Hawkins's Life of Johnson.
��7th *. I again visited him. Before my departure, Dr. Brock- lesby came in, and, taking him by the wrist, Johnson gave him
��but the curious reader may perhaps be tempted to ask, why this remark able circumstantial narrative was omitted in the first edition, or how it happens that the regular chrono logy is now varied to introduce it.' Gentleman's Magazine, 1787, p. 522. Porson, in his Panegyrical Epistle on Hawkins v. Johnson, thus sar castically comments on this fact :
- In this age, which is so sharp-
sighted in detecting forgery, I may perhaps be carried away by the pre vailing rage; but I cannot help think ing, that the whole addition in pages 585-6 is spurious, and did not pro ceed from the pen of Sir John Hawkins. The Knight's style is clear and elegant ; this account cloudy, inconsistent, and embar rassed. But I shall content myself with asking a few queries upon this important paragraph.
' Qu. i. Would a writer, confes sedly so exact in his choice of words as the Knight, talk in this manner : While he was preparing an acci dent happened ? As if one should say of that unfortunate divine, Dr, Dodd, an accident proved fatal to him ; he happened to write another man's name, etc.
- Qu. ii. Would not Sir John have
told us the name of the person who is so darkly described in this narra tion ? He is not usually backward in mentioning people's names at full length, where anything is to be said to their credit.
' Qu. iii. Would he not have told us something more about the im portant paper of a public nature, which he missed after receiving a visit from Mr. Anonymous ; or would
��he not rather have inserted it in the Life, as it probably would have filled a page or two ?
' Qu. iv. Where was this parch ment-covered book, which Sir John happened to lay his fingers upon ? Was it lying carelessly about in the room, or concealed in a deskl In short, was it in such a place that a common acquaintance, as I suppose Mr. Anonymous is represented, could have easily carried it off?
'Qu. v. How did Johnson learn (not surely from his eyesight), before the Knight could convey his prize away (CONVEY /A* Wise it call), that his friend was taking such kind care of his property ? You see, Mr. Urban, how miserably this story hangs to gether.
' Qu. vi. If the fact was exactly as it is here stated, how came Johnson to be so exceedingly provoked, that, as we are left to collect from the sequel, the Knight durst not approach him till he was appeased by a peni tential letter ?
' Qu. vii. What is become of this penitential letter ? and how happens it to be omitted, if such a letter was ever written ? Sir John would cer tainly havey^/#.r with so nourishing a morsel (Life, p. 46) in a genuine account of this accident, partly to swell the volume, and partly to fur nish the world with a perfect model of precatory eloquence (Ib. p. 270).
( Qu. viii. W T ould not the Knight also have favoured us with Johnson's answer in detail, without apologizing for the omission, by saying, that it would render him suspected of in excusable vanity? If the answer was, as the defenders of the authen-
��1 In the first edition, 6th.
��a look
�� �
