The prejudices created against monopolists in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, were not without foundation, in consequence of the absurd rights conceded to patentees of imaginary inventions; amounting to the legalizing of extortion of the most unquestionable and aggravating kind, without any chance of remedy. Real inventions were few, and impositions were everywhere practised with bold effrontery. There was nothing in the public character of the Marquis of Worcester to bespeak public favour. Who could ever dream that the Earl of Glamorgan was suddenly to assume a new character? The few inventions that were regarded as wonders of art were of ancient origin, slowly perfected, and in 1663 were considered to have reached almost the acmé of perfection. Yet here was a nobleman, unheard of, except for his share in Charles the First’s design to punish his rebellious subjects with the aid of an Irish army, suddenly proposing to supersede all ancient approved and improved methods of elevating water; and to perform many other surprising mechanical feats. And not only was he an inventor, but an innovator on old custom and a monopolist, not by patent alone, but by Act of Parliament for ninety-nine years! Even Dr. Hook could not view the Marquis otherwise than by the common standard of public opinion, acknowledging that he only went to see the wondrous engine at Vauxhall “_to laugh at it_!” And he could even condescend to report of his fellow inventor’s labour, that,--“as far as I could see it, it _seemed_ one of the perpetual motion fallacies.” So that its very regularity and remarkable continuity of operation were alone, considered enough to condemn it! Dr. Robert Hook was deservedly esteemed as a mathematician, and he was also distinguished for his mechanical ingenuity; but he was a man of very peculiar habits and singular disposition, being excessively jealous and cynical. This splenetic philosopher appears to have set out for Lambeth in no disposition to form a dispassionate opinion on the work of a rival inventor. A few lines of description, however meagre, would have been invaluable, whereas his cynical remark leads to the unfavourable supposition that his disingenuous statements had their influence on Boyle and other Fellows of the Royal Society, to check any further inquiry respecting the supposed mechanical marvel.