JURIN V. ROBINS AND PEMBERTON loi 



Jurìn^s Review of his own Lettei's to Berkeley 



121. In the November, 1735, number of the 

 Republick of Letters, Philalethes Cantabrigiensis 

 (Jurin) appears with an article, Considerations upon 

 some passages contained in two Letters to the Author 

 of the Analyst. The two letters in question are the 

 two repHes Jurin himself had made to Berkeley. 

 The article is really a reply to Robins, though 

 Robins's name is not mentioned. Jurin claims to 

 have adhered strictly to Newton's language ; some 

 other defenders of Newton, says he, are guilty of 

 departing from it. Their objections to his own 

 defence are threefold : 



" I. My explication of Lemma i, Lib. I, Princip." 

 See our §§ 4, 6, 8. 



'* IL The sense of the Scholium ad Sect. i, 

 Libr. I, Princ, particularly as to, 



*' I. The doctrine of Limits, 2. The meaning 

 of the term evanescent, or vanishing. " 

 See our §§ 10-15. 

 "III. The sense of Z67;2w<2: 2, Lib. \\, Princip." 

 See our §§ 16-19. 



122. As to the first objection, Jurin insists that 

 Newton's v^oràsfitcnt ultimo cequales mean that the 

 quantities 'Mo at last become actually, perfectly, 

 and absolutely equal." He takes the hands of a 

 clock between 11 and 12. The arcs traced by the 

 hands '' i. Constantly tend to equality, 2. During 

 an hour, 3. And will come nearer to one another 

 than to have any given difference, 4. Before the 



