I talked to him of original sin (1), in consequence of the fall of man, and of the atonement made by our Saviour. After some conversation, which he desired me to remember, he, at my request, dictated to me as follows:

"With respect to original sin, the inquiry is not necessary; for whatever is the cause of human corruption, men are evidently and confessedly so corrupt, that all the laws of heaven and earth are insufficient to restrain them from crimes.

"Whatever difficulty there may be in the conception of vicarious punishments, it is an opinion which has had possession of mankind in all ages. There is no nation that has not used the practice of sacrifices. Whoever, therefore, denies the propriety of vicarious punishments, holds an opinion which the sentiments and practice of mankind have contradicted from the beginning of the world. The great sacrifice for the

sins of mankind was offered at the death of the Messiah, who is called in Scripture The Lamb of God, that taketh away the sins of the world.' To judge of the reasonableness of the scheme of redemption, it must be considered as necessary to the government of the universe that God should make known his perpetual and irreconcileable detestation of moral evil. He might indeed punish, and punish only the offenders; but as the end of punishment is not revenge of crimes but propagation of virtue, it was more becoming the divine

(1) Dr. Ogden, in his second sermon "On the Articles of the Christian Faith," with admirable acuteness thus addresses the opposers of that doctrine, which accounts for the confusion, sin, and misery, which we find in this life:

"It would be severe in God, you think, to degrade us to such a sad state as this, for the offence of our first parents; but you can allow him to place us in it without any inducement. Are our calamities lessened by not being ascribed to Adam? If your condition be unhappy, is it not still unhappy, whatever was the occasion? with the aggravation of this reflection, that if it was as good as it was at first designed, there seems to be somewhat the less reason to look for its amendment. '

clemency to find another manner of proceeding, less destructive to man, and at least equally powerful to promote goodness. The end of punishment is to re.. claim and warn. That punishment will both reclaim and warn, which shows evidently such abhorrence of sin in God, as may deter us from it, or strike us with dread of vengeance when we have committed it. This is effected by vicarious punishment. Nothing could more testify the opposition between the nature of God and moral evil, or more amply display his justice, to men and angels, to all orders and successions of beings, than that it was necessary for the highest and purest nature, even for Divinity itself, to pacify the demands of vengeance by a painful death: of which the natural effect will be, that when justice is appeased, there is a proper place for the exercise of mercy; and that such propitiation shall supply, in some degree, the imperfections of our obedience and the inefficacy of our repentance: for obedience and repentance, such as we can perform, are still necessary. Our Saviour has told us, that he did not come to destroy the law but to fulfil: to fulfil the typical law, by the performance of what those types had foreshown, and the moral law, by precepts of greater purity and higher exaltation."

Here he said, "God bless you with it." I acknowledged myself much obliged to him; but I begged that he would go on as to the propitiation being the chief object of our most holy faith. He then dictated this one other paragraph.

"The peculiar doctrine of Christianity is, that of an universal sacrifice and perpetual propitiation. Other prophets only proclaimed the will and the threatenings of God. Christ satisfied his justice."

The Reverend Mr. Palmer (1), fellow of Queen s (1) This unfortunate person, whose full name was Thoma

College, Cambridge, dined with us. He expressed a wish that a better provision were made for parishclerks. JOHNSON. "Yes, Sir, a parish-clerk should be a man who is able to make a will or write a letter for any body in the parish."

I mentioned Lord Monboddo's notion (1) that the ancient Egyptians, with all their learning and all their arts, were not only black, but woolly-haired. Mr. Palmer asked how did it appear upon examin ing the mummies? Dr. Johnson approved of this test. (2)

Although upon most occasions I never heard a more strenuous advocate for the advantages of

Fysche Palmer, afterwards went to Dundee, in Scotland, where he officiated as minister to a congregation of the sect who call themselves Unitarians, from a notion that they distinctively worship one God, because they deny the mysterious doctrine of the Trinity. They do not advert that the great body of the Christian church in maintaining that mystery maintain also the unity of the Godhead: "the Trinity in Unity! -three persons and one God." The church humbly adores the Divinity as exhibited in the holy Scriptures. The unitarian sect vainly presumes to comprehend and define the Almighty. Mr. Palmer having heated his mind with political speculations, became so much dissatisfied with our excellent constitution as to compose, publish, and circulate writings, which were found to be so seditious and dangerous, that upon being found guilty by a jury, the court of justiciary in Scotland sentenced him to transportation for fourteen years. A loud clamour against this sentence was made by some members of both houses of parliament; but both houses approved of it by a great majority, and he was conveyed to the settlement for convicts in New South Wales. — B.—Mr. T. F. Palmer was of Queen's College in Cambridge, where he took the degree of master of arts in 1772, and that of S. T. B. in 1781. He died on his return from Botany Bay in 1803. M. (1) Taken from Herodotus.

(2) It appears from every kind of evidence, that the Egyp tians had flowing hair, and sharp and handsome feat res. all events, they were not negroes. C.

wealth than Dr. Johnson, he this day, I know not from what caprice, took the other side. "I have not observed," said he, "that men of very large fortunes enjoy any thing extraordinary that makes happiness. What has the Duke of Bedford? What has the Duke of Devonshire? The only great instance that I have ever known of the enjoyment of wealth was that of Jamaica Dawkins, who going to visit Palmyra, and hearing that the way was infested by robbers, hired a troop of Turkish horse to guard him."(1)

Dr. Gibbons (2), the dissenting minister, being mentioned, he said, "I took to Dr. Gibbons." And addressing himself to Mr. Charles Dilly, added, “I shall be glad to see him. Tell him, if he'll call on me, and dawdle over a dish of tea in an afternoon, I shall take it kind."

The Reverend Mr. Smith, vicar of Southill, a very respectable man, with a very agreeable family, sent an invitation to us to drink tea. I remarked Dr. Johnson's very respectful politeness. Though always fond of changing the scene, he said, "We must have Mr. Dilly's leave. We cannot go from your house, Sir, without your permission." We all went, and were well satisfied with our visit. I, however, remember nothing particular, except a nice

(1) Henry Dawkins, Esq., the companion of Wood and Bouverie in their travels, and the patron of the Athenian Stuart. . C.

(2) Thomas Gibbons, "a Calvinist" (says the Biog. Dict.) "of the old stamp, and a man of great piety and primitive manners. He wrote a life of Dr. Watts, and assisted Dr. Jo'inson with some materials for the Life of Watts in the English Poets. He died in 1785, ætat. sixty-five. — C.

ÆTAT. 72. REMEMBRANCE AND RECOLLECTION. 107

distinction which Dr. Johnson made with respect to the power of memory, maintaining that forgetful. ness was a man's own fault. "To remember and to recollect," said he, "are different things. A man has not the power to recollect what is not in his mind, but when a thing is in his mind he may remember it." (1)

The remark was occasioned by my leaning back on a chair, which a little before I had perceived to be broken, and pleading forgetfulness as an excuse. "Sir," said he, "its being broken was certainly ir your mind."

When I observed that a housebreaker was in general very timorous: JOHNSON. "No wonder, Sir; he is afraid of being shot getting into a house, or hanged when he has got out of it."

He told us, that he had in one day written sıx sheets of a translation from the French; adding, "I should be glad to see it now. I wish that I had copies of all the pamphlets written against me, as it is said Pope had. Had I known that I should make so much noise in the world, I should have been at pains to collect them. I believe there is hardly a

(3) Mr. Boswell's note must have been imperfect. Dr. Johnson certainly never talked such nonsense as is here attributed to him -a man can no more remember "what is not on his mind" than he can recollect it, and "when a thing is in his mind" he can just as well recollect as remember it. In his Dictionary, Johnson defines "remember, to bear in mind, to recollect, to call to mind." This would seem to imply that he considered the words as nearly synonymous; but in his definition of "recollect, to recover memory, to gather what is scattered," he makes the true distinction. When the words are to be contradistinguished, it may be said that remembrance s spontaneous and recollection an effort. C.