15 Novr 1813 Omitt this page 5 Aug 1815?

Antimir Price and Campbel

2

Ch.1. Beginning

2

In the first place, for simplicity's sake, suppose a single narrator, by whom the state of things in question is reported as having made itself manifested to his senses in the character of a percipient witness. In having taken observation of it in the character of a percipient witness.

Was he himself deceived? on the occasion of the report so made by him, is the case such that not being himself deceived, he has altered this report knowing it to be false and thus if not expressly labouring to deceive, aware of the effect which in proportion to the credence given to it, it can not but have as to the deceiving others?—In either of these cases though by him the state of things in question has been represented by him as not really having at the time and place in question having had place in truth, it is unreal—in truth at the time and place in question it had not place.

Let the state of things as thus reported be such as to any view of the matter presents itself as being in itself improbable, that is of such a sort as to be more or less unconformable to the ordinary scheme of nature: viz [...?] of that which has presented itself to my observation and reflection as being in relation to the state of things in question the ordinary course of nature: in which case the probative/ direct evidence composed of the testimony of the narrator, finds standing in opposition to it this uncomformity in the character of a mass of disprobative circumstantial evidence.