JURIN V. ROBINS AND PEMBERTON 133 



but that Sir Isaac Newton, by the term infinitely 

 little^ meant a quantity variable, divisible, that, by 

 a Constant diminution, is conceived to become less 

 than any finite quantity whatsoever, and at last to 

 vanish into nothing. By which meaning ali that is 

 faulty in the method of indivisibles, is entirely 

 avoided ; and that being allowed, the rest is only 

 a dispute about a word " (p. (74)). 



Jurin declares in a ''Postscript" that " to carry 

 on two controversies at once is more than I have 

 leisure for " ; later "I intend to accept of Dr. 

 Pemberton's invitation " ; meanwhile Jurin inserts 

 an attestation of " his learned friend Phileleutherus 

 Oxoniensis'' to the effect that this friend is " fuUy 

 satisfied, Mr. Philalethes has expressed Sir Isaac 

 Newton's real meaning." The language of this 

 attestation foUows exactly the language of Pember- 

 ton, except that Philalethes, and not Robins, is 

 now declared the correct interpreter of Newton. 



139. In the December issue, 1736, of the Republick 

 of Lctters^ Robins says in an " Advertisement " that 

 " since Philalethes has given loose to passion," he 

 " cannot think anything farther necessary for the 

 satisfaction of impartial readers " (p. 492), and now 

 takes *Meave of Philalethes," but cannot resist a 

 few parting shots. Nor could Philalethes resist 

 making reply to this " Advertisement " in an 

 " Appendix " to the December number, 1736, of 

 the Republick of Letters, in which he expresses regret 

 "that so long a correspondence should end in dis- 

 content or ili humour." Jurin justifies the practice 



