We set sail again about mid-day, and in the evening landed on Mull, near the house of the Reverend Mr. Neal M’Leod, who having been informed of our coming, by a message from Sir Allan, came out to meet us.  We were this night very agreeably entertained at his house.  Dr. Johnson observed to me, that he was the cleanest-headed man that he had met with in the Western islands.  He seemed to be well acquainted with Dr. Johnson’s writings, and courteously said, ’I have been often obliged to you, though I never had the pleasure of seeing you before.’

He told us, he had lived for some time in St. Kilda, under the tuition of the minister or catechist there, and had there first read Horace and Virgil.  The scenes which they describe must have been a strong contrast to the dreary waste around him.

THURSDAY, OCTOBER 21.

This morning the subject of politicks was introduced.  JOHNSON.  ’Pulteney was as paltry a fellow as could be[907].  He was a Whig, who pretended to be honest; and you know it is ridiculous for a Whig to pretend to be honest.  He cannot hold it out[908].’  He called Mr. Pitt a meteor; Sir Robert Walpole a fixed star[909].  He said, ’It is wonderful to think that all the force of government was required to prevent Wilkes from being chosen the chief magistrate of London[910], though the liverymen knew he would rob their shops,—­knew he would debauch their daughters[911].’

BOSWELL.  ’The History of England is so strange, that, if it were not so well vouched as it is, it would hardly be credible.’

JOHNSON.  ’Sir, if it were told as shortly, and with as little preparation for introducing the different events, as the History of the Jewish Kings, it would be equally liable to objections of improbability.’  Mr. M’Leod was much pleased with the justice and novelty of the thought.  Dr. Johnson illustrated what he had said, as follows:  ’Take, as an instance, Charles the First’s concessions to his parliament, which were greater and greater, in proportion as the parliament grew more insolent, and less deserving of trust.  Had these concessions been related nakedly, without any detail of the circumstances which generally led to them, they would not have been believed.’

Sir Allan M’Lean bragged, that Scotland had the advantage of England, by its having more water.  JOHNSON.  ’Sir, we would not have your water, to take the vile bogs which produce it.  You have too much!  A man who is drowned has more water than either of us;’—­and then he laughed. (But this was surely robust sophistry:  for the people of taste in England, who have seen Scotland, own that its variety of rivers and lakes makes it naturally more beautiful than England, in that respect.) Pursuing his victory over Sir Allan, he proceeded:  ’Your country consists of two things, stone and water.  There is, indeed, a little earth above the stone in some places, but a very little; and the stone is always appearing.  It is like a man in rags; the naked skin is still peeping out.’