... ... ... ... ... ... ...

“And it came to pass when Napoleon had not yet been a full year at Elba, that he said unto his men of war that clave unto him, Go to, let us go back to France, and fight against King Lewis, and thrust him out from being king.  So he departed, he and six hundred men with him that drew the sword, and warred against King Lewis.  Then all the men of Belial gathered themselves together, and said, God save Napoleon.  And when Lewis saw that, he fled, and gat him into the land of Batavia:  and Napoleon ruled over France,” &c. &c. &c.[17]

Now if a free-thinking philosopher—­one of those who advocate the cause of unbiassed reason, and despise pretended revelations—­were to meet with such a tissue of absurdities as this in an old Jewish record, would he not reject it at once as too palpable an imposture[18] to deserve even any inquiry into its evidence?  Is that credible then of the civilized Europeans now, which could not, if reported of the semi-barbarous Jews 3000 years ago, be established by any testimony?  Will it be answered, that “there is nothing supernatural in all this?” Why is it, then, that you object to what is supernatural—­that you reject every account of miracles—­if not because they are improbable?  Surely then a story equally or still more improbable, is not to be implicitly received, merely on the ground that it is not miraculous:  though in fact, as I have already (in note, p. 39,) shown from Hume’s authority, it is really miraculous.  The opposition to Experience has been proved to be as complete in this case, as in what are commonly called miracles; and the reasons assigned for that contrariety by the defenders of them, cannot be pleaded in the present instance.  If then philosophers, who reject every wonderful story that is maintained by priests, are yet found ready to believe everything else, however improbable, they will surely lay themselves open to the accusation brought against them of being unduly prejudiced against whatever relates to religion.

* * * * *

There is one more circumstance which I cannot forbear mentioning, because it so much adds to the air of fiction which pervades every part of this marvellous tale; and that is, the nationality of it.[19]

Buonaparte prevailed over all the hostile States in turn, except England; in the zenith of his power, his fleets were swept from the sea, by England; his troops always defeat an equal, and frequently even a superior number of those of any other nation, except the English; and with them it is just the reverse; twice, and twice only, he is personally engaged against an English commander, and both times he is totally defeated; at Acre, and at Waterloo; and to crown all, England finally crushes this tremendous power, which had so long kept the continent in subjection or in alarm; and to the English