him far less criminal
than he was imagined, even by some who favoured him; and Page himself
afterwards confessed, that he had treated him with uncommon rigour. When
all these particulars are rated together, perhaps the memory of Savage
may not be much sullied by his trial.

Some time after he had obtained his liberty, he met in the street the
woman that had sworn with so much malignity against him. She informed
him, that she was in distress, and, with a degree of confidence not
easily attainable, desired him to relieve her. He, instead of insulting
her misery, and taking pleasure in the calamities of one who had brought
his life into danger, reproved her gently for her perjury; and changing
the only guinea that he had, divided it equally between her and himself.

This is an action which, in some ages, would have made a saint, and,
perhaps, in others a hero, and which, without any hyperbolical
encomiums, must be allowed to be an instance of uncommon generosity, an
act of complicated virtue; by which he at once relieved the poor,
corrected the vitious, and forgave an enemy; by which he at once
remitted the strongest provocations, and exercised the most ardent
charity.

Compassion was, indeed, the distinguishing quality of Savage; he never
appeared inclined to take advantage of weakness, to attack the
defenceless, or to press upon the falling: whoever was distressed, was
certain at least of his good wishes; and when he could give no
assistance to extricate them from misfortunes, he endeavoured to sooth
them by sympathy and tenderness.

But when his heart was not softened by the sight of misery, he was
sometimes obstinate in his resentment, and did not quickly lose the
remembrance of an injury. He always continued to speak with anger of the
insolence and partiality of Page, and a short time before his death
revenged it by a satire[73].

It is natural to inquire in what terms Mr. Savage spoke of this fatal
action, when the danger was over, and he was under no necessity of using
any art to set his conduct in the fairest light. He was not willing to
dwell upon it; and, if he transiently mentioned it, appeared neither to
consider himself as a murderer, nor as a man wholly free from the guilt
of blood[74]. How much and how long he regretted it, appeared in a poem
which he published many years afterwards. On occasion of a copy of
verses, in which the failings of good men were recounted, and in which
the author had endeavou