Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 30.djvu/36

 rupture, but did his utmost, in conjunction with the widowed Lady Russell, to procure him a suitable pension. William ultimately granted him a bounty of 1,000l., a pension of 300l. a year for his own life and his son's, and a post of 100l. for his son.

In 1692 he published his view of the true principles of the revolution, in ‘An Argument proving that the Abrogation of King James was according to the Constitution of the English Government.’ Shortly after this seven ruffians broke into his house in Bond Street very early on Sunday morning, 27 Nov. 1692, and made a savage assault on him; only his wife's intercession held back the assailants from executing the threat to ‘pistol him for the book he wrote.’ He continued for another decade to ply an active and sarcastic pen. But his troubles had broken a strong constitution; he died in May 1703.

Calamy speaks of Johnson as ‘that truly glorious person.’ Dryden has vilified him, under the name of ‘Ben-Jochanan,’ in the second part (1682) of ‘Absalom and Achitophel.’ Burnet ignores him, though Swift subsequently accused him of raking up such ‘factious trash’ as that by ‘Julian Johnson’ which would otherwise have been turned to pasteboard. Kettlewell, who as chaplain to the Dowager-countess of Bedford knew him well, respected his frankness and consistency, as well as his ability. The ‘Life of Kettlewell,’ drawn up by Francis Lee [q. v.], contains a favourable appreciation of him as ‘a man of true old Roman principles.’

His most memorable publications are noticed above. A complete collection of his ‘Works,’ with prefixed ‘Memorials,’ was published in 1710, fol.; 2nd edit. 1713, fol. His ‘History and Defence of Magna Charta’ was reprinted, 1772, 8vo, and at Edinburgh, with additions, 1794, 12mo.

 JOHNSON, SAMUEL (1691–1773), dancing-master and dramatist, born in 1691, was a native of Cheshire. In 1722 he gave a ball at Manchester (, Remains, i. 47). In 1724 he was in London with his fiddle (ib. p. 188). He seems to have been chiefly intent upon bringing out the opera ‘Hurlothrumbo,’ which he had repeated to Byrom and other friends in Manchester in the previous year (ib. p. 73 et al.). ‘Hurlothrumbo’ was produced at the ‘little theatre in the Haymarket’ early in April 1729, an epilogue by Byrom being added on the second night, while a prologue was contributed by Amos Meredith, another of the north-country wits in town. The whole circle attended and pledged themselves to applaud it from beginning to end (ib. p. 349). The piece ran for above thirty nights, attracting crowded and fashionable audiences, which included the Duke of Montagu, who was credited with ‘the idea’ of the piece. The most striking figure in the performance was the author himself, who played the part of Lord Flame, ‘sometimes in one key, sometimes in another, sometimes fiddling, sometimes dancing, and sometimes walking on high stilts’ (Biographia Dramatica, ii. 315). ‘Hurlothrumbo’ is a farrago of nonsense, hardly relieved by one or two good burlesque touches and by approaches to wit, probably due to Byrom, who desired both to help his fellow-townsman and to show his aversion for all stage plays (Remains, i. 350). The absurdity and the imperturbable conceit of the author (cf. ib. p. 377) tickled the fancy of the town; the hero was commemorated at Westminster School; the piece was satirised with some bitterness in Fielding's ‘Author's Farce,’ 1729 (act i. sc. 5, cf. act iii. sc. 1); a Hurlothrumbo society was formed, and the words ‘mere Hurlothrumbo’ bade fair to establish themselves as a proverbial phrase (Dedication to Lady Delves;, ii. 570; cf. , Dictionary, 1755). A subscribers' list having been formed, largely among Cheshire people, ‘Hurlothrumbo, or the Supernatural,’ was published with a dedication to Lady Delves, signed Lord Flame; a second edition, with a dedication to Lord Walpole (who had subscribed for thirty copies), signed with the author's name, followed in the same year (1729). This cannot possibly have been ‘the foolish piece said to be written by S. Johnson,’ which the great owner of that name refused to repudiate (, Tour to the Hebrides in G. B. Hill's edition of the Life, 1887, v. 295). He was at the time an undergraduate at Oxford (cf. Notes and Queries, 6th ser. xi. 289–90, 377–8).

In 1730 Johnson, who had prudently declined to produce ‘Hurlothrumbo’ at Manchester (, Remains, i. 377), brought out, at Sir John Vanbrugh's opera-house in the Haymarket, a ‘comedy’ called ‘The Chester Comics,’ apparently with certain alterations by Cibber (, Journal, &c., 1730–1, ed. J. E. Bailey, Manchester, 1882, p. 3). It was never printed. There followed a production called ‘The Mad Lovers,