intention of bis own bill (an intention whicb be thus made a jest of the greatest power on earth to enforce) the conclusion we are left in is, that the real purpose of this psuedo philosopher,[1] was to
- ↑ That there is a class of philosophers by experiment as well as experimental philosophers, the Author once had a remarkable proof. Some years ago he received (and has by him) a letter on business, from a person who till then he was not aware aspired to any higher concerns than those it treated of. It was most grossly illiterate, both in the grammar and orthography; but that a dealer and chapman should be so deficient, not being altogether singular, as the world goes, he might have thought no more of it; had not the letter been seen by a friend, who informed him, to his utter astonishment, that the writer of it was a metaphysician and a philosopher—that he had published a tract to controvert a particular theory of Newton's; and he referred him to a periodical where he might see an account of the work.—That the same sagacity which elevated this metaphysician and philosopher to contend with Newton, could not serve him to put two words together right, as might be seen in this document, being too paradoxical for the Author's solution, he leaves the problem as he found it. But it is worth observing, what "thin partitions do their bounds divide" between these philosophical pretenders, and
bearing of the question—which is that "the reason of the thing" especially demanded of him to exercise this asserted right with all possible forbearance, and with the avoiding of any injury or hardship in enforcing it.—Now as the contrary is glaringly evident, and he indulged a revolting inhumanity towards the aged Claimant, without the least regard to "the reason of the thing," the unavoidable inference is—that he was ready to appeal to this argument, if it squared with his views, but still more ready to throw it to the dogs when it thwarted his disgraceful purpose.
