and the preacher was rallied upon it by no less a
person than David Hume. Gossip having magnified
this into a dispute between the parson and the philosopher,
Sterne disposes of the idle story in a passage deriving
an additional interest from its tribute to that sweet
disposition which had an equal charm for two men so
utterly unlike as the author of
Tristram Shandy
and the author of the
Wealth of Nations.
“I should,” he writes, “be exceedingly
surprised to hear that David ever had an unpleasant
contention with any man; and if I should ever be made
to believe that such an event had happened, nothing
would persuade me that his opponent was not in the
wrong, for in my life did I never meet with a being
of a more placid and gentle nature; and it is this
amiable turn of his character which has given more
consequence and force to his scepticism than all the
arguments of his sophistry.” The real truth
of the matter was that, meeting Sterne at Lord Hertford’s
table on the day when he had preached at the Embassy
Chapel, “David was disposed to make a little
merry with the parson, and in return the parson was
equally disposed to make a little merry with the infidel.
We laughed at one another, and the company laughed
with us both.” It would be absurd, of course,
to identify Sterne’s latitudinarian
bonhomie
with the higher order of tolerance; but many a more
confirmed and notorious Gallio than the clerical humourist
would have assumed prudish airs of orthodoxy in such
a presence, and the incident, if it does not raise
one’s estimate of Sterne’s dignity, displays
him to us as laudably free from hypocrisy.
But the long holiday of somewhat dull travel, with
its short last act of social gaiety, was drawing to
a close. In the third or fourth week of May Sterne
quitted Paris; and after a stay of a few weeks in London
he returned to the Yorkshire parsonage, from which
he had been absent some thirty months.
Unusually long as was the interval which had elapsed
since the publication of the last instalment of Tristram
Shandy, the new one was far from ready; and even
in the “sweet retirement” of Coxwold he
seems to have made but slow progress with it.
Indeed, the “sweet retirement” itself
became soon a little tedious to him. The month
of September found him already bored with work and
solitude; and the fine autumn weather of 1764 set
him longing for a few days’ pleasure-making
at what was even then the fashionable Yorkshire watering-place.
“I do not think,” he writes, with characteristic
incoherence, to Hall Stevenson—“I
do not think a week or ten days’ playing the
good fellow (at this very time) so abominable a thing;
but if a man could get there cleverly, and every soul
in his house in the mind to try what could be done
in furtherance thereof, I have no one to consult in
these affairs. Therefore, as a man may do worse
things, the plain English of all which is, that I
am going to leave a few poor sheep in the wilderness