LIABILITY TO ERROR.
As I always strive to be accurate when writing for the press, an accidental error should not give me much compunction; nevertheless, a touch of the feeling is sure to obtrude itself on such occasions. Even the apprehension of having added to the mass of current errors gives me a fit of uneasiness, and having just recovered from an attack of that description it may not be amiss to report the case for the benefit of future patients.
When I wrote a memorandum on James Wilson, in reply to the query of professor DE MORGAN, I stated that the united libraries of Pemberton and Wilson were sold in 1772. It was guess-work.
I recollected that the two libraries were sold in conjunction, but could not recollect the date. On consulting the printed List of the original catalogues of libraries sold by auction by Mr. Baker and his successors in the years 1744-1828, which was issued by the firm in the latter year, the date appeared to be 1757. With that evidence, I penned a short comment on the remarkable circumstance of the two learned friends resolving to dispose of their libraries at the same time, on their surviving the separation from their beloved books for fourteen years, and on their dying within about six months of each other.
Some undefinable suspicions arose in my mind at this point of the inquiry. Now, the original sale catalogue is in existence, and accessible on proper application. I examined it. The sale commenced on Monday, February the 24th. The year 1757 is added in manuscript; and, since Pemberton and Wilson are described as lately deceased, it is an undoubted error. So I tore up my sentimental scrap, leaving the fragments on the table for the benefit of autograph collectors, and replaced it with the six lines which conclude my reply. On reaching home, I turned to the Chronology of history: the dominical letter was just what I wished it to be! The Book of almanacs added to my comfortable sensations.
On a re-examination of my notes, it appeared that the united libraries were sold by Baker and Leigh. Now, according to the above-described List of catalogues, the partnership between Baker and Leigh did not take place till 1775. The phrase lately deceased, applied to Pemberton and Wilson, is not very precise; the sale, however, must have been after 1774. Resolved to pursue the inquiry, I examined a copy of the catalogue in the royal library in the British Museum. It is bound with the catalogue of the library of Edward Stanley, Esq., secretary to the customs, which was sold in February 1776, and follows it. The volume is lettered 1776. As the libraries of Pemberton and Wilson were to be viewed on Monday the 17th, I turned to that day in the Stanley sale; it was Monday the 17th. This seemed to prove that the two collections were sold in the same year. Chronology says otherwise: the Monday the 17th of the Stanley catalogue is an error of the printer; and the lettering, with regard to Pemberton and Wilson, is an error of the binder!
Believing, on the evidence above stated, that the sale was after the year 1774, I came to the conclusion that it was in 1777—in which year the 24th February fell on Monday. On further search at home, I met with the catalogue in question. It is in a volume which was successively in the possession of Dent and Heber, and contains the rare Fairfax catalogue; also, A catalogue of the very valuable library of Phillip Carteret Webb, Esq., which was sold by Baker and Leigh in 1771. It now became evident that the libraries of Pemberton and Wilson might have been sold by Baker and Leigh in 1772; and on examining the Public advertiser for that year, I found the sale advertised on Thursday the 20th of February. So I was right by chance, and in spite of manuscript and printed authorities. Here ends the case.
Another anecdote in connexion with this inquiry deserves to be recorded. I had read the life of Pemberton in the General biographical dictionary. Chalmers therein states that his course of lectures on chemistry, "was published in 1771, by his friend Dr. James Wilson." I applied for the volume at the British Museum. By a rare accident the Scheme for a course of chemistry was produced instead of the Course of chemistry, and as the day was far advanced, and copy due, I gave up the pursuit. On examination, it turns out that the volume contains a memoir of Pemberton in twenty-three pages. Chalmers cites Hutton and Shaw as his authorities; and Hutton, as I conceive, gives the substance of it as his own composition! Wilson, in this important memoir, declares that his intimacy with Pemberton was the greatest felicity of his life. He dates it the 10th Aug. 1771. He died on the 29th of September in the same year.
Wilson remarks, in his previous work, that on the successful practice of navigation "depends, in an especial manner, the flourishing state of our country." To this remark no one can refuse assent. The Dissertation on the history of the art has fallen into oblivion, because it exists only in a work which has been superseded by others; but I venture to express my opinion that a separate edition of it, with such corrections and additions as might be required, and a continuation to the present time, would be a desirable addition to scientific literature; and that no one would perform the task with more ability, or more conscientiously, than professor DE MORGAN.