4.
reviewers were suspicious of the exuberant style, but gave themselves up to a somewhat unwilling suspension of disbelief: the most critical, on the other hand, objected to the grave pretensions to authenticity, indicated strange omissions and contradictions, and even went so far as to cite parallel passages from past writings. By the 19th of February, 1859, the publication of Cornwallis' work had even become something of a scandal if we are to judge from the following item in The Athenaeum:
A note from a Correspondent warns us against even the small amount of trust we wore disposed to place in the literal exactness of Mr. Cornwallis's adventures in Japan - as being so much honest faith thrown away. It is just as well that both Mr. Cornwallis and his readers should be acquainted with the doubt that has sprung up. Has he ever been in Japan? Was he not in London at the time given by himself to his adventures in the far Orient? If he can answer these questions, so much the better for his book.[1]
This direct assault on Cornwallis' honesty brought forth the following answer in the next number of The Athenaeum, in which we read:
Mr. Kinahan Cornwallis, in answer to the question of last week, writes:- "I have simply, but emphatically, to state that I have been in Japan. The circumstance of my having returned to London, within a comparatively short period after visiting that country, may have afforded a sort of foundation for your anonymous Correspondent to build upon.[2]
But the reviewers, once on the trail, were not to be
