But they do not show how he meant to get over the main difficulty, which at the same time he fully recognises.

Can it have been that Lord Hermiston's part was to have been limited to presiding at the _first_ trial, where the evidence incriminating Archie was unexpectedly brought forward, and to directing that the law should take its course?
Whether the final escape and union of Archie and Christina would have proved equally essential to the plot may perhaps to some readers seem questionable.

They may rather feel that a tragic destiny is foreshadowed from the beginning for all concerned, and is inherent in the very conditions of the tale.

But on this point, and other matters of general criticism connected with it, I find an interesting discussion by the author himself in his correspondence.

Writing to Mr.J.M.Barrie, under date November 1, 1892, and criticising that author's famous story of _The Little Minister_, Stevenson says:-- "Your descriptions of your dealings with Lord Rintoul are frightfully unconscientious.