) 
1888.] 
Home Life of the Redstart. 
358 
they are so persuasive and cogent that 
the testimony of a myriad of witnesses 
cannot prevail against them.” The Su- 
preme Court looked at the matter from 
substantially the same point of view. 
‘‘We do not doubt,” the opinion said, 
“ that Drawbaugh may have conceived 
the idea that speech could be transmit- 
ted to a distance by means of electricity, 
and have experimented upon that sub- 
ject. But to hold that he discovered the 
art of doing it before Bell did would 
be to construe testimony without regard 
to the ordinary laws that govern human 
conduct.” 
This conclusion is just and reasonable, 
and yet it might not have been reached 
so easily a hundred years ago. During 
the present century the value of human 
testimony has been examined as it never 
was before, and its estimation has sunk 
not a little. Historical researches and 
historical criticism have both contributed 
to this result. At the same time, the 
uniformity of human conduct has been 
observed and ascertained to a degree not 
imagined hitherto, and this tends to im- 
pair the force of cumulative testimony. 
It is less difficult now than formerly to 
perceive that where one witness has fallen 
into error, the same or similar causes 
may have led other witnesses to make 
the same mistake, and thus the evidence 
of a dozen men to a particular point 
may weigh but little more than that of 
one or two. I do not mean to imply 
that the Supreme Court decided against 
Drawbaugh solely on the ground that his 
conduct was inconsistent with his preten- 
sions, and that his case was so improbable 
that the testimony to support it must be 
rejected as incredible. There was posi- 
tive evidence against him, to part of 
which I have not alluded. For example, 
the court, placed much reliance on the 
fact that Drawbaugh’s reproduced instru- 
ments (the originals of which made a 
perfect telephone, according to the testi- 
mony of his witnesses) failed to trans- 
mit speech, except in the most imperfect 
and fragmentary manner, when they 
were tested in presence of both parties. 
It is significant, also, that Drawbaugh 
himself does not fix even the year in 
which his telephone was perfected ; that 
is done by other persons. Still, in the 
main, the case was decided on the 
ground that it was more likely that 
many honest men should be in error as 
to a fact, concerning which they swore 
positively, than that one man should 
have acted as Drawbaugh is represented 
to have done. This principle is a sound 
one, but it is so easy to apply that it 
might also easily be abused. Much must 
be allowed to the eccentricities of hu- 
man conduct, especially when a “ genius,” 
whether he be an inventor or a poet, is 
the person under investigation. Daniel 
Drawbaugh must be either a genius, 
and a deeply injured one, or else (and 
this is the implication of the Supreme 
Court opinion) an easy-going, vain, good- 
natured, intelligent mechanic, who, being 
subjected to a great temptation, fell, as 
other men have fallen. 
H. C. Merwin. 
HOME LIFE OF THE REDSTART. 
The redstart himself told me where 
his treasures were “ hid in a leafy hol- 
low.” Not that he intended to be so 
confiding ; on the contrary, he was some- 
what disconcerted when he saw what he 
vol. lxii. — no. 371. 23 
had done, and tried his best to undo it 
by appearing not to have the smallest 
interest in that particular tree. 
I happened, that morning, to be wan- 
dering slowly along the edge of a tree- 
~ 7~7 
