sufficient to state that the "NOTES AND QUERIES" is conceived in the exact
spirit of those works. The chief difference, besides the usual
subject-matter, consists in the greater formality and "stiffness" of those
than of this; arising, however, of necessity out of the specific and rigid
character of mathematical research in itself, and the more limited range of
subjects that were open to discussion.

The one great defect of the researches of those men was, that they were
conducted in a manner so desultory, and that the subjects themselves were
often so isolated, that there can seldom be made out more than a few
dislocated fragments of any one subject of inquiry whatever. Special
inquiries are prosecuted with great vigour and acumen; but we look in vain
for system, classification, or general principles. This, however, is not to
be charged to _them_ as a scientific vice, peculiarly:--for, in truth, it
must be confessed to be a vice, not only too common, but almost universal
amongst English geometers; and even in the geometry of the Greeks
themselves, the great object appears to have been "problem-solving" rather
than the deduction and arrangement of scientific truths. The modern French
geometers have, however, broken this spell; and it is not too much too hope
that we shall not be long ere we join them in the development of the
systems they have already opened; and, moreover, add to the list some
independent topics of our own. The chief dangers to which we are in this
case exposed are, classification with incomplete data, and drawing
inferences upon trust. It cannot be denied, at all events, that some of our
French cotemporaries have fallen into both these errors; but the abuse of a
principle is no argument for our not using it, though its existence (or
even possible existence) should be a strong incentive to caution.

These remarks have taken a more general form than it is usual to give in
your pages. As, however, it is probable that many of your readers may feel