aptivity in Africa was rejected by many as half-fictitious: his
sufferings were greater than human nature could bear, and the Arabs of
the desert could never lead the life described. But since it has been
found that the sufferings undergone by the crew of the French frigate,
the Medusa, were no less horrible, and of the same kind, and that
Clapperton and others who have subsequently crossed the Sahara,
confirmed his statements respecting the Arabs,--he has been regarded
very differently. And it may be supposed, that if Sir Walter Scott had
known of the remarkable confirmation given by Benyouski, to Drury's
account of Madagascar, he would not have expressed his doubts of the
latter's veracity.[12] When writers, unacquainted with each other's
productions, are found, by incidental allusions, to agree in minute
particulars, the evidence is almost irrefutable. Paley has made an
admirable use of this species of proof in his _Horae Paulinae_.

Another mode of judging of an author's credibility is sometimes
furnished, by learning whether any of his alleged facts have been
contradicted by persons acquainted with them, especially if they are
such as these persons would be glad to contradict. If a person is
charged with being an accomplice in a crime, and he fails to rebut the
accusation, we may infer that he is unable to do so. Or, if the narrator
give place and date to certain memorable transactions, which, if false,
might easily be shown to be so, a similar inference may be deduced, when
it can be shown that others are interested in such exposure.

Now, on bringing the works under notice to these different tests, we
shall have tolerably strong presumptive evidence of their being, in the
main, worthy of credence. Vaux's Memoirs contain nothing that may not be
credited on the score of probability, while the circumstances detailed
are remarkably coherent; they seem to arise naturally from each other.
Vidocq's, on the contrary, contain so many marvellous escapes from
prisons, so many perils from contests with ruffians and bravoes, and
such varied turns of fortune, that the reader is necessitated to
ask,--can this be true? Here, however, both Vaux and Ward offer him some
assistance; the similarity of their accounts, though destitute of so
many wonders, corroborating the probability of his. The three narratives
are quite in keeping. We find in each the same restlessness, the same
blind passion impelling to deeds of vice and desperati