Dr. Nowell is celebrated for having preached a sermon before the House of Commons, on the 3Oth of January, 1773, full of high Tory sentiments, for which he was thanked as usual, and printed it at their request; but, in the midst of that turbulence and faction which disgraced a part of the present reign, the thanks were afterwards ordered to be expunged[911].  This strange conduct sufficiently exposes itself; and Dr. Nowell will ever have the honour which is due to a lofty friend of our monarchical constitution.  Dr. Johnson said to me, ’Sir, the Court will be very much to blame, if he is not promoted.’  I told this to Dr. Nowell, and asserting my humbler, though not less zealous exertions in the same cause, I suggested that whatever return we might receive, we should still have the consolation of being like Butler’s steady and generous Royalist,

     ’True as the dial to the sun,
      Although it be not shone upon[912].’

We were well entertained and very happy at Dr. Nowell’s, where was a very agreeable company, and we drank ‘Church and King’ after dinner, with true Tory cordiality.

We talked of a certain clergyman[913] of extraordinary character, who by exerting his talents in writing on temporary topicks, and displaying uncommon intrepidity, had raised himself to affluence.  I maintained that we ought not to be indignant at his success; for merit of every sort was entitled to reward.  JOHNSON.  ’Sir, I will not allow this man to have merit.  No, Sir; what he has is rather the contrary; I will, indeed, allow him courage, and on this account we so far give him credit.  We have more respect for a man who robs boldly on the highway, than for a fellow who jumps out of a ditch, and knocks you down behind your back.  Courage is a quality so necessary for maintaining virtue, that it is always respected, even when it is associated with vice[914].

I censured the coarse invectives which were become fashionable in the House of Commons[915], and said that if members of parliament must attack each other personally in the heat of debate, it should be done more genteely.  JOHNSON.  ’No, Sir; that would be much worse.  Abuse is not so dangerous when there is no vehicle of wit or delicacy, no subtle conveyance.  The difference between coarse and refined abuse is as the difference between being bruised by a club, and wounded by a poisoned arrow.’  I have since observed his position elegantly expressed by Dr. Young:—­

     ’As the soft plume gives swiftness to the dart,
      Good breeding sends the satire to the heart[916].’