This writer will be one instance of the use of such an organ of inquiry as "N. & Q." MR. CORNEY'S reply to my Query reminds me of Wilson's _History of Navigation_, with which I have long been acquainted: but I had quite forgotten, or perhaps never remarked, that this Wilson was _James_, and _M.D._ Baron Maseres reprinted the _History of Navigation_ in the fourth volume of the _Scriptores Logarithmici_: it is an elaborate summary, of wide research, and puts the author's learning and judgment beyond a doubt. Maseres, in his Preface, gives a mention of Wilson, and, in addition to the facts now brought out, states, in his own curiously explicit style, that Dr. Pemberton's _Epistola ad Amicum J. W. de Cotesii inventis_, "was addressed to this Dr. James Wilson, who was the person meant by the word _Amicum_, with the two letters _J. W._, which were the initial letters of his name." I happen to possess Brook Taylor's copy of this _Epistola_ (4to. 1722), and its Supplement (4to. 1723), in which Taylor has written, "E libris Br. Taylor, ex dono eximii paris amicorum, autoris D. H. Pemberton atque editoris D. J. Wilson." Thus it is established that the author of the dissertation on the fluxional controversy appended to Robins's tracts, lived in friendship with some of the most distinguished parties to that quarrel. It is also established that he was fully conversant with the mathematics of the day; for Pemberton's letter, called out by Wilson's own queries, could have been read by none but a previous reader of Cotes and the highest fluxionists. As to Wilson's age, he says (Robins's _Math. Tr._, vol. ii. p. 299.) he was a fellow-student of Pemberton at Paris: the latter was born in 1694, and the former was probably of nearly the same age. They were close friends to the end of their lives, and Wilson published Pemberton's _Course of Chemistry_, delivered at Gresham College, 8vo. 1771, according to Hutton and Watt. These last-named authorities both attribute to Pemberton himself the dissertation on the fluxional controversy in Robins's _Tracts_: but it certainly has Wilson's name to it; or rather, it is said to be by the _publisher_ (which we now call _editor_) of the volumes. It is very likely that Pemberton gave help: assuredly he must have been consulted by his intimate friend on facts the truth of which was within his own knowledge. Accordingly, the following assertions, made by Wilson, are not to be lightly passed over: first (which also Robins assumes again and again), that _Newton_ wrote the anonymous account of the _Commercium Epistolicum_ (_Phil. Trans._, No. 342.) usually attributed to Keill, which, in Latin, forms the Preface to the second edition of that work. Secondly, that Newton wrote the criticism on John Bernoulli's letter at the end of the second edition. Thirdly, that Newton himself, and not Pemberton, omitted the celebrated Scholium from the third edition of the _Principia_. Montucla, in the second edition (1802, vol. iii. p.