262 Vindication of the Attack [April, 



Article IX. 



Vindication of the Attack on Don Joseph Rodrigtiez Paper in the 

 Phito'iopkical Transactions. By Olinthus Gregory, LrL.D. of 

 the Royal Military Academy, Woolwich. 



(To Dr. Thomson.) 

 SIR, 



It was not till yesterday, that I saw the thirteenth Number of 

 your Annals of Philosoplvj, or I should have troubled you earlier 

 with a few observations, occasioned by the notice you have in that 

 number thought proper to take of my animadversions on Don 

 Rodriguez' paper, in the Philosophical Transactions for 1812. 



Your notice is short, and my remarks shall be as concise as they 

 can be rendered consistently with the nature of your strictures. 

 Indeed, had you enabled your readers to judge correctly on the 

 subjtct, either by a fair abridgement of my animadversions, or by 

 referring them to Iv° 159 of Nicholson's Piiilosophical Journal, or 

 to N° 179 of Tilloch's Philosophical Magazine, for the animad- 

 versions themselves, it is highly probable I should have remained 

 silent on so unpleasant a topic. 



There are three points in your brief notice, respecting which I 

 beg permission to speak for myself 1st. " Dr. Gregory has 

 publiblu'd a letter on the subject, in a style qnile new lo astrono- 

 mical discussions." What am I, or what is the public, to under- 

 stand by tiiis? Is it because the style is incorrect, or because the 

 tone is argumentative and decisive, or because the language is intem- 

 perafey that you tlius express yourself? Tlie first, I a))prehend. 

 Dr. Thomson is too courteous and well-bred to think of saying. 

 The second interpretation is equally improbable; for vviio that has 

 ever heard of the letters and pamphlets which, in the course of 

 the last haif century, have appeared in this country, on the subjects 

 of Irwin's marine chair, the equation of time, timekeepers, sup- 

 posed errors in the Nautical Almanac, &c., will venture to affirm 

 that statemtnt, counter-statement, reasoning, refutation, and even 

 recrimination, are " quite new to astronomical discussions ?" Is it 

 then, because my language was intemperate? That I deny, and I 

 am persuaded that every impartial judge who reads my letter, 

 above referred to, will say that no such charge can fairly be 

 brought against it. 1 have, I believe, shown decisively, that every 

 position taken by Don Rodriguez is untenable. I liave, as the 

 public generally admit, and as you do not attempt to deny, (if I 

 lightly understand you,) refuted every argument advanced by that 

 gentleman to prove the incorrectness of Colonel Madge's observa- 

 tions ; I have proved that the D(jn's opinions on the general subject 

 run counter to those of the greatest philosophers in Europe ; J have 

 pliown that an error of 4J seconds could not arise from the fixintf. 



