returned from the Hebrides with a considerable degree of faith in
the many stories of that kind which I heard with a too easy
acquiescence, without any close examination of the evidence: but, since
that time, my belief in those stories has been much weakened,[1068] by
reflecting on the careless inaccuracy of narrative in common matters,
from which we may certainly conclude that there may be the same in what
is more extraordinary. It is but just, however, to add, that the belief
in second sight is not peculiar to the Highlands and Isles.[1069]

Some years after our Tour, a cause[1070] was tried in the Court of
Session, where the principal fact to be ascertained was, whether a
ship-master, who used to frequent the Western Highlands and Isles, was
drowned in one particular year, or in the year after. A great number of
witnesses from those parts were examined on each side, and swore
directly contrary to each other, upon this simple question. One of them,
a very respectable Chieftain, who told me a story of second sight, which
I have not mentioned, but which I too implicitly believed, had in this
case, previous to this publick examination, not only said, but attested
under his hand, that he had seen the ship-master in the year subsequent
to that in which the court was finally satisfied he was drowned. When
interrogated with the strictness of judicial inquiry, and under the awe
of an oath, he recollected himself better, and retracted what he had
formerly asserted, apologising for his inaccuracy, by telling the
judges, 'A man will _say_ what he will not _swear_.' By many he was much
censured, and it was maintained that every gentleman would be as
attentive to truth without the sanction of an oath, as with it. Dr.
Johnson, though he himself was distinguished at all times by a
scrupulous adherence to truth, controverted this proposition; and as a
proof that this was not, though it ought to be, the case, urged the very
different decisions of elections under Mr. Grenville's Act,[1071] from
those formerly made. 'Gentlemen will not pronounce upon oath what they
would have said, and voted in the house, without that sanction.'

However difficult it may be for men who believe in preternatural
communications, in modern times, to satisfy those who are of a different
opinion, they may easily refute the doctrine of their opponents, who
impute a belief in _second sight_ to _superstition_. To entertain a
visionary notion that one sees a dist