publish'd 16 years before As for me so far as I may be concern'd in it I knew that to touch upon this was to touch him in a sore place I could not speak to his Satisfaction and I was not desirous to Disoblige him and therefore as he phraseth it silently passed it over and left it for them to say who knew it I do not know that I have ever been heard to say That he did or That he did not The first I could not say knowingly the other I was loth to say The case is this In the year 1653. I published together with my English Grammar a Treatise of Speech shewing therein with what Organs in what Positions and by what Motions all Sounds used in Speech are Formed and that upon such Positions and Motions such Sounds will certainly follow whether he that Speaks do Hear himself or not This my Letter says as well as the Postscript I think to be the first attempt in that kind And there to the commonly received Organs of Speech Instrument a novem sunt Guttur Lingua Palatum Quatuor Dentes duo Libra simul I add one more and I think I am the first that do so that is the Nostrils on the Closure and different Appertures of which by help of the Uvula the sole Difference in the Articulation of divers Letters depends as of P B M and of T D N and divers others Which I think no body before me had taken notice of But I am since followed by others Some years after Mr. George Dalgarno at Oxford appli'd himself to write a Treatise concerning an Universal Character which he published in the year 1660 intituled Ars Signorum concerning which he consulted Me as he did also Dr. Wilkins Dr. Ward and others I told him my sense of it as I did also to Dr. Wilkins That the thing was certainly fesible in Nature upon such Considerations as that Letter of March 14. 1661 mentions But that I did not think it likely to obtain in Practice Because this Universal Character must be in the nature of a New Language Which he was so apprehensive to be true that having once contrived his Universal Character he did upon this suggestion accommodate thereunto his Universal Language to make his Character Effable as is there seen So that For all Persons to Learn his Character and to have all Books Written in it is the same thing as to Translate all Books into One Language and to have this Language learned by All. Which if it cannot be hoped of any of the Languages now in being which have the advantage of being already understood by more than ever are like to learn that other much less is it to be hoped for of a New Language now to be contrived And in case men should be willing to change the way of Writing from Vocal to Real Characters there would soon arise a like Variety of Real Characters each fansying his own way the best as now there is of Vocal Languages Nor is it to be expected That a general Law should be made to confine All to the same Characters any more than amongst our selves All Writers of Short-hand be confined to the same way and method of Brachy-graphy or Short-writing which we find to multiply according to the variety of Teachers And Specious Arithmetick which as to so much is a kind of Real Character hath not in all Writers the same Characters but very different as different Writers This Enterprise of Mr. Dolgarro gave occasion to Dr. Wilkins the late Bishop of Chester to pursue the same Design as himself intimates in his Epistle both as to a Real Character as he calls it or Characters of Things instead of Words and the expressing those Characters by Vocal Sounds which he calls his Philosophical Language in his Essay of a Real Character and Philosophical Language published in the year 1668. which is the Result of his Thoughts on that Subject for divers years before with the concurrence of Dr. Seth Ward now Bishop of Salisbury and Dr. William Lloyd now Dean of Bangor and others as himself mentions with whom he had frequent conference about that Affair And it would have been publish'd somewhat sooner if not interrupted by the Fire of London in the year 1666. Not that he did expect this Real Character of his and his Philosophical Language should universally obtain and all Books be translated into it But to shew the thing to be fesible and divers Advantages which might arise thence if it could so obtain And to demonstrate the thing it self to be Practicable He was pleased when his Book was newly made publick to write a Letter to me in his Real Character to which I return'd an Answer in his Philosophical Language And we did perfectly understand one another as if written in our own Language In order to this Design he found it expedient for reasons by him expressed to consider the Formation of Sounds in Speech and to engraft in his Essay a particular Discourse thereof in Chap. 10 11 12 13 14. of his Third Part. And because I had particularly considered that Subject and published a Treatise of it he was pleased more particularly to discourse that part with me which we did at divers Meetings on that occasion There being scarce any part in all that Discourse wherein I was not advised with In some things he was pleased on those Discourses to alter his former Thoughts for reasons which I suggested As for instance Some Vowels he judged to be of their own nature Long and could not be pronounced Short as ô in Boat oo in Food ū in Lute c. Others in their own nature Short and not capable of being produced as the French e Feminine in je ne c. and the English ū in cut but c. Contrary to which I suggested that in good goode wood woo'd full fool pull pool wooll wool hood hoo'd c. there is a manifest distinction of the same sound of the Vowel pronounced Long and Short And in recubo tetubo c. we in England pronounce Short the same sound of ú which in cubo tubo c. we pronounce Long. So in gula régula c. And the like of ô in potent impotent dolent indolent rédolent solens insolens vola évola benévola c. And that in Musick the words cut put may be sung as a Brief or Sembrief as well as a Crotchet or Quaver which depends onely upon the Short or Long sounding of that Vowel those Consonants c b t not being capable of production but the Vowel onely and the like of the French e Feminine And contrariwise tô too tú may be a Crotchet or Quaver as well as a Brief or Sembrief Whereupon he agreed with me that all Vowels and some Consonants are capable of Production and Contraction but that some Vowels are for the most part produced in common Speech others mostly Contracted So the English Vowel î in Bite
the business I cannot tell or rather which I take to be the true cause because Mr. Popham's Friends saw so little of success and to so little 〈◊〉 that they did not think fit to pursue the design further 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dr. Holder's removal to Ely intimated page 5. should be the onely cause seems not likely For Mr. Popham might as well at Ely be taught to speak as at Blechington And that his Friends were willing to have pursued the design if they had seen a likelihood of any considerable success we may judge by their sending him to me in 1662. on the same account The great offence which is now taken at the Letter which was then written is not because any thing therein was not True or not Rationally said but rather because it was as he speaks so subtilly contrived that there is nothing in it for him to cavil at And therefore he cavils at what is not in it viz. That amongst the Considerations which induced me to undertake Mr. VVhaly I said nothing of Dr. Holder and Mr. Popham p. 2 13. The truth is to the rest of those Considerations I might have added Nor am I discouraged from this undertaking by Mr. Holders unsuccessful attempt on Mr. Popham c. but I thought it more civil to say nothing of it He would now have it thought p. 8. a mocking of Mr. Boyl to tell him in that Letter How far and upon what Considerations and by what ways I thought it Possible or Fesible when as I certainly knew it possible having already given Proof of it on Mr. VVhaly 'T is true I had then given a Proof of it on Mr. VVhaly having at that time performed more on Mr. VVhaly than ever Dr. Holder did on Mr. Popham and in that Letter I told him of such Proof But Mr. Boyle did not think it a mockery to be so used having in two Letters of Jan. 5. and Febr. 26. desired it of me and in another of April 5. he thanked me for that excellent Paper Nor did those of the Society at Gresham-Colledge to whom he did impart it and before whom in May following Mr. VVhaly was heard to speak And nothing is more common than of things unusual to shew How far and upon what Considerations Others should not think strange or incredible what we certainly know to be True and Fesible Yet Mr. Boyl did in those days live at Oxford as well as Dr. Wallis and within as few miles of Blechington and was as well acquainted at VVadham-Colledge And if Dr. Holden's performance were so generally known in Oxford as p. 5. and in particular to those eminent Persons with whom Mr. Boyl was so well acquainted he had the same opportunity of being made acquainted with it as I had And those at Gresham-Colledge did not want means of being dis-abused if I had designed to impose them since those eminent Persons which he speaks of were of that number and some of them then present and it seems Dr. Holder himself was there also and saw this p. 6. He might therefore as well if things had been as he now represents have let that Company hear Mr. Popham speak as I Mr. VVhaly and they would as well have been pleased to hear it especially if Mr. Popham spake so much better than Mr. VVhaly the one but some words and with a harsh ill Tone the other spoke well with a Good and Graceful Tone and did pronounce plainly and distinctly whatever words c. p. 5 6. 'T would certainly have been much more to their satisfaction to have seen Mr. Whaly so much out-done by Mr. Popham And Dr. Holder who was so desirous to serve the Ends and contribute somewhat to the Design of that worthy Company p. 4 5. should not have denied them this satisfaction if he could have shewed it But the truth is he could not shew it and that 's the grief For when Mr. Popham the same year within a few moneths was brought to me to learn I saw no foot-steps of those effects nor that he was able to speak one word or syllable 'T was therefore wise in him not to produce him as well as civil in me to say nothing of it However If Dr. Holder had caused this of Mr. Popham to be publickly known to many Persons of all Degrees at London at Westminster at the Anatomy-Lecture as well as to those eminent Persons above-named and generally in Oxford and went with him to London and VVestminster that those on this occasion might satisfie themselves in hearing Mr. Popham as p. 5. Why might not as well Mr. VVhaly go with me to Gresham-Colledge and VVhite-hall that others might be satisfi'd in hearing him p. 6. without so much clamour of my being greedy to spread my own Fame especially when himself allows it p. 10. to be very considerable and worthy to be known And if he may tell us p. 5. that he taught Mr. Popham by such means as are since by him made publick in 1669 why might not I as well say in my Letter of 1661. That I taught Mr. Whaly by such as I had before made publick in 1653. But the mockery of this Letter would I suppose have been excused had it not been published in the Transactions eight years after For that 's the complaint These Considerations did not see light till eight years after p. 3. I confess it might have been Printed sooner if I had been as greedy and industrious as he would have it thought p. 3. to spread my own Fame For there is nothing in it why it might not have been Printed the next day But not in the Transactions for Mr. Oldenburg did not begin to write Transactions till 1665. But 't was not too late in 1670. However 't was written sooner and Published though not in Print And 't is well it was so For if Printing an old Letter make so great a clamour what would have been if I had at that time written a new Piece to the same purpose and published that But the great complaint is that in the Post-script yes and in the Letter too mention is made of my Treatise De Loquela published in 1653. And that it is there commended which troubles him much and he doth at least six times complain of it p. 8 9 10 13 14. That is It is there said but it is so said in the Letter also that in this Treatise of Speech I do very distinctly lay down the manner of Forming all sounds of Letters usual in Speech And that in confidence and pursuance of this which the Letter also mentions I did undertake that difficult task And why might not all this be said Would he have had me say that I did in 1661. pursue his Elements of Speech which were not publish'd till 1669 and which I have never yet seen rather than my own published in 1653 But which troubles him yet more the Writer of that Post-script says also That he thinks this to be the first Book that
was ever published in this kind True and I think so too 'T is at least elder than his of 1669. Nor doth Dr. Holder tell us of any precedent than that of mine And all this without determining that his of 1669. is performed with more judgment and accuracy p 8 10 13. And this is the great fault He was it seems not willing that it should be at all remembred that any had written of that Subject before him At lest if he were not the First he would be thought to have done it Best And he hopes though I will not determine against my self that the impartial Reader will so determine p. 10. Yet Bishop VVilkins who as Dr. Holder tells us p. 7. in his Universal Character p. 357. mentions the Papers of Dr. Holder doth not do it with any preference to those of mine But having there named a great Many and some of them Great Men who had written of the Doctrine of Letters he concludes that amongst all that he had seen published Dr. VVallis seemed to him with greatest accurateness and subtilty to have considered the Philosophy of Articulate Sounds Had not this Treatise of mine been remembred He hoped to have passed for the First Author in that kind For that his should be thought earlier than that of Bishop VVilkins he had provided by what he tells us p. 7. that some Papers of Dr. Holders were communicated to the Bishop and by him mentioned which we must suppose to be these and that those Papers were lost in the Bishops Study together with all his own in the dreadful Fire of London 1666. and therefore must at least have been so antient and none but mine of 1653. may pretend to precedence That some of the Bishops Papers that is so much of the Fair Copy of his Universal Character as was then unprinted were lost in the Fire of London is true But not in the Bishops Study as is here pretended but at the Printing-house as the Bishop himself and Mr. Gillibrand for whom it was printing did both tell me where Dr. Holder's Papers are not pretended to have been Nor were the Bishop's Own Papers All lost as is here affirmed But of what was printed Two Copies were preserved And out of his Foul Papers as himself told me which were preserved also he did retrieve what of the Fair Copy was lost Nor is it likely the Fire having burnt for some days before it came thither that Himself if at home and those about him should be All so negligent as that no care was taken of any of his Papers but that they should be All lost Which though it do not much concern the present business yet it shews how apt he is to Trip in matters of Fact Whether Dr. Holder's Papers were then lost or where they were lost I know not And I as little know whether and by whom Dr. Holder was importuned to renew those Papers as we are told p. 7. However Those Elements of Speech with its Appendix may for ought I know be an excellent Piece and for ought I know it may be the contrary I never read either the One or the Other Nor do I know that I ever saw it at least not so as to read a Line of it It 's possible I may have seen the Book lying on a Table or standing on a Shelf in a Book-seller's Shop or the like but without knowing the particular contents of it Nor do I know otherwise than as he now tells me whether any one word therein do concern Me or Mr. Popham or the Business in hand So far was I from being startled as p. 7. at the contents of it or contriving to counterplot it Nor do I think my self concern'd on this occasion to seek it out If there be any thing in it of like import with what he doth now publish or which doth otherwise need an Answer it is unknown to me and may I suppose without more ado receive its Answer from hence The same Post-script says also and it says True that Mr. VVhaly is not the onely person on whom I have shewed the effect of my skill But I have since done the like for another meaning Mr. Popham And Dr. Holder himself p. 10 11. cannot deny it to be all true But it is not true he tells us p. 11. that either Mr. Oldenburg or Dr. Plot did Know or VVrite any thing of these matters but what was put into their hands by me And he would have the like to be thought of all other Authors by whom I have been commended p. 3. that they are but large Characters of my own Graving that so he may at once destroy all the good things that any body hath said of me or shall say As to Dr. Plot I shall speak by and by Mr. Oldenburg is dead and cannot now be asked What he Knew or VVrote nor answer for himself I shall therefore do it for him The best is there is nothing there said which is not True or which he did not Know and a great many more beside him or which was not Fitting for him to say Nothing which he did not say Wittingly and Willingly and nothing I suppose which he would Un-say were he now alive And strange it is that Dr. Holder should perswade us that Mr. Oldenburg knew nothing of all this He did Know that I had taught Mr. Whaly to speak and that Mr. Whaly was at Gresham-Colledge and was heard to speak there and what was thereupon the sense of those present For himself was one of them and did See him and Hear him speak there and heard what the company did express as their sense of it He knew that this was there Registred For himself did it as being then the Secretary of that Society He knew from his own Register and Memorials not from me that this was on May 21. 1662. As to what is said to have been done at Whitehall and my own house He knew them from the Notoreity of the Fact and from the Relation of Persons present whom he had no reason to disbelieve He knew then and many years before my English Grammar and my Treatise of Speech prefixed thereunto which the Title-page tells him was Printed in the year 1653. He knew also that of Bishop Wilkins's Universal Character published in 1668. and that of Dr. Holder's Elements of Speech publish'd in 1669. and gives a particular account of Both The one in his Transactions of May 1668. The other in that of May 1669 and that Both those were since mine of 1653. And if he did not think fit to deliver an Opinion Whether theirs or mine were Better He knew this also And he could not but know That the way to Teach a Deaf person to speak must be by teaching How to apply the Instruments of Speech to Form such Sounds which is the profess'd design of that Treatise of mine And That in teaching Mr. Whaly I pursu'd that Treatise and did in that Letter refer to it
Given over I cannot tell But because such things oft happen I was the less willing to undertake it and did on that account at first decline it as not willing to take anothers Work out of his hand which Dr. Bathurst I presume may still remember who did once and a second time recommend that business to me from the Lady VVharton till Dr. Bathurst did assure me that no more was to be expected from Dr. Holder nor intended by him and that no offence should be taken on that account When Mr. Popham by that Lady his Mother was brought to me I found no appearance of those fine things which are now said to have been done by Dr. Holder And the stories of My having Seen and Heard him before at Blechington c. but Fansies I thought it best therefore to say nothing of it rather than to say That VVhat Dr. Holder had Attempted but Given over I had undertaken with Success Which would have look'd like Insultation in me and a Reproaching of him If any other who knew more than I did could say of him all that which he now says of himself it was free for him or them to have said it if they so pleased But from me who knew it not nor do yet it could not in reason be expected And for the same Reason I said nothing of the Constable of Castil's Son What Pablo Bonnet says of him I know not having never seen the Book nor what is said of him by Sir Kenelm Digby as not having read that I have heard it is said of him That Onely by Seeing another Speak himself being Deaf though Distant from him the Breadth of a large Room he was able to repeat perfectly what ever was said though in VVelsh or Irish or any other Language of which he had no knowledge at all and which had never been spoken to him Which seems to me very Unlikely if not Impossible Concerning which thing I have also delivered my opinion in that Letter of March 14. that I might not be thought to pretend to Impossibilities But without naming any persons in pursuance of the old Rules Parcere nominibus c. I know very well for I have seen it in those that I have taught That Words of such unknown Languages may by a Deaf man be pronounc'd But he must then be otherwise directed what Sound or Letters he is to Form He cannot do it barely by Seeing another speak I know also for the same reason That a Deaf person by Seeing another Speak may sometimes Guess shrewdly at what is said But it must be in such Words and Sentences as he hath been acquainted with not in a strange Language of which he knows neither the Sense nor the Words For certain it is that the Formation of divers Sounds in Speech is perform'd so inwardly in the Mouth Throat and Nostrils and the distinction of Sounds therein so very Nice that it is not possible to be discerned by the Eye of a By-stander But in known Words by Seeing the Formation of some Letters especially the Labials he may Guess at the rest as we do when in a Word we find a Letter or two mis-written or left-out but from the rest may easily know what it should be And in known Sentences having thus discerned some Words he may by them Guess at the rest of the Sentence or at least at the Sense of it And when this very particular was at Gresham-Colledge discoursed upon the occasion of Mr. Whaly's being there it was then affirmed by a Gentleman there present That himself beyond-Sea had seen this Constable of Castil's Son and having heard of these reports before did the more curiously observe him and found those about him to discourse with him by Signs and Gestures in the same manner as is usual with other Deaf persons Which as he well observed would not have been if he by seeing them speak could tell what they said and could himself by speaking give them an answer So that there must needs be something of Amplification in that Story Since therefore I could add nothing from my own knowledge to what by others had been said of him and though I did suspect somewhat of Hyperbole in the case would not concern my self to contradict it I thought best to say nothing of it but leave the Report as I found it upon the credit of the Reporters without going about to extenuate anothers performance And if any one else had of his own Knowledge affirmed as much of Dr. Holder's performance without bespattering another it 's like whatsoever were my own sentiments of it I should have as little concerned my self to contradict that as I did the other But should choose rather if I might be permitted so to do to say nothing of either Another great complaint there is concerning a Book of Dr. Plott It seems he is very much concerned for every one that speaks favourably of me p. 3 4 9 11 14. All that was past might it seems have been pardoned as p. 4 7 9. had it not been for this fresh occasion The fault is this That Dr. Plott in his Natural History of Oxfordshire hath said it seems somewhat of my teaching Dumb persons to speak and of my Treatise De Loquela as p. 9 11. Yet Dr. Plott he can Forgive in hopes of a Reformation p. 11. But Dr. VVallis must be doubly charged 'T was I he says gave this fresh occasion p. 4. 'T was my subtil contrivance p. 2. I practis'd it I caus'd it to be publish'd 't is I that penned and spread my own fame in several Authors works and in this amongst the rest they be large Characters engraven by my self p. 3. 'T was I he says thrust my self into Dr. Plott's work I imposed upon that worthy person that I therein renew the challenge that I passed it into the Book that those three whole Paragraphs or the greatest part of them were Certainly of my Penning and that it may be justly thought All the rest was so too that I imposed upon the good Doctor and penned it my self p. 9. that I put upon him that great abuse p. 10. that he hath indeed put it upon Record but did not Know or VVrite any of those matters but what was put into his hands by me that I imposed upon him and prevail'd him to say it as from himself p. 11. that I do there explain my self p. 13. with much more to that purpose Not that Dr. Holder knows this to be True But because it is fit matter for a Chancery-Bill That Dr. Plott did sometimes advise with me while that Book was Writing and Printing is very true And that I was free to give him my Opinion and Advise when he desired it and he as free to take it or leave it as he saw cause Nor was it a fault in either of us so to do But I did not use to Pen whole Paragraphs for him or thrust him upon saying what he had not a mind
and contribute something to the design of that worthy company viz. The Improvement of Natural Knowledg and Publick Benefit Published his English Grammar with his Treatise of speech prefixed This as p. 5. was publickly taken Notice of and Known not only to those eminent Persons above mentioned but Generally in Oxford Where very many Students on purpose to satisfy their Curiosity and have a Particular Knowledg of what they had received by Report Bought the Book and Read it Dr. William Holder as p. 2 5. then lived at Blechington saw and perfectly Knew this was Conversant with Dr. Wallis was one of those who Bought or borrowed that Book did see and Read it and had discourse with Dr. Wallis on that occasion divers times when they happened to meet at Oxford Now Dr. Holder having a long aking tooth as p. 2. to do something to be talked of and get himself a Trophy had recourse to subtle Contrivances Having learned therefore from Pablo Bonnet as p. 6. that the Constable of Castile's Son when Deaf had been taught to speak And having learned from Dr. Wallis's Treatise of speech How every sound in speech is formed He thought it might prove and there was reason so to think if well managed a successeful way of teaching Deaf and Dumb persons to speak by teaching them so to Form sounds as Dr. Wallis had directed Not doubting as p. 5. but that a Dumb person Dumb only in Consequence of being Deaf might be capable of being instructed so to apply as is there taught the motions of his Tongue and other Instruments of speech And knowing it as another might have done to be both Possible and Fesible from an Example in that kind seen and heard by his late Majesty in Spain And he meets in a happy hour with a young Gentleman as p. 2 4 Mr. Alexander Popham deprived of Hearing and consequently of Speaking Resolving therefore to assume to himself this experiment On him he would make the first Attempt whatever be the Success that is remembred to have been made in England whatever had been done elsewhere And as p. 3. Having got a hint for which he alwaies lay in wait of a new Invention so considerable from a small Treatise of Dr. Wallis on that subject would by putting himself into the Practise of what Dr. Wallis had taught Intitle himself to the experiment All possible Noise is presently made of it It is showed as p. â— 5. at London at Westminster to Persons of all Degrees published at the Anatomy Lecture an express Relation made of it nameing also the Persons concerned in this experiment so far as served his turn but not a word of Dr. Wallis in the cause And if we may believe him p. 1. 5. a multitude of Students Resort from Oxford to Bletchington to See and Hear it Magnis tamen excidit ausis I confess I was out of the Noise and heard very little of it save what I have from his Paper in which I find very great Mis-takes And was far from Oxford the greatest part of that time But the Cry did not last long This he tells us p. 1. 5. was in March 1659 60 and within a few Months after the Summer following he quitted that undertaking Mr. Popham went home to his friends the labour lost and the Cry ceased So that there are at this day very few in Oxford if any who Know or think that Dr. Holder taught Mr. Popham to speak p. 3. The year following notwithstanding this mis-adventure of Dr. Holder Dr. Wallis thereunto induced by the Considerations mentioned in his Letter of March 14 1661 2 and in confidence of his Treatise De Loquela therein mentioned as p. 2 8 12 13 undertook another Person concerning whom Dr. Holder cannot pretend to any thing Mr. Daniel Whaly who having lost his Hearing while a child was consequently Dumb p. 2 and had so continued for Twenty years more Him he taught without any help or direction from Dr. Holder not only to pronounce some words which Dr. Holder had Attempted on Mr. Popham but in good measure to understand a Language also which Dr. Holder doth not pretend to and without which to speak is but like a Parrot of which in a Letter of Decem. 24. 1661 he gave a short Account to Mr. Boyle and in answer to two of his of January 4 and Feb. 26. desiring it a Fuller Account in that of March 14. 1661 Which Mr. Boyle imparted to divers of the Society I do not say to the Royal Society because I doubt whether the Patent which makes them such were then actually sealed though I think it bears Date a little before that time And upon a further solicitation from him and them by letters of Apr. 5 and May 8 to satisfy their Curiosity and have a particular Knowledg of what they had received by Report as Dr. Holder Speaks p. 5. In May 1662 Mr. Whaly came up to London with Dr. Wallis was Seen and Heard at Court and by the Royal Society at Grasham College 't was entred into the Iournal of the Royal Society and there registred Dr. Wallis reaped great praise for this Atchievement as Dr. Holder speakes p. 1 2 5 6. Yet did not the Doctor Impose upon the Society or Confidently shew and Boast it as p. 12. as the First assay that had ever been in this kind For they Knew well and did at that time discourse what had been said of the Constable of Castiles Son and his being heard by the late King And had then a particular Relation from one of themselves who had seen the Person And some of Dr. Holder's particular Friends were then present who might if they had thought it considerable have acquainted the rest what they knew of Dr. Holder's Attempt on Mr. Popham And Dr. Holder himself who it seems was a witness of all this and saw it as he tells us p. 6 had the opportunity if there were occasion to assert his own right And might have had it registred with the rest if the company had thought it had deserved it Dr. Holder who saw this p. 6 was concerned at it As to Mr. Whaly he could pretend nothing Mr. Popham had lost what he is said to have learned The Stories of Dr. Wallis's Resorting to Bletchington and discourses with Dr. Holder on that occasion were mistakes and that whole scene ill laid And should he have then pretended to have done the like for Mr. Popham hic Rhodus hic saltus the company would have been glad to have seen that too which was not to be done But he was more concerned when as he tells as p. 2. the Fame of Mr. Whaly had brought to Dr. Wallis Mr. Popham also and that on him whom Dr. Holder had given over he had as p. 10 performed somewhat very considerable that is as p. 13. had done the like for him as before for Mr. Whaly He had however a Design by playing an after-game to make the world believe in time
what he could not do while things were fresh in memory and knowledg in and about Oxford And therefore that we may still follow his own language he had recourse to subtle contrivances and subtle practises as p. 1 2. Practising from thence-forth to assume Mr. Popham's speaking wholly to himself p. 3. and not allow Dr. Wallis so much as to have shewed any effect of his skill on Mr. Popham p. 13. To this end that Dr. Holder might not be thought to have learned any of his skill from Dr. Wallis's Treatise concerning the Formation of sounds in speech he contrives to write some Papers of his own as he tells us about that subject p. 7. These Papers he compasseth to have mentioned p. 8 9 in the Bishop of Chester's Book of the Universal Character pag. 357. In the year 1668. But he tells us further that in the year 1666 they were lost in the Bishops study together with all his own in the dreadful Fire of London that we may at least think them to be so old These Papers the Bishop tells us did concern the Doctrine of Letters Dr. Holder tells us they were to describe and discover the Method he had used in bringing Mr. Popham to speak p. 7. This it seems was what He aimed at All the rest served but to hedg this in So considerable he would have us think these Papers were that he was Importuned to renew them like another Phaenix out of its own Ashes And a little Importunity we may think served the turn He then contrives further to have the new Phaenix His Elements of speech which we must now suppose to be those Papers presented to the Royal Society 1669 and to get their order to print it and as he speakes p. 6. had it Registred to perpetuat the Memory of his Atchievement But Dr. Holder had a farther Design in it For these elements were to Usher-in a subtle Appendix concerning Persons Deaf and Dumb and in a few subtle lines which was his chief Design to hedge-in what concerned Mr. Popham describing but wisely not nameing him Assuming Mr. Popham's speaking solely to himself To which the other were only subservient to make a noise while this slipt-in Having therein made mention of his success upon a Deaf and Dumb Person in tending Mr. Popham As he tells us p. 7. These Elements as p. 8 9 10 he Contrives and Compasses to have Commended and Magnified as in Mr. Oldenburg's name but I suppose of his own Penning in the Philosophical Transactions of May 1669 as a Well-considered and Useful Tract Concluding with Magnifying its Usefulness for instructing Persons Deaf and Dumb as being by this Author Excellently applied thereunto Modestly said of himself Avouching therein His own Practise Without taking the least notice of any thing Written by Dr. Wallis and others about the Formation of Sounds or the Practise of Teaching Dumb Persons by any other And here as p. 9. he is secure to gain this Point That in a Book which swill come into the hands of all curious Persons Dr. Holder's fame is spread orth to all and Few he hopes will ever happen to know that Dr. Wallis in his Treatise of speech 1653 had shewed him the way that being a Small Treatise and written in Latine and a great while since and but annexed to another Book intended principally for Forraigners desiring to learn English or that Dr. Wallis had done any thing of that nature either to Mr. Popham or to Mr. Whaly there being nothing at that time said thereof any-where in Print so little was the Industry or rather so great was the Negligence of Wallis in spreading his own Fame p. 3. And all this he doth under Countenance of an Order of the Royal Society by him procured for the Printing of it p. 7. as if they had been privy to this Design Which would have been yet more advanced if he could have gotten their License for this his New Paper penned by himself in Mr. Oldenburg's name put by him into Mr. Oldenburg's hand to be published in the Transactions as himself tells us p. 9. making the Transactions his market as p. 3. and a Fair for this Merchant of Glory if he could have found way and leave to croud himself in For who should now believe when every body else is silent that ever any one thought of a Treatise of Speech or the Formation of Sounds before Dr. Holder made this Essay in his Elements of Speech For that they must be thought elder than that of Dr. Wilkins he had subtly contrived already by getting him to mention some Papers of Dr. Holder which might now be thought to be these Elements and the small Treatise of Dr. Wallis 't is hoped will be forgotten or known to few And who can believe that any one but Dr. Holder did Teach or attempt to Teach a Deaf man to speak or ever thought of such a Thing so long as Dr. Wallis is silent there being no body then in Print pretending to it And thus he hopes to bear it out as p. 9 11. with subtilty of contrivance speaking like Truth so artificially that the Reader is to believe more than is True and it serves him to impose on those Mr. Oldenburg and the Royal Society whose name and credit he borrows to commend him who innocently suffer a demur Truth of his own penning unwittingly to pass into the Transactions suffering themselves as p. 3. to be imposed upon to publish the Fame and Praise of Dr. Holder in large Characters engraven by himself For that of p. 4 5 6 7 8. is certainly of his own Penning though in Mr. Oldenburg's name And if as p. 9. we may by that guess at the rest and for some other reasons it may be justly thought That in the Transactions of May 1669. is so at least of his superviding Desiring and Designing as p. 11. the World would be so kind as to be cajoled into such a belief when he prevailed with Mr. Oldenburg so say as from himself what Dr. Holder imposed upon him â—nd very much concerned he is that this subtle contrivance takes no better Dr. Wallis was so ignorant of this Contrivance and so unsuspicious of a Design upon him and so unconcerned for what is said in those Elements and Appendix that he never yet read the One or the Other But so it happened the year following that this Mine was sprung unawares and play'd otherwise than was intended Mr. Oldenburg in the Transactions of July 1670 published a Letter of Dr. Wallis to Mr. Boyle of March 14. 1661. And as he had the year before given a large account of Dr. Holders Elements of Speech published in 1669. and how this was by him applyed to the Instruction of Dumb persons Without taking notice of what Dr. Wallis had Writ or Done So now without saying the same again of Dr. Holder he gives a Brief account of Dr. Wallis's Treatise of Speech published in 1653. and what in pursuance of this was
done by him Dr. Holder who thought he had put himself in sole possession of the Repute of this Experiment was startled as p. 7. or rather Nettled for he doth Winch and Fling like Hudibras's Horse in such a condition without any apparent cause as appears by his printed Paper He falls foul upon Dr. Wallis Mr. Oldenburg the Royal Society Dr. Plot and Dreams of Subtleties Practices Contrivances Designs c. no body can see why who doth not see the Nettle or know of the sore Place That Dr. Wallis had in the year 1653. published a Treatise De Loquela and that he had in pursuance of what is there delivered taught Mr. Whaly to speak and had since done the like for Mr. Popham are things True and Known and Notorious nor doth he deny it And why might not all this be said without making such a Clutter Dr. Holder it seems for so his Paper tells us p. 7. had in his Elements of Speech made mention of his success upon a Deaf and Dumb person intending Mr. Popham which yet Dr. Wallis knew not of till he saw it in this Paper as having never read that Book nor doth yet know what is there said nor how truly and Mr. Oldenburg had given a large account of that Book and the Contents of it in the Transactions of May 1669. without saying any thing of Dr. Wallis and no offence was taken But when in July 1670. he gave a short account of Dr. VVallis and his Treatise without speaking there of Dr. Holder and his Elements as having done it a year before a great Out-cry is made of VVrongs and Injuries of Plots Designs Contrivances and subtle Practises and a great deal more of such Rif-Raf As if every Body were bound every-where and at all times to magnifie his Elements of Speech c. But it seems as p. 10 11. he could not help what was in his Nature or else Habitual to him and could not conceal his Particular Emulation He Desired and had Designed it that the world would be so kind as to be cajoled into such a Belief that he was the First that had consider'd the Formation of Sounds and the onely Person who attempted to teach Dumb Persons to Speak For if he designed any thing less than this there was nothing there said to contradict him Yet he himself knew full well as p. 14 Dr. VVallis's Treatise of Speech and what he had done for Mr. VVhaly and Mr. Popham But the Reader must not know of that The disclosing of this marred his Market He knew full well That Dr. Wallis had taught Dumb Persons and he says it expresly p. 11. So he did for Two were his Scholars Mr. Popham and Mr. Whaly And if we admit what he there says That they had formerly Owed somewhat the one to his Nurse and the other to Dr. Holder Yet if they had equally Forgotten which is the case the one and the other whatever it were and what now they have they have from Dr. VVallis which though True Dr. Holder would not have Known and Mr. Pepham one no more to Dr. Holder than Mr. VVhaly to his Nurse It might very well be said without offence that Mr. Whaly is not the only Person on whom Dr. Wallis hath shewed the effect of his skill but he hath since done the like for another meaning Mr. Popham were there not some Nettle that stings but is not seen or some sore Place wringed which doth not Appear but must not be Touched 'T was nothing therefore but being disappointed in this his great Design which made him thus outragious And persons faulty being mostly jealous he being conscious to himself of such petty contrivances made him fancy that others were imployed in like Plots And Knowing it seems though I knew it not that he had done what I had no reason to take kindly he fancied me to be studying Revenge of what I never knew Now all this as p. 1. if being but nakedly exposed to light in such a Narrative do seem severe it must be imputed to the Matter it self And if the Language seem hard he must not quarrel at it like the Black-smith who threw away the Looking-Glass because it shewed him an Ugly face since it is his own But I shall forbear thus to charge him though there be much more of truth therein than in what he fancies of me and the Language is his own Yet 't is not amiss to let him judge by hearing it how well it doth become him to use such language As to what he Complains of the sum of what I say is this That it was as lawful for me to Write and Publish a Treatise concerning the Formation of Sounds in 1653 as for him to do the like in 1669. That it was as lawful for me to Teach Mr. Whaly to speak a Language and understand it as for him to Attempt some what of this on Mr. Popham without Success That it was as lawfull for me to say that what I did was in pursuance of what I had Before made publick in 1653 as for him to say What he did was in pursuance of what he hath was Since made publick in 1669. That it was lawfull also when he had two years before given-over Mr. Popham and all that he did Attempt or Perform on him was come to nothing for me to do the like for Mr. Popham as I had before done for Mr. Whaly That it was as lawful for Mr. Oldenburg to say What he Knew of me and my Book in the Transactions of July 1670 without repeating there what he had before said of Dr. Holder as in that of May 1669 to say what he Thought of Dr. Holder and his Book without saying any thing of me That it was lawful for Dr. Plot to say that he so found it said in the place by him cited Especially when himself knew the Substance of it to be true and had not cause to dis-believe the Circumstances That when I could not say my Own Thoughts without derogating somewhat from what others had said of the Constable of Castiles Son and what Dr. Holder says of himself it was neither Uncivil nor Dis-ingenuous in me to be Silent in it and let it rest upon the credit of those who do or can say it And consequently that Dr. Holder hath no cause to Complain of all or any of this much less to Write Print or Suggest a Paper full of so many Great Mis-takes in matter of Fact and so many groundless Surmises of Designs And lastly that the Counsel of the Royal Society acted with very good reason when they Refused to License that Paper I have now done with this unpleasing Task For I take no pleasure in quarrels or blemishing another mans Reputation I had thoughts at first to have neglected his Paper without making any Reply because any indifferent Reader would easily discern that there is in it much more of Passion than of Reason But I find others of opinion that it was fit somewhat should be said to it because so many are concerned in it as well as my self I find he doth mis-remember many matters of fact and mis-times divers others and fancies things of meer accident to be matters of Design a thing very incident to persons that are a little uneasie He had attempted I know the Teaching Mr. Popham to speak But for what reasons he knows best quickly gave it over and Mr. Popham forgot all What success he had in the mean time I cannot tell I saw nothing of it And therefore he made an ill choice in calling me to be his Voucher If any who knew more of it than I did have said any thing of him advantagiously I have never concerned my self to contradict it That I did teach Mr. VVhaly with better success and without his Assistance he knows very well And that I taught Mr. Popham too he knows also And that I did not seek the Imployment or take Mr. Popham out of his hands but two years after he had given over the attempt when Mr. Popham whatever it was he had learned had forgot all This though perhaps it might cause somewhat of regret that another should succeed in what he had given over yet is no just cause of complaint Nor do I find any thing in the Transactions of Iuly 1670 which can administer just occasion to find fault with it but if he will needs be angry because I cannot Affirm what I do not Know Or will needs go about to perswade me and tell all the World that I did See and Hear those things which I did neither see nor Hear I cannot help it If in giving your Lordship this trouble I have already been too tedious I shall now add no more to it but subscribe my self My Lord Your Lordships very humble Servant John Wallis FINIS
to say himself What is in those three Paragraphs I cannot tell nor is the Book at hand to look and therefore cannot say whether I am or am not concerned therein But if any thing be there or any where else in that whole Book which concerns the business in hand sure I am that I penned it not Nor did I so much as know that he had therein said any one word of that whole Affair till he told me after the Book was published that Dr. Holder was offended at it Nor do I yet know what it is he hath said of it But have reason to think there is nothing therein said but what was fit enough for him to say So that if Dr. Holder could find in his heart to pass by all the rest as he intimates p. 4 9. as to this last I may plead Innocence And so I may as to that his great Aggravation p. 9. That I knew this affair then to lie before the Royal Society For this I knew not nor perhaps was he desirous I should I know indeed That he and I with Mr. Oldenburg coming together one night from Arundel-house he made great complaint of us both but without any just cause in either Threatning that in case Mr. Oldenburg did not Retract that in the Transactions he would himself publish somewhat against us And to the same purpose when at another time he and I with Sir Christopher Wren came together from Sir William Petty's house And said That he did forbear coming to the Royal Society till he should in this be vindicated So great a crime it was to have it said That Mr. Whaly was not the onely Person on whom I had shewed the effect of my skill but I had done the like for another meaning Mr. Popham My Answer was The thing said was Truth That neither of us in so saying had done him wrong or given him any just cause of complaint That if himself had a mind to publish what concern'd himself without wronging others 't was free for him so to do If he did it with any unhandsome Reflections on me I should when I found it abroad either Answer it or Neglect it as I should see cause That as to Mr. Oldenburg's publishing any thing to satisfie his clamour I would advise nothing one way or other as being a person concerned but leave Mr. Oldenburg to his discretion And I then told him as now I do that his story of my resorting to Blechington c. was a mistake Nor do I remember that from that day to this any word hath since passed between Mr. Oldenburg and me touching that affair or that I have ever concern'd my self about it I now find from what Dr. Holder tells us p. 9 10. which before I did not know That a Paper of his own penning but in Mr. Oldenburg's name Dr. Holder desired to have Licensed by the Counsel of the Royal Society but that they refused to do it And I think with good reason if it were what he now tells us By whose License it is since come out I do not know This he means when he says That affair did then lie before the Royal Society p. 9 10. Of this therefore though there were enough to be said in Justification if it had been True Yet because I must answer punctually to his Chancery-Bill I must plead Not-guilty I know not that any such thing did lie before the Royal Society And can but Thank them for doing me that Justice without giving me the trouble to make a Defence Nor did I Pen or Croud-in what of this matter is said by Dr. Plott And Dr. Plott who yet survives and to whom Dr. Holder applies himself p. 11. will I doubt not be my Compurgator in this point But Mr. Popham also is yet surviving and of Age able to answer for himself And knows as well as any Who it was that Taught him If he be ask'd Whether Dr. Holder taught him to speak He will answer No. If Whether Dr. Wallis He will answer I. For I have been present when he hath been asked Both Qustions and given Those Answers without being prompted so to do The Bottom of the Business seems to be this Dr. Holder having Attempted what he soon Gave-over concerning Mr. Popham in 1660 was a little concern'd that I should the next year undertake Mr. Whaly with better success Had I then proceeded with Mr. Popham it would have been but to Go-on where he Left and he might have been pretended to have done the Hardest part of the work But on Mr. Whaly it could not be denied but to be all my own And he could not then though he saw this and was troubled at it p. 6. shew the like effect of his skill on Mr. Popham Because he had either Not-Learned or had Forgot it And he was yet more concerned when upon this Success on Mr. Whaly Mr. Popham also whom he had quitted was brought to me And seeing me to have a like Success on Mr. Popham as before on Mr. Whaly He would now play an After-game and have it thought That it was He not I that taught Mr. Popham to speak and that what he now hath was learned from Dr. Holder without allowing that Dr. Wallis had any share in it And cannot be content to say He had taught Mr. Popham somewhat and leave it to some of his Friends who knew it for I do not to say How much But makes it a crime to say That I have since shewed any effect of my skill on Mr. Popham For this is all he hath to cavil at And yet he allows it to be true p. 10. And then imagins Plots and Practises Designs and Subtil Contrivances And a great many more Fansies of his own Brain which never came into my Thoughts With which I am charged above twenty times at least p. 1 2 3 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 14. He first imagins that I had a long aking Tooth to joyn to my other Trophies what was performed by Dr. Holder He should rather have said To have the credit of Performing what Dr. Holder did Attempt but gave-over without performing and so it came to nothing Then That in order to this I had recourse to a long train of subtil Contrivances First to meet with Mr. VVhaly who being Deaf from a Child was consequently Dumb. 'T is well I am not charged to have contrived twenty years before that he should be Deaf and consequently Dumb but that this should be unknown to me for twenty years that I might then meet with him in an happy hour and teach him to speak two years after Dr. Holder had quitted his attempt on Mr. Popham Next That I should Contrive to have this known at Court at Gresham-Colledge as he had before contrived to have his Attempt on Mr. Popham to be publickly taken notice of and known generally in Oxford at London Westminster the Anatomy-Lecture to Persons of all Degrees c. p. 5. Then That I