of satisfaction, the insertion in the Edinburgh paper. I am very glad that it was done. "My compliments to Mrs. Boswell, who does not love me; and of all the rest, I need only send them to those that do; and I am afraid it will give you very little trouble to distribute them. -I am, my dear, dear Sir, &c., SAM. JOHNSON." [JOHNSON TO MR. GRANGER.' (About 1775, but undated.) Mr. "SIR, - When I returned from the country I found your letter; and would very gladly have done what you desire, had it been in my power. Farmer is, I am confident, mistaken in supposing that he gave me any such pamphlet or cut. should as soon have suspected myself, as Mr. Farmer, of forgetfulness; but that I do not know, except from your letter, the name of Arthur O'Toole, nor recollect that I ever heard of it before. I think it impossible that I should have suffered such a total obliteration from my mind of any such thing which was ever there. This at least is certain, that I do not know of any such pamphlet; and equally certain I desire you to think it, that if I had it, you should immediately receive it from, Sir, your most humble servant, "SAM. JOHNSON."] Author of the "Biographical History of England." Mr. P. Cunningham has found this letter among Granger's, with the date of 15th Dec., 1772. - CROKER. The pamphlet alluded to was written by John Taylor, the water-poet, and entitled," Honour of the Noble Captain O'Toole, 1622." Some account of O'Toole will be found in Granger, vol. i. p. 398 CROKER, 1835. 3 It was about this time that Mrs. Thrale, who had just recovered from illness and confinement, went into his room on the morning of her birthday (see antè, p. 171.) and said to him, "Nobody sends me any verses now, because I am five and thirty years old; and Stella was fed with them till forty-six, I remember." Upon which he burst out suddenly, without the least previous hesitation, and without having entertained the smallest intention towards it half a minute before: — "Oft in danger, yet alive, Time his hours should never drive mind was still ardent, and fraught with generous wishes to attain to still higher degrees of literary excellence, is proved by his private notes of this year, which I shall insert in their proper place.3 JOHNSON TO BOSWELL. "Jan. 10. 1776. "DEAR SIR, - I have at last sent you all Lord Hailes's papers. While I was in France, I looked very often into Henault; but Lord Hailes, in my opinion, leaves him far and far behind. Why I did not despatch so short a perusal sooner, when I look back, I am utterly unable to discover; but human moments are stolen away by a thousand petty impediments which leave no trace behind them. I have been afflicted, through the whole Christmas, with the general disorder, of which the worst effect a cough, which is now much mitigated, though the country, on which I look from a window at Streatham, is now covered with a deep snow. Mrs. Williams is very ill: every body else is as usual. was 66 4 which I think you had not opened; and a paper Among the papers I found a letter to you, for The Chronicle,' which I suppose it not necessary now to insert. I return them both. I have, within these few days, had the honour of receiving Lord Hailes's first volume, for which I return my most respectful thanks. "I wish you, my dearest friend, and your haughty lady, (for I know she does not love me,) and the young ladies, and the young laird, all happiness. Teach the young gentleman, in spite of his mamma, to think and speak well of, Sir, your affectionate humble servant, "SAM. JOHNSON." At this time was in agitation a matter of great consequence to me and my family, which I should not obtrude upon the world, were it not that the part which Dr. Johnson's friendship for me made him take in it was the occasion of an exertion of his abilities, which it would be injustice to conceal. That what he wrote upon the subject may be understood, it is necessary to give a state of the question, which I shall do as briefly as I can. In the year 1504, the barony or manor of High to soar, and deep to dive, For howe'er we boast and strive, And all who wisely wish to wive And now," said he, as I was writing them down, "you may see what it is to come for poetry to a dictionary-maker; you may observe that the rhymes run in alphabetical order exactly." And so they do. Dr. Johnson did indeed possess an almost Tuscan power of improvisation. Piozzi. He was much pleased with an Italian improvisatore, whom he saw at Streatham, and with whom he talked much in Latin. He told him, if he had not been a witness to his faculty himself, he should not have thought it possible. He said, Isaac Hawkins Browne had endeavoured at it in English, but could not get beyond thirty verses. — Hawkins. . CROKER. 5 Probably some notice relative to the apology to Rasay. -CROKER. Auchinleck (pronounced Affleck 1) in Ayrshire, which belonged to a family of the same name with the lands, having fallen to the crown by forfeiture, James the Fourth, King of Scotland, granted it to Thomas Boswell, a branch of an ancient family in the county of Fife, styling him in the charter, "dilecto familiari nostro; and assigning as the cause of the grant, "pro bono et fideli servitio nobis præstito." Thomas Boswell was slain in battle, fighting along with his sovereign, at the fatal field of Flodden, in 1513. From this very honourable founder of our family, the estate was transmitted, in a direct series of heirs-male, to David Boswell, my father's great-grand-uncle, who had no sons, but four daughters, who were all respectably married, the eldest to Lord Cathcart. David Boswell, being resolute in the military feudal principle of continuing the male succession, passed by his daughters, and settled the estate on his nephew by his next brother, who approved of the deed, and renounced any pretensions which he might possibly have, in preference to his son. But the estate having been burthened with large portions to the daughters, and other debts, it was necessary for the nephew to sell a considerable part of it, and what remained was still much encumbered. The frugality of the nephew preserved, and, in some degree, relieved the estate. His son, my grandfather, an eminent lawyer, not only re-purchased a great part of what had been sold, but acquired other lands; and my father, who was one of the judges of Scotland, and had added considerably to the estate, now signified his inclination to take the privilege allowed by our law 2, to secure it to his family in perpetuity by an entail, which, on account of his marriage articles, could not be done without my consent. In the plan of entailing the estate, I heartily concurred with him, though I was the first to be restrained by it; but we unhappily differed as to the series of heirs which should be established, or, in the language of our law, called to the succession. My father had declared a predilection for heirs-general, that is, males and females indiscriminately. He was willing, however, that all males descending from his 1 Now pronounced as written, Auchinleck. See antè, p. 301. -CROKER. 2 Acts of Parliament of Scotland, 1685, cap. 22. - BosWELL. 3 As, first, the opinion of some distinguished naturalists, that our species is transmitted through males only, the female being all along no more than a nidus, or nurse, as Mother Earth is to plants of every sort; which notion seems to be confirmed by that text of scripture," He was yet in the loins of his PATHER when Melchisedeck met him," (Heb. vii. 10.); and consequently, that a man's grandson by a daughter, instead of being his surest descendant, as is vulgarly said, has, in reality, no connection whatever with his blood. And, secondly, independent of this theory (which, if true, should completely exclude heirs-general), that if the preference of a male to a female, without regard to primogeniture (as a son, though much younger, nay, even a grandson by a son, to a daughter), be once admitted, as it universally is, it must be equally reasonable and proper in the most remote degree of descent from an original proprietor of an estate as in the grandfather should be preferred to females; but would not extend that privilege to males deriving their descent from a higher source. I, on the other hand, had a zealous partiality for heirs-male, however remote, which I maintained by arguments, which appeared to me to have considerable weight. And in the particular case of our family, I apprehended that we were under an implied obligation, in honour and good faith, to transmit the estate by the same tenure which he held it, which was as heirs-males, excluding nearer females. I therefore, as I thought conscientiously, objected to my father's scheme. My opposition was very displeasing to my father, who was entitled to great respect and deference; and I had reason to apprehend. disagreeable consequences from my non-compliance with his wishes. After much perplexity and uneasiness, I wrote to Dr. Johnson, stating the case, with all its difficulties, at full length, and earnestly requesting that he would consider it at leisure, and favour me with his friendly opinion and advice. JOHNSON TO BOSWELL. "London, Jan. 15, 1776. "DEAR SIR, I was much impressed by your letter, and if I can form upon your case any resolution satisfactory to myself, will very gladly impart it: but whether I am equal to it, I do not know. It is a case compounded of law and jus tice, and requires a mind versed in juridical dis quisitions. Could not you tell your whole mind to Lord Hailes? He is, you know, both a Christian and a lawyer. I suppose he is above partiality, and above loquacity; and, I believe, he will not think the time lost in which he may quiet a disturbed, or settle a wavering mind. Write to me as any thing occurs to you; and if I find myself stopped by want of facts necessary to be known, I will make inquiries of you as my doubts arise. If your former resolutions should be found only fanciful, you decide rightly in judging that your father's fancies may claim the preference; but I really think Lord Hailes could help us. whether they are fanciful or rational is the question. "Make my compliments to dear Mrs. Boswell; and tell her, that I hope to be wanting in nothing that I can contribute to bring you all out of your troubles. I am, dear Sir, most affectionately, "SAM. JOHNSON." nearest because, however distant from the representative S the time, that remote heir-male, upon the failure of those nearer to the original proprietor than he is, becomes in fact the nearest male to him, and is, therefore, preferable as representative, to a female descendant. A little extension, JỀ mind will enable us easily to perceive that a son's son, in continuation to whatever length of time, is preferable to a son's daughter, in the succession to an ancient inherituxe, in which regard should be had to the representation of the original proprietor, and not to that of one of his descendants. I am aware of Blackstone's admirable demonstrations of the reasonableness of the legal succession, upon the principle of there being the greatest probability that the nearest best of the person who last dies proprietor of an estate is of the blood of the first purchaser. But supposing a pedigree to be carefully authenticated through all its branches, instead of mere probability there will be a certainty that the nearest heir-male, at whatever period, has the same right of blood with the first heir-male, namely, the original purchaser's eldest son. - BOSWELL. In the exercise of the right which law either leaves or gives, regard is to be paid to moral obligations. "Of the estate which we are now considering, your father still retains such possession, with such power over it, that he can sell it, and do with the money what he will, without any legal impediment. But when he extends his power beyond his own life, by settling the order of succession, the law makes your consent necessary. Let us suppose that he sells the land to risk the money in some specious adventure, and in that adventure loses the whole; his posterity would be disappointed; but they could not think themselves injured or robbed. If he spent it upon vice or pleasure, his successors could only call him vicious and voluptuous; they could not say that he was injurious or unjust. "He that may do more may do less. He that by selling or squandering may disinherit a whole family, may certainly disinherit part by a partial settlement. "Laws are formed by the manners and exigencies of particular times, and it is but accidental that they last longer than their causes: the limitation of feudal succession to the male arose from the obligation of the tenant to attend his chief in war. "As times and opinions are always changing, I know not whether it be not usurpation to prescribe rules to posterity, by presuming to judge of what we cannot know; and I know not whether I fully approve either your design or your father's, to limit that succession which descended to you unlimited. If we are to leave sartum tectum to posterity, what we have without any merit of our own received from our ancestors, should not choice and free-will be kept unviolated? Is land to be treated with more reverence than liberty? If this consideration should restrain your father from disinheriting some of the males, does it leave you the power of disinheriting all the females? "Can the possessor of a feudal estate make any will? Can he appoint, out of the inheritance, any portion to his daughters? There seems to be a very shadowy difference between the power of leaving land, and of leaving money to be raised from land; between leaving an estate to females, and leaving the male heir, in effect, only their steward. Suppose at one time a law that allowed only males to inherit, and during the continuance of this law, many estates to have descended, passing by the females, to remoter heirs. Suppose afterwards the law repealed, in correspondence with a change of manners, and women made capable of inheritance; would not then the tenure of estates be changed? Could the women have no benefit from a law made in their favour? Must they be passed by upon moral principles for ever, because they were once excluded by a legal prohibition? Or may that which passed only to males by one law, pass likewise to females by another? "You mention your resolution to maintain the right of your brothers I do not see how any of their rights are invaded. "As your whole difficulty arises from the act of your ancestor, who diverted the succession from the motives, and what was his intention: for you cerfemales, you inquire, very properly, what were his tainly are not bound by his act more than he intended to bind you, nor hold your land on harder or stricter terms than those on which it was granted. he left the estate to his nephew, by excluding his "Intentions must be gathered from acts. When daughters, was it, or was it not in his power to he could have done it, he seems to have shown, by have perpetuated the succession to the males? If omitting it, that he did not desire it to be done, and, upon your own principles, you will not easily prove your right to destroy that capacity of succession which your ancestors have left. purely legal, no man can be supposed to bequeath As the rules of succession are, in a great part, anything, but upon legal terms; he can grant no power which the law denies; and if he makes no special and definite limitation, he confers all the power which the law allows. 66 Your ancestor, for some reason, disinherited his daughters; but it no more follows that he intended this act as a rule for posterity, than the If, therefore, you ask disinheriting of his brother. by what right your father admits daughters to inheritance, ask yourself, first, by what right you It appears, upon require them to be excluded? reflection, that your father excludes nobody; he only admits nearer females to inherit before males more remote; and the exclusion is purely consequential. and deliberative; but, perhaps, you may find in "These, dear Sir, are my thoughts, immethodical I cannot, them some glimmering of evidence. however, but again recommend to you a conference with Lord Hailes, whom you know to be both a Make my compliments to Mrs. Boswell, though she does not love me. I am, Sir, your affectionate servant, lawyer and a Christian. "SAM. JOHNSON." I had followed his recommendation and consulted Lord Hailes, who upon this subject had a firm opinion contrary to mine. His lordship 1 Which term I applied to all the heirs male. - BOSWELL. obligingly took the trouble to write me a letter, in which he discussed, with legal and historical learning, the points in which I saw much difficulty, maintaining that "the succession of heirs general was the succession, by the law of Scotland, from the throne to the cottage, as far as we can learn it by record;" observing that the estate of our family had not been limited to heirs male; and that though an heir male had in one instance been chosen in preference to nearer females, that had been an arbitrary act, which had seemed to be best in the embarrassed state of affairs at that time: and the fact was, that upon a fair computation of the value of land and money at the time, applied to the estate and the burthens upon it, there was nothing given the heirs male but the skeleton of an estate. "The plea of conscience," said his lordship, "which you put, is a most respectable one, especially when conscience and self are on different sides. But I think that conscience is not well informed, and that self and she ought on this occasion to be of a side." This letter, which had considerable influence upon my mind, I sent to Dr. Johnson, begging to hear from him again upon this interesting question. JOHNSON TO BOSWELL. "Feb. 9. 1776. your scheme of entail, nor perhaps to any scheme. My observation, that only he who acquires an estate may bequeath it capriciously, if it contains any conviction, includes this position likewise, that only he who acquires an estate may entail it capriciously. But I think it may be safely presumed, that He who inherits an estate, inherits all the power legally concomitant;' and that He who gives or leaves unlimited an estate legally limitable, which he omitted to take away, and to commit must be presumed to give that power of limitation, future contingencies to future prudence.' In these two positions I believe Lord Hailes will advise you to rest; every other notion of possession seems to me full of difficulties, and embarrassed with scruples. "If these axioms be allowed, you have arrived now at full liberty without the help of particular circumstances, which, however, have in your case great weight. You very rightly observe, that he who passing by his brother gave the inheritance to his nephew, could limit no more than he gave; and by Lord Hailes's estimate of fourteen years' purchase, what he gave was no more than you may easily entail according to your own opinion, if that opinion should finally prevail. "Lord Hailes's suspicion that entails are encroachments on the dominion of Providence, may be extended to all hereditary privileges and all permanent institutions. I do not see why it may not be extended to any provision for the present hour, since all care about futurity proceeds upon a supposition, that we know at least in some degree what will be future. Of the future we certainly know nothing; but we may form conjectures from the past; and the power of forming conjectures includes, in my opinion, the duty of acting in conformity to that probability, which we discover. Providence gives the power, of which reason teaches the use. I am, dear Sir, your most faithservant, SAM. JOHNSON. "DEAR SIR, Having not any acquaintance with the laws or customs of Scotland, I endeavoured to consider your question upon general principles, and found nothing of much validity that I could oppose to this position: He who inherits a fief unlimited by his ancestors inherits the power of limiting it according to his own judg-ful ment or opinion.' If this be true, you may join with your father. "Further consideration produces another conclusion: He who receives a fief unlimited by his ancestors gives his heirs some reason to complain if he does not transmit it unlimited to posterity. For why should he make the state of others worse than his own, without a reason?' If this be true, though neither you nor your father are about to do what is quite right, but as your father violates (I think) the legal succession least, he seems to be nearer the right than yourself. "It cannot but occur that Women have natural and equitable claims as well as men, and these claims are not to be capriciously or lightly superseded or infringed.' When fiefs implied military service, it is easily discerned why females could not inherit them; but that reason is now at an end. As manners make laws, manners likewise repeal them. "These are the general conclusions which I have attained. None of them are very favourable to ! I had reminded him of his observation, mentioned antè, p. 473. BOSWELL. 2 The entail framed by my father, with various judicious clauses, was settled by him and me, settling the estate upon the heirs male of his grandfather, which I found had been already done by my grandfather, imperfectly, but so as to be defeated only by selling the lands. I was freed by Dr John "I hope I shall get some ground now with Mrs. Boswell make my compliments to her, and to the little people. Don't burn papers; they may be safe enough in your own box; you will wish to see them hereafter." JOHNSON TO BOSWELL. "Feb. 15. 1776 "DEAR SIR, To the letters which I have written about your great question I have nothing to add. If your conscience is satisfied, you have now only your prudence to consult. I long for a letter, that I may know how this troublesome and vexatious question is at last decided. I hope that it will at last end well. Lord Hailes's letter was very friendly, and very seasonable; but I think his aversion from entails has something in it like superstition. Providence is not counteracted by any means which Providence puts into our power. The continuance and propagation of families makes a great part of the Jewish law, and is by no means son from scruples of conscientious obligation, and could therefore gratify my father. But my opinion and partially for male succession, in its full extent, remained unshakes Yet let me not be thought harsh or unkind to daughters ke my notion is, that they should be treated with great affection and tenderness, and always participate of the prosperity of the family. BOSWELL. prohibited in the Christian institution, though the necessity of it continues no longer. Hereditary tenures are established in all civilised countries, and are accompanied in most with hereditary authority. Sir William Temple considers our constitution as defective, that there is not an unalienable estate in land connected with a peerage: and Lord Bacon mentions as a proof that the Turks are barbarians, their want of stirpes, as he calls them, or hereditary rank. Do not let your mind, when it is freed from the supposed necessity of a rigorous entail, be entangled with contrary objections, and think all entails unlawful, till you have cogent arguments, which I believe you will never find. I am afraid of scruples. "I have now sent all Lord Hailes's papers; part I found hidden in a drawer in which I had laid them for security, and had forgotten them. Part of these are written twice; I have returned both the copies. Part I had read before. Be so kind as to return Lord Hailes my most respectful thanks for his first volume: his accuracy strikes me with wonder; his narrative is far superior to that of Henault, as I have formerly mentioned. I am afraid that the trouble which my irregularity and delay has cost him is greater, far greater, than any good that I can do him will ever recompense; but if I have any more copy I will try to do better. 44 Pray let me know if Mrs. Boswell is friends with me, and pay my respects to Veronica, and Euphemia, and Alexander. I am, Sir, your most humble servant, SAM. JOHNSON." "DEAR SIR, — I am glad that what I could think or say has at all contributed to quiet your thoughts. Your resolution not to act, till your opinion is confirmed by more deliberation, is very just. If you have been scrupulous, do not be rash. I hope that, as you think more, and take opportunities of talking with men intelligent in questions of property, you will be able to free yourself from every difficulty. When I wrote last, I sent, I think, ten packets. Did you receive them all? "You must tell Mrs. Boswell that I suspected her to have written without your knowledge', and therefore did not return any answer, lest a clandestine correspondence should have been perniciously discovered. I will write to her soon. I am, dear Sir, &c., SAM. JOHNSON." Having communicated to Lord Hailes what Dr. Johnson wrote concerning the question which perplexed me so much, his fordship wrote to me: "Your scruples have produced more fruit than I ever expected from them; A letter to him on the interesting subject of the family settlement, which I had read. - BOSWELL. an excellent dissertation on general principles of morals and law." I wrote to Dr. Johnson on the 20th of February, complaining of melancholy, and expressing a strong desire to be with him; informing him that the ten packets came all safe; that Lord Hailes was much obliged to him, and said he had almost wholly removed his scruples against entails. JOHNSON TO BOSWELL. "March 5. 1776. "DEAR SIR, I have not had your letter half an hour; as you lay so much weight upon my notions, I should think it not just to delay my answer. I am very sorry that your melancholy should return, and should be sorry likewise if it could have no relief but from my company. My counsel you may have when you please to require it but of my company you cannot in the next month have much, for Mr. Thrale will take me to Italy, he says, on the 1st of April. "Let me warn you very earnestly against scruples. I am glad that you are reconciled to your settlement, and think it a great honour to have shaken Lord Hailes's opinion of entails. Do not, however, hope wholly to reason away your troubles; do not feed them with attention, and they will die imperceptibly away. Fix your thoughts upon your business, fill your intervals with company, and sunshine will again break in upon your mind. If you will come to me, you must come very quickly; and even then I know not but we may scour the country together, for I have a mind to see Oxford and Lichfield before I set out on this long journey. To this I can only add that I am, dear Sir, your most affectionate humble servant, SAM. JOHNSON." JOHNSON TO BOSWELL. "March 12. 1776. "DEAR SIR, Very early in April we leave England, and in the beginning of the next week I shall leave London for a short time; of this I think it necessary to inform you, that you may not be disappointed in any of your enterprises. I had not fully resolved to go into the country before this day. Please to make my compliments to Lord Hailes; and mention very particularly to Mrs. Boswell my hope that she is reconciled to, Sir, your faithful servant, SAM. JOHNSON." [JOHNSON TO JOHN WESLEY. "Feb. 6. 1776. "SIR, When I received your Commentary on the Bible,' I durst not at first flatter myself that I was to keep it, having so little claim to so valuable a present; and when Mrs. Hall informed me of your kindness, was hindered from time to time. from returning you those thanks which I now entreat you to accept. I have thanks likewise to return you for the addition of your important suffrage to my argument on the American question. To have gained such a mind as yours may justly 2 Mr. Wesley's sister. CROKER. |
