Comprising:\nVolume II\n[Jurin, James (1684-1750)] Geometry no friend to infidelity: or, a defence of Sir Isaac Newton and the British mathematicians… by Philalethes Cantabrigiensis. London: T. Cooper, 1734, , 5-84pp., [Wallis 394]\nIbid. The minute mathematician: or, the free-thinker no just-thinker. Set forth in a second letter to the author of the Analyst; containing a defence of Sir Isaac Newton and the British mathematicians, against a late pamphlet, entituled, A defence of free-thinking in mathematicks. By Philalethes Cantabrigiensis. London: T. Cooper, 1735, , 112pp., [Wallis 396]\nThe Present State of the Republick of Letters. Reviews of the various pamphlets of this controversy contained in numbered articles in the issues for November 1735, January 1736, July, August 1736, extracts\nAn appendix to the Present State of the Republick of Letters for the month of November 1736. Being observations upon some remarks relating to the method of fluxions, published… August last, and in the Appendix to that for September. By Philalethes Cantabrigiensis. London: W. Innys and R. Manby, 1736, 79pp.\nAn appendix… for December 1736. Containing a reply to an advertisement of Mr. Robins [contained in vol. 1]… by Philalethes Cantabrigiensis. London: Innys and Manby, 1737, , 43, pp., with a ‘List of the several Tracts, that have been published in the present controversy about Sir Isaac Newton’s fluxions' [16 titles]; followed by further extracts\n2 volumes, 8vo (195 x 118mm.), binding: contemporary mottled calf, gilt spines, coloured edges, spines slightly worn\nA remarkable record of this controversy initiated by Berkeley in The Analyst, a work at one time thought to have been directed against Halley, but actually prompted by a story about the physician Samuel Garth, author of The Dispensary, who was said (by some) to have ended his days in unbelief, an unbelief explained by the fact, as he put it, that ‘his friend Halley who has dealt so much in demonstration has assured me that the doctrines of Christianity are incomprehensible and religion itself an imposture’. The nub of Berkeley’s argument is an attack partly on the mathematical basis of the calculus, which depended on illogical and unclear notions of infinitesimals, and partly on the Newtonian system, which Berkeley accepted in respect of how things moved, but not in respect of why that was so.\nAll sorts of people took up the cudgels on Newton’s behalf (Newton himself was, of course, dead), notably the medical man Jurin in his two pamphlets which Berkeley answered with A defence of freethinking in mathematics. Thomas Bayes, who came from a long line of Nonconformists and is famous for his work on probability theory (published posthumously in 1763 in the Philosophical Transactions with a preface by Richard Price), contributed an important rebuttal of Berkeley. Berkeley responded to Walton in an appendix to his pamphlet A defence of free thinking in mathematics, and Walton to that with The catechism of the author of The minute philosopher fully answer'd.