(for there are two) Scott addresses Sir Samuel Shepherd, remarking that the tract deals with 'perhaps the only…
- Date of account
- Published 1894
- Source
- Cock Lane and Common-Sense
- Reference
- Cock Lane and Common-Sense · selected passage 215
- Rights
- public_domain
- Language
- English
- Record updated
- 2026-08-24
Record summary
(for there are two) Scott addresses Sir Samuel Shepherd, remarking that the tract deals with 'perhaps the only subject of legal inquiry which has escaped being investigated by his skill, and illustrated by his genius'
Published source text
Read the available text below. Archive transcriptions may contain OCR errors; later context is labelled separately. A recorded claim is not a finding that it happened.
Source passage
Source text · mention only(for there are two) Scott addresses Sir Samuel Shepherd, remarking that the tract deals with 'perhaps the only subject of legal inquiry which has escaped being investigated by his skill, and illustrated by his genius'. That point is the amount of credit due to the evidence of a ghost. In his preface Sir Walter cites the familiar objection of a learned judge that 'the ghost must be sworn in usual form, but in case he does not come forward, he cannot be heard, as now proposed, through the medium' (medium indeed!) 'of a third party'. It seems to be a rule of evidence that what a dead man said may be received, on the report of the person with whom he communicated. A ghost is a dead man, and yet he is deprived, according to the learned judge's ruling, of his privilege. Scott does not cite the similar legend in Hibernian Tales, the chap book quoted by Thackeray in his Irish Sketch-book. In that affair, when the judge asked the ghost to give his own evidence: 'Instantly there came a dreadful rumbling noise into the court--"Here am I that was murdered by the prisoner at the bar"'. The Hibernian Tales are of no legal authority, nor can we give chapter and verse for another well-known anecdote.
Historical context
Contextual commentary · mention onlyThis comes from historical psychical research. Methods, witness handling and standards of evidence differ from present-day research and should be assessed from the cited passage and edition.
Modern context
Contextual commentary · mention onlyThe passage can support a history of claims and recurring descriptions. It does not establish a paranormal mechanism, and competing psychological, social and physical explanations remain relevant.
Investigate related details with Anomaly Graph’s account-based search, or read how matching and provenance work.