CORRESPONDENCE, 18G7-70. 391 



of diary, in which he put all the scandal of every sort he met with 1869. 

 in Cambridge society much about Porson ; Hansel's epigrams 

 and verses ; his contest with Sir Busick Harwood ; much of the 

 vulgar drollery of Jemmy Gordon, who did not survive till your 

 day : in short, a collection of very low and ribald stuff, mixed with 

 what was worth preserving (but Gunning could not distinguish 

 between the two). Some one persuaded him to burn it, and the 

 book he published was what he remembered when his memory 

 was gone and the real book burnt. His son Frederick was my 

 pupil, and did well as a barrister, from whom I had this. You 

 have put together as revivers five very different men. Woodhouse 

 was better than Waring, who could not prove Wilson's (Judge 

 of C. P.) guess about the property of prime numbers ; but Wood- 

 house (I think) did prove it, and a beautiful proof it is. Yince 

 was a bungler, and I think utterly insensible of mathematical 

 beauty. Milner was incomparable. The Claphamite Christians 

 are a class to be found in every form of religion ; and when they 

 are not too intolerant (which generally they are) they have 

 much of my sympathy, though I don't agree with them. 



Now for your questions. I did not get my conic sections from 

 Vince. I copied a MS. of Dealtry's. I fell in love with the cone 

 and its sections, and everything about it. I have never forsaken 

 my favourite pursuit ; I delighted in such problems as two spheres 

 touching each other and also the inside of a hollow cone, &c. As 

 to Newton, I read a good deal (men now read nothing), but I 

 read much of the notes. I detected a blunder which nobody 

 seemed to be aware of. Tavel, tutor of Trinity, was not ; and 

 he augured very favourably of me in consequence. The applica- 

 tion of the Principia I got from MSS. 



The blunder was this : in calculating the resistance of a globe 

 at the end of a cylinder oscillating in a resisting medium they 

 had forgotten to notice that there is a difference between the 

 resistance to a globe and a circle of the same diameter. 



The story of Whewell and Jacob cannot be true. Whewell 

 was a very, very considerable man, I think not a great man. I 

 have no doubt Jacob beat him in accuracy, but the supposed 

 answer cannot be true ; it is a mere echo of what actually passed 

 between me and Hornbuckle on the day the Tripos came out 

 for the truth of which I vouch. I think the examiners are 

 taking too practical a turn ; it is a waste of time to calculate 

 actually a longitude by the help of logarithmic tables and lunar 

 observations. It would be a fault not to know how, but a 



