Title:  Historic Doubts Relative To Napoleon Buonaparte

Author:  Richard Whately

Release Date:  March 30, 2006 [EBook #18087]

Language:  English

Character set encoding:  ASCII

*** Start of this project gutenberg EBOOK historic doubts ***

Produced by Jeannie Howse, Thierry Alberto and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team of Distributed Proofreaders Europe at http://dp.rastko.net

HISTORIC

DOUBTS

RELATIVE TO

Napoleon buonaparte.

  Is not the same reason available in theology and in politics?... 
  Will you follow truth but to a certain point?—­BURKE’S
  Vindication of Natural Society.

The first author who stated fairly the connexion between the evidence of testimony and the evidence of experience, was Hume, in his essay on miracles; a work abounding in maxims of great use in the conduct of life.—­Edinburgh Review, Sept. 1814, p. 328.

NEW EDITION.

London: 
LONGMANS, green, and co. 
MDCCCLXV.

London: 
SAVILL and Edwards, Printers, CHANDOS Street,
Covent Garden.

PREFACE.

Several of the readers of this little work (first published in 1819) have derived much amusement from the mistakes of others respecting its nature and object.  It has been by some represented as a serious attempt to inculcate universal scepticism; while others have considered it as a jeu d’esprit, &c.[1] The author does not, however, design to entertain his readers with accounts of the mistakes which, have arisen respecting it; because many of them, he is convinced, would be received with incredulity; and he could not, without an indelicate exposure of individuals, verify his anecdotes.

But some sensible readers have complained of the difficulty of determining what they are to believe.  Of the existence of Buonaparte, indeed, they remained fully convinced; nor, if it were left doubtful, would any important results ensue; but if they can give no satisfactory reason for their conviction, how can they know, it is asked, that they may not be mistaken as to other points of greater consequence, on which they are no less fully convinced, but on which all men are not agreed?  The author has accordingly been solicited to endeavour to frame some canons which may furnish a standard for determining what evidence is to be received.

This he conceives to be impracticable, except to that extent to which it is accomplished by a sound system of Logic; including under that title, a portion—­that which relates to the “Laws of Evidence”—­of what is sometimes treated under the head of “Rhetoric.”  But the full and complete accomplishment of such an object would confer on Man the unattainable attribute of infallibility.