eving that worldly competitions and commercial
jealousy made it very improbable that they would unite so closely as
the commission of such a crime would imply.

What testimony is there then to overcome these probabilities?
Confession wrung from mortal agony and unsupported by circumstantial
evidence. Their enemies do, to be sure, appeal to certain
circumstances, such as the identity of the extorted confession itself:
true, I believe it to be so perfectly identical as to lose all
character of independence. But there were other circumstances. There
were animal remains found twenty-five days after the Friar had
disappeared, in a running sewer in closer proximity to a butcher's
stall than to David Arari's house. There was said also to be the mark
of fire on the white marble pavement of the same gentleman's court. I
saw it not, though the stone was pointed out. This mark, which did not
exist, was supposed to be caused by the burning of the Padre's
clothes, but there were certain stains on a wall which might be blood;
I thought they might be anything else rather. Again, with the
aforesaid animal remains there was found a piece of cloth such as
might identify it with part of the Friar's cap. Is this circumstance
consistent with the burning of his apparel, or did they spare that
part only, which would most easily lead to detection?

But there was another circumstance much dwelt on, viz., the posting of
a notice at the barber's door, at too great a height for the Friar's
stature; therefore, evidently the work of a Jew. I can positively say,
it was at the natural height for such fixtures, within the reach of
any middle-sized person, and with the slightest trouble might be
placed there by anyone. But what was the object of the gigantic Jew in
posting the advertisement at all? He had taken it, it was _supposed_,
from the Synagogue door, where it was _supposed_ the Friar had posted
it. And for the purpose of destroying all trace of the Friar having
been in the Jews' quarter, he transferred it to the barber's door,
which was actually within the Jews' quarter. He might, to be sure,
have destroyed it and all trace of the Padre at once; but this would
have been an expedient too simple for the sagacity of this Hebrew,
which appears to have been in an inverse ratio to his bulk.

The dulness of such reasoning defeats its malice. And this is all the
evidence for the charge procured by the bastinadoing of one hundred
and twenty persons, i