1829.] 
accordingly all the ghost-stories that were 
ever heard of, are to be raked up, and 
forced down our throats, with any evidence, 
which he chooses to consider of the most 
inrefragable kind. Lord Clarendon, for 
instance, reports the apparition which pre- 
sented itself to Villiers, Duke of Bucking- 
ham, and who can refuse the testimony of 
such a man as Clarendon ? yet he, in truth, 
bears no testimony to the truth of it ; but in- 
troduces it thus— There were many stories 
scattered abroad, at that time, of several 
prophecies and predictions of the duke’s 
untimely and violent death. Amongst. the 
rest there was one, which was upon a. better 
foundation of credit than usually such dis- 
courses are founded upon.”? Now what is 
there here to rest upon? Lord Clarendon 
does not. give his authority at all; and if 
his evidence is to be regarded as personal, 
as being admitted by a man of undoubted 
veracity and intelligence, the utmost he 
Says is, it was better supported than others. 
The author talks of judges and rules of evi- 
dence—why, there is nothing here that 
would not be rejected instantaneously, as 
mere hearsay, or wholly irrelevant, upon 
any two-penny matter that ever came into 
court. 
Then comes Colonel Gardiner’s story, as 
narrated, not as attested, though believed, 
by Dr. Doddridge. Dr. D., we are told, 
was ‘eminently pious ;’ but what has that 
te do with the story? Nobody questions 
Dr. Doddridge’s veracity—no, nor Colonel 
Gardiner’s. The doctor reported what Gar- 
diner told him—Gardiner told what he 
seemed to see and hear; but is here evi- 
dence to establish miraculous interposition ? 
* With regard to the vision,” observes Dr. 
H., “ the appearance of our Saviour on the 
cross, and the awful words repeated, can be 
considered in no other light, than as so many 
tecollected images of the mind, which, pro- 
bably, had their origin in the language of 
some urgent appeal to repentance, that the 
colonel might have casually read, or heard 
delivered. Dr. H.,” adds the anonymous 
replier, “ hints also at some possible injury of 
the brain.”’ This is true, and is founded 
upon the fact of Colonel Gardiner’s having 
a short time before received a severe fall 
from his horse—which the replier has chosen 
to conceal. 
But why should we doubt of ghosts, 
when every man has his guardian angel— 
Millions of spiritual creatures walk the earth 
Unseen, both when we wake, and when we sleep. 
_ This the author professes to believe no 
ae vision—and on what ground? Its 
allowed by some of our best divines, 
ve even made it the subject of dis- 
courses from the pulpit. Now, how in the 
pame of common sense, are divines to 
know any thing more of the matter than 
the laity? The reader will see the cast of 
the writer, and how little qualified he must 
be to judge of a point of evidence ; and this, 
M.M. New Series.—Vor. VII. No.37. 
Domestic and Foreign. 
89 
we suppose, is a question that rests, except 
in the case of individual experience, solely 
upon testimony. Dr. Hibbert is charged 
with fabricating a theory, and then look- 
ing up evidence to substantiate it; whereas 
facts, first pointed to the theory, and then 
other cases were tried by it. But we are 
spending more time than the book deserves. 
It will do Dr. Hibbert no harm; but col- 
lecting, as it does, all the stories of any 
notoriety, ancient and modern, the record 
will be convenient for reference. 
Mémoires inédits de Louis Henri De 
Lomenie, Comte de Brienne, Secrétaire 
@éiat sous Louis XIV; 1828.—Three 
Comtes de Brienne held in succession the 
office of secretary of state in the 17th cen- 
tury. The second, Henry Augusti, left be- 
hind him memoirs, which were published 
in 1719, and his son and successor, Louis 
Henri, left also, it seems, his memoirs, 
which are now for the first time printed, by 
Barriere, who edited Madame Campan’s 
book, and has prefixed a long essay, of no 
great value, on the “‘ Mceurs and Usages 
of the 17th Century.’? De Brienne, the 
well known Archbishop of Toulouse, a 
descendant of the family, was in possession 
of these papers, and only prevented from 
publishing them by the outbreak of the 
revolution giving him something else to 
think about. The originals are now in the 
hands of the Editor, and there exists, we 
believe, no reason for throwing a doubt upon 
their authenticity. 
The author was born in 1636, two years 
before Louis XIV., and when seven years 
old, was introduced as a playmate to the 
young king, of whose early propensities and 
extraordinary precocity, a variety of details 
are given. At fifteen, obtaining, by the 
favour of the Queen Regent, the reversion 
of his father’s office, he was admitted into 
the council, and, under Mazarin’s control, 
executed some of its functions. But the 
next year, during the confusions of the 
Fronde, he was sent upon his travels, and, 
what no Frenchman had ever done before, 
visited the remotest regions of the earth, and 
after an absence of three years, was cour- 
teously welcomed by the queen, and coms 
manded to give arelation of his adventures. 
The queen and her ladies, and all the fa- 
vourites of the court assembled, he com- 
menced his viva voce narrative in this style 
—‘ You shall see the Laplanders such as 
they are; I do not suppose they will please 
you, but I shall be but too happy, if he who 
is going to speak of them does not displease 
you. Imagine,'then, Madame, a nation of 
pygmies, covered with the skins of rein- 
deer, with nothing of the human about 
them, but their voice. The ladies are all 
smaller than Mademoiselle’s dwarf, and 
more ugly—their complexion smokey—eyes 
very red—teeth the colour of ebony—mouth 
very large—lips very pale, and nose as flat 
as a negro’s. Their hands are short and 
N 
