It has been seen, second, by internal evidence, that the Letters are spurious,--because the translations differ from each other,--because the style and composition of many passages, are not such as could ever have come from Mary's pen,--because every facility was given to forgery by the nature of her handwriting, and by the access which the forgers had to genuine letters and papers, of which they could make a partial use,--because, at the time in which they are alleged to have been written, Mary was, in all probability, not at the places from which they are dated,--because the letters contradict each other, and are all contradicted by the sonnets,--and because the arguments in support of them, drawn from internal evidence by Robertson and others, are equally inconclusive with their external proofs. If Mary's innocence, from all the blacker crimes with which she has been charged, must still continue matter of doubt, it is not too much to declare all history uncertain, and virtue and vice merely convertible terms. ADDENDUM. Through the kindness of William Traill, Esq. of Woodwick, Orkney, we are enabled to give the following authentic genealogical account of the manner in which the interesting portrait of Mary Queen of Scots, engraved for this Work, and particularly described in Vol. I. Chap. IV., came into the possession of his family. "Sir Robert Stewart of Strathdon, son of King James V., by Eupham, daughter of Alexander, 1st Lord Elphingston, obtained a grant of the Crown lands of Orkney and Shetland from his sister Queen Mary in 1565. He was created Earl of Orkney by his uncle James VI., 28th October 1581. He married Lady Jean Kennedy, daughter of Gilbert, fourth Earl of Cassils.