Review of O.Gregory'' s Treatise on Mechanics. 8S 



more force, and elegance by Maclaurin. The whole of 

 this long, and elaborate investigation is taken from Don 

 Juan's examen maritimo. 



The 6th and last chapter on Dynamics is that, which 

 treats of the maximum effects of machines. As this partofL^ 

 the work consists chiefly of problems selected from differ- 

 ent authors we pass it over in silence. 



The next great division of our author's work, which he 

 has brought under the denomination of Mechanics, is what is 

 usually denominated in English Hydrostatics, and Hydrau- 

 lics, but by our author, and the French writers, the latter is 

 termed Hydrodynamics. Considering fluids as subject to 

 the laws of mechanical philosophy, the latter nomenclature 

 is perfectly proper, and analogous to that of the first part of 

 the work. 



We might go into details of this part of our author's book, 

 as we have into some of the first, but it would not be con- 

 sistent with our prescribed limits. The same character per- 

 vades the whole, excepting, that the latter subjects are more 

 incumbered with experiments, often of a frivolous import, 

 than the former. 



In addition to what we have before remarked, another, 

 and very material fault of this book is the spirit of generali- 

 zation, without sufficient inductive reasoning, which appears to 

 pervade it. Jn philosophy,according to Baconian principles, a 

 general principle ought never to be assumed, unless so ma- 

 ny particulars unite in one principle as to render it wholly 

 indisputable. But admitting the particulars are sufficiently 

 numerous, and well selected, so as to bear the test of m- 

 stantia crucis, or experimentnm crucis ; yet general princi- 

 ples and formulae so useful to the mathematician, who must 

 be supposed to be well versed in particulars, are not those 

 by which a subject can be best illustrated, and rendered 

 comprehensible to a learner. This assumption of generai 

 principles, in the exact sciences, before the mind has been 

 familiarized with the reasonings and results of particular ca- 

 ses, borders very near on Cartesian Hypotheses, or at least 

 there is no great discrepancy in the two methods. We 

 therefore agree with Dr. Watts, who, in his improvement 

 of the mind recommends, that a student of the mathematics, 

 proceed from practical or particular cases coming under his 

 notice and observation, to those which require more general 



