man would do is therefore right." I said, I wished to have it settled whether duelling was contrary to the laws of Christianity. Johnson immediately entered on the subject, and treated it in a masterly manner; and, so far as I have been able to recollect, his thoughts were these: "Sir, as men become in a high degree refined, various causes of offence arise, which are considered to be of such importance that life must be staked to atone for them, though in reality they are not so. A body that has received a very fine polish may be easily hurt. Before men arrive at this artificial refinement, if one tells his neighbor-he lies, his neighbor tells him-he lies; if one gives his neighbor a blow, his neighbor gives him a blow; but in a state of highly polished society an affront is held to be a serious injury. It must therefore be resented, or rather a duel must be fought upon it, as men have agreed to banish from their society one who puts up with an affront without fighting a duel. Now, sir, it is never unlawful to fight in self-defence. He, then, who fights a duel does not fight from passion against his antagonist, but out of self-defence, to avert the stigma of the world, and to prevent himself from being driven out of society. I could wish there was not that superfluity of refinement; but while such notions prevail, no doubt a man may lawfully fight a duel."-Boswell.

He thus treated the point as to prescription of murder in Scotland: "A jury in England would make allowance for deficiencies of evidence on account of lapse of time; but a general rule that a crime should not be punished, or tried for the purpose of punishment, after twenty years, is bad. It is cant to talk of the king's advocate delaying a prosecution from malice. How unlikely is it the king's advocate should have malice against persons who commit murder, or should even know them at all! If the son of the murdered man should kill the murderer, who got off merely by prescription, I would help him to make his escape, though were I upon

his

jury I would not acquit him. I would not advise him to commit such an act; on the contrary, I would bid him submit to the determination of society, because a man is bound to submit to the inconveniences of it, as he enjoys the good; but the young man, though politically wrong, would not be morally wrong. He would have to say, 'Here I am among barbarians, who not only refuse to do justice, but encourage the greatest of all crimes. I am therefore in a state of nature; for so far as there is no law, it is a state of nature; and, consequently, upon the eternal and immutable law of justice, which requires that he who sheds man's blood should have his blood shed, I will stab the murderer of my father.”” -Boswell.

On Thursday, March 28th, we pursued our journey. I mentioned that old Mr. Sheridan complained of the ingratitude of Mr. Wedderburne and General Fraser, who had been much obliged to him when they were young Scotchmen entering upon life in England. Johnson: "Why, sir, a man is very apt to complain of the ingratitude of those who have risen far above him. A man, when he gets into a higher sphere, into other habits of life, cannot keep up all his former connections. Then, sir, those who knew him formerly upon a level with themselves may think that they ought still to be treated as on a level, which cannot be; and an acquaintance in a former situation may bring out things which it would be very disagreeable to have mentioned before higher company, though, perhaps, everybody knows of them.". Boswell.

I mentioned to him a dispute between a friend of mine and his lady, concerning conjugal infidelity, which my friend had maintained was by no means so bad in the husband as in the wife. Johnson: "Your friend was in the right, sir. Between a man and his Maker, it is a different question; but between a man and his wife, a husband's infidelity is noth

ing. They are connected by children, by fortune, by serious considerations of community. Wise married women don't trouble themselves about infidelity in their husbands." Boswell: "To be sure there is a great difference between the offence of infidelity in a man and that of his wife." Johnson: "The difference is boundless. The man imposes no bastards upon his wife.”—Boswell.

He talked of the heinousness of the crime of adultery, by which the peace of families was destroyed. He said, "Confusion of progeny constitutes the essence of the crime; and therefore a woman who breaks her marriage vows is much more criminal than a man who does it. A man, to be sure, is criminal in the sight of God; but he does not do his wife a very material injury, if he does not insult her; if, for instance, from mere wantonness of appetite, he steals privately to her chamber-maid. Sir, a wife ought not greatly to resent this. I would not receive home a daughter who had run away from her husband on that account. A wife should study to reclaim her husband, by more attention to please him. Sir, a man will not, once in a hundred instances, leave his wife and go to a harlot, if his wife has not been negligent of pleasing."-Boswell.

OBTUSENESS TO NATURAL BEAUTY.

WE walked, in the evening, in Greenwich Park. He asked me I suppose, by way of trying my disposition-"Is not this very fine?" Having no exquisite relish of the beauties of nature, and being more delighted with "the busy hum of men," I answered, "Yes, sir, but not equal to Fleet Street." Johnson: "You are right, sir."-Boswell.

Some gentlemen of the neighborhood came to visit my father; but there was little conversation. One of them ask

ed Dr. Johnson how he liked the Highlands. The question seemed to irritate him, for he answered, "How, sir, can you ask me what obliges me to speak unfavorably of a country where I have been hospitably entertained? Who can like the Highlands? I like the inhabitants very well." The gentleman asked no more questions.-Boswell.

Mr. Thrale loved prospects, and was mortified that his friend could not enjoy the sight of those different dispositions of wood and water, hill and valley, that travelling through England and France affords a man. But when he wished to point them out to his companion, "Never heed such nonsense," would be the reply; "a blade of grass is always a blade of grass, whether in one country or another. Let us, if we do talk, talk about something. Men and women are my subjects of inquiry: let us see how these differ from those we have left behind.”—Mrs. Piozzi.

Mrs. Brooke expatiated on the accumulation of sublime and beautiful objects which form the fine prospect up the river St. Lawrence, in North America. "Come, madam" (says Dr. Johnson), "confess that nothing ever equalled your pleasure in seeing that sight reversed, and finding yourself looking at the happy prospect down the river St. Lawrence." The truth is, he hated to hear about prospects and views, and laying out ground, and taste in gardening. "That was the best garden," he said, "which produced most. roots and fruits; and that water was most to be prized which contained most fish." He used to laugh at Shenstone most unmercifully for not caring whether there was anything good to eat in the streams he was so fond of. Walking in a wood when it rained was, I think, the only rural image which pleased his fancy.-Mrs. Piozzi.

BRUTE FORCE.

Ir has been confidently related, with many embellishments, that Johnson one day knocked Osborne down in his shop with a folio, and put his foot upon his neck. The simple truth I had from Johnson himself. "Sir, he was impertinent to me, and I beat him. But it was not in his shop: it was in my own chamber."-Boswell.

Tom Osborne, the bookseller, was one of "that mercantile rugged race to which the delicacy of the poet is sometimes exposed," as the following anecdote will more fully evince: Mr. Johnson being engaged by him to translate a work of some consequence,* he thought it a respect which he owed his own talents, as well as the credit of his employer, to be as circumspect in the performance of it as possible. Osborne, irritated by what he thought an unnecessary delay, went one day into the room where Johnson was sitting, and abused him in the most illiberal manner. Among other things, he told Johnson "he had been much mistaken in his man; that he was recommended to him as a good scholar, and a ready hand; but that he doubted both; for that Tom such-a-one would have turned out the work much sooner; and that being the case, the probability was that by this here time the first edition would have moved off." Johnson heard him for some time unmoved; but at last, losing all patience, he seized a huge folio, which he was at that time consulting, and aiming a low at the bookseller's head, succeeded so forcibly as to send him sprawling to the floor. Osborne alarmed the family with his cries; but Johnson, clapping his foot on his breast, would not let him stir till he had exposed him in that situation, and then left him with this triumphant ex

* All the other authorities who notice this event say that it was the Preface to the Catalogue of the Harleian Library.