THE

THE year 1753 found Johnson in his desolated home in Gough-square, still occupied with his "Dictionary," which had hung heavily upon his hands through many years of toil and weariness. He was still doomed to unremitted diligence; nor was the grim form of poverty yet driven beyond his threshold, though the long night of his labors was rapidly drawing toward its termination.

Under date of January 1st, 1753, newstyle-which he then adopted, and used ever afterward-is found among his published "Prayers and Meditations" a prayer by which the state of his mind is forcibly indicated. After an expression of gratitude for past mercies, and a prayer for gracious assistance for the future, he adds, "Make me so to consider the loss of my wife whom thou hast taken from me, that it may dispose me, by thy grace, to lead the residue of my life in thy fear." The loss of his wife for a long time pressed heavily upon his spirit, and gave a tinge of sadness to many of his productions.

He had then, for nearly a year, been relieved, by the discontinuance of "The Rambler," from one half of the double burden that had before rested upon him for two whole years. But though constitutionally inclined to indolence, its indulgence was quite incompatible with

66

the healthy action of his mind, as well as inconsistent with the requirements of his circumstances. He found it agreeable, therefore, to relieve the dull routine of heaping up words and writing definitions by more congenial occupations. His love of the Essay was not exhausted by the hard service it had given him; and though he was not prepared again to assume the burden of such a stated issue, he was pleased to see a successor to his cherished "Rambler" brought into existence soon after the cessation of that work. "The Adventurer" was set on foot, under the influence of "The Rambler," and was designed, from the first, to be its supplement. But it was wisely determined that it should not, like its predecessor, be the production of a single hand. The work was undertaken by Hawkesworth, the intimate friend and willing disciple of Johnson; with whom it is supposed that Dr. Bathurst, another equally intimate and endeared companion of the great moralist, was associated. For the work thus assumed, Hawkesworth was not wholly unqualified, though his just pretensions to scholarship were never extensive. But he was a man of quick perception, and he had by much reading, chiefly of current English and French literature, acquired a good share of super

ficial knowledge, and some facility in criticism and composition; and by aiming at the style of Johnson, whom he long regarded as "his guide, philosopher, and friend," he gave a good degree of strength and dignity to his own. It is known that the work was undertaken with Johnson's concurrence and approval, and presently he came to be actively engaged in it.

The first number of "The Adventurer" was issued on the 7th of November, 1752, and, like its predecessor, it made its appearance in semi-weekly numbers. The principal contributors, besides Hawkesworth, who, in addition to the general editorial supervision, wrote nearly one half of the essays-and Johnson, whose pieces are supposed to amount to about thirtywere Dr. Bathurst, who wrote several of the earlier numbers; Bonnel Thornton, who had been among the first publicly to recognize the excellence of "The Rambler," which he did in a miscellany called "The Student," of which he was then editor; and Dr. Joseph Warton. The connection of Warton with "The Adventurer" was procured by Johnson, with the design of obtaining from him such critical essays as it was known he was capable of producing, and which could not fail greatly to enhance the value of the publication.

The design and general form of "The Adventurer" being the same with those of "The Rambler," that work may seem to be little more than a continuation of this. But though the two works have many features in common, they are equally clearly distinguished by strongly marked differences. Their diversity of authorship necessarily gave greater variety of style and modes of thought to "The Adventurer's" essays than could have been attained from a single mind. The range of subjects was also larger than in the preceding work; and, instead of confining themselves to the grave themes that almost exclusively occupy "The Rambler," the writers of" The Adventurer" frequently indulged their readers with portraits of character, narratives, and essays of wit, humor, and pleasantry. Compared with "The Rambler," "The Adventurer" has less solemn dignity; its style is not so grave, its morality is less rigid, and its religious character is almost wholly wanting; while it has more variety, is more sprightly, and altogether has less of

*

DR. JOSEPH WARTON.

the magisterial tone of the teacher, and more of the manner of a companion and friend. The critical papers in "The Adventurer," for which it was indebted chiefly to the Reverend Dr. Warton, constitute a feature of real excellence that finds but a poor counterpart in "The Rambler." Even Johnson's own papers in "The Adventurer," though generally similar to those in "The Rambler," are less elevated and solemn, and also much more varied in style and purpose.

The immediate success of this new candidate for public favor, as might be presumed, was greater than that attained by its stately predecessor; and though many of its essays relate to matters of less permanent interest, yet they are even now read with both pleasure and profit.

For the year 1753 Johnson's history presents very few points of interest. He toiled at his "Dictionary," and occasionally wrote an essay for the "Adventurer;" and that is about all that can be said of his occupations: his domestic affairs will be noticed in another place. Nearly the same account must be given of the next year, only omitting the " Adventurer," and substituting the "Life of Cave." That earliest of Johnson's patrons of the trade died during the latter part of the former year; and in the February number of the Gentleman's Magazine appeared his biography,-the same that is still found in the collected works of its author. That work is a remarkable instance of the power of genius, to elevate and ennoble a subject in itself quite common, and without the elements of greatness. Cave, no doubt, possessed many good qualities, as well as some characteristic foibles; but in neither was there anything to dis

tinguish him from thousands of others. He was a diligent and moderately-successful man of business; he had lived as other men in similar circumstances live, and had died as other men die, and one would ask what could be made of the biography of such a one? Yet did Johnson make of it a considerably extensive and really valuable piece of biography; and so gave to fame a name that otherwise would not have survived his own generation.

But a more important epoch in Johnson's history was now at hand. His great philological work, which had been upon his hands for nearly seven years, was rapidly approaching its completion; and as the author began to see the end of his labors he increased his diligence, from the impatience resulting from hopes almost realized but still deferred. Another motive may also have added to his haste and impatience. He had contracted with the booksellers to do the job for fifteen hundred and seventy-five pounds, out of which he was to meet all expenses incidental to the preparation of the work; and he was to be paid as it advanced. Of this sum, a considerable proportion was paid to assistants, and for books of reference and stationery; so that now the whole amount was exhausted, though the work was not yet finished.

It has been noticed, that when the "Plan of the Dictionary" was issued in 1747, it was addressed to Lord Chesterfield. In the accompanying address Johnson consented to solicit for the proposed work the patronage of that nobleman, who was then one of his majesty's Secretaries of State. The tone of delicate but decided flattery there used, is so unlike the hardy independent style in which he usually turned over his productions to public criticism, as to suggest the suspicion that large expectations were entertained as to the advantages likely to result from the solicited patronage. It should be remembered that during all this period Johnson was miserably poor; that he was compelled in whatever he did to make "provision for the day that was passing over him." The "Dictionary "he considered as "a work devoted especially to the honor and advantage of the whole nation; and one in which the nation might be said to have a kind of property." It is not strange, therefore, that the starving author, while

thus toiling for the public advantage, should think that since one of the king's ministers had become patron to the work, the favor of the government, in a substantial form, should be extended to him. This expectation induced him to depart from his usual course, and evidently at some sacrifice of feeling, to solicit one of the great to consent to be recognized as his patron.

To those who view the subject from a distance, and know the characters of the men and their circumstances, it is not a matter of surprise that the attempted coalition was not successful. How far the attempt was carried is not certainly known; but probably further than either of the parties subsequently wished to confess. It is known that Chesterfield highly appreciated the flattering distinction shown to him, and that Johnson paid several visits to his lordship's mansion, and, worst of all, that Chesterfield gave, and Johnson accepted, ten pounds from his patron. But the union was a forced and unnatural one, and was destined from the first to result in mutual disgust and alienation.

Among the celebrated "Letters" of Lord Chesterfield, which, though not published till some years later, were written about this time, is one containing what is commonly known as the character of “a respectable Hottentot," of which portrait Johnson was by many believed to have been the original. Though a base caricature, the points of likeness are well chosen, and, perhaps, according to Chesterfield's notions of things, not overdrawn.

"There is a man," writes his lordship," whose moral character, deep learning, and superior parts, I acknowledge, admire, and respect; but whom it is so impossible for me to love, that I am almost in a fever whenever I am in his

company. His figure (without being deformed)

seems made to disgrace or ridicule the common structure of the human body. His legs and arms are never in the position which, according to the situation of his body, they ought to be in; but constantly employed in committing acts of hostility upon the graces. He throws anywhere but down his throat whatever he means to drink, and only mangles what he means to carve. Inattentive to all the regards of social life, he mistimes and misplaces everything. He disputes with heat and indiscriminately, mindless of the rank, character, or situation of those with whom he disputes. Absolutely ignorant of the several gradations of familiarity and respect, he is exactly the same to his superiors, his equals, and his inferiors; and, therefore, by a necessary consequence, absurd to two of the three. Is it possible to