1803.] 
tion of an eye-witnefs; but our own hif- 
torian has with the fineit fimplicity drawn 
thefe tremendous fcenes, and painted a pic- 
ture (too affecting for fome minds, to 
paufe on) with perpetual colours. D. 
London, Auguft, 1803. 
<a 
To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. 
SIR, 
AM one of your readers who, proba- 
bly in common with many others, 
have received pleafure from the perufa] 
of the Memoir on James Bofwell, Eq. 
contained in a late number of your Ma- 
gazine. Jt difplays upon the whole both 
candour and fagacity; yet I cannot but 
think that in fome degree the eftimate 
formed of the chara&ter defcribed,. is er- 
yoneous, and that fome obfervations have 
been negleted which would have been 
ufeful and appropriate. 
Too: much credit, I think, has been 
given toa certain vivacity and levity of 
difpofition in the fubject of the memoir, 
which ought not to be fuppofed to denote 
genius or fuperior parts, without much 
better proofs than he ever exhibited. If 
there cannot be produced one jeu a’ efprit 
either in profe or verfe of Bolwell’s, 
worth repeating, he furely had little claim 
to the title of a man of wit, in the moft 
limited fenfe of the word; nor does he 
deferve to be placed above his more 
fortunate competitors the bar, on 
the {core of abilities, becaufe he could 
not plod like them; when habits of 
conviviality, and the indulgence of an 
idle vanity, were the real caules which im- 
peded his progrefs. From his diligence 
and accuracy in noting down converfa- 
tion, I:fhould take him to have been really 
intended by nature fora plodder, rather 
than for a genius; but that he was fpoiled 
by circumftances. 
His propenfity to introduce himfelf to 
the company of men of celebrity, was 
but an equivecal mark of a fuperior tafte 
for converiation and fociety ; fince it was 
undirected by judgment or principle, and — 
feemed to evaporate in frivolous curiofity, 
and the weak ambition of a reflected re- 
putation. His durable attachment to 
Johnfon may be thought an infiance of 
higher views ; yet in faét, confidering the 
manner in which he difplayed it, to the 
derogation of all perfonal dignity, and 
the negleét’ of better means of mental 
improvement, it was the ftrongeft proof 
he could give of natural imbecillity. The 
profound refpeét paid by the memoir-wri- 
ter to men of talents even in their Joofeft 
hours, and his idea of ‘* the feaft of rea- 
Remarks onthe Life of Bafwell. 
99 
fon and the flow of foul,’? always to be 
enjoyed in the company of fuch men as 
Foote and Wilkes, will probably excite 
a fmile at his expence. How much of 
paltry mimicry and grofs ribaldry there 
vas in the ¢able-talk of even profefled wits, 
-and how much dullnefs and common-piace 
in the ordinary chat even of men high in 
literary reputation, is too well known by 
thofe who have frequented them; and it 
is commonly a great falling-off to go 
from. their. books to their converfation. 
Poor Bofwell, in faé, could not exift 
«without his bottle ; and he could ** make 
‘a hearty meal upon a dunce,”’ provided 
‘it were wafhed down with 
plentiful liba- 
tions of claret. 
His Niftory might have afforded an im- 
portant remark concerning the little affift- 
‘ance derived to morals from a religion 
‘confifting in the belief of fpeculative dog- 
“mas, and the practice of ceremonial ob- 
fervances, even though accompanied with 
warin devotional feelings. In fact, the value 
of fuch feelings is often very {mall ; it is 
the mind’s idolatry towards beings of its 
own creation, and is fooner excited by 
images of human origin,and by fanciful af- 
fociations, than by fober and philofophi- 
cal notions of divine perfe&tion. Bofwell! 
was fo fuperftitious, that even his fuper- 
ftitious preceptor laughed at him. Bof- 
‘well, (lays Johnfon in his Tour), who is 
very pious, went into the chapel at night 
to perform his devotions, but came back 
in hafte through fear of {pectres.”? Such 
a devotion was not likely to make a rule 
of life; and few men deviated more than 
he from the plain path of duty. It is a 
fault that runs through Johnfon’s Biogra- 
phy, that he has eftimated men more from 
what they believed than what they prac- 
tifed, and has given fome very diffolute 
characters credit fora little difplay of com- 
punction under the influence of death-bed 
terrors. No wonder, therefore, that the 
fentiments of religion he infpired did little 
‘good to his votaries. 
It is by nomeans my with to infult the 
manes of poor Bofwell, who had good- 
nature enough to entitle his failings to 
oblivion; but when his charagter was 
brought sbefore the public, I thought 
the correction of any erroneous fentiments 
with which it was accompanied, might be 
a point of public utility. Your’s, &c. 
| Nan: 
To the Editor of the Monthly 
F SIR, 
gt Wee uare various titles affumed by 
~ Chofroes, Monarch of Perfia, at 
O 2 
Magazine.’ 
