(Vol. viii., pp. 429. 543.)
One has some doubt, in reading PROFESSOR DE MORGAN'S article on the above
subject, what inference is to be drawn from it. If it is to prove a private
marriage between Halifax and Mrs. Barton, on the strength of the date on
the watch at the Royal Society being falsified, it is a failure. I have
examined that watch since PROFESSOR DE MORGAN published his Note, and can
testify most decidedly that, if anything, the inscription is older than the
case, nor is there a vestige of anything like unfair alteration; and any
one accustomed to engraving would arrive at the same conclusion. The
outside case is beautifully chased in Louis Quatorze style: but the inner
case, on which the inscription is graven, has no need of such elaborate
work, nor is such work ever introduced on the inside of watches; they are
invariably smooth.
And all that is noticeable in the present instance is, that the writing has
lost the sharpness of the graver by use, or returning it into its case; or
more probably the case has not been used at all, being cumbersome and set
aside as a curious work of art, which indeed it is.
The date on the watch is 1708, and PROFESSOR DE MORGAN states that Mrs.
Barton was married in 1718; the watch therefore denies this; but when she
married Conduit ought, if possible, to be found out by register, which
might prove the watch date untrue; but the watch declares she was Mrs.
Conduit in 1708. She was then of course twenty-eight years of age: thus we
come to a {591} plainer conclusion that when she lived with Halifax, or
whatever other arrangement they made, a position which is said to have
occurred between 1700 and the time of Halifax's death in 1715, she was
really Mrs. Conduit, and not Catherine Barton. And thus we are brought to
think that if there is any private marriage in the case, it is between the
lady and Mr. Conduit; at all events she went back to her husband, if the
watch is true.
As to an apology for Newton, I look upon it in a very different light:
first, I should say he had no clear right to interfere in the matter, as
the lady was married; and supposing he had, he could have done no more than
expostulate. He lived in a world of his own studies, and did not choose to
be interrupted by quarrels and scandals. And it is certainly a proper
addition to say, that the public morals of that age are not to be judged by
the present standard. All these account very well for Newton's silence on
the subject; but to settle the matter, some search might be made in the
registers of the parishes where they resided, in order that the subject may
be fully explained.