_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.