But this does not seem to have been the case, at least in his outward conduct. We find him, in writing home from France, casually mentioning his not having seen Elliot's sons "in church;" and on another occasion making a like allusion, indicative of his having been a pretty regular attendant at the ambassador's chapel. He is said to have been fond of Dr. Robertson's preaching, and not averse to that of his colleague and opponent, John Erskine. A lady, distinguished in literature, remembers that in a conversation with a respectable tradesman's wife, who had been a servant to Hume, she said that her master one day asked her very seriously, why she was never seen in church, where he had provided seats for all his household. At that time there were very few of the humbler classes in Edinburgh, who did not belong to the Church of Scotland. The woman's defence was, that she belonged to a dissenting congregation; and it was admitted to be quite satisfactory.
Social in his habits, and living the life of a wealthy bachelor, it was natural that Hume should connect himself with the societies, whether of a literary or convivial character, which brought the good company of Edinburgh together. He appears to have been a pretty active member of the Philosophical Society. In a letter, of which part has already been printed, and which would probably in strict chronological order belong to an earlier period, we find him with mild dignity enforcing the tolerance and philosophical equanimity, that ought to reign wherever men of different sentiments meet each other in intellectual discussion.
"Tuesday Forenoon.
"Sir,—I am so great a lover of peace, that I am resolved to drop this matter altogether, and not to insert a syllable in the Preface, which can have a reference to your Essay. The truth is, I could take no revenge but such a one as would have been a great deal too cruel, and much exceeding the offence: for, though most authors think, that a contemptuous manner of treating their writings is but slightly revenged by hurting the personal character and the honour of their antagonists, I am very far from that opinion. Besides, I am as certain as I can be of any thing, (and I am not such a sceptic as you may perhaps imagine,) that your inserting such remarkable alterations in the printed copy, proceeded entirely from precipitancy and passion, not from any formed intention of deceiving the Society. I would not take advantage of such an incident to throw a slur on a man of merit, whom I esteem, though I might have reason to complain of him.
"When I am abused by such a fellow as Warburton, whom I neither know nor care for, I can laugh at him. But if Dr. Stewart approaches any way towards the same style of writing, I own it vexes me; because I conclude, that some unguarded circumstance of my conduct, though contrary to my intention, had given occasion to it.
"As to your situation with regard to Lord Kames, I am not so good a judge. I only think that you had so much the better of the argument, that you ought, upon that account, to have been more reserved in your expressions. All raillery ought to be avoided in philosophical argument, both because it is unphilosophical, and because it cannot but be offensive, let it be ever so gentle. What, then, must we think with regard to so many insinuations of irreligion, to which Lord Kames's paper gave not the least occasion? This spirit of the inquisitor is, in you, the effect of passion, and what a cool moment would easily correct. But where it predominates in the character, what ravages has it committed on reason, virtue, truth, liberty, and every thing that is valuable among mankind! I shall now speak a word as to the justness of your censure with regard to myself after these remarks on the manner of it. I have no scruple of confessing my mistakes. You see I have owned that I think Lord Kames is mistaken in his argument; and I would sooner give up my own cause than my friend's, if I thought that imputation of any consequence to a man's character. . . . .[455:1]
"As I am resolved to drop this matter entirely from the Preface, so I hope to persuade Lord Kames to be entirely silent with regard to it in our meeting. But in case I should not prevail, or if any body else start the subject, I think it better that some of your friends should be there, and be prepared to mollify the matter. If I durst pretend to advise, I should think it better you yourself were absent, unless you bring a greater spirit of composition than you express in your letter. I am persuaded that whatever a person of Mr. Monro's authority proposes will be agreed to: though I must beg leave to differ from his judgment in proposing to alter two pages. That chiefly removes the offence given to me; but what regards Lord Kames is so interwoven with the whole discourse, that there is not now any possibility of altering it. I am, sir, your most obedient humble servant," &c.
"P. S.—I hope you are very zealous in promoting the sale of Blacklock's Poems. I will never be reconciled to you unless you dispose of at least a score of them; and make your friends Sir John Maxwell and Lord Buchan pay a guinea a piece for their copy."[455:2]
The Poker Club, occasionally mentioned in these pages, seems to have had no other direct and specific object but the consumption of claret. The duty laid on that national wine, by "the English statesman," so pathetically commemorated by John Home, was a heavy blow and great discouragement to the club; but it rallied, and returned to its old esteemed beverage; and, indeed, it is a somewhat curious circumstance, that the national taste, created by the early intercourse with France and the consequent cheapness of French wines, still lingers in Scotland, where claret is much more generally consumed than in England. The club met in Fortune's tavern every Friday. It was the practice, at each meeting, to name two to be, what were called, "attendant members;" an arrangement, probably, designed to form a nucleus round which those whose attendance was uncertain, but who might drop in occasionally in the course of the evening, could form themselves; and to prevent any general desertion of the club, or, what might be, perhaps, more calamitous, the accident of any individual finding himself, for the night, its sole and solitary representative. We find Hume duly taking his turn in these attendances, and keeping the minutes according to rotation. On the 20th January, 1775, there is this emphatic entry, in his handwriting, "As Mr. Nairne was one of the attendant members, and neglected his duty, the club sent him the bill." The last meeting of the club, attended by Hume, appears to have been that of 8th December, 1775.[457:1]
It does not appear to be necessary that traditional anecdotes, such as the few we possess of Hume, must either be authenticated, or excluded from such a work as the present. It seems to entitle them to a place, that they were current among those who knew his character and habits. They thus afford all that is expected from such sources—passing fancy sketches, recognised as likenesses. Like several others that have appeared in these pages, as mere traditions, the following anecdote, which is eminently natural and curious, has no farther authentication than the general belief, in Edinburgh, that it "was like the man."
About the commencement of his last illness, a female member of the respectable Berean congregation, in Leith, presented herself at his door, with the information that she had been intrusted with a message to him from on High; and, becoming very urgent, succeeded in obtaining admission. "This is a very important matter, madam," said the philosopher, "we must take it with deliberation;—perhaps you had better get a little temporal refreshment before you begin. 'Lassie, bring this good lady a glass of wine.'" While she was preparing for the attack, Hume entered, good-humouredly, into conversation with her; and, discovering that her husband was a chandler, announced that he stood very much in want, at that time, of some temporal lights, and intrusted his guest with a very large order. This unexpected stroke of business at once absorbed all the good woman's thoughts; and, forgetting her important mission, she immediately trotted home to acquaint her husband with the good news.
There is an anecdote, which has appeared in numerous collections of such literary scraps, which represents him as having slipped into the boggy ground at the base of the castle rock, and called to a woman to help him out. In his unwieldy and infirm state, during his latter years, the accident is not improbable. The anecdote proceeds to say, that the female called on had great doubts of the propriety of helping "Hume, the Deist," out of that slough of despond into which it had pleased Providence to cast him. "But, my good woman, does not your religion as a Christian, teach you to do good, even to your enemies?" "That may be," said she, "but ye shallna get out o' that, till ye become a Christian yersell: and repeat the Lord's Prayer and the Belief," a feat which is said to have been very rapidly performed, much to the worthy catechist's astonishment.
Some of his witticisms have a tone of sarcastic severity, which he does not appear to have been disposed to suppress, even when women were the victims, if it was called forth by affectation or folly. To a celebrated "fine woman" of his day, who said she was often pestered to tell her age, and desired his opinion what answer she should give: he is reported to have said, "Madam, say you are not yet come to years of discretion." To the same lady, who, when crossing one of the ferries of the Firth of Forth, during a fresh breeze, was making a loud outcry about danger, he remarked, with much coolness, that they would probably soon be food for fishes; "and who," said the frightened belle, probably a little confused by the horrors of their position, "who will they begin with?" The answer she received was, "Why, madam, those of them that are gluttons will begin with me; those that are epicures with your ladyship."
We now resume Hume's correspondence. The letters of the last five years of his life, which have been preserved, are comparatively few; a circumstance which may be accounted for from his living, during that period, among his correspondents. On 28th January, 1772, he writes to Smith, that he would be glad to receive a visit from him; but that his house would be rather dull, from his sister having fever. In continuation he says:—
"I shall not take an excuse from your own state of health; which I suppose only a subterfuge invented by indolence and love of solitude. Indeed, my dear Smith, if you continue to hearken to complaints of this nature, you will cut yourself out entirely from human society, to the great loss of both parties.
"P.S.—I have not yet read 'Orlando Inamorato;' but intend soon to do it. I am now in a course of reading the 'Italian Historians,' and am confirmed in my former opinion, that that language has not produced one author who knew how to write elegant correct prose, though it contains several excellent poets."[459:1]
In the following letters, we find several details about that remarkable revulsion in the state of trade in Scotland, which, at the present day, is chiefly known by the quantity of decisions on points of bankruptcy law, with which it filled the Reports.
Hume to Adam Smith
"St. Andrew's Square, 27th June, 1772.
"We are here in a very melancholy situation, continual bankruptcies, universal loss of credit, and endless suspicions. There are but two standing houses in this place—Mansfields and the Coutses—for I comprehend not Cummin, whose dealings were always very narrow. Mansfield has paid away £40,000 in a few days: but it is apprehended that neither he nor any of them can hold out till the end of next week, if no alteration happen. The case is little better in London. It is thought that Sir George Colebroke must soon stop; and even the Bank of England is not entirely free from suspicion. Those of Newcastle, Norwich, and Bristol, are said to be stopped. The Thistle Bank has been reported to be in the same condition. The Carron Company is reeling, which is one of the greatest calamities of the whole, as they gave employment to near ten thousand people. Do these events any wise affect your theory, or will it occasion the revisal of any chapters?
"Of all the sufferers, I am the most concerned for the Adams, particularly John. But their undertakings were so vast, that nothing could support them. They must dismiss three thousand workmen, who, comprehending the materials, must have expended above £100,000 a-year. They have great funds; but if these must be disposed of in a hurry, and to disadvantage, I am afraid the remainder will amount to little or nothing. People's [compa]ssion I see was exhausted for John, in his last calamity, and every body asks why he incurred any more hazards. But his friendship for his brothers is an apology; though I believe he has a projecting turn of his own. To me the scheme of the Adelphi always appeared so imprudent, that my wonder is how they could have gone on so long.
"If Sir George Colebroke stop, it will probably disconcert all the plans of our friends, as it will diminish their patron's influence; which is a new misfortune.
"On the whole, I believe that the check given to our exorbitant and ill grounded credit, will prove of advantage in the long run, as it will reduce people to more solid, and less sanguine projects, and, at the same time, introduce frugality among the merchants and manufacturers: what say you? Here is food for your speculation."[461:1]
Hume to Adam Smith.
"St. Andrew's Square, 23d Nov. 1772.
"Dear Smith,—I should agree to your reasoning, if I could trust your resolution. Come hither for some weeks about Christmas; dissipate yourself a little; return to Kirkcaldy; finish your work before autumn: go to London; print it; return and settle in this town, which suits your studious independent turn, even better than London. Execute this plan faithfully, and I forgive you.
"Ferguson has returned, fat and fair, and in good humour, notwithstanding his disappointment, which I am glad of."[461:2]
In 1772, Macpherson published a quarto volume, called "An Introduction to the History of Great Britain and Ireland," of which Pinkerton, indignant at the Celtic spirit it displayed, said, "The empty vanity, shallow reading, vague assertion, and etymological nonsense, in this production, are truly risible." In a letter to Colonel Dow,[461:3] we find Hume criticising this book in a rather less emphatic manner.
"My compliments to Ossian. He has given us a work last winter, which contains a great deal of genius and good writing; but I cannot assent to his system. I must still adhere to the common opinion regarding our origin, or rather your origin; for we are all plainly Danes or Saxons in the low countries. But these subjects I reserve to a discussion over an evening fire on your return. I charge you not to think of settling in London, till you have first seen our New Town, which exceeds any thing you have seen in any part of the world."[462:1]
With the following letter, many readers may perhaps be familiar, but to those who have not already seen it, the curious historical incident it details, will give it much interest.
Hume to Sir John Pringle.
St. Andrew's Square, Edinburgh,
Feb. 10, 1773.
My dear Sir,—That the present Pretender was in London, in the year 1753, I know with the greatest certainty; because I had it from Lord Marischal, who said, it consisted with his certain knowledge. Two or three days after his lordship gave me this information, he told me, that the evening before, he had learned several curious particulars from a lady, (who I imagined to be Lady Primrose,) though my lord refused to name her. The Pretender came to her house in the evening, without giving her any preparatory information; and entered the room when she had a pretty large company with her, and was herself playing at cards. He was announced by the servant under another name. She thought the cards would have dropped from her hands on seeing him. But she had presence enough of mind, to call him by the name he assumed; to ask him when he came to England, and how long he intended to stay there. After he and all the company went away, the servants remarked how wonderfully like the strange gentleman was to the prince's picture, which hung on the chimney-piece, in the very room in which he entered. My lord added, (I think from the authority of the same lady,) that he used so little precaution, that he went abroad openly in day-light, in his own dress; only laying aside his blue riband and star; walked once through St. James's, and took a turn in the Mall.
About five years ago, I told this story to Lord Holderness, who was secretary of state in the year 1753; and I added, that I supposed this piece of intelligence had at that time escaped his lordship. "By no means," said he, "and who do you think first told it me? it was the king himself, who subjoined, 'And what do you think, my lord, I should do with him?'" Lord Holderness owned that he was puzzled how to reply; for if he declared his real sentiments, they might savour of indifference to the royal family. The king perceived his embarrassment, and extricated him from it, by adding, "My lord, I shall just do nothing at all; and when he is tired of England, he will go abroad again." I think this story, for the honour of the late king, ought to be more generally known.
But what will surprise you more, Lord Marischal, a few days after the coronation of the present king, told me, that he believed the young Pretender was at that time in London; or at least had been so very lately, and had come over to see the show of the coronation, and had actually seen it. I asked my lord the reason for this strange fact. "Why," says he, "a gentleman told me so that saw him there; and that he even spoke to him, and whispered in his ears these words: 'Your royal highness is the last of all mortals whom I should expect to see here.'—'It was curiosity that led me,' said the other; 'but I assure you,' added he, 'that the person who is the object of all this pomp and magnificence is the man I envy the least.'" You see this story is so near traced from the fountain head, as to wear a great face of probability. Query, What if the Pretender had taken up Dymock's gauntlet? I find that the Pretender's visit in England, in the year 1753, was known to all the Jacobites; and some of them have assured me, that he took the opportunity of formally renouncing the Roman Catholic religion, under his own name of Charles Stuart, in the new church in the Strand; and that this is the reason of the bad treatment he met with at the court of Rome. I own that I am a sceptic with regard to the last particulars.
Lord Marischal had a very bad opinion of this unfortunate prince; and thought there was no vice so mean or atrocious of which he was not capable; of which he gave me several instances. My lord, though a man of great honour, may be thought a discontented courtier; but what quite confounded me in the idea of that prince, was a conversation I had with Helvétius at Paris, which, I believe, I have told you. In case I have not, I shall mention a few particulars. That gentleman told me, that he had no acquaintance with the Pretender; but, some time after that prince was chased out of France, "a letter," said he, "was brought me from him, in which he told me that the necessity of his affairs obliged him to be at Paris; and, as he knew me, by character, to be a man of the greatest probity and honour in France, he would trust himself to me, if I would promise to conceal and protect him. I own," added Helvétius to me, "although I knew the danger to be greater of harbouring him at Paris than at London; and although I thought the family of Hanover not only the lawful sovereigns in England, but the only lawful sovereigns in Europe, as having the full and free consent of the people; yet was I such a dupe to his flattery, that I invited him to my house; concealed him there, going and coming, near two years; had all his correspondence pass through my hands; met with his partisans upon Pont Neuf; and found, at last, that I had incurred all this danger and trouble for the most unworthy of all mortals; insomuch that I have been assured, when he went down to Nantz, to embark on his expedition to Scotland, he took fright and refused to go on board; and his attendants, thinking the matter gone too far, and that they would be affronted for his cowardice, carried him, in the night time, into the ship, pieds et mains liés." I asked him, if he meant literally? "Yes," said he, "literally. They tied him and carried him by main force." What think you now of this hero and conqueror?
Both Lord Marischal and Helvétius agree, that with all this strange character, he was no bigot; but rather had learned, from the philosophers at Paris, to affect a contempt of all religion. You must know that both these persons thought they were ascribing to him an excellent quality. Indeed, both of them used to laugh at me for my narrow way of thinking in these particulars.[465:1] However, my dear Sir John, I hope you will do me the justice to acquit me.
I doubt not but these circumstances will appear curious to Lord Hardwicke, to whom you will please to present my respects. I suppose his lordship will think this unaccountable mixture of temerity and timidity, in the same character, not a little singular. I am yours very sincerely.[465:2]
If there should be any doubts of the genuineness of this letter, from its having first appeared, unauthenticated, in a periodical work, they will be removed by the perusal of the following answer by Sir John Pringle, printed from the original manuscript.
Sir John Pringle to Hume.
London, 5th November, 1773.
Dear Sir,—I was much obliged to you for your letter of the 10th ult., as it furnished me with sufficient means for maintaining my credit with Lord Hardwicke, a person I have not the honour to be well known to; and I had the more occasion for such a testimony as yours, as the other earl, mentioned in your letter, has thought proper, (I presume since he has once more become a courtier,) to deny his knowing any thing of the story, when one of the company, (where I told the anecdote to Lord Hardwicke,) inquired of him about it.
Lord Hardwicke, not being in town when yours came to hand, I charged his intimate friend, Mr. Wray, who was going to visit him, with it. Yesterday, that gentleman returned, and, with the letter, sent me a line, expressing his lordship's great satisfaction in the communication; and with many thanks to us both for it. I understand he is very curious in picking up such historical facts; and, if so, he certainly never met with any thing of that kind more suited to his genius. The most extraordinary circumstance is, that of the pied et poing liés; and yet your authority seems to be unexceptionable. What could be expected from an adventurer whom they had been obliged to treat in that humiliating manner? and whose timidity, they must believe, was every now and then to recur, to affront those that set him upon the enterprise? I know that our people were at great pains to decry his courage, after the battle of Culloden; but that I considered always as done upon a political, rather than an historical principle. I had good evidence for believing that, at Derby, he was, of the council of war, the person who stood longest out against the motion for returning, and not advancing to London. Again, he was for standing at the Spey; and, lastly, he did not retire from Culloden till his whole band was put to flight. It is true he never advanced nearer than the corps de réserve; but which corresponded to our second line, in which the Duke of Cumberland placed himself. I may add, that both of us have been informed, that he betrayed no unmanly concern, when he skulked so long with his female heroine; and then, surely, he was daily in the greatest danger of his life; had he been taken he would have met with no quarter. But, after all, these testimonies, in favour of his courage, must yield to such proofs as you bring to the contrary.[466:1]
Hume to Adam Smith.
"St. Andrew's Square, 24th Feb., 1773.
"Dear Smith,—There are two late publications here which I advise you to commission. The first is Andrew Stuart's Letters to Lord Mansfield, which they say have met with vast success in London. Andrew has eased his own mind, and no bad effects are to follow. Lord Mansfield is determined, absolutely, to neglect them. The other is Lord Monboddo's treatise on the Origin and Progress of Language, which is only part of a larger work. It contains all the absurdity and malignity which I expected; but is writ with more ingenuity and in a better style than I looked for."[467:1]
"St. Andrew's Square, 10th April, 1773.
"To-day news arrived in town, that the Ayr Bank had shut up, and, as many people think, for ever. I hear that the Duke of Buccleuch is on the road. The country will be in prodigious distress for money this term. Sir G. Colebroke's bankruptcy is thought to be the immediate cause of this event.
"Have you seen Macpherson's Homer? It is hard to tell whether the attempt or the execution be worse. I hear he is employed by the booksellers to continue my History. But, in my opinion, of all men of parts, he has the most anti-historical head in the universe.
"Have you seen Sir John Dalrymple? It is strange what a rage is against him, on account of the most commendable action in his life. His collection[467:2] is curious; but introduces no new light into the civil, whatever it may into the biographical and anecdotical history of the times.
"Have you seen 'Alonzo?' Very slovenly versification, some pathetic, but too much resembling 'Douglas.'"[467:3]
We have found Gilbert Stuart deferentially courting Hume's notice of his earlier literary efforts. A few years of popularity as an author, and the command of a periodical work, had in the meantime changed the man's character, by developing all its arrogance, jealousy, conceit, and vindictiveness. He was one of those who indulge in the comfortable consciousness, that any comparison between their own genius and that of any other given person is supremely ludicrous; and as some one said of La Harpe, it might have proved a good speculation to buy him at what he was worth, and sell him at his own estimate of his value. Sick of the praises he heard bestowed on Robertson and the other eminent historians of his age, he thought it his duty to show the world how the lamp of such industrious drudges would grow pale before the lustre of true genius; and thus he favoured the public with some historical efforts, in which the curious reader of the present day, who takes them from forgotten shelves, is somewhat surprised to find how effectually well-turned periods, and a certain audacity of opinion, keep out of view the meagreness of the author's inquiries.
In 1773, Stuart began to edit the Edinburgh Magazine and Review . Periodical literature was the proper sphere for exhibiting his powers; which consisted in the ready acquisition of a superficial view of any subject, and a rapid, yet elegant style; occasionally magniloquent, and at other times descriptive or sarcastic. No other periodical work of that day equalled the Edinburgh Magazine and Review , in genius and originality. But the editor made it the vehicle of his tyrannical and vindictive spirit; and the purse and person of the proprietor—it might almost be said the peace of society, were endangered by so formidable a weapon remaining in such hands.[468:1]
At this time, the Rev. Robert Henry was publishing his valuable History of Britain, volume by volume. Stuart had vowed that he would crush this work; and the critical columns he concentrated against it, do great credit to his ability as a tactician. Hume was promised the privilege of reviewing the book in the Magazine, and probably Stuart thought that to arm him against an interloper in his own province was excellent policy; but when the article was written, and put in proof, it was found not adapted to the editor's purpose. We find him thus writing to a confederate:
David Hume wants to review Henry; but that task is so precious, that I will undertake it myself. Moses, were he to ask it as a favour, should not have it: yea, not even the man after God's own heart. I wish I could transport myself to London, to review him for the Monthly : a fire there and in the Critical , would perfectly annihilate him. Could you do nothing in the latter? To the former I suppose David Hume has transcribed the criticism he intended for us. It is precious and would divert you. I keep a proof of it in my cabinet for the amusement of friends. This great philosopher begins to dote.[470:1]
A review of Henry's work did appear in The Monthly Review , but from a very different pen. The proof, however, which gave Stuart so much amusement, has fortunately been preserved. After giving a favourable analysis of Henry's second volume, it concludes with the following sentences, in many respects remarkable.
The reader will scarcely find in our language, except in the works of the celebrated Dr. Robertson, any performance that unites together so perfectly the great points of entertainment and instruction. It is happy for the inhabitants of this metropolis, which has naturally a great influence on the country, that the same persons who can make such a figure in profane learning, are intrusted with the guidance of the people in their spiritual concerns, which are of such superior, and indeed of unspeakable importance. These illustrious examples, if any thing, must make the infidel abashed of his vain cavils, and put a stop to that torrent of vice, profaneness, and immorality, by which the age is so unhappily distinguished.
This city can justly boast of other signal characters of the same kind, whom learning and piety, taste and devotion, philosophy and faith, joined to the severest morals and most irreproachable conduct, concur to embellish. One in particular, with the same hand by which he turns over the sublime pages of Homer and Virgil, Demosthenes and Cicero, is not ashamed to open with reverence the sacred volumes; and with the same voice by which, from the pulpit, he strikes vice with consternation, he deigns to dictate to his pupils the most useful lessons of rhetoric, poetry, and polite literature.[470:2]
Hume was an early friend of Benjamin Franklin, whom he was instrumental in introducing to his Parisian friends.[471:1] The celebrated publication of the papers revealing the policy of the ascendency party, and the scene at the council board, of which Franklin so deeply cherished the memory, are thus alluded to in a letter to Smith, of 13th February, 1774:—
"Pray, what strange accounts are these we hear of Franklin's conduct? I am very slow in believing that he has been guilty in the extreme degree that is pretended; though I always knew him to be a very factious man, and faction, next to fanaticism, is of all passions the most destructive of morality. How is it supposed he got possession of these letters? I hear that Wedderburn's treatment of him before the council was most cruel, without being in the least blameable. What a pity!"[471:2]
The following, among the very few letters which Hume appears to have written at this period of his life, is addressed to John Home.
"St. Andrew's Square, 4th June, 1774.
"Dear John,—The enclosed came to hand to-day, and, as I take it to be directed to you, I have sent it you. If on opening it you find it otherwise, you may return it to me, that I may find the true owner.
"You have seen, no doubt, the specimen of a Scotch review.[472:1] My first conjecture was that Carlyle was the author; but Dr. Blair has convinced me that it is much more probably the production of your spiritual guide, Tom Hepburn;[472:2] but, whoever be the father, the child has a great deal of salt, and spirit, and humour. I wish he would continue, though at the hazard of my getting a rap over the knuckles from time to time; for I see in this hero the spirit of a Drawcansir, who spares neither friend nor foe. I think I can reckon about twenty people, not including the king, whom he has attacked in this short performance. I hope all his spleen is not exhausted. I should desire my compliments to him, were I not afraid that he would interpret the civility as paying black mail to him. I am, dear John, yours sincerely."[472:3]
The following appears to be the earliest letter in which Hume expresses himself conscious of some unpleasant feelings, systematic of a decay of the physical functions.
Hume to Colonel Edmondstoune.
"Edinburgh, 23d March, 1775.
"Caro Giuseppe,—No request can be more obliging than yours; and no party could have been proposed to any place, or with any company, more agreeable to me. But you remember what a plague I was to every body and to myself on my last journey; and you may recollect that I made a vow, in the bitterness of my distress, never more to leave my own house, nor lie out of my own bed. This vow I have religiously kept, except two or three days last autumn, when I went to my brother's; and though I could scarcely there esteem myself from home, I resolved never more to pay them a visit. You have not a bed cool enough for me, which proceeds not from any distemper or disorder, but from a peculiarity of constitution, that has been gradually increasing on me these last twelve years. I am in very good health: but let me tell you, that you express yourself strangely when you say I have been complaining. How could you imagine that I could ever complain, even though fractus illabatur orbis? I beseech you, know better the people to whom you speak, and the force of the terms you make use of. Miss Keiths desired me to tell you, that some time ago they had a letter from Sir Basil, by which they learn that your request with regard to Maillet's friend, is complied with.
"My compliments to Mrs. Edmondstoune; embrace Jean Jacques in my name. Dear Guidelianus, I am ever yours."[473:1]
Colonel Edmondstoune's answer to these excuses is not a little curious.
Dear obstinate David,
Will nothing move you, you obdurate philosopher? Your reasons are not worth a straw; and I'll prosecute you for scandalizing my house. The room next to your last is as cool as any room ought to be. It looks to the north, and you was put into a south room, merely because it was thought that the sun's vivifying ray would be of use to a man that had been worn out and so much epuisé in France. Besides, you scrub, have I not seen you basking for hours together in the sun, contemplating Shellie, and burning with envy at his prowess? and I heard nothing about your being heated till we came to Killin, and that was Crichen's doing, to season you for still a hotter place.[474:1]
Hume to his Nephew.[474:2]
"St. Andrew's Square, 30th August, 1775.
"Dear Davy,—Your letter gave me satisfaction, and I approve very much of your course of study. But I think you are unreasonably diffident of yourself with regard to the copia verborum: you are not wanting in that particular [consider]ing you as a beginner; and the course you take will tend very much to [produce] greater facility as well as correctness of expression. Stylus est optimus [magis]ter eloquentiæ. These, if not the words, are the sense of Quinctilian, for I cite from memory. You know that the Roman stylus was the same as the pen.
"I had a letter to-day from Mr. Millar,[474:3] who tells me that he expects to see you on the first Monday of November.
"I do not go to Inverara as soon as I proposed: it will be next week before I set out. I think I am the better for jaunting; though in the main I should like better to stay at home.
"My compliments to your mother; I am glad she has heard from Josey; but I wonder what has detained him so long at Paris.
"I fancy you and Jock are very happy at present in your field sports; and your father will not be displeased to see the favourable progress of the harvest. I am, dear Davy, your affectionate uncle."[475:1]
Hume to John Home.
St. Andrew's Square, Sept. 20th, 1775.
Dear John,—Of all the vices of language, the least excusable is the want of perspicuity; for, as words were instituted by men, merely for conveying their ideas to each other, the employing of words without meaning is a palpable abuse, which departs from the very original purpose and intention of language. It is also to be observed, that any ambiguity in expression is next to the having no meaning at all; and is indeed a species of it; for while the hearer or reader is perplexed between different meanings, he can assign no determinate idea to the speaker or writer; and may, on that account, say with Ovid, "Inopem me copia fecit." For this reason, all eminent rhetoricians and grammarians, both ancient and modern, have insisted on perspicuity of language as an essential quality; without which, all ornaments of diction are vain and fruitless. Quinctilian carries the matter so far, as to condemn this expression, vidi hominem librum legentem; because, says he, legentem may construe as well with librum as hominem; though one would think that the sense were here sufficient to prevent all ambiguity. In conformity to this way of thinking, Vaugelas, the first great grammarian of France, will not permit that any one have recourse to the sense, in order to explain the meaning of the words; because, says he, it is the business of the words to explain the meaning of the sense—not of the sense to give a determinate meaning to the words; and this practice is reversing the order of nature; like the custom of the Romans (he might have added the Greeks,) in their Saturnalia, who made the slaves the masters; for you may learn from Lucian that the Greeks practised the same frolic during the festival of Saturn, whom they called Χρονος.
Now, to apply, and to come to the use of this principle: I must observe to you, that your last letter, besides a continued want of distinctness in the form of the literal characters, has plainly transgressed the essential rule above-mentioned of grammar and rhetoric. You say that Coutts has complained to you of not hearing from me; had you said either James or Thomas, I could have understood your meaning. About two months ago, I heard that James complained of me in this respect; and I wrote to him, though then abroad, making an apology for my being one of the subscribers of a paper which gave him some offence. I was afraid he had not received mine. The letter of Thomas, I conceived to be only a circular letter, informing me of a change in the firm of the house: and having answered it a few days ago, by giving him some directions about disposing of my money, which proved that I intended to remain a customer to the shop; it happens, therefore, luckily, that I had obviated all objections to my conduct on both sides.
In turning over my papers, I find a manuscript journal of the last rebellion, which is at your service. I hope Mrs. Home is better, and will be able to execute her journey. Are you to be in town soon? Yours without ambiguity, circumlocution, or mental reservation.[476:1]
Hume, though we have found him censuring the conduct of Franklin, was opposed to any attempt to coerce America. "I always thought," says Sir John Pringle, when writing to him, "you were in the wrong, when you supposed these colonies wanted only a pretext to shake off their subjection."[477:1] This subjection he seems to have thought they were entitled to throw off; for he was far more tolerant of the sway of individuals over numbers, which he looked upon as the means of preserving order and civilization, than of the predominance of one territory over another, which he looked upon as subjugation. Unfortunately, few of his opinions on this subject can be better ascertained than by the reflex light of the letters addressed to him, in answer to his remarks. With Strahan, the eminent printer, he carried on an extensive correspondence on political matters, of which the letters on his own side have unfortunately been lost.[477:2] The sentiments which Hume had expressed on the American war, are thus described, by contrast, in the words of that member of Parliament, to whom Franklin addressed his celebrated letter of defiance.