\"Butourauthor’schiefconcernisforthepoorHouseofCommons，whomherepresentsasnakedanddefenceless，whentheCrown，bylosingthisprerogative，wouldbelessabletoprotectthemagainstthepowerofaHouseofLords。WhoforbearslaughingwhentheSpanishFriarrepresentslittleDickyunderthepersonofGomez，insultingtheColonelthatwasabletofrighthimoutofhiswitswithasinglefrown？ThisGomez，sayshe，flewuponhimlikeadragon，gothimdown，theDevilbeingstronginhim，andgavehimbastinadoonbastinado，andbuffetonbuffet，whichthepoorColonel，beingprostrate，sufferedwithamostChristianpatience。Theimprobabilityofthefactneverfailstoraisemirthintheaudience;andonemayventuretoanswerforaBritishHouseofCommons，ifwemayguess，fromitsconducthitherto，thatitwillscarcebeeithersotameorsoweakasourauthorsupposes。\"]
ThemeritedreproofwhichSteelehadreceived，thoughsoftenedbysomekindandcourteousexpressions，galledhimbitterly。Herepliedwithlittleforceandgreatacrimony;butnorejoinderappeared。Addisonwasfasthasteningtohisgrave;andhad，wemaywellsuppose，littledispositiontoprosecuteaquarrelwithanoldfriend。Hiscomplainthadterminatedindropsy。Heboreuplongandmanfully。Butatlengthheabandonedallhope，dismissedhisphysicians，andcalmlypreparedhimselftodie。
HisworksheintrustedtothecareofTickell，anddedicatedthemaveryfewdaysbeforehisdeathtoCraggs，inaletterwrittenwiththesweetandgracefuleloquenceofaSaturday’sSpectator。
Inthis，hislastcomposition，healludedtohisapproachingendinwordssomanly，socheerful，andsotender，thatitisdifficulttoreadthemwithouttears。AtthesametimeheearnestlyrecommendedtheinterestsofTickelltothecareofCraggs。
Withinafewhoursofthetimeatwhichthisdedicationwaswritten，AddisonsenttobegGay，whowasthenlivingbyhiswitsabouttown，tocometoHollandHouse。Gaywent，andwasreceivedwithgreatkindness。Tohisamazementhisforgivenesswasimploredbythedyingman。PoorGay，themostgood—naturedandsimpleofmankind，couldnotimaginewhathehadtoforgive。
Therewas，however，somewrong，theremembranceofwhichweighedonAddison’smind，andwhichhedeclaredhimselfanxioustorepair。Hewasinastateofextremeexhaustion;andthepartingwasdoubtlessafriendlyoneonbothsides。GaysupposedthatsomeplantoservehimhadbeeninagitationatCourt，andhadbeenfrustratedbyAddison’sinfluence。Noristhisimprobable。
Gayhadpaidassiduouscourttotheroyalfamily。ButintheQueen’sdayshehadbeentheeulogistofBolingbroke，andwasstillconnectedwithmanyTories。ItisnotstrangethatAddison，whileheatedbyconflict，shouldhavethoughthimselfjustifiedinobstructingtheprefermentofonewhomhemightregardasapoliticalenemy。Neitherisitstrangethat，whenreviewinghiswholelife，andearnestlyscrutinisingallhismotives，heshouldthinkthathehadactedanunkindandungenerouspart，inusinghispoweragainstadistressedmanofletters，whowasasharmlessandashelplessasachild。
Oneinferencemaybedrawnfromthisanecdote。ItappearsthatAddison，onhisdeath—bed，calledhimselftoastrictaccount，andwasnotateasetillhehadaskedpardonforaninjurywhichitwasnotevensuspectedthathehadcommitted，foraninjurywhichwouldhavecauseddisquietonlytoaverytenderconscience。Isitnotthenreasonabletoinferthat，ifhehadreallybeenguiltyofformingabaseconspiracyagainstthefameandfortunesofarival，hewouldhaveexpressedsomeremorseforsoseriousacrime？Butitisunnecessarytomultiplyargumentsandevidenceforthedefence，whenthereisneitherargumentnorevidencefortheaccusation。
ThelastmomentsofAddisonwereperfectlyserene。Hisinterviewwithhisstep—sonisuniversallyknown。\"See，\"hesaid，\"howaChristiancandie。\"ThepietyofAddisonwas，intruth，ofasingularlycheerfulcharacter。Thefeelingwhichpredominatesinallhisdevotionalwritings，isgratitude。Godwastohimtheall—wiseandall—powerfulfriendwhohadwatchedoverhiscradlewithmorethanmaternaltenderness;whohadlistenedtohiscriesbeforetheycouldformthemselvesinprayer;whohadpreservedhisyouthfromthesnaresofvice;whohadmadehiscuprunoverwithworldlyblessings;whohaddoubledthevalueofthoseblessings，bybestowingathankfulhearttoenjoythem，anddearfriendstopartakethem;whohadrebukedthewavesoftheLiguriangulf，hadpurifiedtheautumnalairoftheCampagna，andhadrestrainedtheavalanchesofMontCenis。OfthePsalms，hisfavouritewasthatwhichrepresentstheRulerofallthingsundertheendearingimageofashepherd，whosecrookguidestheflocksafe，throughgloomyanddesolateglens，tomeadowswellwateredandrichwithherbage。Onthatgoodnesstowhichheascribedallthehappinessofhislife，hereliedinthehourofdeathwiththelovewhichcastethoutfear。HediedontheseventeenthofJune1710。Hehadjustenteredonhisforty—eighthyear。
HisbodylayinstateintheJerusalemChamber，andwasbornethencetotheAbbeyatdeadofnight。Thechoirsangafuneralhymn。BishopAtterbury，oneofthoseTorieswhohadlovedandhonouredthemostaccomplishedoftheWhigs，metthecorpse，andledtheprocessionbytorchlight，roundtheshrineofSaintEdwardandthegravesofthePlantagenets，totheChapelofHenrytheSeventh。OnthenorthsideofthatChapel，inthevaultoftheHouseofAlbemarle，thecoffinofAddisonliesnexttothecoffinofMontague。Yetafewmonths;andthesamemournerspassedagainalongthesameaisle。Thesamesadanthemwasagainchanted。Thesamevaultwasagainopened;andthecoffinofCraggswasplacedclosetothecoffinofAddison。
ManytributeswerepaidtothememoryofAddison;butonealoneisnowremembered。Tickellbewailedhisfriendinanelegywhichwoulddohonourtothegreatestnameinourliterature，andwhichunitestheenergyandmagnificenceofDrydentothetendernessandpurityofCowper。ThisfinepoemwasprefixedtoasuperbeditionofAddison’sworks，whichwaspublished，in1721，bysubscription。Thenamesofthesubscribersprovedhowwidelyhisfamehadbeenspread。Thathiscountrymenshouldbeeagertopossesshiswritings，eveninacostlyform，isnotwonderful。
Butitiswonderfulthat，thoughEnglishliteraturewasthenlittlestudiedontheContinent，SpanishGrandees，ItalianPrelates，MarshalsofFrance，shouldbefoundinthelist。AmongthemostremarkablenamesarethoseoftheQueenofSweden，ofPrinceEugene，oftheGrandDukeofTuscany，oftheDukesofParma，Modena，andGuastalla，oftheDogeofGenoa，oftheRegentOrleans，andofCardinalDubois。Weoughttoaddthatthisedition，thougheminentlybeautiful，isinsomeimportantpointsdefective;nor，indeed，doweyetpossessacompletecollectionofAddison’swritings。
Itisstrangethatneitherhisopulentandnoblewidow，noranyofhispowerfulandattachedfriends，shouldhavethoughtofplacingevenasimpletablet，inscribedwithhisname，onthewallsoftheAbbey。Itwasnottillthreegenerationshadlaughedandweptoverhispagesthattheomissionwassuppliedbythepublicveneration。Atlength，inourowntime，hisimage，skilfullygraven，appearedinPoet’sCorner。Itrepresentshim，aswecanconceivehim，cladinhisdressing—gown，andfreedfromhiswig，steppingfromhisparlouratChelseaintohistrimlittlegarden，withtheaccountofthe\"EverlastingClub，\"orthe\"LovesofHilpaandShalum，\"justfinishedforthenextday’sSpectator，inhishand。Suchamarkofnationalrespectwasduetotheunsulliedstatesman，totheaccomplishedscholar，tothemasterofpureEnglisheloquence，totheconsummatepainteroflifeandmanners。Itwasdue，aboveall，tothegreatsatirist，whoaloneknewhowtouseridiculewithoutabusingit，who，withoutinflictingawound，effectedagreatsocialreform，andwhoreconciledwitandvirtue，afteralonganddisastrousseparation，duringwhichwithadbeenledastraybyprofligacy，andvirtuebyfanaticism。
SAMUELJOHNSON
（September1831）
TheLifeofSamuelJohnsonLL。D。IncludingaJournalOfaTourtotheHebridesbyJamesBoswell，Esq。AnewEdition，withnumerousAdditionsandNotesByJOHNWILSONCROKER，LL。D。，F。R。S。
Fivevolumes，8vo。London:1831
THISworkhasgreatlydisappointedus。Whateverfaultswemayhavebeenpreparedtofindinit，wefullyexpectedthatitwouldbeavaluableadditiontoEnglishliterature;thatitwouldcontainmanycuriousfacts，andmanyjudiciousremarks;thatthestyleofthenoteswouldbeneat，clear，andprecise;andthatthetypographicalexecutionwouldbe，asinneweditionsofclassicalworksitoughttobe，almostfaultless。WearesorrytobeobligedtosaythatthemeritsofMr。Croker’sperformanceareonaparwiththoseofacertainlegofmuttononwhichDr。
Johnsondined，whiletravellingfromLondontoOxford，andwhichhe，withcharacteristicenergy，pronouncedtobe\"asbadasbadcouldbe，illfed，illkilled，illkept，andilldressed。\"Thiseditionisillcompiled，illarranged，illwritten，andillprinted。
NothingintheworkhasastonishedussomuchastheignoranceorcarelessnessofMr。Crokerwithrespecttofactsanddates。Manyofhisblundersaresuchasweshouldbesurprisedtohearanywell—educatedgentlemancommit，eveninconversation。Thenotesabsolutelyswarmwithmisstatements，intowhichtheeditorneverwouldhavefallen，ifhehadtakentheslightestpainstoinvestigatethetruthofhisassertions，orifhehadevenbeenwellacquaintedwiththebookonwhichheundertooktocomment。
Wewillgiveafewinstances。
Mr。CrokertellsusinanotethatDerrick，whowasmasteroftheceremoniesatBath，diedverypoorin1760。[Vol。i。394。]Wereadon;and，afewpageslater，wefindDr。JohnsonandBoswelltalkingofthissameDerrickasstilllivingandreigning，ashavingretrievedhischaracter，aspossessingsomuchpoweroverhissubjectsatBath，thathisoppositionmightbefataltoSheridan’slecturesonoratory。[i。404。]Andallthisisin1763。Thefactis，thatDerrickdiedin1769。
Inonenoteweread，thatSirHerbertCroft，theauthorofthatpompousandfoolishaccountofYoung，whichappearsamongtheLivesofthePoets，diedin1805。[Vol。iv。321。]Anothernoteinthesamevolumestates，thatthissameSirHerbertCroftdiedatParis，afterresidingabroadforfifteenyears，onthe27thofApril，1816。[iv。428。]
Mr。Crokerinformsus，thatSirWilliamForbesofPitsligo，theauthoroftheLifeofBeattie，diedin1816。[ii。262。]ASirWilliamForbesundoubtedlydiedinthatyear，butnottheSirWilliamForbesinquestion，whosedeathtookplacein1806。Itisnotorious，indeed，thatthebiographerofBeattielivedjustlongenoughtocompletethehistoryofhisfriend。EightornineyearsbeforethedatewhichMr。CrokerhasassignedforSirWilliam’sdeath，SirWalterScottlamentedthateventintheintroductiontothefourthcantoofMarmion。Everyschoolgirlknowsthelines:
\"ScarcehadlamentedForbespaidThetributetohisMinstrel’sshade;
Thetaleoffriendshipscarcewastold，Erethenarrator’sheartwascold:
FarmaywesearchbeforewefindAheartsomanlyandsokind！\"
Inoneplace，wearetold，thatAllanRamsay，thepainter，wasbornin1709，anddiedin1784;[iv。105。]inanother，thathediedin1784，intheseventy—firstyearofhisage。[v。281。]
Inoneplace，Mr。Crokersays，thatatthecommencementoftheintimacybetweenDr。JohnsonandMrs。Thrale，in1765，theladywastwenty—fiveyearsold。[i。510。]Inotherplaceshesays，thatMrs。Thrale’sthirty—fifthyearcoincidedwithJohnson’sseventieth。[iv。271，322。]Johnsonwasbornin1709。If，therefore，Mrs。Thrale’sthirty—fifthyearcoincidedwithJohnson’sseventieth，shecouldhavebeenonlytwenty—oneyearsoldin1765。Thisisnotall。Mr。Croker，inanotherplace，assignstheyear1777asthedateofthecomplimentarylineswhichJohnsonmadeonMrs。Thrale’sthirty—fifthbirthday。
[iii。463。]Ifthisdatebecorrect，Mrs。Thralemusthavebeenbornin1742，andcouldhavebeenonlytwenty—threewhenheracquaintancewithJohnsoncommenced。Mr。Crokerthereforegivesusthreedifferentstatementsastoherage。Twoofthethreemustbeincorrect。Wewillnotdecidebetweenthem;wewillonlysay，thatthereasonswhichMr。CrokergivesforthinkingthatMrs。Thralewasexactlythirty—fiveyearsoldwhenJohnsonwasseventy，appeartousutterlyfrivolous。
Again，Mr。Crokerinformshisreadersthat\"LordMansfieldsurvivedJohnsonfulltenyears。\"[ii。151。]LordMansfieldsurvivedDr。Johnsonjusteightyearsandaquarter。
JohnsonfoundinthelibraryofaFrenchlady，whomhevisitedduringhisshortvisittoParis，someworkswhichheregardedwithgreatdisdain。\"Ilooked，\"sayshe，\"intothebooksinthelady’scloset，and，incontempt，showedthemtoMr。Thrale。
PrinceTiti，BibliothequedesFees，andotherbooks。\"[iii。271。]
TheHistoryofPrinceTiti，observesMr。Croker，\"wassaidtobetheautobiographyofFrederickPrinceofWales，butwasprobablywrittenbyRalphhissecretary。\"Amoreabsurdnoteneverwaspenned。TheHistoryofPrinceTiti，towhichMr。Crokerrefers，whetherwrittenbyPrinceFrederickorbyRalph，wascertainlyneverpublished。IfMr。CrokerhadtakenthetroubletoreadwithattentionthatverypassageinPark’sRoyalandNobleAuthorswhichhecitesashisauthority，hewouldhaveseenthatthemanuscriptwasgivenuptotheGovernment。Evenifthismemoirhadbeenprinted，itisnotverylikelytofinditswayintoaFrenchlady’sbookcase。AndwouldanymaninhissensesspeakcontemptuouslyofaFrenchlady，forhavinginherpossessionanEnglishwork，socuriousandinterestingasaLifeofPrinceFrederick，whetherwrittenbyhimselforbyaconfidentialsecretary，musthavebeen？ThehistoryatwhichJohnsonlaughedwasaverypropercompaniontotheBibliothequedesFees，afairytaleaboutgoodPrinceTitiandnaughtyPrinceViolent。Mr。
CrokermayfinditintheMagasindesEnfans，thefirstFrenchbookwhichthelittlegirlsofEnglandreadtotheirgovernesses。
Mr。CrokerstatesthatMr。HenryBate，whoafterwardsassumedthenameofDudley，wasproprietoroftheMorningHerald，andfoughtaduelwithGeorgeRobinsonStoney，inconsequenceofsomeattacksonLadyStrathmorewhichappearedinthatpaper。[v。
196。]NowMr。Batewasthenconnected，notwiththeMorningHerald，butwiththeMorningPost;andthedisputetookplacebeforetheMorningHeraldwasinexistence。TheduelwasfoughtinJanuary1777。TheChronicleoftheAnnualRegisterforthatyearcontainsanaccountofthetransaction，anddistinctlystatesthatMr。BatewaseditoroftheMorningPost。TheMorningHerald，asanypersonmayseebylookingatanynumberofit，wasnotestablishedtillsomeyearsafterthisaffair。Forthisblunderthereis，wemustacknowledgesomeexcuse;foritcertainlyseemsalmostincredibletoapersonlivinginourtimethatanyhumanbeingshouldeverhavestoopedtofightwithawriterintheMorningPost。
\"JamesdeDuglas，\"saysMr。Croker，\"wasrequestedbyKingRobertBruce，inhislasthours，torepair，withhisheart，toJerusalem，andhumblytodeposititatthesepulchreofourLord，whichhedidin1329。\"[Vol。iv。29。]Now，itiswellknownthathedidnosuchthing，andforaverysufficientreason，becausehewaskilledbytheway。Norwasitin1329thathesetout。
RobertBrucediedin1329，andtheexpeditionofDouglastookplaceinthefollowingyear，\"Quandleprintempsvintetlasaison，\"saysFroissart，inJune1330，saysLordHailes，whomMr。
Crokercitesastheauthorityforhisstatement。
Mr，CrokertellsusthatthegreatMarquisofMontrosewasbeheadedatEdinburghin1650。[ii。526。]ThereisnotaforwardboyatanyschoolinEnglandwhodoesnotknowthatthemarquiswashanged。TheaccountoftheexecutionisoneofthefinestpassagesinLordClarendon’sHistory。WecanscarcelysupposethatMr。Crokerhasneverreadthatpassage;andyetwecanscarcelysupposethatanypersonwhohaseverperusedsonobleandpatheticastorycanhaveutterlyforgottenallitsmoststrikingcircumstances。
\"LordTownshend，\"saysMr。Croker，\"wasnotSecretaryofStatetill1720。\"[iii。52。]CanMr。CrokerpossiblybeignorantthatLordTownshendwasmadeSecretaryofStateattheAccessionofGeorgeI。in1714，thathecontinuedtobeSecretaryofStatetillhewasdisplacedbytheintriguesofSunderlandandStanhopeatthecloseof1716，andthathereturnedtotheofficeofSecretaryofState，notin1720butin1721？
Mr。Croker，indeed，isgenerallyunfortunateinhisstatementsrespectingtheTownshendfamily。HetellsusthatCharlesTownshend，theChancelloroftheExchequer，was\"nephewofthePrimeMinister，andsonofapeerwhowasSecretaryofState，andleaderoftheHouseofLords。\"[iii。368。]CharlesTownshendwasnotnephew，butgrandnephew，oftheDukeofNewcastle，notson，butgrandson，oftheLordTownshendwhowasSecretaryofState，andleaderoftheHouseofLords。
\"GeneralBurgoynesurrenderedatSaratoga，\"saysMr。Croker，\"inMarch1778。\"[iv。222。]GeneralBourgoynesurrenderedonthe17thofOctober1777。
Nothing，\"saysMr。Croker，\"canbemoreunfoundedthantheassertionthatByngfellamartyrtopoliticalparty。Byastrangecoincidenceofcircumstances，ithappenedthattherewasatotalchangeofadministrationbetweenhiscondemnationandhisdeath:sothatonepartypresidedathistrial，andanotherathisexecution:therecanbenostrongerproofthathewasnotapoliticalmartyr。\"[i。298。]Nowwhatwillourreadersthinkofthiswriter，whenweassurethemthatthisstatement，soconfidentlymade，respectingeventssonotorious，isabsolutelyuntrue？Oneandthesameadministrationwasinofficewhenthecourt—martialonByngcommenceditssittings，throughthewholetrial，atthecondemnation，andattheexecution。InthemonthofNovember1756，theDukeofNewcastleandLordHardwickeresigned;
theDukeofDevonshirebecameFirstLordoftheTreasury，andMr。
Pitt，SecretaryofState。ThisadministrationlastedtillthemonthofApril1757。Byng’scourt—martialbegantositonthe28thofDecember1756。Hewasshotonthe14thofMarch1757。
ThereissomethingatoncedivertingandprovokinginthecoolandauthoritativemannerinwhichMr。Crokermakestheserandomassertions。Wedonotsuspecthimofintentionallyfalsifyinghistory。Butofthishighliterarymisdemeanourwedowithouthesitationaccusehimthathehasnoadequatesenseoftheobligationwhichawriter，whoprofessestorelatefacts，owestothepublic。Weaccusehimofanegligenceandanignoranceanalogoustothatcrassanegligentia，andthatcrassaignorantia，onwhichthelawanimadvertsinmagistratesandsurgeons，evenwhenmaliceandcorruptionarenotimputed。
Weaccusehimofhavingundertakenaworkwhich，ifnotperformedwithstrictaccuracy，mustbeverymuchworsethanuseless，andofhavingperformeditasifthedifferencebetweenanaccurateandaninaccuratestatementwasnotworththetroubleoflookingintothemostcommonbookofreference。
Butwemustproceed。Thesevolumescontainmistakesmoregross，ifpossible，thananythatwehaveyetmentioned。BoswellhasrecordedsomeobservationsmadebyJohnsononthechangeswhichhadtakenplaceinGibbon’sreligiousopinions。ThatGibbonwhenaladatOxfordturnedCatholiciswellknown。\"Itissaid，\"
criedJohnson，laughing，\"thathehasbeenaMahommedan。\"\"Thissarcasm，\"saystheeditor，\"probablyalludestothetendernesswithwhichGibbon’smalevolencetoChristianityinducedhimtotreatMahommedanisminhishistory。\"Nowthesarcasmwasutteredin1776;andthatpartoftheHistoryoftheDeclineandFalloftheRomanEmpirewhichrelatestoMahommedanismwasnotpublishedtill1788，twelveyearsafterthedateofthisconversation，andnearfouryearsafterthedeathofJohnson。
[Adefenceofthisblunderwasattempted。ThatthecelebratedchaptersinwhichGibbonhastracedtheprogressofMahommedanismwerenotwrittenin1776couldnotbedenied。ButitwasconfidentlyassertedthathispartialitytoMahommedanismappearedinhisfirstvolume。Thisassertionisuntrue。NopassagewhichcanbyanyartbeconstruedintothefaintestindicationofthefaintestpartialityforMahommedanismhaseverbeenquotedoreverwillbequotedfromthefirstvolumeoftheHistoryoftheDeclineandFalloftheRomanEmpire。
Towhat，then，ithasbeenasked，couldJohnsonallude？Possiblytosomeanecdoteorsomeconversationofwhichalltraceislost。
Oneconjecturemaybeoffered，thoughwithdiffidence。GibbontellsusinhisMemoirs，thatatOxfordhetookafancyforstudyingArabic，andwaspreventedfromdoingsobytheremonstrancesofhistutor。Soonafterthis，theyoungmanfellinwithBossuet’scontroversialwritings，andwasspeedilyconvertedbythemtotheRomanCatholicfaith。TheapostasyofagentlemancommonerwouldofcoursebeforatimethechiefsubjectofconversationinthecommonroomofMagdalene。HiswhimaboutArabiclearningwouldnaturallybementioned，andwouldgiveoccasiontosomejokesabouttheprobabilityofhisturningMussulman。Ifsuchjokesweremade，Johnson，whofrequentlyvisitedOxford，wasverylikelytohearofthem。]
\"Itwasintheyear1761，\"saysMr。Croker，\"thatGoldsmithpublishedhisVicarofWakefield。ThisleadstheeditortoobserveamoreseriousinaccuracyofMrs。Piozzi，thanMr。
Boswellnotices，whenhesaysJohnsonlefthertabletogoandselltheVicarofWakefieldforGoldsmith。NowDr。JohnsonwasnotacquaintedwiththeThralestill1765，fouryearsafterthebookhadbeenpublished。\"[Vol。v。409]Mr。Croker，inreprehendingthefanciedinaccuracyofMrs。Thrale，hashimselfshownadegreeofinaccuracy，or，tospeakmoreproperly，adegreeofignorance，hardlycredible。Inthefirstplace，JohnsonbecameacquaintedwiththeThrales，notin1765，butin1764，andduringthelastweeksof1764dinedwiththemeveryThursday，asiswritteninMrs。Piozzi’sanecdotes。Inthesecondplace，GoldsmithpublishedtheVicarofWakefield，notin1761，butin1766。Mrs。ThraledoesnotpretendtoremembertheprecisedateofthesummonswhichcalledJohnsonfromhertabletothehelpofhisfriend。ShesaysonlythatitwasnearthebeginningofheracquaintancewithJohnson，andcertainlynotlaterthan1766。Heraccuracyisthereforecompletelyvindicated。ItwasprobablyafteroneofherThursdaydinnersin1764thatthecelebratedsceneofthelandlady，thesheriff’sofficer，andthebottleofMadeira，tookplace。[Thisparagraphhasbeenaltered;andaslightinaccuracyimmaterialtotheargument，hasbeenremoved。]
Theverypagewhichcontainsthismonstrousblunder，containsanotherblunder，ifpossible，moremonstrousstill。SirJosephMawbey，afoolishmemberofParliament，atwhosespeechesandwhosepig—styesthewitsofBrookes’swere，fiftyyearsago，inthehabitoflaughingmostunmercifully，stated，ontheauthorityofGarrick，thatJohnson，whilesittinginacoffee—houseatOxford，aboutthetimeofhisdoctor’sdegree，usedsomecontemptuousexpressionsrespectingHome’splayandMacpherson’sOssian。\"Manymen，\"hesaid，\"manywomen，andmanychildren，mighthavewrittenDouglas。\"Mr。Crokerconceivesthathehasdetectedaninaccuracy，andgloriesoverpoorSirJosephinamostcharacteristicmanner。Ihavequotedthisanecdotesolelywiththeviewofshowingtohowlittlecredithearsayanecdotesareingeneralentitled。HereisastorypublishedbySirJosephMawbey，amemberoftheHouseofCommons，andapersoneverywayworthyofcredit，whosayshehaditfromGarrick。Nowmark:
Johnson’svisittoOxford，aboutthetimeofhisdoctor’sdegree，wasin1754，thefirsttimehehadbeentheresincehelefttheuniversity。ButDouglaswasnotactedtill1756，andOssiannotpublishedtill1760。All，therefore，thatisnewinSirJosephMawbey’sstoryisfalse。\"[Vol。v。409。]AssuredlyweneednotgofartofindampleproofthatamemberoftheHouseofCommonsmaycommitaverygrosserror。Nowmark，saywe，inthelanguageofMr。Croker。Thefactis，thatJohnsontookhisMaster’sdegreein1754，[i。262。]andhisDoctor’sdegreein1775。[iii。205。]Inthespringof1776，[iii。326。]hepaidavisittoOxford，andatthisvisitaconversationrespectingtheworksonHomeandMacphersonmighthavetakenplace，and，inallprobability，didtakeplace。TheonlyrealobjectiontothestoryMr。Crokerhasmissed。Boswellstates，apparentlyonthebestauthority，that，asearlyatleastastheyear1763，Johnson，inconversationwithBlair，usedthesameexpressionsrespectingOssian，whichSirJosephrepresentshimashavingusedrespectingDouglas。[i。
405。]SirJoseph，orGarrick，confounded，wesuspect，thetwostories。Buttheirerrorisvenial，comparedwiththatofMr。
Croker。
Wewillnotmultiplyinstancesofthisscandalousinaccuracy。Itisclearthatawriterwho，evenwhenwarnedbythetextonwhichheiscommenting，fallsintosuchmistakesasthese，isentitledtonoconfidencewhatever。Mr。CrokerhascommittedanerroroffiveyearswithrespecttothepublicationofGoldsmith’snovel，anerroroftwelveyearswithrespecttothepublicationofpartofGibbon’sHistory，anerroroftwenty—oneyearswithrespecttoaneventinJohnson’slifesoimportantasthetakingofthedoctoraldegree。Twoofthesethreeerrorshehascommitted，whileostentatiouslydisplayinghisownaccuracy，andcorrectingwhatherepresentsasthelooseassertionsofothers。Howcanhisreaderstakeontrusthisstatementsconcerningthebirths，marriages，divorces，anddeathsofacrowdofpeople，whosenamesarescarcelyknowntothisgeneration？Itisnotlikelythatapersonwhoisignorantofwhatalmosteverybodyknowscanknowthatofwhichalmosteverybodyisignorant。Wedidnotopenthisbookwithanywishtofindblemishesinit。Wehavemadenocuriousresearches。Theworkitself，andaverycommonknowledgeofliteraryandpoliticalhistory，haveenabledustodetectthemistakeswhichwehavepointedout，andmanyothermistakesofthesamekind。Wemustsay，andwesayitwithregret，thatwedonotconsidertheauthorityofMr。Croker，unsupportedbyotherevidence，assufficienttojustifyanywriterwhomayfollowhiminrelatingasingleanecdoteorinassigningadatetoasingleevent。
Mr。Crokershowsalmostasmuchignoranceandheedlessnessinhiscriticismsasinhisstatementsconcerningfacts。Dr。Johnsonsaid，veryreasonablyasitappearstous，thatsomeofthesatiresofJuvenalaretoogrossforimitation。Mr。Croker，who，bytheway，isangrywithJohnsonfordefendingPrior’stalesagainstthechargeofindecency，resentsthisaspersiononJuvenal，andindeedrefusestobelievethatthedoctorcanhavesaidanythingsoabsurd。\"Heprobablysaid——somepassagesofthem——fortherearenoneofJuvenal’ssatirestowhichthesameobjectionmaybemadeastooneofHorace’s，thatitisaltogethergrossandlicentious。\"[Vol。i。167。]SurelyMr。
CrokercanneverhavereadthesecondandninthsatiresofJuvenal。
Indeedthedecisionsofthiseditoronpointsofclassicallearning，thoughpronouncedinaveryauthoritativetone，aregenerallysuchthat，ifaschoolboyunderourcareweretoutterthem，oursoulassuredlyshouldnotspareforhiscrying。ItisnodisgracetoagentlemanwhohasbeenengagedduringnearthirtyyearsinpoliticallifethathehasforgottenhisGreekandLatin。Buthebecomesjustlyridiculousif，whennolongerabletoconstrueaplainsentence，heaffectstositinjudgmentonthemostdelicatequestionsofstyleandmetre。Fromoneblunder，ablunderwhichnogoodscholarwouldhavemade，Mr。
Crokerwassaved，asheinformsus，bySirRobertPeel，whoquotedapassageexactlyinpointfromHorace。WeheartilywishthatSirRobert，whoseclassicalattainmentsarewellknown，hadbeenmorefrequentlyconsulted。Unhappilyhewasnotalwaysathisfriend’selbow;andwehavethereforearichabundanceofthestrangesterrors。BoswellhaspreservedapoorepigrambyJohnson，inscribed\"AdLauramparituram。\"Mr。CrokercensuresthepoetforapplyingthewordpuellatoaladyinLaura’ssituation，andfortalkingofthebeautyofLucina。\"Lucina，\"hesays，\"wasneverfamedforherbeauty。\"[i。133。]IfSirRobertPeelhadseenthisnote，heprobablywouldhaveagainrefutedMr。Croker’scriticismsbyanappealtoHorace。Inthesecularode，LucinaisusedasoneofthenamesofDiana，andthebeautyofDianaisextolledbyallthemostorthodoxdoctorsoftheancientmythology，fromHomerinhisOdyssey，toClaudianinhisRapeofProserpine。Inanotherode，HoracedescribesDianaasthegoddesswhoassiststhe\"laborantesuteropuellas。\"Butweareashamedtodetainourreaderswiththisfourth—formlearning。
Boswellfound，inhistourtotheHebrides，aninscriptionwrittenbyaScotchminister。Itrunsthus:\"JoannesMacleod，etc。gentissuaePhilarchus，etcFloraeMacdonaldmatrimonialivinculoconjugatusturremhancBeganodunensemproaevorumhabitaculumlongevetustissimum，diupenituslabefactatamannoaeraevulgarisMDCLXXXVI。instauravit。\"——\"Theminister，\"saysMr。
Croker，\"seemstohavebeennocontemptibleLatinist。IsnotPhilarchusaveryhappytermtoexpressthepaternalandkindlyauthorityoftheheadofaclan？\"[ii。458。]ThecompositionofthiseminentLatinist，shortasitis，containsseveralwordsthatarejustasmuchCopticasLatin，tosaynothingoftheincorrectstructureofthesentence。ThewordPhilarchus，evenifitwereahappytermexpressingapaternalandkindlyauthority，wouldprovenothingfortheminister’sLatin，whateveritmightproveforhisGreek。ButitisclearthatthewordPhilarchusmeans，notamanwhorulesbylove，butamanwholovesrule。TheAtticwritersofthebestageusedthewordphilarchosinthesensewhichweassigntoit。WouldMr。Crokertranslatephilosophos，amanwhoacquireswisdombymeansoflove，orphilokerdes，amanwhomakesmoneybymeansoflove？Infact，itrequiresnoBentleyorCasaubontoperceivethatPhilarchusismerelyafalsespellingforPhylarchus，thechiefofatribe。
Mr。CrokerhasfavoureduswithsomeGreekofhisown。\"Atthealtar，\"saysDr。Johnson，\"Irecommendedmythph。\"\"Theseletters，\"saystheeditor，\"（whichDr。Strahanseemsnottohaveunderstood）probablymeanphnetoiphiloi，departedfriends。\"
[Vol。iv。251。AnattemptwasmadetovindicatethisblunderbyquotingagrosslycorruptpassagefromtheIketidesofEuripidesbathikaiantiasongonaton，epikheirabalousa，teknontethnatonkomisaidemas。
Thetruereading，aseveryscholarknows，isteknon，tethneotonkomisaidemas。Indeedwithoutthisemendationitwouldnotbeeasytoconstruethewords，evenifthnatoncouldbearthemeaningwhichMr。Crokerassignstoit。]Johnsonwasnotafirst—
rateGreekscholar;butheknewmoreGreekthanmostboyswhentheyleaveschool;andnoschoolboycouldventuretousethewordthnetoiinthesensewhichMr。Crokerascribestoitwithoutimminentdangerofaflogging。
Mr。CrokerhasalsogivenusaspecimenofhisskillintranslatingLatin。Johnsonwroteanoteinwhichheconsultedhisfriend，Dr。Lawrence，ontheproprietyoflosingsomeblood。Thenotecontainsthesewords:——\"Sipertelicet，imperaturnuncioHolderumadmededucere。\"Johnsonshouldratherhavewritten\"imperatumest。\"Butthemeaningofthewordsisperfectlyclear。
\"Ifyousayyes，themessengerhasorderstobringHoldertome。\"
Mr。Crokertranslatesthewordsasfollows:\"Ifyouconsent，praytellthemessengertobringHoldertome。\"[v。17。]IfMr。Crokerisresolvedtowriteonpointsofclassicallearning，wewouldadvisehimtobeginbygivinganhoureverymorningtoouroldfriendCorderius。
Indeedwecannotopenanyvolumeofthisworkinanyplace，andturnitoverfortwominutesinanydirection，withoutlightingonablunder。Johnson，inhisLifeofTickell，statedthatapoementitled\"TheRoyalProgress，\"whichappearsinthelastvolumeoftheSpectator，waswrittenontheaccessionofGeorgeI。Theword\"arrival\"wasafterwardssubstitutedforaccession。\"\"Thereaderwillobserve，\"saysMr。Croker，thattheWhigtermaccession，whichmightimplylegality，wasalteredintoastatementofthesimplefactofKingGeorge’sarrival。\"[iv。
425。]NowJohnson，thoughabigotedTory，wasnotquitesuchafoolasMr。Crokerhererepresentshimtobe。IntheLifeofGranville，LordLansdowne，whichstandsaveryfewpagesfromtheLifeofTickell，mentionismadeoftheaccessionofAnne，andoftheaccessionofGeorgeI。ThewordarrivalwasusedintheLifeofTickellforthesimplestofallreasons。Itwasusedbecausethesubjectofthepoemcalled\"TheRoyalProgress\"wasthearrivaloftheking，andnothisaccession，whichtookplaceneartwomonthsbeforehisarrival。
Theeditor’swantofperspicacityisindeedveryamusing。Heisperpetuallytellingusthathecannotunderstandsomethinginthetextwhichisasplainaslanguagecanmakeit。\"Mattaire，\"saidDr。Johnson，\"wroteLatinversesfromtimetotime，andpublishedasetinhisoldage，whichhecalledSenilia，inwhichheshowssolittlelearningortasteinwriting，astomakeCarteretadactyl。\"[iv。335。]Hereuponwehavethisnote:\"Theeditordoesnotunderstandthisobjection，northefollowingobservation。\"
Thefollowingobservation，whichMr。Crokercannotunderstand，issimplythis:\"Inmattersofgenealogy，\"saysJohnson，\"itisnecessarytogivethebarenamesastheyare。Butinpoetryandinproseofanyeleganceinthewriting，theyrequiretohaveinflectiongiventothem。\"IfMr。CrokerhadtoldJohnsonthatthiswasunintelligible，thedoctorwouldprobablyhavereplied，asherepliedonanotheroccasion，\"Ihavefoundyouareason，sir;Iamnotboundtofindyouanunderstanding。\"EverybodywhoknowsanythingofLatinityknowsthat，ingenealogicaltables，JoannesBarodeCarteret，orVice—comesdeCarteret，maybetolerated，butthatincompositionswhichpretendtoelegance，Carteretus，orsomeotherformwhichadmitsofinflection，oughttobeused。
AllourreadershavedoubtlessseenthetwodistichsofSirWilliamJones，respectingthedivisionofthetimeofalawyer。
OneofthedistichsistranslatedfromsomeoldLatinlines;theotherisoriginal。Theformerrunsthus:
\"Sixhourstosleep，tolaw’sgravestudysix，Fourspendinprayer，therestonnaturefix。\"
Rather，\"saysSirWilliamJones，\"Sixhourstolaw，tosoothingslumbersseven，Tentotheworldallot，andalltoheaven。\"
ThesecondcoupletpuzzlesMr。Crokerstrangely。\"SirWilliam，\"
sayshe，\"hasshortenedhisdaytotwenty—threehours，andthegeneraladviceof\"alltoheaven，\"destroysthepeculiarappropriationofacertainperiodtoreligiousexercises。\"[v。
233。]Nowwedidnotthinkthatitwasinhumandullnesstomissthemeaningofthelinessocompletely。SirWilliamdistributestwenty—threehoursamongvariousemployments。Onehouristhusleftfordevotion。Thereaderexpectsthattheversewillendwith\"andonetoheaven。\"Thewholepointofthelinesconsistintheunexpectedsubstitutionof\"all\"for\"one。\"Theconceitiswretchedenough，butitisperfectlyintelligible，andnever，wewillventuretosay，perplexedman，woman，orchildbefore。
PoorTomDavies，afterfailinginbusiness，triedtolivebyhispen。Johnsoncalledhim\"anauthorgeneratedbythecorruptionofabookseller。\"Thisisaveryobvious，andevenacommonplaceallusiontothefamousdogmaoftheoldphysiologists。DrydenmadeasimilarallusiontothatdogmabeforeJohnsonwasborn。
Mr。Croker，however，isunabletounderstandwhatthedoctormeant。\"Theexpression，\"hesays，\"seemsnotquiteclear。\"Andheproceedstotalkaboutthegenerationofinsects，aboutburstingintogaudierlife，andHeavenknowswhat。[Vol。iv。323。]
Thereisastillstrangerinstanceoftheeditor’stalentforfindingoutdifficultyinwhatisperfectlyplain。\"Noman，\"saidJohnson，\"cannowbemadeabishopforhislearningandpiety。\"
\"Fromthistoojustobservation，\"saysBoswell，\"therearesomeeminentexceptions。\"Mr。CrokerispuzzledbyBoswell’sverynaturalandsimplelanguage。\"Thatageneralobservationshouldbepronouncedtoojust，bytheverypersonwhoadmitsthatitisnotuniversallyjust，isnotalittleodd。\"[2iii。228。]
AverylargeproportionofthetwothousandfivehundrednoteswhichtheeditorboastsofhavingaddedtothoseofBoswellandMaloneconsistsoftheflattestandpoorestreflections，reflectionssuchastheleastintelligentreaderisquitecompetenttomakeforhimself，andsuchasnointelligentreaderwouldthinkitworthwhiletoutteraloud。Theyremindusofnothingsomuchasofthoseprofoundandinterestingannotationswhicharepencilledbysempstressesandapothecaries’boysonthedog—earedmarginsofnovelsborrowedfromcirculatinglibraries;
\"Howbeautiful！\"\"Cursedprosy！\"\"Idon’tlikeSirReginaldMalcolmatall。\"\"IthinkPelhamisasaddandy。\"Mr。Crokerisperpetuallystoppingusinourprogressthroughthemostdelightfulnarrativeinthelanguage，toobservethatreallyDr。
Johnsonwasveryrude，thathetalkedmoreforvictorythanfortruth，thathistasteforportwinewithcapillaireinitwasveryodd，thatBoswellwasimpertinent，thatitwasfoolishinMrs。Thraletomarrythemusic—master;andsoforth。
Wecannotspeakmorefavourablyofthemannerinwhichthenotesarewrittenthanofthematterofwhichtheyconsist。Wefindineverypagewordsusedinwrongsenses，andconstructionswhichviolatetheplainestrulesofgrammar。Wehavethevulgarismof\"mutualfriend，\"for\"commonfriend。\"Wehave\"fallacy\"usedassynonymouswith\"falsehood。\"Wehavemanysuchinextricablelabyrinthsofpronounsasthatwhichfollows:\"LordErskinewasfondofthisanecdote;hetoldittotheeditorthefirsttimethathehadthehonourofbeinginhiscompany。\"Lastly，wehaveaplentifulsupplyofsentencesresemblingthosewhichwesubjoin。\"Markland，who，withJortinandThirlby，Johnsoncallsthreecontemporariesofgreateminence。\"[iv。377。]\"Warburtonhimselfdidnotfeel，asMr。Boswellwasdisposedtothinkhedid，kindlyorgratefullyofJohnson。\"[iv。415。]\"ItwashimthatHoraceWalpolecalledamanwhonevermadeabadfigurebutasanauthor。\"[ii。461。]Oneortwoofthesesolecismsshouldperhapsbeattributedtotheprinter，whohascertainlydonehisbesttofillboththetextandthenoteswithallsortsofblunders。Intruth，heandtheeditorhavebetweenthemmadethebooksobad，thatwedonotwellseehowitcouldhavebeenworse。
WhenweturnfromthecommentaryofMr。CrokertotheworkofouroldfriendBoswell，wefinditnotonlyworseprintedthaninanyothereditionwithwhichweareacquainted，butmangledinthemostwantonmanner。MuchthatBoswellinsertedinhisnarrativeis，withouttheshadowofareason，degradedtotheappendix。Theeditorhasalsotakenuponhimselftoalteroromitpassageswhichheconsidersasindecorous。Thispruderyisquiteunintelligibletous。ThereisnothingimmoralinBoswell’sbook，nothingwhichtendstoinflamethepassions。Hesometimesusesplainwords。Butifthisbeataintwhichrequiresexpurgation，itwouldbedesirabletobeginbyexpurgatingthemorningandeveninglessons。ThedelicateofficewhichMr。Crokerhasundertakenhehasperformedinthemostcapriciousmanner。Onestrong，old—fashioned，Englishword，familiartoallwhoreadtheirBibles，ischangedforasobersynonyminsomepassages，andsufferedtostandunalteredinothers。InoneplaceafaintallusionmadebyJohnsontoanindelicatesubject，anallusionsofaintthat，tillMr。Croker’snotepointeditouttous，wehadnevernoticedit，andofwhichwearequitesurethatthemeaningwouldneverbediscoveredbyanyofthoseforwhosesakebooksareexpurgated，isaltogetheromitted。Inanotherplace，acoarseandstupidjestofDr。Tayloronthesamesubject，expressedinthebroadestlanguage，almosttheonlypassage，asfarasweremember，inallBoswell’sbook，whichweshouldhavebeeninclinedtoleaveout，issufferedtoremain。
Wecomplain，however，muchmoreoftheadditionsthanoftheomissions。WehavehalfofMrs。Thrale’sbook，scrapsofMr。
Tyers，scrapsofMr。Murphy，scrapsofMr。Cradock，longprosingsofSirJohnHawkins，andconnectingobservationsbyMr。Crokerhimself，insertedintothemidstofBoswell’stext。Tothispracticewemostdecidedlyobject。AneditormightaswellpublishThucydideswithextractsfromDiodorusinterspersed，orincorporatetheLivesofSuetoniuswiththeHistoryandAnnalsofTacitus。Mr。Crokertellsus，indeed，thathehasdoneonlywhatBoswellwishedtodo，andwaspreventedfromdoingbythelawofcopyright。Wedoubtthisgreatly。Boswellhasstudiouslyabstainedfromavailinghimselfoftheinformationgivenbyhisrivals，onmanyoccasionsonwhichhemighthavecitedthemwithoutsubjectinghimselftothechargeofpiracy。Mr。Crokerhashimself，ononeoccasion，remarkedveryjustlythatBoswellwasunwillingtooweanyobligationtoHawkins。But，bethisasitmay，ifBoswellhadquotedfromSirJohnandfromMrs。Thrale，hewouldhavebeenguidedbyhisowntasteandjudgmentinselectinghisquotations。OnwhatBoswellquotedhewouldhavecommentedwithperfectfreedom;andtheborrowedpassages，soselected，andaccompaniedbysuchcomments，wouldhavebecomeoriginal。Theywouldhavedovetailedintothework。Nohitch，nocrease，wouldhavebeendiscernible。Thewholewouldappearoneandindivisible。
\"UtperlaeveseverosEffundatjuncturaungues。\"
ThisisnotthecasewithMr。Croker’sinsertions。TheyarenotchosenasBoswellwouldhavechosenthem。TheyarenotintroducedasBoswellwouldhaveintroducedthem。TheydifferfromthequotationsscatteredthroughtheoriginalLifeofJohnson，asawitheredboughstuckinthegrounddiffersfromatreeskilfullytransplantedwithallitslifeaboutit。
NotonlydotheseanecdotesdisfigureBoswell’sbook;theyarethemselvesdisfiguredbybeinginsertedinhisbook。ThecharmofMrs。Thrale’slittlevolumeisutterlydestroyed。Thefemininequicknessofobservation，thefemininesoftnessofheart，thecolloquialincorrectnessandvivacityofstyle，thelittleamusingairsofahalf—learnedlady，thedelightfulgarrulity，the\"dearDoctorJohnson，\"the\"itwassocomical，\"alldisappearinMr。Croker’squotations。Theladyceasestospeakinthefirstperson;andheranecdotes，intheprocessoftransfusion，becomeasflatasChampagneindecanters，orHerodotusinBeloe’sversion。SirJohnHawkins，itistrue，losesnothing;andforthebestofreasons。SirJohnHawkinshasnothingtolose。
ThecoursewhichMr。Crokeroughttohavetakenisquiteclear。
HeshouldhavereprintedBoswell’snarrativepreciselyasBoswellwroteit;andinthenotesortheappendixheshouldhaveplacedanyanecdotewhichhemighthavethoughtitadvisabletoquotefromotherwriters。Thiswouldhavebeenamuchmoreconvenientcourseforthereader，whohasnowconstantlytokeephiseyeonthemargininordertoseewhetherheisperusingBoswell，Mrs。
Thrale，Murphy，Hawkins，Tyers，Cradock，orMr。Croker。WegreatlydoubtwhethereventheTourtotheHebridesoughttohavebeeninsertedinthemidstoftheLife。Thereisonemarkeddistinctionbetweenthetwoworks。MostoftheTourwasseenbyJohnsoninmanuscript。ItdoesnotappearthatheeversawanypartoftheLife。
Welove，weown，toreadthegreatproductionsofthehumanmindastheywerewritten。Wehavethisfeelingevenaboutscientifictreatises;thoughweknowthatthesciencesarealwaysinastateofprogression，andthatthealterationsmadebyamoderneditorinanoldbookonanybranchofnaturalorpoliticalphilosophyarelikelytobeimprovements。SomeerrorshavebeendetectedbywritersofthisgenerationinthespeculationsofAdamSmith。A
shortcuthasbeenmadetomuchknowledgeatwhichSirIsaacNewtonarrivedthrougharduousandcircuitouspaths。YetwestilllookwithpeculiarvenerationontheWealthofNationsandonthePrincipia，andshouldregrettoseeeitherofthosegreatworksgarbledevenbytheablesthands。Butinworkswhichowemuchoftheirinteresttothecharacterandsituationofthewriters，thecaseisinfinitelystronger。Whatmanoftasteandfeelingcanendurerifacimenti，harmonies，abridgments，expurgatededitions？
Whoeverreadsastage—copyofaplaywhenhecanprocuretheoriginal？WhoevercutopenMrs。Siddons’sMilton？WhoevergotthroughtenpagesofMr。Gilpin’stranslationofJohnBunyan’sPilgrimintomodernEnglish？Whowouldlose，intheconfusionofaDiatessaron，thepeculiarcharmwhichbelongstothenarrativeofthedisciplewhomJesusloved？ThefeelingofareaderwhohasbecomeintimatewithanygreatoriginalworkisthatwhichAdamexpressedtowardshisbride:
\"ShouldGodcreateanotherEve，andI
Anotherribafford，yetlossoftheeWouldneverfrommyheart。\"
Nosubstitute，howeverexquisitelyformed，willfillthevoidleftbytheoriginal。Thesecondbeautymaybeequalorsuperiortothefirst;butstillitisnotshe。
ThereasonswhichMr。CrokerhasgivenforincorporatingpassagesfromSirJohnHawkinsandMrs。ThralewiththenarrativeofBoswell，wouldvindicatetheadulterationofhalftheclassicalworksinthelanguage。IfPepys’sDiaryandMrs。Hutchinson’sMemoirshadbeenpublishedahundredyearsago，nohumanbeingcandoubtthatMr。HumewouldhavemadegreatuseofthosebooksinhisHistoryofEngland。Butwouldit，onthataccount，bejudiciousinawriterofourowntimestopublishaneditionofHume’sHistoryofEngland，inwhichlargeextractsfromPepysandMrs。Hutchinsonshouldbeincorporatedwiththeoriginaltext？
Surelynot。Hume’shistory，beitsfaultswhattheymay，isnowonegreatentirework，theproductionofonevigorousmind，workingonsuchmaterialsaswerewithinitsreach。Additionsmadebyanotherhandmaysupplyaparticulardeficiency，butwouldgrievouslyinjurethegeneraleffect。WithBoswell’sbookthecaseisstronger。Thereisscarcely，inthewholecompassofliterature，abookwhichbearsinterpolationsoill。Weknownoproductionofthehumanmindwhichhassomuchofwhatmaybecalledtherace，somuchofthepeculiarflavourofthesoilfromwhichitsprang。Theworkcouldneverhavebeenwrittenifthewriterhadnotbeenpreciselywhathewas。Hischaracterisdisplayedineverypage，andthisdisplayofcharactergivesadelightfulinteresttomanypassageswhichhavenootherinterest。