Edinburgh Activities

During his stay in Glasgow, Smith maintained intimate relations with his old friends in Edinburgh.

• He often visited them by coach even if the journey took 13 hours before the road was improved. He spent most of his many successive vacations among them.
• He actively promoted some literary, scientific, and social improvement projects then widespread in Scotland.
• His patron was Henry Home.

In 1752, Mr. Home was raised to the bench as Lord Kames. He did works of criticism and speculation which soon gave him European fame. David Hume had settled for a time as a librarian to the Faculty of Advocates after his own defeat at Glasgow. He was writing his History of England in the Canongate.

Adam Ferguson threw up his clerical calling in 1754. He wrote Smith from Groningen to stop giving him clerical titles for he was a downright layman. He came to Edinburgh and became=

• Hume’s successor in the Advocates’ Library in 1757 and
• professor in 1759.

Robertson did not live in Edinburgh until 1758. But he used to come to town every week with his neighbour John Home before Home left Scotland in 1757.

Gilbert Elliot entered Parliament in 1754. But he was always back during the recess with news of the capital.

Sir David Dalrymples of Hailes and Sir John Dalrymples of Cousland were toiling at their respective histories. Both were Smith’s personal friends.

Wilkie was the eccentric author of the Epigoniad. He was living a few miles out as minister of the parish of Ratho. Smith was particularly fond of him.

Smith was at least more constructive than Hume.

Wilkie used to plough his own land with his own hands in the ordinary ploughman’s dress.

A Scotch friend used him to play a joke on Dr. Roebuck, the chemist.

As they were passing Ratho, his friend said that:

• the parish schools of Scotland had given almost every peasant a knowledge of the classics

“Here is a man working in the field who is an example of that training. Let us speak with him.”

Roebuck observed Wilkie’s agriculture.

Wilkie said “Yes, sir. But in Sicily they had a different method,”

He quoted Theocritus, to Roebuck’s great astonishment.

Among Smith’s chief Edinburgh friends at this period was William Johnstone.

He was:

• one of Smith’s former pupils.
• son of Sir James Johnstone of Westerhall and nephew of Lord Elibank.

He was then practising as an advocate at the Scotch bar.

But ultimately he went into Parliament and married [Pg 103] Miss Pulteney.

She was: the greatest heiress of the time the niece of the Earl of Bath long filled an honoured and influential place in public life as Sir William Pulteney. Even Wraxall admits that he= was a man of “masculine sense” was “independent as well as upright” character devoted special attention to all economic and financial questions. Pulteney gave a speech on the suspension of cash payments by the Bank of England in 1797. In this speech, he= proposed the establishment of another bank. quoted from an unknown source a memorable saying which came out as his own, that Smith “would persuade the present generation and govern the next.” These words were “well said.” Pulteney and Smith had a warm and affectionate friendship for more than 40 years. During Smith’s short stay in London, he gave Pulteney a letter introducing him to James Oswald. James Oswald was then newly appointed to the Board of Trade. Below is the only preserved letter of all Smith’s correspondence with Oswald. It reveals their personal intimacy. Its ceremonious opening and ending indicate something of the reverence and gratitude of the client to the patron= Sir

This will be delivered to you by Mr. William Johnstone. He is= the son of Sir James Johnstone of Westerhall. a young gentleman whom I have known intimately these four years. I have frequent proofs of his discretion, good temper, sincerity, and honour during all that time. If you come to know him better, you will find in him some qualities not shown by his real and unaffected modesty= a refinement and depth of observation, an accuracy of judgment, These are joined to a natural delicacy of sentiment. This is as improved as the study and narrow sphere of acquaintance this country allows. When I first knew him, he had a good deal of [Pg 104]vivacity and humour. But he has studied them away. He is an advocate. I know the folly of predicting the future fortune of so young a man. But I could almost foretell that he will be eminent in that profession. I think he has every quality that should forward his progress. He has modesty and sincerity. But he needs experience and a better sense of things. I do not, I assure you, exaggerate knowingly, but could pawn my honour upon the truth of every article. You will find him as a gentleman of solid, substantial (not flashy) abilities and worth. Private business obliges him to spend some time in London. He would like the privilege of receiving your advice sometimes on how he may employ his time there in a way that will tend most to his real and lasting improvement.

I know how much I presume upon your indulgence in giving you this trouble. But I know you will excuse me for this, as it is to serve a close friend. At least if you do not, you will not judge others as you would desire to be judged yourself. For I am very sure a like motive would carry you to be guilty of a greater.

If the College allowed me three days’ vacation, I would have waited for you when you were last in Scotland. I feel really uneasy that we should be in the same country without seeing each other. Believe me, I am the happiest to hear of your recent success,[76] or whatever else tends to your honour and prosperity. Sir, your ever obliged and very humble servant, Adam Smith.

Glasgow, January 19, 1752, N.S.[77]

Pulteney abandoned the law in which Smith prophesied eminence for him. But he was happily not cured entirely of his sincerity by his subsequent experience. For it was greatly from that quality that he derived the weight he enjoyed in the House of Commons. Sir John Sinclair was his contemporary in Parliament. He says that Pulteney never voted for something that he did not believe to be right in his heart. This was the source of his influence [Pg 105]. He had no taste for display. He lived when he had £20,000 a year about as simply as he did when he had only £200. On that account, he is sometimes accused of avarice, though he was constantly doing acts of signal liberality.

Smith’s chief friend in Edinburgh was David Hume. Their first relations were begun apparently in 1739. But they could not have met much personally before Smith’s settlement in Glasgow. For when Smith came to Edinburgh in 1748, Hume was abroad as secretary to General St. Clair in the Embassy at Vienna and Turin. He left this post in 1749. But he remained for the next two years at Ninewells. It was his father’s place in Berwickshire. He only settled in Edinburgh again just as Smith was moving to Glasgow. He would visit town occasionally. However, and before Smith was a year in Glasgow he had already entered on that correspondence with the elder philosopher which, beginning with the respectful “dear sir,” grew shortly into the warmer style of “my dearest friend” as their memorable and Roman friendship ripened. Hume never visited Smith in Glasgow, though he had often promised to do so. Smith in his runs to Edinburgh spent always more and more of his time with Hume. He latterly made Hume’s house his regular Edinburgh home.

In 1752, Hume had already taken Smith as one of his literary counsellors. Hume consulted him about the new edition of his= Essays, Moral and Political, and historical projects. On September 24, 1752 Hume writes—

On December 17, 1754, Hume tells Smith of his quarrel with the Faculty of Advocates. His resolution to stay as librarian after all, for the sake of the use of the books, which he cannot do without, but to give Blacklock, the blind poet, a bond of annuity for the salary. Three weeks later he writes again=

In 1752, Smith was chosen a member of the Philosophical Society of Edinburgh. It was revived in that year after an interregnum caused by the rebellion. with David Hume for Secretary. It was eventually merged in the Royal Society in 1784. But we do not know if he took part in its proceedings. The famous old club in Ranken’s Coffee-house was part of the Rankenian Society. It survived until 1774. Smith was never even a member of it. Colin Maclaurin and other eminent men were members. Some of its members carried on a philosophical controversy with Berkeley. According to Ramsay of Ochtertyre, they were pressed by Bishop Berkeley to accompany him in his Utopian mission to Bermuda. Berkeley founded a third society with a more celebrated name, the Select Society, in 1754 which far eclipsed either of these for a time.