’I flatter myself that I have discovered an argument which, if just, will, with the wise and learned, be an everlasting check to all kinds of superstitious delusions, and consequently will be useful as long as the world endures.’

He does not expect, however, to convince the multitude.  Till the end of the world, ’accounts of miracles and prodigies, I suppose, will be found in all histories, sacred and profane.’  Without saying here what he means by a miracle, Hume argues that ’experience is our only guide in reasoning.’  He then defines a miracle as ’a violation of the laws of nature.’  By a ‘law of nature’ he means a uniformity, not of all experience, but of each experience as he will deign to admit; while he excludes, without examination, all evidence for experience of the absence of such uniformity.  That kind of experience cannot be considered.  ’There must be a uniform experience against every miraculous event, otherwise the event would not merit that appellation.’  If there be any experience in favour of the event, that experience does not count.  A miracle is counter to universal experience, no event is counter to universal experience, therefore no event is a miracle.  If you produce evidence to what Hume calls a miracle (we shall see examples) he replies that the evidence is not valid, unless its falsehood would be more miraculous than the fact.  Now no error of human evidence can be more miraculous than a ‘miracle.’  Therefore there can be no valid evidence for ‘miracles.’  Fortunately, Hume now gives an example of what he means by ‘miracles.’  He says:—­

’For, first, there is not to be found, in all history, any miracle attested by a sufficient number of men, of such unquestioned good sense, education, and learning, as to secure us against all delusion in themselves; of such undoubted integrity, as to place them beyond all suspicion of any design to deceive others; of such credit and reputation in the eyes of mankind, as to have a great deal to lose in case of their being detected in any falsehood; and at the same time attesting facts performed in such a public manner, and in so celebrated a part of the world, as to render the detection unavoidable; all which circumstances are requisite to give us a full assurance in the testimony of men.’[2]

Hume added a note at the end of his book, in which he contradicted every assertion which he had made in the passage just cited; indeed, be contradicted himself before he had written six pages.

’There surely never was a greater number of miracles ascribed to one person than those which were lately said to have been wrought in France upon the tomb of Abbe Paris, the famous Jansenist, with whose sanctity the people were so long deluded.  The curing of the sick, giving hearing to the deaf, and sight to the blind, were everywhere talked of as the usual effects of that holy sepulchre.  But what is more extraordinary, many of the miracles were immediately