“But, it is said, that the disclosure of the name of the gentleman, from whom these papers came, would remove all doubts, and settle men’s minds upon the subject. He believes, and is confident, that with some it would. But who is it that says this? It cannot be the real Critic or Antiquarian. He will not say that his art or science amounts to nothing, and that his lucubrations are idle and useless. But if the point cannot finally or satisfactorily be decided either by the thing written, its paper or parchment vehicle, or seals appendant, or the other circumstances under which it was introduced, and must depend wholly upon the place and person from whom they came, what becomes of the acumen of the Critic, or the skill and labour of the Antiquarian? By this rule it is a question for another jurisdiction; and the occupation of the Critic and Antiquarian is gone.”
After perusing this account, we are naturally led to ask one or two questions. It is observable that we are not here told where the three deeds which are said to have been first discovered, were found. The principal part of the whole mass, indeed, is said to
