"_Theophania_" (Vol. i., p. 174.).--An inquiry is made by your correspondent as to the author of this romance, printed in 4to. in 1655, to which no answer has yet been returned. In my copy, under "By an English Person of Quality," in the title-page, is written, in a contemporary handwriting, "Sr. W. Sales." In the same handwriting is a MS. key, annexed to the book, to all the names. This is too long to copy here, but if your correspondent wishes for a transcript I shall be happy to supply him with one. JAS. CROSSLEY. _Royal Library_ (Vol. iv., p. 446.).--I cannot let GRIFFIN'S observation on my contradiction of the fable about an intended sale of the library to Russia pass unanswered, as it might seem as if I acquiesced in his criticism, and so leave a doubt on the point. He asks, "Must the story be false because the Princess de Lieven never heard of it? that is, must a whole story be untrue if a part of it is?" To which I answer, Yes, when the part refuted is the sole evidence for the rest. The story of the sale to Russia stood on the _sole_ alleged evidence of the Princess de Lieven. I had myself good reason to believe that the story was false, but I delayed contradicting it on general grounds, till I had obtained the direct testimony of the Princess that she had not only not said or done what had been imputed to her, but that she had _never before heard of any such proposition_. Those who know anything of the _English Court_ and _Russian Embassy_ of those days, will acknowledge that this is also a complete refutation of GRIFFIN'S new, but still more vague, version, that _perhaps_ it was "the _Russian ambassador, or some distinguished Russian_," that was engaged in the matter. I believe that I know as much about it as any one now alive, and though I cannot trust my memory to state all the details, I can venture to assert that I never heard of any _Russian_ proposition, and that I am confident that there never was one. C. _Reichenbach's Ghosts_ (Vol. iv., p. 5.).--DR. MAITLAND asked what "thousands of ghost-stories" Reichenbach thought he had disproved. Certainly those by which it is said "the spirits of the departed wander over their graves" (Ashburner's _Reichenbach_, p. 177.). He shows that superstition to be popular in Germany. The weakness of the Baron's _tirade_ (a bad style, in which he rarely indulges,) lies in this, that the best class of ghosts is an entirely different class. So that enlightenment and freedom, superstition and ignorance, have not yet wound up their accounts. See Gregory's _Letters to a Candid Enquirer_, p. 277., where enlightenment and freedom get a slap on the face. He maintains that even grave-lights (probably) humaniform apparitions; and that all other ghost-stories, not connected with the place of interment, equally belong to bi-od or animal magnetism. A. N.