146 LIMITS AND FLUXIONS 



not whether I thought him in the right or in the 

 wrong, but only whether I should take anything 

 amiss ; to which I replied as before. Upon talking 

 with another friend of Mr. Robins a day or two 

 after, I repeated my desire to talk with Mr. Robins 

 about his explanation of the Lemma, before his 

 papers went to the press : but was told that could 

 not be, for that the part of the papers where the 

 Lemma was spoke of, was to go to the press that 

 afternoon. ... I do not remember, that any offer 

 was made to me of ' letting the whole design fall, 

 if I desired it. ' Had any such offer been made, I 

 had at that time so much regard for Mr. Robins, 

 that I think I should at least have desired him to 

 stop the design, till he and I had examined the 

 Lemma together, in order to prevent his exposing 

 himself in the manner he has since done. As to 

 the second application made to me near a year 

 after, it may easily be judged, that I, who gave 

 these gentlemen no reason to think I had any in- 

 fluence over Philalethes, or so much as knew who 

 he was, could neither comply with nor reject their 

 proposai " (p. 9). 



Remarks 



147. The debate between Jurin and Robins is 

 the most thorough discussion of the theory of 

 limits carried on in England during the eighteenth 

 century. It constitutes a refinement of previous 

 conceptions. 



Jurin possessed the more general conception of 



