There were no doubt some special reasons, connected with his attitude towards the law itself, which may account in a large degree for Boswell's failure at the Bar. We have mentioned already the aversion which Boswell had for the society of lawyers. This in itself was likely to be a hindrance in his legal career; but it is only the result of the general unfittedness of Boswell for the Bar. He was not unwilling, when his plan of being a soldier had been abandoned, to enter upon a legal career; it would offer the kind of opportunities for distinction which he wanted. Possibly he was attracted too by the formalism of the Courts; one may suppose that the mere wearing of a wig and gown would give him pleasure. But the mind of Boswell was entirely unlegal. He had no capacity for estimating the value of evidence, and was readily convinced by a plausible story. He applied to his work rather the common sense of the layman (being actually advised very often by Johnson, who knew nothing of Scotch law) than the exact reasoning required by his profession. And though Boswell could apply himself at times with continued effort to any work which he particularly wanted to do, the dislike which he had for his legal studies made him tire of them so soon that he never knew very much about any body of laws. 'Mr. Boswell,' says Malone, 'professed the Scotch and the English Law; but had never taken very great pains on the subject. His father, Lord Auchinleck, told him one day that it would cost him more trouble to hide his ignorance in these professions than to show his knowledge. This Boswell owned he had found to be true.'[4] Boswell himself wrote to Temple on the subject of his chances of success at the English Bar: 'To confess fairly to you, my friend, I am afraid that, were I to be tried, I should be found so deficient in the forms, the quirks and quiddities which early habit acquires, that I should expose myself.'
Boswell, moreover, had never the reputation which is suitable for a legal man. The sober citizen does not choose either the adventurer or the littérateur to plead his cause before a jury. His connections with actors, who were disapproved as a class by the respectable community, told against Boswell in legal circles. And worst of all was the tour in the Hebrides with the avowed enemy of Scotland.
Boswell, besides, acquired a reputation for eccentricity which must have been fatal to the chances of a barrister.
One habit, that of attending executions, deserves a closer examination; by this behaviour Boswell made himself conspicuous in a wholly unprofessional attitude, which must have been extremely damaging to his position as a lawyer. 'I must confess,' he writes, 'that I myself am never absent from a public execution.... When I first attended them I was shocked to the greatest degree. I was in a manner convulsed with pity and terror, and for several days, EXECUTIONS but especially nights after, I was in a very dismal situation.' The object in the first place seems then to have been the mere indulgence of morbid sentiment; but later he continued the habit more out of curiosity and as an inherent part of his whole study of Man.
I can now see one with great composure. I can account for this curiosity in a philosophical manner, when I consider that death is the most awful object before every man who ever directs his thoughts seriously towards futurity. Therefore it is that I feel an irresistible impulse to be present at every execution, as I there behold the various effects of the near approach of death.
In accordance with this practice Boswell accompanied a celebrated criminal, Hackman, in the prison coach to the gibbet; and he made the acquaintance of the murderess Mrs. Rudd. The latter apparently was an interesting woman. Johnson entirely approved Boswell's conduct, and said he would have done the same himself if he had not been afraid that his presence would be reported in the newspapers. It is interesting to note that Boswell had scruples, and wrote to Temple: 'Perhaps the adventure with Mrs. Rudd is very foolish notwithstanding the approbation of Dr. Johnson.'
On one occasion Boswell persuaded Sir Joshua Reynolds to go with him, and evidently won him over to his view about the question of propriety: 'I am obliged to you,' wrote Sir Joshua, 'for carrying me yesterday to see the execution at Newgate of the five malefactors. I am convinced it is a vulgar error in the opinion that it is so terrible a spectacle, or that it in any way implies a hardness of heart or cruelty of disposition.'
Sir Walter Scott gives a kinder motive on Boswell's part than mere curiosity:
He used to visit the prisoners on the day before execution, with the singular wish to make the condemned wretches laugh by dint of buffoonery, in which he not infrequently succeeded.
The satisfaction which Boswell had from these strange interviews was no doubt in part the commendable satisfaction of being kind and good; and his piety as well as his jesting may have been a comfort to many of these criminals in their last hours. It was also a pleasure to Boswell to read his name in the newspaper on the day following an execution. But probably this conduct did not earn the praises of the Scotch lawyers nor inspire the confidence of the litigating public.