from 1869:

> I wrote about all this in such detail because I must know whether you wish to make a priority claim against any part of this \[report\].
>
> So far as I can see, 1) Kronecker was incorrect, if he opined, that the curve in his article on the discriminant has only multiple point; 2) that Clebsch was the first to use the mapping of an $F_3$ for the resolution of ordinary point; that you used the $F_3$ successively to resolve several ordinary singular points; 4) you do not show that this method is effective for arbitrary singular points; 5) nor, in particular, that the process terminates; 6) you give no applications of it.[^13]

At this point, Noether briefly listed some of his own accomplishments, obviously in order to make clear why he saw no need to pay great heed to the problem of reducing ordinary singularities to double points. “I did not give any further resolution of multiple points because I held this to be unnecessary, and above all, because this seemed to then as it does now completely evident.” (Die weitere Auflösung der vielf\[achen\] Pktn habe ich nicht mitgegeben, weil ich sie für unnötig hielt, 