138 LIMITS AND FLUXIONS 



Lemma, •' Every body will be satisfied that the 

 true reason of bis backwardness, is the fear he is 

 under, that I shall make good my promise, in shew- 

 ing, that bis explanation is either a false one, or, 

 in case it be true, is to ali intents and purposes the 

 very same with mine " (p. 396). 



In June, 1737, Dr. Pemberton replies again, by re- 

 peating bis previous assertion against Philalethes's 

 explanation of Newton's Le^nma^ given in the 

 Minute Mathematician, but does not permit him- 

 self to be drawn into giving an explanation of his 

 own of Newton's Lemma. 



In Jurin's article in the July issue, 1737, we read : 

 **I did indeed take notice of the prudence Dr. 

 Pemberton used, in passing by my second inter- 

 pretation, which was so clear and plain, and was so 

 fully illustrated by examples, that there was no 

 possibility of perverting the sense of it " (p. 70). 

 *'But since this dispute, which began upon matters 

 of science, . . . unless Dr. Pemberton shall see fit 

 to revive it by giving his so long demanded explica- 

 tion, I shall not judge it worth while to take notice 

 of what he may hereafter write. " 



Dr. Pemberton followed with some Observations in 

 the August, 1737, number, while in the September 

 number there appears " the last reply of Philalethes," 

 and in the October number the final answer by 

 Pemberton. Thus ended a dispute which had for 

 some time ceased to contain much of scientific and 

 historic value. 



