DE MORGAN'S ACCOUNT OF WRIGHT'S SPECULATIONS 193 



and was published in 1750. Kant, as appears by Professor 

 Struve's statement, took his knowledge of it from the 

 Hamburgische Freie Urtheile of 1751, and wrote on the 

 same subject in his Allgemeine Naturgeschichte und Theorie 

 des Himmeh, Leipzig, 1755, 8vo. As far as I can see from 

 Professor Struve's description of Kant's views, there is not 

 in them any extension of Wright's, except in two points, 

 which I shall notice in the proper place. 



Wright's work consists of nine letters to a friend, and 

 in its speculations is both astronomical and theological; 

 the latter term including not merely expression of devo- 

 tional feeling, but much actual conjecture on what astronomy 

 may teach in relation to the future state of mankind. 

 Omitting this, I shall proceed to register the purely 

 astronomical doctrines of the treatise, so far as they seem 

 peculiar to Wright. 



I make one long extract from the seventh letter, which 

 might have been shortened, and the English of it made 

 clear and more correct, with no loss to Wright's memory. 

 But as this passage is very important as evidence, and is 

 unquestionably, out of the whole book, that which most 

 nearly contains the pith and marrow of the system, I have 

 thought it best to extract the whole of it. 



In the preface it is stated that the chief design is "an 

 Attempt towards solving the Phenomena of the Via Lactea, 

 and in consequence of that Solution, the framing of a 

 regular and rational Theory of the known Universe, before 

 unattempted by any." It is "... entirely upon a new 

 Plan, and the Beginning, as it were, of a new Science, 

 before unattempted in any Language, the Author having 

 dug all his Ideas from the Mines of Nature . . ." And 

 further, " How the Author has succeeded in this Point, is 

 a Question of no great Consequence ; he has certainly 

 done his best ; another, no Doubt, will do better, and a 

 third perhaps, by some more rational Hypothesis, may 

 perfect this Theory, and reduce the Whole to infallible 

 Demonstration : . . ." 



The claim which Wright makes to originality will easily 

 be admitted ; and his priority must remain uncontested 

 until it can be impugned upon evidence. At present, 

 neither Arago nor Struve have met with anything of the 

 same kind anterior to Wright. 



N 



