[29] The idea of a Calculating Engine is not new. The celebrated Pascal constructed a machine for executing the ordinary operations of arithmetic, a description of which will be found in the _Encycl. Méthod._, and in the Works of Pascal, Tom. IV. p. 7, Paris, 1819. In his _Pensées_ he says, alluding to this Engine: “_La machine arithmétique fait des effets qui approchent plus de la pensée que tout ce que font les animaux; mais elle ne fait rien qui puisse faire dire qu’elle a de la volonté comme les animaux._” Subsequently, Leibnitz invented a machine by which, says Mr. De Morgan, “arithmetic computations could be made.” Polenus, a learned and ingenious Italian, invented a machine by which multiplication was performed—and mechanical contrivances for performing particular arithmetical processes were made about a century ago, but they were merely modifications of Pascal’s. These Engines were very different to Mr. Babbage’s Difference-Engine. [30] This letter was printed and published in July, 1822. [31] Sir H. Davy had witnessed and expressed his admiration of the performances of the Engine. [32] I am informed upon good authority, that Dr. Young differed in opinion from his colleagues. Without doubting that an engine could be made, he conceived that it would be far more useful to invest the probable cost of constructing such a calculating machine as was proposed, in the funds, and apply the dividends to paying calculators. [33] Parliamentary Paper, No. 370, 1823. [34] Mr. Babbage very justly observes, that had the mutual relations of the two parties, and the details of the plans then adopted, been clearly defined, there is little doubt but that the Difference-Engine would long since have existed. [35] It will be desirable to distinguish between, 1. The small _Model_ of the Original or Difference-Engine. 2. The Difference-Engine itself, belonging to the Government, a part only of which has been put together. 3. The designs for another Engine called the Analytical-Engine. [36] Sir R. Peel distinctly admitted this in the House of Commons in March, 1843. [37] A curious anecdote is related illustrative of the great perfection to which Mr. Clement was in the habit of bringing machinery. He received an order from America to construct a large screw in the _best possible manner_, and he accordingly made one with the greatest mathematical accuracy. But his bill amounted to some hundreds of pounds, which completely staggered the American, who never calculated upon paying more than 20_l._ at the utmost for the screw. The matter was referred to arbitrators, who gave an opinion in favour of Mr. Clement. [38] They were Messrs. Brunel, Donkin, and Field. [39] Colonel Sabine informs me, that Dr. Whewell was afterwards added to the Committee.