In giving an account of this transaction,[92] Mr. Whiston states,
that nobody understood Sir Isaac’s paper, and that after sitting down
he obstinately kept silence, though he was much pressed to explain
himself more distinctly. At last, seeing that the scheme was likely to
be rejected, Whiston ventured to say that Sir Isaac did not wish to
explain more through fear of compromising himself, but that he really
approved of the plan. Sir Isaac, he goes on to say, repeated word for
word what Whiston had said. This is the part of Mr. Newton’s conduct
which M. Biot has described as puerile, and “tending to confirm the
fact of the aberration of his intellect in 1693.” Before we can admit
such a censure we must be satisfied with the correctness of Whiston’s
statement. Newton’s paper is perfectly intelligible, and we may easily
understand how he might have approved of Mr. Ditton’s plan as ingenious
and practicable under particular circumstances, though he did not think
it of that paramount importance which would have authorized the House
of Commons to distinguish it by a parliamentary reward. The conflict
between public duty and a disposition to promote the interests of Mr.
Whiston and Mr. Ditton was no doubt the cause of that embarrassment of
manner which the former of these mathematicians has so unkindly brought
before the public.
CHAPTER XV.
_Respect in which Newton was held at the Court of George I.—The
Princess of Wales delighted with his Conversation—Leibnitz
endeavours to prejudice the Princess against Sir Isaac and Locke—
Controversy occasioned by his Conduct—The Princess obtains a
Manuscript Abstract of his System of Chronology—The Abbé Conti
is, at her request, allowed to take a Copy of it on the promise of
Secresy—He prints it surreptitiously in French, accompanied with a
Refutation by M. Freret—Sir Isaac’s Defence of his System—Father
Souciet attacks it—and is answered by Dr. Halley—Sir Isaac’s larger
Work on Chronology published after his Death—Opinions respecting it—
Sir Isaac’s Paper on the Form of the most ancient Year._
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account