MEMOIRS

OF THE

LIFE AND WRITINGS OF SIR ISAAC NEWTON.

CHAPTER XV.

Nicolas Facio de Duillier attacks Leibnitz-Leibnitz appeals to Newton-He reviews Newton's "Quadrature of Curves," and accuses him of Plagiarism-Newton's opinion of the Review-Dr. Keill defends Newton as the true Inventor of Fluxions, and apparently retorts the charge of Plagiarism on Leibnitz, who complains to the Royal Society-Keill explains his Defence--The Royal Society approves of his Explanation -Leibnitz calls Keill an Upstart, and begs the Royal Society to silence him-The Society appoints a Committee to inquire into the Claims of Leibnitz and NewtonThe Committee report to the Society, who publish the result in the "Commercium Epistolicum"-Instigated by Leibnitz, John Bernoulli attacks the Report, and asserts, in a private letter to Leibnitz, that he was the first Inventor of the new CalculusLeibnitz circulates this Letter in a Charta Volans, and gives up Bernoulli as the Author of it-Keill replies to this Letter, and attacks Bernoulli as its Author, who solemnly denies it to Newton-Leibnitz attacks Newton in a Letter to the Abbé Conti-Newton replies to it-The Controversy excites great interest-Leibnitz urges Bernoulli to make a Public Declaration in his favour-Bernoulli sends to Leibnitz the celebrated Letter "Pro Eminente Mathematico," on condition of his Name being kept secret-Leibnitz and Wolf alter this Letter improperly, and publish it in such a form, that Bernoulli is proved to be its Author-Bernoulli is annoyed by the discovery, and endeavours, by improper means, to evade the truth-The Abbé Varignon reconciles Newton and Bernoulli-Death of Leibnitz-Newton writes a History of the Calculus-General view of the Controversy, and of the conduct of the parties.

NICOLAS FACIO DE DUILLIER, a Genevese by birth, came to England in the spring of 1687, and, with the exception of a visit to Switzerland in 1699, 1700, and 1701, remained there during the rest of his life. He had become acquainted with the celebrated Huygens at the Hague in 1686, and had attained

VOL. II.

A

to such a proficiency in mathematics, that he was introduced to Sir Isaac Newton, and visited him at Cambridge in the month of November 1692. Though only in the 28th year of his age, his health was precarious, and he seems to have consulted Newton on the subject of his spiritual as well as of his bodily condition. On his return from Cambridge, he caught a severe cold, which affected his lungs, and gave him great alarm. In communicating to Sir Isaac an account of his symptoms, he says, "I thank God that my soul is extremely quiet, in which you have had the chief hand;" and fearing that his illness would prove fatal, he expresses the "wish that his eldest brother, a man of an extraordinary integrity, should succeed him in his friendship." Sir Isaac answered this letter in course of post, making inquiries about his brother, and telling Facio that he remembered him in his prayers. In his reply, Facio gave him his most humble thanks, both for his prayers and his kindness,―requested him thus to remember him as long as he lived, and assured him that he always remembered him in a similar manner.1

1 Nicolas Facio de Duillier, an eminent mathematician, was born at Basle on the 16th February 1664. In 1684 and 1685 he became acquainted with Count Fenil, a Piedmontese, who, having incurred the displeasure of the Duke of Savoy, took refuge in France, where he became captain of a troop of horse. Having quarrelled one day with the commanding officer of his regiment, when drawn up on parade, the Count shot him dead, and, being well mounted, escaped from his pursuers. He fled to Alsace, where he took refuge in the house of Mr. Facio's maternal grandfather; but, in order to assist him more effectually, he was sent to the house of Facio's father, who lived at Duillier. When walking alone with young Facio, the Count told him that he had offered to M. De Louvois to seize the Prince of Orange, and deliver him into the hands of the King; and he showed him the letter of M. Louvois, offering him the King's pardon, approving of the plan, and enclosing an order for money. The Prince of Orange was in the habit of taking a drive on the sands at Scheveling, a village three miles from the Hague, and the Count proposed, with the aid of ten or twelve men, to land in a light ship with Dutch colours, and carry off the Prince to Dunkirk. The scheme was ripe for execution in 1686; but Facio, aware of the Count's design to take the life of his son, felt it his duty to thwart him in the commission of the two crimes which he had in view. He had become acquainted with Dr. Burnet at Geneva, and knowing that he was going to Holland to visit the Prince of Orange, he acquainted the doctor with the Count's scheme, and agreed to accompany him to Holland with the view of explaining it to the Prince. The scheme was accordingly communicated to the Prince and Princess, and, though

Having been elected a Fellow of the Royal Society in 1687, he took an active part in its proceedings, and communicated papers to its Transactions. In the year 1699 he published a tract entitled a "Geometrical Investigation of the Solids of least Resistance,' ," in which he made the following reference to the history of the new calculus.1

"The celebrated Leibnitz may perhaps inquire how I became acquainted with the calculus which I use. About the month

seconded by the latter, Monsieur Fagel and others had great difficulty in inducing the Prince to have the protection of a guard when he went abroad. In return for the services of Facio, it was resolved, on the strength of testimonials from Huygens, to create for him a professorship of mathematics for instructing the nobility and gentry of Holland, with a salary of 1200 florins, and a pension from the Prince.

Some delay having taken place in completing this arrangement, Facio got leave to pay a visit to England, where he arrived in 1687; but having been taken ill at Oxford, elected a Fellow of the Royal Society in 1687, and treated with much kindness by the English mathematicians, he remained till the accession of William III. When he visited Switzerland in 1699, 1700, and 1701, he learned that Count Fenil had received from the French Court a situation at Pignerol, a fortified city not far from Turin; and that in consequence of having conspired to surrender the place to the Duke of Savoy, he was condemned to be beheaded. In 1732, Facio endeavoured, but we believe unsuccessfully, to obtain, through the influence of Mr. Conduitt, some reward for having saved the life of the Prince of Orange. He assisted Conduitt in making out the design, and writing the inscription, for Newton's Monument in Westminster Abbey.

In 1704, when Facio taught mathematics in Spitalfields, he unfortunately became secretary to the Camisards, or fanatical prophets from the Cevennes, who pretended to raise the dead, and perform other miracles. Lord Shaftesbury attacked them in his Letter on Enthusiasm; and having been unjustly suspected of some political scheme, Facio and other two prophets were seized by the police in 1707, and condemned to the pillory. On the 2d of December 1707, Facio stood on the pillory at Charing Cross with the following inscription on his hat: "Nicolas Facio convicted for abetting Elias Moner in his wicked and counterfeit prophecies, and causing them to be printed and published to terrify the Queen's people." It is stated by Spence (Observations, Anecdotes, &c., 1820, p. 159), on the authority of Lockier, Dean of Peterborough, "that Sir Isaac Newton had a strong inclination to go and hear the French prophets, and was restrained from it with difficulty by some of his friends, who feared he might be infected by them as Facio had been." Facio spent the rest of his life at Worcester, where he died in 1753, nearly ninety years of age.-See Phil. Trans. 1713, and Gentleman's Magazine, 1737, 1738.

1 Dr. Guhrauer, in his biography of Leibnitz, published in 1842, has most unjustly stated that Newton prompted this attack of Facio. We have carefully inspected all the manuscripts of Newton, and cannot discover the slightest evidence in support of a charge which deserves the severest reprobation.

of April, and the following months in the year 1687, and subsequent years, when nobody, as I thought, used such a calculus but myself, I invented its fundamental principles, and several of its rules. Nor would it have been less known to me if Leibnitz had never been born. He may, therefore, boast of other disciples, but certainly not of me. And this would be sufficiently evident if the letters which passed between me and the illustrious Huygens were given to the public.1 Compelled by the evidence of facts, I hold Newton to have been the first inventor of the calculus, and the earliest by several years: And whether Leibnitz, its second inventor, has borrowed anything from him, I would prefer to my own judgment that of those who have seen the letters of Newton and copies of his other maunscripts. Nor will the silence of the more modest Newton, or the active exertions of Leibnitz in everywhere ascribing the invention of this calculus to himself, impose upon any person who shall examine these documents as I have done." 2

Strong as these expressions are, they cannot be regarded as charging Leibnitz with plagiarism. He is styled the second inventor, the title with which he, on many occasions, expressed himself satisfied, and he is blamed only for everywhere ascrib

1 These letters do not appear in the Correspondence of Huygens with Leibnitz and the other distinguished men of the seventeenth century, lately published by Professor Uylenbroek. There are no letters dated between 1680 and 1690; but it appears from a letter to Leibnitz from Huygens, dated 18th November 1690, that he was acquainted with the calculus of Facio above referred to, and that it had been the subject of correspondence between these two celebrated mathematicians. Huygens tells Leibnitz that he had some share in the rule of Facio, and that it was Facio who first pointed out the mistake of Tschirnhaus. He adds that his method was a very beautiful one; and Uylenbroek, in a note on the subject, pointing at what Huygens had done in the matter, speaks of it as a fine invention. In a subsequent letter, dated 26th April 1690, Leibnitz pays a high compliment to Facio. "As Facio has much penetration," he says, "I expect from him fine things when he comes to details; and having profited by your instruction and that of Newton, he will not fail to produce works which will gain him distinction. I wish I were as fortunate as he is in being able to consult two such oracles." See Christiani Huygenii, aliorumque seculi xvii. virorum celebrium. Exercit. Math. et Philos. Fascic. i. p. 41, and Fascic. ii. pp. 56, 175. Hage Comitum, 1833. 2 Investigatio Geometrica, &c., p. 18. Lond. 1699.