In discussing the question of the origin of the Gipsies with some English members of the race, I found that “a very intelligent Gipsy informed me that his race sprang from a body of men—a cross between the Arabs and Egyptians—that left Egypt in the train of the Jews” (p. 14). And I wrote when I published this, that “the intelligent reader will not differ with me as to the weight to be attached to the Gipsy’s remark on this point.” To that question I devoted ten (13–23) closely printed pages to demonstrate that the “mixed multitude,” or part of it, that left Egypt with Moses, after separating from the Jews, travelled East into Northern Hindostan, where they formed the Gipsy caste (p. 21); becoming in every way a people like the Gipsy so far as he is known to the public to-day. I further said that this people “travelled East, _their own masters_, and became the origin of the Gipsy nation throughout the world” (p. 40). “What objection could any one advance against the Gipsies being the people that left Egypt in the train of the Jews? Not certainly an objection as to race, for there must have been many captive people or tribes introduced into Egypt from the many countries surrounding it . . . That the ‘mixed multitude’ travelled into India, acquired the language of that part of Asia, _and perhaps modified its appearance there_, and became the origin of the Gipsy race, we may safely assume . . . Everything harmonizes so beautifully with the idea that the Gipsies are the ‘mixed multitude’ of the Exodus that it may be admitted by the world. Even in the matter of religion, we could imagine Egyptian captives losing a knowledge of their religion, as has happened with the Africans in the New World, {14} and, not having had another taught them, leaving Egypt under Moses without any religion at all. After entering India they would in all probability become a wandering people, and for a certainty live aloof from all others” (pp. 494–496). “If we could but find traces of an Egyptian origin among the Gipsies of Asia, say Central and Western Asia, the question would be beyond dispute. But that might be a matter of some trouble” (p. 40). In this way Mr. Leland’s informant, John Nano, if he was correct in what he said, confirmed my conjecture as to the Gipsies’ Egyptian or rather Syrian origin; for after escaping from Egypt they would remain for some time in Syria or its neighbourhood before they would become a body and proceed East. As illustrative of Mr. Leland’s desire to “give quite as good an opportunity to others who are in our business as to ourselves,” I find him writing thus:—