Life Of Johnson, Vol. 1 by Boswell, Edited by Birkbeck Hill

B >> Boswell, Edited by Birkbeck Hill >> Life Of Johnson, Vol. 1

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58

He not only took the greatest liberties in his reports, but he often
took them openly. Thus an army bill was debated in committee on Dec. 10,
1740, and again the following day on the report in the full House. 'As
in these two debates,' he writes, 'the arguments were the same, Mr.
Gulliver has thrown them into one to prevent unnecessary repetitions.'
(_Gent. Mag_. Dec. 1742, p. 676.) In each House during the winter of
1742-3 there was a debate on taking the Hanoverian troops into pay. The
debate in the Lords was spread over five numbers of the _Magazine_ in
the following summer and autumn. It was not till the spring of 1744 that
the turn of the Commons came, and then they were treated somewhat
scurvily. 'This debate,' says the reporter, who was Johnson, 'we thought
it necessary to contract by the omission of those arguments which were
fully discussed in the House of Hurgoes, and of those speakers who
produced them, lest we should disgust our readers by tedious
repetitions.' (_Ib_. xiv. 125.) Many of these debates have been reported
somewhat briefly by Bishop (afterwards Archbishop) Seeker. To follow his
account requires an accurate knowledge of the times, whereas Johnson's
rhetorick for the most part is easily understood even by one very
ignorant of the history of the first two Georges. Much of it might have
been spoken on almost any occasion, for or against almost any minister.
It is true that we here and there find such a correspondence between the
two reports as shews that Johnson, as he has himself told us, was at
times furnished with some information. But, on the other hand, we can no
less clearly see that he was often drawing solely on his imagination.
Frequently there is but the slightest agreement between the reports
given by the two men of the same speeches. Of this a good instance is
afforded by Lord Carteret's speech of Feb. 13, 1741. According to
Johnson 'the Hurgo Quadrert began in this manner':--

'As the motion which I am about to make is of the highest importance and
of the most extensive consequences; as it cannot but meet with all the
opposition which the prejudices of some and the interest of others can
raise against it; as it must have the whole force of ministerial
influence to encounter without any assistance but from justice and
reason, I hope to be excused by your Lordships for spending some time in
endeavouring to shew that it wants no other support; that it is not
founded upon doubtful suspicions but upon uncontestable facts,' and so
on for eight more lines. (_Gent. Mag_. xi. 339).

The Bishop's note begins as follows:--

'CARTERET. I am glad to see the House so full. The honour of the nation
is at stake. And the oldest man hath not known such circumstances as we
are in. When storms rise you must see what pilots you have, and take
methods to make the nation easy. I shall (1) go through the foreign
transactions of several years; (2) The domestic; (3) Prove that what I
am about to propose is a parliamentary method.' (_Parl. Hist_. xi.
1047.)

Still more striking is the difference in the two reports of a speech by
Lord Talbot on May 25, 1742. According to the _Gent. Mag_. xii. 519,
'the Hurgo Toblat spoke to this effect':--

'So high is my veneration for this great assembly that it is never
without the utmost efforts of resolution that I can prevail upon myself
to give my sentiments upon any question that is the subject of debate,
however strong may be my conviction, or however ardent my zeal.'

The Bishop makes him say:--

'I rise up only to give time to others to consider how they will carry
on the debate.' (_Parl. Hist_. xii. 646.)

On Feb. 13, 1741, the same Lord, being called to order for saying that
there were Lords who were influenced by a place, exclaimed, according to
the Bishop, '"By the eternal G--d, I will defend my cause everywhere."
But Lords calling to order, he recollected himself and made an excuse.'
(_Parl. Hist_. xi. 1063). In the _Gent. Mag_. xi. 4l9, 'the Hurgo Toblat
resumed:--"My Lords, whether anything has escaped from me that deserves
such severe animadversions your Lordships must decide."'

Once at least in Johnson's reports a speech is given to the wrong
member. In the debate on the Gin Bill on Feb. 22, 1743 (_Gent. Mag_.
xiii. 696), though the Bishop's notes show that he did not speak, yet a
long speech is put into his mouth. It was the Earl of Sandwich who had
spoken at this turn of the debate. The editor of the _Parl. Hist_. (xii.
1398), without even notifying the change, coolly transfers the speech
from the 'decent' Seeker[1466], who was afterwards Primate, to the
grossly licentious Earl. A transference such as this is, however, but of
little moment. For the most part the speeches would be scarcely less
lifelike, if all on one side were assigned to some nameless Whig, and all
on the other side to some nameless Tory. It is nevertheless true that
here and there are to be found passages which no doubt really fell from
the speaker in whose mouth they are put. They mention some fact or
contain some allusion which could not otherwise have been known by
Johnson. Even if we had not Cave's word for it, we might have inferred
that now and then a member was himself his own reporter. Thus in the
_Gent. Mag_. for February 1744 (p. 68) we find a speech by Sir John St.
Aubyn that had appeared eight months earlier in the very same words in
the _London Magazine_. That Johnson copied a rival publication is most
unlikely--impossible, I might say. St. Aubyn, I conjecture, sent a copy
of his speech to both editors. In the _Gent. Mag_. for April 1743 (p.
184), a speech by Lord Percival on Dec. 10, 1742, is reported apparently
at full length. The debate itself was not published till the spring of
1744, when the reader is referred for this speech to the back number in
which it had already been inserted. (_Ib_. xiv. 123).

The _London Magazine_ generally gave the earlier report; it was,
however, twitted by its rival with its inaccuracy. In one debate, it was
said, 'it had introduced instead of twenty speakers but six, and those
in a very confused manner. It had attributed to Caecilius words
remembered by the whole audience to be spoken by M. Agrippa.' (_Gent.
Mag_. xii. 512). The report of the debate of Feb. 13, 1741, in the
_London Magazine_ fills more than twenty-two columns of the _Parl.
Hist_. (xi. 1130) with a speech by Lord Bathurst. That he did speak is
shewn by Secker (_ib_. p. 1062). No mention of him is made, however, in
the report in the _Gent. Mag_. (xi. 339). But, on the other hand, it
reports eleven speakers, while the _London Magazine_ gives but five.
Secker shows that there were nineteen. Though the _London Magazine_ was
generally earlier in publishing the debates, it does not therefore
follow that Johnson had seen their reports when he wrote his. His may
have been kept back by Cave's timidity for some months even after they
had been set up in type. In the staleness of the debate there was some
safeguard against a parliamentary prosecution.

Mr. Croker maintains (Croker's _Boswell_, p. 44) that Johnson wrote the
_Debates_ from the time (June 1738) that they assumed the _Lilliputian_
title till 1744. In this he is certainly wrong. Even if we had not
Johnson's own statement, from the style of the earlier _Debates_ we
could have seen that they were not written by him. No doubt we come
across numerous traces of his work; but this we should have expected.
Boswell tells us that Guthrie's reports were sent to Johnson for
revision (_ante_, p. 118). Nay, even a whole speech now and then may be
from his hand. It is very likely that he wrote, for instance, the
_Debate_ on buttons and button-holes (_Gent. Mag_. viii. 627), and the
_Debate_ on the registration of seamen (_ib_. xi.). But it is absurd to
attribute to him passages such as the following, which in certain
numbers are plentiful enough long after June 1738. 'There never was any
measure pursued more consistent with, and more consequential of, the
sense of this House' (_ib_. ix. 340). 'It gave us a handle of making
such reprisals upon the Iberians as this Crown found the sweets of'
(_ib_. x. 281). 'That was the only expression that the least shadow of
fault was found with' (ib. xi. 292).

'Johnson told me himself,' says Boswell (_ante_, p. 150), 'that he was
the sole composer of the _Debates_ for those three years only
(1741-2-3). He was not, however, precisely exact in his statement, which
he mentioned from hasty recollection; for it is sufficiently evident
that his composition of them began November 19, 1740, and ended February
23 [22], 1742-3.' Some difficulty is caused in following Boswell's
statement by the length of time that often elapsed between the debate
itself and its publication. The speeches that were spoken between Nov.
19, or, more strictly speaking, Nov. 25, 1740, and Feb. 22, 1743, were
in their publication spread through the _Magazine_ from July 1741 to
March, 1744. On Feb. 13, 1741, Lord Carteret in the House of 'Lords, and
Mr. Sandys, 'the Motion-maker[1467],' in the House of Commons, moved an
address to the King for the removal of Sir Robert Walpole. Johnson's
report of the debate in the Lords was published in the _Magazine_ for
the next July and August. The year went round. Walpole's ministry was
overthrown, and Walpole himself was banished to the House of Lords. A
second year went by. At length, in three of the spring numbers of 1743,
the debate on Sandys's motion was reported. It had been published in the
_London Magazine_ eleven months earlier.

Cave, if he was tardy, nevertheless was careful that his columns should
not want variety. Thus in the number for July 1743, we have the middle
part of the debate in the Lords on Feb. 1, 1743, the end of the debate
in the Commons on March 9, 1742, and the beginning of another in the
Commons on the following March 23. From the number for July 1741 to the
number for March 1744 Johnson, as I have already said, was the sole
composer of the _Debates_. The irregularity with which they were given
at first sight seems strange; but in it a certain method can be
discovered. The proceedings of a House of Commons that had come to an
end might, as I have shown, be freely published. There had been a
dissolution after the session which closed in April 1741. The
publication of the _Debates_ of the old parliament could at once begin,
and could go on freely from month to month all the year round. But they
would not last for ever. In 1742, in the autumn recess, the time when
experience had shewn that the resolution of the House could be broken
with the least danger, the _Debates_ of the new parliament were
published. They were continued even in the short session before
Christmas. But the spring of 1743 saw a cautious return to the reports
of the old parliament. The session closed on April 21, and in the May
number the comparatively fresh _Debates_ began again. In one case the
report was not six months after date. In the beginning of 1744 this
publication went on even in the session, but it was confined to the
proceedings of the previous winter.

The following table shews the order in which Johnson's Debates were
published:--

_Gentleman's _Debate or part
Magazine_. of debate of_

July, 1741 {Parliament was dissolved } Feb. 13, 1741
{ on April 25, 1741. }
Aug. " Feb. 13, "

Sept. " {Jan. 27, "
{Mar. 2, "
Oct. " Mar. 2, "

Nov. " Mar. 2, "

Dec. " { The new Parliament met} Dec. 9, 1740
{ on Dec. 1. }

_Gentleman's Debate or part
Magazine. of debate of_

Supplement to 1741 Dec. 2, "
Dec. 12,"
Jan. 1742 Feb. 3, 1741
Feb. 27, "
Feb. " Jan. 26, "
April 13, "
Mar. " Feb. 24, "
April 13, "
April " Jan. 27, "
Feb. 24, "
May " Nov. 25, 1740
June " Nov. 25, "
April 8, 1741
July " The session ended on July April 8, "
15. Dec. 1, "
Dec. 4, "
Aug. " Dec. 4, "
Sept. " Dec. 4, "
Dec. 8, "
Oct. " Dec. 8, "
May 25, 1742
Nov. " The Session opened on May 25, "
Nov. 16.
Dec. " May 25, "
June 1, "
Supplement to 1742 Dec. 10, 1740
June 1, 1742
Jan. 1743 Dec. 10, 1740
Feb. " Feb. 13, 1741
Mar. " Feb. 13, "
April " The Session ended on April 21 Feb. 13, "
May " Mar. 9, 1742
Nov. 16, "
June " Mar. 9, "
Feb. 1, 1743
July " Mar. 9, 1742
Mar. 23, "
Feb. 1, 1743
Aug. " Feb. 1, "
Sept. " Feb. 1, "
Oct. " Feb. 1, "
Nov. " Feb. 22, "
Dec. " The Session opened on Dec. 1 Feb. 22, "
Supplement to 1743 Feb. 22, "
Jan. 1744 Feb. 22, "
Feb. " Dec. 10, 1742
Feb. 22, 1743
Mar. " Dec. 10, 1742

During the rest of 1744 the debates were given in the old form, and in a
style that is a close imitation of Johnson's. Most likely they were
composed by Hawkesworth (_ante_, p. 252). In 1745 they were fewer in
number, and in 1746 the reports of the Senate of Lilliputia with its
Hurgoes and Clinabs passed away for ever. They had begun, to quote the
words of the Preface to the _Magazine_ for 1747, at a time when 'a
determined spirit of opposition in the national assemblies communicated
itself to almost every individual, multiplied and invigorated periodical
papers, and rendered politics the chief, if not the only object, of
curiosity.' They are a monument to the greatness of Walpole, and to the
genius of Johnson. Had that statesman not been overthrown, the people
would have called for these reports even though Johnson had refused to
write them. Had Johnson still remained the reporter, even though Walpole
no longer swayed the Senate of the Lilliputians, the speeches of that
tumultuous body would still have been read. For though they are not
debates, yet they have a vast vigour and a great fund of wisdom of their
own.

* * * * *

APPENDIX B.

JOHNSON'S LETTERS TO HIS MOTHER AND MISS PORTER IN 1759. (_Page 340_.)

Malone published seven of the following letters in the fourth edition,
and Mr. Croker the rest.

'TO MRS. JOHNSON IN LICHFIELD.

'HONOURED MADAM,

'The account which Miss [Porter] gives me of your health pierces my
heart. God comfort and preserve you and save you, for the sake of Jesus
Christ.

'I would have Miss read to you from time to time the Passion of our
Saviour, and sometimes the sentences in the Communion Service, beginning
"_Come unto me, all ye that travail and are heavy laden, and I will give
you rest_."

'I have just now read a physical book, which inclines me to think that a
strong infusion of the bark would do you good. Do, dear mother, try it.

'Pray, send me your blessing, and forgive all that I have done amiss to
you. And whatever you would have done, and what debts you would have
paid first, or any thing else that you would direct, let Miss put it
down; I shall endeavour to obey you.

'I have got twelve guineas[1468] to send you, but unhappily am at a loss
how to send it to-night. If I cannot send it to-night, it will come by
the next post.

'Pray, do not omit any thing mentioned in this letter: God bless you for
ever and ever.

'I am your dutiful son,

'SAM. JOHNSON.'

'Jan. 13, 1758[1469].'

'To Miss PORTER, AT MRS. JOHNSON'S, IN LICHFIELD.

'MY DEAR Miss,

'I think myself obliged to you beyond all expression of gratitude for
your care of my dear mother. God grant it may not be without success.
Tell Kitty[1470] that I shall never forget her tenderness for her
mistress. Whatever you can do, continue to do. My heart is very full.

'I hope you received twelve guineas on Monday. I found a way of sending
them by means of the postmaster, after I had written my letter, and hope
they came safe. I will send you more in a few days. God bless you all.

'I am, my dear,

'Your most obliged

'And most humble servant,

'SAM. JOHNSON.'

'Jan. 16, 1759.
'Over the leaf is a letter to my mother.'

'DEAR HONOURED MOTHER,

'Your weakness afflicts me beyond what I am willing to communicate to
you. I do not think you unfit to face death, but I know not how to bear
the thought of losing you. Endeavour to do all you [can] for yourself.
Eat as much as you can.

'I pray often for you; do you pray for me. I have nothing to add to my
last letter.

'I am, dear, dear mother

'Your dutiful son,

'SAM. JOHNSON.'

'Jan. 16, 1759.'

'To MRS. JOHNSON, IN LICHFIELD.

'DEAR HONOURED MOTHER,

'I fear you are too ill for long letters; therefore I will only tell
you, you have from me all the regard that can possibly subsist in the
heart. I pray God to bless you for evermore, for Jesus Christ's sake.
Amen.

'Let Miss write to me every post, however short.

'I am, dear mother,

'Your dutiful son,

'SAM. JOHNSON.'

'Jan. 18, 1759.'

'TO MISS PORTER, AT MRS. JOHNSON'S, IN LICHFIELD.

'DEAR Miss,

'I will, if it be possible, come down to you. God grant I may yet [find]
my dear mother breathing and sensible. Do not tell her, lest I
disappoint her. If I miss to write next post, I am on the road.

'I am, my dearest Miss,
'Your most humble servant,
'SAM. JOHNSON.'
'Jan. 20, 1759.'

_On the other side_.

'DEAR HONOURED MOTHER[1471],

'Neither your condition nor your character make it fit for me to say
much. You have been the best mother, and I believe the best woman in the
world. I thank you for your indulgence to me, and beg forgiveness of all
that I have done ill, and all that I have omitted to do well. God grant
you his Holy Spirit, and receive you to everlasting happiness, for Jesus
Christ's sake. Amen. Lord Jesus receive your spirit. Amen.

'I am, dear, dear mother,
'Your dutiful son,
'SAM. JOHNSON.'
'Jan. 20, 1759.'

'TO MISS PORTER IN LICHFIELD.

'You will conceive my sorrow for the loss of my mother, of the best
mother. If she were to live again surely I should behave better to her.
But she is happy, and what is past is nothing to her; and for me, since
I cannot repair my faults to her, I hope repentance will efface them. I
return you and all those that have been good to her my sincerest thanks,
and pray God to repay you all with infinite advantage. Write to me, and
comfort me, dear child. I shall be glad likewise, if Kitty will write to
me. I shall send a bill of twenty pounds in a few days, which I thought
to have brought to my mother; but God suffered it not. I have not power
or composure to say much more. God bless you, and bless us all.

'I am, dear Miss,
'Your affectionate humble servant,
'SAM. JOHNSON.'
'Jan. 23, 1759[1472].'

'To Miss PORTER.

(_The beginning is torn and lost_.)

* * * * *

'You will forgive me if I am not yet so composed as to give any
directions about any thing. But you are wiser and better than I, and I
shall be pleased with all that you shall do. It is not of any use for me
now to come down; nor can I bear the place. If you want any directions,
Mr. Howard[1473] will advise you. The twenty pounds I could not get a
bill for to-night, but will send it on Saturday.

'I am, my dear, your affectionate servant,

'SAM. JOHNSON.'

'Jan. 25, 1759.'

* * * * *

'To Miss PORTER.

'DEAR Miss,

'I have no reason to forbear writing, but that it makes my heart heavy,
and I had nothing particular to say which might not be delayed to the
next post; but had no thoughts of ceasing to correspond with my dear
Lucy, the only person now left in the world with whom I think myself
connected. There needed not my dear mother's desire, for every heart
must lean to somebody, and I have nobody but you; in whom I put all my
little affairs with too much confidence to desire you to keep receipts,
as you prudently proposed.

'If you and Kitty will keep the house, I think I shall like it best.
Kitty may carry on the trade for herself, keeping her own stock apart,
and laying aside any money that she receives for any of the goods which
her good mistress has left behind her. I do not see, if this scheme be
followed, any need of appraising the books. My mother's debts, dear
mother, I suppose I may pay with little difficulty; and the little trade
may go silently forward. I fancy Kitty can do nothing better; and I
shall not want to put her out of a house, where she has lived so long,
and with so much virtue. I am very sorry that she is ill, and earnestly
hope that she will soon recover; let her know that I have the highest
value for her, and would do any thing for her advantage. Let her think
of this proposal. I do not see any likelier method by which she may pass
the remaining part of her life in quietness and competence.

'You must have what part of the house you please, while you are inclined
to stay in it; but I flatter myself with the hope that you and I shall
some time pass our days together. I am very solitary and comfortless,
but will not invite you to come hither till I can have hope of making
you live here so as not to dislike your situation. Pray, my dearest,
write to me as often as you can.

'I am, dear Madam,

'Your affectionate humble servant,

'SAM. JOHNSON.

'Feb. 6, 1759'

'To Miss PORTER.

'DEAR MADAM,

'I thought your last letter long in coming; and did not require or
expect such an inventory of little things as you have sent me. I could
have taken your word for a matter of much greater value. I am glad that
Kitty is better; let her be paid first, as my dear, dear mother ordered,
and then let me know at once the sum necessary to discharge her other
debts, and I will find it you very soon.

'I beg, my dear, that you would act for me without the least scruple,
for I can repose myself very confidently upon your prudence, and hope we
shall never have reason to love each other less. I shall take it very
kindly if you make it a rule to write to me once at least every week,
for I am now very desolate, and am loth to be universally forgotten.

'I am, dear sweet,
'Your affectionate servant,
'SAM. JOHNSON.'
'March 1, 1759.'

'TO MISS PORTER.

'DEAR MADAM,

'I beg your pardon for having so long omitted to write. One thing or
other has put me off. I have this day moved my things and you are now to
direct to me at Staple Inn, London. I hope, my dear, you are well, and
Kitty mends. I wish her success in her trade. I am going to publish a
little story book [_Rasselas_], which I will send you when it is out.
Write to me, my dearest girl, for I am always glad to hear from you.

'I am, my dear, your humble servant,
'SAM. JOHNSON.'
'March 23, 1759.'

'TO MISS PORTER.

'DEAR MADAM,

'I am almost ashamed to tell you that all your letters came safe, and
that I have been always very well, but hindered, I hardly know how, from
writing. I sent, last week, some of my works, one for you, one for your
aunt Hunter, who was with my poor dear mother when she died, one for Mr.
Howard, and one for Kitty.