198; Cvs Reply to D. [Seer. 
in the following extract from D.’s letter in the Annals for April, 
p- 292. “ Accuracy, it seems to me, should be rigidly adhered 
to in all discussions. An author should never be made to say. 
what he has not. In more than one instance, C. has not been 
over delicate in this respect.” 
By this no doubt D. means to insinuate, that I make little 
scruple to state a writer’s meaning or expression to be different 
from that which I believe it really is—an insinuation which I 
must take leave to assert is wholly unfounded and unjustifiable. 
To state that a writer means that which itis known he does not 
mean is as direct a falsehood, as to assert, he says, that which he 
does not say; and to do either, would be so degrading to any 
one guilty of such misconduct, as to render him unworthy of any 
other attention than such as might be necessary for his exposure ; 
whether or not I have so done will best appear from an examina- 
tion of what D. has offered as an instance. 
“At present,” says D. “I shall adduce an example which 
will serve as a specimen of the rest; and lest there should be 
any mistake or difficulty in turning to Mr. H.’s opinion, I shall 
place right against it one or two quotations from his first paper. 
Quotations from 
“ Cs Observations on Mr. “ Mr. Herapath’s paper, An- 
Herapath’s Theory, Annals for nals for April, 1821, p. 279.” 
Dec. 1821, p. 420.” 
<< But whether the atoms be «“ Therefore it seemed to me 
elastic, or hard, having the pro- that the ultimate atoms ought 
erties of elastic bodies which to possess two properties 7 
Mr. Herapath has attributed to direct contrariety, hardness and 
them.” elasticity.” 
The evident meaning of the extract from my former paper is, 
that Mr. H. has attributed to hard bodies properties which do 
actually belong to elastic bodies. Now this he might have done 
even though he had really thought the properties of elasticity 
and hardness to be in direct contrariety to each other, it. being 
sufficiently clear that however opposed he might have esteemed 
them to be, it is still possible that he might have erroneously 
attributed to the one, properties which really belong to the other. 
Bat whether the statement that he did so be correct or erro-: 
neous, the sentence does not pretend to give either Mr. H.’s 
expression, or his meaning; and, therefore, cannot possibly 
have misrepresented the one or the other. It cannot fairly be 
made to amount to more than an assertion, that:some of the pro- 
petties which Mr. H. has attributed to hard bodies-in my. judg- 
ment belong to elastic bodies. That the opinion expressed in 
the extract is really not ill founded, will appear from the following 
quotations : 
Mr. Herapath says, “ If two hard and equal balls come in 
