d myself to preserve every
scrap of paper of any remote (and indeed recent) period, that had the
appearance of being written by a literary man, whether I {133} knew the
hand, or understood the circumstance to which it referred, or not. Such
papers, whether we understand them or not, have a _possible value_ to
others; and indeed, as my collections have always been at the service of
my friends, very few indeed have been left in my hands, and those,
probably, of no material value.

I wish this system were generally adopted. Papers, occasionally of great
historical importance, and very often of archaeological interest, would
thus be preserved, and, what is more, _used_, as they would thus
generally find their way into the right hands.

There are, I fancy, few classes of papers that would be so little likely
to interest archaeologists in general, as those relating to mathematics;
and yet such are not unlikely to fall in their way, often and largely,
if they would take the trouble to secure them. I will give an example or
two, indicating the kind of papers which are desiderata to the
mathematical historian.

1. A letter from Dr. Robert Simson, the editor of Euclid and the
restorer of the Porisms, to John Nourse of the Strand, is missing from
an otherwise unbroken series, extending from 1 Jan. 1751 to near the
close of Simson's life. The missing letter, as is gathered from a
subsequent one, is Feb. 5. 1753. A mere letter of business from an
author to his publisher might not be thought of much interest; but it
need not be _here_ enforced how much of consistency and clearness is
often conferred upon a series of circumstances by matter which such a
letter might contain. This letter, too, contains a problem, the nature
of which it would be interesting to know. It would seem that the letter
passed into the hands of Dodson, editor of the _Mathematical
Repository_; but what became of Dodson's papers I could never discover.
The uses, however, to which such an unpromising series of letters have
been rendered subservient may be seen in the _Philosophical Magazine_,
under the title of "Geometry and Geometers," Nos. ii. iii. and iv. The
letters themselves are in the hands of Mr. Maynard, Earl's Court,
Leicester Square.

2. Thomas Simpson (a name venerated by every geometer) was one of the
scientific men consulted by the committee appointed to decide upon the
plans for Blackfriars Bridge, in 1759 and 1760.

"It is probable," says