C 75 3 
on my reflexions upon the lame matter, without 
taking the trouble to examine whether they were 
founded upon the truth or not, I find myfelf under 
the neceflity of laying before the Royal Society the 
paflages of my book, which, having been mifunder- 
flood by F. Frifius, have occafionedthe mifconftruc- 
tion, which he has made of my fentiments, either 
upon the trufl: I give to the adtual operation made for 
difcovering the figure of the earth, or Sir Ifaac New- 
ton’s theoretical inquiries about the fame fubjedt. 
The expreflions of Father Frifius, referr’d to by 
Mr. Short, are as follow : 
“ Quia tamen plerique omnes hucufque, aut nihil 
<c pro figura telluris determinanda ex iis obfervationi- 
“ bus deduci pofie cum geometra celeberrimo Rug- 
“ gero Bofcovik autumarunt, aut exinde cum 111. 
“ Clairaut, Bouguer, aliifque, contra incomparabilem 
a virum ac prope divinum Ifaacum Newton infur- 
“ gentes, admirabilem ipfius thcoriam fadto minus 
“ refpondentem dixerunt, aflignatamque in prop. 19. 
“ lib. 3. Princip. Mathem. terreftrium axium pro- 
“ portionem a vcra abfonam omnino efle, alios mihi 
“ obfervationibus parum, alios nimis tribuere vifum 
“ efi, omnes ferme oppofitis erroribus peccafle, ubi 
“ res neque aurificis lance, neque molitoris, ut aiunt, 
“ fiatera librandae funt.” 
This, when compared with the propofitions of my 
theory, which they are relative to, will appear, I hope, 
quite incoherent : and I cannot fliew it more clearly, 
than by tran dating the lafl: chapter of my book, to 
which F. Frifius refers the reader. 
For 
