a Demonstration of Mr. _Rook_'s, in
confutation of Mr. _Hobs_'s Duplication of the Cube. Which when he had
repeated, _pag._ 43. He doth then (that it might seem absurd) change those
words, _aequales {293} quatuor cubis_ DV; (_pag._ 43. _line_ 33.) into these
(p. 44. l. 5.) _aequalia quatuor Lineis, nempe quadruplus Recta_ DV: And
would thence perswade you, that Mr. _Rook_ had assigned a _Solide_, equal
to a _Line_. But Mr. _Rook's_ Demonstration was clear enough without Mr.
_Hobse's_ Comment. Nor do I know any Mathematician (unless you take _Mr.
Hobs_ to be one) who thinks that _a Line multiplyed by a Number will make a
Square_; (what ever _Mr. Hobs_ is pleased to teach us.) But, That _a Number
multiplyed by a Number, may make a Square Number_; and, That _a Line drawn
into a Line may make a Square Figure_, _Mr. Hobs_ (if he were, what he
would be thought to be) might have known before now. Or, (if he had not
before known it) he might have learned, (by what I shew him upon a like
occasion, in my _Hob. Heaut._ _pag._ 142. 143. 144.) _How_ to understand
that language, without an Absurdity.

Just in the same manner he doth, in the next page, deal with _Clavius_, for
having given us his words, pag. 45 l. 3. 4. _Dico hanc Lineam
Perpendicularem extra circulum cadere_ (because neither _intra Circulum_,
nor in _Peripherea_;) He doth, when he would shew an errour, first make
one, by falsifying his word, _line_ 15. where instead of _Lineam
Perpendicularem_, he substitutes _Punctum A._ As if _Euclide_ or _Clavius_
had denyed the _Point A._ (the utmost point of the _Radius_,) to be in the
Circumference: Or, as if Mr. _Hobs_, by proving the _Point A._ to be in the
Circumference, had thereby proved, that the _Perpendicular Tangent A E_ had
also lyen in the Circumference of the Circle. But this is a Trade, which
Mr. _Hobs_ doth drive so often, as if he were as well faulty in his
_Morals_, as in his _Mathematicks_.

The _Quadrature of a Circle_, which here he gives us, _Chap._ 20. 21. 23.
is one of those _Twelve_ of his, which in my _Hobbius Heauton-timorumenus_
(from _pag._ 104. to _pag._ 119) are already confuted: And is the _Ninth_
in order (as I there rank them) which is particularly considered, _pag._
106. 107. 108. I call it _One_, because he takes it so to be; though it
might as well be called _Two_. For, as there, so here, it consisteth of
_Two branches_, which are Both false; and each overthrow the other. For if
the _Arch of