Part 2

[15] Moſt of what can be told concerning his petty peculiarities was communicated by a female domeſtic of the Earl of Oxford, who knew him, perhaps, after the middle of life.—Johnſon’s Lives of the Poets, 8vo. vol. 4, p. 141.

[16] And yet certain it is that no pains was ſpared for this purpoſe; for “my mother (ſaid he) was always telling me that I did not behave myſelf; that I ſhould endeavour to learn behaviour, and ſuch cant.” Indeed his defect in this particular could not be overlooked by his moſt partial admirer; for “I ſuppoſe none (ſays ſhe) who ſaw his odd manner of geſticulation, much blamed or wondered at the good lady’s ſolicitude concerning her ſon’s behaviour.”—Piozzi’s Memoirs of Johnſon, p. 24 and 25.

[17] Cant words are uſually begot in a cellar by _fun_ upon _folly_: but the word _bore_ and _boar_ has another origin; it was begot on a ſofa by _Madamoiſelle Ennui_ upon herſelf, and brought forth into the world in the midſt of the ton. The roar and fury of the river Severn the people of the country call the _boar_. A female ſaint was reported miraculouſly to have ſhed tears: the fact was denied by a Madrid carpenter who had made the ſaint, “becauſe (ſays he) ſhe is not only compoſed of heart of oak, but if ſhe had been at all diſpoſed to weep, ſhe muſt have wept when I _bored_ an aperture with my largeſt augre in her rump.” And thus teazing and vexation of every kind may be called a _bore_. A dun is a _bore_, and a ſermon is a _bore_, and ſo forth; but the greateſt of all poſſible _bores_, in whatever ſpelling, is a huſband, a _bore_ at night, a _bore_ in the morning, and, in ſhort, one general univerſal _bore_. Our author has uſed this faſhionable word with the moſt perfect propriety, in a ſenſe ſatisfying the very letter, as well as ſpirit of the word.

[18] When we went into Wales together, and ſpent ſome time at Sir Robert Cotton’s at Llewenney, one day at dinner I meant to pleaſe Mr. Johnſon particularly with a diſh of very young peas.—“Are not they charming?” ſaid I to him, while he was eating them.—“Perhaps (ſaid he) they would be ſo—to a Pig.”—Piozzi, p. 63.

[19] This paſſage ſeems inexplicable. We have had reſort to Bozz, but in vain: the ſtaff, indeed, he readily acknowledged; but as to the other aſſociate, or who, or what was meant, neither he nor we were able to diſcover.

* * * * * *

Transcriber's note:

Footnotes have been renumbered 1–19 and moved from within paragraphs natural breaks in paragraphs. We would ordinarily have moved the footnotes to the end of the book, we but did not wish to entirely deprive you of the ambience that readers of the original printed book enjoyed.

Original printed spelling and grammar are retained, with one exception:

Page 3. “refeences” changed to “references”.