COINCIDENCES AND SUPERSTITIONS. 395 



most surprising'. In fact, it is only the utter triviality 

 of the whole occurrence which renders it credible ; it is 

 just one of those events which no one would think of 

 inventing. Whether credible or not, it happened. As 

 De Morgan says of the coincidences he relates, so 

 can I say for the above (equally important) circum- 

 stance, c I can solemnly vouch for its literal truth.' 

 Yet it would be preposterous to say that there was 

 anything providential in such an occurrence. Swift, 

 in his Tale of a Tub, has indicated in forcible terms 

 the absurdity of recognising miraculous interven- 

 tions in such cases ; but should it appear to some of 

 my readers that, trivial though the event was, I 

 should have recognised the hand of Providence in it, 

 I would remark that it requires some degree of self- 

 conceit to regard oneself as the subject of the special 

 intervention of Providence, and moreover that Provi- 

 dence might have contrived the escape in, less compli- 

 cated sort by simply so arranging matters that the 

 glass had not fallen at all. So, at least, it appears to 

 me. 



There arises, in certain cases, the question whether 

 coincidences may not appear so surprising as to justify 

 the assumption that they are due to a reaJ though 

 undiscerned association between the coinciding events. 

 This, of course, is the very basis of the scientific 

 method ; and it is well to notice how far this method 

 may sometimes be unsafe. If remarkable coincidences 

 can occur when there is no real connection as we have 

 seen to be the case caution must be required in 



