8 Letters of Sir Writtam Jonus to Samvet Davis, Esq. 
IX. 
“Aarif-nagar : 4 May 1789. 
My dear Sir, 
Having set myself along task for my summer vacation, I will answer 
your two agreeable letters with all possible conciseness. I anxiously hope 
that the work of BuAscara may prove a treatise on universal arithmetic : 
the rule, which you translate from it, goes no farther than signs placed over 
numbers : but, as a point is a symbol of sound, when it stands over a letter, 
it would be rather an inconvenient negative sign, if the Hindus have a 
specious or universal notation. I have met, in the Lettres Edifiantes, a 
curious passage on Indian science, which you will soon be able to disprove 
or to confirm: * The Hindu logicians,” says Father Du Pons, “ admit four 
« principles of knowledge; 1. prdtyacsha or intuition. 2. infallible or 
“ divine authority. 3. anuwmdna, which means syllogism or enthymema. 
“ 4, upamdna, or equation, which is the application of a definite known 
“ quantity to the definition of another quantity “ll then unknown.” Now 
a clearer description of algebra than this could hardly be given; and if 
there be treatises on specious arithmetic in Sanscrit, we shall possibly find 
rules and methods, which may be substantially useful. The list of astro- 
nomical books is in my study at Calcutta; and I will not fail to send it to 
you. Mr. Chambers is, I know, desirous that the sketch of Mavalipuram 
should appear in our second volume, with a reference to his paper in the 
first ; and | hope Mr. Daniell will return in time to etch both that drawing, 
and the figures which will be necessary to illustrate your own valuable 
paper. I now come to your second letter. The Sanscrit stanza is literally 
this : 
« Fruitless are other Shastrds : in them zs contention only: 
« Fruitful is the Jyétish Shastra ; where the sun and moon are two witnesses.” 
or, more literally still in Latin : 
« [nutiles aliz scientiz : lis in istis tantum : 
“ Utilis astronomia; in qua Sol Luna testes duo.” 
Your translation of it, therefore, is accurate ; and I only took the liberty 
of altering it, because the fastidiousness of my ear made me think one of 
the rhymes imperfect. Your spirited paraphrase of the stanza I have read 
more than once with great pleasure. And now, my dear Sir, permit me to 
