1780—85.]

THE ROYAL SOCIETY.

167

matical and physical science. His writings had neverplaced him higher than a mere amateur, and a some-what feeble amateur in all essentials, though stoutenough in the overbearing language of his polemicalwritings, and magniloquent enough in the diction of hisself-laudatory prefaces. Some of his efforts are merelypuerile like the sieve of Eratosthenes , which he tried,he says, Diis propitiis usus; some are far too easy toconfer any fame, like the restoration of Apollonius’sInclinations; while his great attempt, an edition of New-ton, is confessed by all, to be as signal a failure as anyon record in the history of science 12 .”

The late Professor Playfair has left in his Jour-nal his impression of Dr. Horsley’s philosophy. Hesays:—

“ At Dr. Maskelyne’s, soon after my arrival in Lon-don , I was introduced to Dr. Horsley. Our conversationturned first on Lord Monboddo, who is a great friend ofHorsley. He expressed great respect for Lord M. forhis learning and acuteness, and (what was more sur-prising) for the soundness of his judgment. He talkedvery seriously of the notion, of mind being united to allthe parts of matter and being the cause of motion. Sofar as I could gather, Dr. Horsley supposes that everyatom of matter has a soul, which is the cause of its mo-tion, its gravitation, &c. What has made him adoptthis strange unphilosophical doctrine I cannot tell, un-less it be the fear that his study of natural philoso-phy should make him suspected of atheism, or at leastof materialism. For it is certain that there is at presenta prejudice among the English Clergy, that natural

12 Lives of Men of Science, Yol. ii. p. 370.