them on the track of the burglar, with the view to the recovery of your
property. But just as you are starting with this object, some person
comes in, and on learning what you are about, says, "My good friend,
you are going on a great deal too fast. How do you know that the man
who really made the marks took the spoons? It might have been a monkey
that took them, and the man may have merely looked in afterwards." You
would probably reply, "Well, that is all very well, but you see it is
contrary to all experience of the way tea-pots and spoons are
abstracted; so that, at any rate, your hypothesis is less probable than
mine." While you are talking the thing over in this way, another friend
arrives, one of that good kind of people that I was talking of a little
while ago. And he might say, "Oh, my dear sir, you are certainly going
on a great deal too fast. You are most presumptuous. You admit that
all these occurrences took place when you were fast asleep, at a time
when you could not possibly have known anything about what was taking
place. How do you know that the laws of Nature are not suspended
during the night? It may be that there has been some kind of
supernatural interference in this case." In point of fact, he declares
that your hypothesis is one of which you cannot at all demonstrate the
truth, and that you are by no means sure that the laws of Nature are
the same when you are asleep as when you are awake.

Well, now, you cannot at the moment answer that kind of reasoning. You
feel that your worthy friend has you somewhat at a disadvantage. You
will feel perfectly convinced in your own mind, however, that you are
quite right, and you say to him, "My good friend, I can only be guided
by the natural probabilities of the case, and if you will be kind enough
to stand aside and permit me to pass, I will go and fetch the police."
Well, we will suppose that your journey is successful, and that by good
luck you meet with a policeman; that eventually the burglar is found