Page 52.—In his “Life of Garrick” (Lond., 1868, vol. I., p. 422) Mr. Percy Fitzgerald presents the following narrative of Boswell’s appearance at a dinner in Guildhall. The date 1759 assigned to the occasion is evidently erroneous. It is not improbable that it took place shortly after the interchange of letters between him and Mr. Pitt. “The Grocer in London” was probably composed in the manner of the “Song of the Barber,” quoted at page 36.

“At a Guildhall dinner, when Mr. Pitt was present with Sir Joshua [Reynolds] and other celebrities, Mr. Boswell contrived to be asked to sing; then, standing up, he delivered a short speech referring to himself, in which he said that he had had the good fortune to be introduced to most of the crowned heads and distinguished characters in Europe, but with all his exertions had never attained the happiness of being presented to a gentleman, who was an honour to his country, and whose talents he held in the highest esteem. All the company understood the allusion, but Mr. Pitt remained perfectly cold and impassive. Then Mr. Boswell gave his song, which was a sort of parody on Dibdin’s ‘Sweet Little Cherub,’ and called ‘A Grocer in London.’ The minister was a member of the Grocers’ guild, and this absurdity was in his honour. So far this was ludicrous enough, but Boswell, half volunteering and half pressed by the company, and no doubt much affected by the wine, sang this song over no less than six times, until Mr. Pitt’s muscles at length relaxed, and he was obliged to join in the general roar. Mr. Taylor, who was present, walked home with the author of the song, and recollected that they roared ‘Grocer of London’ all through the streets.”

Pages 49 and 110.—Boswell was wont to attend public executions, both in Edinburgh and London, but the propensity of witnessing such spectacles was in his mind unassociated with an indifference to suffering. His love of excitement overcame his natural sympathies, and obscured his judgment. In June, 1790, he induced Sir Joshua Reynolds to accompany him to Newgate, to witness the execution of five convicts. One of these, an old servant of Mrs. Thrale, recognised Boswell among the crowd, and bowed to him from the scaffold. Some persons having censured Sir Joshua for being present at such a revolting spectacle, he justified his procedure in a letter to Boswell. An extract follows:—

“I am obliged to you for carrying me yesterday to see the execution at Newgate of the five malefactors. I am convinced it is a vulgar error; the opinion that it is so terrible a spectacle, or that it in any way implies a hardness of heart or cruelty of disposition, any more than such a disposition is implied in seeking delight from the representation of a tragedy. Such an execution as we saw, when there was no torture of the body, or expression of agony of the mind, but when the criminals, on the contrary, appeared perfectly composed, without the least trembling, ready to speak and answer with civility and attention any question that was proposed, neither in a state of torpidity nor insensibility, but grave and composed,—I am convinced from what we saw, and from the report of Mr. Ackerman, that it is a state of suspense that is the most irksome and intolerable to the human mind, and that certainty, though of the worst, is a more eligible state; that the mind soon reconciles itself even to the worst, when that worst is fixed as fate.... I consider it is natural to desire to see such sights, and, if I may venture, to take delight in them, in order to stir and interest the mind, to give it some emotion, as moderate exercise is necessary for the body.”

Page 136.—When he was passing through the press his “Tour to the Hebrides,” Boswell conceived the idea of sitting for his portrait to Sir Joshua Reynolds. The following letter which he addressed to the great artist is peculiarly characteristic:—

“My Dear Sir,—The debts which I contracted in my father’s lifetime will not be cleared off by me for some years. I therefore think it unconscientious to indulge myself in any expensive article of elegant luxury. But in the meantime you may die, or I may die; and I should regret very much that there should not be at Auchinleck my portrait painted by Sir Joshua Reynolds, with whom I have the felicity of living in social intimacy. I have a proposal to make to you. I am for certain to be called to the English Bar next February: will you now do my picture? and the price shall be paid out of the first fees which I receive as a barrister in Westminster Hall. Or if that fund should fail, it shall be paid at any rate five years hence by myself or my representatives. If you are pleased to approve of this proposal, you signifying your concurrence underneath upon two duplicates, one of which shall be kept by each of us, will be a sufficient voucher of the obligation. I ever am, with very sincere regards, my dear sir, your faithful and affectionate humble servant,

James Boswell.

“London, 7th June, 1785.”

This letter was endorsed by Sir Joshua thus:—“I agree to the above condition.—London, September 10th, 1785.” Boswell’s portrait, in kit-cat size, was painted by Sir Joshua some time afterwards. Whether a price was named or paid does not appear, but it is certain the biographer and the great painter remained in terms of the closest friendship. Sir Joshua died in 1792; he bequeathed to Boswell the sum of £200, to be expended, if he thought proper, in the purchase of a picture at the sale of his paintings, to be kept for his sake. Boswell’s portrait by Reynolds is now in the collection of Sir Robert Peel, Bart. (“Life and Times of Sir Joshua Reynolds,” by C. R. Leslie, R.A., and Tom Taylor. Lond., 1815, 2 vols.)