66 WATT. 



own, and makes no reference to any previous communication 

 from any one upon the subject, nor of having ever heard of 

 Mr. Cavendish drawing the same conclusion. 



The improbability must also be admitted to be extreme, 

 of Sir Charles Blagden ever having heard of Mr. Caven- 

 dish's theory prior to the date of Mr. Watt's letter, and 

 not mentioning that circumstance in the insertion which 

 he made in Mr. Cavendish's paper. 



It deserves to be farther mentioned, that Mr. Watt left 

 the correction of the press, and every thing relating to the 

 publishing of his paper, to Sir Charles Blagden. A letter 

 remains from him to that effect, written to Sir Charles 

 Blagden, and Mr. Watt never saw the paper until it was 

 printed. 



Since M. Arago's learned Eloge was published, with this 

 paper as an Appendix, the Rev. W. Vernon Harcourt has 

 entered into controversy with us both, or, I should rather 

 say, with M. Arago, for he has kindly spared me ; and 

 while I express my obligations for this courtesy of my 

 reverend, learned, and valued friend, I must express my 

 unqualified admiration of his boldness in singling out for 

 his antagonist my illustrious colleague, rather than the far 

 weaker combatant against whom he might so much more 

 safely have done battle. Whatever might have been his 

 fate had he caken the more prudent course, I must fairly 

 say (even without waiting until my fellow-champion seal 

 our adversary's doom), that I have seldom seen any two 

 parties more unequally matched, or any disputation in which 

 the victory was so complete. The attack on M. Arago 

 might have passed well enough at a popular meeting at 

 Birmingham, before which it was spoken ; but as a scientific 

 inquirer, it would be a flattery running the risk of seeming 

 ironical to weigh the reverend author against the most 

 eminent philosopher of the day, although upon a question 

 of evidence (which this really is, as well as a scientific dis- 

 cussion) I might be content to succumb before him. As a 

 strange notion, however, seems to pervade this paper, that 



p. 335 of his paper; and by the existing copies of his letters in December 

 1782. [Note by Mr. James Watt.] 



