[994] Mr. Boswell has chosen to omit, for reasons which will be presently obvious, that Johnson and Adam Smith met at Glasgow; but I have been assured by Professor John Miller that they did so, and that Smith, leaving the party in which he had met Johnson, happened to come to another company where Miller was.  Knowing that Smith had been in Johnson’s society, they were anxious to know what had passed, and the more so as Dr. Smith’s temper seemed much ruffled.  At first Smith would only answer, ‘He’s a brute—­he’s a brute;’ but on closer examination, it appeared that Johnson no sooner saw Smith than he attacked him for some point of his famous letter on the death of Hume (ante, p. 30).  Smith vindicated the truth of his statement.  ‘What did Johnson say?’ was the universal inquiry.  ‘Why, he said,’ replied Smith, with the deepest impression of resentment, ‘he said, you lie!’ ’And what did you reply?’ ‘I said, you are a son of a------!’ On such terms did these two great moralists meet and part, and such was the classical dialogue between two great teachers of philosophy.  WALTER SCOTT.  This story is erroneous in the particulars of the time, place, and subject of the alleged quarrel; for Hume did not die for [nearly] three years after Johnson’s only visit to Glasgow; nor was Smith then there.  Johnson, previous to 1763 (see ante, i. 427, and iii. 331), had an altercation with Adam Smith at Mr. Strahan’s table.  This may have been the foundation of Professor Miller’s misrepresentation.  But, even then, nothing of this offensive kind could have passed, as, if it had, Smith could certainly not have afterwards solicited admission to the Club of which Johnson was the leader, to which he was admitted 1st Dec. 1775, and where he and Johnson met frequently on civil terms.  I, therefore, disbelieve the whole story.  CROKER.

[995] ‘His appearance,’ says Dr. A. Carlyle (Auto. p. 68), ’was that of an ascetic, reduced by fasting and prayer.’  See ante, p. 68.

[996] See ante, ii. 27, 279.

[997] See ante, p. 92.

[998] Johnson wrote to Mrs. Thrale:—­’I was not much pleased with any of the Professors.’ Piozzi Letters, i. 199.  Mme. D’Arblay says:—­ ’Whenever Dr. Johnson did not make the charm of conversation he only marred it by his presence, from the general fear he incited, that if he spoke not, he might listen; and that if he listened, he might reprove.’ Memoirs of Dr. Burney, ii. 187.  See ante, ii. 63

[999] Boswell has not let us see this caution.  When Robertson first came in, ‘there began,’ we are told, ‘some animated dialogue’ (ante, p.32).  The next day we read that ‘he fluently harangued to Dr. Johnson’ (ante, p.43).

[1000] See ante, iii. 366.

[1001] He was Ambassador at Paris in the beginning of the reign of George I., and Commander-in-Chief in 1744.  Lord Mahon’s England, ed. 1836, i. 201 and iii. 275.