acute,) that whatever one Saint relates of another, when he writes his life, is reverently to be believed. Unwilling as you might be to subscribe to this as a general rule, I am persuaded that in the case of Bede you will hesitate as little as I do to admit it. It is well known that he relates no miracles of his own performing; and this you may account for satisfactorily by his modesty, and because he has not written any detailed account of his own life. But how will you explain the singular fact, that though his Ecclesiastical History, and the biographies which he drew up from materials which were supplied to him, are full of miraculous stories, the Lives of the Abbots of Wearmouth under whom and with whom he had lived, and which he composed therefore upon his own knowledge and responsibility, have no such garnish? How happens it, Sir, that when he gives you in so many instances, with a fidelity like that of Dampier, the authorities for his relations of this kind, he never presents one as having occurred directly within his own knowledge? He was a Saint himself, and conversant with Saints; and miracles were performed by every Saint of whom he speaks, except those whom he knew and lived with. They took place everywhere, except where he was present.

I

He heard of them from all sides far and near. He saw persons who had seen others who had seen them performed, or who knew the Saint by whom they were worked, or the patients upon whom they worked them; but he never witnessed one himself. It could not be for want of faith, for he believed the cases which were communicated to him, and faithfully recorded them. It could not be for want of opportunity; the United Monasteries contained a constellation of living Saints, and a choice assortment of relics, the authenticity of which could not be called in question: they had not been purchased as stolen goods, (common as it was so to deal in such articles,) but brought from Rome by Benedict Biscop himself, and were therefore undoubted originals; ...moreover they were of the first water, of the finest touch,...relics of the Apostles as well as of the Martyrs. He tells us that they were there, and does not relate a single instance of their wonder-working virtue. And yet, believing feelingly and fervently in these things as he did, can it be doubted that he would have recorded such instances with eager delight, if there had been any which, as a wise and religious man, he could conscientiously have attested?

That Bede was aware of the importance of such attestations in these cases, is clearly shown in his writings. He contents himself with a general reference to his documents for the events which are merely historical, and gives it in his introductory Epistle to King Ceolulph, once for all: but when he introduces miracles, he is as particular in citing *authorities as you have required me to be, Sir.

* For example, a miracle (and a very possible one) was wrought upon a boy at the tomb of King Oswald, quod ita esse gestum, qui referebat mihi frater inde adveniens adjecit, quod eo adhuc tempore quo mecum loquebatur, superesset in eodem monasterio jam juvenis ille, in quo tunc puero factum erat hoc miraculum sanitatis. (L. 3. c. 12.) Others he heard from Bishop Acca, who heard them from Willebord or Wilfred. (L. 3. c. 13. p. 62.) Another, non quilibet dubius relator, sed fidissimus mihi nostræ Ecclesiæ presbyter, Cynimund vocabulo narravit, qui se hoc ab ipso Utta presbytero, in quo et per quem completum est, audisse perhibebat. (L. 3. c. 15.) This, too, I shall have occasion to adduce as one of a numerous class, in which the modus operandi is perfectly understood. The brave stories of St. Fursey he relates upon the authority of an old brother in the Monastery, who had heard them from a very veracious and pious man, who had heard them from Fursey himself, (L. 3. 20.) This is exactly in the manner of Dampier, one of the most faithful as well as exact and excellent of all voyage-writers, And where Bede cannot thus directly refer to his testimonies, he gives such stories as quæ a majoribus audivimus, or with an ut ferunt. I have here given a few instances only of what is his constant practice.

This is a remarkable circumstance, and I know not of any other instance in which such precaution has been of so much consequence to the author's own reputation. By so doing he has given the most decisive proof of his own trust-worthiness. The only imputation which could have stained his otherwise spotless character, was that of having knowingly concurred in the system of deceit which the Romish Church was carrying on; and from that imputation he is thus completely cleared. He was credulous in an age of credulity, and therefore he believed and related the miracles of which he heard. But he was too intelligent to be deceived into a belief that he saw any himself, and too upright to increase the currency of fables by circulating any from the mint of his own invention. Conversant as I was with Bede's historical and biographical works, this observation (and I am persuaded, Sir, that you will feel its importance) had not struck me till I recurred to them on the present occasion. I have real pleasure, for the deep and unfeigned respect with which I regard his venerable name, in bringing forth this part of his character, the only one of his many great and admirable virtues which, during eleven centuries, has (if I am not mistaken) never before been distinctly

perceived and I once more thank you, Sir, sincerely, for having drawn me into a course of inquiry which has produced so gratifying a result.

your

Bede's evidence, therefore, as to the existence of miracles in his time, may be compared to what your own would be concerning those of the present age, if in a Supplement to your Historical Memoirs, or in a second part of Reminiscences, you were to write upon the boasted perpetual succession of supernatural occurrences, as still characterizing the Papal Church, and thereby demonstrating it to be the true one. You might refer to many prodigious instances, abroad and at home, and relate some of them for edification; and such testimony would have all the weight of your name and character, till some thoughtful person should examine to what that testimony amounted. It might be recorded in your pages that many of your friends (persons of undoubted integrity) had witnessed the liquefaction at Naples, with great devotion; and that nothing could be more certain and notorious than that this miracle was still performed annually, as it had been from time immemorial, in public, before the Court and people of that populous and enlightened city. You might appeal also to the recent