world under the firmest belief +that such a refutation <i>never can be made</i>. The AFRICAN +VENUS is said to officiate as housekeeper at +Montecello. When Mr. Jefferson has read this article,<span class='pagenum'>– iii –</span> +he will find leisure to estimate how much has been +lost or gained by so many unprovoked attacks upon +J. T. Callender!<a href="#Footnote_3" class="fnanchor">3</a></p></div> + +<p>Callender's <ins class="mycorr" title="original reads 'ignominous'">ignominious</ins> end came on 17 July 1803. The +<i>Gentleman's Magazine</i> declared (LXXIII [September 1803], 882) that +he, "after experiencing many varieties of fortune as Iscariot +Hackney ... drowned himself ... in James River": the coroner's +jury, however, declared that his death was accidental, following +intoxication.</p> + +<p>There can be scant doubt that the <i>Deformities</i> and <i>A Critical +Review</i><a href="#Footnote_4" class="fnanchor">4</a> have a common origin. The paper, type, and makeup +of the title-pages indicate that they were issued from the same +press. In the "Introduction" to <i>A Critical Review</i>, the statement +is made that "The author of the present trifle was last year induced +to publish a few remarks on the writings of Dr. Samuel +Johnson.... Like the former essay, these pages will endeavour +to ascertain the genuine importance of Dr. Johnson's literary +character" (pp. iii, v). In the text on page 50, the <i>Deformities</i> +is cited in proprietary tones; and it is also mentioned in notes on +pages 19, 37, 55, and 63. Moreover, the tell-tale words "deformities" +and "deformity" appear (pp. 31, 43) in the text, and there is an +advertisement for the <i>Deformities</i> on page 72.</p> + +<p>An attempt to identify the author of the <i>Deformities</i> was made +by George Steevens when it appeared. In a letter to William Cole +dated 14 May 1782, he says that it was "written by a Club of +Caledonian Wits."<a href="#Footnote_5" class="fnanchor">5</a> The <i>Critical Review</i> for August 1782 (LIV, +140) surmised that "the pamphlet ... is apparently written by +some angry Caledonian, who, warmed with the deepest resentment +for some real or supposed injury, gives vent to his indignation, +and treats every part of Dr. Johnson's character with the utmost +asperity." A month later, the <i>Gentleman's Magazine</i> (LII +[September 1782], 439), "reciting the circumstance" of the origin +of the <i>Deformities</i>, contended that it was a revenge pamphlet inspired +by an anti-Ossian publication by William Shaw ("Nadir" +Shaw, in the <i>Deformities</i>), who "'denied the existence of Gaelic +poetry....'" "Dr. Johnson was his patron; and THEREFORE +this Essayist, 'by fair and copious quotations from Dr. Johnson's +ponderous performances, has attempted to illustrate'" his extraordinary +defects. And in February 1783 (LXVIII, 185-186), the<span class='pagenum'>– iv –</span> +<i>Monthly Review</i> briefly noted:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"><p>This seems to be the production of some ingenious +but angry Scotchman, who has taken great pains to prove, +what all the world knows, that there are many exceptionable +passages in the writings of Dr. Johnson. There are, +however, few spots in this literary luminary now pointed +out that have not been discovered before. So that the +present map must be considered rather as a monument +of the delineator's malignity, than of his wit.—His +<i>personalities</i> seem to indicate personal provocation; +though perhaps it may be all pure <i>nationality</i>.</p></div> + +<p>Though Boswell mentions the pamphlet and quotes a letter +in which Johnson comments on it,<a href="#Footnote_6" class="fnanchor">6</a> neither he nor any of his +editors before L. F. Powell try to identify the incensed author. +In 1815 Robert Anderson said that the <i>Deformities</i>, "an invidious +contrast to 'The Beauties of Johnson,'" is "the production of Mr. +Thomson Callender, nephew of Thomson the poet."<a href="#Footnote_7" class="fnanchor">7</a></p> + +<p>When the <i>Deformities</i> was catalogued in the Bodleian Library +in 1834,<a href="#Footnote_8" class="fnanchor">8</a> it was attributed to John Callander of Craigforth. In +<i>A Critical Review of the Works of Dr. Samuel Johnson</i>, the statement +is made (p. 4) that "Mr. Callander of Craigforth ... observes" +that "'Had the laborious Johnson been better acquainted with the +oriental tongues, or had he even understood the first rudiments of +the northern languages from which the English and Scots derive +their origin, his bulky volumes had not presented to us the melancholy +truth, that unwearied industry, <i>devoid of settled principles</i>, +avails only to add one error to another.'" This latter blast, taken +from the "Introduction" to Callander's <i>Two Ancient Scottish Poems, +The Gaberlunzie Man and Christ's Kirk on the Green</i> (Edinburgh, +1782), may well have been the evidence that caused <i>A Critical +Review</i> to be attributed to John Callander of Craigforth; then, +because of the interconnections between it and the <i>Deformities</i> +and because of their convincing similarity, the <i>Deformities</i> +was also assigned to him. On the other hand, one is puzzled by +the Bodleian's failure to accept the passage from John Callander +in <i>A Critical Review</i> as conclusive evidence that he was not the +author of that work.<a href="#Footnote_9" class="fnanchor">9</a></p> + +<p><span class='pagenum'>– v –</span>When the <i>Deformities</i> and <i>A Critical Review</i> were catalogued +in the British Museum, in 1854 and 1862, they were likewise attributed +to John Callander of Craigforth. In 1915 Courtney and +Smith seemed to doubt that John Callander wrote them; for, they +noticed, "strangely enough no mention of them is made by Robert +Chambers in his memoir of Callander."<a href="#Footnote_10" class="fnanchor">10</a> The <i>Catalogue of +Printed Books in the Edinburgh Library</i> (1918) assigns <i>A Critical +Review</i> to John Callander; it does not list the <i>Deformities</i>. +Arthur G. Kennedy, in <i>A Bibliography of Writings on the English +Language</i> (1927), attributes the <i>Deformities</i> to John Callander; +he lists the 1787 issue of <i>A Critical Review</i> as anonymous. In +their <i>Dictionary of Anonymous and Pseudonymous English Literature</i> +(1926-1932), Halkett and Laing assign <i>A Critical Review</i> to +John Callander on the authority of the British Museum; the <i>Deformities</i> +is also assigned to him on the authority of a note by +Chalmers in 1782.</p> + +<p>Finally, L. F. Powell, <i>primus editorum</i>, in his revision of +G. B. Hill's edition of Boswell's <i>Life</i> (1934-1950), quoted from a +letter by James Thomson Callender to John Stockdale, dated 4 +October 1783, which says: "I will be greatly obliged to you, +for delivering the remaining Copies of Deformities of Johnson to +the bearer, and sending me his Receipt for them." Dr. Powell +thinks—rightly, we believe, when all the other evidence is taken +into account—that this letter "shows" that Callender "was the +author of the book."<a href="#Footnote_11" class="fnanchor">11</a></p> + +<p>Then in 1940, D. Nichol Smith, no doubt having followed the +suspicion he and W. P. Courtney expressed in 1915, and having +available the proof unearthed by Dr. Powell, attributed both items +to J. T. Callender in the <i>CBEL</i> (II, 627), listing two editions of +the <i>Deformities</i> in 1782 and two of <i>A Critical Review</i> in 1783. +The British Museum <i>Catalogue</i> also now credits the same Scotsman +with both works.</p> + +<p>The information in Callender's letter to Stockdale, Anderson's +identification, a fairly plausible reason that the <i>Deformities</i> was +so long attributed to John Callander, the similarity of the styles +and contents of the two pamphlets, the parallel circumstances of +publication, the virtual acknowledgement of the <i>Deformities</i> in +<i>A Critical Review</i>—all point to a safe conclusion that the two +works were the creations of James Thomson Callender.<span class='pagenum'>– vi –</span></p> + +<p>Though students of Johnson have frequently noticed the +bitter ridicule in the <i>Deformities</i> and <i>A Critical Review</i>, they +(since the author of the pamphlets was unknown) have seldom,<a href="#Footnote_12" class="fnanchor">12</a> +if ever, detailed Callender's turbulent career in America. Similarly, +students of American history have studied Callender's +attacks on early American statesmen; but they have been completely +unaware, it seems, that the pamphleteer who wrote them +began his career by making fun of Samuel Johnson. Now that the +authorship of these two early productions has been established, +a study of them provides details that illuminate the foreground +of Callender's career in America. Likewise, of course, the particulars +of his activities in America illuminate the background +of his career in Great Britain.</p> + +<p>Near the conclusion of the <i>Deformities</i>, Callender relates +the "circumstances which," as he says, "gave ... birth" to the +work.</p> + +<div class="blockquot"><p>In 1778, Mr William Shaw published an Analysis +of the Gaelic language. He quoted specimens of +Gaelic poetry, and harangued on its beauties.... +A few months ago, he printed a pamphlet. He traduced +decent characters. He denied the existence of Gaelic +poetry, and his name was echoed in the newspapers as +a miracle of candour. Is there in the annals of Grubæan +impudence any parallel to this?... This incomparable +bookbuilder, who writes a dictionary before he can write +grammar, had previously boasted what a harvest he would +reap from English credulity. He was not deceived. The +bait was caught.... Mr Shaw wants only money.... +But better things might have been expected from the +moral and majestic author of the Rambler. He must have +seen the Analysis of the Gaelic language, for Shaw mentions +him as the patron of that work. He must have seen +the specimens of Celtic poetry there inserted. That he +is likewise the patron of this poor scribble, no man, I +suppose, will offer to deny. From this single circumstance, +Dr Johnson stands convicted of <i>an illiberal intention +to deceive</i>. Candour can hardly hesitate to sum +up his character in the vulgar but expressive pollysyllable +[pp. 86-87].</p></div><p><span class='pagenum'>– vii –</span></p> + +<p>Readily available facts support some of the central assertions +in this rather heated description of the inception of the +<i>Deformities</i>. Specifically, as readers of Boswell's <i>Life</i> may recall, +Johnson must be considered a—if not the—principal patron +of the Scotsman William Shaw's <i>Analysis of the Gaelic Language</i>: +he wrote the official proposals for the work, he solicited subscribers +to it, and he received from the grateful author a public +acknowledgement (in the "Introduction") that "To the advice and +encouragement of Dr. Johnson, the friend of letters and humanity, +the public is indebted for these sheets."<a href="#Footnote_13" class="fnanchor">13</a> It is probable, too, +that he examined the book at least cursorily<a href="#Footnote_14" class="fnanchor">14</a> and that in doing +so he caught sight of one or more of the references to Ossian's +poetry, perhaps including the "specimen" on pages 145-149. +Moreover, in the pamphlet Callender mentions, entitled <i>An Enquiry +into the Authenticity of the Poems Ascribed to Ossian</i> +(1781), Shaw, setting out to demolish the arguments favoring the +ostensible origins of the purported translations, accords (p. 2) +Johnson pride of place in starting "objections" to the poems and +quotes (pp. 6-12) approvingly first a lengthy passage from <i>A +Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland</i> (1775) and then Johnson's +famous letter to James Macpherson. In addition, Boswell records +Johnson's later assistance to Shaw in composing a reply to John +Clark's pro-Ossian <i>Answer to Mr. Shaw's Inquiry</i> (1781).<a href="#Footnote_15" class="fnanchor">15</a> But +to admit all this is scarcely to "convict" Johnson of a deliberate +"<i>intention to deceive</i>." On the contrary, since by 1778 his scepticism +regarding the Ossianic writings was widely known, his +<i>Journey</i> having appeared three years earlier, it could be argued +that his patronage of Shaw's <i>Analysis</i> revealed a degree of understanding +and tolerance not always associated with his name.</p> + +<p>For the irate Callender, however, such "shameful" conduct +demanded countermeasures—even by "a private individual, without +interest or connections." The self-appointed champion both +of "virtue" and also of "a world ... weary of" the culprit's +"arrogant pedantry" and "officious malice," he hoped "to humble +and reform" Johnson by "glean[ing] the tithe of" his "absurdities," +which, Callender declares, illustrate, among other defects, +Johnson's "prolixity," "corruptions of our language," "want of +general learning," "antipathy to rival merit," "paralytick reasoning," +"adherence to contradictions," "defiance of decency," and +"contempt of truth" (pp. 87-88).<span class='pagenum'>– viii –</span></p> + +<p>After garnering the supposed proofs of these multitudinous +"deformities," Callender published his book at Edinburgh (where +it was sold by "W. Creech") in the early part of 1782.<a href="#Footnote_16" class="fnanchor">16</a> The +pamphlet, priced at a shilling and consisting of a two-page introduction +and sixty-three pages of text, was also sold at London +by "T. Longman, and J. Stockdale."<a href="#Footnote_17" class="fnanchor">17</a> Towards the end of the +same year (probably in December),<a href="#Footnote_18" class="fnanchor">18</a> encouraged by the initial +"reception," he brought out a second, enlarged edition of the +work, which he had "perused ... with honest attention, from the +first line to the last, that he might endeavour to supply its deficiencies, +and to correct its errors" (p. vi). Selling for "eighteen +pence"<a href="#Footnote_19" class="fnanchor">19</a> and appearing at both Edinburgh and London, this edition +includes a separate preface and comes to a total of eighty-nine +pages. We have chosen it as the text for the present reproduction +of the <i>Deformities</i>.</p> + +<p>Callender's very limited powers of ridicule and exposure reside +largely in his amassment of material, not in his ability to +arrange and synthesize that material. Indeed, one looks in vain +at the work for anything more than the most obvious and elementary +form of organization. The Preface begins with brief general +remarks on "man's" incapacity to "reform" his "follies" and the +"prejudice" and "good nature" of the "public" respecting this +human frailty, offers "Dr. Samuel Johnson" as a capital example +of the general observation, proceeds to "enquire" how "such a +man crawled to the summit of classical reputation," and concludes, +rather abruptly, with a short postcript on the second edition of +the <i>Deformities</i> itself. The Introduction stresses the enormous +differences that, according to Callender, often exist between a +man's words and deeds—particularly, so the reader is told repeatedly +if a bit obliquely, between Johnson's writings (especially +the <i>Dictionary</i>) and actions.</p> + +<p>The body of the pamphlet may be divided into five unequal +parts. In the first (pp. 11-15), Callender launches a freewheeling +attack on Johnson, accusing him of "ill-nature," a revengeful +spirit, peevishness, and insolence (among other lamentable traits), +and announces his chosen mode of chastisement: "From the +Doctor's volumes I am to select some passages, illustrate them +with a few observations, and submit them to the reader's opinion." +In the second (pp. 15-47), he presents a disconnected string of<span class='pagenum'>– ix –</span> +quotations drawn from a number of Johnson's works and embellished +with caustic strictures on their creator's presumed moral, +intellectual, and literary shortcomings. In the third and longest +section (pp. 47-82), separated from the second by a small +printer's device, Callender, after "quoting [pp. 47-51] the remarks +already made by a judicious friend,<a href="#Footnote_20" class="fnanchor">20</a> on this subject," +begins a series of disjointed, angry comments on the supposed +weaknesses of "the Doctor's English Dictionary." Thirty-one +pages later, having vented his ire on the choice and definitions +of hundreds of words in the <i>Dictionary</i>, he "take[s] leave" of +the "enormous compilation," stigmatized as "perhaps ... the +strangest farrago which pedantry ever produced," and "return[s]" +briefly, in part four (pp. 82-86; set off from part three by another +small device), "to the rest of" Johnson's publications, extracts +from which he again employs as a means of exhibiting his subject's +supposed faults. Finally, he brings the rambling essay to +a close (pp. 86-89) by recounting its origins, repeating his principal +charges against Johnson, and reasserting his hopes for the +Doctor's "reformation."</p> + +<p>Although it contains some lively reading (with the author +himself being the center of our interest about as often as his subject) +and should certainly be readily accessible to students of +eighteenth-century literature, the <i>Deformities</i> merits only restricted +attention as a valid critique of Johnson's character and +writings. Ostensibly employing, by and large, an inductive argument, +it professes to demonstrate the pronounced ethical and +mental flaws of the Great Cham, who enjoys, so Callender freely +confesses, an unrivalled reputation among his contemporaries +for his achievements in letters and lexicography. Besides the +deplorable qualities mentioned above and excluding for the moment +a consideration of those most evident in the <i>Dictionary</i>, Johnson's +faults are alleged to include dishonesty, pride, vulgarity, slovenliness, +dullness, contempt for other persons, prejudice (especially +against the Scots), ingratitude, "gross expressions," turgid language, +and, above all, ignorance, "nonsense," and countless inconsistencies. +To this sweeping broadside of invective, the +modern reader must respond with steady, sometimes amused, +sometimes annoyed disbelief. He recognizes, to be sure, certain +points of likeness between Callender's abusive imputations and +(say) Boswell's highly laudatory portrait. But the former's<span class='pagenum'>– x –</span> +accusations are so irresponsible and intemperate, so obviously +the outburst of a quivering Scotsman's intense indignation, and +the evidence adduced is so often wrenched from its context and +misapplied, that the reader inevitably finds himself a partisan of +Johnson even when he might be occasionally inclined to admit +the tenability of Callender's criticism.</p> + +<p>Among Johnson's works, the <i>Dictionary</i>, as already indicated, +bears the brunt of Callender's heaviest, most sustained assault. +Its principal "deformities," to judge from the amount of space devoted +to them, occur in its definitions and word-list. In Callender's +opinion, "most of the definitions ... may be divided into three +classes; the erroneous, œnigmatical, and superfluous" (p. 58); +many of them explicate "indecent," "blackguard" expressions +(pp. 54, 74); and some, exemplifying the lexicographer's "political +tenets," are downright "seditious and impudent" (p. 13). Of +the word-list itself, probably "two thousand" members, comprising +a "profusion of trash," are "not to be found at all in any other +book" (p. 70).</p> + +<p>A short introduction is scarcely the place to examine the +presumed existence of these defects in the <i>Dictionary</i>. Nevertheless, +a few facts, based on a random sampling of passages +in the <i>Deformities</i>, may provide a partial historical perspective +for Callender's censures. Of the group of 210 words on pages +71-72 whose real currency he doubts or denies, 190 also appear +in the second edition (1736) of Nathan Bailey's <i>Dictionarium +Britannicum</i>, a copy of which Johnson interleaved and used as +he compiled his own <i>Dictionary</i>. Equally revealing, the <i>OED</i> +includes 204 of the 210, the second edition of <i>Webster's International</i> +158, and the third edition 108. Again, of the 65 words +on pages 51-53 whose definitions Callender objects to, 48 also +appear, with comparable explanations, in Bailey's dictionary. +Finally, an unsystematic comparison of Bailey's and Johnson's +works reveals a much higher incidence of so-called "indecent"—at +least sexual—terms in the former than in the latter. The +author of the <i>Deformities</i>, it is quite obvious, knew what he disliked +about the <i>Dictionary</i>; when pressing his strictures against +the book, however, as when mounting his other attacks on Johnson, +his violent passions rode roughshod over his faint pretensions to +fairness and objectivity.</p> + +<p> +University of Chicago<br /> +Findlay College<br /> +</p> +</div> + + +<p> </p> +<p><span class='pagenum'>– xi –</span></p> +<h4>NOTES TO THE INTRODUCTION</h4> + + +<div class="footnote"> +<p><a name="Footnote_1" id="Footnote_1"></a><span class="label">1.</span> The <i>DNB</i> and the <i>DAB</i> both contain accounts of Callender (complete, +of course, with lists of their primary sources) to which we are indebted +for various details in our own sketch of his life. However, +neither mentions his pamphlets on Johnson.</p> + +<p><a name="Footnote_2" id="Footnote_2"></a><span class="label">2.</span> Quoted from Hamilton by David Loth in <i>Alexander Hamilton: Portrait +of a Prodigy</i> (New York, 1939), p. 249.</p> + +<p><a name="Footnote_3" id="Footnote_3"></a><span class="label">3.</span> From the Richmond <i>Recorder</i> as printed in the New York <i>Evening +Post</i>, 10 September 1802; quoted from <i>Jefferson Reader</i>, ed. Francis +Coleman Rosenberger (New York, 1953), pp. 109-111.</p> + +<p><a name="Footnote_4" id="Footnote_4"></a><span class="label">4.</span> There were apparently three editions of <i>A Critical Review</i>: (1) Edinburgh: +Printed for J. Dickson, and W. Creech, 1783. (2) Second Edition. +London. Printed for the Author, and sold by T. Cadell and J. +Stockdale; at Edinburgh, by J. Dickson and W. Creech, 1783. (3) +London. Printed for R. Rusted, 1787. We are indebted to the Pierpont +Morgan Library for a photographic reproduction of its copy of +the first edition of the pamphlet.</p> + +<p><a name="Footnote_5" id="Footnote_5"></a><span class="label">5.</span> Brit. Mus. Addit. MS 6401, f. 175 b. Part of this letter is quoted by +L. F. Powell in Boswell's <i>Life of Johnson</i>, IV, 499 (cited hereafter +as <i>Life</i>).</p> + +<p><a name="Footnote_6" id="Footnote_6"></a><span class="label">6.</span> Writing to Boswell on 28 March 1782, Johnson remarks: "The Beauties +of Johnson are said to have got money to the collector; if the +'Deformities' have the same success, I shall be still a more extensive +benefactor" (<i>The Letters of Samuel Johnson</i>, ed. R. W. Chapman +[Oxford, 1952], II, 475).</p> + +<p><a name="Footnote_7" id="Footnote_7"></a><span class="label">7.</span> <i>Life of Samuel Johnson, LL.D. With Critical Observations on His +Works</i> (3rd ed.; Edinburgh, 1815), p. 231. Anderson is apparently +incorrect in saying that Callender was Thomson's nephew.</p> + +<p><a name="Footnote_8" id="Footnote_8"></a><span class="label">8.</span> There is apparently no copy of <i>A Critical Review</i> in the Bodleian.</p> + +<p><a name="Footnote_9" id="Footnote_9"></a><span class="label">9.</span> In his Introduction to a recent reprint (New York, 1965) of John Rae's +<i>Life of Adam Smith</i> (1895), Jacob Viner (who expresses his indebtedness +to "Herman W. Liebert for bringing <i>A Critical Review</i> to my attention +and for warning me that J. T. Callender, its author, was probably +also the author of <i>Deformities of Dr. Samuel Johnson</i>") concludes that +the quotation from John Callander in <i>A Critical Review</i> is sufficient +"to acquit John Callander of any responsibility for authorship of either +<i>Deformities of Samuel Johnson</i> or <i>A Critical Review</i>" (p. 68; see also +pp. 62-69).<span class='pagenum'>– xii –</span></p> + +<p><a name="Footnote_10" id="Footnote_10"></a><span class="label">10.</span> William P. Courtney and D. Nichol Smith, <i>A Bibliography of Samuel +Johnson</i> (Oxford, 1915; reissued with facsimiles, 1925), p. 136.</p> + +<p><a name="Footnote_11" id="Footnote_11"></a><span class="label">11.</span> <i>Life</i>, IV, 499. Callender's letter itself, reproduced in the <i>R. B. +Adam Library</i> (III, 48), is now in the Hyde Collection. Dr. Powell, +like Robert Anderson, says that James Thomson Callender was a +nephew of the poet James Thomson, and gives the <i>DNB</i> as the source +of his information.</p> + +<p><a name="Footnote_12" id="Footnote_12"></a><span class="label">12.</span> In 1962, one of the present writers, J. E. Congleton, published an +article on "James Thomson Callender, Johnson and Jefferson" +(<i>Johnsonian Studies</i> [Cairo, 1962], pp. 161-172) which forms the +basis of a part of the present introduction.</p> + +<p><a name="Footnote_13" id="Footnote_13"></a><span class="label">13.</span> <i>Life</i>, III, 106, 107, 214, 488.</p> + +<p><a name="Footnote_14" id="Footnote_14"></a><span class="label">14.</span> <i>Ibid.</i>, III, 106.</p> + +<p><a name="Footnote_15" id="Footnote_15"></a><span class="label">15.</span> <i>Ibid.</i>, IV, 252-253, 526.</p> + +<p><a name="Footnote_16" id="Footnote_16"></a><span class="label">16.</span> The work appeared well before 28 March 1782 when Johnson referred +to it in the letter of Boswell cited above in note 6. In the <i>Life</i> (IV, +148), Boswell remarks that he had previously "informed" Johnson +"that as 'The Beauties of Johnson' had been published in London, +some obscure scribbler had published at Edinburgh, what he called +'The Deformities of Johnson.'"</p> + +<p><a name="Footnote_17" id="Footnote_17"></a><span class="label">17.</span> On p. 63, Callender calls the work "a shilling pamphlet." We are +grateful to the Pierpont Morgan Library for a photographic reproduction +of its copy of the first edition of the <i>Deformities</i>.</p> + +<p><a name="Footnote_18" id="Footnote_18"></a><span class="label">18.</span> Since its Preface is dated 21 November 1782, the second edition was +presumably published after that time but before the beginning of 1783.</p> + +<p><a name="Footnote_19" id="Footnote_19"></a><span class="label">19.</span> At the end of the second edition, Callender declares: "To collect +every particle of <i>inanity</i> which may be found in our <i>patriot's</i> works +is infinitely beyond the limits of an eighteen-pence pamphlet" (p. 88).</p> + +<p><a name="Footnote_20" id="Footnote_20"></a><span class="label">20.</span> In a footnote on p. 51, Callender tells us that the "remarks" of the +"judicious friend" appear in No. 12 of the <i>Weekly Mirror</i>, a periodical +which, according to the <i>CBEL</i> (II, 665, 685), was published at Edinburgh +from 22 September 1780 through 23 March 1781, for a total of 26 +numbers; the editor was apparently James Tytler, the publisher J. +Mennons.</p> +</div> + + +<p> </p> +<h3>BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE</h3> + + +<p class="poem"><big>The text of this facsimile reprint of the second +edition of Callender's <i>Deformities</i> (1782) is published +with the kind permission of the University +of Chicago Library.</big></p> + + + + +<hr style="width: 100%;" /> + + + +<h1>DEFORMITIES</h1> + +<h4>O F</h4> + +<h2><span class="smcap">Dr</span> SAMUEL JOHNSON.</h2> + +<h4>SELECTED FROM HIS WORKS.</h4> + +<p class="center"><i>Nihil rerum mortalium tam instabile ac fluxum est, quam fama</i>—<span class="smcap">Tacitus.</span></p> + +<div class="poem"> +<p>The diversion of <i>baiting</i> an <span class="smcap">Author</span> has the sanction of all ages +and nations, and is more lawful than the sport of teizing other <i>animals</i> +because for the most part <small>HE</small> comes voluntarily to the stake.</p> + +<p style='text-align: right'><span class="smcap">Rambler</span>, No. 176.</p> +</div> + +<h4>S E C O N D E D I T I O N.</h4> + + +<h4>L O N D O N:<br /> +<small>Printed for the <span class="smcap">Author</span>; and sold by <span class="smcap">J. Stockdale;<br /> +and<br /> +W. Creech</span>, Edinburgh.<br /> +M.DCC.LXXXII.</small></h4> + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_iii" id="Page_iii">( iii )</a></span></p> +<h2>P R E F A C E</h2> + +<h4>TO THE SECOND EDITION.</h4> + + +<p>Man is endowed with sagacity sufficient to discover +his errors, but seldom has fortitude to +forsake them. Hence it arises that even the weakest +of the species can point out the follies of his companions, +and fancies that he can reform his own. We +are amazed that a being like ourselves should thus +deliberately act below the dignity of reason, but we +forget that our own conduct may also be reviewed +with contempt and pity.</p> + +<p>The world is buried in prejudice: Every department +of knowledge is deeply infected by its fatal +poison. Thus we frequently respect or reprobate a +book without a perusal, merely on account of the +Author's name. Not one in ten thousand of his panegyrists +hath ever comprehended the system of Newton.—What +then is the value of <i>their</i> approbation? +The public have long heard that a late English Dictionary +is a most masterly performance; but is there a +single man in England who ever read it half through? +No. The school-boy imagines that it is above his capacity: +The man of letters feels it to be below his; +but being considered as a fashionable decoration in a +closet of books, it is bought without the least chance +of being perused, and <small>WE</small> (for the <i>first</i> time to be sure) +have been admiring we know not what.</p> + +<p>However as the variety of our sentiments is without +end, it often happens, that while a philosopher +is celebrated by one part of his readers, he is despised +by some of the rest. Almost all the great +authors of the present age have been more bitterly<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_iv" id="Page_iv">( iv )</a></span> +reviled than any other subjects of England, the +Ministry excepted. But in a matter so frivolous +as the merit of a book, the public are seldom guilty +of gross injustice. Indeed, when an acute historian +continues, in contempt of his own conviction, to persist +in a falsehood, merely because he hath once affirmed +it—when an elegant poet, in search of sublimity, +soars, or rather sinks beyond the kenn of common +sense<a name="FNanchor_1_1" id="FNanchor_1_1"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_1" class="fnanchor">[1]</a>—when an astronomer treats his antagonist like +a felon—when an advocate of piety impregnates his +pages with slander, scurrility, and treason—then the +world may be pardoned though they abate something +of their veneration for the dignity of the learned.</p> + +<p>We can hardly produce a stronger evidence of the +prejudice, and the good nature of the public, than +their indulgence to the foibles of Dr Samuel Johnson; +nor a stronger evidence of the force of self-conceit, +than that disdain of admonition which forms the capital +feature in his character. He seems to fancy that +his opinions cannot be disputed; and many of his admirers +acquiesce in his idea; yet his volumes are of +no great value; his personal appearance cannot much +recommend him; his conversation would shock the +rudest savage. His ignorance, his misconduct, and +his success, are a striking proof that the race is not +always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong. Let +us enquire by what singular series of accidents, such a +man crawled to the summit of classical reputation?</p> + +<p>Most of his verses were among his early productions, +and they merit abundant praise. His account +of Savage compelled our approbation, and discovered +a species of excellence but very little known +in the annals of English literature. The force of language +and of thought which he displayed in the +Rambler, extended his reputation, and atoned for<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_v" id="Page_v">( v )</a></span> +his numerous imperfections. He had by this time +engaged to write an English Dictionary. Wise men +are known by their work, says the Proverb. After +many years he produced a performance of which I +shall only say what can easily be proved, that few +books are so unworthy of the title which they bear, +and so void of every thing intellectual.</p> + +<p>But Dr Johnson's credit was supported by something +very different from intrinsic merit. As he was +not worth a shilling, his work was printed and patronized +by a phalanx of booksellers; and we can have +no doubt that much of his success was owing to their +vigorous but interested exertions. He had likewise +other assistance, which would have been more than +sufficient to support the reputation of an ordinary +writer. He was protected by Mr. Garrick, the darling +of mankind. England herself never produced a +more generous friend: And though he seldom wrote +lessons of morality, nothing could exceed the clearness +of his understanding, but the benevolence of his +heart. By him, it is probable, Dr Johnson was +introduced to the late Earl of Chesterfield; a Minister, +a man of letters, and a friend to merit. His Lordship +was persuaded to celebrate, by anticipation, the +merits of the Doctor's Dictionary<a name="FNanchor_2_2" id="FNanchor_2_2"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_2" class="fnanchor">[2]</a>, and his condescension +is said to have been repaid by the most ungrateful +insolence. Of these two illustrious men it +may almost be affirmed that their influence was universal, +and when supported by the weight of the +booksellers, opposition sunk before it. The Doctor +soon after received a pension from the most unfortunate +of all Statesmen, a Statesman whom North Britons +ought to mention as seldom as possible, and his +name acquired additional splendour from the dignity +of Independence.</p> + +<p>Since that period his reputation, or at least his po<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_vi" id="Page_vi">( vi )</a></span>pularity, +has been rather on the decline. His edition +of Shakespeare was with difficulty forced upon the +world by every artifice of trade. His political pieces +have long since insured the detestation of his countrymen, +a few individuals excepted. His Tour, considered +as a whole, is a ridiculous performance. His +lives of English Poets abound with judicious observations; +but the great misfortune is, that our historian +can very seldom conceal the narrowness of his +soul.</p> + +<p>Of the present trifle the Author has very little to +say. The reception which it at first met with has +induced him to risk a second edition. He has perused +it with honest attention, from the first line to +the last, that he might endeavour to supply its deficiencies, +and to correct its errors. In the execution +of this task, he has frequently had occasion to remark, +that it is more easy to demolish a palace than to erect +a cottage.</p> + +<p> <span class="smcap">Edinburgh</span>, <span class="rbrace">}</span><br /> +<i>Nov.</i> 21, 1782.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_vii" id="Page_vii">( vii )</a></span></p> +<h2>I N T R O D U C T I O N.</h2> + + +<p>When a boy peruses a book with pleasure, his +admiration riseth immediately from the work +to its author. His fancy fondly ranks his favourite +with the wise, and the virtuous. He glows with a +lover's impatience, to reach the presence of this <i>superior +being</i>, to drink of science at the fountain-head, +to complete his ideas at once, and riot in all the luxuries +of learning.</p> + +<p>The novice unhappily presumes, that men who command +the passions of others cannot be slaves to their +own: That a historian must feel the worth of justice +and tenderness, while he tells us, how kings and +conquerors are commonly the burden and the curse of +society: That an assertor of public freedom will never +become the dupe of flattery, and the pimp of oppression: +That the founder of a system cannot want +words to explain it: <i>That</i> the compiler of a <i>dictionary</i> +has at least a common degree of knowledge: <i>That</i> an +inventor of <i>new</i> terms can tell what they mean: <i>That</i> +he, who refines and fixes the language of empires, is +able to converse, without the pertness of a pedant, +or the vulgarity of a porter: <i>That</i> a preacher of morality +will blush to persist in vindictive, deliberate, +and detected falsehoods: <i>That</i> he who totters on the +brink of eternity will speak with caution and humanity +of the dead: And <i>that</i> a traveller, who pretends +to veracity, dares not avow contradictions.</p> + +<p>But in learning, as in life, much of our happiness +flows from deception. Ignorance, the parent of wonder, +is often the parent of esteem and love. While<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_viii" id="Page_viii">( viii )</a></span> +devouring Horace we venerate the Deserter of Brutus, +and the Slave of Cæsar. Transported by his sublime +eloquence, the reader of Cicero forgets that +Cicero himself was a plagiarist and a coward: That +Rome was but a den of robbers: That Cataline resembled +the rest; and that this rebel was only revenging +the blood of butchered nations, of Samnium, of +Epirus, of Carthage, and of—<span class="smcap">Hannibal</span>.</p> + +<p>'The laurels which human praise confers are +withered and blasted by the unworthiness of those +who wear them.' There is often a curious contrast +between an author and his books. The mildest, the +politest, the wisest, and the most <i>worthy</i> man alive, +pens five hundred pages to display the pleasures of +friendship and the beauties of benevolence; but alas! +he is a theorist only, for his sympathy never cost him a +shilling. A party-tool talks of public spirit. A pedant +commands our tears. A pensioner inveighs against +pensions; and a bankrupt preaches public œconomy. +The philosopher quotes Horace, while he defrauds his +valet. A mimick of Richardson, is a domestic tyrant: +A Sydenham, the rendezvous of diseases: A declaimer +against envy, of all men the most invidious. The +satirist has not a reformer's virtues. The poet of love +and friendship is without a mistress, or a friend; while +a time-server celebrates the valour of heroes, and exults +in the <i>freedom</i> of England. Like Penelope, most +writers employ part of their time to undo the labours +of the rest. Judging by their lives one would think it +were their chief study to render learning ridiculous. We +lose all respect for teachers, who, when the lesson is +ended, are 'no wiser or better than common men.' +To be convinced that books are trifles, let us only +remark how little good they do, and how little those, +who love them, love each other. The monopolists of +literary fame, for the most part, regard a rival as an +enemy. Their mutual hostilities, like those of aquatick +animals, are unavoidable and constant; and their<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_ix" id="Page_ix">( ix )</a></span> +voracity differs from that of the shark, but as a half-devoured +carcase, from a murdered reputation. The +existence of many books depends on the ruin of +some of the rest; yet, with our <i>English Dictionary</i>, a +few <i>immortal</i> compositions are to live unwounded by +the shafts of envy, and to descend in a torrent of applause +from one century to another. A thousand of +their critics will exist and be forgotten; a thousand of +their imitators will sink into contempt; but <small>THEY</small> +shall defy the force of time; continue to flourish thro' +every <i>fashion</i> of philosophy, and, like Egyptian pyramids, +perish but in the ruins of the globe.</p> + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_11" id="Page_11">( 11 )</a></span></p> +<h2>D E F O R M I T I E S, &c.</h2> + + +<p>In the number of men who dishonour their own genius, +ought to be ranked Dr Samuel Johnson; for +his abilities and learning are not accompanied by candour +and generosity. His life of Pomfret concludes +with this maxim, that 'he who pleases many, must +have merit;' yet, in defiance of his own rule, the +Doctor has, a thousand times, attempted to prove, +that they who please many, have <i>no</i> merit. His invidious +and revengeful remark on Chesterfield, would +have disgraced any other man. He said, and nobody +but himself would have said it, that Churchill was a +shallow fellow. And he once told some of his admirers, +that <span class="smcap">Swift</span> was a <i>shallow</i>, a <i>very shallow</i> fellow: +reminding us of the Lilliputian who drew <i>his</i> bow to +Gulliver<a name="FNanchor_3_3" id="FNanchor_3_3"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_3" class="fnanchor">[3]</a>. For the memory of this man, who may<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_12" id="Page_12">( 12 )</a></span> +be classed with Cato and Phocion, the Doctor feels +no tenderness or respect. And for that<a name="FNanchor_4_4" id="FNanchor_4_4"></a><a href="#Footnote_4_4" class="fnanchor">[4]</a>, and other +critical blasphemies, he has undergone innumerable +floggings. No writer of this nation has made more +noise. None has discovered more contempt for other +men's reputations, or more confidence in his own. I +would humbly submit a few hints for his improvement, +if he be not 'too <ins class="mycorr" title="Missing period added">old to learn.</ins>' And, whatever +freedoms I take, the Doctor himself may be quoted +as a precedent for insolent invective, and brutal +reproach. He has told us<a name="FNanchor_5_5" id="FNanchor_5_5"></a><a href="#Footnote_5_5" class="fnanchor">[5]</a>, that 'the two lowest of +all human beings are, a scribbler for a party, and a +commissioner of excise.' This very man was himself +the hired scribbler of a party; and why should a commissioner +of excise be one of the meanest of mankind? +In the preface to his octavo Dictionary, the Doctor +affirms, that, 'by the labours of all his predecessors, +not even the <i>lowest</i> expectation can be gratified.' +The author of a revisal of Shakespeare<a name="FNanchor_6_6" id="FNanchor_6_6"></a><a href="#Footnote_6_6" class="fnanchor">[6]</a> attacks (he +says) with '<i>gloomy malignity</i>, as if he were dragging +to justice an assassin or incendiary. He bites like a +viper, and would be glad to leave inflammations +and gangrene behind him.' For this shocking language, +which could have been answered by nothing +but a blow, the <i>primum mobile</i>, perhaps, was, that the +critic had dedicated his book to Lord Kaims, (a Scotsman, +and another very <i>shallow</i> fellow) 'as the truest +judge, and most intelligent admirer of Shakespeare.'<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_13" id="Page_13">( 13 )</a></span></p> + +<p>His treatment of Colley Cibber is, if possible, worse. +That great ornament of the stage was a man of genius, +at least equal to Dr Johnson—but they had a +quarrel, and though Cibber has been more than twenty +years buried, the Doctor, in his life of Pope, studies +to revenge it. His expressions are gross. 'In +the Dunciad, among other <i>worthless</i> scribblers he +(Pope) had mentioned <i>Cibber</i>. The dishonour of +being shewn as <i>Cibber's</i> antagonist could never be +compensated by <ins class="mycorr" title="Missing period added">the victory.</ins> <i>Cibber</i> had nothing to +lose—The shafts of satire were directed in vain against +<i>Cibber</i>, being repelled by the impenetrable +impudence,' &c.<a name="FNanchor_7_7" id="FNanchor_7_7"></a><a href="#Footnote_7_7" class="fnanchor">[7]</a> We have been deafened about +the Doctor's private virtues; of which these passages +are a very poor evidence.</p> + +<p>It is believed by some, that Dr Johnson's <i>admirable</i> +Dictionary is the most capital monument of human +genius; that the studies of Archimedes and Newton +are but like a feather in the scale with this amazing +work; that he has given our language a stability, which, +without him, it had never known; that he has performed +alone, what, in other nations, whole academies +fail to perform; and that as the fruit of <i>his</i> +learning and sagacity, our compositions will be classical +and immortal. This may be true; but the book displays +many proofs or his <i>ill-nature</i>, and evinces what +I want to insist on, viz. that <i>he who despises politeness +cannot deserve it</i>. For his seditious and impudent definitions<a name="FNanchor_8_8" id="FNanchor_8_8"></a><a href="#Footnote_8_8" class="fnanchor">[8]</a> +he would, in Queen Anne's reign, have<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_14" id="Page_14">( 14 )</a></span> +had a fair chance of mounting the pillory. Hume, +Smith, and Chesterfield may be quoted to prove, that +Walpole and Excise were improper objects of execration; +but an <i>emanation</i> of royal munificence has, of +late, relaxed the Doctor's <i>frigorific</i> virtue; and, in his +<i><ins class="mycorr" title="Initial F not italicised in original">False</ins> Alarm</i>, he affirms, that our government approaches +nearer to perfection, <i>than any other that fiction +has feigned, or history recorded</i>. This is going pretty +far; but the peevish, though <i>incorruptible</i> patriot, +proceeds a great deal farther. His political pieces +have great elegance and wit; yet, if the tenth part of +what he advances in them be true, his countrymen +are a mob of ignorant, ungrateful, rebellious ruffians. +Every member in Opposition is a fool, a firebrand, +a monster; worse, if that were possible, than Ravillac, +Hambden, or Milton<a name="FNanchor_9_9" id="FNanchor_9_9"></a><a href="#Footnote_9_9" class="fnanchor">[9]</a>. Here is a short specimen:</p> + +<p>'On the original contrivers of mischief let an insulted +nation pour out its vengeance. With whatever +design they have inflamed this pernicious contest, +they are themselves equally detestable. If they +wish success to the colonies, they are <small>TRAITORS</small> to +this country; if they wish their defeat, they are +<small>TRAITORS</small> at once to America and England. To<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_15" id="Page_15">( 15 )</a></span> +them (Mess. Burke & Co.) and them only, must be +imputed the interruption of commerce, and the miseries +of war, the sorrow of those who shall be ruined, +and the blood of those that shall fall<a name="FNanchor_10_10" id="FNanchor_10_10"></a><a href="#Footnote_10_10" class="fnanchor">[10]</a>.'</p> + +<p>From the Doctor's volumes I am to select some passages, +illustrate them with a few observations, and +submit them to the reader's opinion. These pages +aim at <i>perspicacity</i>. They are ambitious to record +<small>TRUTH</small>.</p> + +<p>'He that writes the life of another, is either his +friend or his enemy, and wishes either to exalt his +praise, or aggravate his infamy<a name="FNanchor_11_11" id="FNanchor_11_11"></a><a href="#Footnote_11_11" class="fnanchor">[11]</a>.' The Doctor betrays +a degree of inconsistency incompatible with his +reputed abilities. After such a confession, what +have we to hope for in <i>his</i> lives of English poets?</p> + +<p>Having thus denied veracity both to Plutarch and +<i>himself</i>, this Idler, in the very next page, leaps at +once from the wildest scepticism to the wildest credulity. +The paragraph is too long for insertion; but +the tenor of it is, that 'a man's account of himself, +left behind him unpublished, may be <i>depended on</i>;' +because, 'by self-love all have been so often betrayed, +<i>that</i> (now for the strangest flight of nonsense) all +are on the watch against its artifices.'</p> + +<p>In his Dictionary, <i>temperance</i> is defined to be '<i>moderation +opposed to gluttony and drunkenness</i>.' And he +has since defined 'sobriety or temperance' to be '<i>nothing</i> +but the forbearance of <i>pleasure</i><a name="FNanchor_12_12" id="FNanchor_12_12"></a><a href="#Footnote_12_12" class="fnanchor">[12]</a>.' This maxim +needs no comment.</p> + +<p>'A man will, in the hour of darkness and fatigue, +be content to leave behind him every thing but +<i>himself</i><a name="FNanchor_13_13" id="FNanchor_13_13"></a><a href="#Footnote_13_13" class="fnanchor">[13]</a>.' Here the Doctor supposes, that a person +can leave <i>himself</i> behind <i>himself</i>. When the reader +examines the passage in the original, he will be convinced, +that this cannot be an error of the press only. +Had the Rambler, when he crossed Tweed, left +behind him his pride, his indolence, and his vulga<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_16" id="Page_16">( 16 )</a></span>rity, +he would have returned a much wiser, better, +and happier man than he did.</p> + +<p><i>Form</i>, he explains to be, 'the external appearance +of any thing, shape;' but, when speaking of hills +in the North of Scotland, he says, 'the appearance +is that of matter incapable of <small>FORM</small><a name="FNanchor_14_14" id="FNanchor_14_14"></a><a href="#Footnote_14_14" class="fnanchor">[14]</a>!' He has seen +<i>matter</i>, not only destitute, but incapable of <i>shape</i>. He +has seen an <i>appearance</i> which is incapable of <i>external</i> +appearance. And yet, in the same book, he seems +to regret the weakness of his vision.</p> + +<p>Beauty is 'that assemblage of graces which pleases +the eye.' But, in the Idler<a name="FNanchor_15_15" id="FNanchor_15_15"></a><a href="#Footnote_15_15" class="fnanchor">[15]</a>, he displays his +true idea of beauty; and it is a very lame piece of +philosophy. Judge from a few samples: 'If a man, +born blind, was to recover his sight, and the most +beautiful woman was to be brought before him, he +could not determine whether she was handsome or +not. Nor if the most handsome and most deformed +were produced, could he any better determine +to which he should give the preference, having seen +only these two.' And again, 'as we are then more +accustomed to beauty than deformity, we may conclude +<i>that</i> to be the reason why we approve and +admire it.' Moreover, 'though habit and custom +cannot be said to be the cause<a name="FNanchor_16_16" id="FNanchor_16_16"></a><a href="#Footnote_16_16" class="fnanchor">[16]</a> of beauty, <small>IT</small> is certainly +the cause of our liking it<a name="FNanchor_17_17" id="FNanchor_17_17"></a><a href="#Footnote_17_17" class="fnanchor">[17]</a>. I have no doubt, +but that, if we were more used to deformity than +beauty, deformity would then lose the idea now annexed +to it, and take that of beauty; as if the whole +world should agree that <i>yes</i> and <i>no</i> should change +their meanings, <i>yes</i> would then deny, and <i>no</i> would +affirm.' This is such a perfection of nonsense, that +the reader will, perhaps, think it a forgery; but he +will find it <i>verbatim et literatim</i>, and the whole number +is in the same stile.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_17" id="Page_17">( 17 )</a></span></p> + +<p>'Swift in his <i>petty</i> treatise on the English language, +allows that new words <i>must</i> sometimes be introduced, +but proposes that <i>none</i> should be suffered to become +obsolete<a name="FNanchor_18_18" id="FNanchor_18_18"></a><a href="#Footnote_18_18" class="fnanchor">[18]</a>.' The Doctor has not given a fair +quotation from Swift. One would imagine that Swift +had proposed to retain every word which is to be +found in any of our popular authors, but he neither +said nor meant any such thing. His words are these: +'<ins class="mycorr" title="Missing singlequote added at the end">They'</ins> (the members of the proposed society) 'will +find many words <i>that deserve to be utterly thrown out +of our language</i>!' And the Dean says nothing afterwards +which infers a contradiction<a name="FNanchor_19_19" id="FNanchor_19_19"></a><a href="#Footnote_19_19" class="fnanchor">[19]</a>.</p> + +<p>In his account of Lyttleton, the Doctor's good nature +is evident. He speaks not a word as to the merit +of the history of Henry II. but—'It was published +with such anxiety as only <i>vanity</i> can dictate.' +We are next entertained with a page of dirty anecdotes +concerning its publication, which the Doctor +seems to have picked up from some printer's journeyman. +'The Persian Letters have something of that +indistinct and headstrong ardour for liberty which +a man of genius <i>always</i> catches when he enters the +world, and <i>always</i> suffers to cool as he passes forward.' +Of the admired monody to the memory of +Lady Lyttleton, we are told only that it is <i>long</i>. 'His +dialogues of the dead were very eagerly read, tho' +the production rather, as it seems of leisure than of +study, rather effusions than compositions. The +names of his persons too often enable the reader to +anticipate their conversation; and when they have +met, they too often part without a conclusion.' +These remarks apply with peculiar justice to Dr Johnson's +dictionary, for that work is an <i>effusion</i> rather than a<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_18" id="Page_18">( 18 )</a></span> +<i>composition</i>. His reader is for the most part able to anticipate +his definitions, and they generally end without +conclusion. Lord Lyttleton's poems 'have <i>nothing</i> +to be <i>despised</i> and <i>little</i> to be <i>admired</i>.' But +here, as usual, the Doctor contradicts himself, and in +the very next line 'of his Progress of Love, <i>it is sufficient +blame to say</i> that it is pastoral. His blank +verse in Blenheim has neither much force, nor much +elegance. His little performances, whether songs +or epigrams, are sometimes spritely, and sometimes +<i>insipid</i>'—and of course <i>despicable</i>. The candid and +accurate author of the Rambler has forgot the existence +of that beautiful blossom of sensibility, that pure +effusion of friendship, the prologue to Coriolanus.</p> + +<p>The life of Dr Young has been written by a lawyer, +who conveys the meanest thoughts in the meanest +language. His stile is dry, stiff, grovelling, and +impure. His anecdotes and ideas, are evidently the +cud of Dr Johnson's conversation. He continues in +the same fretful tone from the first line to the last. He +is at once most contemptuous and contemptible. +Whatever he says is insipid or disgusting. He is the +bad imitator of a bad original; and an honest man +cannot peruse his libel without indignation. He steps +out of his way to remind us of Milton's <i>corporal correction</i>, +a story fabricated, as is well known, by his +Employer. His ignorance has already been illustrated +in a periodical pamphlet. Johnson himself, with +all his imperfections, is often as far superior to this +unhappy penman, as the author of the Night-Thoughts +is superior to Johnson. And yet this critical +assassin, this literary jackall, is celebrated by the +Doctor<a name="FNanchor_20_20" id="FNanchor_20_20"></a><a href="#Footnote_20_20" class="fnanchor">[20]</a>. <i>Pares cum paribus facile congregantur.</i><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_19" id="Page_19">( 19 )</a></span></p> + +<p>'Dryden's poem on the death of Mrs Killigrew is +undoubtedly the noblest ode that our language ever +has produced. The first part flows with a torrent +of enthusiasm. All the stanzas, indeed, are not equal.' +He proceeds to compare it with an imperial +crown, &c. But, a little after, 'the ode on St Cecilia's +day is allowed <i>to stand without a rival</i><a name="FNanchor_21_21" id="FNanchor_21_21"></a><a href="#Footnote_21_21" class="fnanchor">[21]</a>.' +These are his identical words; and his admirers may +reconcile them if they can. Indeed, he seems ashamed +of his own inconsistency, and is ready to relapse; +but thinks, upon the whole, that Alexander's Feast +'may, <i>perhaps</i>, be pronounced superior to the ode +on Killigrew.' Dr Johnson is said to be the greatest +critic of his age; yet the verses on Mrs Killigrew +are beneath all criticism; and, perhaps, no person ever +read them through, except their author, and himself.</p> + +<p>Dryden's fable 'of the Cock and Fox seems hardly worth +the labour of <i>rejuvenescence</i><a name="FNanchor_22_22" id="FNanchor_22_22"></a><a href="#Footnote_22_22" class="fnanchor">[22]</a>.' Some <i>nar<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_20" id="Page_20">( 20 )</a></span>cotic</i> +seems to have <i>refrigerated</i> the red liquor which circulates +in the Doctor's veins<a name="FNanchor_23_23" id="FNanchor_23_23"></a><a href="#Footnote_23_23" class="fnanchor">[23]</a>, and to have <i>hebetated</i> and +<i>obtunded</i> his powers of <i>excogitation</i><a name="FNanchor_24_24" id="FNanchor_24_24"></a><a href="#Footnote_24_24" class="fnanchor">[24]</a>, for elegance and +wit never met more happily than here. Peruse only +the first page of this poem, and then judge. The +nonsense which has been written by critics is, in +quantity and absurdity, beyond all conception. Perhaps +his admirers may answer, that my remark is but +the <i>ramification</i> of envy, the <i>intumescence</i> of ill-nature, +the <i>exacerbation</i> of 'gloomy malignity.' However, +it would not be amiss to commit that page of <i>inanity</i> +to the power of <i>cremation</i>; and let not his fondest idolaters +confide in its <i>indiscerptibility</i>. In painting +the sentiments and the scenes of common life, to write +English which Englishmen cannot read, is a degree +of insolence hardly known till now, and seems to +be nothing but the poor refuge of pedantic dullness.</p> + +<p>His Abyssinian tale hath many beauties, yet the +characters are insipid, the narrative ridiculous, the +moral invisible, and the reader disappointed. '<i>Intercepting +interruptions</i> and <i>volant</i> animals' are above +common comprehension. The Newtonian system had +reached the happy valley; for its inhabitants talk of +the earth's <i>attraction</i> and the body's <i>gravity</i><a name="FNanchor_25_25" id="FNanchor_25_25"></a><a href="#Footnote_25_25" class="fnanchor">[25]</a>. To +tell a tale is not the Doctor's most happy talent; he +can hardly be proud of his success in <i>that</i> species of +fiction.</p> + +<p>Speaking of Scotland, he says, 'The variety of sun +and shade is here<a name="FNanchor_26_26" id="FNanchor_26_26"></a><a href="#Footnote_26_26" class="fnanchor">[26]</a> utterly unknown. There is no +tree for either shelter or timber. The oak and the +thorn <i>is</i> equally a stranger. They have neither +wood for palisades, nor thorns for hedges. A +tree may be shown in Scotland as a horse in Venice<a name="FNanchor_27_27" id="FNanchor_27_27"></a><a href="#Footnote_27_27" class="fnanchor">[27]</a>.' +An <i>English</i> reader may, perhaps, require to +be told, that there are thousands of trees of all ages<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_21" id="Page_21">( 21 )</a></span> +and dimensions, within a mile of Edinburgh; that +there are numerous and thriving plantations in Fife; +and that, as some of them overshadow part of the +post-road to St Andrew's, the Doctor must have been +blinder than darkness, if he did not see them. But +why would any man travel at all, who is determined +to believe nothing which he <i>hears</i>, and who, at the +same time, cannot <i>see</i> six inches beyond his nose?</p> + +<p>'We are not very sure that the bull is ever <i>without +horns</i>, though we have been told that such bulls +there are<a name="FNanchor_28_28" id="FNanchor_28_28"></a><a href="#Footnote_28_28" class="fnanchor">[28]</a>.' Who are the <i>we</i> he refers to? and +who but the Doctor ever started so weak a question? +His ignorance is below ridicule. It is true, that, in +England, bulls which <i>want</i> horns are less numerous +than husbands who <i>have</i> them; yet such bulls are always +to be found. For the performance which contains +this profound remark, this <i>agglomerated ramification +of torpid imbecility</i>, be it known, that <i>we</i> have +paid six shillings, which verifies the proverb, that <i>a +fool and his money are soon parted</i>.</p> + +<p>'We found a small church, clean to a degree unknown +in any other part of Scotland<a name="FNanchor_29_29" id="FNanchor_29_29"></a><a href="#Footnote_29_29" class="fnanchor">[29]</a>!' Here the fact +<i>may</i> be true; but Dr Johnson <i>must</i> be ignorant whether +it is or not. It is certain, that some buildings of that +kind in Edinburgh, are no high specimens of national +taste; but, if the Rambler would insinuate that this +want of elegance is general, we must impeach his veracity; +we must remind him, that there are gloomy, +dirty, and unwholesome cathedrals in <i>both</i> countries; +and we must lament, that, when entering Scotland, +the Doctor <i>left every thing behind him but</i> <small>HIMSELF</small>.</p> + +<p>'Suspicion has been always considered, when it +exceeds the common measure, as a token of depravity +and corruption; and a Greek writer has laid +it down as a standing maxim, that <i>he who believes +not the oath of another, knows himself to be perjured</i>.—Suspicion +is, indeed, a temper so uneasy and restless, +that it is very justly appointed the concomi<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_22" id="Page_22">( 22 )</a></span>tant +of guilt. Suspicion is not less an enemy to +virtue than to happiness. He that is already corrupt, +is naturally suspicious, and he that becomes +suspicious, will quickly be corrupt<a name="FNanchor_30_30" id="FNanchor_30_30"></a><a href="#Footnote_30_30" class="fnanchor">[30]</a>.' This cannot +always be true; but, if it were, the Rambler is by far +the greatest miscreant who ever infested society. +Speaking of Scotland, he says, 'I know not whether +I found man or woman whom I interrogated concerning +payments of money, that could surmount +the illiberal desire of <i>deceiving me</i>, by representing +every thing as dearer than it is.—The Scot must be +a sturdy moralist who does not love Scotland better +than truth<a name="FNanchor_31_31" id="FNanchor_31_31"></a><a href="#Footnote_31_31" class="fnanchor">[31]</a>.' Apply the Doctor's maxims to +his own conduct, and then judge of his honesty. He +adds a little after: 'The civility and respect which we +found at every place, it is <i>ungrateful</i> to omit, and +tedious to repeat<a name="FNanchor_32_32" id="FNanchor_32_32"></a><a href="#Footnote_32_32" class="fnanchor">[32]</a>.' He should not have spoke of +ingratitude. The picture grows quite shocking.</p> + +<p>'How they lived without kail, it is not easy to +guess. They cultivate hardly any other plant for +common tables; and, when they had not kail, <i>they +probably had</i> <small>NOTHING</small><a name="FNanchor_33_33" id="FNanchor_33_33"></a><a href="#Footnote_33_33" class="fnanchor">[33]</a>.' As the word <i>kail</i> is not +to be found in his Dictionary, an English reader will +be at a loss to find out what he means. His conjecture +is ridiculous; and here a <i>new</i> contradiction must +be swallowed by the Doctor's believers; for, if <small>OATS</small> +be 'a grain, which, in England, is generally given +to horses, but, in Scotland, <i>supports</i> the people<a name="FNanchor_34_34" id="FNanchor_34_34"></a><a href="#Footnote_34_34" class="fnanchor">[34]</a>,' +in that case, it is easy to guess how they lived without +<i>kail</i>. Any thing else had surely been better than +to fill up his heavy folios with such peevish nonsense.</p> + +<p>In his life of Butler, the Doctor has confined his +remarks to <i>Hudibras</i>, though the rest of that author's +works, both in prose and verse, merit equal attention. +What are we to think of this invidious and +culpable omission? Hudibras itself would, perhaps, +have been omitted, if the book had not tended to ri<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_23" id="Page_23">( 23 )</a></span>dicule +dissenters; for no man in England seems to +hate that sect so heartily. In Watt's life, he takes +care to tell us, that the author was to be praised in +every thing but his <i>non-conformity</i>; and, in his ever +memorable Tour, the Rambler says, 'I found several +(Highland Ministers), with whom I could not converse, +without wishing, as my respect increased, that they +had not been presbyterians<a name="FNanchor_35_35" id="FNanchor_35_35"></a><a href="#Footnote_35_35" class="fnanchor">[35]</a>.' Here a critic has +very properly interrogated the Doctor, what he would +have said or thought, if the Highland ministers had +lamented that <i>he</i> was <i>not</i> a presbyterian? This man +has no tincture of the liberal and humane manners of +the present age; and yet, with his peculiar consistency, +he laughs at the dissenter who refused to eat a +Christmas pye<a name="FNanchor_36_36" id="FNanchor_36_36"></a><a href="#Footnote_36_36" class="fnanchor">[36]</a>. This quondam believer in the +Cocklane ghost says, 'though I have, like the rest +of mankind, many failings and weaknesses, I have +not yet, by either friends or enemies, been charged +with <i>superstition</i><a name="FNanchor_37_37" id="FNanchor_37_37"></a><a href="#Footnote_37_37" class="fnanchor">[37]</a>;' yet, with all the Doctor's 'contempt +of old women and their tales<a name="FNanchor_38_38" id="FNanchor_38_38"></a><a href="#Footnote_38_38" class="fnanchor">[38]</a>,' he would, +if a Roman consul, have disbanded his army for the +scratching of a rat<a name="FNanchor_39_39" id="FNanchor_39_39"></a><a href="#Footnote_39_39" class="fnanchor">[39]</a>.</p> + +<p>'We found tea here, as in every other place, but +our spoons were of horn<a name="FNanchor_40_40" id="FNanchor_40_40"></a><a href="#Footnote_40_40" class="fnanchor">[40]</a>.' This important fact +had been hinted in a former page; and such is the +Doctor's politeness!</p> + +<p class="poem"> +Some rugged rock's hard entrails gave thee form,<br /> +And raging seas produc'd thee in a storm.<br /> +<span style="margin-left: 20em;"><span class="smcap">Pope.</span></span> +</p> + +<p>'They do what I found it not very easy to endure. +They <i>pollute</i> the tea-table by plates piled with large +slices of Cheshire cheese<a name="FNanchor_41_41" id="FNanchor_41_41"></a><a href="#Footnote_41_41" class="fnanchor">[41]</a>.' The happiness of this +remark will be fully felt by those acquainted with the +peculiar purity of Pomposo's person.</p> + +<p>'M'Leod left them <i>lying</i> dead by families as they +<i>stood</i><a name="FNanchor_42_42" id="FNanchor_42_42"></a><a href="#Footnote_42_42" class="fnanchor">[42]</a>.' This is <i>profound</i>; for no man can stand +and lie at the same time. The line ought to be read<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_24" id="Page_24">( 24 )</a></span> +thus: 'M'Leod left them lying <i>dead</i> by families as +they <small>HAD</small> <i>stood</i>.'</p> + +<p>Of the Memoirs of Scriblerus, the Doctor says: 'If +the whole may be estimated by this specimen, which +seems to be the production of Arbuthnot, with a +few touches, perhaps, by Pope, the want of more +will not be much lamented; for the follies which +the writer ridicules, are so little practised, that they +are not known; nor can the satire be understood +but by the learned: He raises phantoms of absurdity, +and then drives them away: He cures diseases +that were never felt.</p> + +<p>'For this reason<a name="FNanchor_43_43" id="FNanchor_43_43"></a><a href="#Footnote_43_43" class="fnanchor">[43]</a>, the joint production of three +great writers has never obtained <i>any</i> notice from +mankind. It has been little read, or when read, +has been forgotten, as no man could be wiser, better, +or merrier by remembering it.</p> + +<p><ins class="mycorr" title="original has double instead of single quote">'The design</ins> cannot boast of much originality; +for, besides its general resemblance to <i>Don Quixote</i>, +there will be found in it particular imitations of +the history of Mr Ouffle.</p> + +<p>'Swift carried so much of it into Ireland as supplied +him with hints for his travels; and with those +the world might have been contented, though the +rest had been suppressed<a name="FNanchor_44_44" id="FNanchor_44_44"></a><a href="#Footnote_44_44" class="fnanchor">[44]</a>.'</p> + +<p>Here we have a copious specimen of the Doctor's +<i>taste</i>; and all the volumes of English criticism cannot +produce a poorer page.</p> + +<p>The work thus condemned, displays a very rich +vein of wit and learning. The follies which it exposes, +though a little heightened, were, in that age, +frequent, and perfectly well known. The writers +whom it ridicules, have sunk into <i>nihility</i>. The book +is always reprinted with the prose works of Pope, +and Swift, and Arbuthnot; and what stronger mark +of <i>notice</i> can the public bestow? Every man who reads<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_25" id="Page_25">( 25 )</a></span> +it, must be the wiser and the merrier; and the satire +may be understood with very little learning.</p> + +<p>Dr Arbuthnot was a Scotsman, and, probably, a +Presbyterian. He was an amiable man. He is <i>dead</i>. +Dr Johnson feels himself to be his inferior; and, +therefore, endeavours to murder the reputation of +his works. To gain credit with the reader, he artfully +draws a very high character of Arbuthnot, a few +pages before, and here, in effect, overturns it. He +had said that Arbuthnot was 'a scholar, with great +brilliancy of wit.' But, if his wit and learning +are not displayed in the Memoirs of Scriblerus, we +may ask where wit and learning are to be found?</p> + +<p>Of this extract, the style is as slovenly as the leading +sentiments are false.</p> + +<p>The book is said to be, the 'production of Arbuthnot.' +Within ten lines, it is 'the joint production +of <i>three</i> great writers.' How can follies be practised +which are not known? or diseases cured, which +were never felt? He claims the attributes of omniscience +when saying, that 'it has been little read, or +when read, has been forgotten;' for, as it has been +so frequently reprinted, no human being can be certain +that it has been little read, or forgotten; but +there is the strongest evidence of the contrary. This +period concludes, as it began, with a most absurd assertion. +If 'the design cannot boast of much originality,' +there is nothing original in the literary +world. Who is Mr Ouffle? and who told the Doctor +that Swift carried any part of Scriblerus into Ireland, +to supply hints for his travels? When Gulliver +was published, Dr Arbuthnot, as appears from their +correspondence, did not know whether that book +was written by Swift or not; so that we are sure the +Dean carried <i>nothing</i> of Arbuthnot's along with him. +Had Dr Johnson 'flourished and stunk' in their age, +he would have been the hero of Martin's memoirs; +and, to suppose him conscious of this circumstance, will +account for the Rambler's malevolence, and explain +why the bull broke into a china-shop.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_26" id="Page_26">( 26 )</a></span></p> + +<p>I beg particular attention to the following passage.</p> + +<p>'His (Pope's) version may be said to have tuned +the English tongue; for, since its appearance, no +writer<a name="FNanchor_45_45" id="FNanchor_45_45"></a><a href="#Footnote_45_45" class="fnanchor">[45]</a>, however deficient in other powers, has +wanted <i>melody</i><a name="FNanchor_46_46" id="FNanchor_46_46"></a><a href="#Footnote_46_46" class="fnanchor">[46]</a>.' This is wild enough; but, of +Gray's two longest Odes, 'the language is laboured +into <i>harshness</i>.' Hammond's verses 'never glide in +a stream of <i>melody</i>.' The diction of Collins 'was +often <i>harsh</i>, unskilfully laboured, and injudiciously +selected. His lines, commonly, are of slow motion, +clogged and impeded with clusters of consonants.' +Of the style of Savage, 'The general fault is, <i>harshness</i>.' +The diction of Shenstone 'is often <i>harsh</i>, +improper, and affected,' &c.</p> + +<p>Of these five poets, some were not born when Pope's +version was published; and, of the rest, not one had +penned a line now extant. They are all here charged, +in the strongest terms, with <i>harshness</i>; and yet, +(<i>mirabile dictu!</i>) since the appearance of Pope's version, +'no writer, however deficient in other powers, has +wanted <i>melody</i>.'</p> + +<p>It is no less curious, that the author of this wonder-working +translation is himself charged with want of +melody; and that too in a poem written many years +after the appearance of Pope's Homer. 'The essay +on man contains more lines unsuccessfully laboured, +more <i>harshness</i> of diction, more thoughts imperfectly +expressed, more levity without elegance, and +more heaviness without strength,<a name="FNanchor_47_47" id="FNanchor_47_47"></a><a href="#Footnote_47_47" class="fnanchor">[47]</a>' &c.</p> + +<p>'Gray thought his language more poetical, as it +was more remote from common use<a name="FNanchor_48_48" id="FNanchor_48_48"></a><a href="#Footnote_48_48" class="fnanchor">[48]</a>.' This assertion +is not entirely without foundation, but it is very +far from being quite true.</p> + +<p>'Finding in Dryden, honey <i>redolent of spring</i>, an +expression that reaches the utmost limits of our language, +Gray drove it a little more beyond common<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_27" id="Page_27">( 27 )</a></span> +apprehension, by making <i>gale</i> to be <i>redolent of joy +and youth</i><a name="FNanchor_49_49" id="FNanchor_49_49"></a><a href="#Footnote_49_49" class="fnanchor">[49]</a>.' The censure is just. But Dr Johnson +is the last man alive, who should blame an author +for driving our language to its utmost limits: For +a very great part of his life has been spent in corrupting +and confounding it. In some verses to a Lady, he +talks of his <i>arthritic</i> pains<a name="FNanchor_50_50" id="FNanchor_50_50"></a><a href="#Footnote_50_50" class="fnanchor">[50]</a>, an epithet not very suitable +to the dialect of Parnassus. Dr Johnson himself cannot +always write common sense. 'In a short time many +were content to be shewn beauties which <i>they +could not see</i><a name="FNanchor_51_51" id="FNanchor_51_51"></a><a href="#Footnote_51_51" class="fnanchor">[51]</a>.' He must here mean—'Beauties +which they could not <ins class="mycorr" title="Missing singlequote added at the end">have seen;'</ins>—for it is needless +to add, that no man can be shewn what he cannot +see.</p> + +<p>It is curious to observe a man draw his own picture, +without intending it. Pomposo, when censuring +some of Gray's odes, observes, That 'Gray is too fond +of words arbitrarily compounded. The mind of +the writer seems to work with unnatural violence. +<i>Double, double, toil and trouble.</i>' He (the author of +an Elegy in a country church-yard) 'has a kind of +strutting dignity, and is tall by walking on tip-toe. +His art and his struggle are too visible, and there is +too little appearance of ease, or nature. In all +Gray's odes, there is a kind of cumbrous splendour +which we wish away<a name="FNanchor_52_52" id="FNanchor_52_52"></a><a href="#Footnote_52_52" class="fnanchor">[52]</a>.' We may say like Nathan, +<i>Thou art the man</i>.</p> + +<p>Mr. Gray, and Mr. Horace Walpole, are said to have +<i>wandered</i> through France and Italy<a name="FNanchor_53_53" id="FNanchor_53_53"></a><a href="#Footnote_53_53" class="fnanchor">[53]</a>. And as a contrast +to this polite expression, I shall add some remarks +which have occurred on the Doctor's own mode of +wandering.</p> + +<p>'It must afford peculiar entertainment to see a person +of his character, who has scarcely ever been +without the precincts of this metropolis (London), +and <i>who has been long accustomed to the adulation of a +little knot of companions of his own trade</i>, sallying forth<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_28" id="Page_28">( 28 )</a></span> +in quest of discoveries—Neither the people nor the +country that he has visited will perhaps be considered +as the most extraordinary part of the phænomena +he has described.—The Doctor has endeavoured +to give an account of his travels; but he has furnished +his readers with a picture of himself. He +has seen very little, and observed still less. His +narration is neither supported by vivacity, to +make it entertaining, nor accompanied with information, +to render it instructive. It exhibits the +pompous artificial diction of the Rambler with the +same <i>vacuity of thought</i>.—The reader is led from one +Highland family to another merely to be informed +of the number of their children, the barrenness of +their country, and of the kindness with which the +Doctor was treated. In the Highlands he is like a +foolish peasant brought for the first time into a great +city, staring at every sign-post, and gaping with equal +wonder and astonishment at every object he +meets<a name="FNanchor_54_54" id="FNanchor_54_54"></a><a href="#Footnote_54_54" class="fnanchor">[54]</a>.'</p> + +<p>'At Florence they (Gray and Walpole) quarelled +and parted; and Mr. Walpole is <i>now</i> content to +have it told that it was by his fault<a name="FNanchor_55_55" id="FNanchor_55_55"></a><a href="#Footnote_55_55" class="fnanchor">[55]</a>.' This is a +dirty insinuation; and the rant which follows in the +next period is of equal value.</p> + +<p>He observes, That '<i>A long story</i> perhaps adds little +to Gray's reputation<a name="FNanchor_56_56" id="FNanchor_56_56"></a><a href="#Footnote_56_56" class="fnanchor">[56]</a>.' <i>Perhaps</i> was useless here, +and indeed the Doctor has introduced it in a thousand +places, where it was useless, and left it out in as many +where it was necessary. In justice to Gray, he +ought to have added, that their Author rejected, from +a correct edition of his works, this insipid series of +verses.</p> + +<p>'Gray's reputation was now so high that he had +the honour of refusing the laurel<a name="FNanchor_57_57" id="FNanchor_57_57"></a><a href="#Footnote_57_57" class="fnanchor">[57]</a>.' No man's reputation +has ever yet acquired him the laurel, without +some particular application from a courtier. What<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_29" id="Page_29">( 29 )</a></span> +honour is acquired by refusing the laurel? An hundred +pounds a-year would have enabled an œconomist +like Mr Gray to preserve his independence and exert +his generosity. The office of laureat is only ridiculous +in the hands of a fool. Mr. Savage in that character +produced nothing which would dishonour an +Englishman and a poet. It is probable that Mr. Gray, +a very costive writer, could hardly have made a decent +number of verses within the limited time. From +the passage now quoted the reader will not fail to remark, +that the Rambler 'nurses in his mind a foolish +disesteem of kings<a name="FNanchor_58_58" id="FNanchor_58_58"></a><a href="#Footnote_58_58" class="fnanchor">[58]</a>.'</p> + +<p>Mr. Gray 'had a notion not very peculiar, that he +could not write but at certain times, or at happy +moments; a fantastic foppery to which <i>my</i> kindness +for a man of learning and of virtue wishes him to +have been superior<a name="FNanchor_59_59" id="FNanchor_59_59"></a><a href="#Footnote_59_59" class="fnanchor">[59]</a>.' Milton, who was no doubt +a shallow fellow compared with the Reformer of our +language, had the same 'fantastic foppery.' Mr +Hume remarks that Milton had not leisure 'to watch +the returns of genius.'—Every man feels himself at +some times less capable of intellectual effort, than at +others. The Rambler himself has, in the most express +terms, contradicted his present notion. In Denham's +life he quotes four lines which must, he says, have +been written 'in some <i>hour propitious to poetry</i>.' In +another place in the same lives his tumid and prolix +eloquence disembogues itself to prove, what no man +ever doubted, viz. 'That a tradesman's hand is often +out, he cannot tell why.' And an inference is +drawn, That this is still more apt to be the case with +a man straining his mental abilities.</p> + +<p>In Gray's ode on spring, 'The thoughts have nothing +new, the morality is natural, but too stale<a name="FNanchor_60_60" id="FNanchor_60_60"></a><a href="#Footnote_60_60" class="fnanchor">[60]</a>.' +Read the poem, and then esteem the critic if you +can. Speaking of <i>the Bard</i> he says, 'Of the first +stanza the abrupt beginning has been celebrated; +but <i>technical</i> beauties can give praise only to the in<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_30" id="Page_30">( 30 )</a></span>ventor<a name="FNanchor_61_61" id="FNanchor_61_61"></a><a href="#Footnote_61_61" class="fnanchor">[61]</a>.' +The question here is, What he means +by a <i>technical</i> beauty? That word he explains, 'Belonging +to arts; not in common or popular use'—How +can this word in either of these senses apply +here with propriety?</p> + +<p>What he says of 'these four stanzas<a name="FNanchor_62_62" id="FNanchor_62_62"></a><a href="#Footnote_62_62" class="fnanchor">[62]</a>'—conveys, I +think, no sentiment. Every word may be understood +separately, but in their present arrangement they seem +to have no meaning, or they mean nonsense, and +perhaps, contradiction; but this passage I leave to +the supreme tribunal of all authors—to the reason and +common sense of the reader. He can best determine +whether he has 'never seen the notions in any other +place, yet persuades himself that he always felt +them.' These ideas are very beautifully expressed +in many passages of Gaelic poetry: and Mr. Gray, let +it be remembered, to the honour of his taste and candour, +was the warm admirer of Fingal.</p> + +<p>Comparing Gray's ode with an ode of Horace<a name="FNanchor_63_63" id="FNanchor_63_63"></a><a href="#Footnote_63_63" class="fnanchor">[63]</a>, he +says, 'there is in <i>the Bard</i> more force, more thought, +and more variety'—as indeed there very well may, +for in the one there are thirty-six lines only, and in +the other one hundred and forty-four. His whole +works are full of such trifling observations. 'But to +copy is less than to invent, theft is always dangerous.' +If he means to insinuate that Gray's Bard +is a copy of Horace, (and this is the plain inference +from his words) I charge him in direct terms as <i>an +atrocious violator of</i> <span class="smcap">Truth</span>.</p> + +<p>'The fiction of Horace was to the Romans credible; +(<small>NO</small>) but its revival disgusts <i>us</i> with apparent +and unconquerable falsehood, <i>Incredulus odi</i><a name="FNanchor_64_64" id="FNanchor_64_64"></a><a href="#Footnote_64_64" class="fnanchor">[64]</a>.' How<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_31" id="Page_31">( 31 )</a></span> +will the Doctor's verdict be digested at Aberdeen by +'a poet, a philosopher, and a good man<a name="FNanchor_65_65" id="FNanchor_65_65"></a><a href="#Footnote_65_65" class="fnanchor">[65]</a>.' It is +diverting to remark how these <i>mutual admirers</i> clash +on the clearest point, with not a possibility of reconcilement.</p> + +<p>I pass by five or six lines, which are not worth +contradiction, though they cannot resist it. 'I do +not <i>see</i> that <i>the Bard</i> promotes any truth moral or +political<a name="FNanchor_66_66" id="FNanchor_66_66"></a><a href="#Footnote_66_66" class="fnanchor">[66]</a>.' The Rambler's intellect is <i>blind</i>.—He +seems to have stared a great deal, to have seen little +or nothing. The Bard very forcibly impresses this +moral, political, and important truth, that eternal +vengeance would pursue the English Tyrant and his +posterity, as enemies to posterity, and exterminators +of mankind. Dr Johnson, a stickler for the <i>jus divinum</i>, +did not relish this idea.</p> + +<p>He commends the 'Ode on Adversity,' but the +hint was at 'first taken from Horace<a name="FNanchor_67_67" id="FNanchor_67_67"></a><a href="#Footnote_67_67" class="fnanchor">[67]</a>.' The poem +referred to has almost no resemblance to Mr Gray's. +And if we go on at this rate, where will we find any +thing original? He mistakes the title of this poem, +which is not an 'Ode on,' but a 'Hymn to' Adversity. +This is a clear though trifling proof of his inattention. +As he dare not condemn this piece, it is +dismissed in six lines, to make room for '<i>The wonderful +wonder of wonders</i>, the two Sister Odes, by which +many have been persuaded to think themselves delighted<a name="FNanchor_68_68" id="FNanchor_68_68"></a><a href="#Footnote_68_68" class="fnanchor">[68]</a>.' +He chews them through four tedious +octavo pages. We come then to Gray's Elegy, which +occupies an equal share of a paragraph containing only +fourteen lines. So much more plentiful is the cri<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_32" id="Page_32">( 32 )</a></span>tic +in gall than honey! And in reading this fragment +we may remark that <i>nonsense</i> is not <i>panegyric</i>.</p> + +<p>Speaking of Welsh Mythology, he says, 'Attention +recoils from the repetition of a tale that, even +when it was <i>first</i> heard, was heard with scorn<a name="FNanchor_69_69" id="FNanchor_69_69"></a><a href="#Footnote_69_69" class="fnanchor">[69]</a>.' +There is no reason to think that the Welsh disbelieved +these fictions. It is much more likely that many believe +them at this day. Shakespeare has from this superstition +made a whimsical picture of Owen Glendower: +He painted nature. This is one of those assertions +which our dictator should have qualified with +a <i>perhaps</i>, an adverb, which, wherever it <i>ought</i> to be +met with in the Doctor's pages, 'will not easily be +found<a name="FNanchor_70_70" id="FNanchor_70_70"></a><a href="#Footnote_70_70" class="fnanchor">[70]</a>.'</p> + +<p>'But I will no longer look for particular faults; +yet let it be observed that the ode might have been +concluded with an action of better example; but +suicide is always to be had without expence of +thought<a name="FNanchor_71_71" id="FNanchor_71_71"></a><a href="#Footnote_71_71" class="fnanchor">[71]</a>.'</p> + +<p>The lines objected to are these:</p> + +<p class="poem"> +'He spoke, and headlong from the mountains height,<br /> +Deep in the roaring tide, he plung'd to endless night.'<br /> +</p> + +<p>Let the Doctor, if he can, give us a better conclusion.</p> + +<p>'<i>The Prospect of Eaton College</i> suggests nothing to +Gray, which every beholder does not equally think +and feel<a name="FNanchor_72_72" id="FNanchor_72_72"></a><a href="#Footnote_72_72" class="fnanchor">[72]</a>.' He might as well have said, that every +man in England is capable of producing Paradise Lost.</p> + +<p>We have seen with what tenderness Dr Johnson +speaks of the dead, we shall now see his tenderness +to the living. 'Let us give the Indians arms, and +teach them discipline, and encourage them now and +then to plunder a plantation. Security and leisure +are the parents of sedition<a name="FNanchor_73_73" id="FNanchor_73_73"></a><a href="#Footnote_73_73" class="fnanchor">[73]</a>.' The Doctor seems +here to be serious. The proposal must reflect infinite +honour on his wisdom and humanity.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_33" id="Page_33">( 33 )</a></span></p> + +<p>'No part of the world has yet had reason to rejoice +that <span class="smcap">Columbus</span> found at last reception and employment<a name="FNanchor_74_74" id="FNanchor_74_74"></a><a href="#Footnote_74_74" class="fnanchor">[74]</a>.' +This wild opinion is fairly disproved +by Dr Smith, a philosopher not much afraid of novelty; +for he has advanced a greater variety of original, +interesting, and profound ideas, than almost +any other author since the first existence of books.</p> + +<p>'Such is the unevenness of Dryden's compositions +that ten lines are seldom found together without +something of which the reader is ashamed<a name="FNanchor_75_75" id="FNanchor_75_75"></a><a href="#Footnote_75_75" class="fnanchor">[75]</a>.' This +is a very wide <i>aberration</i> from truth. In Dryden's +fables we may frequently meet with five hundred +lines together, without <i>ten</i> among them, which could +have disgraced the most eminent writer. His prologues +and epilogues are a never failing fountain of +good sense and genuine poetry. But it were insulting +the taste of the English nation to insist any farther +on this point. We shall presently see how far Dr +Johnson's Dictionary will answer the foregoing description.</p> + +<p>Dryden it is said discovers 'in the preface to his +fables, that he translated the first book of the Iliad +without knowing what was in the second<a name="FNanchor_76_76" id="FNanchor_76_76"></a><a href="#Footnote_76_76" class="fnanchor">[76]</a>.' This +insinuation revolts against all probability; and whoever +peruses that elegant and delightful preface will +find it to be <small>NOT TRUE</small>.</p> + +<p>'The highest pleasure which nature has indulged +to sensitive perception is that of rest after fatigue<a name="FNanchor_77_77" id="FNanchor_77_77"></a><a href="#Footnote_77_77" class="fnanchor">[77]</a>.' +And <i>sensitive</i> is defined '<i>having sense or perception; but +not reason</i>.' If I understand the meaning of this passage, +it is, that no pleasure communicated through +any of the organs of sense is equal to that of <i>rest</i>. +This assertion leads to the most absurd consequences. +In man, to separate sensitive from rational perception +appears to be simply impossible. Even rest is not in +strict language any pleasure. It is merely a mitigation +of pain. The reader will decide whether I do the<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_34" id="Page_34">( 34 )</a></span> +Doctor justice, while I say, that he must have been +petrified when he composed this maxim. Thirst and +hunger had been long forgot. Handel and Titian +had no power to charm. We learn that a lover can +receive, and his mistress can bestow nothing which is +equal to the rapturous enjoyment of an <i>easy chair</i>. +The thought is new; no human being ever did, or +ever will conceive it, except this immortal <span class="smcap">Idler</span>.</p> + +<p>'Physicians and lawyers are no friends to religion, +and many <i>conjectures</i> have been formed to discover +the <i>reason</i> of such <i>a combination</i> between men who +agree in <i>nothing else</i>, and who seem to be less affected +in their own provinces by religious opinions than +any other part of the community<a name="FNanchor_78_78" id="FNanchor_78_78"></a><a href="#Footnote_78_78" class="fnanchor">[78]</a>.' He then proceeds +in the tone of an author, who has made a discovery +to inform us of the cause. 'They have all seen +a parson, seen him in a habit different from their +own, and therefore <i>declared war</i> against him.' But +<i>this</i> can be no motive for peculiar antipathy to parsons, +allowing such antipathy to exist; for in habit +all other classes differ no less from the clergy, than the +lawyer and physician. But the remark itself is frivolous +and false. Boerhaave and Hale were men of eminent +piety. Physicians and lawyers have as much +regard for religion as any other people generally have. +Their <i>agreeing in nothing else</i> is another of the blunders +crowded into this passage. But I have too much +respect for the reader's understanding to insist any +farther on this point. The <i>conjecturers</i>, the <i>combination</i>, +and the <i>declaration of war</i>, exist no where but in the +Doctor's pericranium. He was at a loss what to say, +and the position is only to be regarded as a <i>turbid ebullition +of amphibological inanity</i>. But while we thus +meet with something which is ridiculous in every +page, we are not to forget even for a moment, what +we have often heard, and what is most unquestionably +<i>true</i>, viz. That Dr Johnson is the father of Bri<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_35" id="Page_35">( 35 )</a></span>tish +literature, capital author of his age, and the greatest +man in Europe<a name="FNanchor_79_79" id="FNanchor_79_79"></a><a href="#Footnote_79_79" class="fnanchor">[79]</a>!!!</p> + +<p>'We are by our occupations, education, and habits +of life, divided almost into different species, +who regard one another for the most part with scorn +and malignity<a name="FNanchor_80_80" id="FNanchor_80_80"></a><a href="#Footnote_80_80" class="fnanchor">[80]</a>.' The Doctor is himself a proof, +that a man may look upon almost all of his own profession +with scorn and malignity: So that between his +precept and his practice, the world seems bad enough. +But I hope every heart revolts at this gross insult on +the characters of mankind. He brings as an instance +the aversion which subsists between soldiers and sailors. +There no doubt have been jealousies and bloodshed +between these two classes of men, but the same accidents +fall out more frequently between soldiers themselves. +The <i>scorn</i> and <i>malignity</i> of admirals seldom affect +any line of service but their own. His captain +of foot<a name="FNanchor_81_81" id="FNanchor_81_81"></a><a href="#Footnote_81_81" class="fnanchor">[81]</a>, who saw no danger in a sea-fight was a fool, +and just such a <ins class="mycorr" title="original reads 'speimen'">specimen</ins> of English officers, as the Doctor +himself is of English travellers. Our repulse at +Carthagena was not owing to an antipathy between +the <i>common</i> men. Our late victory at Savannah proves +with what ardour they can unite. The Doctor has +insulted almost every order of society.</p> + +<p class="poem"> +<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Coblers with coblers smoke away the night,</span><br /> +Even players in the common cause, unite.<br /> +<span class="smcap">Authors</span> alone with more than mortal rage,<br /> +Eternal war with brother authors wage<a name="FNanchor_82_82" id="FNanchor_82_82"></a><a href="#Footnote_82_82" class="fnanchor">[82]</a>.<br /> +</p> + +<p>'To raise esteem we must benefit others,' is an assertion +advanced in the same page. But the Doctor, +if he knows any thing, must know that <i>esteem</i> is often +felt for an enemy. We value for his courage or ingenuity +the man who never heard our name, or who +would not give a guinea to save us from perdition. +We can esteem the hero who butchers nations, and +the pedant who perplexes truth. Marlborough's avarice +led him to continue the continental war, till<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_36" id="Page_36">( 36 )</a></span> +he had laid the great foundation of our public debt. +He was detested as much as any general <i>now</i> in England, +and yet 'he was so great a man (said one of +his enemies) that I have forgot his faults.' Posterity, +while they suffer for his baseness, pay the due +tribute of esteem to his genius and intrepidity.</p> + +<p>In every point of view this maxim is 'the baseless +fabrick of a vision.' And what had so far <i>obumbrated</i> +the Rambler's powers of <i>ratiocination</i>, it is not easy +to guess. We sometimes feel it impossible to esteem +even our benefactor. 'I have received obligations +(said Chatterton) without being obliged.' And of +consequence, his benefactors had forfeited his esteem. +The father of British literature has in forty other places +contradicted his own words. He has proved that +esteem is involuntary, and that benefits do not always +<ins class="mycorr" title="original has extra singlequote at the end">procure it.</ins></p> + +<p>The Doctor says, 'That Cowley having, when very +young, read Spenser, became <i>irrecoverably</i> <ins class="mycorr" title="Missing singlequote added at the end">a poet<a name="FNanchor_83_83" id="FNanchor_83_83"></a><a href="#Footnote_83_83" class="fnanchor">[83]</a>.'</ins> +And he adds a remark that shows his good sense: 'Such +are the accidents which, sometimes remembered, +and sometimes perhaps forgotten, <small>PRODUCE</small> that +particular designation of mind and propensity for +some certain science or employment, which is commonly +called genius. The true genius is a mind of +large general powers, <i>accidentally</i> determined to some +particular direction. The great painter of the present +age had the first fondness for his art excited by +a perusal of Richardson's treatise.' This drawling<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_37" id="Page_37">( 37 )</a></span> +definition contradicts common sense. Does the Doctor +mean that Cowley would have become a painter by perusing +Richardson? or that Reynolds would have become +a poet by perusing Spenser? This is the clear +inference from his words, and its absurdity is 'too +evident for detection, and too gross for aggravation<a name="FNanchor_84_84" id="FNanchor_84_84"></a><a href="#Footnote_84_84" class="fnanchor">[84]</a>.' +At this rate Garrick might have eclipsed +Newton, and Voltaire defeated Frederick. Plato +possessed 'a mind of large general powers.' He read +Homer. He wrote verses, and he found that he could +not be a poet. The Doctor himself has 'large general +powers;' but he could never have been made a +decent dancing master. Marcel might have broke his +heart, before his pupil had acquired three steps of a +minuet. In his dictionary the Doctor, without a word +of <i>accidental</i> determination, defines genius to be 'disposition +of <i>nature</i>, by which any one is qualified for +some peculiar employment.' And here I cannot +help adding, that 'the great painter' has by stepping +out of his own line, discovered the narrowness of even +a great man's knowledge. He affirms<a name="FNanchor_85_85" id="FNanchor_85_85"></a><a href="#Footnote_85_85" class="fnanchor">[85]</a>, That +<i>scarce a poet from Homer down to Dryden ever felt his +fire diminished merely by his advance in years</i>. There is +nothing more absurd, says Cicero, than what we hear +asserted by some of the philosophers. Even in painting, +the President's own profession, that rule does +not hold. Cellini tells us, that Michael Angelo's genius +decayed with years; and he speaks of it as common +to all artists. His notion was perhaps grafted<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_38" id="Page_38">( 38 )</a></span> +on an opinion of the Doctor's about the durability of +Waller's genius<a name="FNanchor_86_86" id="FNanchor_86_86"></a><a href="#Footnote_86_86" class="fnanchor">[86]</a>. But Waller was a feeble poet; +he never had a genius, so that we need not wonder +he never lost it. All his verses are hardly worth one +of Dr Johnson's imitations of Juvenal.</p> + +<p>Rowe (the famous tragic poet) 'seldom moves either +pity or terror<a name="FNanchor_87_87" id="FNanchor_87_87"></a><a href="#Footnote_87_87" class="fnanchor">[87]</a>.' Paradise Lost is a work which +'the reader admires, and lays down, <i>and forgets to +take up again</i><a name="FNanchor_88_88" id="FNanchor_88_88"></a><a href="#Footnote_88_88" class="fnanchor">[88]</a>,' But Rowe's Lucan, which is very +little read, the Doctor pronounces to be 'one of the +<i>greatest</i> productions of English poetry.' Dr Johnson's +sycophants have asserted, that 'in the walks of criticism +and biography he has long been without a rival.' +And they are no doubt willing to support +their idol in his infamous assertion, that Swift 'excites +neither surprise nor admiration<a name="FNanchor_89_89" id="FNanchor_89_89"></a><a href="#Footnote_89_89" class="fnanchor">[89]</a>.' The Doctor's disregard +for the unanimous sentiments of mankind often +excites surprize, but never admiration. Let us +here apply his own observation, that 'there is often +found in commentaries a spontaneous train of invective +and contempt, more eager and venemous +than is vented by the most furious controvertist in +politics, against whom he is hired to defame<a name="FNanchor_90_90" id="FNanchor_90_90"></a><a href="#Footnote_90_90" class="fnanchor">[90]</a>.' We +may illustrate the Rambler's remark by his own example: +'Theobald, a man of narrow comprehension, +and small acquisitions, with no native and intrinsick +splendour of genius, with little of the artificial light +of learning—his contemptible ostentation I have +frequently concealed<a name="FNanchor_91_91" id="FNanchor_91_91"></a><a href="#Footnote_91_91" class="fnanchor">[91]</a>.' The definer of a fiddlestick +proceeds thus: 'I have in some places shewn him, as +he would have shewn himself for the reader's diversion, +that the <i>inflated</i> emptiness of some notes may +justify or excuse the contraction of the rest.'—The +advocate for tenderness and decorum goes on to +tell us, that 'Theobald, thus weak and ignorant, +thus <i>mean</i> and <small>FAITHLESS</small>, thus petulant and ostentatious, +by the good luck of having Pope for his<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_39" id="Page_39">( 39 )</a></span> +enemy, has escaped, and escaped <i>alone</i> with reputation +from this undertaking. So easily is he praised +whom no man can envy<a name="FNanchor_92_92" id="FNanchor_92_92"></a><a href="#Footnote_92_92" class="fnanchor">[92]</a>.' How does it appear +that Theobald was weak and ignorant? The +Doctor himself had in the preceding page told us, +that 'he (Theobald) collated the antient copies, and +rectified <i>many</i> errors.' This assertion our author, +with his wonted consistency, has flatly contradicted +in the very next line. 'What <i>little</i> he (Theobald) +did was commonly right.' Has the Doctor adduced, +or has he attempted to adduce evidence, that +Theobald was <i>mean</i> and <i>faithless</i>, or what provocation +has he to load this man's memory with such injurious +epithets? His burst of vulgarity can reflect +disgrace on nobody but himself. It is evident, tho' +he thinks proper to deny it, that he considered Theobald +as an object of envy; yet he is obliged to confess +that Theobald 'escaped, and escaped <i>alone</i>, with +reputation,' from the talk of amending Shakespeare. +In assigning a reason for this applause of Theobald, +Dr Johnson pays a very poor compliment to the penetration +of the public, for surely to combat a writer +of so much merit and popularity as Pope, was not +the plainest road to eminence in the literary world.</p> + +<p>'In his (Shakespeare's) tragic scenes there is <i>always +something wanting</i>'——NO<a name="FNanchor_93_93" id="FNanchor_93_93"></a><a href="#Footnote_93_93" class="fnanchor">[93]</a>——'In his comic scenes he +is seldom very successful, when he engages his characters +in <i>reciprocations</i> of smartness, and contests of +sarcasms; their ideas are <i>commonly gross</i>, and their +pleasantry <i>licentious</i>.' This accusation is cruel and +unjust, as all the world knows already. But a great +part of that preface is an incoherent jumble of reproach +and panegyrick<a name="FNanchor_94_94" id="FNanchor_94_94"></a><a href="#Footnote_94_94" class="fnanchor">[94]</a>. If any thing can be yet +more faulty than what we have just now seen, it is +what follows: 'Whenever he (Shakespeare) solicits<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_40" id="Page_40">( 40 )</a></span> +his invention, or strains his faculties<a name="FNanchor_95_95" id="FNanchor_95_95"></a><a href="#Footnote_95_95" class="fnanchor">[95]</a>, the offspring +of his <i>throes</i> is <i>tumour</i> (i. e. <i>puffy</i> grandeur<a name="FNanchor_96_96" id="FNanchor_96_96"></a><a href="#Footnote_96_96" class="fnanchor">[96]</a>), <i>meanness</i>, +<i>tediousness</i>, and <i>obscurity</i>. His declamations or +set speeches are <i>commonly cold and weak</i>.' The <i>set +speeches</i> (as the Doctor elegantly terms them) of Petruchio, +of Jacques, of Wolsey, and of Hamlet, are +<i>perhaps</i> neither cold nor weak. The conclusion of +this period is worthy of such a beginning; he mentions +certain attempts from which Shakespeare 'seldom +escapes without the pity or resentment of his +reader.' The Doctor himself is an object of pity. +Shakespeare has been in his grave near two centuries—His +life was innocent—His writings are immortal. +To feel resentment against so great a man because his +works are not every where equal, is an idea highly +becoming the generosity of Dr Johnson.</p> + +<p>What 'truth, moral or political,' is promoted by +telling us, that, when Thomson came to London, <i>his +first want was a pair of shoes</i>; that Pope 'wore a kind +of fur doublet, under a shirt of very coarse warm +linen, with <ins class="mycorr" title="Missing singlequote added at the end">fine sleeves<a name="FNanchor_97_97" id="FNanchor_97_97"></a><a href="#Footnote_97_97" class="fnanchor">[97]</a>;'</ins> and a long string of such +tiresome and disgusting trifles, which make his narrative +seem ridiculous. Had Dr Johnson been Pope's +apothecary, we would certainly have heard of the +frequency of his pulse, the colour of his water, and +the quantity of his stools.</p> + +<p>'Though Pope seemed angry when a dram was +offered him, he did not forbear to drink it<a name="FNanchor_98_98" id="FNanchor_98_98"></a><a href="#Footnote_98_98" class="fnanchor">[98]</a>.' And +who the Devil cares whether he did or not? The +Doctor needed hardly to have told us, that 'his petty +peculiarities were communicated by a female domestic;' +for no gentleman would have confessed +that they came within the reach of his observation.</p> + +<p>The <i>truly illustrious</i> author of the <span class="smcap">Rambler</span>, has<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_41" id="Page_41">( 41 )</a></span> +exerted his venemous eloquence, <i>through several pages</i>, +in order to convince us, that 'never were penury of +knowledge and <i>vulgarity</i> of sentiment so happily disguised,' +as in Pope's Essay on Man. For this purpose, +the Doctor celebrates the character of Crousaz, +whose intentions 'were <i>always</i> right, his opinions +were solid, and his religion pure<a name="FNanchor_99_99" id="FNanchor_99_99"></a><a href="#Footnote_99_99" class="fnanchor">[99]</a>.' In opposition +to such authorities, let us hear the great and immortal +citizen of Geneva.</p> + +<p>'M. de Crousaz has lately given us a refutation of +the ethic epistles of Mr Pope, which I have read; +but it did not please me. I will not take upon me +to say, which of these two authors is in the right; +but I am persuaded, that the book of the former +will never excite the reader to do any one virtuous +action, whereas <i>our zeal for every thing great and good +is awakened by that of</i> <span class="smcap">Pope</span><a name="FNanchor_100_100" id="FNanchor_100_100"></a><a href="#Footnote_100_100" class="fnanchor">[100]</a>.'</p> + +<p>The Essay on Man, he says, 'affords an egregious +instance of the predominance of genius, the dazzling +splendour of imagery, and the seductive powers of +eloquence. The reader feels his mind full, though +he learns <small>NOTHING</small>; and when he meets it in its +new array, no longer knows the talk of his mother, +and his nurse<a name="FNanchor_101_101" id="FNanchor_101_101"></a><a href="#Footnote_101_101" class="fnanchor">[101]</a>.' If the conversations of Dr Johnson's +mother and his nurse were equal to Mr Pope's +verses, it is a pity the Doctor had not preserved them. +He could hardly have spent his time so well. And it +is a wonder that with so many rare opportunities +of improvement, the Doctor has never yet eclipsed +his nurse. Voltaire pronounces Pope's Essay to be +the finest didactick poem in the world, and he would +no doubt have replied to the Doctor's objections in +that tone of contempt with which the Doctor replied +to some of his—'These are the petty cavils of petty +minds<a name="FNanchor_102_102" id="FNanchor_102_102"></a><a href="#Footnote_102_102" class="fnanchor">[102]</a>.'</p> + +<p>In the Essay on Man 'so little was any evil tendency +discovered, that, as innocence is unsuspicious,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_42" id="Page_42">( 42 )</a></span> +many read it for a manual of piety<a name="FNanchor_103_103" id="FNanchor_103_103"></a><a href="#Footnote_103_103" class="fnanchor">[103]</a>;'—and will continue +to read it, when the cavils of Dr Johnson are +forgotten or despised.</p> + +<p>'He (Pope) nursed in his mind a foolish disesteem +of Kings.' And again, 'He gratified that ambitious +petulance with which he affected to insult the +great<a name="FNanchor_104_104" id="FNanchor_104_104"></a><a href="#Footnote_104_104" class="fnanchor">[104]</a>.'</p> + +<p>Dr Johnson himself is by no means remarkable for +his respect to the great. In the preface to his folio +Dictionary, he tells us, that it was written 'without +any patronage of the <i>great</i>,' which is a mistake; for +he had published a pamphlet, some years before, +wherein he acknowledges, that Chesterfield had patronized +him; and why the Doctor should retract his +own words, it is hard to say; for Chesterfield continued +his friend to the last; and such a man was very likely +<i>the strongest spoke in the Doctor's wheel</i>. But his +Lordship is now dead, and the Doctor is always and +eminently <i>grateful</i>.</p> + +<p>'It has been maintained by some, <i>who love to talk of +what they do not know</i>, that pastoral is the <i>most antient</i> +poetry.' But in the next period, 'pastoral poetry +was the <i>first</i> employment of the human imagination<a name="FNanchor_105_105" id="FNanchor_105_105"></a><a href="#Footnote_105_105" class="fnanchor">[105]</a>.' +The Doctor, therefore, by his own account, is one +of those, <i>who love to talk of</i> (and what is yet worse, to +assert) <i>what they do not know</i>. In North America, the +natives have no conception of pastoral life among +themselves, and their poetry, such as it is, hath no +relation to that state of society.</p> + +<p>Pastoral poetry 'is generally pleasing, because it +entertains the mind with representations of scenes, +familiar to <i>almost every</i> imagination, and of which +<i>all</i> can equally judge whether they are well described, +or not<a name="FNanchor_106_106" id="FNanchor_106_106"></a><a href="#Footnote_106_106" class="fnanchor">[106]</a>.'</p> + +<p>This period is so closely interwoven with nonsense, +that it will take some pains to disentangle it. Rural +scenes are not familiar to <i>almost every</i> imagination. In +England half the people are shut up in large towns,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_43" id="Page_43">( 43 )</a></span> +and such is the gross ignorance of some of them, that +an old woman in London once asked, <i>whether potatoes +grew on trees</i>. Neither is every man an equal judge +even of what is familiar to him. Observe how the +Rambler confounds the distinction between <i>all</i>, and +<i>almost every</i>. The whole number is in the same stile.</p> + +<p>'At this time a long course of opposition to Sir +Robert Walpole had filled the nation with clamours +for liberty, of which no man felt the want, and +with care for liberty which was not in danger<a name="FNanchor_107_107" id="FNanchor_107_107"></a><a href="#Footnote_107_107" class="fnanchor">[107]</a>.'</p> + +<p>No man was more violent than Dr Johnson in abusing +Walpole. We have already seen some of those +political definitions, which at this hour deform the +Doctor's Dictionary. His late zeal for government +could arise from self interest only. And to take his +own words, he comes under suspicion <i>as a wretch hired +to vindicate the late measures of the Court</i><a name="FNanchor_108_108" id="FNanchor_108_108"></a><a href="#Footnote_108_108" class="fnanchor">[108]</a>. He accuses +Milton as a tool of authority, as a forger hired +to assassinate the memory of Charles I. These charges +came with a very bad grace from the Rambler. +They are long since refuted in a separate publication, +and yet they will be reprinted in every future edition +of his book.</p> + +<p>Will any man be the wiser, the better, or the merrier, +by reading what follows—'Lyttleton was his +(Shenstone's) neighbour, and his rival, whose empire, +spacious and opulent, looked with disdain on +the <i>petty state</i> that appeared behind it. For a while +the inhabitants of Hagley affected to tell their acquaintance +of the <i>little fellow</i> that was trying to make +himself admired; but when by degrees the Leasowes +forced themselves into notice, they took care +to defeat the curiosity which they could not suppress, +by conducting their visitants perversely to +inconvenient points of view, and introducing them<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_44" id="Page_44">( 44 )</a></span> +at the wrong end of a walk to detect a deception; +injuries of which Shenstone would heavily complain<a name="FNanchor_109_109" id="FNanchor_109_109"></a><a href="#Footnote_109_109" class="fnanchor">[109]</a>.' +The paragraph closes with a <i>deep</i> observation.</p> + +<p>As the Doctor's own associates<a name="FNanchor_110_110" id="FNanchor_110_110"></a><a href="#Footnote_110_110" class="fnanchor">[110]</a> have lamented +the existence of this beautiful and important passage, +I have only to say, that <i>Poor</i> Lyttleton (as the Doctor +calls him) patronized Fielding, and that the Rambler +patronizes William Shaw: That his Lordship was an +elegant writer: That he did not adopt Johnson's +new words: That <i>Lexiphanes</i> was dedicated to him: +That he was a great and an amiable man: And that +he is <i>dead</i>.</p> + +<p>With all his affectation of hard words, the Doctor +becomes at once intelligible when he wishes to reprobate +a rival genius, or insult the ashes of a benefactor. +In defiance of Addison, and a thousand other <i>shallow +fellows</i>, he asserts that Milton 'both in prose and +verse had formed his stile by a <i>perverse</i> and <i>pedantick</i> +principle<a name="FNanchor_111_111" id="FNanchor_111_111"></a><a href="#Footnote_111_111" class="fnanchor">[111]</a>.'</p> + +<p>Speaking of Mr Walmsley, he says, 'At this +man's table I enjoyed many chearful and agreeable +hours, with companions such as are not often to be +found.—I am not able to name a man of equal +knowledge. He never received <i>my</i> notions with +contempt.—He was one of the first friends whom literature +procured me,—and I hope that at least my +<i>gratitude</i> made me worthy of his notice. It may be +doubted whether a day now passes, in which I have +not some advantage from his friendship<a name="FNanchor_112_112" id="FNanchor_112_112"></a><a href="#Footnote_112_112" class="fnanchor">[112]</a>.' But then, +'He was a <span class="smcap">Whig</span> with <small>ALL</small> the virulence and malevolence +of <i>his</i> party.' This is a most beautiful conclusion; +and quite in the Doctor's stile. His accusation +is incredible. A monster, such as he draws here, +can seldom deform existence.</p> + +<p>We are told that at St. Andrews Cardinal Bea<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_45" id="Page_45">( 45 )</a></span>ton +'was murdered by the ruffians of Reformation<a name="FNanchor_113_113" id="FNanchor_113_113"></a><a href="#Footnote_113_113" class="fnanchor">[113]</a>.' +And it seems to be the fashion of the day, to censure +that action. Yet it is allowed on all hands that +Wishart's doctrine, in spite of its <i>incomprehensibilities</i>, +was better than Popery—that Beaton, a profligate usurping +Priest, had committed every human vice—that, +without civil authority, he dragged our Apostle +to the stake—and that his avowed design was to expell +or exterminate the whole Protestant party. Had +the Cardinal been permitted to complete his plan, we +durst not at this day have disputed, 'Whether it is +better to worship a piece of rotten wood<a name="FNanchor_114_114" id="FNanchor_114_114"></a><a href="#Footnote_114_114" class="fnanchor">[114]</a>, or +throw it in the fire?' It is therefore evident that to +kill this tyrant was highly proper and laudable. We +may just as well censure the centurion who slew Caligula. +When a philosopher, who truly deserves that +title, was once in conversation reprobating Melvil, +he was interrupted by this, simple question, Whether +if his own antagonist had conducted <i>him</i> to the stake, +he would not have pardoned a pupil for avenging his +blood? 'I would most certainly,' he replied, and such +must be the real sentiments of all men, whatever they +may chuse to print. When we attempt to hide the +feelings of nature, that we may support a favourite +system, we never fail to become ridiculous. In this +age and nation, if a magistrate shall rise above the +law; if he rob us of life with the most barbarous exulation; +if his guilt equal whatever history hath recorded; +if he want nothing but the purple and the +legions to rival Domitian, the voice of nature will +be heard. The brave will reject such unmanly, +such fatal refinements of speculation. Like Hambden +and Melvil, they will stand forth in defence of +themselves, and their posterity. They will relieve +their fellow citizens from temporal perdition. +They will drive insolence and injustice from the seat +of power. They will exult in danger, and rush to +revenge or death. They will plunge their swords in<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_46" id="Page_46">( 46 )</a></span> +the heart of their oppressor; or they will teach him, +like Charles, to atone upon the scaffold for the tears +and the blood of his people; and while in the eyes of +their countrymen, they read their glory<a name="FNanchor_115_115" id="FNanchor_115_115"></a><a href="#Footnote_115_115" class="fnanchor">[115]</a>, they will +perhaps reflect with a smile, that some slavish pedant, +some pensioned traitor to the rights of mankind, is +one day to mark them out as objects of public detestation<a name="FNanchor_116_116" id="FNanchor_116_116"></a><a href="#Footnote_116_116" class="fnanchor">[116]</a>.</p> + +<p>'The theatre, when it is under any other direction, +is peopled by such characters as were never +seen, conversing in a language which was never +heard, upon topics which will never arise in the +commerce of mankind.—Upon every other stage +the universal agent is love, by whose power all +good and evil is distributed, and every action quickened +or retarded. To bring a lover, a lady and a +rival into the fable; to entangle them in contradictory +obligations, perplex them with oppositions of +interest, and harrass them with violence of desires +inconsistent with each other; to make them meet in +rapture, and part in agony; to fill their mouths +with hyperbolical joy, and outrageous sorrow; to +distress them as nothing human ever was distressed; +to deliver them as nothing human ever was delivered, +is the business of a modern dramatist. For<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_47" id="Page_47">( 47 )</a></span> +this probability is violated, life is misrepresented, and +language is depraved<a name="FNanchor_117_117" id="FNanchor_117_117"></a><a href="#Footnote_117_117" class="fnanchor">[117]</a>.' The weakest of Dr Johnson's +admirers will blush in reading this passage. He +very fairly denies every degree of merit, to every dramatic +writer, of every age or nation, Shakespeare alone +excepted. What can be more ridiculous than this?</p> + +<p>'Every man finds his mind more strongly seized +by the tragedies of Shakespeare than of any other +writer; others please us by particular speeches, but +he always makes us anxious for the event, by exciting +restless and <i>unquenchable</i><a name="FNanchor_118_118" id="FNanchor_118_118"></a><a href="#Footnote_118_118" class="fnanchor">[118]</a> curiosity, and compelling +him that reads his work to read it through<a name="FNanchor_119_119" id="FNanchor_119_119"></a><a href="#Footnote_119_119" class="fnanchor">[119]</a>.' +But the Doctor overthrows all this within a few pages, +for Shakespeare has '<i>perhaps</i> not <i>one</i> play, which, +if it were now exhibited as the work of a cotemporary +writer, <i>would be heard to the conclusion</i><a name="FNanchor_120_120" id="FNanchor_120_120"></a><a href="#Footnote_120_120" class="fnanchor">[120]</a>.' The +Rambler cannot always suppress his thorough contempt +for the taste of the public. He no doubt laughs +internally at their folly in admiring him.</p> + +<hr style='width: 45%;' /> + +<p>I proceed to the Doctor's English Dictionary, and +shall begin with quoting the remarks already made +by a judicious friend, on this subject.</p> + +<p>'Among the many foibles of the human race, we +may justly reckon this to be one, that when they +have once got any thing really useful, they apply it +in all cases, proper or improper, till at last they +make it quite ridiculous. Nothing can possibly be +more useful than a just and accurate <i>definition</i>, because +by this only we are able to distinguish one +thing from another. It is obvious, however, that +<i>in definitions we ought always to define a thing less +known, by one which is more so, and those things which +are known to every body, neither can be defined, nor<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_48" id="Page_48">( 48 )</a></span> +ought we to attempt a definition of them at all; because +we must either explain them by themselves, or by something +less known than themselves, both of which give +our definitions the most ridiculous air imaginable</i>.</p> + +<p>'A certain right reverend gentleman, not many +miles from Edinburgh, and whom, out of my great +regard for the cloth, I put in the first place, gave +the following definition of a thief. "A thief," says +he, "my friends, is a man of a <i>thievish disposition</i>." +Now though this definition is somewhat imperfect, +for a thief also exerts that <i>thievish disposition</i> which +lurks in his breast, I intend to take it for my model, +on account of its great conformity to many of the +definitions given by the most celebrated authors.—I +remember to have seen in one of the Reviews a definition +of <i>Nature</i>, which began in the following +manner. "Nature is that <i>innate</i> celestial fire."—The +rest has in truth escaped my memory, though +I remember the Reviewers indecently compared it +to the following lines, which they say were a description +of a dog-fish.</p> + +<p class="poem"> +'And his evacuations<br /> +<span style="margin-left: 1em;">Were made <i>a parte post</i>.</span><br /> +<i>A parte post!</i> these words so hard<br /> +<span style="margin-left: 1em;">In Latin though I speak 'em,</span><br /> +Their meaning in plain English is,<br /> +<span style="margin-left: 1em;">He made pure <i>Album Græcum</i>.</span><br /> +</p> + +<p>'This definition rather goes a step beyond that of +the clergyman, as it explains the words <i><ins class="mycorr" title="'a' not italicised in original">a parte post</ins></i> +by <i>Album Græcum</i>, which are more obscure than the +former, and neither of which, out of my great regard +to decency, I choose to translate.—Whether +Dr Johnson composed his dictionary, after hearing +the above-mentioned clergyman's sermon, or not, +I cannot tell, but he seems very much to have taken +him for his model, even though the said clergyman +was a Presbyterian, and Dr Johnson has an +aversion at Presbyterians. Thus, when he tells +us, that <i>short</i> is <i>not long</i>, and that <i>long</i> is <i>not short</i>, he<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_49" id="Page_49">( 49 )</a></span> +certainly might as well have told us that a thief is a +man of a thievish disposition. I am surprised indeed +how the intellects of a human creature could be +obscured by pedantry, and the love of words, to +such a degree, as to insert this distinction in a book, +pretended to be written for the instruction and benefit +of society. Much more am I surprised how +the authors of all dictionaries of the English language +have followed the same ridiculous plan, as if +they had positively intended to make their books +as little valuable as possible. Nay, I am almost +tempted to think, that the readers have a natural +inclination to peruse nonsense, and cannot be satisfied +without a considerable quantity of that <ins class="mycorr" title="original reads 'ingre-(newline)gredient'">ingredient</ins> +in every book which falls into their hands. +<i>Long</i> and <i>short</i> are terms merely relative, and which +every body knows; to explain them therefore by +one another, is to explain them by themselves. But +besides this ridiculous way of explaining a thing by +itself, pedants, of whom we may justly reckon Dr +Johnson the Prince, have fallen upon a most ingenious +method of explaining the English by the <i>Latin</i>, +or some other language still further beyond the +reach of vulgar ken. Thus, when Dr Johnson defines +<i>fire</i>, he tells us it is the <i>igneous element</i>. <i>To +water</i> (the verb) he tells us, is to <i>irrigate</i>, by which +no doubt we are greatly edified. <i>To do</i> is to <i>practise</i>, +and <i>to practise</i> is <i>to do</i>, &c.</p> + +<p>'But the most curious kind of definitions are these +œnigmatical ones of our author, by which he industriously +prevents the reader from knowing the +meaning of the words he explains. Thus, the <i>hair</i> +he tells us is one of the common <i>teguments</i> of the +body; but this will not distinguish it from the skin, +and shews the extreme poverty of judgment under +which the Doctor laboured, when he could not +point out the distinguishing mark between the hair +and skin. A dog is "a domestic animal remarkably +various in his species," but this does not di<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_50" id="Page_50">( 50 )</a></span>stinguish +him, except to natural historians, from a +cow, a sheep, or a hog; for of these there are also +different <i>breeds</i> or species. A cat is "a domestic +animal that catches mice;" but this may be said of +an owl, or a dog; for a dog will catch mice if he +sees them, though he does not watch for them as a +cat does. Nay, if we happen to overlook the word +<i>animal</i>, or not to understand it, we may mistake +the cat for a mouse-trap. The earth, according to +our learned author, is "the element distinct from +fire, air, or water;" but this may be light or electricity +as well as earth.—Air is "the element encompassing +the terraqueous globe;" but an unlearned +reader would be very apt to mistake this +for the ocean, &c.</p> + +<p>'When the Doctor comes to his <i>learned</i> definitions, +he outdoes, if possible, his œnigmatical ones. Network +is "any thing <i>reticulated</i> or <i>decussated</i> at equal +distances." A nose is "the prominence on the face +which is the organ of scent, and the emunctory of +the brain."—The heart is "the muscle which by +its contraction and dilatation propells the blood +through the course of circulation, and is therefore +considered as the source of vital motion."—Now +let any person consider for whom such strange definitions +can possibly be intended. To give instruction +to the ignorant they certainly are not designed; +neither can they give satisfaction to the learned, +because they are not accurate. The nose, for +instance, he says is the emunctory of the brain; but +every anatomist knows that it performs no such office, +neither hath the nose any communication with +the brain, but by means of its nerves.—Yet this +dictionary is reckoned the best English one extant. +What then must the rest be; or what shall we think +of those who mistake a book, stuffed with such stupid +assemblages of words, for a <i>learned</i> composition? +Definitions undoubtedly are necessary, but not +such as give us no information, or lead us astray.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_51" id="Page_51">( 51 )</a></span> +Neither can any thing shew the sagacity, or strength +of judgment, which a man possesses, more clearly +than his being able to define exactly what he speaks +about; while such blundering descriptions as these, +above quoted, shew nothing but the Doctor's insignificance<a name="FNanchor_121_121" id="FNanchor_121_121"></a><a href="#Footnote_121_121" class="fnanchor">[121]</a>.'</p> + +<p>That the courteous reader may be qualified to judge +for himself, I shall now insert a variety of quotations +from this wonderful, amazing, admirable, astonishing, +incomparable, immortal, and inimitable book. +Too much cannot be said in its praise. I shall however +let it speak for itself. Every page, indeed, is so +pregnant with superexcellent beauties, that in selecting +them, the critic's situation resembles that of the +schoolman's ass between two bundles of hay; his only +<ins class="mycorr" title="original reads 'difficuly'">difficulty</ins> +is where to begin. The pious husband +of Bathsheba had asked 'What is <span class="smcap">Man</span>?' But let it +be told in Rome, and published in the streets of Paris, +to the honour of the English nation, that her +greatest philosopher has received 300l. a-year for informing +us that—</p> + +<p><span class="smcap">Man</span> is a 'Human being. 2. Not a woman. 3. Not +a boy. 4. <i>Not a beast.</i>' Woman. 'The female of +the human race.' Boy. '1. A male child; not +a girl. 2. One in the state of <i>adolescence</i>.' Girl. 'A +young woman or child.' (<i>Female</i> child he should +have said.) Damsel. 'A young gentlewoman; a +wench; a country lass.' Lass. 'A girl; a maid; +A young woman.' Wench. '1. A young woman. +2. A young woman in contempt. 3. A strumpet.' +Strumpet. 'A whore, a prostitute.' Whore. +'1. A woman who converses unlawfully with men; +a fornicatress; an adultress; a strumpet. 2. a prostitute; +a woman who receives men for money.' +To whore, <i>v. n.</i> (from the noun) 'To converse unlawfully +with the other sex.' To whore, <i>v. a.</i> 'To +corrupt with regard to chastity.' Whoredom, <i>s.</i> +(from whore) 'Fornication.' (Here follow several<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_52" id="Page_52">( 52 )</a></span> +other definitions on the same pure subject, which every +body understands as well as Dr Johnson.) Young. +'Being in the first part of life. <i>Not old.</i>' Youngster, +younker. 'A young person.' (I pass by <i>ten</i> other articles, +about <i>youthful</i> compounded of <i>youth</i> and <i>full</i>, +&c. &c. because young people are in no danger of +thinking themselves old.) Yuck, <i>s.</i> (<i>jocken</i>, Dutch.) +'Itch,' Old. 'Past the middle part of life; <i>not +young</i>; not new; ancient; not modern. <span class="smcap">Of old.</span> +Long ago; from ancient times.' Hum, interj. 'A +sound implying doubt and deliberation, <i>Shakespeare</i>.' +Fiddlefaddle, <i>s.</i> (a cant word) 'Trifles.' Fiddlefaddle, +<i>a.</i> 'Trifling; giving trouble.'</p> + +<p class="poem"> +(——His own example strengthens all his laws,<br /> +Sam is himself the true sublime he draws.)<br /> +</p> + +<p>Fiddler, <i>s.</i> (from <i>fiddle</i>) 'A musician, one that plays +upon a fiddle.' Here follow fiddlestick, compounded +of fiddle and stick, and warranted an English word +by Hudibras; and Fiddle-string, <i>s.</i> (Fiddle and string) +'the string of a fiddle. <i>Arbuthnot.</i>' Sheep's eye. '<i>A +modest and diffident look, such as lovers cast at their +mistresses.</i>' Love. 'Lewdness.' And <i>thirteen</i> other +explanations. <i>Lovemonger.</i> 'One who deals in affairs +love.' (Besides about twenty other articles concerning +this subject of equal obscurity and importance.) +Sweetheart. 'A lover or mistress.' Mistress. +'A woman beloved and courted; a whore, a concubine.' +Wife. 'A woman that has a husband.' +A Runner. 'One who runs.' Husband. 'The <i>correlative</i> +to wife.' Shrew. '<i>A peevish, malignant, clamorous, +spiteful, vexatious, turbulent woman.</i>' Scold. +'<i>A clamorous, rude, mean, low, foul mouthed woman.</i>' +Henpecked, <i>a.</i> (<i>hen</i> and <i>pecked</i>) 'Governed by the +wife.' Strap. 'A narrow long slip of cloth or <i>leather</i>.' +Whip. 'An instrument of correction <i>tough</i> +and <i>pliant</i>.' Cuckingstool, <i>s.</i> 'An engine invented +for the punishment of scolds and <i>unquiet</i> women.' +Cuckoldom. 'The state of a cuckold.' (Cuckold, <i>s.</i> +Cuckold, <i>v. a.</i> Cuckoldy, <i>a.</i> and Cuckoldmaker, <i>s.</i><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_53" id="Page_53">( 53 )</a></span> +(compounded of <i>cuckold</i>, and <i>maker</i>) I leave out, as +the reader is, perhaps, already initiated in the mysteries +of that subject.) Arse, <i>s.</i> 'The buttocks' To +hang an arse. 'To be tardy, sluggish' Buttock. +'The rump, the part near the <i>tail</i>' Rump. '1. The +end of the backbone. 2. The buttocks.' Thimble. +'A metal cover by which women (yea and <i>taylors</i> +too Doctor) secure their fingers from the needle.' +Needle. 'A small instrument pointed at one end to +pierce cloth, and <i>perforated</i> at the other to receive +the thread.' Gunpowder. '<i>The powder put into +guns to be fired.</i>' Maidenhead. Maidenhode. Maidenhood. +'Virginity, virgin purity, freedom from +contamination.' Oh, <i>interj</i> 'An exclamation denoting +pain, sorrow, or surprise.' Hope '<i>That +which gives</i> <span class="smcap">Hope</span>. <i>The object of</i> <span class="smcap">Hope</span>.' Fear. '1. +Dread; horror; apprehension of danger. 2. Awe; +dejection of mind. 3. Anxiety, solicitude,' &c. +Impatience. 'Heat of passion; <i>inability</i> to suffer delay, +eagerness.' Virgin. '<i>A woman not a mother.</i>' +Virginity. 'Maidenhead; unacquaintance with man.' +Fart. 'Wind from behind. <i>Suckling</i>' To fart. 'To +break wind behind. <i>Swift.</i>' Marriage. 'The +act of uniting a man and woman for life.' Repentance. +'Sorrow for any thing past.' Kiss. 'Salute given +by joining lips.' Kisser. 'One that Kisses.' To +piss, <i>v. n.</i> 'To make water. <i>L'Estrange.</i>' Piss <i>s.</i> +(from the verb) 'Urine; <ins class="mycorr" title="Missing singlequote added at the end">animal water. <i>Pope.</i>'</ins> <ins class="mycorr" title="original reads 'Piss-(newline)burnt'">Pissburnt</ins>, +<i>a.</i> 'Stained with urine.' Pedant. 'A man +vain of <i>low</i> knowledge.'</p> + +<p>Of these extracts, I suppose opinion is uniform. Every +man who reads them, reads them with contempt. +To tell us that a <i>man</i> is not a <i>beast</i>, seems to +be an insult, rather than a definition. To say, that +<i>young</i> is <i>not old</i>, and, that <i>old</i> is <i>not young, of old</i>, &c. +is to say nothing at all. There is a medium; there is +a state between these periods of life. And his definitions +convey no meaning; for a man may be <i>not old</i> tho' +he is <i>not young</i>. Many articles, such as whoring,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_54" id="Page_54">( 54 )</a></span> +whoremaster, whoremonger, whorishly, &c. are as indecent, +as they are impertinent, and seem only designed +to <ins class="mycorr" title="Missing period added">divert school boys.</ins> Hum, Yuck, Fiddle, +Fiddler, Fiddlefaddle, <ins class="mycorr" title="Missing period added"><i>s.</i> Fiddlefaddle</ins>, <i>a.</i> Fiddlestick, +Fiddlestring, Thimble, Needle, Gunpowder, Hope, +O, and O—and Oh, and twenty-eight or thirty explanations +of the particle <i>on</i>, are left without remark +to the reader's penetration. Some are well enough +acquainted with a <i>maidenhead</i>, and such as are not, +will be no wiser by reading Dr Johnson: For he says, +That it is <i>virginity</i>, and that again is explained (like +more than half the words in his book) by the word it +explains. Neither can a <i>maidenhead</i> ensure freedom +from <i>pollution</i>; for a girl may be polluted, without +losing her <i>maidenhead</i>; and on the other hand, the +Doctor dare not say that a <i>married</i> woman is, for that +reason, <i>polluted</i>. Love, he calls <i>lewdness</i>, and he +may as well say, that <i>light</i> is <i>darkness</i>. His admirers +will answer, that he also gives the right meaning; +but let them tell, why he gave any besides the right +meaning, and why he collected such a load of blunders +into his book. Or since he did collect them, +why he did not mark them down as wrong. For in +the preface to his octavo, he tells us, that it is written +for 'explaining terms of science.' But to select +twenty barbarous misapplications of a word, is not +explaining the word, but only <i>confusion worse confounded</i>. +Indeed that whole preface is a piece of the +most profound nonsense, which ever insulted the common +sense of the world. A virgin, is <i>a woman not a +mother</i>. But many wives, and many concubines too, +have never propagated the species, though they had +(as Othello says) a thousand times committed the act +of shame. From this literary chaos, a foreigner would +be apt to imagine that <i>they</i> were <i>virgins</i>.</p> + +<p>Corking pin. 'A pin of the largest size.' Bum. +'<i>The part upon which we sit.</i>' Butter. 'An <i>unctuous</i> +substance.' Buttertooth. '<i>The</i> great broad foretooth.' +Off. prep. '<i>Not on.</i>' Potato. 'An <i>es<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_55" id="Page_55">( 55 )</a></span>culent</i> +root.' Turnip. 'A white <i>esculent</i> root.' Parsley, +'A plant.' Parsnep. 'A plant.' Colliflower. +'<i>Cauliflower.</i>' Cauliflower. 'A species of <i>cabbage</i>.' +Cabbage. 'A plant.' Pit. 'A hole in the ground.' +Pin. 'A short wire, with a sharp point, and round +head, used by women to fasten their cloaths.' Plate. +'A small shallow vessel of metal (or of stone or wood +Doctor) on which meat is eaten.' Play. '<i>Not work.</i>' +Poker. 'The iron bar with which <i>men</i> stir the fire.' +Pork. 'Swine's flesh <i>unsalted</i>.' (Here you may find +<i>Porker</i>, <i>Porkeater</i>, <i>Porket</i>, <i>Porkling</i>, with all their derivations, +definitions, and authorities.) Porridge. +'Food made by boiling meat in water.' Porridge-pot, +(<i>porridge</i> and <i>pot</i>) 'The pot in which meat is +boiled for a family.' Porringer, (from <i>porridge</i>) 'a +vessel in which broth is eaten.' Part. '<i>Some thing +less than the whole.</i>' And <i>thirteen</i> other <i>ramifications</i>. +Pulse. '<i>Oscillation</i>; <i>vibration</i>.' Puff. 'A quick blast +with the mouth.' Vid. in same page, Pudding, <i>s.</i> +from the <i>Swedish</i>, (which is a mistake, for it is from +the French <i>boudin</i>) <i>Pudding Pie</i>, from <i>Pudding</i> and +<i>Pie</i>, and <i>Pudding-time</i>, from <i>Pudding</i> and <i>time</i>. Puddle, +<i>s.</i> Puddle, <i>v. a.</i> & Puddly, &c. Shadow. '<i>Opacity</i>, +darkness, <i>Shade.</i>' Shade. 'The cloud or +<i>opacity</i> made by interception of the light.' Darkness. +'Obscurity. <i>Umbrage.</i>' Shadiness, 'The state +of being <i>shady</i>; <i>umbrageousness</i>.' Shady. 'Full of +<i>shade</i>; <small>MILDLY</small> <i>gloomy</i>.'</p> + +<p class="blockquot">(No light, but rather darkness visible.)</p> + +<p>Sevenscore. 'Seven times twenty.' Shadowy. +'Dark, <i>opake</i>.' To yawn. 'To gape, to <i>oscitate</i>,' +Yawn, <i>s.</i> '<i>Oscitation</i>, <span class="smcap">Hiatus</span>.' Yea. 'Yes.' Yes, +'A term of affirmation, the affirmative particle opposed +to <i>no</i>.' See also in the same place, Yest. Year. +(12 months) Yesterday, <i>s.</i> The day last past, the next +day before to-day. Yesterday, <i>ad.</i> Yesternight, <i>s.</i> +Yesternight, <i>ad.</i> Yet, <i>con.</i> <ins class="mycorr" title="Missing period added">Yet, <i>ad.</i></ins> Nine times explained. +Vent. 'A small <i>aperture</i>; a hole; a <i>spiracle</i>.' +Wind. 'A <i>flowing</i> wave of air; <i>flatulence</i>; windiness.'<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_56" id="Page_56">( 56 )</a></span> +Winker. 'One who winks.' To wink. 'To shut +the eyes.'</p> + +<p class="blockquot">(No, Sir, unless you open them again directly.)</p> + +<p>Window. 'An <i>aperture</i> in a building by which air +and light are <i>intromitted</i>.' <i>N. B.</i> Almost the whole +of the same page is daubed over with such jargon. +Said. 'Aforesaid.' Scoundrel. 'A mean rascal; a +low petty villain.' Rascal. 'A mean fellow; a +scoundrel.' Villain. 'A wicked wretch.' Wretch. +'A miserable mortal.' No, <i>ad.</i> 'The word of refusal. +2. The word of denial.' No, <i>a.</i> '1. Not any; +<small>NONE</small>. 2. <i>No one</i>; <small>NONE</small>: <i>not any one</i>.' (Had +this word <i>none</i> altered its meaning, before the Doctor +got to the end of the line?) Nobody. (<i>No</i> and <i>body</i>) +'No one; not any one.' (See also Nod, <i>v. a.</i> Nod, <i>s.</i> +Nodder. Noddle. Noddy, &c.) None. '1. Not +one. 2. Not any. 3. Not other.' Nothing. '<i>Negation</i> +of being; not any thing,' and <i>seventeen</i> other +definitions. Afore. (<i>a</i> and <i>fore</i>) '<i>before</i>, nearer in +place to any thing.'</p> + +<p>'There is a certain line, beyond which, if ridicule +attempts to go, it becomes itself ridiculous, and +there is a sphere of criticism in that particular region, +in which, if the critic plays his batteries on too +<i>contemptible</i> objects, he must unavoidably depart +from his proper dignity, and must himself be an object +of the raillery he would convey<a name="FNanchor_122_122" id="FNanchor_122_122"></a><a href="#Footnote_122_122" class="fnanchor">[122]</a>.'</p> + + +<h4><span class="smcap">Hear the Doctor on Music.</span></h4> + +<p>Music. '1. The science of <i>harmonical</i> sounds. 2. Instrumental, +or vocal <i>harmony</i>.' Harmony. 'Just +proportion of sound.' Melody. 'Music; <i>harmony</i> +of sound.' Tune. '<i>Tune</i> is a diversity of notes put +together.' <i>Locke</i>, <i>Milton</i>, <i>Dryden</i>. Tenour, <i>s.</i> 'A +<i>sound</i> in music.'</p> + +<p>One requires little skill in music to see that the +Doctor knows nothing of that science. He confounds +<i>melody</i> with <i>harmony</i>; the one consisting in a succession +of agreeable sounds, and the other arising from co<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_57" id="Page_57">( 57 )</a></span>existing +sounds. His account of a <i>tune</i> is curious. +And we may say in his own stile, that his dictionary +is 'a diversity of <i>words</i> put together.' His numerous +omissions on this head will neither afflict, nor +surprise us; but we must be mortified and amazed +to reflect on the partial and injurious distribution of +fame. For his book exhibits in every page, perhaps +without a single exception, a variety of errors and +absurdities. They are clear to the darkest ignorance. +They are level to the lowest understanding, and yet +our language is exhausted in praise of <i>their</i> author. +<i>Pronis animis audiendum!</i></p> + +<p>Poem. 'The work of a poet; a <i>metrical</i> composition.' +Poet. 'An inventor; an author of fiction; +a writer of poems; one who writes in measure.' +Poetess. 'A <i>she</i> poet.' Poetry. '<i>Metrical</i> composition; +the art or practice of writing poems. 2. Poems, +poetical pieces.' <i>To circumscribe poetry by a</i> +<small>DEFINITION</small> <i>will only shew the narrowness of the definer</i><a name="FNanchor_123_123" id="FNanchor_123_123"></a><a href="#Footnote_123_123" class="fnanchor">[123]</a>. +Tragedy. 'A dramatic representation of a +<i>serious</i> action.' Comedy. 'A dramatic representation +of the <i>lighter faults</i> of mankind.' Eclogue. 'A pastoral +poem, so called, because Virgil called his pastorals +eclogues.' Tragic-comedy. 'A drama compounded +of <i>merry</i> and <i>serious</i> events.' Farce. 'A +dramatic representation written <i>without</i> regularity.' +Elegy. '1. A mournful song. 2. A funeral song. 3. +A short poem, without points or turns.' Idyl. 'A +small short poem.' Epigram. 'A short poem terminating +in a <i>point</i>.' Epic, <i>a.</i> 'Narrative; comprising +narrations, not acted, but rehearsed. It is +usually supposed to be heroic.' Epistle. 'A letter;' +and a letter again is 'an epistle.' Ode. 'A poem +written to be <i>sung</i> to music; a lyric poem.' Ballad. +'A song.' Song. 'A poem to be <i>modulated</i> by +the voice.' Catch. 'A song sung in <i>succession</i>.'</p> + +<p>I believe that Dr Johnson has written better verses +than any man now alive in England. He is said to be<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_58" id="Page_58">( 58 )</a></span> +the first critic in that country, and therefore we had +the highest reason to expect elegant entertainment and +philosophical instruction, when the poet and critic was +to speak in his own character.</p> + +<p>But here, as in the rest of this work, the native +vigour of his mind seems entirely to leave him. We +look around us in vain for the well known hand of +the Rambler, for the sensible and feeling historian of +Savage, the caustic and elegant imitator of Juvenal, +the man of learning, and taste, and genius. The +reader's eye is repelled from the Doctor's pages, by +their hopeless sterility, and their horrid nakedness.</p> + +<p>Most of the definitions in this work may be divided +into three classes; the erroneous, œnigmatical, and +superfluous. And of the nineteen last quoted, every +one comes under some, or all of these heads.</p> + +<p>A poem is said to be the work of a <i>poet</i>: And so +were Dryden's prefaces. Again it is <i>a metrical composition</i>. +No age had ever a greater profusion of rhimes +than the present. In Oxford there are two thousand +persons all of whom can occasionally make verses. Yet +in this abundance of <i>metrical composition</i>, we have very +few poems.</p> + +<p>A poet is—1. '<i>An inventor</i>,' but so was Tubal Cain. +2. '<i>An author of fiction</i>,' but so was Des Cartes. 3. '<i>A +writer of poems</i>;' but as he has not been able to point +out what a poem is, the definition goes for nothing. +4. 'One who writes <i>in measure</i>.' But in Cowley's +life, the Doctor himself speaks of men, who thought +they were writing <i>poetry</i>, when they were only writing +<i>verses</i>. We are still exactly where we set out.</p> + +<p>The third definition is superfluous, and the +fourth is very clumsy. The fifth and sixth are +still worse, for comedy<a name="FNanchor_124_124" id="FNanchor_124_124"></a><a href="#Footnote_124_124" class="fnanchor">[124]</a> is frequently very <i>serious</i> +and tender, as well as tragedy; and that again represents +the <i>lighter</i> faults of mankind, as well as comedy. +By the way, what are these <i>lighter</i> faults, +which our comedy is said to represent. In our co<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_59" id="Page_59">( 59 )</a></span>mic +scenes, adultery, and profaneness, appear to be the +chief pulse of merriment. What the Doctor says +of a farce is not true, nor is elegy <i>always</i> mournful<a name="FNanchor_125_125" id="FNanchor_125_125"></a><a href="#Footnote_125_125" class="fnanchor">[125]</a>. +What can he mean by a poem without points or turns? +An Idyll is a small short poem. An Epigram is a +<i>short</i> poem; but so is an Epitaph, or a Sonnet, and +often an Ode, a Fable, &c. An Epigram terminates +in a <i>point</i>. Wonderful! Of the rest of these definitions, +the reader will determine whether they be not every +one of them pitiful; and if it was possible for the +Doctor, or any other man, to convey <i>less</i> information, +on so plain a subject.</p> + +<p>'In comparing this with other dictionaries of the +same kind, it will be found that the senses of each +word are more <i>copiously</i> enumerated, and more +<i>clearly</i> explained<a name="FNanchor_126_126" id="FNanchor_126_126"></a><a href="#Footnote_126_126" class="fnanchor">[126]</a>.'</p> + +<p>Of his <i>clear</i> and <i>copious</i> explanations, here is an additional +specimen.</p> + +<p>Beast. 'An animal distinguished from birds, insects, +fishes, and man.' It is also distinguished from +<i>reptiles</i>, though the Doctor cannot tell us <i>how</i>. A +Reptile is (but sometimes only) '<i>An animal that creeps +upon many feet</i>.' A Snail is 'A slimy animal that +creeps upon plants.' Many animals creep on plants +besides a Snail. He dare not venture to say that a +Snail is <i>a Reptile</i>, for he had said that a Reptile creeps +upon many feet, and a Snail has none. Locke is +quoted to prove that a <i>Bird</i> is a <i>fowl</i>, and we are edified +by hearing that a <i>fowl</i> is a '<i>bird</i>, or a <i>winged</i> +animal.' But this may be the butterfly, the bat, +or the flying fish. He should have said a <i>feathered</i> animal. +We are informed from Creech and Shakespeare, +that a fish is <i>an animal that inhabits the water</i>. +But besides amphibious animals, from the crocodile +down to the water-mouse, we have seen <i>Erucæ Aquaticæ</i>, +or Water Caterpillars, which are truly aquatic +animals, yet are perfectly different from all fish. In<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_60" id="Page_60">( 60 )</a></span>sects +are 'so called from a separation in the middle of +their bodies, whereby they they are cut into two +parts, which are joined together by a small ligature, +as we see in common flies.'</p> + +<p><i>Quere.</i> How many insects answer this description?</p> + +<p>Dr. Johnson had certainly no great occasion to quote +Peacham and Swift before he durst tell us, (as he +does) that a <i>Lily</i> is a <i>flower</i>, and <i>Posteriors</i> the <i>hinder</i> +parts. He forgot to introduce the Dean when affirming, +that a T——d is <i>excrement</i>; but both Pope and +Swift (among others) are cited for P—ss and F—t.</p> + +<p>His learning and his ignorance amaze us in every +page. Pox are, '1. <i>Pustules</i>; <i>efflorescencies</i>; <i>exanthematous</i> +eruptions. 2. The venereal disease.' A particular +species of it <i>only</i>. The first part of this <i>clear</i> +explanation would puzzle every old woman in England, +though most of them know more of small pox +than the Rambler himself.</p> + +<p>Day. '1. The time between the rising and the setting +of the sun, called the <i>artificial</i> day. 2. The +time from noon to noon, called the <i>natural</i> day.' +Natural. 'What is produced by nature,' therefore as +the day from sunrise to sunset is 'produced by nature,' +<i>that</i>, and that only, must be the <i>natural</i> day. +Artificial. 'Made by <i>art</i>, not natural, fictitious, not +genuine.' The day from noon to noon is certainly +<i>not</i> natural, and of consequence, <i>that</i>, and that +only, must be the <i>artificial</i> day.</p> + +<p>Night is, '1. The time of darkness. 2. The time +between sunset, and sunrise.' When the Doctor +acquires the first elements of geography, he will learn, +that in no climate of the world is the time between +sunset and sunrise all of it a time of <i>darkness</i>. Even +at the equator, night does not succeed till half an +hour after sunset. If he has ever seen the sun rise +here, he must also have seen that we have always +day light long before the sun appears. In June our +nights are never entirely dark. Neither is <i>night</i>, +when it really comes on, constantly the 'time of<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_61" id="Page_61">( 61 )</a></span> +darkness,' for the Doctor may frequently see to +read his own mistakes by moonshine. Of this profound +period, the first part contradicts the second, +and every body sees the absurdity of both. What +are we to think of such a definer of 'scientific terms,' +when his errors have not even the negative merit of +consistency.</p> + +<p>Snowbroth, <i>s.</i> (<i>snow</i> and <i>broth</i>) 'very cold liquor.' +And Shakespeare is quoted; but when the poet said<a name="FNanchor_127_127" id="FNanchor_127_127"></a><a href="#Footnote_127_127" class="fnanchor">[127]</a> +that the blood of an old courtier was as cold as <i>Snowbroth</i>, +he meant <i>melted snow</i>. Now it is somewhat odd +that every body can see Shakespeare's idea exactly, except +this learned commentator. Lion. 'The fiercest +and most magnanimous of four-footed beasts.' But +fierceness cannot consist with magnanimity<a name="FNanchor_128_128" id="FNanchor_128_128"></a><a href="#Footnote_128_128" class="fnanchor">[128]</a>. Other +animals exceed the Lion in fierceness; and a Horse, +an Elephant, or a Dog, equal his magnanimity. This +definition contains nothing but a glaring contradiction, +of which neither end is true! Thunder 'Thunder is +a most <i>bright flame</i> rising on a sudden, moving with +great violence, and with a very <i>rapid</i> velocity, +through the air, <i>according</i> to any determination, +and commonly ending with a loud noise or rattling.' +<i>Shakespeare.</i> <i>Milton.</i></p> + +<p>It is needless to say that the learned and ingenious +Pensioner has confounded thunder with lightning. +The inelegance and tautology of this definition I pass +by; but why should he profane the names of Milton +and Shakespeare to support such monstrous nonsense?</p> + +<p>Stone. 'Stones are bodies insipid, hard, not <i>ductile</i> +or <i>malleable</i>, nor <i>soluble</i> in water.' This definition +answers wood, or glass, or the bones of an animal. +One. 'Less than two; single; denoted by an unit.' +<i>Raleigh.</i></p> + +<p>Without consulting Raleigh, we know that a man +may have 'less than <i>two</i>' guineas in his pocket, and +yet have more than <i>one</i>. But still we are not sure,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_62" id="Page_62">( 62 )</a></span> +that he has even a single farthing. One is <i>single</i>, but +we are only where we started, for <i>single</i> (<i>more Lexiphanico</i>) +is '<i>one</i>, not double; not more than one.' +The matter is little mended, when he subjoins that +one is <i>that which is expressed by an unit</i>, for this may +be the numerator of <i>any</i> fraction. Take his book to +pieces, put it into the scales of common sense, and see +how it kicks the beam.</p> + +<p>A circle is, '1. A line continued till it ends where +it began. 2. The space inclosed in a <i>circular</i> line. +3. A round body, an orb.'</p> + +<p>The first of these definitions does not distinguish a +circle from a triangle, or any other plain figure. He +might have found a circle properly defined in Euclid, +and a hundred other books. What are we to think +of the rest of his mathematical definitions? Well, but +he clears up this point, for a circle is 'the <i>space inclosed</i> +in a <i>circular</i> line,' The third definition is no +less erroneous than the second, for if a man were to +mention the circle of the earth, we could not suspect +that he meant the globe itself.</p> + +<p>Botany and the electrical fluid, are not inserted. +Electricity he terms <i>a property</i> in bodies. From +this expression, and from all he says on the subject, +we can ascertain his ignorance of that most curious +and important branch of natural philosophy. <i>Electricity</i> +in general signifies 'the operations of a very +subtile fluid, commonly invisible, but sometimes +the object of our sight and other senses. It is one of +the chief agents employed in producing the phænomena +of nature.' Its identity with lightning was +discovered in 1752, three years before the publication +of Dr. Johnson's folio dictionary. For the author then +to talk of it as 'a <i>peculiar</i> property, supposed once +to belong chiefly to amber,' is shameful. It shews +us the depth of his learning, and the degree of attention +which he thought proper to bestow on his +<i>great</i> work.</p> + +<p>Elasticity. 'Force in bodies, by which they endea<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_63" id="Page_63">( 63 )</a></span>vour +to <i>restore</i> themselves.' To what? To their +former figure, after some external pressure? And +without adding some words like these the definition +conveys no meaning.</p> + +<p>Of Water, we get a very long winded account, +which neither Dr. Johnson nor any body else can +comprehend, for he sinks into mere jargon. Canst +thou conceive (gentle reader) what are 'small, <i>smooth</i>, +hard, <i>porous</i>, spherical particles' of water! <i>Water</i>, +says Newton, 'is a fluid tasteless salt, which nature +changes by heat, into vapour, and by cold into +ice, which is a hard fusible brittle stone, and this +stone returns into water by heat<a name="FNanchor_129_129" id="FNanchor_129_129"></a><a href="#Footnote_129_129" class="fnanchor">[129]</a>.' Boerhaave +calls water, 'a kind of glass that melts at a heat any +thing greater than 32 degrees of Farenheit's thermometer. +The boundary between water and ice<a name="FNanchor_130_130" id="FNanchor_130_130"></a><a href="#Footnote_130_130" class="fnanchor">[130]</a>.'</p> + +<p>Claw. 'The <i>foot</i> of a beast or bird armed with sharp +nails.' Nail. 'The talons of birds or beasts.' Talon. +'The claw of a bird of prey.' <i>Dict. 4th edit.</i></p> + +<p>Here a <i>nail</i> is <i>talons</i>; Talons are a <i>claw</i>; and +a claw is said to be a <i>foot</i> (alias a <i>nail</i>) armed with +<i>nails</i>. The quotations are literal and complete. The +words are all plain English. And if you cannot +comprehend <i>a nail armed with nails</i>, wait upon Dr. +Johnson, and perhaps he will explain it.</p> + +<p>Legion. 'A body of Roman soldiers, consisting of +about <i>five</i> thousand.'</p> + +<p>This is not accurate. The number of men in a +Roman legion rose by degrees from about 3200 to +about 7000.</p> + +<p>Decemvirate. 'The dignity and office of the <i>ten</i> +governors of Rome.' Tribune. 'An officer of +Rome chosen by the people.' Censor. 'An officer +of Rome, who had the power of correcting manners.' +Consul. 'The chief magistrate in the Roman +republic.'</p> + +<p>Wherein did the Decemviri differ from the King, +the Consul, the Dictator, the Triumvir, the Milita<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_64" id="Page_64">( 64 )</a></span>ry +Tribune, the Cæsar, and the Emperor, for all these +were likewise 'Governors of Rome?' The Decemviri +were also an inferior set of men appointed to take +care of the Sybil's books, to conduct colonies, &c. +So that this definition is very incompleat. A Tribune +was 'chosen by the people.' But this does not distinguish +him from many other magistrates. The +Censor had 'the power of correcting manners;' but +he had other powers beside that, and every magistrate +had that power as well as he, though it +was a province more peculiarly his. The Censor is +an officer still known in Venice, and in countries +where the liberty and abuse of the press are unknown, +the licensers of books are called Censors, +though the Doctor does not give us these two explanations +of the word. A Consul is 'the chief magistrate +in the Roman republic.' He was a magistrate +long after the republic was dissolved; for Caligula +made his horse a Consul! But tho' the Consul +was commonly <i>one</i> of the chief magistrates in Rome, +he was never the <i>chief</i>, as the Doctor roundly expresses +it, for he had always a colleague. The Censor +was at least his equal, and the Dictator was by law +his superior. What we learn of the Centurion, the +Triumvir, and the Lictor, is very trifling. Innumerable +words which puzzle the plain reader of a Roman +historian are wanting, such as an Ædile, a Prætor, a +Quæstor, a Cæsar, a Military Tribune, the Hastati, +Principes, Triarii, Velites, the Labarum, or Imperial +Standard, the Balistæ, the Balearians, &c. A <i>Maniple</i> +is 'a small band of soldiers.' And a Cohort is +'a troop of soldiers, containing about 500 foot.' A +Cohort was in general the tenth part of the foot in a +Roman Legion, consequently their number varied, +and the Prætorian Cohort, or that to which the standard +was intrusted, contained, at least in latter ages, +many more men than any of the rest. But in the very +page where this concise author thus blunders about +a Cohort, he takes care to tell us, that <i>Coition</i>, is <i>co<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_65" id="Page_65">( 65 )</a></span>pulation</i>; +<i>the act of generation</i>. That cold is '<i>not hot</i>, +not warm, chill, having sense of cold, having cold +qualities.' That <i>coldly</i> is '<i>without heat</i>.' that coldness +is '<i>want of heat</i>;' and a heap of similar jargon. +Blot. 'A blur.' Blur. 'A blot.'</p> + +<p>The Doctor's admirers will answer, that in so large +a work there was no room for full definitions. I reply, +that his account of Whipgrafting, of Will-with-a-Wisp, +of a Wood-louse, and of the Stool of Repentance, +are very full; that if he was to say no +more of a Roman Consul, he should have said nothing +at all; but that there are other books of the same kind, +and of half the price too, which find room for copious +and useful definitions. Pardon's dictionary is not much +less than the Doctor's octavo, though its price is only +six shillings; (7th edition) and of many useful articles, +such as the Roman Legion, there is a very clear +and full explanation. Besides which, it contains a +description of the counties, the cities, and the market +towns in England; and in the end of the book +there is inserted a list of near 7000 proper names, +none of which are to be found in the Doctor's dictionary. +With what then has Dr. Johnson filled his +book? With words of his own coining, with roots, +and authorities often ridiculous, and always useless; +or with definitions impertinent and erroneous. A +Bashaw he calls 'the viceroy of a province;' and he +might as well have said that every man in England is +six feet high. A Condoler is 'one who <i>compliments</i> +another upon his misfortunes.'</p> + +<p>From the Rambler's <i>accurate</i> and <i>profound</i> knowledge +of anatomy, we must form very high expectations +as to his knowledge of medicine, and we are +not disappointed; for <span class="smcap">Arthritis</span> is 'the Gout' and +the <span class="smcap">Gout</span> is 'Arthritis; a <i>periodical</i> disease attended +with great pain.' The first part of this definition +is not true; and the second will not distinguish the +Gout from the Gravel, the Tooth-ach, &c. &c. <span class="smcap">Gravel</span> +is 'sandy matter concreted in the kidneys,' and<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_66" id="Page_66">( 66 )</a></span> +as often in the bladder too. His account of a Gonnorhœa +is no less incomplete. A <i>Headach</i> is 'a pain +in the head.' <i>Jaundice</i> is 'a distemper from obstructions +of the glands of the liver, which prevent +the gall being duly separated from the blood.' The +Doctor seems to have borrowed his system of anatomy +from the antients; for the moderns have discovered +that the liver (which he ingeniously calls 'one +of the entrails') is itself an indivisible gland. The +Jaundice arises from an obstruction in the biliary ducts. +Tympany is 'a kind of obstructed <i>flatulence</i>, that +swells the body like a drum.' <i>Flatulence</i> is not inserted; +but Flatulency is said to be 'windiness; fulness +of wind.' And what does he mean by an obstructed +fullness of wind, or by his elegant simile of +a drum? His descriptions of the Rickets, Rupture, +Rheumatism, Scrophula, Dropsy, Scurvy, &c. are +equally perspicuous and perfect. The Doctor had no +great occasion to attest, that '<i>the</i> English dictionary +was written with little assistance of the <i>learned</i><a name="FNanchor_131_131" id="FNanchor_131_131"></a><a href="#Footnote_131_131" class="fnanchor">[131]</a>.' +For in almost every department of learning, from astronomy +down to the first principles of grammar, his +ignorance seems amazing. His book is a mass of +words without ideas. Through the whole there runs +a radical corruption of truth and common sense. It +is most astonishing that the <i>Idler</i> has hardly ever been +attacked in this quarter by any of his innumerable invidious +and inveterate enemies.</p> + +<p>I anticipate the answer of his admirers, viz. That +'the <i>nature</i> of his work did not admit of a copious explanation +for every word.' But let them first tell why +he gave such a strange jumble of quotations, to support +a word of which he himself knows not the meaning, +and are we to be told that the <i>nature</i> of <i>any</i> work +whatever, can entitle its author to write nonsense, or +to write on a subject of which he knows nothing. +Indeed the Doctor himself has repeatedly declared, +that his book is deformed by a profusion of errors,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_67" id="Page_67">( 67 )</a></span> +and those who decline to credit my assertion, ought, +<small>PERHAPS</small>, to credit <i>his own</i>. He says, 'I cannot +hope, in the warmest moments to preserve so much +caution through so long a work, as not <small>OFTEN</small> <i>to +sink into negligence</i>, or to obtain so much knowledge +of all its parts as not <small>FREQUENTLY</small> <i>to fail by ignorance</i>. +I expect that sometimes the desire of accuracy +will urge me to superfluities, and sometimes +the fear of prolixity betray me to <i>omissions</i>; that in +the extent of such variety, I shall be <small>OFTEN</small> <i>bewildered</i>, +and in the mazes of such <i>intricacy</i><a name="FNanchor_132_132" id="FNanchor_132_132"></a><a href="#Footnote_132_132" class="fnanchor">[132]</a>, be <i>frequently +entangled</i>, &c.<a name="FNanchor_133_133" id="FNanchor_133_133"></a><a href="#Footnote_133_133" class="fnanchor">[133]</a>' Here is a beautiful confession, +which he afterwards recants: for 'despondency +has never so far prevailed, as to depress me +to <i>negligence</i>,' &c.<a name="FNanchor_134_134" id="FNanchor_134_134"></a><a href="#Footnote_134_134" class="fnanchor">[134]</a> But his recantation is in effect +immediately <i>re-recanted</i>, and we are informed, 'That +a few <i>wild blunders</i>, and <small>RISIBLE</small> <i>absurdities</i>, from +which no work of such multiplicity was ever free, +<i>may</i> for a time furnish folly with laughter, and harden +ignorance into contempt<a name="FNanchor_135_135" id="FNanchor_135_135"></a><a href="#Footnote_135_135" class="fnanchor">[135]</a>.' That this distrust +of his own merit did not arise from want of pride or +vanity we discover within a few lines: For 'in this +work' (<i>the</i> English dictionary, as its author modestly +terms it) 'when it shall be found that <i>much is +omitted</i>, let it not be forgotten that <i>much</i> likewise <i>is +performed</i>. If our language is not here fully displayed, +I have only failed in an attempt, which no human +powers have hitherto completed.—I may surely +be contented without the praise of perfection, +which <i>if</i> I could obtain, in this gloom of solitude' +(<i>London</i>, or its neighbourhood) 'what would it avail +me<a name="FNanchor_136_136" id="FNanchor_136_136"></a><a href="#Footnote_136_136" class="fnanchor">[136]</a>?' And again, 'I have devoted this book, the +labour of years, to the honour of my country<a name="FNanchor_137_137" id="FNanchor_137_137"></a><a href="#Footnote_137_137" class="fnanchor">[137]</a>.' +<i>Item.</i> 'I cannot but have some degree of parental +fondness.' But after all this parental fondness, this +zeal for the honour of his country, the Doctor's ex<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_68" id="Page_68">( 68 )</a></span>traordinary +preface concludes in perhaps the most +extraordinary language that ever flowed from an author's +pen. 'Success and miscarriage are <i>empty sounds</i>, +I therefore dismiss it' (his dictionary) 'with frigid +tranquillity, having little to fear or <i>hope</i> from censure, +or from praise.' All this is surely despicable. +The booksellers had paid their workman on the nail, +or the Doctor would have had something to hope and +<ins class="mycorr" title="Missing period added">fear.</ins> But an honest and sensible tradesman, though +paid before-hand, will always wish and endeavour to +please his employers. From this writer's own words, +it would appear that he is incapable of a sentiment so +generous.</p> + +<p>Bawd 'A Procurer, or Procuress.' To bawd, <i>v. +n.</i> 'To procure.' Bawdily (from <i>bawdy</i>) 'obscenely.' +Bawdiness (from <i>bawdy</i>) 'obsceneness.' Bawdry, +<i>s.</i> '1. A wicked practise of procuring and bringing +whores and <i>rogues</i> together. 2. Obscenity.' +Bawdy, <i>a.</i> (from <i>bawdy</i>) 'Obscene, unchaste.' Bawdyhouse. +'A house where traffic is made by wickedness +and debauchery.' Baggage. 'A worthless woman.' +Bitch. '1. The female of the <i>canine</i> kind. +2. A name of reproach for a woman.' Blackguard<a name="FNanchor_138_138" id="FNanchor_138_138"></a><a href="#Footnote_138_138" class="fnanchor">[138]</a>. +'A dirty fellow.' Block. 'A Blockhead.' Blockhead. +'A stupid fellow; a dolt; a man without +parts,' Blunderer. 'A blockhead.' Blockhead 'A +stupid fellow' Bloodletter. '<i>A Phlebotomist.</i>' Suds. +'<i>A Lixivium</i> of soap and water.' Sun. 'The luminary +that makes the day.'</p> + +<p><i>The</i> English dictionary is prodigiously defective—<i>Nervi +desunt.</i> It has no force of thought. This wilderness +of words displays a mind, patient, but almost +incapable of reasoning; ignorant, but oppressed by +a load of frivolous ideas; proud of its own powers, +but languishing in the last stage of hopeless debility. +We have long extolled it with the wildest luxuriance +of adulation, and we pretend to despise the worshippers +of <i>the golden calf</i>.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_69" id="Page_69">( 69 )</a></span></p> + +<p>No man has done more honour to England, than +Mr Locke. What would he have said or thought, +had Dr Johnson's dictionary been published in his +days? We can easily determine his opinion from several +passages in his works. I select the following, +because it is both short and decisive; and he who +feels any respect for Mr Locke will retain little for +the author of the Rambler. His words are these: 'If +any one asks <i>what this solidity is</i><a name="FNanchor_139_139" id="FNanchor_139_139"></a><a href="#Footnote_139_139" class="fnanchor">[139]</a>, I send him to +his senses to inform him. Let him put a flint, or +a football between his hands, and then endeavour +to join them <i>and he will know</i>. If he thinks this not +a sufficient explication of <i>solidity</i>, what it is, and +wherein it consists, I promise to tell him, what it +is, and wherein it consists, when he tells me, what +<i>thinking</i> is, or wherein it consists, or explains to me +what <i>extension</i> or <i>motion</i> is, which perhaps seems much +easier. The simple ideas we have are such as experience +teaches them us; but <i>if, beyond that, we endeavour +by words to make them clearer</i> in the mind, we +shall succeed no better, than if we went about to +clear up the darkness of a blind man's mind by +talking, and discourse into him the ideas of light +and colours<a name="FNanchor_140_140" id="FNanchor_140_140"></a><a href="#Footnote_140_140" class="fnanchor">[140]</a>.'</p> + +<p>In the title page of his octavo, we learn, that 'the +words are deduced from their originals.' And in +the preface, he adds, that 'the etymologies and derivations, +whether from foreign languages or native +roots, are more diligently traced, and more +distinctly noted, than in other dictionaries of the +same kind.' Mr Whitaker assures us that in this +single article the Doctor has committed upwards of +<i>three thousand</i> errors: And the historical pioneer produces +abundant evidence in support of his assertion<a name="FNanchor_141_141" id="FNanchor_141_141"></a><a href="#Footnote_141_141" class="fnanchor">[141]</a>. +But independent of this curious circumstance, let us<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_70" id="Page_70">( 70 )</a></span> +ask the Doctor what he means by crouding such trifles +into an abstract, which is, he says, intended for +those who are 'to gain degrees of knowledge suitable +to lower characters, or necessary to the common +business of life.' To tell such people, that the word +<i>porridgepot</i> is compounded of <i>porridge</i>, and <i>pot</i>, is to +insult their understandings; and of his Greek and +Saxon roots, not one individual in a thousand can +read even a single letter. The preface commences with +a pitiful untruth. Having mentioned the publication +of his folio dictionary, he subjoins, 'it has <i>since</i> +been considered that works of that kind are by no +means necessary for the bulk of readers.' Here he +would insinuate that the <i>abstract</i> was an <i>after-thought</i>: +But every body sees, that its publication was delayed, +only to accelerate the sale of his folio dictionary. +There is not room now left, to dissect every sentence +in the preface to his octavo. I shall therefore conclude +that subject with one particular, wherein the Doctor's +taste, learning, and genius, blaze in their meridian.</p> + +<p>In the title page to his octavo dictionary, we are informed, +that the words are 'authorised by the names +of the writers in whose works they are found.' And +this tale is repeated at greater length in the preface, +where 'it will be found that truth requires him to +<ins class="mycorr" title="Missing singlequote added at the end">say less<a name="FNanchor_142_142" id="FNanchor_142_142"></a><a href="#Footnote_142_142" class="fnanchor">[142]</a>'</ins>: For under letter A only, there are between +four and five hundred words, for which the +<i>Idler</i> has not assigned any authority—and of these one +hundred and eighty are to be found in no language +under heaven. He boasts indeed that his dictionary +'contains many words not to be found in any other.' +But it also contains many words, not to be found at +all in any other book. If we compute that letter A +has a thirteenth part of these <i>recruits</i>, we shall find +that the whole number scattered through his compilation +exceeds two thousand. A purchaser of his <i>abstract</i> +has a title to ask the Doctor, why the work is +loaded with such a profusion of trash, which serves on<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_71" id="Page_71">( 71 )</a></span>ly +to testify the folly of him who collected or created +it. Men of eminent learning have been consulted, +who disown all acquaintance (in English) with most +articles in the following list:</p> + +<p>Abacus, Abandonement, Abarticulation, Abcedarian, +Abcedary, Aberrant, Aberuncate, Abject, <i>v. a.</i> +Ablactate, Ablactation, Ablation, Ablegate, Ablegation, +Ablepsy, Abluent, Abrasion, Abscissa, Absinthiated, +Abitention, Absterge, Accessariness, Accidentalness, +Accipient, Acclivious, Accolent, Accompanable, +Accroach, Accustomarily, Acroamatical, Acronycal, +Acroters, or Acroteria, Acuate, Aculerate, +Addulce, Addenography, Ademption, Adiaphory, +Adjectitious, <i>Adition</i>, Abstergent, Acceptilation, Adjugate, +Adjument, Adjunction, Adjunctive, Adjutor, +Adjutory, Adjuvant, Adjuvate, Admensuration, +Adminicle, Adminicular, Admix, Admonishment, +<i>Admurmuration</i>, Adscititious, Adstriction, Advesperate, +Adulator, Adulterant, Adulterine, Adumbrant, +Advolation, Advolution, Adustible, Aerology, Aeromancy, +Aerometry, Aeroscopy, Affabrous, Affectuous, +Affixion, Afflation, Afflatus, Agglomerate, +Agnation, Agnition, Agreeingness, Alate, Abb, Alegar, +Alligate, Alligation, Allocution, Amalgmate, +Amandation, Ambidexterity, Ambilogy, Ambiloquous, +Ambry, Ambustion, Amende, Amercer, Amethodical, +<i>Amphibological</i>, <i>Amphibologically</i>, Amphisch, +Amplificate, Amygdalate, Amygdaline, Anacamptick, +Anacampticks, <i>Anaclacticks</i>, Anadiplosis, Anagogetical, +Anagrammatize, Anamorphosis, Anaphora, Anastomosis, +Anastrope, Anathematical, Androgynal, +Androgynally, Androgynus, Anemography, Anemometer, +<i>Anfractuousness</i>, Angelicalness, <i>Angiomonospermous</i>, +Angularity, Angularness, Anhelation, Aniented, +Anileness, Anility, Animative, Annumerate, +Annumeration, Annunciate, Anomalously, Ansated, +Antaphroditick, Antapoplectick, Antarthritick, +Antasthmatick, Anteact, Auscultation, Antemundane, +Antepenult, Antepredicament, Anthology,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_72" id="Page_72">( 72 )</a></span> +Anthroposophy, Anthypnotick, Antichristianity, Auxiliation, +Antinephritick, Antinomy, Antiquatedness, +Apert, Apertly, Aphilanthrophy, Aphrodisiacal, Aphrodosiack, +Apocope, Apocryphalness, Apomecometry, +Appellatory, Apsis, Aptate, Aptote, Aqua, Aquatile, +Aqueousness, Aquose, Aquosity, Araignee, +Aratory, Arbuscle, Archchanter, Archaiology, Archailogick, +Archeus, Arcuation, Arenose, Arenulous, +Argil, Argillaceous, Argute, Arietate, Aristocraticallness, +Armental, Armentine, Armigerous, +Armillary, Armipotence, Arrentation, Arreptitious, +Arrison, Authentickness, Arrosion, Articular, Articulateness, +Austral, Arundinaceous, Arundineous, +Asbestine, Ascriptitious, Asinary, Asperation, Asperifolious, +Aspirate, <i>v. a.</i> Assassinator, Assumptive, Astonishingness, +Astrography, Attiguous, Attinge, Aucupation, +Avowee.</p> + +<p>Of these words about forty only are proper, yet +though they are so, and though they are frequently +to be found in the best authors, yet the Doctor has not +given any authority for them. His reading therefore +must have been very circumscribed, or his negligence +very great. Is the word <i>Avowee</i>, for instance, one of +those which 'are however, to be yet considered as +resting only upon the credit of former dictionaries<a name="FNanchor_143_143" id="FNanchor_143_143"></a><a href="#Footnote_143_143" class="fnanchor">[143]</a>.' +Besides these forty, there are under letter A, some +hundreds of the most common words, for which no +author's name is quoted. A gross omission according +to the plan which he lays down.</p> + +<p>Let us put the case, that a foreigner sits down to +compose a page of English, by the help of Dr Johnson's +work. The strange combinations of letters <ins class="mycorr" title="Open bracket missing in original">(for I dare</ins> +not call them words) which swell his book to +its present bloated size, are not marked with an asterisk, +to distinguish them as barbarous: The novice +would therefore adopt a stile unknown to any native +of England. Here is a short specimen of what he +would say.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_73" id="Page_73">( 73 )</a></span></p> + +<p>'An <i>Admurmuration</i> has long wandered about the +world, that the pensioner's political principles are +<i>anfractuous</i>. Their <i>anfractuousness</i>, their <i>insipience</i>, +and their <i>turpitude</i>, are no longer <i>amphibological</i>. +His <i>nefarious repercussion</i> of <i>obloquy</i> must <i>contaminate</i>, +and <i>obumbrate</i>, and who can tell but it may even +<i>aberuncate</i> his <i>feculent</i> and <i>excrementitious celebrity</i>. +His <i>perspicacity</i> will see without <i>comity</i>, or <i>hilarity</i>, +that his character as an author and a gentleman, requires +<i>resuscitation</i>, for it is neither <i>immane</i> nor <i>immarcessible</i>. +This is a <i>homogeneous</i> truth<a name="FNanchor_144_144" id="FNanchor_144_144"></a><a href="#Footnote_144_144" class="fnanchor">[144]</a>. Let him +distend, like the <i>flaccid</i> sides of a football<a name="FNanchor_145_145" id="FNanchor_145_145"></a><a href="#Footnote_145_145" class="fnanchor">[145]</a>, his <i>sal</i>, +his <i>sapience</i>, and his powers of <i>ratiocination</i>. The +<i>mellifluous</i> and <i>numerose cadence</i> of <i>equiponderant</i> periods +cannot ensure him from a <i>luxation</i>, a <i>laceration</i>, +and a <i>resiliency</i> of his <i>adminicular concatenation</i> with +the <i>rugged mercantile</i> race<a name="FNanchor_146_146" id="FNanchor_146_146"></a><a href="#Footnote_146_146" class="fnanchor">[146]</a>. The loss of this <i>adscititious +adminicle</i> would make the sage's <i>impeccable</i>, +but <i>lugubrious</i> bosom vibrate with the horrors of +<i>dilution</i> and <i>dereliction</i>. His organs of vision would +gush with <i>salsamentarious</i> torrents of spherical particles, +of equal diameters, and of equal specific gravities, +as Dr Cheyne observes—their smoothness—their +sphericity—their frictions, and their hardness,'<a name="FNanchor_147_147" id="FNanchor_147_147"></a><a href="#Footnote_147_147" class="fnanchor">[147]</a> +&c.</p> + +<p>To the last edition (the 4th) of the folio dictionary, +there is prefixed an advertisement, from which I have +extracted a few lines: 'Finding my dictionary about +to be reprinted, I have endeavoured by a revisal to +make it less reprehensible. I will not deny that I +found <i>many parts requiring emendation</i>, and <i>many +more capable of improvement.</i> <i>Many faults</i> I have corrected, +some superfluities I have taken away, and +some deficiencies I have supplied. I have methodised +some parts that were <i>disordered</i>, and illuminated +some that were <i>obscure</i>. Yet the changes or ad<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_74" id="Page_74">( 74 )</a></span>ditions +bear a very small proportion to the whole.' +That his improvements, bear a very small proportion +to the quantity of errors still in his book is true, for +after a long and painful search, I have only been able +to trace out <small>ONE</small> alteration. The word <i>Gazetteer</i> is now +defined without that insolent scurrility formerly quoted. +But in this correct edition, thunder continues +to be a <i>most bright flame</i>. Whig is still the name of a +faction; and a Tory is said to be an adherent to the +antient constitution of England. Oats, Excise, <i>Monarch</i>, +&c. are all in the same stile. Nowise, <i>n. s.</i> +'(<i>no</i> and <i>wise</i>: this is commonly spoken and written +by <small>IGNORANT BARBARIANS</small>, <i>noways</i>). Not in any +manner, or degree.' Theorem, <i>n. s.</i> 'A position +laid down as an acknowledged truth.'</p> + +<p>Here a schoolboy can detect the Doctor's ignorance, +for every body knows that this word has the <i>opposite</i> +meaning, which is indeed evident from the quotations +that are intended to exemplify it.</p> + +<p>'Having found this the head <i>theorem</i> of all their +discourses, we hold it necessary that the <i>proofs</i> thereof +be weighed.' <i>Hooker.</i> 'Here are three <i>theorems</i>, that +from thence we may draw some conclusions<a name="FNanchor_148_148" id="FNanchor_148_148"></a><a href="#Footnote_148_148" class="fnanchor">[148]</a>.' <i>Dryden.</i> +No words can paint the Doctor's want of attention.</p> + +<p>To piss, <i>v. n.</i> (pisser Fr. pissen Dutch) 'To make +water. I charge the <i>pissing</i> conduit run nothing +but claret. <i>Shakespeare.</i> One ass pisses, the rest <i>piss</i> +for company. <i>L'Estrange.</i> The wanton boys <i>piss</i> +upon your grave. <ins class="mycorr" title="Missing period added"><i>Dryden.</i></ins>' Whoredom, <i>n. s.</i> (from +<i>whore</i>) 'Fornication. Some let go <i>whoredom</i> as an +indifferent matter. <i>Hale.</i>' Whorish, <i>a.</i> (from +whore) 'Unchaste, incontinent. By means of a +<i>whorish</i> woman a man is brought to a piece of +<ins class="mycorr" title="Missing period added">bread.</ins> <i>Proverbs.</i> I had as lief you should tell me +of a mess of <i>porridge</i><a name="FNanchor_149_149" id="FNanchor_149_149"></a><a href="#Footnote_149_149" class="fnanchor">[149]</a>.'</p> + +<p>The reader has seen what a profusion of low, and +even blackguard expressions are to be met with in +the Doctor's celebrated work. I shall now give an<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_75" id="Page_75">( 75 )</a></span> +additional specimen of his <i>great</i> work; and if, like +some American savages, we cannot count our fingers, +Dr Johnson himself will teach us how to do it; <ins class="mycorr" title="original reads 'forhe'">for he</ins> +tells us, on <i>Shakespeare's</i> authority, that two is, 'one and +one,' Pope and Creech are quoted to prove, that +three is, 'two and one.' Four is, 'two and two;' +and, if you have the least doubt that 'four and one' +make five, or that five is, 'the half of ten,' you will +be silenced by the name of Dryden. Six is, 'twice +three, one more than five.' Seven is, 'four and +three, one more than six.' Eight is, 'twice four, +a word of number.' Nine is, 'one more than +eight.' Ninth is, 'that which precedes the tenth.' +Ten is, 'the decimal number, twice five.' Tenth is, +'first after the ninth, the ordinal of ten.' Eleven is, +'ten and one.' Eleventh is, 'the next in order to +the tenth, and is derived from eleven.' Twelve is, +'two and ten;' and twelfth, 'second after the tenth, +the ordinal of twelve.' Thirteen is, 'ten and three.' +Fourteen is, 'four and ten.' Fifteen is, 'five and +ten.' Fifteen, 'the ordinal of fifteen, the fifth +after the tenth;' and, if you entertain any suspicion +as to the verity of these definitions, read over +Boyle, Brown, Dryden, Moses, Raleigh, Sandys, +Shakespeare, and Bacon. Thirdly is, in the 'third +place.' Thrice, 'three times,' threefold, 'thrice +repeated, consisting <ins class="mycorr" title="Missing period added">of three.</ins>' Threepence, (<i>three</i> +and <i>pence</i>) 'a small silver coin, valued at thrice a +penny.' Threescore, a. (<i>three</i> and <i>score</i>) 'thrice +twenty, sixty.' Pope, Raleigh, Wiseman, Shakespeare, +Brown, Dryden, and Spencer, are cited to +convince you, that these explanations are accurate. +And the other articles of numeration, with all their +derivations, definitions, and the passages which are +quoted to support them, would fill a sixpenny pamphlet. +And this is one recipe for making a book +worth four guineas!</p> + +<p>A farthing is, 'the fourth part of a penny, and a +penny is, <i>a small coin</i><a name="FNanchor_150_150" id="FNanchor_150_150"></a><a href="#Footnote_150_150" class="fnanchor">[150]</a>, of which twelve make a<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_76" id="Page_76">( 76 )</a></span> +shilling.' A shilling is 'now twelve pence.' A +Pound is, 'the sum of twenty shillings;' and, if thou +hast forgot the worth of a Guinea, know that it is 'a +gold coin, valued at one and twenty shillings;' for +Dryden, Locke, and Cocker, have said all this. A +Punk is, 'a whore, a common prostitute;' and a +Puppy is, 'a whelp, the progeny of a bitch, a name +of contemptuous reproach to a man.' To <i>Mew</i> is, +'to cry as a cat.' To Kaw is, 'to cry as a Raven, +Crow, or Rook; and the cry of a Raven or Crow +(and he might have added, of a Jack Daw too) is +kaw.'</p> + +<p>'There are men (says Dr Johnson) who claim the +name of authors, merely to disgrace it, and fill the +world with volumes, only to bury letters in their +own rubbish. The traveller who tells, in a pompous +Folio, that he saw the <i>Pantheon</i> at <i>Rome</i>, and +the <i>Medicean Venus</i> at <i>Florence</i>; the natural historian, +who, describing the productions of a narrow island, +recounts all that it has in common with every other +part of the world; the collector of antiquities, that +accounts every thing a curiosity, which the ruins +of Herculaneum happen to emit, though an instrument +already shown in a thousand repositories, or a +cup common to the antients, the moderns, and all +mankind, may be justly censured as the persecutors +of students, and the <i>thieves</i> of that time, which never +can be restored<a name="FNanchor_151_151" id="FNanchor_151_151"></a><a href="#Footnote_151_151" class="fnanchor">[151]</a>.'</p> + +<p>The traveller who visits Rome and Florence, and +gives an account of what he saw to the world, without +describing the Pantheon and the Medicean Venus, +will, very properly, be censured as an ignorant +and tasteless wanderer. The historian who describes +an island, whether wide or narrow, ought to begin +by telling if it produces water, grass, wood, and corn. +A sword, a bow, and a dagger, are common to the +antients, the moderns, and almost all mankind; yet, +if any Roman military weapon were discovered in the<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_77" id="Page_77">( 77 )</a></span> +ruins of Herculaneum, it would deservedly be the +object of curiosity, and a collector of antiquities might +describe it without being censured, in Dr Johnson's +polite style, as a <i>thief of time</i>. Of this passage, however, +the leading idea is just; and, had the Doctor +been able to express himself with precision, it would +have served, in an admirable manner, to delineate the +character of the author of those passages which we +have just now been reading from his Dictionary.</p> + +<p>A Puppy is said to be, 'the progeny of a bitch,' +but so is the bitch herself. Repleviable is, 'what +may be <i>replevined</i>.' Repair is, 'reparation;' and +reparation is, 'the act of repairing.' A Republican +is, 'one who thinks a commonwealth, without monarchy, +the best government.' But this is only +half a definition; for every subject of a republic, is a +republican, whether he think it the best government +or not. Republican, a. (from republic) is, 'placing +the government in the people.' Is Venice under +the government of the people? It is curious enough +to hear such an author as Ben Johnson cited to prove +what a republic is. The reader will compute what +title the Doctor has to the character given him by a late +writer, viz. that 'his great learning and genius render +him one of the most <i>shining</i> ornaments of the +present age.' A Looking-glass is, 'a glass which +shews forms reflected;' but so will a common glass +bottle; though we never term it a looking-glass. He +says it is compounded of <i>look</i> and <i>glass</i>; but, if the +reader happens to think it is derived from <i>looking</i> and +<i>glass</i>, the Doctor cannot confute him. A knave is, +'a petty rascal, a scoundrel.' A <i>Loon</i> is, 'a sorry +fellow, a scoundrel.' A <i>Looby</i> is, 'a lubber, a clumsy +clown.' A <i>Lubber</i> is, 'a sturdy drone, an idle, +fat, bulky <i>losel</i>, a booby.' A <i>Losel</i> is, 'a scoundrel, +a sorry worthless fellow.' A <i>Lubbard</i> is, 'a lazy +sturdy fellow.' A <i>Booby</i> is—but you must know +what it is, while you read, in these elegant definitions, +the taste and genius of Dr Johnson. He says,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_78" id="Page_78">( 78 )</a></span> +that Bone is, 'the solid parts of the body of an animal.' +Are not the fat and the muscles also solid? A +Volume is, 'something rolled or convolved;' and so +is a barrel, a foot-ball, and a blanket. But a volume +is likewise '<i>as much as seems convolved at once</i>;' an +expression hardly intelligible; and it is a book. A +Book, we are told, is, 'a volume, in which we read +<ins class="mycorr" title="Missing singlequote added at the end">or write;'</ins> and whether we read and write in it or +not.</p> + +<p>'V has two powers expressed in English by two +characters, v, consonant, and u, vowel.' One would +think these were two different letters, as much as any +others in the alphabet. The same remark applies +to letters I and J, which the Doctor has blended. It +is remarkable that this <i>English</i> Dictionary begins with +a <i>Latin</i> word; and the Doctor has inserted it without +giving an authority.</p> + +<p>A Ketch is, 'a <ins class="mycorr" title="Missing singlequote added at the end"><i>heavy</i> ship;'</ins> and a Junk is, 'a <i>small</i> +ship of China.' A Sloop is, 'a small ship;' and a +Brigantine is, 'a light vessel;' but, it would have required +little learning or ingenuity to have said, that, +in our marine, a sloop has only one mast, except sloops +of war, which have three; and, that a brigantine is a +merchant ship with two. A brig, a lugger, a hooker, +a schooner, a galliot, a galleon, a proa, a punt, a xebeque, +and a snow, are not inserted in this <i>compleat</i> +English Dictionary; but a Cutter is, 'a nimble boat +that <i>cuts</i> the water.' Did we ever hear of a boat +that did not cut the water? This explanation, like +that of at least twenty thousand others, is defective; +because, besides a man of war's boat, the word Cutter +is applied to a small vessel with one mast, rigged +as a sloop, that sails very near the <i>wind</i>; from which +peculiarity, its appellation is derived.</p> + +<p>A Cannon is, 'a gun larger than can be managed by +the hand.' Cannon-ball and Cannon shot are, 'the +balls which are shot from great guns.' Mr Locke +is cited to shew, that <i>cannot</i> is compounded of <i>can</i> +and <i>not</i>. Menstruous is, 'having the catamenia;'<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_79" id="Page_79">( 79 )</a></span> +and this last word is wanting, a frequent mode of +<i>definition</i> in this book. The Eye is, 'the organ of +vision.' Eye-drop, (<i>eye</i> and <i>drop</i>) 'tear.' See also +Eye-ball, Eye-brow, Eye-glance, Eye-glass, Eyeless, +Eye-lid, Eye-sight, Eye-sore, Eye-tooth, Eye-wink, +Eye-witness. Eye-string is, 'the string of the eye<a name="FNanchor_152_152" id="FNanchor_152_152"></a><a href="#Footnote_152_152" class="fnanchor">[152]</a>.' +The following names are cited to support the explanations: +Dryden, Spencer, Newton, Milton, Garth, +Bacon, Samuel, Peter, and Shakespeare four times. +The man who can make such a pedantic parade of erudition, +must be a mere quack in the business of +book-building; and the reader who thinks himself edified +by hearing, that an eye-wink is, 'a wink as a +hint or token,' must be an object of pity. But there +is no such reader. <i>Quere.</i> Do we never wink but as +a hint or token? Achor is, 'a species of the <i>Herpes</i>;' +and Hey, 'an expression of joy.' A Mocker is,'one +who mocks;' and a Laughing-stock, (<i>laugh</i> and +<i>stock</i>) a 'butt, an object of ridicule.' Iron, a. is, +'made of iron;' and Iron, s. is said to be, 'a metal +common to all parts of the world;' which is not +the fact.</p> + +<p>Numskull, <i>s.</i> (<i>numb</i> and <i>skull</i>) 'a <i>Dullard</i>; a dunce; +a dolt; a blockhead.' Numskulled, <i>a.</i> (from <i>Numskull</i>) +'dull; stupid; doltish.' Nun, <i>s.</i> 'a woman +dedicated to the severer duties of religion, secluded +in a cloister from the world.' The Nuns of London +were <i>not</i> employed in the severer duties of religion, +which has nothing to do with severity. The +institution of nunneries is the most atrocious insult +upon human feelings, that ever disgraced the selfish and +brutal policy of the Roman priesthood, and its consequences +are the most shocking and criminal. The man +who would palliate such an outrage on Christianity, +deserves no quarter<a name="FNanchor_153_153" id="FNanchor_153_153"></a><a href="#Footnote_153_153" class="fnanchor">[153]</a>. From this sample of his good<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_80" id="Page_80">( 80 )</a></span> +sense and piety, one would hardly rank the Rambler +above 'a domestic animal, that catches mice.'</p> + +<p>Jack is, '1. The diminutive of John. 2. The name +of <i>instruments</i>, which supply the place of a boy, <i>as +an instrument</i> to pull off boots.' Bronchocele, <i>s.</i> 'a +tumor of that part of the <i>aspera tertia</i>, called the +<i>Bronchos</i>,' and this last word is wanting. Broom +is 'a shrub;' and Brogue 'a kind of shoe.' See also +Broomstaff, Broomy, Broth, Brothel, and <ins class="mycorr" title="original reads 'Brothel-(newline)house'">Brothelhouse</ins>. +Bubo, 'the groin from the bending of the +thigh to the <i>scrotum</i>;' but the <i>scrotum</i> is not explained.</p> + +<p>Snot. 'The mucus of the nose.' Nose. 'The prominence +on the face, which is the organ of <i>scent</i>, +and the emunctory of the brain.'</p> + +<p>He should have said the organ of <i>smell</i>, for we do +not say the sense of <i>scenting</i>. But from what he says +of them, it appears that he is ignorant of the distinction +between these two words. If the nose were the +emunctory of the brain (which every surgeon's apprentice +knows that it is <i>not</i>), in that case snot could +not be the mucus of the nose, but the mucus of the +brain. It belongs to neither. It is entirely, or principally +formed in the glands of the throat, as we see +every day in coughing. To contradict such inconsist<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_81" id="Page_81">( 81 )</a></span>encies, +would be below the dignity of any writer, if +they were found in a book less famous than the English +Dictionary.</p> + +<p>Rust. 'The red <i>Desquamation</i> of old iron.' Desquamation. +'The act of scaling foul bones.' Sinew. +'1. A tendon; the ligaments by which the joints are +moved. 2. <i>Muscle</i> or <i>nerve</i>!' Other metals rust as +well as iron, and rust is not always red; that of copper +for instance is blue or green. It is not quite clear +why the word <i>Desquamation</i> is introduced. But his +account of <i>sinew</i> exceeds every thing of the kind.</p> + +<p>Highflier. 'One that carries his opinion to extravagance.' +The word relates to a particular set of men +in this country, and to them only. A Dervise, a +Friar, and a Bramin, profess extravagant opinions; +but an English writer would not call them <i>Highfliers</i>, +nor would he be understood if he did.</p> + +<p>Chervill. 'An <i>umbelliferous</i> plant.' Periwig. '<i>Adscititious</i> +hair.' Chemist, and Chemistry are omitted, +but Chymistry is, 'philosophy by <small>FIRE</small>;' and +Chymist, 'a philosopher by <small>FIRE</small>!' With what inexpressible +contempt would the youngest of Dr Black's +audience hear these definitions? The folly of the +man, who can scribble such jargon is eclipsed by the +superlative ignorance of those who vindicate and admire +him. Dr Johnson asserts, that Shakespeare 'has +corrupted language by every mode of depravation<a name="FNanchor_154_154" id="FNanchor_154_154"></a><a href="#Footnote_154_154" class="fnanchor">[154]</a>.' +The remark applies to himself. And his advocates must +allow, that 'they endure in <i>him</i> what they should +in another loath and despise<a name="FNanchor_155_155" id="FNanchor_155_155"></a><a href="#Footnote_155_155" class="fnanchor">[155]</a>.' Indeed I can very +well believe the Doctor, when he says, that his book +was composed while he was in a state of <span class="smcap">Distraction</span><a name="FNanchor_156_156" id="FNanchor_156_156"></a><a href="#Footnote_156_156" class="fnanchor">[156]</a>. +For the honour of his veracity, we may hope, +that he was likewise <i>distracted</i> when he observed of +the social, facetious, and celebrated John Wilkes, +Esq; that 'Lampoon would disdain to speak ill of +him, of whom no man speaks well<a name="FNanchor_157_157" id="FNanchor_157_157"></a><a href="#Footnote_157_157" class="fnanchor">[157]</a>.'<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_82" id="Page_82">( 82 )</a></span></p> + +<p>Part of his book has merit; but take it altogether, +and perhaps it is the strangest farrago which pedantry +ever produced. It will be said that these are partial specimens, +but we have traced him through various <i>ramifications</i> +of learning, and found his ignorance extreme. +A sensible reader will try his own abilities, in judging +of the Doctor's <i>great</i> performance. Nor will he throw +down this pamphlet without a candid perusal, because, +by some unaccountable infatuation, the dictionary +has for twenty seven years been admired +by thousands and ten thousands, who have never <i>seen</i> +it. Let us exert that courage of thought, and that +contempt of quackery, which to feel, and to display, +is the privilege and the pride of a Briton. In a country +where no man fears his king, can any man fear +the sound of a celebrated name, or crouch behind the +the banner of Dullness, because it is born by <span class="smcap">Samuel +Johnson</span>, A. M. & LL.D.?</p> + +<p>I shall now take leave of this enormous compilation, +and return, for a few pages, to the rest of his works.</p> + +<hr style='width: 45%;' /> + +<p>Speaking of Pope's edition of Shakespeare, Dr +Johnson observes, 'That on this undertaking, to +which Pope was induced by a reward of two hundred +and seventeen pounds, twelve shillings, he +seems never to have reflected afterwards <i>without vexation</i><a name="FNanchor_158_158" id="FNanchor_158_158"></a><a href="#Footnote_158_158" class="fnanchor">[158]</a>.' +The Doctor ought never to reflect 'without +vexation' on his own edition of Shakespeare. +He published his proposals in 1756, but the work itself +did not appear till 1768, and then, though the +world was warmly prejudiced in his favour, and tho' +he had plundered every thing which he thought valuable, +from all his predecessors, yet his performance +was received with general disregard. His preface was +the particular butt of censure; his deficiencies were +detected 'with all the insolence of victory;' and the<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_83" id="Page_83">( 83 )</a></span> +public were, for once, inclined to say of him, what +he says of Mr Theobald, viz. that he was 'a man of +heavy diligence, with very slender powers<a name="FNanchor_159_159" id="FNanchor_159_159"></a><a href="#Footnote_159_159" class="fnanchor">[159]</a>.'</p> + +<p>Indeed the Doctor persecutes the name of Theobald +with the most rancorous spirit of revenge. In +his proposals for printing Shakespeare, he tells us, +'that Mr Theobald, if fame be just to his memory, +considered his learning only as an instrument of +gain, and made no farther enquiry after his authour's +meaning, when once he had notes sufficient +to embellish his page with the expected decorations.' +If Theobald was poor, he was certainly prudent in +considering his learning as an instrument of gain. +In this point, he has been exactly copied by no less a +personage than Dr Johnson himself. But the Doctor +has not ventured to say that Theobald was a venal +prostituted dabbler in politics; that he insulted his +King, till he received a pension; and that when he had +received his pension, he insulted his country. No. +'The old books, the cold pedantry, and sluggish +pertinacity of Theobald,' never excited the serious +contempt or indignation of mankind. Dr Johnson +asserts, 'That when Theobald published Shakespeare +in opposition to Pope, the <i>best</i> notes were supplied +by Warburton<a name="FNanchor_160_160" id="FNanchor_160_160"></a><a href="#Footnote_160_160" class="fnanchor">[160]</a>.' This is an assertion without a +proof, and merits no regard; for his veracity keeps +pace with his candour.</p> + +<p>The admirers of Pope will be sensible of the good +nature and honesty of Dr Johnson, from the following +unqualified assertion: 'The great object of his +(Pope's) ridicule is <i>poverty</i>; the crimes with which +he reproaches his antagonists are their debts, their +habitation in the mint, and their want of a dinner. +He seems to be of an opinion, not very uncommon +in the world, that to want money is to want every +thing<a name="FNanchor_161_161" id="FNanchor_161_161"></a><a href="#Footnote_161_161" class="fnanchor">[161]</a>.' The crimes with which Pope reproaches +the Duncenian heroes are slander and <i>forgery</i><a name="FNanchor_162_162" id="FNanchor_162_162"></a><a href="#Footnote_162_162" class="fnanchor">[162]</a>, most<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_84" id="Page_84">( 84 )</a></span> +of them were not only bad writers, but bad men; +and it is only in the latter point of view, that the poet +considered them as fair objects of ridicule. Had Pope +been capable of insulting honest indigence, his reputation +and his glory must have been for ever blasted. +The humanity of Englishmen would have rejected, +with horror, such impious wit. The last part of this +malicious paragraph is, after a few pages, contradicted +by Dr Johnson himself. Had Pope been of opinion, +that <i>to want money is to want every thing</i>, he +would not have assisted Dodsley 'with a hundred +pounds that he might open a shop—of the subscription +of forty pounds a-year that he raised for Savage, +<small>TWENTY</small> were paid by himself. He was accused +of loving money, but his love was eagerness +to gain, not solicitude to keep it. In the duties of +friendship, he was zealous and constant. It does not +appear that he lost a <i>single</i> friend by coldness, or by +injury; those who loved him once, continued their +kindness<a name="FNanchor_163_163" id="FNanchor_163_163"></a><a href="#Footnote_163_163" class="fnanchor">[163]</a>.' This cannot be the picture of a man +who insulted innocent misery.</p> + +<p>The Doctor is perpetually giving us strokes of his +own character. Thus, of Mr Thomson we are informed, +'that he was "more fat than bard beseems," +of a <i>dull</i> countenance, and a <i>gross, unanimated, uninviting</i> +appearance.' This is the Rambler's portrait, +but when applied to the author of the Seasons, +it is not true, for Mr Murdoch assures us, 'that his +worst appearance was, when you saw him walking +alone, in a thoughtful mood; but let a friend accost +him, and enter into conversation, he would +instantly brighten into a most amiable aspect, his features +no longer the same, and his eye darting a peculiar +animated fire. His looks always announced, +and half expressed what he was about to say<a name="FNanchor_164_164" id="FNanchor_164_164"></a><a href="#Footnote_164_164" class="fnanchor">[164]</a>.'</p> + +<p>The Doctor fills up several pages with blotted variations +from Pope's manuscript translation of the Iliad. +He exults in this precious production, and fore<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_85" id="Page_85">( 85 )</a></span>sees +that the wisest of his readers will wish for more. +Having perused a few lines of it only, I cannot pretend +to rate the value of this commodity: But a +plain reader will be apt to suspect that the Doctor has +on this, as on former occasions, adopted the prudent +proverb,<i> multum scribere, multum solvere</i>. If Lexiphanes +<i>overflows with Greek</i>, he may, by comparing Pope +with Homer, afford much entertainment.</p> + +<p>'Wives and husbands are, indeed, incessantly complaining +of each other<a name="FNanchor_165_165" id="FNanchor_165_165"></a><a href="#Footnote_165_165" class="fnanchor">[165]</a>.'—Not unless both are fools, +nor always then. For the credit of its author, I suppress +the sequel of this unhappy period.</p> + +<p>Dr Johnson observes, that Mr Addison, 'by a serious +display of the beauties of Chevy Chace, exposed +himself to the ridicule of Wagstaff.—In Chevy +Chace there is <i>not much</i> of either bombast or affectation, +but there is chill and lifeless imbecility. +The story cannot possibly be told in a manner that +shall make <i>less</i> impression on the mind<a name="FNanchor_166_166" id="FNanchor_166_166"></a><a href="#Footnote_166_166" class="fnanchor">[166]</a>.' This is a +most scandalous criticism; no man who ever heard +the ballad, will hear it with patience. The Doctor's +pious intention seems to have been to lessen the reputation +of Addison. Let him who falsifies without +shame, be chastised without mercy<a name="FNanchor_167_167" id="FNanchor_167_167"></a><a href="#Footnote_167_167" class="fnanchor">[167]</a>.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_86" id="Page_86">( 86 )</a></span></p> + +<p>Though Dr Johnson long acted as Reviewer of +books for the Gentleman's Magazine, and though he +often exercised his pen in that capacity with the most +grovelling insolence, yet he cannot speak with patience +of his rivals in that branch of trade. 'We have now,' +says he, 'among other disturbers of human quiet, a +numerous body of Reviewers and Remarkers<a name="FNanchor_168_168" id="FNanchor_168_168"></a><a href="#Footnote_168_168" class="fnanchor">[168]</a>.' +He is angry with Lord Lyttleton, for having once condescended +to correspond with the Critical Reviewers. +He observes, that the <span class="smcap">Critical Reviewers</span>, 'can satisfy +their hunger only by devouring their brethren. +I am far from imagining that they are naturally +more ravenous or <ins class="mycorr" title="hyphen unclear in original">blood-thirsty</ins>, +than those on whom they fall with so much violence and fury; but they +are <i>hungry</i>, and <i>hunger</i> must be satisfied; and these +<span class="smcap">Savages</span>, when their bellies are full, will fawn on +those whom they now bite<a name="FNanchor_169_169" id="FNanchor_169_169"></a><a href="#Footnote_169_169" class="fnanchor">[169]</a>.' They have lately<a name="FNanchor_170_170" id="FNanchor_170_170"></a><a href="#Footnote_170_170" class="fnanchor">[170]</a> +celebrated the Doctor's great candour, of which this +passage is the best evidence that 'will easily be found.'</p> + +<p>I finish this essay by reciting the circumstance which +gave it birth.</p> + +<p>In 1778, Mr William Shaw published an Analysis +of the Gaelic language. He quoted specimens of Gaelic +poetry, and harangued on its beauties, with the +aukward elocution of one who did not understand +them. A few months ago, he printed a pamphlet. +He traduced decent characters. He denied the existence +of Gaelic poetry, and his name was echoed in +the newspapers as a miracle of candour. Is there in +the annals of Grubæan impudence any parallel to +this? Is there any nation in the world except <i>one</i>, +perpetually deluded by a succession of impostors? Are +these the blessed fruits of that freedom which patriots +perish to defend? If there be no pillory, no whipping +post for such accumulated guilt, we may truly say<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_87" id="Page_87">( 87 )</a></span> +with Shakespeare, that 'Liberty plucks Justice by the +nose.' This incomparable bookbuilder, who writes +a dictionary before he can write grammar, had previously +boasted what a harvest he would reap from +English credulity. He was not deceived. The bait +was caught; and the voice of truth was for some time +drowned in the clamours of the rabble. Mr Shaw +wants only money. He thinks only how to get it, +and with a courage that is respectable, avowed his intentions. +But better things might have been expected +from the moral and majestic author of the Rambler. +He must have seen the Analysis of the Gaelic +language, for Shaw mentions him as the patron of that +work. He must have seen the specimens of Celtic +poetry there inserted. That he is likewise the patron +of this poor scribble, no man, I suppose, will offer +to deny. From this single circumstance, Dr Johnson +stands convicted of <i>an illiberal intention to deceive</i>. +Candour can hardly hesitate to sum up his character +in the vulgar but expressive pollysyllable.</p> + +<p>It will be demanded, why a private individual, +without interest or connections, presumes to interfere +in the quarrels of the learned? But when the +most shameless of mankind, is <i>hired</i> to abuse the characters +of his countrymen, to blast the reputations of +the living and the dead; when <i>such</i> a tool is employed +for <i>such</i> a purpose, that those who are insulted +cannot with propriety stoop to a reply,—<span class="smcap">Then</span> the +highest degree of goodness may degenerate into the +lowest degree of weakness, silence becomes approbation, +and tenderness and delicacy deserve different +names. He is unfit to be the friend of virtue who +cannot defend her dignity; who dares not execute +her vengeance. In this shameful affair, one circumstance +does honour to Dr Johnson. <i>His friendship is +not exhausted in a compliment.</i> He does not excite expectation +merely to disappoint it. He resembles not +some perfidious wretches, whom his intrepid eloquence +hath so properly pointed out to public indignation.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_88" id="Page_88">( 88 )</a></span> +Exerting the generosity which often ennobles the +character of an Englishman, he engages not his dependant +in a performance for which he scruples to pay.</p> + +<p>To glean the tithe of this man's absurdities cannot +be of peculiar consequence to me: But the world is +long since weary of his arrogant pedantry, his officious +malice, his detested assiduity to undermine his superiors, +and overbear his equals. Reformation is never +quite hopeless, and by submitting to make a catalogue +of his errors, there is a chance to humble and +reform him. Perhaps indeed, like '<i>The drudges of +sedition</i>, <small>HE</small> will hear in sullen silence, <small>HE</small> will feel +conviction without shame, and be confounded, but +not abashed<a name="FNanchor_171_171" id="FNanchor_171_171"></a><a href="#Footnote_171_171" class="fnanchor">[171]</a>.' I have not arrested a few careless +expressions, which, in the glow of composition, will +sometimes escape, but by fair, and copious quotations +from Dr Johnson's ponderous abortions, have attempted +to illustrate his covetous and shameless prolixity; +his corruptions of our language; his very limited +literature; his entire want of general learning; +his antipathy to rival merit; his paralytick reasoning; +his solemn trifling pedantry; his narrow views +of human life; his adherence to contradictions; his +defiance of decency; and his contempt of truth. I +have not been sporting in the mere wantonness of assertion. +I have produced such various, such invincible, +such damning proofs, that the Doctor himself must +feel a burst of conviction. To collect every particle +of <i>inanity</i> which may be found in our <i>patriot's</i> works +is infinitely beyond the limits of an eighteen-pence +pamphlet. I stop at present here, but the subject +seems <i>inexhaustible</i><a name="FNanchor_172_172" id="FNanchor_172_172"></a><a href="#Footnote_172_172" class="fnanchor">[172]</a>!<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_89" id="Page_89">( 89 )</a></span></p> + +<h4><i>F I N I S.</i></h4> + + + + + +<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_1_1" id="Footnote_1_1"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_1"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> Read Mr Mason's Ode to Truth, and pick out a single sentiment +if you can.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_2_2" id="Footnote_2_2"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_2"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> World, No. 100.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_3_3" id="Footnote_3_3"></a><a href="#FNanchor_3_3"><span class="label">[3]</span></a> Swift had the splendid misfortune to be a man of genius. By +a very singular felicity, he excelled both in verse and prose. He +boasted, that no <i>new</i> word was to be found in his volumes; though, +in glory above all writers of his time, he did not fancy <i>that</i> entitled +him to ingross or insult conversation. He was no less remarkably +clean, than <i>some</i> are remarkably dirty. His love of fame never led +him into the lowest of all vices; and a sense of his own dignity made +him respect the importance and the feelings of others. He often went +many miles on foot, that he might be able to bestow on the poor, what a +coach would have cost him. He raised some hundreds of families from +beggary, by lending them five pounds a-piece only. He inspired his +footmen with Celtic attachment. Whatever was his pride, he shewed +none of it in 'the venerable presence of misery.' Though a poet he +was free from vanity; though an author and a divine, his example +did not fall behind his precepts; though a courtier, he disdained to +fawn on his superiors; though a patriot, he never, like our successive +generations of blasted orators, sacrificed his principles to his passions. +'His meanest talent was his wit.' His learning had no pedantry, +his piety no superstition; his benevolence almost no parallel. His +intrepid eloquence first pointed out to his oppressed countrymen, that +path to Independence, to happiness, and to glory, which their posterity, +at this moment, so nobly pursue. His treatise on the conduct +of their foreign allies, first taught the English nation the dangers of a +continental war, dispelled their delusive dreams of conquest, and stopt +them in the full career to ruin.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_4_4" id="Footnote_4_4"></a><a href="#FNanchor_4_4"><span class="label">[4]</span></a> See parallel between Diogenes and Dr Johnson in Town and +Country Magazine. In his life of Swift, the Doctor tells us, that +'he relieved without pity, and assisted without kindness.'</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_5_5" id="Footnote_5_5"></a><a href="#FNanchor_5_5"><span class="label">[5]</span></a> Idler, No. 70.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_6_6" id="Footnote_6_6"></a><a href="#FNanchor_6_6"><span class="label">[6]</span></a> Preface to Shakespeare.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_7_7" id="Footnote_7_7"></a><a href="#FNanchor_7_7"><span class="label">[7]</span></a> Life of Pope.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_8_8" id="Footnote_8_8"></a><a href="#FNanchor_8_8"><span class="label">[8]</span></a> The following extracts from the Doctor's Dictionary are a key +to his political tenets: <span class="smcap">Excise</span>, a hateful tax levied upon commodities, +and adjudged, not by the common judges of property, but +<i>wretches</i> hired by those to whom excise is paid. <i>Gazetteer</i>, was +lately a term of the utmost infamy, being usually applied to wretches +that were <i>hired</i> to vindicate the court. <i>Pension</i>, an allowance +made to any one without an equivalent. In England it is generally +understood to mean pay given to a state hireling for treason to his +country. <i>Pensioner</i>, a slave of state, hired by a stipend to obey his +master. <span class="smcap">King</span>, monarch, supreme governour. <i>Monarch</i>, a governour +invested with <i>absolute</i> authority, a <i>King</i>. <i>Whig</i>, 1. whey, +2. the name of a <i>faction</i>. <i>Tory</i>, one who adheres to the <i>antient</i> +constitution of the state, and the apostolical hierarchy of the church +of England, opposed to a <i>whig</i>. <i>Johnson's fol. Dic.</i> The word +<i>faction</i> is always used in a <i>bad</i> sense; though, in defining it, the +Doctor did not, and, after what he had said of a whig, perhaps +durst not say, that a faction is always a term for the supposed disturbers +of public peace. 'The most obsequious of the slaves of pride, the +most rapturous of the gazers upon wealth, the most officious of the +whisperers of greatness, are collected from seminaries appropriated +to the study of wisdom and of virtue;' <i>Rambler</i>, No. 180. That +is to say, men of learning are a set of the most sneaking, pitiful, +time-serving rascals. The reader will make his own applications.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_9_9" id="Footnote_9_9"></a><a href="#FNanchor_9_9"><span class="label">[9]</span></a> See <i>Political tracts by the author of the Rambler</i>. His character +of Hambden, the reader will find in the 1st page of Waller's +life. Of Milton, he says, that 'his impudence had been at least equal +to his other powers. Such was his malignity, that hell grew +darker at his frown. He thought women born only for obedience, +and men only for rebellion.' There is much more in the +same tone; and, with what justice his epithets are applied, let Englishmen +judge.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_10_10" id="Footnote_10_10"></a><a href="#FNanchor_10_10"><span class="label">[10]</span></a> Taxation no tyranny.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_11_11" id="Footnote_11_11"></a><a href="#FNanchor_11_11"><span class="label">[11]</span></a> Ibid, No. 89.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_12_12" id="Footnote_12_12"></a><a href="#FNanchor_12_12"><span class="label">[12]</span></a> Idler, No. 85.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_13_13" id="Footnote_13_13"></a><a href="#FNanchor_13_13"><span class="label">[13]</span></a> Tour, p. 59.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_14_14" id="Footnote_14_14"></a><a href="#FNanchor_14_14"><span class="label">[14]</span></a> Tour, p. 84.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_15_15" id="Footnote_15_15"></a><a href="#FNanchor_15_15"><span class="label">[15]</span></a> Idler, No. 82.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_16_16" id="Footnote_16_16"></a><a href="#FNanchor_16_16"><span class="label">[16]</span></a> He should have said <i>causes</i>, for he mentions <i>two</i>.—What is +the Doctor's distinction here between habit and custom?</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_17_17" id="Footnote_17_17"></a><a href="#FNanchor_17_17"><span class="label">[17]</span></a> <i>Quere</i>, Are we more accustomed to beauty than deformity? or +is not the fact otherwise.—Did habit ever make a sick man fond of +disease, or a poor man fond of poverty?</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_18_18" id="Footnote_18_18"></a><a href="#FNanchor_18_18"><span class="label">[18]</span></a> Vide Preface to folio Dict.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_19_19" id="Footnote_19_19"></a><a href="#FNanchor_19_19"><span class="label">[19]</span></a> Dr Campbell of Aberdeen, on the use of new words, says, +'That nothing can be juster than Johnson's manner of arguing on +this subject, in regard to what Swift a little chimerically proposeth, +that though new words be introduced, none should be suffered to +become obsolete.' This Gentleman ought to have consulted Swift +himself. Let him peruse the 'petty treatise,' and then let him +blush for having trusted an author void of fidelity.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_20_20" id="Footnote_20_20"></a><a href="#FNanchor_20_20"><span class="label">[20]</span></a> As the venerable and admirable father of <i>the</i> English Dictionary +has treated the names of such men as Young and Lyttleton with +so little ceremony, the reader will perhaps forgive the insertion of his +own character, as drawn by Chesterfield. '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 any where but down his throat, whatever he +means to drink; and only mangles what he means to carve. <i>Inattentive +to all the regards of social life</i>, he mistimes, or misplaces +every thing. He disputes with heat, and indiscriminately, mindless +of the rank, character, and situation, of those with whom he +disputes; absolutely ignorant of the several gradations of familiarity +or respect, he is exactly the same to his superiors, his equals, and +his inferiors; and therefore by a necessary consequence absurd to two +of the three. Is it possible to love such a man? No. The utmost +I can do for him, is to consider him as a respectable Hottentot.' +Churchill's account of our hero comes nearly to the same. And I +presume that the inimitable Dr Smollet, has exhibited a third picture +of this illustrious original in Humphry Clinker, Vol. 1.—Dr Johnson's +letter to the Earl of Chesterfield concludes in these words: 'Whatever +be the event of my endeavours, I shall <i>not easily</i> regret an attempt +which has procured me the honour of appearing thus publicly, +my Lord, your Lordship's most obedient, and most humble servant, +Sam. Johnson.' These extracts afford a striking contrast between +the severity of the polite peer, and the humble politeness (for +<i>once</i>) of the rugged pedant.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_21_21" id="Footnote_21_21"></a><a href="#FNanchor_21_21"><span class="label">[21]</span></a> Lives of English poets, vol. iii. p. 243 and 284. 12<i>mo</i> edit.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_22_22" id="Footnote_22_22"></a><a href="#FNanchor_22_22"><span class="label">[22]</span></a> Vide Life of Dryden.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_23_23" id="Footnote_23_23"></a><a href="#FNanchor_23_23"><span class="label">[23]</span></a> Vid. Dict. article Blood.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_24_24" id="Footnote_24_24"></a><a href="#FNanchor_24_24"><span class="label">[24]</span></a> <i>Excogitation</i>, this combination of letters is to be found in the +Doctor's works, though not in his Dictionary.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_25_25" id="Footnote_25_25"></a><a href="#FNanchor_25_25"><span class="label">[25]</span></a> Rasselas, chap. vi.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_26_26" id="Footnote_26_26"></a><a href="#FNanchor_26_26"><span class="label">[26]</span></a> He meant to say <i>there</i>.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_27_27" id="Footnote_27_27"></a><a href="#FNanchor_27_27"><span class="label">[27]</span></a> Tour, p. 16. and 18. &c.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_28_28" id="Footnote_28_28"></a><a href="#FNanchor_28_28"><span class="label">[28]</span></a> Tour, p. 186.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_29_29" id="Footnote_29_29"></a><a href="#FNanchor_29_29"><span class="label">[29]</span></a> Ibid, p. 21.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_30_30" id="Footnote_30_30"></a><a href="#FNanchor_30_30"><span class="label">[30]</span></a> Rambler, No. 79.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_31_31" id="Footnote_31_31"></a><a href="#FNanchor_31_31"><span class="label">[31]</span></a> Tour, p. 369 &c.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_32_32" id="Footnote_32_32"></a><a href="#FNanchor_32_32"><span class="label">[32]</span></a> Tour, p. 373.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_33_33" id="Footnote_33_33"></a><a href="#FNanchor_33_33"><span class="label">[33]</span></a> Ibid, p. <ins class="mycorr" title="Missing period added">55.</ins></p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_34_34" id="Footnote_34_34"></a><a href="#FNanchor_34_34"><span class="label">[34]</span></a> Vid. folio Dictionary.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_35_35" id="Footnote_35_35"></a><a href="#FNanchor_35_35"><span class="label">[35]</span></a> Tour, p. 242.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_36_36" id="Footnote_36_36"></a><a href="#FNanchor_36_36"><span class="label">[36]</span></a> Butler's life.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_37_37" id="Footnote_37_37"></a><a href="#FNanchor_37_37"><span class="label">[37]</span></a> Rambler, No. 59.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_38_38" id="Footnote_38_38"></a><a href="#FNanchor_38_38"><span class="label">[38]</span></a> Ibid.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_39_39" id="Footnote_39_39"></a><a href="#FNanchor_39_39"><span class="label">[39]</span></a> Vid. Plutarch.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_40_40" id="Footnote_40_40"></a><a href="#FNanchor_40_40"><span class="label">[40]</span></a> Tour, p. 283.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_41_41" id="Footnote_41_41"></a><a href="#FNanchor_41_41"><span class="label">[41]</span></a> Tour, p. 124.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_42_42" id="Footnote_42_42"></a><a href="#FNanchor_42_42"><span class="label">[42]</span></a> Ibid, p. 154.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_43_43" id="Footnote_43_43"></a><a href="#FNanchor_43_43"><span class="label">[43]</span></a> The Doctor ought to have said, 'For <ins class="mycorr" title="Missing singlequote added at the end"><i>these reasons</i>,'</ins> as he mentions +several.</p></div> + + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_44_44" id="Footnote_44_44"></a><a href="#FNanchor_44_44"><span class="label">[44]</span></a> Pope's life.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_45_45" id="Footnote_45_45"></a><a href="#FNanchor_45_45"><span class="label">[45]</span></a> He should have said, <i>no poet</i>; for that was his meaning, if he +had any. No <i>writer</i>, includes prose as well as verse; and this sample +may give us a fair idea of the Doctor's <i>accuracy</i> in point of style.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_46_46" id="Footnote_46_46"></a><a href="#FNanchor_46_46"><span class="label">[46]</span></a> Life of Pope.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_47_47" id="Footnote_47_47"></a><a href="#FNanchor_47_47"><span class="label">[47]</span></a> Ibid.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_48_48" id="Footnote_48_48"></a><a href="#FNanchor_48_48"><span class="label">[48]</span></a> Gray's life.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_49_49" id="Footnote_49_49"></a><a href="#FNanchor_49_49"><span class="label">[49]</span></a> Gray's life.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_50_50" id="Footnote_50_50"></a><a href="#FNanchor_50_50"><span class="label">[50]</span></a> Gentleman's Magazine, Vol. XVII.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_51_51" id="Footnote_51_51"></a><a href="#FNanchor_51_51"><span class="label">[51]</span></a> Gray's life.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_52_52" id="Footnote_52_52"></a><a href="#FNanchor_52_52"><span class="label">[52]</span></a> Ibid.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_53_53" id="Footnote_53_53"></a><a href="#FNanchor_53_53"><span class="label">[53]</span></a> Ibid.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_54_54" id="Footnote_54_54"></a><a href="#FNanchor_54_54"><span class="label">[54]</span></a> Edinburgh Review, Vol. III. P. 55. <i>et seq.</i></p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_55_55" id="Footnote_55_55"></a><a href="#FNanchor_55_55"><span class="label">[55]</span></a> Gray's life.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_56_56" id="Footnote_56_56"></a><a href="#FNanchor_56_56"><span class="label">[56]</span></a> Ibid.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_57_57" id="Footnote_57_57"></a><a href="#FNanchor_57_57"><span class="label">[57]</span></a> Ibid.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_58_58" id="Footnote_58_58"></a><a href="#FNanchor_58_58"><span class="label">[58]</span></a> Life of Pope.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_59_59" id="Footnote_59_59"></a><a href="#FNanchor_59_59"><span class="label">[59]</span></a> Gray's life.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_60_60" id="Footnote_60_60"></a><a href="#FNanchor_60_60"><span class="label">[60]</span></a> Ibid.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_61_61" id="Footnote_61_61"></a><a href="#FNanchor_61_61"><span class="label">[61]</span></a> Gray's life.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_62_62" id="Footnote_62_62"></a><a href="#FNanchor_62_62"><span class="label">[62]</span></a> Ibid.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_63_63" id="Footnote_63_63"></a><a href="#FNanchor_63_63"><span class="label">[63]</span></a> Pastor cum traheret per freta navibus, &c.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_64_64" id="Footnote_64_64"></a><a href="#FNanchor_64_64"><span class="label">[64]</span></a> Gray's life. Dr. Beattie of Aberdeen differs very widely from +Dr. Johnson on the merit of this poem. He says, 'I have heard the +finest Ode in the world (meaning Gray's Bard) blamed for the +boldness of its figures, and for what the critic was pleased to call +obscurity.' Beattie's Essays on poetry and musick, 3d edit. p. 269. +This is, certainly very strong; yet he seems in some danger of contradicting himself, when he says in another place, That 'for energy of +words, vivacity of description, and <i>apposite</i> variety of numbers, +Dryden's Feast of Alexander is superior to any ode of Horace or +Pindar now extant.' Ibid, p. 17. One would have been apt to +suppose that the Lyrick Poem which eclipsed Horace, if not the finest, +is at least one of 'the finest in the world.'—But an author has +novelty to recommend him, when he affirms that Gray is superior to +Dryden, and Dryden to all Antiquity.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_65_65" id="Footnote_65_65"></a><a href="#FNanchor_65_65"><span class="label">[65]</span></a> Gray's life.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_66_66" id="Footnote_66_66"></a><a href="#FNanchor_66_66"><span class="label">[66]</span></a> Ibid.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_67_67" id="Footnote_67_67"></a><a href="#FNanchor_67_67"><span class="label">[67]</span></a> Ibid.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_68_68" id="Footnote_68_68"></a><a href="#FNanchor_68_68"><span class="label">[68]</span></a> Gray's life.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_69_69" id="Footnote_69_69"></a><a href="#FNanchor_69_69"><span class="label">[69]</span></a> Gray's life.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_70_70" id="Footnote_70_70"></a><a href="#FNanchor_70_70"><span class="label">[70]</span></a> A favourite phrase of the Rambler's.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_71_71" id="Footnote_71_71"></a><a href="#FNanchor_71_71"><span class="label">[71]</span></a> Gray's life.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_72_72" id="Footnote_72_72"></a><a href="#FNanchor_72_72"><span class="label">[72]</span></a> Ibid.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_73_73" id="Footnote_73_73"></a><a href="#FNanchor_73_73"><span class="label">[73]</span></a> Taxation no Tyranny.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_74_74" id="Footnote_74_74"></a><a href="#FNanchor_74_74"><span class="label">[74]</span></a> Taxation no Tyranny.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_75_75" id="Footnote_75_75"></a><a href="#FNanchor_75_75"><span class="label">[75]</span></a> Dryden's life.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_76_76" id="Footnote_76_76"></a><a href="#FNanchor_76_76"><span class="label">[76]</span></a> Ibid.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_77_77" id="Footnote_77_77"></a><a href="#FNanchor_77_77"><span class="label">[77]</span></a> Rambler, No. 150.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_78_78" id="Footnote_78_78"></a><a href="#FNanchor_78_78"><span class="label">[78]</span></a> Rambler, No. 9.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_79_79" id="Footnote_79_79"></a><a href="#FNanchor_79_79"><span class="label">[79]</span></a> Vide the life of Garrick by Mr Davies.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_80_80" id="Footnote_80_80"></a><a href="#FNanchor_80_80"><span class="label">[80]</span></a> Rambler, No. 160.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_81_81" id="Footnote_81_81"></a><a href="#FNanchor_81_81"><span class="label">[81]</span></a> Ibid.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_82_82" id="Footnote_82_82"></a><a href="#FNanchor_82_82"><span class="label">[82]</span></a> Churchill's Apology.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_83_83" id="Footnote_83_83"></a><a href="#FNanchor_83_83"><span class="label">[83]</span></a> Vide Life of Cowley. His impressions had been very slight, for +Crowley has nothing of the melody, or magnificence of the Fairy +Queen. Of its great author we know little but that he was praised, +and neglected, unfortunate, and poor: and, from his epitaph, that +he died young. His subject is not happy, his words are often obsolete, +and his stanza can hardly please us long. But we may presume +that he wanted leisure to study the great models of antiquity: +That he wanted that tranquillity of mind so requisite to the success +of a poet: And that his defects are owing to the bad taste of his +age, and the hardships of his life. Had he lived longer, and had he +enjoyed that competence which a prudent shoeblack seldom fails to +enjoy, Spenser would have been second in fame to Shakespeare only.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_84_84" id="Footnote_84_84"></a><a href="#FNanchor_84_84"><span class="label">[84]</span></a> Dr Johnson on Cymbeline. The same sentiment is started in +his account of Pope, 'To the particular species of excellence men +are directed, not by an ascendant planet, or predominant humour, +but by the first book which they read, some early conversation +which they heard, or some accident which excited ardour and emulation.'—The +Doctor is in this passage censuring Pope's ignorance +of human nature—while his own marvellous and extreme stupidity +makes him almost beneath censure. The reader will not realize +Montesquieu's remark, That <i>when we attempt to prove things +so evident we are sure never to convince</i>.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_85_85" id="Footnote_85_85"></a><a href="#FNanchor_85_85"><span class="label">[85]</span></a> Annual Register 1779, Part II. p. 148. I abridge his words, +but give their full meaning.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_86_86" id="Footnote_86_86"></a><a href="#FNanchor_86_86"><span class="label">[86]</span></a> Life of Waller.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_87_87" id="Footnote_87_87"></a><a href="#FNanchor_87_87"><span class="label">[87]</span></a> Life of Rowe.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_88_88" id="Footnote_88_88"></a><a href="#FNanchor_88_88"><span class="label">[88]</span></a> Life of Milton.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_89_89" id="Footnote_89_89"></a><a href="#FNanchor_89_89"><span class="label">[89]</span></a> Life of Swift.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_90_90" id="Footnote_90_90"></a><a href="#FNanchor_90_90"><span class="label">[90]</span></a> Preface to Shakespeare.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_91_91" id="Footnote_91_91"></a><a href="#FNanchor_91_91"><span class="label">[91]</span></a> Ibid.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_92_92" id="Footnote_92_92"></a><a href="#FNanchor_92_92"><span class="label">[92]</span></a> Preface to Shakespeare.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_93_93" id="Footnote_93_93"></a><a href="#FNanchor_93_93"><span class="label">[93]</span></a> 'He has scenes of <i>undoubted</i> and <i>perpetual</i> excellence.' Ibid. +Is there not some inconsistency in these various assertions.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_94_94" id="Footnote_94_94"></a><a href="#FNanchor_94_94"><span class="label">[94]</span></a> See in the same style his observations on Prior, Akenside, and +others.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_95_95" id="Footnote_95_95"></a><a href="#FNanchor_95_95"><span class="label">[95]</span></a> <i>Quere.</i> Did ever Shakespeare, or any other man, compose a +single page, or even a single line, on any subject, without either +straining his faculties, or at least soliciting his invention. It is very +possible that the Doctor did not suspect the full extent of his expression.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_96_96" id="Footnote_96_96"></a><a href="#FNanchor_96_96"><span class="label">[96]</span></a> Vide Dictionary.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_97_97" id="Footnote_97_97"></a><a href="#FNanchor_97_97"><span class="label">[97]</span></a> Life of Pope.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_98_98" id="Footnote_98_98"></a><a href="#FNanchor_98_98"><span class="label">[98]</span></a> Ibid.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_99_99" id="Footnote_99_99"></a><a href="#FNanchor_99_99"><span class="label">[99]</span></a> Pope's life.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_100_100" id="Footnote_100_100"></a><a href="#FNanchor_100_100"><span class="label">[100]</span></a> Eloisa, Letter 83.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_101_101" id="Footnote_101_101"></a><a href="#FNanchor_101_101"><span class="label">[101]</span></a> Pope's life.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_102_102" id="Footnote_102_102"></a><a href="#FNanchor_102_102"><span class="label">[102]</span></a> Preface to Shakespeare.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_103_103" id="Footnote_103_103"></a><a href="#FNanchor_103_103"><span class="label">[103]</span></a> Pope's life.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_104_104" id="Footnote_104_104"></a><a href="#FNanchor_104_104"><span class="label">[104]</span></a> Ibid.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_105_105" id="Footnote_105_105"></a><a href="#FNanchor_105_105"><span class="label">[105]</span></a> Rambler, No. 36.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_106_106" id="Footnote_106_106"></a><a href="#FNanchor_106_106"><span class="label">[106]</span></a> Ibid.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_107_107" id="Footnote_107_107"></a><a href="#FNanchor_107_107"><span class="label">[107]</span></a> Thomson's life.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_108_108" id="Footnote_108_108"></a><a href="#FNanchor_108_108"><span class="label">[108]</span></a> The author has no intention here to disseminate political opinions—His +only meaning is to prove, that <i>somebody</i> has neither principle, +nor consistency, nor shame.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_109_109" id="Footnote_109_109"></a><a href="#FNanchor_109_109"><span class="label">[109]</span></a> Life of Shenstone.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_110_110" id="Footnote_110_110"></a><a href="#FNanchor_110_110"><span class="label">[110]</span></a> Gentleman's Magazine.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_111_111" id="Footnote_111_111"></a><a href="#FNanchor_111_111"><span class="label">[111]</span></a> Vide life of Milton.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_112_112" id="Footnote_112_112"></a><a href="#FNanchor_112_112"><span class="label">[112]</span></a> Life of Smith.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_113_113" id="Footnote_113_113"></a><a href="#FNanchor_113_113"><span class="label">[113]</span></a> Tour, p. 8, 12mo edit.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_114_114" id="Footnote_114_114"></a><a href="#FNanchor_114_114"><span class="label">[114]</span></a> The Crucifix—Gulliver's Travels.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_115_115" id="Footnote_115_115"></a><a href="#FNanchor_115_115"><span class="label">[115]</span></a> 'And read their history in a nation's eyes.' <span class="smcap">Gray's Elegy.</span></p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_116_116" id="Footnote_116_116"></a><a href="#FNanchor_116_116"><span class="label">[116]</span></a> On this subject nothing liberal could be expected from Dr +Johnson, who, in spite of his murmurs about Excise, and his actual +benevolence in private life, has always been the firm advocate of oppression. +His project of hiring the Cherokees to massacre the North +Americans (vide supra p. 32) may serve to inform us what he himself +would have done, had he been seated in the saddle of authority. But +what shall be said for some Scottish historians who have adopted the same +ideas? One of them tells us, that Beaton had prepared a list of +three hundred and sixty of the leaders of the Protestant party, whose +lives and fortunes were to be sacrificed to the rapacity and the pride +of this ambitious prelate. Yet he pronounces the killing of such a +dangerous monster to be a most execrable deed. He dwells with studied +exultation on the execution of Charles I. but if our King really +deserved his fate, Was not Beaton by many degrees more criminal? +An author can hardly spend his time worse, than in writing to flatter +the prejudices, and to corrupt the common sense of the world.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_117_117" id="Footnote_117_117"></a><a href="#FNanchor_117_117"><span class="label">[117]</span></a> Preface to Shakespeare.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_118_118" id="Footnote_118_118"></a><a href="#FNanchor_118_118"><span class="label">[118]</span></a> <i>Quere.</i> What is <i>unquenchable</i> curiosity? and how can a play +excite curiosity which cannot be satisfied by its conclusion?</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_119_119" id="Footnote_119_119"></a><a href="#FNanchor_119_119"><span class="label">[119]</span></a> Preface to Shakespeare.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_120_120" id="Footnote_120_120"></a><a href="#FNanchor_120_120"><span class="label">[120]</span></a> Ibid.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_121_121" id="Footnote_121_121"></a><a href="#FNanchor_121_121"><span class="label">[121]</span></a> Weekly Mirror, No. 12.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_122_122" id="Footnote_122_122"></a><a href="#FNanchor_122_122"><span class="label">[122]</span></a> Monthly Review, on Dr Graham's Pindaricks.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_123_123" id="Footnote_123_123"></a><a href="#FNanchor_123_123"><span class="label">[123]</span></a> Dr Johnson's life of Pope.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_124_124" id="Footnote_124_124"></a><a href="#FNanchor_124_124"><span class="label">[124]</span></a> Vide Terence and the Careless Husband.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_125_125" id="Footnote_125_125"></a><a href="#FNanchor_125_125"><span class="label">[125]</span></a> Vide Dr Johnson's life of Shenstone.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_126_126" id="Footnote_126_126"></a><a href="#FNanchor_126_126"><span class="label">[126]</span></a> Vide Preface to Dr Johnson's octavo Dictionary, 4th edition.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_127_127" id="Footnote_127_127"></a><a href="#FNanchor_127_127"><span class="label">[127]</span></a> Vide Measure for measure.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_128_128" id="Footnote_128_128"></a><a href="#FNanchor_128_128"><span class="label">[128]</span></a> Vide Dictionary.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_129_129" id="Footnote_129_129"></a><a href="#FNanchor_129_129"><span class="label">[129]</span></a> Optics, P. 349.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_130_130" id="Footnote_130_130"></a><a href="#FNanchor_130_130"><span class="label">[130]</span></a> Chem. I. P. 399. 614.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_131_131" id="Footnote_131_131"></a><a href="#FNanchor_131_131"><span class="label">[131]</span></a> Preface to Folio Dictionary.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_132_132" id="Footnote_132_132"></a><a href="#FNanchor_132_132"><span class="label">[132]</span></a> Perhaps he means, in defining <i>Thunder</i>, <i>Plum porridge</i>, the +particle <i>But</i>, &c.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_133_133" id="Footnote_133_133"></a><a href="#FNanchor_133_133"><span class="label">[133]</span></a> Letter to the Earl of Chesterfield.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_134_134" id="Footnote_134_134"></a><a href="#FNanchor_134_134"><span class="label">[134]</span></a> Preface to folio dictionary.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_135_135" id="Footnote_135_135"></a><a href="#FNanchor_135_135"><span class="label">[135]</span></a> Ibid.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_136_136" id="Footnote_136_136"></a><a href="#FNanchor_136_136"><span class="label">[136]</span></a> Ibid.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_137_137" id="Footnote_137_137"></a><a href="#FNanchor_137_137"><span class="label">[137]</span></a> Ibid.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_138_138" id="Footnote_138_138"></a><a href="#FNanchor_138_138"><span class="label">[138]</span></a> It is said that this word is not to be found in any book previous +to the reign of James II. and that it was derived from the +Priests who surrounded him.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_139_139" id="Footnote_139_139"></a><a href="#FNanchor_139_139"><span class="label">[139]</span></a> <span class="smcap">Solidity.</span> '1. Fullness of matter; <i>not hollowness</i>. 2. Firmness; +hardness; compactness; <i>density</i>;' &c. &c. Dr Johnson's +dictionary. Every page is replete with jargon of this kind.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_140_140" id="Footnote_140_140"></a><a href="#FNanchor_140_140"><span class="label">[140]</span></a> Essay, &c. Book II. Chap. iv. Sect. 6.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_141_141" id="Footnote_141_141"></a><a href="#FNanchor_141_141"><span class="label">[141]</span></a> History of Manchester, Vol. II.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_142_142" id="Footnote_142_142"></a><a href="#FNanchor_142_142"><span class="label">[142]</span></a> Preface to the octavo dictionary.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_143_143" id="Footnote_143_143"></a><a href="#FNanchor_143_143"><span class="label">[143]</span></a> Vid. Preface to folio Dictionary.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_144_144" id="Footnote_144_144"></a><a href="#FNanchor_144_144"><span class="label">[144]</span></a> Vide Life of Pope.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_145_145" id="Footnote_145_145"></a><a href="#FNanchor_145_145"><span class="label">[145]</span></a> Vide Rambler.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_146_146" id="Footnote_146_146"></a><a href="#FNanchor_146_146"><span class="label">[146]</span></a> The Booksellers, vide Life of Dryden.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_147_147" id="Footnote_147_147"></a><a href="#FNanchor_147_147"><span class="label">[147]</span></a> Vide Dictionary, article <span class="smcap">Water</span>.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_148_148" id="Footnote_148_148"></a><a href="#FNanchor_148_148"><span class="label">[148]</span></a> Dr Johnson's Dictionary, 4th edition, folio.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_149_149" id="Footnote_149_149"></a><a href="#FNanchor_149_149"><span class="label">[149]</span></a> Ibid.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_150_150" id="Footnote_150_150"></a><a href="#FNanchor_150_150"><span class="label">[150]</span></a> It is needless to observe, that there is no such coin <ins class="mycorr" title="Missing period added">in existence.</ins></p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_151_151" id="Footnote_151_151"></a><a href="#FNanchor_151_151"><span class="label">[151]</span></a> Idler, No. 94.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_152_152" id="Footnote_152_152"></a><a href="#FNanchor_152_152"><span class="label">[152]</span></a> What string does the Doctor mean? for, besides the optic +nerve, there are six muscles, four straight, and two oblique, and +other small nervous branches.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_153_153" id="Footnote_153_153"></a><a href="#FNanchor_153_153"><span class="label">[153]</span></a> It is surprising how some persons acquire the reputation of +piety. The fervour of Dr Johnson's devotion cannot be denied by +those who have seen him rise in the midst of a large company—fall +down on his knees behind his chair, repeat his Pater noster, and +then resume his seat. This is one way to get a character for holiness, +and it is an absolute fact. +</p><p> +Laud proved his title to the dignity of a saint, by doing all the +mischief that lay in his power. He lighted up the flames of discord +through three kingdoms. They were extinguished in the course of +twenty years, by rivers of blood. +</p><p> +'Knocking Jack of the North' founded his reputation, by railing +at the damnable sin of fornication, destroying great numbers of fine +buildings, and insulting the person of his Sovereign. His character +was completely detestable, which is evident from the whole +tenor of his life and writings, from his 'Blast against Women,' and +above all, from his insolence to Queen Mary, a Princess the most +admired, the most beautiful, the most injured, and the most unfortunate +of her age.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_154_154" id="Footnote_154_154"></a><a href="#FNanchor_154_154"><span class="label">[154]</span></a> Preface to Shakespeare.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_155_155" id="Footnote_155_155"></a><a href="#FNanchor_155_155"><span class="label">[155]</span></a> Ibid. Dr Johnson on Shakespeare.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_156_156" id="Footnote_156_156"></a><a href="#FNanchor_156_156"><span class="label">[156]</span></a> Preface to Folio Dictionary.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_157_157" id="Footnote_157_157"></a><a href="#FNanchor_157_157"><span class="label">[157]</span></a> False Alarm.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_158_158" id="Footnote_158_158"></a><a href="#FNanchor_158_158"><span class="label">[158]</span></a> Life of Pope.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_159_159" id="Footnote_159_159"></a><a href="#FNanchor_159_159"><span class="label">[159]</span></a> Life of Pope.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_160_160" id="Footnote_160_160"></a><a href="#FNanchor_160_160"><span class="label">[160]</span></a> Ibid.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_161_161" id="Footnote_161_161"></a><a href="#FNanchor_161_161"><span class="label">[161]</span></a> Ibid.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_162_162" id="Footnote_162_162"></a><a href="#FNanchor_162_162"><span class="label">[162]</span></a> +</p><p class="poem"> +Let Budgell charge low Grubstreet on my quill—<br /> +And write whate'er he please, <i>except my</i> <small>WILL</small>!<br /> +</p> +<p style='text-align: right'>Epistle to Arbuthnot.</p> +</div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_163_163" id="Footnote_163_163"></a><a href="#FNanchor_163_163"><span class="label">[163]</span></a> Life of Pope.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_164_164" id="Footnote_164_164"></a><a href="#FNanchor_164_164"><span class="label">[164]</span></a> Vide life prefixed to his works.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_165_165" id="Footnote_165_165"></a><a href="#FNanchor_165_165"><span class="label">[165]</span></a> Rambler, No. 45.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_166_166" id="Footnote_166_166"></a><a href="#FNanchor_166_166"><span class="label">[166]</span></a> Life of Addison.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_167_167" id="Footnote_167_167"></a><a href="#FNanchor_167_167"><span class="label">[167]</span></a> Dr Johnson's reputation is raised to such a height, that many +writers do not think their productions can be successful, unless they +have his liberty to acknowledge their obligations to him. This tribute +of gratitude generally occupies a splendid dedication, or the +second paragraph in the author's preface, and we are sometimes reminded +in a marginal note of his particular respect for the Doctor. +By a man of tolerable information, such eulogiums cannot be perused +without intense disgust. But one of these gentlemen has boasted +of the Doctor's approbation of a work, which, had he ever been +consulted, he would have <i>damned beyond all depth</i>. Dr Percy has +published three volumes of English ballads, and as an apology for +this work, he says in his preface, that he could refuse nothing to such +judges as the late Mr Shenstone, and—the author of the <span class="smcap">Rambler</span>. +Now take notice, that the very first poem in the collection, and one +of the very best in the whole of it, is Chevy Chace! Dr Percy admires +it. Dr Johnson ridicules it in the roughest terms. What are +we to think of this; and what must Dr Percy feel when he reads +the passage just now quoted from his friend? If Dr Johnson thinks +Chevy Chace so insufferably dull, how must he have sickened in the +perusal of many pieces in that collection.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_168_168" id="Footnote_168_168"></a><a href="#FNanchor_168_168"><span class="label">[168]</span></a> Fugitive pieces. Vol. II. p. 136.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_169_169" id="Footnote_169_169"></a><a href="#FNanchor_169_169"><span class="label">[169]</span></a> Ibid, p. 26.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_170_170" id="Footnote_170_170"></a><a href="#FNanchor_170_170"><span class="label">[170]</span></a> Review for August 1782.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_171_171" id="Footnote_171_171"></a><a href="#FNanchor_171_171"><span class="label">[171]</span></a> Vide False Alarm.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_172_172" id="Footnote_172_172"></a><a href="#FNanchor_172_172"><span class="label">[172]</span></a> Though Dr Johnson has on all occasions expressed the utmost +contempt and aversion for the Scots, yet they have in general been +solicitous to soothe his pride. Dr Smollet says, that 'Johnson, inferior +to none in philosophy, philology, and poetry, stands foremost +as an essayist, justly celebrated for the strength, dignity, and +variety of his stile, &c.' And Beattie affirms, that his dictionary, +considered as the work of one man, is a <i>most wonderful</i> performance! +The Doctor's capital enemies have likewise been Caledonians. +The great author of Lexiphanes was a Scot, and the Rambler is +yet smarting under the rough but irresistible <i>remarks</i> of a Highland +reviewer. +</p><p> +Our ingenious advocate for the second sight (vid. Tour) has long +been duped by a succession of rascals. Lawder persuaded him to believe, +that Paradise Lost was compiled from scraps of modern Latin +poetry; his pamphlet bears strong internal evidence that part of it at +least (as has been long alledged) is the production of the Doctor's +pen. Compare in particular the preface with such attempts in prose +as we know to be Lawder's own. Vide Gentleman's Magazine. +</p><p> +Mr Shaw has of late renewed his <i>enquiries</i>. They are only to be +regarded as the desperate ravings of a man who believes that, in +consequence of the <i>new light</i>, his moral and his literary character +have sunk together into final perdition; that his name, like Lawder's, +will be remembered only to his infamy, and <i>that</i> Dr Johnson +himself despises and abhors him. Do you think me too severe on +the Doctor's infirmities? Can you forgive his injustice to the memory +of his benefactors—his political duplicity—his thirst for blood—his +inveterate antipathy to the most sacred rights of mankind? +</p><p> +Dr Johnson says, that one of the lowest of all human beings is a +Commissioner of Excise. This can hardly be the case, unless himself +or his reverend friend Mr Shaw shall arrive at that dignity. But in +the meantime, there is a Commissioner of Excise, or Customs, (no matter +which) who in the scale of human beings is not much <i>lower</i> than +Lexiphanes himself. This couple stand in the most striking contrast: +and to draw the character of the first is to write an oblique but +most severe censure on the character of the second. Dr Smith's language +is a luscious and pure specimen of strength, elegance, precision, +and simplicity. His <i>Enquiry into the nature and causes of the +wealth of nations</i> deserves to be studied by every member of the community, +as one of the most accurate, profound, and persuasive books +that ever was written. In <i>that</i> performance he displays an intimate +and extensive knowledge of mankind, in every department +of life, from the cabinet to the cottage; a supreme contempt of national +prejudice, and a fearless attachment to liberty, to justice, and +to truth. His work is admired as a mass of excellence, a condensation +of reasonings, the most various, important, original, and just.</p></div> + +</div> + + + + +<hr style="width: 100%;" /> +<h4>William Andrews Clark Memorial Library: University of California, Los Angeles</h4> + +<h2><span class="smcap">The Augustan Reprint Society</span></h2> + +<h5>2520 CIMARRON STREET, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90018</h5> + +<p class="center"><i>General Editors</i>: William E. Conway, William Andrews Clark Memorial Library; George Robert Guffey,<br /> +University of California, Los Angeles: Maximillian E. Novak, University of California, Los Angeles</p> + +<p class="center"><i>Corresponding Secretary</i>: Mrs. Edna C. Davis, William Andrews Clark Memorial Library</p> + +<hr class="tb" /> + +<p>The Society's purpose is to publish rare Restoration and eighteenth-century works (usually as facsimile reproductions). +All income of the Society is devoted to defraying costs of publication and mailing.</p> + +<p>Correspondence concerning memberships in the United States and Canada should be addressed to the Corresponding +Secretary at the William Andrews Clark Memorial Library, 2520 Cimarron Street, Los Angeles, California. Correspondence +concerning editorial matters may be addressed to the General Editors at the same address. Manuscripts of +introductions should conform to the recommendations of the MLA <i>Style Sheet</i>. The membership fee is $5.00 a year in +the United States and Canada and £1.19.6 in Great Britain and Europe. British and European prospective members +should address B. H. Blackwell, Broad Street, Oxford, England. Copies of back issues in print may be obtained from +the Corresponding Secretary.</p> + +<p>Publications of the first fifteen years of the Society (numbers 1-90) are available in paperbound units of six issues at +$16.00 per unit, from the Kraus Reprint Company, 16 East 46th Street, New York, N.Y. 10017.</p> + +<hr class="tb" /> + +<p class="center">Make check or money order payable to <span class="smcap">The Regents of the University of California</span></p> + + + +<hr style="width: 100%;" /> +<h4>REGULAR PUBLICATIONS FOR 1970-1971</h4> + +<div class="sblockquot"> +<p class="nblockquot">145-146. Thomas Shelton, <i>A Tutor to Tachygraphy, or, Short-writing</i>, 1642, and <i>Tachygraphy</i>, +1647. Introduction by William Matthews.</p> + +<p class="nblockquot">147-148. <i>Deformities of Dr. Samuel Johnson</i>, 1782. Introduction by Gwin J. Kolb and J. E. +Congleton.</p> + +<p class="nblockquot">149. <i>POETA DE TRISTIBUS: or, the Poet's Complaint</i>, 1682. Introduction by Harold Love.</p> + +<p class="nblockquot">150. Gerard Langbaine, <i>Momus Triumphans: or, the Plagiaries of the English Stage</i> [<i>A New +Catalogue of English Plays</i>], 1687. Introduction by David Rodes.</p></div> + +<hr class="tb" /> +<p class="center">Members of the Society will receive<br /> +copies of Clark Library seminar papers.</p> + +<hr style="width: 100%;" /> +<h4>SPECIAL PUBLICATION FOR 1969-1970-1971</h4> + +<p class="nblockquot">Gerard Langbaine, <i>An Account of the English Dramatick Poets</i> (1691), Introduction by John +Loftis. 2 Volumes. Approximately 600 pages. Price to members of the Society, +$7.00 for the first copy (both volumes), and $8.50 for additional copies. Price to +non-members, $10.00.</p> + +<hr class="tb" /> + +<p>Already published in this series:</p> + +<div class="sblockquot"> +<p class="nblockquot">1. John Ogilby, <i>The Fables of Aesop Paraphras'd in Verse</i> (1668), with an Introduction by Earl +Miner. 228 pages.</p> + +<p class="nblockquot">2. John Gay, <i>Fables</i> (1727, 1738), with an Introduction by Vinton A. Dearing. 366 pages.</p> + +<p class="nblockquot">3. <i>The Empress of Morocco and Its Critics</i> (Elkanah Settle, <i>The Empress of Morocco</i> [1673] with +five plates; <i>Notes and Observations on the Empress of Morocco</i> [1674] by John Dryden, +John Crowne and Thomas Shadwell; <i>Notes and Observations on the Empress of Morocco +Revised</i> [1674] by Elkanah Settle; and <i>The Empress of Morocco. A Farce</i> [1674] by +Thomas Duffett), with an Introduction by Maximillian E. Novak. 348 pages.</p> + +<p class="nblockquot">4. <i>After THE TEMPEST</i> (the Dryden-Davenant version of <i>The Tempest</i> [1670]; the "operatic" +<i>Tempest</i> [1674]; Thomas Duffett's <i>Mock-Tempest</i> [1675]; and the "Garrick" <i>Tempest</i> +[1756]), with an Introduction by George Robert Guffey. 332 pages.</p></div> + +<p>Price to members of the Society, $3.50 for the first copy of each title, and $4.25 for additional +copies. Price to non-members, $5.00. Standing orders for this continuing series of Special Publications +will be accepted. British and European orders should be addressed to B. H. Blackwell, +Broad Street, Oxford, England.</p> + +<hr style="width: 100%;" /> +<h2><span class="smcap">The Augustan Reprint Society</span></h2> + +<h4>PUBLICATIONS IN PRINT</h4> + + + +<p class="caption">1948-1949</p> + +<div class="blockquot"><p>16. Henry Nevil Payne, <i>The Fatal Jealousie</i> (1673).</p> + +<p>18. Anonymous, "Of Genius," in <i>The Occasional Paper</i>, Vol. III, +No. 10 (1719), and Aaron Hill, Preface to <i>The Creation</i> (1720).</p></div> + +<p class="caption">1949-1950</p> + +<div class="blockquot"><p>19. Susanna Centlivre, <i>The Busie Body</i> (1709).</p> + +<p>20. Lewis Theobald, <i>Preface to the Works of Shakespeare</i> (1734).</p> + +<p>22. Samuel Johnson, <i>The Vanity of Human Wishes</i> (1749), and two +<i>Rambler</i> papers (1750).</p> + +<p>23. John Dryden, <i>His Majesties Declaration Defended</i> (1681).</p></div> + +<p class="caption">1951-1952</p> + +<div class="blockquot"><p>26. Charles Macklin, <i>The Man of the World</i> (1792).</p> + +<p>31. Thomas Gray, <i>An Elegy Wrote in a Country Churchyard</i> (1751). +and <i>The Eton College Manuscript</i>.</p></div> + +<p class="caption">1952-1953</p> + +<div class="blockquot"><p>41. Bernard Mandeville, <i>A Letter to Dion</i> (1732).</p></div> + +<p class="caption">1963-1964</p> + +<div class="blockquot"><p>104. Thomas D'Urfey, <i>Wonders in the Sun; or, The Kingdom of the +Birds</i> (1706).</p></div> + +<p class="caption">1964-1965</p> + +<div class="blockquot"><p>110. John Tutchin, <i>Selected Poems</i> (1685-1700).</p> + +<p>111. Anonymous, <i>Political Justice</i> (1736).</p> + +<p>112. Robert Dodsley, <i>An Essay on Fable</i> (1764).</p> + +<p>113. T. R., <i>An Essay Concerning Critical and Curious Learning</i> (1698).</p> + +<p>114. <i>Two Poems Against Pope</i>: Leonard Welsted, <i>One Epistle to +Mr. A. Pope</i> (1730), and Anonymous, <i>The Blatant Beast</i> (1742).</p></div> + +<p class="caption">1965-1966</p> + +<div class="blockquot"><p>115. Daniel Defoe and others, <i>Accounts of the Apparition of Mrs. Veal</i>.</p> + +<p>116. Charles Macklin, <i>The Covent Garden Theatre</i> (1752).</p> + +<p>117. Sir Roger L'Estrange, <i>Citt and Bumpkin</i> (1680).</p> + +<p>118. Henry More, <i>Enthusiasmus Triumphatus</i> (1662).</p> + +<p>119. Thomas Traherne, <i>Meditations on the Six Days of the Creation</i> +(1717).</p> + +<p>120. Bernard Mandeville, <i>Aesop Dress'd or a Collection of Fables</i> (1704).</p></div> + +<p class="caption">1966-1967</p> + +<div class="blockquot"><p>123. Edmond Malone, <i>Cursory Observations on the Poems Attributed +to Mr. Thomas Rowley</i> (1782).</p> + +<p>124. Anonymous, <i>The Female Wits</i> (1704).</p> + +<p>125. Anonymous, <i>The Scribleriad</i> (1742). Lord Hervey, <i>The Difference +Between Verbal and Practical Virtue</i> (1742).</p></div> + +<p class="caption">1967-1968</p> + +<div class="blockquot"><p>129. Lawrence Echard, Prefaces to <i>Terence's Comedies</i> (1694) +and <i>Plautus's Comedies</i> (1694).</p> + +<p>130. Henry More, <i>Democritus Platonissans</i> (1646).</p> + +<p>132. Walter Harte, <i>An Essay on Satire, Particularly on the Dunciad</i> +(1730).</p></div> + +<p class="caption">1968-1969</p> + +<div class="blockquot"><p>133. John Courtenay, <i>A Poetical Review of the Literary and Moral +Character of the Late Samuel Johnson</i> (1786).</p> + +<p>134. John Downes, <i>Roscius Anglicanus</i> (1708).</p> + +<p>135. Sir John Hill, <i>Hypochondriasis, a Practical Treatise</i> (1766).</p> + +<p>136. Thomas Sheridan, <i>Discourse ... Being Introductory to His +Course of Lectures on Elocution and the English Language</i> (1759).</p> + +<p>137. Arthur Murphy, <i>The Englishman From Paris</i> (1736).</p> + +<p>138. [Catherine Trotter], <i>Olinda's Adventures</i> (1718).</p></div> + +<p class="caption">1969-1970</p> + +<div class="blockquot"><p>139. John Ogilvie, <i>An Essay on the Lyric Poetry of the Ancients</i> (1762).</p> + +<p>140. <i>A Learned Dissertation on Dumpling</i> (1726) and <i>Pudding Burnt +to Pot or a Compleat Key to the Dissertation on Dumpling</i> (1727).</p> + +<p>141. Selections from Sir Roger L'Estrange's <i>Observator</i> (1681-1687).</p> + +<p>142. Anthony Collins, <i>A Discourse Concerning Ridicule and Irony +in Writing</i> (1729).</p> + +<p>143. <i>A Letter From A Clergyman to His Friend, With An Account of +the Travels of Captain Lemuel Gulliver</i> (1726).</p> + +<p>144. <i>The Art of Architecture, A Poem. In Imitation of Horace's Art +of Poetry</i> (1742).</p> +</div> + +<p class="sblockquot">Publications of the first fifteen years of the Society (numbers 1-90) are +available in paperbound units of six issues at $16.00 per unit, from the +Kraus Reprint Company, 16 East 46th Street, New York, N.Y. 10017.</p> + +<p class="sblockquot">Publications in print are available at the regular membership rate of $8.00 +yearly. Prices of single issues may be obtained upon request. Subsequent +publications may be checked in the annual prospectus.</p> + + + + + + + + +<pre> + + + + + +End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Deformities of Samuel Johnson, +Selected from his Works, by Anonymous + +*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK DEFORMITIES OF SAMUEL *** + +***** This file should be named 37764-h.htm or 37764-h.zip ***** +This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: + http://www.gutenberg.org/3/7/7/6/37764/ + +Produced by Jon Ingram, Chris Curnow, Joseph Cooper and +the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at +http://www.pgdp.net + + +Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions +will be renamed. + +Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no +one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation +(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without +permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, +set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to +copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to +protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project +Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you +charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you +do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the +rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose +such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and +research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do +practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is +subject to the trademark license, especially commercial +redistribution. + + + +*** START: FULL LICENSE *** + +THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE +PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK + +To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free +distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work +(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project +Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project +Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at +http://gutenberg.org/license). + + +Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic works + +1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to +and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property +(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all +the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy +all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. +If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the +terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or +entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. + +1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be +used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who +agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few +things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works +even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See +paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement +and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. See paragraph 1.E below. + +1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" +or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the +collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an +individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are +located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from +copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative +works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg +are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project +Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by +freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of +this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with +the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by +keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project +Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. + +1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern +what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in +a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check +the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement +before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or +creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project +Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning +the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United +States. + +1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: + +1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate +access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently +whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the +phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project +Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, +copied or distributed: + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + +1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived +from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is +posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied +and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees +or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work +with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the +work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 +through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the +Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or +1.E.9. + +1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted +with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution +must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional +terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked +to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the +permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. + +1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this +work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. + +1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this +electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without +prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with +active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project +Gutenberg-tm License. + +1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, +compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any +word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or +distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than +"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version +posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), +you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a +copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon +request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other +form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. + +1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, +performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works +unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. + +1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing +access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided +that + +- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from + the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method + you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is + owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he + has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the + Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments + must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you + prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax + returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and + sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the + address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to + the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." + +- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies + you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he + does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm + License. You must require such a user to return or + destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium + and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of + Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any + money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the + electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days + of receipt of the work. + +- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free + distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set +forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from +both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael +Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the +Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. + +1.F. + +1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable +effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread +public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm +collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain +"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or +corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual +property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a +computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by +your equipment. + +1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right +of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project +Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all +liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal +fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT +LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE +PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE +TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE +LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR +INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH +DAMAGE. + +1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a +defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can +receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a +written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you +received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with +your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with +the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a +refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity +providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to +receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy +is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further +opportunities to fix the problem. + +1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth +in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER +WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO +WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. + +1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied +warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. +If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the +law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be +interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by +the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any +provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. + +1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the +trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone +providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance +with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, +promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, +harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, +that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do +or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm +work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any +Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. + + +Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm + +Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of +electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers +including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists +because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from +people in all walks of life. + +Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the +assistance they need, are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's +goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will +remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure +and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. +To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation +and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 +and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org. + + +Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive +Foundation + +The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit +501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the +state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal +Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification +number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at +http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent +permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. + +The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. +Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered +throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at +809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email +business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact +information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official +page at http://pglaf.org + +For additional contact information: + Dr. Gregory B. Newby + Chief Executive and Director + gbnewby@pglaf.org + + +Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation + +Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide +spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of +increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be +freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest +array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations +($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt +status with the IRS. + +The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating +charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United +States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a +considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up +with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations +where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To +SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any +particular state visit http://pglaf.org + +While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we +have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition +against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who +approach us with offers to donate. + +International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make +any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from +outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. + +Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation +methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other +ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. +To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate + + +Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. + +Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm +concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared +with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project +Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. + + +Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed +editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. +unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily +keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. + + +Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: + + http://www.gutenberg.org + +This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, +including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary +Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to +subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. + + +</pre> + +</body> +</html> |