tom of Johnson's prejudice against players; a prejudice which may be attributed to the following causes: first, the imperfection of his organs, which were so defective that he was not susceptible of the fine impressions which theatrical excellence produces upon the generality of mankind; secondly, the cold rejection of his tragedy; and, lastly, the brilliant success of Garrick, who had been his pupil, who had come to London at the same time with him, not in a much more prosperous state than himself, and whose talents he undoubtedly rated low, compared with his own. His being outstripped by his pupil in the race of immediate fame, as well as of fortune, probably made him feel some indignation, as thinking, that whatever might be Garrick's merits in his art, the reward was too great when compared with what the most successful efforts of literary labour could attain. At all periods of his life Johnson used to talk contemptuously of players; but in this work he speaks of them with peculiar acrimony; for which, perhaps, there was formerly too much reason, from the licentious and dissolute manners of those engaged in that profession. It is but justice to add, that in our own time such a change has taken place, that there is no longer room for such an unfavourable distinction.

His schoolfellow and friend, Dr. Taylor, told me a pleasant anecdote of Johnson's triumphing over his pupil, David Garrick. When that great actor had played some little time at Goodman's Fields, Johnson and Taylor went to see him perform, and afterwards passed the evening at a tavern with him and old Giffard.' Johnson, who was ever depreciating stage-players, after censuring some mistakes in emphasis, which Garrick had committed in the course of that night's acting, said, "The players, Sir, have got a kind of rant, with which they run on, without any regard either to accent or emphasis." Both Garrick and Giffard were offended at this sarcasm, and endeavoured to refute it; upon which Johnson rejoined, "Well now, I'll give you something to speak, with which you are little acquainted, and then we shall see how just my observation is. That shall be the criterion. Let me hear you repeat the ninth Commandment, Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.'" Both tried at it, said Dr. Taylor, and both mistook the emphasis, which should be upon not and

1 Giffard was the manager of Goodman's Fields playhouse, where Garrick made his first appearance, Oct. 19. 1741, in the character of Richard the Third. -WRIGHT.

2 I suspect Dr. Taylor was inaccurate in this statement. The emphasis should be equally upon shalt and not, as both concur to form the negative injunction and false witness, like the other acts prohibited in the Decalogue, should not be marked by any peculiar emphasis, but only be distinctly enunciated. - BOSWELL. A moderate emphasis should be placed on false. - KEARNEY. Sheridan, in his "Lectures on the Art of Reading,”(p. 258.) places the emphasis wholly on false. MARKLAND. Here, on those six words, Thou shalt not bear false witness, we have six authorities Drs. Johnson, Taylor, and Kearney, and Messrs. Giffard, Sheridan, Boswell - with each a different emphasis. This diversity seems to arise from the fact, that in these awful and com

false witness. Johnson put them right, and enjoyed his victory with great glee.

His "Life of Savage" was no sooner published, than the following liberal praise was given to it, in "The Champion," a periodical paper: :

"This pamphlet is, without flattery to its author, as just and well-written a piece of its kind as I ever saw; so that at the same time that it highly deserves, it certainly stands very little in need of this recommendation. As to the history of the unfortunate person, whose memoirs compose this work, it is certainly penned with equal accuracy and spirit, of which I am so much the better judge, as I know many of the facts mentioned to Besides, it is not only the story of Mr. Savage, but be strictly true, and very fairly related. innumerable incidents relating to other persons, and other affairs, which renders this a very amusing, and, withal, a very instructive and valuable performance. The author's observations are short, significant, and just, as his narrative is remarkably smooth and well disposed. His reflections open to all the recesses of the human heart; and, in a word, a more just or pleasant, a more engaging or a more improving treatise, on all the excellencies and defects of human nature, is scarce to be found in our own, or, perhaps, any other language."3

Johnson's partiality for Savage made him entertain no doubt of his story, however extraordinary and improbable. It never occurred to him to question his being the son of the Countess of Macclesfield4, of whose unrelenting barbarity he so loudly complained, and the particulars of which are related in so strong and affecting a manner in Johnson's Life of him. Johnson was certainly well warranted in publishing his narrative, however offensive it might be to the lady and her relations; because her alleged unnatural and cruel conduct to her son, and shameful avowal of guilt, were stated in a Life of Savage now lying before me, which came out so early as 1727, and no attempt had been made to confute it, or to punish the author or printer as a libeller: but for the honour of human nature, we should be glad to find the shocking tale not true; and from a respectable gentleman 5 connected with the lady's family, I have received such information and remarks, as, joined to my own inquiries, will, I think, render it at least somewhat doubtful, especially when we consider that it must have originated from the person himself who went by the name of Richard Savage.

prehensive commands of God himself, there is no room for any peculiar emphasis: in steal not-murder not - bear not false witness all the words are of equal value towards expressing the Divine Command. - CROKER.

3 This character of the "Life of Savage" was not written by Fielding, as has been supposed, but most probably by Ralph, who, as appears from the minutes of the partners of "The Champion," in the possession of Mr. Reed, of StapleInn, succeeded Fielding in his share of the paper, before the date of that eulogium. - BoSWELL.

4 Anne Mason, wife of Charles Gerrard, Earl of Macclesfield, of the first creation. He died in 1704, and was succeeded by his brother, who also dying without issue, the title became extinct - CROKER.

5 The late Francis Cockayne Cust, Esq., one of his Majesty's counsel.-BOSWELL. He died Nov. 30. 1791.-WRIGHT.

If the maxim, falsum in uno, falsum in omnibus, were to be received without qualification, the credit of Savage's narrative, as conveyed to us, would be annihilated; for it contains some assertions which, beyond a question, are

not true.

1. In order to induce a belief that the Earl Rivers on account of a criminal connection with whom, Lady Macclesfield is said to have been divorced from her husband, by act of parliament [1697]-had a peculiar anxiety about the child which she bore to him, it is alleged, that his Lordship gave him his own name, and had it duly recorded in the register of St. Andrew's, Holborn. I have carefully inspected that register, but no such entry is to be found.1

2. It is stated, that "Lady Macclesfield, having lived for some time upon very uneasy terms with her husband, thought a public confession of adultery the most obvious and expeditious method of obtaining her liberty; and Johnson, assuming this to be true, stigmatises her with indignation, as "the wretch who had, without scruple, proclaimed herself an adultress." But I have perused the Journals of both houses of Parliament at the period of her divorce, and there find it authentically ascertained, that so far from voluntarily submitting to the ignominious charge of adultery, she made a strenuous defence by her Counsel; the bill having been first moved the 15th of January, 1697-8, in the House of Lords, and proceeded on (with various applications for time to bring up witnesses at a distance, &c.) at intervals, till the 3d of March, when it passed. It was brought to the Commons, by a message from the Lords, the 5th of March, proceeded on the 7th, 10th, 11th, 14th, and 15th, on which day, after a full examination of witnesses on both sides, and hearing of Counsel,

it was reported without amendments, passed, and carried to the Lords.

That Lady Macclesfield was convicted of the crime of which she was accused, cannot be denied; but the question now is, whether the person calling himself Richard Savage was her son.

It has been said3, that when Earl Rivers was dying, and anxious to provide for all his natural children, he was informed by Lady Macclesfield, that her son by him was dead. Whether, then, shall we believe that this was a malignant lie, invented by a mother to prevent her own child from receiving the bounty of his father, which was accordingly the consequence, if the person whose life Johnson wrote was her son; or shall we not rather believe that the person who then assumed the name of Richard Savage was an impostor, being in reality the son of the shoemaker, under whose wife's care Lady Macclesfield's child was placed; that after the death of the real Richard Savage, he attempted to personate him; and that the fraud being known to Lady Macclesfield, he was therefore repulsed by her with just resentment?

There is a strong circumstance in support of the last supposition; though it has been mentioned as an aggravation of Lady Macclesfield's unnatural conduct, and that is, her having prevented him from obtaining the benefit of a legacy left to him by Mrs. Lloyd, his godmother. For if there was such a legacy left, his not being able to obtain payment of it must be imputed to his consciousness that he was not the real person. The just inference should be, that by the death of Lady Macclesfield's child before its godmother, the legacy became lapsed, and therefore that Johnson's Richard Savage was an impostor.

If he had a title to the legacy, he could not

Conformable to this statement is the entry in the register of St. Andrew's, Holborn, which is as follows, and which unquestionably records the baptism of Richard Savage, to whom Lord Rivers gave his own Christian name, prefixed to the assumed surname of his mother:-"Jan. 1696-7. Richard, son of John Smith and Mary, in Fox Court, in Gray's Inn Lane, baptized the 18th."-BINDLEY.

From The Earl of Macclesfield's Case," which, in 1697-8, was presented to the Lords, in order to procure an act of divorce, it appears that "Anne, Countess of Macclesfield, under the name of Madam Smith, was delivered of a male child in Fox Court, near Brook Street, Holborn, by Mrs. Wright, a midwife, on Saturday, the 16th of January, 1696-7, at six o'clock in the morning, who was baptized on the Monday following, and registered by the name of Richard, the son of John Smith, by Mr. Burbridge, assistant to Dr. Manningham's curate for St. Andrew's, Holborn: that the child was christened on Monday, the 18th of January, in Fox Court; and, from the privacy, was supposed by Mr. Burbridge to be a by-blow or bastard."" It also appears, that during her delivery, the lady wore a mask: and that Mary Pegler on the next day after the baptism (Tuesday) took a male child, whose mother was called Madam Smith. from the house of Mrs. Pheasant, who went by the name of Mrs. Lee, in Fox Court (running from Brook Street into Gray's Inn Lane.]

Mr. Cust and Mr. Boswell's share of the argument and assertions in the text not being distinguished, it is not possible to say which of them hazarded the erroneous statement relative to the parish register of St. Andrew's, which certainly does contain what the text asserts is not to be found in it. If the maxim, therefore, falsum in uno, falsum in omnibus, were to be applied to them, all their observations must be re

only to prove what has been generally admitted, that Lady Macclesfield had a child, by Lord Rivers, baptized by the name of Richard; but it does not disprove the assertion, that this child died in its infancy, and that Savage, when between seventeen and eighteen, assumed its name. Savage, in a letter to Miss Carter, admits that he did pass under another name till he was seventeen years of age, but not the name of any person he lived with.— Life of Mrs. Carter, vol. i. p. 59. -CROKER.

2 No divorce can be obtained in the courts on mere confession of the party. There must be proofs. - KEARNEY. 3 By Johnson, in his Life of Savage.-MALONE.

4 This, as an accurate friend remarks to me, is not correctly stated. The shoemaker under whose care Savage was placed, with a view to his becoming his apprentice, was not the husband of his nurse. See Johnson's Life of Savage.-J. BOSWELL, jun.

have found any difficulty in recovering it; for had the executors resisted his claim, the whole costs, as well as the legacy, must have been paid by them, if he had been the child to whom it was given.'

The talents of Savage, and the mingled fire, rudeness, pride, meanness, and ferocity of his character, concur in making it credible that he was fit to plan and carry on an ambitious and daring scheme of imposture, similar instances of which have not been wanting in higher spheres, in the history of different countries, and have had a considerable degree of

success.

Yet, on the other hand, to the companion of Johnson (who, through whatever medium he was conveyed into this world, be it ever so doubtful, to whom related, or by whom begot," was, unquestionably, a man of no common endowments,) we must allow the weight of general repute as to his status or parentage, though illicit; and, supposing him to be an impostor, it seems strange that Lord Tyrconnel, the nephew of Lady Macclesfield, should patronise him, and even admit him as a guest in his family. Lastly, it must ever appear very suspicious, that three different accounts of the Life of Richard Savage,—one published in "The Plain Dealer," in 1724, another in 1727, and another by the powerful pen of Johnson, in 1744,-and all of them while Lady Macclesfield was alive+, should, notwithstanding the severe attacks upon her, have been suffered to pass without any public and effectual contradiction.5

I have thus endeavoured to sum up the evidence upon the case, as fairly as I can; and

1 This is decisive: if Savage was what he represented himself to be, nothing could have prevented his recovering his legacy.-CROKER.

2 Johnson's companion appears to have persuaded that lofty minded man, that he resembled him in having a noble pride; for Johnson, after painting in strong colours the quarrel between Lord Tyrconnel and Savage, asserts that the spirit of Mr. Savage, indeed, never suffered him to solicit à reconciliation: he returned reproach for reproach, and insult for insult." But the respectable gentleman to whom I have alluded, has in his possession a letter from Savage, after Lord Tyrconnel had discarded him, addressed to the Rev. Mr. Gilbert, his Lordship's chaplain, in which be requests him, in the humblest manner, to represent his case to the Viscount. - BosWELL.

3 Trusting to Savage's information, Johnson represents this unhappy man's being received as a companion by Lord Tyrconnel, and pensioned by his Lordship, as posterior to Savage's conviction and pardon. But I am assured, that Savage had received the voluntary bounty of Lord Tyrconnel, and had been dismissed by him long before the murder was committed, and that his Lordship was very instrumental in procuring Savage's pardon. by his intercession with the Queen, through Lady Hertford. If, therefore, he had been desirous of preventing the publication by Savage, he would have left him to his fate. Indeed, I must observe, that although Johnson mentions that Lord Tyrconnel's patronage of Savage was "upon his promise to lay aside his design of exposing the cruelty of his mother," the great biographer has forgotten that he himself has mentloned, that Savage's story had been told several years before in "The Plain Dealer;" from which he quotes this strong saying of the generous Sir Richard Steele, that the "inhumanity of his mother had given him a right to find every good man his father." At the same time it must be acknowledged, that Laly Macclesfield and her relations might still wish that her story should not be brought into more conspicuous notice by the satirical pen of Savage. - BOSWELL.

4 Miss Mason, after having forfeited the title of Lady Mac

the result seems to be, that the world must vibrate in a state of uncertainty as to what was the truth.

This digression, I trust, will not be censured, as it relates to a matter exceedingly curious, and very intimately connected with Johnson, both as a man and an author.

He this year wrote the "Preface to the Harleian Miscellany." The selection of the pamphlets of which it was composed was made by Mr. Oldys, a man of eager curiosity, and indefatigable diligence, who first exerted that spirit of inquiry into the literature of the old English writers, by which the works of our great dramatic poet have of late been so signally illustrated.

clesfield by divorce, was married to Colonel Brett, and, it is said, was well known in all the polite circles. Colley Cibber, I am informed, had so high an opinion of her taste and judgment as to genteel life and manners, that he submitted every scene of his "Careless Husband" to Mrs Brett's revisal and correction. Colonel Brett was reported to be free in his gallantry with his lady's maid. Mrs. Brett came into a room one day in her own house, and found the Colonel and her maid both fast asleep in two chairs. She tied a white handkerchief round her husband's neck, which was a sufficient proof that she had discovered his intrigue; but she never at any time took notice of it to him. This incident, as I am told, gave occasion to the well-wrought scene of Sir Charles and Lady Easy, and Edging. - BoswELL.

Lady Macclesfield died 1753, aged above 80. Her eldest daughter, by Col. Brett, was, for the few last months of his life, the mistress of George I. (See Walpole's Reminiscences.) Her marriage ten years after her royal lover's death is thus announced in the Gent. Mag. 1737 :-" Sept. 17. Sir W. Leman, of Northall, Bart., to Miss Brett of Bond Street, an heiress;" and again next month -“ Oct. 8. Sir William Leman, of Northall, Barone!, to Miss Brett, half sister to Mr. Savage, son to the late Earl Rivers;" for the difference of date I know not how to account; but the second insertion was, no doubt, made by Savage to countenance his own pretensions-CROKER.

5 It should, however, as Boswell himself suggests, be recollected, before we draw any conclusion from Lady Macclesfield's forbearance to prosecute a libeller, that however innocent she might be as to Savage, she was undeniably and inexcusably guilty in other respects, and would have been naturally reluctant to drag her frailties again before the public. CROKER.

6 William Oldys was born in 1696. In 1737 he published The British Librarian; an Abstract of our most scarce, useful, and valuable Books; and, in 1738, a Life of Sir Walter Raleigh. He also contributed several articles to the General Dictionary, and the Biographia Britannica. lle died in 1761.- WRIGHT.

of Macbeth, with Remarks on Sir T. H.'s (Sir Thomas Hanmer's) Edition of Shakspeare." * To which he affixed, Proposals for a new edition of that poet.

As we do not trace any thing else published by him during the course of this year, we may conjecture that he was occupied entirely with that work. But the little encouragement which was given by the public to his anonymous proposals for the execution of a task which Warburton was known to have undertaken, probably damped his ardour. His pamphlet, however, was highly esteemed, and was fortunate enough to obtain the approbation even of the supercilious Warburton himself, who, in the Preface to his Shakspeare, published two years afterwards, thus mentioned it: "As to all those things which have been published under the titles of Essays, Remarks, Observations, &c. on Shakspeare, if you except some Critical Notes on Macbeth, given as a specimen of a projected edition, and written, as appears, by a man of parts and genius, the rest are absolutely below a serious notice."

Of this flattering distinction shown to him by Warburton, a very grateful remembrance was ever entertained by Johnson, who said, "He praised me at a time when praise was of value to me."

In 1746, it is probable that he was still employed upon his Shakspeare, which perhaps he laid aside for a time, upon account of the high expectations which were formed of Warburton's edition of that great poet. It is somewhat curious, that his literary career appears to have been almost totally suspended in the years 1745 and 1746, those years which were marked by a civil war in Great Britain, when a rash attempt was made to restore the House of Stuart to the throne. That he had a tenderness for that unfortunate House, is well known; and some may fancifully imagine, that a sym

Sir Thomas Hanmer was born in 1676. He was Speaker of the House of Commons in Queen Anne's last parliament, and died May 5. 1746. His Shakspeare, in six volumes quarto, was published in 1744. WRIGHT.

2 In the Garrick Correspondence, there is a letter from Gilbert Walmesley, dated Nov. 3. 1746, containing this passage: "When you see Mr. Johnson, pray give my compliments, and tell him I esteem him as a great genius — quite List, both to himself and the world." Upon which the Editor observes, "Between the years 1743 and 1746, Johnson literally wrote nothing. The rebellion that was then raging perhaps inspi ed Aim with the hopes that attached to his political principles. He loved the House of Stuart, and in the success of the Pretender might anticipate his own independence." G. C. i. 45. It would be, I readily admit, too fanciful to believe that his literary powers were suspended by "sympathetic anxiety; but it is little less so to imagine with Mr. Boswell, that he had employed these two years in contemplative preparation for his future Dictionary He must have had some means, however small, of subsistence. In the absence then of any other explanation, I cannot reject as altogether fanciful the ilos of the Garrick Editor, that he may have been diverted om his ordinary pursuits-not by "sympathetic anxiety,' but by some mere personal share in the proceedings of the Jacobite party. We shall see hereafter (Aug. 1766) that was privy to the concealment of at least one of the Nech Jacobites, who was hiding from justice for his share the rebellion may he not have been in some difficulpap which might occasion his own absence or concealment? *ght this not have been the period of his temporary sepadean his wife, if any such thing ever occurred? and It is at least a curious coincidence, that Johnson's

pathetic anxiety impeded the exertion of his intellectual powers: but I am inclined to think, that he was, during this time, sketching the outlines of his great philological work.

None of his letters during those years are extant, so far as I can discover. This is much to be regretted. It might afford some entertainment to see how he then expressed himself to his private friends concerning state affairs. Dr. Adams informs me, that "at this time a favourite object which he had in contemplation was The Life of Alfred;' in which, from the warmth with which he spoke about it, he would, I believe, had he been master of his own will, have engaged himself, rather than on any other subject."

In 1747, it is supposed that the Gentleman's Magazine for May was enriched by him with five short poetical pieces distinguished by three asterisks. The first is a translation, or rather a paraphrase, of a Latin Epitaph on Sir Thomas Hanmer. Whether the Latin was his, or not, I have never heard, though I should think it probably was, if it be certain that he wrote the English; as to which my only cause of doubt is, that his slighting character of Hanmer as an editor, in his "Observations on Macbeth," is very different from that in the Epitaph. It may be said, that there is the same contrariety between the character in the Observations, and that in his own Preface to Shakspeare; but a considerable time elapsed between the one publication and the other, whereas, the Observations and the Epitaph came close together. The others are, Το Miss -, on her giving the Author a gold and silk net-work Purse of her own weaving;" "Stella in Mourning ;” “The Winter's Walk;" "An Ode ;" and, "To Lyce, an elderly Lady." I am not positive that all these were his productions; but as "The Winter's Walk "has never been controverted to be his, and all of

disappearance from the Gentleman's Magazine, Feb. 1744, (antè, p. 49. n. 1.) is exactly contemporaneous with the arrest of Col. Cecil, the Pretender's agent and the general agitation into which the country was thrown by the king's message to Parliament announcing an invasion, and that he reappears in 1747, when the rebellion and all its fatal conse quences were over. I have a strong suspicion that from this period dates what I may call his morbid antipathy to the Scotch; and I also faintly suspect that a strong wish to recover an old letter out of the hands of Francis Stuart, one of his amanuenses in compiling the Dictionary, may have reference to this period. See post, Dec. 1779, 27th Feb. and 18th March, 1784, and the notes about Francis Stuart in the Appendix. CROKER, 1846.

3 In the "Universal Visiter." to which Johnson contributed, the mark which is affixed to some pieces unquestionably his, is also found subjoined to others, of which he certainly was not the author. The mark, therefore, will not ascertain the poems in question to have been written by him. Some of them were probably the productions of Hawkesworth, who, it is believed, was afflicted with the gout The verses on a Purse were inserted afterwards in Mrs. Williams's Miscellanies, and are, unquestionably, Johnson's."- MALONE.

There is no evidence whatever that any of these were Johnson's, and every reason to suppose that they are all Hawkesworth's. The ode which Boswell doubts about on internal evidence, is the ode to Spring, which, as well as those on Summer, Autumn, and Winter, have been of late published as Johnson's, and are, no doubt, as Boswell says, all by the same hand. But we see that Spring bears internal marks of not being Johnson's, and of being Hawkesworth's. Winter and Summer, Mr. Chalmers asserts to be also Hawkes