Tracts, legal and historical

76
in support of the previous allegation, which, there-
fore, resolves at present into mere assumption. The
direct charge of forgery against an ancient docu-
ment, as in the present instance, of more than four
hundred years standing, is rather a bold experi-
ment, and must require some extraordinary, nay,
almost miraculous evidence in its support. In the
" Marian Controversy," the device was often resorted
to, as will always happen in controverted points of
moment, but much, indeed, to the satisfaction and
edification of the world ! The difficulty of the charge
brought such mode of argument into disrepute, and
it is now rather regarded as a display of ingenuity,
than leading to solid conviction. On other occasions,
Mr. Tytler is far more punctilious, and acts so hyper-
critically, that even legal evidence will not satisfy
p. 382. him. Hence, we are not to believe the " Mamuet"
or " Impostor" of Scotland, to be the ideot Impostor
of Scotland, and the personificator of Richard, —
while the description of " Thomas of Trumpington,"
forsooth, under these 'peculiar appellations, is not
sufficient to identify him with either ! — we are bound
to produce farther proofs of their reciprocity, and,
for any thing we know, the attestations of his
godfather and godmother, if not nearest blood rela-
tives ! As for a remaining cavil, upon which, as has
been shewn, he lays stress — the silence of one or two
Ps. 347-8, historians with respect to a fact, although known to
M2-MG. t j le rema j n( j er — w hich he thinks fatal to its reality —
it is just what might be expected in any event, for