While I remained in London this year, Johnson and I dined together at several places.  I recollect a placid day at Dr. Butter’s, who had now removed from Derby to Lower Grosvenor-street, London; but of his conversation on that and other occasions during this period, I neglected to keep any regular record, and shall therefore insert here some miscellaneous articles which I find in my Johnsonian notes.

His disorderly habits, when ’making provision for the day that was passing over him,’ appear from the following anecdote, communicated to me by Mr. John Nichols:—­’In the year 1763, a young bookseller, who was an apprentice to Mr. Whiston, waited on him with a subscription to his Shakspeare:  and observing that the Doctor made no entry in any book of the subscriber’s name, ventured diffidently to ask, whether he would please to have the gentleman’s address, that it might be properly inserted in the printed list of subscribers.  “I shall print no list of subscribers;” said Johnson, with great abruptness:  but almost immediately recollecting himself, added, very complacently, “Sir, I have two very cogent reasons for not printing any list of subscribers;—­one, that I have lost all the names,—­the other, that I have spent all the money.”

Johnson could not brook appearing to be worsted in argument, even when he had taken the wrong side, to shew the force and dexterity of his talents.  When, therefore, he perceived that his opponent gained ground, he had recourse to some sudden mode of robust sophistry.  Once when I was pressing upon him with visible advantage, he stopped me thus:—­’My dear Boswell, let’s have no more of this; you’ll make nothing of it.  I’d rather have you whistle a Scotch tune.’

Care, however, must be taken to distinguish between Johnson when he ‘talked for victory,’ and Johnson when he had no desire but to inform and illustrate.  ’One of Johnson s principal talents (says an eminent friend of his) was shewn in maintaining the wrong side of an argument, and in a splendid perversion of the truth.  If you could contrive to have his fair opinion on a subject, and without any bias from personal prejudice, or from a wish to be victorious in argument, it was wisdom itself, not only convincing, but overpowering.’

He had, however, all his life habituated himself to consider conversation as a trial of intellectual vigour and skill; and to this, I think, we may venture to ascribe that unexampled richness and brilliancy which appeared in his own.  As a proof at once of his eagerness for colloquial distinction, and his high notion of this eminent friend, he once addressed him thus:-- ’-----, we now have been several hours together; and you have said but one thing for which I envied you.’

Goldsmith could sometimes take adventurous liberties with him, and escape unpunished.  Beauclerk told me that when Goldsmith talked of a project for having a third Theatre in London, solely for the exhibition of new plays, in order to deliver authours from the supposed tyranny of managers, Johnson treated it slightingly; upon which Goldsmith said, ’Ay, ay, this may be nothing to you, who can now shelter yourself behind the corner of a pension;’ and that Johnson bore this with good-humour.