to by Nunez de la Vega'--for he is indebted, after all, for the sum total of this now simple _historical tract_, to the _allusions_ of some unknown writer--'or _another_,' he says, '_similar_ to it, _may be_ the one now in the possession of Don Ramon de Ordonez y Aguiar,' (though before pronounced to have been destroyed!) So much for the proof of this story, good, bad, or indifferent. To have continued out these observations, we could have more clearly shown its folly and untruth; but, though necessary to satisfy the mind of the curious on so important a subject, yet we would avoid unnecessary minutia, and deem what has already been stated, quite sufficient to establish our position. Now for the story itself. This, he says, was 'communicated' to him by some 'valuable notices,' (how, we are left entirely to conjecture,) 'by the above writer,' (Aguiar,) 'who' he says, 'is engaged at this time in composing a work, the _title_ of which I have seen!' The said title is '_Historia del Cielo y de la Tierra_!' (History of Heaven and Earth!) 'that will not only embrace the original population of America, but trace its progress from Chaldea, immediately after the confusion of tongues, its mystical and moral theology, its mythology, and most important events!' Such a work we should be glad to see, and so would all the world beside; but 'unfortunately' it has never appeared, though 'this time' spoken of, was more than forty years ago! The title of the work, and the abilities which he ascribes to its author, he says, 'lead us to anticipate a work so perfect in its kind as will completely astonish the world!' Let the reader notice the agreement between this source of 'communicated' information, and that 'alluded to' by Nunez de la Vega. 'The memoir in his possession, (Aguiar's) consists,' he continues, 'of five or six folios of common quarto paper, written in ordinary characters in the Tzendal language; an evident proof,' he farther adds, 'of its having been copied from the original in hieroglyphics, shortly after the conquest.' We do not see, in this circumstance, the 'evident proof mentioned, or 'the shadow, thereof;' but this is in keeping with all his 'proofs.'