The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1855-11-15
1872

He parted with his money freely-so freely, III
deed, that his biographies have regarded it as
proof of singular generosity. 1t was nothing
of the kind; it was no more generosity than is
the act of the poor savage, who gives away in
estimable treasures for a glass bead or a little
bit Of mirror
What cared he for wealth? He had no in
terest IN human life; he had no sublunary
pleasures which money could purchase, except
pippins and red-streaks. He gave it away to
anybody who asked for it. In one of his alb
sent fits he had his pocket picked of more than
f3,0OO aud suspected a nephew Of the celebra-
ted William Winston; he made no efforts to re-
cover his bank bills, and, when asked how
much he had lost, only replied, "too much"
lie was so far imposed upon, that he paid
1000 for an estate in Wiltshire. worth only
half that sum; he was told that he might vacate
hrs bargain in equity, and he declined the
trouble. :" have SEEN" says honest Hum
phrey Newton, have seen a small pasteboard
box IN his study set against the open window,
no less, as one might suppose, than 900
guiheas IN IT, crowded edgeways; whether this
was suspicion or carelessness. / cannot say !:
perhaps to try the fidelity Of those about him.
Ii was certainly carelessness; but poor
Humphrey (how wildly he remembers IT all ,
felt sorely tempted when he saw as one might
suppose for he was too honest to count
them no less than 1000 guineas - crowded
edgeways; and il was a help to his fidelity to
believe that the trial was intended by his mas
ter-his master. to whom, when at the head Of
the mint, Duchess all in vain offered bride
OF c6,000. At one period of his life, Sir Isaac
gave some study to alchemy; and we might
suppose, from one Of the sentences in the letter
10 Francis Aston, from which we have already
quoted, that he had thought of transmutation
as a means Of money-making. He recommends
bis young friend to inquire on the continent
about transmutatons, these being the most
luciierous, and many times iuciferoms expert
ments, too, in philosophy"
This letter, however, 1T must be remembered,
was written not long before his circumstances
wels s 5 10 ss httss SOME .1Tsies y and he
was glad TO escape his weekly payments as
member Of the Royal Society If ever he
thought of money making, it was only to pay
his frugal buttery book, and buy putty for his
lenses and oranges for his sister. He gave
away his money without concern; he was even
offensive in his liberality and quarrelled with
persons who refused his purse. Think 6f Sir
Isaac taking handful of guineas at random
out of his pocket, and Offering it as a fee to a
physician like Cheselden!
We have not said anything of the controver-
sizes which brought Newton into contact with
his fellow men, and put his manliness to the
test; and must leave it to others TO adjust
all the microscopic details OF authorship and
copyright which these controversies involved.
But il is impossible to pass without reprehen-
sion the unlairness with which Newton treated
his opponents, Huygens and Hooke, leibnitz
and Flamsteed. Ii is just retribution that
Newton's corpuscular theory of light has sue
cumbed before the undulatory theory defended
II
reiraction has been dispatched by that of Huy-
gems; that his theory of the infexion of light
has been forgotten for Hooke's; and that his
method Of iuxions, which raised the greatest
din of all, has been supplanted by the differen-
tial calculus of Leibnitz. For one thing in
these controversies we may be proud of New
ton. His jealousy was absurd, all generosity
was forgotten, but he never descended to the
atrocious frauds which disgraced his opponents,
Bernoulli, Leibnitz, and Wolf
Such was Newton man. Glorious in his
intellect, with piety rather intellectual than
devotional, he n stole without the merit of
a stole, for he had no feelings TO contend with.
liz is very saddenng to find that the two most
splendid names which science can boast of, he
long to men so deficient in their moral natures
Lord Bacon and Sir Isaac Newton. In the
former We find positive moral obliquity, which
would awaken pity, were II not joined to so
lestic an intellect, that II eXciteS terror and
despair of human nature. In the latter we find
simply vacltum-iron intellect on every side
surrounding and maintaining the tremendous
gap within. We have no desire to moralize on
the fact. We have simply endeavored to give
a faithful representation of Newton's charac-
ter, believing that no possible good can result
from the fulsome batteries which are heaped on
his name. When the contemporaries of Newton
hailed him as a god, they declared, in very bril-
lisy.t phrase, that he was not a man.