with all due reverence to Mrs. Bret, once Countess of Macclesfield. By Richard Savage, son of the late Earl Rivers. London, printed for T. Worrall, 1728.’ Fol. first edition. P. CUNNINGHAM. Between Savage’s character, as drawn by Johnson, and Johnson himself there are many points of likeness. Each ‘always preserved a steady confidence in his own capacity,’ and of each it might be said:—‘Whatever faults may be imputed to him, the virtue of suffering well cannot be denied him.’ Each ‘excelled in the arts of conversation and therefore willingly practised them.’ In Savage’s refusal to enter a house till some clothes had been taken away that had been left for him ‘with some neglect of ceremonies,’ we have the counterpart of Johnson’s throwing away the new pair of shoes that had been set at his door. Of Johnson the following lines are as true as of Savage:—‘His distresses, however afflictive, never dejected him; in his lowest state he wanted not spirit to assert the natural dignity of wit, and was always ready to repress that insolence which the superiority of fortune incited; … he never admitted any gross familiarities, or submitted to be treated otherwise than as an equal.’ Of both men it might be said that ‘it was in no time of his life any part of his character to be the first of the company that desired to separate.’ Each ‘would prolong his conversation till midnight, without considering that business might require his friend’s application in the morning;’ and each could plead the same excuse that, ‘when he left his company, he was abandoned to gloomy reflections.’ Each had the same ‘accurate judgment,’ the same ‘quick apprehension,’ the same ‘tenacious memory.’ In reading such lines as the following who does not think, not of the man whose biography was written, but of the biographer himself?—‘He had the peculiar felicity that his attention never deserted him; he was present to every object, and regardful of the most trifling occurrences … To this quality is to be imputed the extent of his knowledge, compared with the small time which he spent in visible endeavours to acquire it. He mingled in cursory conversation with the same steadiness of attention as others apply to a lecture…. His judgment was eminently exact both with regard to writings and to men. The knowledge of life was indeed his chief attainment.’ Of Johnson’s London, as of Savage’s The Wanderer, it might equally well be said:—‘Nor can it without some degree of indignation and concern be told that he sold the copy for ten guineas.’
[485] ‘Savage was now again abandoned to fortune without any other friend than Mr. Wilks; a man who, whatever were his abilities or skill as an actor, deserves at least to be remembered for his virtues, which are not often to be found in the world, and perhaps less often in his profession than in others. To be humane, generous, and candid is a very high degree of merit in any case, but those qualities deserve still greater praise when they are found in that condition which makes almost every other man, for whatever reason, contemptuous, insolent, petulant, selfish, and brutal.’ Johnson’s Works, viii. 107.
[486] In his old age he wrote as he had written in the vigour of his manhood:—‘To the censure of Collier … he [Dryden] makes little reply; being at the age of sixty-eight attentive to better things than the claps of a playhouse.’ Johnson’s Works vii. 295. See post, April 29, 1773, and Sept. 21, 1777.
[487] Johnson, writing of the latter half of the seventeenth century, says:—‘The playhouse was abhorred by the Puritans, and avoided by those who desired the character of seriousness or decency. A grave lawyer would have debased his dignity, and a young trader would have impaired his credit, by appearing in those mansions of dissolute licentiousness.’ Johnson’s Works, vii. 270. The following lines in Churchill’s Apology (Poems, i. 65), published in 1761, shew how strong, even at that time, was the feeling against strolling players:—
‘The strolling tribe, a despicable race,
Like wand’ring Arabs shift from place to place.
Vagrants by law, to Justice open laid,
They tremble, of the beadle’s lash afraid,
And fawning cringe, for wretched means of life,
To Madam May’ress, or his Worship’s Wife.’
[488] Johnson himself recognises the change in the public estimation:—‘In Dryden’s time,’ he writes, ‘the drama was very far from that universal approbation which it has now obtained.’ Works, vii. 270.
[489] Giffard was the manager of the theatre in Goodman’s Fields, where Garrick, on Oct. 19, 1741, made his first appearance before a London audience. Murphy’s Garrick, pp. 13, 16.
[490] ‘Colonel Pennington said, Garrick sometimes failed in emphasis; as, for instance, in Hamlet,
“I will speak daggers to her; but use none;”
instead of
“I will speak daggers to her; but use none.”’
Boswell’s Hebrides, Aug. 28, 1773.
[491] I suspect Dr. Taylor was inaccurate in this statement. The emphasis should be equally upon shalt and not, as both concur to form the negative injunction; and false witness, like the other acts prohibited in the Decalogue, should not be marked by any peculiar emphasis, but only be distinctly enunciated. BOSWELL.
[492] This character of the Life of Savage was not written by Fielding as has been supposed, but most probably by Ralph, who, as appears from the minutes of the partners of The Champion, in the possession of Mr. Reed of Staple Inn, succeeded Fielding in his share of the paper, before the date of that eulogium. BOSWELL. Ralph is mentioned in The Dunciad, iii. 165. A curious account of him is given in Benjamin Franklin’s Memoirs, i. 54-87 and 245.
[493] The late Francis Cockayne Cust, Esq., one of his Majesty’s Counsel. BOSWELL.
[494] Savage’s veracity was questioned, but with little reason; his accounts, though not indeed always the same, were generally consistent. ‘When he loved any man, he suppressed all his faults: and, when he had been offended by him, concealed all his virtues: but his characters were generally true so far as he proceeded; though it cannot be denied that his partiality might have sometimes the effect of falsehood.’ Johnson’s Works, viii. 190.
[495] 1697. BOSWELL.
[496] Johnson’s Works, viii. 98.
[497] The story on which Mr. Cust so much relies, that Savage was a supposititious child, not the son of Lord Rivers and Lady Macclesfield, but the offspring of a shoemaker, introduced in consequence of her real son’s death, was, without doubt, grounded on the circumstance of Lady Macclesfield having, in 1696, previously to the birth of Savage, had a daughter by the Earl Rivers, who died in her infancy; a fact which was proved in the course of the proceedings on Lord Macclesfield’s Bill of Divorce. Most fictions of this kind have some admixture of truth in them. MALONE. From The Earl of Macclesfield’s Case, it appears that ‘Anne, Countess of Macclesfield, under the name of Madam Smith, in Fox Court, near Brook Street, Holborn, was delivered of a male child on the 16th of January, 1696-7, who was baptized on the Monday following, the 18th, and registered by the name of Richard, the son of John Smith, by Mr. Burbridge; and, from the privacy, was supposed by Mr. Burbridge to be “a by-blow or bastard.”’ It also appears, that during her delivery, the lady wore a mask; and that Mary Pegler, on the next day after the baptism, took a male child, whose mother was called Madam Smith, from the house of Mrs. Pheasant, in Fox Court [running from Brook Street in Gray’s Inn Lane], who went by the name of Mrs. Lee.
Conformable to this statement is the entry in the register of St. Andrew’s, Holborn, which is as follows, and which unquestionably records the baptism of Richard Savage, to whom Lord Rivers gave his own Christian name, prefixed to the assumed surname of his mother:—‘Jan. 1696-7. Richard, son of John Smith and Mary, in Fox Court, in Gray’s Inn Lane, baptized the 18th.’ BINDLEY. According to Johnson’s account Savage did not learn who his parents were till the death of his nurse, who had always treated him as her son. Among her papers he found some letters written by Lady Macclesfield’s mother proving his origin. Johnson’s Works, viii. 102.