Some years after our Tour, a cause[1070] was tried in the Court of Session, where the principal fact to be ascertained was, whether a ship-master, who used to frequent the Western Highlands and Isles, was drowned in one particular year, or in the year after.  A great number of witnesses from those parts were examined on each side, and swore directly contrary to each other, upon this simple question.  One of them, a very respectable Chieftain, who told me a story of second sight, which I have not mentioned, but which I too implicitly believed, had in this case, previous to this publick examination, not only said, but attested under his hand, that he had seen the ship-master in the year subsequent to that in which the court was finally satisfied he was drowned.  When interrogated with the strictness of judicial inquiry, and under the awe of an oath, he recollected himself better, and retracted what he had formerly asserted, apologising for his inaccuracy, by telling the judges, ‘A man will say what he will not swear.’  By many he was much censured, and it was maintained that every gentleman would be as attentive to truth without the sanction of an oath, as with it.  Dr. Johnson, though he himself was distinguished at all times by a scrupulous adherence to truth, controverted this proposition; and as a proof that this was not, though it ought to be, the case, urged the very different decisions of elections under Mr. Grenville’s Act,[1071] from those formerly made.  ’Gentlemen will not pronounce upon oath what they would have said, and voted in the house, without that sanction.’

However difficult it may be for men who believe in preternatural communications, in modern times, to satisfy those who are of a different opinion, they may easily refute the doctrine of their opponents, who impute a belief in second sight to superstition.  To entertain a visionary notion that one sees a distant or future event, may be called superstition:  but the correspondence of the fact or event with such an impression on the fancy, though certainly very wonderful, if proved, has no more connection with superstition, than magnetism or electricity.

After dinner, various topicks were discussed; but I recollect only one particular.  Dr. Johnson compared the different talents of Garrick and Foote,[1072] as companions, and gave Garrick greatly the preference for elegance, though he allowed Foote extraordinary powers of entertainment.  He said, ’Garrick is restrained by some principle; but Foote has the advantage of an unlimited range.  Garrick has some delicacy of feeling; it is possible to put him out; you may get the better of him; but Foote is the most incompressible fellow that I ever knew; when you have driven him into a corner, and think you are sure of him, he runs through between your legs, or jumps over your head, and makes his escape.’