C 1 
meridian^ &c. If thcfe piiirticularo had been Infer tedj 
there would have been no occafion likewife to alter 
my numbers rcfpcdling the periods of the tranfit, 
lince every altronomer, from the previous obferva- 
tions, might draw his own conduhons. Obfervations 
-ought not to be rejeded or flifled becaufe they do not 
entirely fuit any adopted ryftem, or favourite parallac- 
tic angle. If 1 declared I law an oblongation of the 
planet Venus, it ought rot to be diferedited becaufe 
another did not fee it. If I gave reafons for foggefl- 
ing that Venus had an atmofphere, but had not a la- 
tellite, the report fhould have been impartially dated, 
though another diould be of a contrary opinion. 
I fliall beg leave toextrad the following paragraph 
from my original letter from India to Lord Mac- 
clesfield, on the fubjed of the tranfit of Venus, in the 
year 1761, which, for what good reafon 1 know not, 
was fuppreffed, cind had not the honour of a pla^e in 
the Philofophical Tranfadions ; but which 1 am the 
more delirous fliould now be inferted, as it tends to 
elucidate a matter of fad, and to render indifputable 
an aftronomical truth, only to be edabliflied by thofe 
who had the opportunity of feeing as I did, the entire 
pafTage of Venus over the folar dife. The paragraph 
is as follows : 
“ Looking over the Philofophical Tranfadions, 
fome time before the tranfit, I found Mr. Short 
“ had obferved a fmall flar near Venus, which had 
“ the fame phafis as that planet. This gave fufpicion 
that Venus was attended with a fatellite. A cor- 
“ roborating circumftance was 'added, vizy M. Caf- 
fini, in his Elements d' AJironomie, mentions a like 
‘‘ obfervation. This I regarded as a favourable 
“ opportunity, 
