Qt 
[o’e] 
THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF CANADA 
worthy. From this universal omission it must be concluded that 
such investigations in order to check or corroborate the essential 
trustworthiness of these individuals are not necessary; for were they 
necessary, experience would long since have shown the need and 
enforced a contrary practice. Neither is the omission of such 
set investigations to be explained on the ground that, even apart 
from them, the statements of any individual are subject to more 
or less continual check by subsequent developments. The fact 
is that experience has shown, not in the one, two, or three, or 
dozen or score or more of cases within the range of any one person, 
but universally, that individuals of a certain type (those exemplify- 
ing in their statements the requisites for trustworthiness) make 
statements which, notwithstanding incidental error, are essentially 
correct; and therefore, where persons recognize an individual of 
this type, they feel it necessary without test, check or corrobora- 
tion, to accept his statements as essentially correct, 7.e. as correct 
save in those points, if any, where incidental error, to which he 
may be liable, is established. The statements of such an individual 
do indeed meet successfully the test of subsequent developments, 
just as they would meet successfully the test of a set investigation 
if this were instituted; but in meeting successfully this test of 
subsequent developments, he is not establishing his trustworthi- 
ness: he simply confirms what has been already established con- 
cerning himself by an infinite number of previous cases; for the 
statements of individuals of his type always have been, are now, 
and always will be, found to be essentially correct. Therefore a 
person who recognizes an individual of this type does not institute 
aset investigation: it isnot necessary. Neither does he consciously 
apply the test of subsequent developments, by actually watch- 
ing whether the statements of the individual are confirmed by 
such developments: for this test, though not wholly avoidable in 
itself, is equally unnecessary. If in some particular point the 
person has reason to surmise that the individual is in error, he 
may investigate that point; and if the investigation establishes 
the surmise as correct, that point, but that point only, in the 
statement of the individual will be rejected as incorrect: 2.e., 
in actual intercourse tests that confirm the statements of an 
individual exemplifying the requisites for trustworthiness are not 
necessary before such statements are accepted as correct, but 
on the contrary, tests which disprove such statements are neces- 
sary before these are rejected as incorrect. If, therefore, a record 
exemplifies in its statements the requisites for trustworthiness, 
the example and practice found in actual intercourse and experi- 
