In the preface to his third edition, issued in 1786, Boswell vigorously denounces his critics on both sides the Tweed. His Scottish compeers, he alleges, have displayed “a petty national spirit unworthy of his countrymen.” The English critics are styled “shallow and envious cavillers.” In opposition to their assertions that he has _lessened_ Dr. Johnson’s character, he maintains that he was assured by persons of taste that he had _greatly heightened_ it. He appeals to the judgment of posterity. Elated by his popularity as a tourist, he determined to reassert his political pretensions. An opportunity for displaying patriotic ardour seasonably occurred. A Bill was introduced into the House of Commons by Mr. Islay Campbell, the Lord Advocate, and Mr. Dundas, Dean of Faculty, for reconstructing the Court of Session. By this Bill it was proposed to reduce the judges from fifteen to ten, and with the funds secured by the reduction to augment the salaries of those who remained. In opposition to this measure Boswell issued a pamphlet, sensationally entitled “A Letter to the People of Scotland on the alarming attempt to infringe the Articles of Union, and introduce a most pernicious innovation, by diminishing the number of the Lords of Session.” This composition, extending to 107 octavo pages, was published by Dilly, and sold for half a crown. There were few sales, but copies of the pamphlet were presented to the author’s friends.[82] In his characteristic manner Boswell sets forth that the number of judges was fixed unalterably by the Act of Union, “an Act which, entering into the constitution of Parliament itself, Parliament dare not alter.” The number of fifteen was declared by George Buchanan to be small enough to avoid the character of a tyrannical junto.—“Is a court of ten,” he proceeds, “the same with a court of fifteen? Is a two-legged animal the same with a four-legged animal? I know nobody who will gravely defend that proposition, except one grotesque philosopher, whom ludicrous fable represents as going about avowing his hunger, and wagging his tail, fain to become cannibal and eat his deceased brethren.”[83] Lords of Session, he argues, do the work of English juries in civil cases, and exercise the functions of English Grand Juries. Mr. Dundas he denounces as “Harry the Ninth,” and Mr. Islay Campbell is censured, though less abusively. Boswell next introduces himself, and proceeds to expatiate on his personal merits. He had in his previous letter “kindled the fire of loyalty and saved the constitution.” He is “a true patriot,” and begs that he may not be misunderstood by associating with Mr. Wilkes, “he being so pleasant,” and an “old classical companion.” He declares himself a scholar and a gentleman—“a scholar,” as he is familiar with Latin authors; and a gentleman, “since his friends were persons of title and influence.” His wife, whom “he loved as dearly as when she gave him her hand,” is “a