The Project Gutenberg EBook of Historic Doubts Relative To Napoleon
Buonaparte, by Richard Whately

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or
re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org

Title: Historic Doubts Relative To Napoleon Buonaparte

Author: Richard Whately

Release Date: March 30, 2006 [EBook #18087]

Language: English

Character set encoding: ASCII

*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK HISTORIC DOUBTS ***

Produced by Jeannie Howse, Thierry Alberto and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team of Distributed Proofreaders
Europe at http://dp.rastko.net

HISTORIC

DOUBTS

RELATIVE TO

NAPOLEON BUONAPARTE.

Is not the same reason available in theology and in politics?...
Will you follow truth but to a certain point?--BURKE'S
_Vindication of Natural Society._

The first author who stated fairly the connexion between the
evidence of testimony and the evidence of experience, was Hume, in
his ESSAY ON MIRACLES; a work _abounding in maxims of great use_ in
the conduct of life.--_Edinburgh Review_, Sept. 1814, p. 328.

_NEW EDITION._

LONDON:
LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO.
MDCCCLXV.

LONDON:
SAVILL AND EDWARDS, PRINTERS, CHANDOS STREET,
COVENT GARDEN.

PREFACE.

Several of the readers of this little work (first published in 1819)
have derived much amusement from the mistakes of others respecting its
nature and object. It has been by some represented as a serious
attempt to inculcate universal scepticism; while others have
considered it as a jeu d'esprit, &c.[1] The author does not, however,
design to entertain his readers with accounts of the mistakes which,
have arisen respecting it; because many of them, he is convinced,
would be received with incredulity; and he could not, without an
indelicate exposure of individuals, verify his anecdotes.

But some sensible readers have complained of the difficulty of
determining _what_ they are to believe. Of the existence of
Buonaparte, indeed, they remained fully convinced; nor, if it were
left doubtful, would any important results ensue; but if they can give
no _satisfactory reason_ for their conviction, how can they know, it
is asked, that they may not be mistaken as to other points of greater
consequence, on which they are no l