** A^^ .4^^ • o* • M ..^ .^^^ • a ^H^ * *:*> ^0^ .n«fc dc^^ ' ^5 HISTORIC ' DOUBTS EEIA^ITE TO NAPOLEON BUONAPARTE. "Is not the same reason available in theology and in politics 1 Will you follow truth but to a certain point?" Burke^s Vindication of J^atural Society. BY RICHARD WHATELY, D. D. ARCHBISHOP OF DUBLIN. FIRST AMERICAJV'MDITIO^ PHILADELPHIA: JAMES M. CAMPBELL, S. E. CORNER CHESTNUT AND FIFTH STREETS. NEW YORK :— SAXTQJV h. MILES. 1846. • J^ V 1 1 * * hZ sJ^ ^. PREFACE. Several of the readers of this little work have derived much amusement from the mistakes of others respecting its nature and object. It has been bj some represented as a serious attempt to inculcate universal scepticism; v^hile others have considered it as a jeu d' esprit, &c. The Author does not however design to entertain his readers with accounts of the mistakes which have arisen respecting it : . be- cause many of them, he is convinced, would be received with incredulity ; and he could not, without indelicate exposure of individuals, verify his an- ecdotes. But some sensible readers have com- (3) IV PREFACE. plained of the difficulty of determining what they are to believe. Of the ex- istence of Buonaparte, indeed, they re- mained fully convinced ; nor, if it were left doubtful, would any important re- sults 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 so- licited to endeavour to frame some ca- nons which may furnish a standard for determining what evidence is to be re- ceived. This he conceives to be im- practicable, 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 of iinder the head PREFACE. of '' Rhetoric." But the fall and complete accomplishment of snch an object would confer on man the unat- tainable attribute of infallibility. But the difficu^^ complained of he conceives to arise from men's mis- stating the grounds of their orvn con- viction- They are convinced, indeed, and perhaps with very sufficient rea- son ; but they imagine this reason to be a different one from what it is. The _eyidence^_which Jbhey haj^^sseat^ii is applied to their minds in a different manner from that in which they be- lieve it is — and suppose it ought to be — applied. And when challenged to defend and iustify their. QWtt. belief, tEeyTeel at a loss, because they are attempting to maintain a position which is not in fact that in which their force lies. For a developement of the nature, the consequences, and the remedies of this VI PREFACE, mistake, the reader is referred to ''Hinds on Inspiration," pp. 30 — 46. If such, a developement is to be found in any earher works, the Author of the following pages at least has never chanced to meet with any attempt of the kind.* ' It is only necessary to add, that as this work first appeared in the year 1819, many things are spoken of in the present tense to which the past would now be applicable. A Postscript was added to the third edition, which was published soon after the accounts of Buonoparte's death reached us ; and another at the time of the supposed removal of his re- mains. * See Elements of Rhetoric, P. L ch, 2. § 4. HISTORIC DOUBTS RELATIVE TO NAPOLEON BUONAPARTE. LoNGJ- as the public attention has been occupied by the extraordinary Personage from whose ambition we are supposed to have so narrowly escaped, the subject seems to have lost scarcely anything of its interest. We are still occupied in recounting the exploits, discussing the character, inquiring into the present situation, and even con- jecturing as to the future prospects of Napoleon Buonaparte. Nor is this at all to be wondered at, if we consider the very extraordinary nature of those exploits, and of that character ; their greatness and extensive importance, as well as the unexampled strangeness of the events, and also that strong additional stimulant, the mysterious uncertainty that hangs over the character of the man. If it 8 HISTORIC DOUBTS RELATIVE TO be doubtful whether any history (exclusive of such as is confessedly fabulous) ever attributed to its hero such a series of won- derful achievements compressed into so small a space of time, it is certain that to no one were ever assigned so many dissimilar characters. It is true, indeed, that party-prejudices have drawn a favourable and an unfavour- able portrait of almost every eminent man ; but amidst all the diversities of colouring, something of the same general outline is always distinguishable. And even the \Airtues in the one description bear some resemblance to the vices of another : rash- ness, for instance, will be called courage, or courage, rashness ; heroic firmness, and obstinate pride, will correspond in the two opposite descriptions ; and in some leading features both will agree. Neither the friends nor the enemies of Philip of Macedon, or of Julius Csesar, ever questioned their cou- rage, or their military skill. With Buonaparte, however, it has been otherwise. This obscure Corsican adven- turer, a man, according to some, of extraor- NAPOLEON BUONAPARTE. 9 dinary talents and courage, according to others, .of very moderate abilities, a,nd a rank coward, advanced rapidly in the French army, obtained a high command, gained a series of important victories, and, elated by success, embarked in an expedi- tion against Egypt ; which was planned and conducted, according to some, with the most consummate skill, according to others, with the utmost wildness and folly : he was un- successful however ; and leaving the army of Egypt in a very distressed situation, he returned to France, and found the nation, or at least the army, so favourably disposed towards him, that he was enabled, with the utmost ease, to overthrow the existing gov- ernment, and obtain for himself the supreme power ; at first under the modest appella- tion of Consul, but afterwards with the more sounding title of Emperor. While in possession of this power, he overthrew the most powerful coalitions of the other European States against him ; and though driven from the sea by the British fleets, overran nearly the whole continent, triumph- ant ; finishing a war, not unfrequently, in a 10 HISTORIC DOUBTS RELATIVE TO single campaign, he entered the capitals of most of the hostile potentates, deposed and created kings at his pleasure, and appeared the virtual sovereign of the chief part of the continent, from the frontiers of Spain to those of Russia. Even those countries we find him invading with prodigious armies, defeating their forces, penetrating to their capitals, and threatening their total subjuga- tion. But at Moscow his progress is stopped : a winter of unusual severity, co-operating with the efforts of the Russians, totally de- stroys his enormous host ; and the German sovereigns throw off the yoke, and combine to oppose him. He raises another vast army, which is also ruined at Leipsic ; and again another, with which, like a second Antgeus, he for some time maintains himself in France ; but is finally defeated, deposed, and banished to the island of Elba, of which the sovereignty is conferred on him. Thence he returns, in about nine months, at the head of 600 men, to attempt the deposition of King Louis, who had been peaceably recalled ; the French nation declare in his favour, and he is reinstated without a strug- NAPOLEON BUONAPARTE, 11 gle. He raises another great army to oppose the allied powers, which is totally defeated at Waterloo : he is a second time deposed, surrenders to the British, and is placed in confinement at the island of St. Helena. Such is the outline of the eventful history presented to us ; in the detail of which, how- ever, there is almost every conceivable variety of statement ; while the motives and conduct of the chief actor are involved in still greater doubt, and the subject of still more eager controversy. In the midst of these controversies, the preliminary question, concerning the exist- ence of this extraordinary personage, seems never to have occurred to any one as a matter of doubt ; and to show even the smallest hesitation in admitting it, would probably be regarded as an excess of scepti- cism; on the ground that this point has always been taken for granted by the dis- putants on all sides, being indeed implied by the very nature of their disputes. But is it in fact found that undisputed points are always such as have been the most carefully examined as to the evidence 12 HISTORIC DOUBTS RELATIVE TO on which they rest ? that facts or principles which are taken for granted, without con- troversy, as the common basis of opposite opinions, are always themselves established on sufficient grounds ? On the contrary, is not any such fundamental point, from the very circumstance of its being taken for granted at once, and the attention drawn off to some other question, likely to be admitted on insufficient evidence, and the flaws in that evidence overlooked ? Experi- ence will teach us that such instancesoiten occur : witness the well known anecdote of ■" ■"■liiiiiinini II I 1 ml the Royal Society ; to whom King Charles II. proposed as a question, whence it is that a vessel of water receives no addition of weight from a live fish being put into it, though it does if the fish be dead. Various solutions, of great ingenuity, were proposed, discussed, objected to, and defended ; nor was it till they had been long bewildered in the inquiry, that it occurred to them to try the experiment ; by which they at once ascertained, that the phaenomenon which they were striving to account for, — which was the acknowledged basis and NAPOLEON BUONAPARTE. 13 substratum, as it were, of their debates, — had no existence but in the invention of the witty monarch.* Another instance of the same kind is so very remarkable that I cannot forbear men- tioning it. It was objected to the system of Copernicus when first brought forward, that if the earth turned on its axis as he represented, a stone dropped from the sum- mit of a tower would not fall at the foot of it, but at a great distance to the west ; in the samemanner as a stone dropped from the mast-head of a ship in full sail, does not fall at the foot of the mast, but to- wards the stern. To this it was answered, that a stone being a part of the earth obeys * " A report is spread, (says Voltaire in one of his works,) that there is, in some country or other, a giant as big as a mountain ; and men presently fall to hot disputing concerning the precise length of his nose, the breadth of his thumb, and other particulars, and anathe- matize each other for heterodoxy of belief concerning them. In the midst of all, if some bold sceptic ventures to hint a doubt as to the existence of this giant, all are ready to join against him and tear him to pieces." This looks almost like a prophetic allegory relating to the gigantic Napoleon. 2 14 HISTORIC DOUBTS RELATIVE TO the same laws, and moves with it ; whereas, it is no part of the ship ; of which, conse- quently, its motion is independent. This solution was admitted by some, but opposed by others ; and the controversy went on with spirit ; nor was it till one hundred years after the death of Copernicus, that the experiment being tried, it was ascer- tained that the stone thus dropped from the -head of the mast does fall at the foot ofit!^ Let it be observed that I am not now impugning any one particular point ; but merely showing generally, that what is un- questioned is not necessarily unquestion- able ; since men will often, at the very moment v/hen they are actually sifting the evidence of some disputed point, admit hastily, and on the most insufficient grounds, what they have been accustomed to see taken for granted. The celebrated Humet has pointed out xai £7il "ta aifocfxa (mM.ov 'fpiy.ovTfiu. Thucyd, b. i. c. 20- j- " With what greediness are the miraculous accounts of travellers received, their descriptions of sea and land NAPOLEON BUONAPARTE. 15 also the readiness with which men behevej on very slight evidence, any story that pleases their imagination by its admirable and marvellous character. Such hasty cre- dulity, however, as he well remarks, is utterly unworthy of a philosophical mind ; which should rather suspend its judgment the more, in proportion to the strangeness of the account, and yield to none but the most decisive and unimpeachable proofs. Let it then be allowed us, as is surely reasonable, just to inquire, with respect to the extraordinary story I have been speak- ing of, on what evidence we believe it. We shall be told that it is notorious ; i. e. in plain English, it is very much talked about. But as the generality of those who talk about Buonaparte, do not even pretend to speak 'from their own authority, but monsters, their relations of wonderful adventures, strange men, and uncouth manners !" — Hume's Essay on Mira- cles, p. 179, 12mo; p. 185, 8vo. 1767; p. 117, Svo. 1817. N. B. — In order to give every possible facility of re- ference, three editions of Hume's Essays have been generally employed; a 12mo. London, 1756, and two Svo. editions. — -^.^ 16 HISTORIC DOUBTS RELATIVE TO merely to repeat what they have casually heard, we cannot reckon them as in any de- gree witnesses ; but must allow ninety-nine hundredths of what we are told to be mere nearsay, which would not be at all the more worthy of credit even if it were repeated by ten times as many more. As for those who profess to have personally known Napoleon Buonaparte, and to have them- selves ivitnessed his transactions, I write not for them : if any such there be, who are inwardly conscious of the truth of all they relate, I have nothing to say to them, but to beg that they will be tolerant and charitable .towards their neighbours, who have not the same means of ascertaining the truth, and who may well be excused for remaining doubtful about such extraor- dinary events, till most unanswerable proofs shall be adduced. " I would not have be- heved such a thing, if I had not seen it," is a common preface or appendix to a narra- tive of marvels ; and usually calls forth from an intelligent hearer the appropriate answer, " no more will /." Let us, however, endeavour to trace up NAPOLEON BUONAPARTE. 17 some of this hearsay evidence as far towards its source as we are able. Most persons would refer to the newspapers as the autho- rity from which their knowledge on the subject was derived; so that, generally speaking, we may say it is on the testimony of the newspapers that men believe in the existence and exploits of Napoleon Buona- parte. It is rather a remarkable circumstance, that it is common to hear Englishmen speak of the impudent fabrications of foreign newspapers, and express wonder that any one can be found to credit them ; while they conceive that, in this favoured land, the liberty of the press is a sufficient secu- rity for veracity. It is true they often speak contemptuously of such ^' newspaper stories" as last but a short time ; indeed they con- tinually see theui contradicted within a day or two in the same paper, or their falsity detected by some journal of an opposite party ; but still, whatever is long adhered to and often repeated, especially if it also appear in several different papers (and this, though they notoriously copy from ouo 18 HISTORIC DOUBTS RELATIVE TO ''■ :i another), is almost sure to be generally be- lieved. Whence this high respect which is practically paid to newspaper authority? Do men think, that because a witness has been perpetually detected in falsehood, he may therefore be the more safely believed whenever he is 7iot detected ? or does ad- herence to a story, and frequent repetition of it, render it the more credible ? On the contrary, is it not a common remark in other cases, that a liar will generally stand to and reiterate what he has once said, merely because he has said it ? Let us, if possible, divest ourselves of this superstitious veneration for every thing that appears " in print," and examine a little more systematically the evidence which is adduced. I suppose it will not be denied, that the three following are among the most impor- tant points to be ascertained, in deciding on the credibility of witnesses ; first, whether they have the means of gaining correct in- formation ; secondly, whether they have any interest in concealing truth, or propa- gating falsehood ; and, thirdly, whether they NAPOLEOxV BUONAPARTE. 19 agree in their testimony. Let us examine the present witnesses upon all these points. First, what means have the editors of newspapers for gaining correct information? We know not, except from their own state- ments. Besides what is copied fram other journals, foreign or British, (which is usually more than three-fourths of the news pub- lished,*) they profess to refer to the author- * " Suppose a fact to be transmitted through twenty persons ; the first communicating it to the second, the second to the third, &c., and let the probabihty of each testimony be expressed by nine-tenths, (that is, suppose that of ten reports made by each witness, nine only are true,) then, at every time the story passes from one witness to another, the evidence is reduced to nine- tenths of what it was before. Thus, after it has passed through the whole twenty, the evidence will be found to be less than one-eighth." — La Place, Essai PMloso- phique stir les Prohahilites. That is, the chances for the fact thus attested being true, will be, according to this distinguished calculator, less than one in eight. Very few of the common news- paper stories, however, relating to foreign countries, could be traced, if the matter were carefully investigated, up to an actual eye-witness, even through twenty inter- mediate witnesses ; and many of the steps of our ladder would, I fear, prove but rotten ; few of the reporters 20 HISTORIC DOUBTS RELATIVE TO ity of certain private correspondents abroad ; who these correspondents are, what means they have of obtaining information, or whether they exist at all, we have no way of ascertaining. We find ourselves in the condition of the Hindoos, who are told by their priests that the earth stands on an elephant, and the elephant on a tortoise ; but are left to find out for themselves what the tortoise stands on, or whether it stands on anything at all. So much for our clear knowledge of the means of information possessed by these witnesses ; next, for the grounds on which we are to calculate on their veracity. Have they not a manifest interest in cir- culating the wonderful accounts of Napoleon Buonaparte and his achievements, whether true or false ? Few would read newspapers if they did not sometimes find wonderful or important news in them ; and we may safely say that no subject was ever found so inexhaustibly interesting as the present. would deserve to have one in ten fixed as the proportion of their false accounts. NAPOLEON BUONAPARTE. 21. It may be urged, however, that there are several adverse political parties, of which the various public prints are respectively the organs, and who would not fail to ex- pose each other's fabrications.* Doubtless they would, if they could do so without at the same time exposing their own; but identity of interests may induce a commu- nity of operations up to a certain point. And let it be observed that the object of contention between these rival parties is, who shall have the administration of public affairs, the control of public expenditure, and the disposal of places : the question, I say, is, not, whether the people shall be governed or not, but, by which party they shall be governed ; — not whether the taxes * " I did not mention the difficulty of detecting a false- hood in any private or even public history, at the time and place where it is said to happen ; much more w^here the scene is removed to ever so small a distance. . . But the matter never comes to any issue, if trusted to the common method of altercation and debate and flying rumours." — Hume's Essay on Mira- cles,^. 195, 13mo; pp.200, 201, 8vo, 1767; p. 127, 8vo, 1817. 22 HISTORIC DOUBTS RELATIVE TO shall be paid or not, but who shall receive them. Now it must be admitted, that Buo- naparte is a political bugbear, most conve- nient to any administration : " if you do not adopt our measures and reject those of our opponents, Buonaparte will be sure to prevail over you ; if you do not submit to the Government, at least under our admin- istration, this formidable enemy will take advantage of your insubordination, to con- quer and enslave you : pay your taxes cheerfully, or the tremendous Buonaparte will take all from you.^^ Buonaparte, in short, was the burden of every song ; his redoubted viame was the charm which always succeeded in unloosing the purse- strings of the nation. And let us not be too sure, safe as we now think ourselves, that some occasion may not occur for again pro- ducing on the stage so useful a personage : it is not merely to naughty children in the nursery that the threat of being " given to Buonaparte" has proved effectual. It is surely probable, therefore, that with an object substantially the same, all parties may have availed themselves of one com- NAPOLEON BUONAPARTE. 23 mon instrument. It is not necessary to suppose that for this purpose they secretly entered into a formal agreement ; though hy the way, there are reports afloat, that the editors of the Courier and Morning Chron- icle hold amicable consultations as to the conduct of their public warfare : I will not take upon me to say that this is incredible ; but at any rate it is not necessary for the establishment of the probability I contend for. Neither again would I imply that all newspaper-editors are utterers of forged stories, " knowing them to be forged ;" most likely the great majority of them pub- lish what they find in other papers with the same simplicity that their readers peruse it ; and therefore, it must be observed, are not at all more proper than their readers to be cited as authorities. Still it will be said, that unless we sup- pose a regularly preconcerted plan, we must at least expect to find great discrep- ancies in the accounts published. Though they might adopt the general outline of facts one from another, they would have to fill up the detail for themselves ; and in 24 HISTORIC DOUBTS RELATIVE TO this, therefore, we should meet with infinite and irreconcilable variety. Now this is precisely the point I am tend- ing to ; for the fact exactly accords with the above supposition ; the discordance and mutual contradictions of these witnesses being such as would alone throw a con- siderable shade of doubt over their testi- mony. It is not in minute circumstances alone that the discrepancy appears, such as might be expected to appear in a narrative substantially true; but in very great and leading transactions, and such as are very intimately connected with the supposed hero. For ihstance, it is by no means agreed whether Buonaparte led in person the celebrated charge over the bridge of Lodi, (for celebrated it certainly is, as well as the siege of Troy, whether either event ever really took place or no,) or was safe in the rear, while Augereau performed the exploit. The same doubt hangs over the charge of the French cavalry at Waterloo. The peasant Lacoste, who professed to have been Buonaparte's guide on the day of the battle, and who earned a fortune by ' NAPOLEON BUONAPARTE. 25 detailing over and over again to visitors all the particulars of what the great man said and did up to the moment of flight, — this same Lacoste has been suspected by others, besides me, of having never even been near the great man, and having fabricated the whole story for the sake of making a gain of the credulity of travellers. In the ac- counts that are extant of the battle itself, published by persons professing to have been present, the reader will find that there is a discrepancy of three or four hours as to the time when the battle began ! — a battle, belt remembered, not fought with javelins and arrows, like those of the ancients, in which one part of a large army might be engaged, while a distant portion of the same army knew nothing of it ; but a battle com- mencing (if indeed it were ever fought at all) with the firing of cannon, which would have announced pretty loudly what was going on. It is no less uncertain whether or no this strange personage poisoned in Egypt an hospital-full of his own soldiers, and butchered in cold blood a garrison that had surrendered. But not 3 26 HISTORIC DOUBTS RELATIVE TO to multiply instances ; the battie of Boro- dino^ which is represented as one of the greatest ever fought, is unequivocally claimed as a victory by both parties ; nor is the question decided at this day. We have ofiicial accounts on both sides, circumstan- tially detailed, in the names of supposed respectable persons, professing to have been present on the spot ; yet totally irreconcila- ble. Both these accojunts may be false ; but since one of them must be false, that one (it is no matter which we suppose) proves incontrovertibly this important maxim ; that it is possible for a narrative — however circumstantial — however steadily main- tained — however public, and however im- portant, the events it relates — hoivever grave the authority on which it is pub- lished — to be nevertheless an entire fabri- cation ! Many of the events which have been recorded were probably believed much the more readily and firmly, from the apparent caution and hesitation with which they were at first published, — the vehement contra- diction in our papers of many pretended NAPOLEON BUONAPARTE. 27 French accounts, — and the abuse lavished upon them for falsehood, exaggeration, and gasconade. But is it not possible, — is it not indeed perfectly natural, — that the publish- ers even of known falsehood should assume this cautious demeanour, and this abhor- rence of exaggeration, in order the more easily to gain credit ? Is it not also very possible, that those who actually believed what they published, may have suspected mere exaggeration in stories which were entire fictions? Many men have that sort of simplicity, that they think themselves quite secure against being deceived, pro- vided they believe only part of the story they hear; when perhaps the whole is equally false. So that perhaps these simple- hearted editors, who were so vehement against lying bulletins, and so wary in an- nouncing their great news, were in the condition of a clown, who thinks he has bought a great bargain of a Jew because he has beat down the price perhaps from a guinea to a crown, for some article that is not really worth a groat. 28 HISTORIC DOUBTS RELATIVE TO J^jM With respect to the character of Buona- parte, the dissonance is if possible still greater. According to some, he was a wise, humane, magnanimous hero ; others paint him as a monster of cruelty, meanness, and - perfidy : some, even of those who are most inveterate against him, speak very highly of his political and military ability ; others place him on the very verge of insanity. But allowing that all this may be the colour- ing of party prejudice, (which surely is allowing a great deal,) there is one point to which such a solution will hardly apply : if there be anything that can be clearly ascer- tained in history, one would think it must be the personal courage of a military man ; yet here we are as much at a loss as ever ; at the very same times, and on the same occasions, he is described by different writers as a man of undaunted intrepidity, and as an absolute poltroon. What then are we to believe ? if we are disposed to credit all that is told us, we must believe in the existence not only of one, but of two or three Buonapartes ; if we admit NAPOLEON BUONAPARTE, 29 nothing but what is well authenticated, we shall be compelled to doubt of the existence of any.* It appears, then, that those on whose tes- timony the existence and actions of Buona- parte are generally believed, fail in all the most essential points on which the credi- biUty of witnesses depends : first, we have no assurance that they have access to cor- rect information; secondly, they have an apparent interest in propagating falsehood ; and, thirdly, they palpably contradict each other in the most important points. Another circumstance which throws ad- ditional suspicion on these tales is, that the whig-party, as they are called, — the warm advocates for liberty, and opposers of the en- croachments of monarchical power, — have for some time past strenuously espoused the cause, and vindicated the character of * " We entertain a suspicion concerning any matter of fact, when the witnesses contradict each other ; when they are of a suspicious character ; when they have an interest in what they affirm." — Hume's Essay on Miracles, p. 172, 13mo; p. 176, 8vo, 1767; p. 113, 8vo. 1817 ^0 mSTORlC OOUSTS RELATIVE TO Buonaparte, who is represented by all as having been, if not a tyrant, at least an absolute despot. One of the most forward in this cause is a gentleman, who once stood foremost in holding up this very man to public execration, — -who first published, and long maintained against popular incre- dulity, the accounts of his atrocities in Egypt. Now that such a course should be adopted for party purposes, by those who are aware that the whole story is a fiction, and the hero of it imaginary, seems not very incredible ; but if they believed in the real existence of this despot, I cannot conceive how they could so forsake their principles as to advocate his cause, and eulogize his character. After all, it may be expected that many who perceive the force of these objections, will yet be loath to think it possible that they and the public at large can have been so long and so greatly imposed upon. And thus it is that the magnitude and boldness of a fraud become its best support ; the millions who for so many ages have believed in Mahomet or Brahma, lean as it were on NAPOLEON nUONAPARTK, 31 each other for support ; and not having vigour of mind enough holdly to throw off vulgar prejudices, and dare be wiser than the multitude, persuade themselves that what so many have acknowledged must be true. But I call on tliose who boast their philosophical freedom of thought, and would fain tread in the steps of Ilumc and other inquirers of the like exalted and specula- tive genius, to follow up fairly and fully ilicir own principles, and, throwing off the shackles of authority, to examine carefully the evidence of whatever is proposed to (hem, before they admit its truth. That even in this enlightened age, as it is called, a whole nation may be egregiously imposed upon, even in matters which inti- mately concern them, may be proved (if it has not be<. i already proved) by the follow- ing instance : it was stated in the newS' papers, that, a month after the battle of Trafalgar, an English officer, who had been a prisoner of war, and was exchanged returned to this country from France, and beginning to condole with his countrymen on the terrible defeat they had sustained, 32 HISTORIC DOUBTS RELATIVE TO was infinitely astonished to learn that the battle of Trafalgar was a splendid victory : he had been assured, he said, that in that battle the English had been totally defeated ; and the French were fully and universally persuaded that such was the fact. Now if this report of the belief of the French nation was not true, the British public were completely imposed upon ; if it were true, then both nations were, at the same time, rejoicing in the event of the same battle, as a signal victory to themselves ; and conse- quently one or other, at least, of these nations must have been the dupes of their Government : for if the battle was never fought at all, or was not decisive on either side, in that case both parties were deceived. This instance, I conceive, is absolutely demonstrative of the point in question. " But what shall we say to the testimony of those many respectable persons who went to Plymouth on purpose, and saw Buonaparte with their own eyes ? must they not trust their senses ?" I would not disparage either the eye-sight or the veracity of these gentlemen. I am ready to allow NAPOLEON BUONAPARTE. 33 that they went to Plymouth for the pur- pose of seeing Buonaparte ; nay more, that they actually rowed out mto the harbour in a boat, and came alongside of a man-of-war, on whose deck they saw a man in a cocked hat, who, they were told, was Buonaparte. This is the utmost point to which their tes- timony goes ; how they ascertained that this man in the cocked hat had gone through all the marvellous and romantic adventures with which we have so long been amused, we are not told. Did they perceive in his physiognomy, his true name, and authentic history? Truly this evidence is such as country people give one for a story of apparitions ; if you discover any signs of incredulity, they triumphantly show the very house which the ghost haunted, the identical dark corner where it used to vanish, and perhaps even the tombstone of the person whose death it foretold. Jack Cade's nobility was supported by the same irresistible kind of evidence : having asserted that the eldest son of Edmund Mortimer, Earl of March, v/as stolen by a beggar- woman, " became a bricklayer when he 34 HISTOBIC DOUi,TS RELATIVE TO came to age," and was the father of the supposed Jack Cade ; one of his companions confirms the story, by saying, " Sir, he made a chimney in my father's house, and the bricks are aUve at this day to testify it ; therefore deny it not." Much of the same kind is vhe testimony of our brave countrymen, "vyho are ready to produce the scars they received in fight- ing against this terrible Buonaparte. That they fought and were wounded, they may safely testify ; and probably they no less firmly believe what they were told respect- ing the cause in which they fought : it would have been a high breach of discipline to doubt it ; and they, I conceive, are men better skilled in handling a musket, than in sifting evidence, and detecting imposture. But I defy any one of them to come for- ward and declare, on his own knoivledge, what was the cause in which he fought, — under whose commands the opposed gen- erals acted, — and whether the person who issued those commands did really perform the mighty achievements we are told of. Let those then who pretend to philoso- NAPOLEON BUONAPARTE. 35 phical freedom of inquiry, — who scorn to rest their opinions on popular belief, and to shelter themselves under the example of the unthinking multitude, consider carefully, each one for himself, what is the evidence proposed to himself in particular, for the existence of such a person as Napoleon Buonaparte :— I do not mean, whether there ever was a person bearing that name, for that is a question of no consequence ; but whether any such person ever per- formed all the wonderful things attributed to him; — let him then weigh well the objections to that evidence, (of which I have given but a hasty and imperfect sketch,) and if he then finds it amount to anything more than a probability, I have only to congratulate him on his easy faith. But the same testimony which would have great weight in establishing a thing intrinsically probable, will lose part of this weight in proportion as the matter attested is improbable ; and if adduced in support of anything that is at variance with uniform 06 HISTORIC DOUBTS RELATIVE TO experiencej* will be rejected at once by all sound reasoners. Let us then consider what sort of a story it is that is proposed to our acceptance. How grossly contradictory are the reports of the different authorities, I have already remarked : but consider, by itself, the story told by any one of them ; it carries an air of fiction and romance on the very face of it ; all the events are great, and splendid, and marvellous ;t great armies, great victories, great frosts, great reverses, " hair-breadth ^scapes,'' empires subverted * "That testimony itself derives all its force from experience, seems very certain . . . The first author, we believe, 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." -^—Edinb. Review, Sept. 1814, p. 328. j- " Suppose, for instance, that the fact which the tes- timony endeavours to establish partakes of the extraor- dinary and the marvellous ; in that case, the evidence resulting from the testimony receives a diminution, greater or less in proportion as the fact is more or, less unusual." — Hume's Essay on Miracles, p. 173, 12mo • p. 170, 8vo, 1767 ; p. 113, 8vo, 1817 NAPOLEON BUONAPARTE. 37 in a few days ; everything happening in defiance of political calculations, and in opposition to the experience of past times ; everything upon that grand scale, so com- mon in Epic Poetry, so rare in real life ; and thus calculated to strike the imagination of the vulgar, — and to remind the sober-think- ing few of the Arabian Nights. Every event too has that roundness and complete- ness which is so characteristic of fiction ; nothing is done by halves 5 we have com- plete victories, — total overthrows, — entire subversion of empires, — perfect re-establish- ments of them, — crowded upon us in rapid succession. To enumerate the improbabili- ties of each of the several parts of this his- tory, would fill volumes ; but they are so fresh in every one's memory, that there is no need of such a detail : let any judicious man, not ignorant of history and of human nature, revolve them in his' mind, and con- sider how far they are conformable to Experience,* our best and only sure guide. * " The ultimate standard by which we determine all disputes that may arise is ahravs derived from experience 4 S8 HISTORIC DOUBTS RELATIVE TO In vain will he seek in history for something similar to this wonderful Buonaparte ; "nought but himself can be his parallel." Will the conquests of Alexander be com- pared with his ? They were effected over a rabble of effeminate undisciplined barba- rians ; else his progress v/ould hardly have been so rapid : witness his father Philip, who was much longer occupied in subdu- ing the comparatively insignificant territory of the warlike and civilized Greeks, not- withstanding their being divided into numerous petty States, whose mutual jealousy enabled him to contend with them separately. But the Greeks had never made such progress in arts and arms as the great and powerful States of Europe, which Buonaparte is represented as so speedily overpowering. His empire has been com- pared to the Roman : mark the contrast ; he gains in a f»w years, that dominion, or at least control, over Germany, wealthy, civilized, and powerful, which the Romans and observation." — Hume^s Essay on Miracles, p. 172, 12mo ; p. 175, 8vo, 1767; p. 112, 8vo, 1817. NAPOLEON BUONAPARTE. 39 ill the plenitude of their power could not obtahi, during a struggle of as many cen- turies, against the ignorant half-savages who then possessed it ; of whom Tacitus remarks, that, up to his own time they had been " triumphed over rather than con- quered." Another peculiar circumstance in the history of this extraordinary personage is, that when it is found convenient to repre- sent him as defeated, though he is by no means defeated by halves, but iuA'olved in much more sudden and total ruin than the personages of real history usually meet with ; yet, if it is thought fit he should be restored, it is done as quickly and com- pletely as if Merlin's rod had been employed. He enters Russia with a prodigious army, which is totally ruined by an unprecedented hard winter ; (everything relating to this man is prodigious and unprecedented ;) yet m a few months we find him intrusted with another great army in Germany, which is aiso totally ruined at Leipsic ; making, inclusive of the Egyptian, the third great army thus totally lost : yet the French are so 40 HISTORIC DOUBTS RELATIVE TO good-natured as to furnish him with another, sufficient to make a formidable stand in France ; he is however conquered^ and presented with the sovereignty of Elba ; (surely, by the bye, some more probable way might have been found of disposing of him, till again wanted, than to place him thus on the very verge of his ancient domin- ions ;) thence he returns to France, where he is received with open arms, and enabled to lose a fifth great army at Waterloo ; yet so eager were these people to be a sixth time led to destruction, that it was found necessary to confine him in an island some thousand miles off, and to quarter foreign troops upon them, lest they should make an insurrection in his favour !* Does any one believe all this, and yet refuse to believe a miracle ? Or rather, what is this but a miracle ? Is it not a violation of the laws of nature ? for surely there are moral laws Kat Tiov T't xai )3pc?7'wv ^pfi'aj 'THEP TON AAH0H AOrON '.Elartar't^i'rt uvO.qi. Pind. Oiymp. 1. NAPOLEON BUONAPARTE. 41 of nature as well as physical ; which though more liable to exceptions in this or that par- ticular case, are no less true as general rules than the laws of matter, and therefore cannot be violated and contradicted beyond a certain point, without a miracle.* * This doctrine, though hardly needing confirmation from authority, is supported by that of Hume : his eighth essay is, throughout, an argument for the doctrine of Philosophical " necessity," drawn entirely from the general uniformity observable in the course of nature with respect to the principles of human conduct, as well as those of the material universe ; from which uni- formity, he observes, it is that we are enabled, in both cases, to form our judgments by means of Experience : " and if," says he, "we would explode any forgery in history, we cannot make use of a more convincing argu- ment, than to prove that the actions ascribed to any person, are directly contrary to the course of nature. . The veracity of Quintus Curtius is as suspicious when he describes the supernatural courage of Alexander, by which he was hurried on single to attack multitudes, as when he describes his supernatural force and activity, by which he was able to resist them. So readily and universally do we acknowledge a uni- formity in human Quotives and actions as well as in the operations of body.'' — Eighth Essay, p. 131, 12rao; p. Vb, 8vo, 1817. Accordingly,/in the tenth essav, his use of the term 4^ 42 HISTORIC DOUBTS RELATIVE TO Nay, there is this additional circumstance; which renders the contradiction of Experi- " miracle," after having called it " a transgression of a law of nature," plainly shows that he meant to include human nature : " no testimony," says he, " is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a nature that its falsehood would be more miraculous than the fact which it endeavours to establish." The term " prodigy" also (which he all along employs as synony- mous with "miracle") is applied to testimony, in the same manner, immediately after: "In the foregoing reasoning we have supposed that the falsehood of that testimony would be a kind oi 'prodigy T Now had he meant to confine the meaning of " miracle," and "prodigy," to a violation of the laws primum a victore ob metum, mox a seipsis invento nomi- ne, Germani vocarentur. — Tacitus, de Mor. Germ. 5* NArOLEON BUONAPARTE. 63 I call upon those, therefore, who profess themselves advocates of free mqiihy — who disdain to be carried along with the stream of popular opinion, — and who will listen to no testimony that runs counter to experi- ence, — to follow up their own principles fairly and consistently. Let the same mode of argument be adopted in all cases alike ; and then it can no longer be attributed to hostile prejudice, but to enlarged and philo- sophical views. If they have already reject- ed some histories, on the ground of their being strange and marvellous, — -of their relating facts, unprecedented, and at vari- ance with the established course of nature, • — let them not give credit to another history which lies open to the very same objections, — the extraordinary and romantic tale we have been just considering. If they have discredited the testimony of witnesses, who are said at least to have been disinterested, and to have braved persecutions and death in support of their assertions, — can these philosophers consistently listen to and be- lieve the testimony of those who avowedly get money by the tales they publish, and t)4 HISTORIC DOUBTS RELATIVE TO who do not even pretend that they incur any serious risk in case of being detected in a falsehood ? If in other cases they have refused to hsten to an account which has passed through many intermediate hands before it reaches them, and whicii is defend- ed by those who have an interest in main- taining it ; let them consider through how many, and what very suspicious hands, this story has arrived to them, without the possi- biUty, as I have shown, of tracing it back to any decidedly authentic source, after all ; — to any better authority, according to their own, showing, than that of an unnamed and unknown foreign correspondent ; — and hkewise how strong an interest, in every way, those who have hitherto imposed on them, have, in keeping up the imposture. Let them, in short, show themselves as ready to detect the cheats, and despise the fables, of politicians, as of priests. But if they are still Avedded to the popu- lar belief in this point, let them be consist- ent enough to admit the same evidence in oMer cases, which they yield to in this. If, after all that lias been said, they cannot NAPOLEON BUONAPARTE. 65 bring themselves to doubt of the existence of Napoleon Buonaparte, they must at least acknowledge that they do not apply to that question the same plan of reasoning which they have made use of in others ; and they are consequently bound in reason and in honesty to renounce it altogether. 66 POSTSCRIPT TO THE THIRD EDITION. It may seem arrogant for an obscure and nameless individual to claim the glory of having put to death the most formidable of all recorded heroes. But a shadowy cham- pion may be overthrown by a shadowy an- tagonist. Many a terrific spectre has been laid by the beams of a half-penny candle. And if I have succeeded in making out, in the foregoing pages, a probable case of sus- picion, it must, I think, be admitted, that there is some ground for my present boast, of having killed Napoleon Buonaparte. Let but the circumstances of the case be considered. This mighty Emperor, who had been so long the bugbear of the civilized world, after having obtained successes and undergone reverses, such as never befel any (other at least) real potentate, was at length sentenced to confinement in the remote POSTSCRIPT TO THE THIRD EDITION. 67 Island of St. Helena: a measure which many persons wondered at, and many objected to, on various grounds ; not unreasonabl^rj sup- posing the ilhistrious exile to be a real per- son : but on the supposition of his being only a man of straw, the situation was ex- ceedingly favourable for keeping him out of the way of impertinent curiosity, when not wanted, and for making him the foun- dation of any new plots that there might be occasian to conjure up. About this juncture it was that the public attention was first invited by these pages, to the question as to the real existence of Na- poleon Buonaparte. They excited, it may be fairly supposed, along with much sur- prise and much censure, some degree ofi doubt, and probably, of consequent inquiry. No fresh evidence, as far as I can learn, of the truth of the disputed points, was brought forward to dispel these doubts. We heard, however, of the most jealous precautions being used to prevent any intercourse be- tween the formidable prisoner, and any stranger, who, from motives of curiosity, might wish to visit him. The '' man in the 68 POSTSCRIPT TO THE THIRD EDITION. iron mask'^ could hardly have been more rigorously secluded: and we also heard various contradictory reports of conversa- tions between him and the few who were allowed access to him ; the falsehood and inconsistency of most of these reports being proved in contemporary publications. At length, just about the time when the public scepticism respecting this extraordi- nary personage might be supposed to have risen to an alarming height, it was an- nounced to us that he was dead ! A stop was thus put, most opportunely, to all troublesome inquiries. I do not undertake to deny that such a person did live and die. That he was, and that he did, everything that is reported, we cannot believe, unless we consent to admit contradictory state- ments ; but many of the events recorded, however marvellous, a.re certainly not physi- cally impossible. But I would only entreat the candid reader to reflect what might naturally be expected, on the supposition of the surmises contained in the present work being well-founded. Supposing the whole of the tale I have been considering POSTSCRIPT TO THE THIRD EDITION. 69 to have been a fabrication, what would be the natural result of such an attempt to ex- cite inquiry into its truth ? Evidently, the shortest and most effectual mode of eluding detection, would be to kill the phantom, and so get rid of him at once. A ready and decisive answer would thus be provided to any one in whom the foregoing arguments might have excited suspicions : " Sir, there can be no doubt that such a person existed, and performed what is related of him ; and if you will just take a voyage to St. Helena, you may see with your own eyes, — not him indeed, for he is no longer living, — but his tomb : and what evidence would you have that is more decisive ?" So much for his Death : as for his Life — it is just published by an eminent writer : besides which, the shops will supply us with abundance of busts and prints of this great man ; all striking likenesses — of one an- other. The most incredulous must be satis- fied with this ! " Stat magni NOMINIS umbra !" KONX OMPAX. 70 POSTSCRIPT TO THE SEVENTH EDITION. Since the publication of the Sixth Edition of this work, the French nation, and the world at large, have obtained an additional evidence, to which I hope they will attach as much weight as it deserves, of the reality of the wonderful history I have been treat- ing of. The Great Nation, among the many indications lately given of an heroic zeal like what Homer attributes to his Argive warriors, 'tloaadai 'eaen'hs o^yJifiatd •is 6tovaxO'? Tfsj have formed and executed the design of bringing home for honourable interment the remains of their illustrious Chief How many persons have actually in- spected these relics, I have not ascertained ; but that a real coffin, containing real bones, POSTSCRIPT TO THE riEVENTH EDITION. 71 was brought from St. Helena to France, I see no reason to disbelieve. Whether future visitors to St. Helena will be shown merely the identical place in which Buonaparte, was (said to have been) interred, or whether another set of real bones will be exhibited in that island, we have yet to learn. This latter supposition is not very im- probable. It was something of a credit to the island, an attraction to strangers, and a source of profit to some of the inhabitants, to possess so remarkable a relic ; and this glory and advantage they must naturally wish to retain. If so, there seems no reason why they should not have a Buonaparte of their own ; for there is, I believe, no doubt that therejirg!, or were, several Museums in England, which, among other curiosities, boasted, each, of a genuine skull of Oliver Cromwell. Perhaps, therefore, we shall hear of several well-authenticated skulls of Buona- parte also, in the collections of different virtuosos, all of whom (especially those ia 72 POSTSCRIPT TO THE SEVENTH EDITION. whose own crania the " organ of wonder" is the most largely developed) will doubt- less derive equal satisfaction from the relics they respectively possess. FINIS, Geo. Charles, Stereotyper, No. 9 George Street. C Z39 89l e ^^-r. . . « * ^ ^ > ^T"^^*^**