afraid of fpirits, and we think with some reason, for he told Dr. Lawrence (p. 192) "That many years after his mother's death he heard her voice call to him Sam!" So very zealous was he in the faith of the Church of England, that he could not hear of an infidel's name with patience, and never quoted the authority of an infidel writer in his dictionary. For the fame reason, when asked, "Who was the best man he had ever known?" he anfwered, "George Pfalmanazzar," a notorious cheat and profligate impoftor, who, after having ftudied and difgraced all religions, died of the Church of England.

We come now to fome particulars that discover and difplay his tafte. It is very justly obferved by Dr. Armitrong, that there is an analogy between the organization of the body and that of the mind, and that there is hardly an inftance of a perfon of a robust and vulgar make who has an elegant mind. An elegant man difcovers his tafte in the pleasures of the table. Dr. Johnson's notions about eating, fays Mrs. Piozzi, (p. 104) were nothing less than delicate. A leg of pork boiled till it dropped from the bone, a veal pye with plums and fugar, or the outfide cut of a falt buttock of beef, were his favourite dainties with regard to drink; his liking was for the Strongeft; as it was not the flavour, but the effect he fought for; and when I first knew him he ufed to pour capillaire into his port-wine, He poured large quantities of cream or even melted butter into his chocolate.

A high enjoyment of fine fcenes, delightful landscapes, and the beauties of nature, has generally been found to cha'racterise a man of tafte. Dr. Johnson knew none of these senfual pleasures. When Mr. Thrale pointed out a fine landfcape to him, " Never heed fuch nonsense, (faid he) a blade of grafs is always a blade of grafs, whether in one country or another." He hated to hear about profpects and views, and tafte in gardening. "That is the best garden (he faid), (p. 264) which produces moft roots and fruits; and that water most to be prized which contains most fifh." He used to laugh most unmercifully at Shenftone for not caring whether there was any thing good to eat in his ftreams, " as if (fays Dr. Johnson) one could fill one's belly with hearing foft murmurs, or looking at rough cafcades." He derided the people who covered their canals with foreign fowls, "when (fays he) our own geese and ganders are twice as large." The following ftory not only fhews his tafte in painting, but the delicacy of his raillery. He told Sir Joshua Reynolds, one of his molt refpected friends, that it grieved him to fee fo much mind laid out upon fuch perishable materials: "Why do you not paint on copper?" Sir Joshua urged the difficulty of procuring a plate large enough for hiftorical fubjects: "What toppifh obftacles are thefe! (exENG. REV. Vol. VI. April 1786.

R

claims

claims Dr. Johnfon.) Here is Thrale who has a thousand tun of copper, you may paint it all round if you will, and I suppose it will ferve to brew in afterwards; will it not, Sir?"

Another mark of the peculiarity of his tafte was (fays Signora Piozzi, p. 257) that ftrong averfion felt by all the vulgar towards four-footed companions. Belle, Mr. Thrale's bitch, one day ftole their toast and butter. Fye Belle, faid I, you used to be upon honour. Yes, faid he, but Belle grows old. His reafon for hating the dog was, that he was a professed favourite, and because her lady ordered her from time to time to be washed and combed, an affumption of fuperiority, (faid he) that one's nature revolts it. So great was his ambition to be the favourite of the family, that he could not even bear a fourfooted rival!

With this degree of taste, which would have done honour to a Hottentot, we need not be furprised that he quarrelled with his wife, for her perpetual reverence for cleanliness, and attention to fweep the house!

His general humanity and the delicacy of his friendship are a little fingular, but ftrongly marked in his character. Dr. Johnson profeffed to defpife Swift for hating whole focieties of men and loving individuals; and yet, without loving individuals, he hated whole focieties of men. He hated Cambridge, because the university was infected with whiggifm, and had produced Mafon and Gray. He hated the Scotch, because they were Prefbyterians, and because many repectable authors in the reigns of George the 2d and 3d were born north of the Tweed. He hated the French because they were the most enlightened and refined nation of Europe, and because their authors and their language circulated round the world. When a French author was mentioned with approbation, he flew into a rage: "What can be expected, fays he, from fellows that live on frogs?" His private friendfhip was of a piece with his general character. Lord Anfon invited him to his houfe. "I was well received, (fays he) and kindly treated, and with the true grati tude of a wit ridiculed the matter of the houfe before I had left it an hour." To Garrick he was highly indebted for his fuc cefs and reputation in the world, and with a lively resentment of fuch favours he made it his conftant object to turn him into ridicule at his own table. We have seen how he treated Sir Joshua Reynolds. He profeffed to love his mother. One day fhe called him a puppy: "Pray," fays this dutiful and loving fon, “do you know what they call a puppy's mother?" To Mrs. Thrale he owed the highest obligations that one human being can owe to another. As an admirer the flattered him; as a friend she foothed him; as a nurse fhe watched him. She faved him from disease, from melancholy, from madness, and from death, One

day

day the lamented the lofs of a firft coufin killed in America: "Prithee, (faid he) have done with canting; how would the world be worse, if all your relations were at once fpitted like larks and roasted for Prefto's fupper?" Prefto was the dog that lay under the table.

With regard to his wit we fhall fay little, as his bon mots are fo well known. Talking in company, fays Mrs. Thrale, was his chief employment and fole pleasure. He knew he could not fhine by elegant wit and polished manners, and therefore cultivated the eafier graces of the vulgar, ill nature, infolence, rufticity, and barbarity. All his efforts at wit are tinctured with malignity and expreffed with brutality. Indeed, in the whole collection of what are called his bon mots, we recollect few for which a boy would not have been whipped; for which a gentleman would not have been expelled from fociety, and perhaps run through the body; and for which a Chriftian, on account of the difpofitions from which they flow, is not threatened with the highest punishments of his religion.

From this account of Dr. Johnfon, different conclufions may be drawn. One is given us by Mrs. Piozzi; " that he was the wifeft and beft man fhe had ever known." The other by himself; "that he was ready to become a rafcal, and with a To little more fpoiling would grow a complete fcoundrel." which of these the preference is to be given, we shall leave to the determination of the reader.

Such was the man! With regard to the author, his reputation with the public is fuch, that it has not been injured or affected by the indifcreet and difhonourable conduct of his profeffed friends and admirers, in expofing to the ridicule of the world all the abfurdities and follies which fell from his tongue, in his weak, wicked, and mad moments. Of these we have had enough. A diftinguished character may be allowed fome peculiarities and oddities, but there is no occafion to transfer them to the lift of his virtues. An orthodox tartar may poffefs a fufficient degree of veneration for the Delai Lama, without either worshipping or eating his excrements.

ART. III. The Philofophical Dictionary: or, the Opinions of Modern Philofophers on Metaphyfical, Moral, and Political Subjects. In Four Volumes, 12m0, 12s. fewed. Robinsons, 1786. London.

THE HE prefent fashion of publishing truths and opinions under the form of dictionaries, cyclopedies, and in other compilations with other names, is inimical to the improvement of fcience. A Thefaurus Lingua Grece, or Linguæ Latina, is very

R 2

proper

proper. These languages are dead and fixed, and admit not of progrefs or variation. It is otherwise with science, which is in its nature progreffive, and with opinions, which are ever changing. It is better to lead on a young mind to discover truth itself, than to prefent to its view a collection of the opinions of other men. And a divifion of the objects of truth or knowledge ought to be made in a scientific manner; either according to the leading powers of the mind, imagination, memory, and judgment, which is the comprehenfive arrangement followed by Lord Bacon in his Augmentis Scientiarum, or fome other divifion, if any fuch divifion can be found equally philofophical. The mind, in all general views of knowledge, hould be led into the great cabinet of truth and nature, by fuch fteps and views, as thofe that we find in "Inftitutes of Moral Philofophy, for the Ufe of Students, by Doctor Adam Ferguson." On these principles, we hold this Philofophical Dictionary in very flight eftimation, confidered, as its title bears, as a philofophical publication. But the compiler, in a preface, tells us

that

The following work is compiled from the writings of the most eminent philofophers in Europe It was originally undertaken with no other view but to ferve as a common-place book for private use. If the publication of it can add to the amusement of travellers who carry few books with them, or fatisfy the curiofity of those who cannot purchafe many books, or have little time to read them, it will antwer every purpose the editor could expect.

There are fome articles in it which have been the subject of controverly amongst ancient as well as modern philofophers; on these fubjects the arguments on both fides of the question are, in general, extracted for the fatisfaction of the reader. If the work meet the approbation of the public, the defects of it may be amended in a fupplement or future edition.

A love of truth and warm wishes for its diffufion, under respectable authorities, were the fole objects of the editor in this publication.'

From the writings of Locke, Hume, Helvetius, Smith, Montefquieu, Bolingbroke, Franklin, Burke, Voltaire, Rouffeau, Fergufon, Hartley, Raynal, D'Alembert, Beccaria, &c. &c. it was an eafy matter to form a very fenfible, entertaining, and philofophical mifcellany; and our author has formed one that merits this character.

We could have wished that our compiler had not introduced together with the great names juft recited, others of very inferior merit and reputation; and fome who afpire to diftinction and fame by joining though with feeble voice, in the hue and cry against the Chriftian religion, and the administration of Providence. Our compiler feems fond of joining the pack and re-echoing the cries. May God of his infinite mercy pity, as

from

from the majefty of his nature he fcorns their weak and foolish attempts.

The editor has in different places ventured an anonymous paragraph, which we may fairly prefume to be of his own compofition, and of which it may be faid, that they neither do their author credit or difcredit.

ART. IV. The Beauties of the British Senate: Taken from the Debates of the Lords and Commons, from the Beginning of the Adminiftration of Sir Robert Walpole, to the End of the Second Seffion of the Adminiftration of the Right Hon. William Pitt: Being an impartial Selection of, or faithful Extracts from, the most eminent Speeches delivered in the Courfe of a most important and truly interefting Period of more than fifty Years; feverally arranged under their respective Heads, with the Names of the Members to whom they are afcribed annexed thereto. To which is prefixed the Life of Sir Robert Walpole. Two Volumes, 8vo. 1 s. boards. Stockdale. 1786. London.

THE

HE hacknied name of Beauties, and the uncommon clumfinefs of the title-page, difpofe us beforehand to entertain an opinion that the editor of this collection from the parliamentary debates is not diftinguished by fuperior tafte and judgment. This prejudice is confirmed by a perufal of the collection, in which, with many excellent orations, the dulleft and most infipid, and even the moft childish, are interspersed. This pofition we would prove by a multitude of inftances, if we did not think it indelicate, and even unjust, to exhibit very respectable characters in the light of fimple orators, when, perhaps, they never entertained the ambition of having their fpeeches made public: did they publish, as Mr. Burke and Governor Johnftone, and others do, their own fpeeches, they would be amenable to public criticifm. As they are dragged into print by newfmongers, compilers, and booksellers, it would be unfair to decide concerning their merits, either as orators or statesmen. But of the hiftory of the reports of parliamentary debates we have already given a fketch in our re view of Mr. Woodfall's report of the debates in the Irish parliament, on the fubject of the commercial regulations.

Many of the members of parliament, we understand, now write their own fpeeches: and, as there is a progress in every thing, this cuftom will undoubtedly become daily more and more prevalent. Hence many important confequences will arife to the ftate of fociety, and to government. It is plain, to any person who has been accuftomed to attend the debates in parliament, that there is, especially in the SPEAKER of the House of Commons, (we do not mean Mr. Cornwall, but