At this time there being a competition among the architects of London to 1759. be employed in the building of Blackfriars-bridge, a question was very Etat. 50. warmly agitated whether femicircular or elliptical arches were preferable. In the design offered by Mr. Mylne the elliptical form was adopted, and therefore it was the great object of his rivals to attack it. Johnson's regard for his friend Mr. Gwyn induced him to engage in this controverfy against Mr. Mylne3; and after being at confiderable pains to study the fubject, he wrote three several letters in the Gazetteer, in oppofition to his plan. If 3 Sir John Hawkins has given a long detail of it, in that manner vulgarly, but fignificantly, called rigmarole; in which, amidst an oftentatious exhibition of arts and artists, he talks of “ "proportions of a column being taken from that of the human figure, and adjusted by Nature-mafculine and feminine-in a man, sesquioctave of the head, and in a woman fefquinonal;" nor has he failed to introduce a jargon of mufical terms, which do not feem much to correfpond with the fubject, but ferve to make up the heterogeneous mafs. To follow the Knight through all this, would be an useless fatigue to myself, and not a little difgufting to my readers. I fhall, therefore, only make a few remarks upon his ftatement.-He feems to exult in having detected Johnson in procuring "from a perfon eminently skilled in mathematicks and the principles of architecture, answers to a string of questions drawn up by himself, touching the comparative ftrength of femicircular and elliptical arches." Now I cannot conceive how Johnson could have acted more wifely. Sir John complains that the opinion of that excellent mathematician, Mr. Thomas Simpfon, did not preponderate in favour of the femicircular arch. But he should have known, that however eminent Mr. Simpson was in the higher parts of abstract mathematical science, he was little verfed in mixed and practical mechanicks. Mr. Muller, of Woolwich Academy, the fcholaftick father of all the great engineers which this country has employed for forty years, decided the question by declaring clearly in favour of the elliptical arch. It is ungraciously suggested, that Johnson's motive for oppofing Mr. Mylne's fcheme may have been his prejudice against him as a native of North-Britain; when, in truth, as has been stated, he gave the aid of his able pen to a friend, who was one of the candidates; and fo far was he from having any illiberal antipathy to Mr. Mylne, that he afterwards lived with that gentleman upon very agreeable terms of acquaintance, and dined with him at his houfe. Sir John Hawkins, indeed, gives full vent to his own prejudice in abufing Blackfriarsbridge, calling it "an edifice, in which beauty and symmetry are in vain fought for; by which the citizens of London have perpetuated their own disgrace, and subjected a whole nation to the reproach of foreigners." Whoever has contemplated, placido lumine, this ftately, elegant, and airy ftructure, which has fo fine an effect, especially on approaching the capital on that quarter, muft wonder at fuch unjust and ill-tempered cenfure; and I appeal to all foreigners of good taste, whether this bridge be not one of the most distinguished ornaments of London. As to the stability of the fabrick, it is certain that the City of London took every precaution to have the best Portland stone for it; but as this is to be found in the quarries belonging to the publick, under the direction of the Lords of the Treafury, it fo happened that parliamentary intereft, which is often the bane of fair purfuits, thwarted their endeavours. Notwithstanding this difadvantage, it is well known that not only has Blackfriars-bridge never funk either in its foundations or in its arches, 1759. Etat. 50. 1760. If it fhould be remarked that this was a controverfy which lay quite out of Johnfon's way, let it be remembered that after all, his employing his powers of reafoning and eloquence upon a fubject which he had ftudied on the moment, is not more strange than what we often obferve in lawyers, who, as Quicquid agunt bomines is the matter of law-fuits, are fometimes obliged to pick up a temporary knowledge of an art or fcience, of which they understood nothing till their brief was delivered, and appear to be much masters of it. In like manner, members of the legislature frequently introduce and expatiate upon fubjects of which they have informed themfelves for the occafion. In 1760 he wrote "An Addrefs of the Painters to George III. on his Acceffion to the Throne of these Kingdoms,t" which no monarch ever afcended with more fincere congratulations from his people. Two generations of foreign princes had prepared their minds to rejoice in having again a King, who gloried in being "born a Briton." He alfo wrote for Mr. Baretti the Dedication of his Italian and English Dictionary, to the Marquis of Abreu, then Ambaffadour Extraordinary from Spain at the Court of Great-Britain. Johnson was now either very idle, or very bufy with his Shakspeare; for I can find no other publick composition by him except an account which he gave in the Gentleman's Magazine of Mr. Tytler's acute and able vindication of Mary Queen of Scots.* The generofity of Johnfon's feelings shines forth in the following fentence: "It has now been fashionable, for near half a century, to defame and vilify the house of Stuart, and to exalt and magnify the reign of Elizabeth. The Stuarts have found few apologists; for the dead cannot pay for praise, and who will, without reward, oppose the tide of popularity? Yet there remains still among us, not wholly extinguished, a zeal for truth, a defire of establishing right in opposition to fashion," In this year I have not discovered a fingle private letter written by him to any of his friends. It fhould feem, however, that he had at this period a floating intention of writing a history of the recent and wonderful successes of the British arms in all quarters of the globe; for among his refolutions or memorandums, September 18, there is, "Send for books for Hift. of War." How much is it to be regretted that this intention was not fulfilled. His majestick expreffion would have carried down to the latest posterity the glorious arches, which were so much the subject of conteft, but any injuries which it has suffered from the effects of fevere frofts have been already, in fome measure, repaired with founder stone, and every neceffary renewal can be completed at a moderate expence, Prayers and Meditations, p. 42. atchievements 1760. achievements of his country, with the fame fervent glow which they produced on the mind at the time. He would have been under no temptation to tat. 51. deviate in any degree from truth, which he held very facred, or to take a licence which a learned divine told me he once feemed, in a converfation, jocularly to allow to hiftorians. "There are (faid he) inexcufable lies, and confecrated lies. For inftance, we are told that on the arrival of the news of the unfortunate battle of Fontenoy, every heart beat, and every eye was in tears. Now we know that no man eat his dinner the worfe, but there should have been all this concern; and to fay there was, (fmiling) may be reckoned a confecrated lie." This year Mr. Murphy having thought himself ill treated by the Reverend Dr. Francklin, who was one of the writers of " The Critical Review," published an indignant vindication in "A Poetical Epiftle to Samuel Johnfon, A. M." in which he compliments Johnson in a juft and elegant manner: "Transcendant Genius, whofe prolifick vein "Ne'er knew the frigid poet's toil and pain; "And every Muse presents her facred lore; Say, pow'rful JOHNSON, whence thy verse is fraught "Her innocence exchang'd for guilty state; "Thy nervous phrafe impreffes every foul, Again, towards the conclufion: "Thou then, my friend, who fee'ft the dang'rous ftrife "To the Aonian fount direct my feet, Say where the Nine thy lonely mufings meet? "Where warbles to thy ear the facred throng, 1760. Ætat. 51. 1761. "In each bright page fome truth important give, "And bid to future times thy RAMBLER live." I take this opportunity to relate the manner in which an acquaintance first commenced between Dr. Johnson and Mr. Murphy. During the publication of "The Gray's-Inn Journal," a periodical paper which was fuccefffully carried on by Mr. Murphy alone, when a very young man, he happened to be in the country with Mr. Foote; and having mentioned that he was obliged to go to London in order to get ready for the prefs one of the numbers of that Journal, Foote faid to him, "You need not go on that account. Here is a French magazine, in which you will find a very pretty oriental tale; tranflate that, and fend it to your printer." Mr. Murphy having read the tale, was highly pleafed with it, and followed Foote's advice. When he returned to town, this tale was pointed out to him in the Rambler, from whence it had been tranflated into the French magazine. Mr. Murphy then waited upon Johnson, to explain this curious incident. His talents, literature, and gentlemanlike manners, were foon perceived by Johnfon, and a friendship was formed which was never broken. Johnson, who was ever awake to the calls of humanity, wrote this year an Introduction* to the proceedings of the Committee for cloathing the French prifoners. In 1761 Johnson appears to have done little. He was ftill, no doubt, proceeding in his edition of Shakspeare; but what advances he made in it cannot be ascertained. He certainly was at this time not active; for in his fcrupulous examination of himself on Easter eve, he laments, in his too rigorous mode of cenfuring his own conduct, that his life, fince the communion of the preceding Easter, had been " dissipated and useless "." He, however, contributed this year the Preface to "Rolt's Dictionary of Trade and Commerce," in which he displays fuch a clear and comprehenfive knowledge of the fubject, as might lead the reader to think that its authour had devoted all his life to it. I asked him, whether he knew much of Rolt, and of his work. "Sir, (faid he) I never faw the man, and never read the book. The bookfellers wanted a Preface to a Dictionary of Trade and Commerce. I knew very well what fuch a Dictionary fhould be, and I wrote a Preface accordingly." Rolt, who wrote a great deal for the bookfellers, particularly a Hiftory of the War, on which, as we have feen, Johnfon himself once had thoughts of employing his pen, was, as Johnson told me, a fingular character. Though not in the least acquainted with him, he used to say, "I am just come from Sam. Johnson.” This was a fufficient fpecimen of his vanity and impudence. But he gave a more 1761. eminent proof of it in our fifter kingdom, as Dr. Johnson informed me. When Akenfide's "Pleasures of the Imagination" first came out, he did not put Atat. 52. his name to the poem. Rolt went over to Dublin, published an edition of it, and put his own name to it. Upon the fame of this he lived for several months, being entertained at the best tables as "the ingenious Mr. Rolt." His converfation, indeed, did not discover much of the fire of a poet; but it was recollected, that both Addison and Thomson were equally dull till excited by wine. Akenfide having been informed of this impofition, vindicated his right by publishing the poem with its real authour's name. Several instances of fuch literary fraud have been detected. The Reverend Dr. Campbell, of St. Andrew's, wrote a book on the authenticity of the Gofpel Hiftory, the manufcript of which he sent to Mr. Innys, a clergyman in England, who was his countryman and acquaintance. Innys published it with his own name to it; and before the impofition was discovered, obtained confiderable promotion, as à reward of his merit. The celebrated Dr. Hugh Blair, and his coufin Mr. George Ballantine, when students in divinity, wrote a poem, entitled Redemption," copies of which were handed about in manufcript. They were, at length, very much furprized to fee a pompous edition of it in folio, dedicated to the Queen, by a Dr. Douglas, as his own. Some years ago a little novel, entitled "The Man of Feeling," was affumed by Mr. Eccles, a young Irish clergyman, who was afterwards drowned near Bath. He had been at the pains to transcribe the whole book, with blottings, interlineations, and corrections, that it might be fhewn to feveral people as an original. It was, in truth, the production of Mr. Henry Mackenzie, an attorney in the Exchequer at Edinburgh, who is the authour of several other ingenious pieces; but the belief with regard to Mr. Eccles became fo general, that it was thought neceffary for Meffieurs Strahan and Cadell to publish an advertisement in the newspapers, contradicting the report, and mentioning that they purchased the copy right of Mr. Mackenzie. I can conceive this kind of fraud to be very easily practifed with fuccessful effrontery. The filiation of a literary performance is difficult of proof; feldom is there any witness present at its birth. A man, either in confidence or by improper means, obtains poffeffion of a copy of it in manuscript, and boldly publishes it as his own. many cafes, may not be able to make his title clear. the peculiar features of his literary offspring, might bid to appropriate them to others: The true authour, in Johnfon, indeed, from defiance to any attempt "But Shakspeare's magick could not copied be, Cc 2 He |