propofed trigonometrical Operation. 2 1 1 
11s to judge, the figure here affigned to the earth, notwithftand- 
ing what has been alledged to the * contrary, is exceedingly near 
the truth. According to this hypothecs, the diftance MP on the 
meridian of Paris, which is yet to be determined by our trigono- 
metrical operations, fhould contain 27243 fathoms, being only 35 
fathoms lefs than what is given by the mean of the feven different 
ellipfoids, a fpacenot amounting quite to 2" of latitude. The re- 
fult of the meafurement of this fpace, anfwering to an arc in the 
heavens of 26' 50'' $2"' of latitude, will be a further confir- 
mation, or other wife, of the juftnefs of the theory. The 
degree at the equator being adhered to as the ffandard, it will 
be feen from the table, that the 45th is defective 37. 6, while 
that at the polar circle errs in excefs 9.4 fathoms. 
* Mr. J. Klos ter mann, Infpe&or of the Corps of Pages at St. Peterfourg, 
in his manufcript Memoir, fome time fince tranfmittecl to the Royal Society, to 
the Academy of Sciences at Paris, and alfo to that at Gottingen, has endea- 
voured to fhew, that the French trigonometrical operations are extremely erro- 
neous. It would feem, neverthelefs, that he has attempted to prove too much. 
He fhould certainly have confined his criticifm to the triangles of the meridian 
only, which are diflinguifhed from the others in M. Cassini’s book, by being 
printed in larger charafters, without drawing conclufions from very acute angles, 
which, although inferted in the general regifter, were not made ufe of in the 
determination in queftion. But as the Royal Academy of Sciences will, no doubt, 
vindicate the credit of their own operations, I fhall only further remark, on tho 
Literary News from Gottingen (Nacbricbt aus den. Gottingifcben Anzeigen vox 
gelebrten Sacben , 1 17 Stuck, 1785), which accompanied the Laid Memoir, and 
where it is faid, “ That M. Bouguer’s hypothecs of the 4^ P ovver fell to the 
{c ground, fo foon as other degrees were meafured than thofe on which he had 
“ founded it,” that I confefs myfelf to be quite of a different opinion, not 
doubting, that when the comparifon is fairly drawn between this and every other 
fyflem that has hitherto been fubmitted to the confideration of the public, M. 
Bouguer’s will be found to be juftly entitled to the preference, which I have 
here endeavoured to give it. His works fhew, that he was a man of very fuperior 
abilities, eminent as a mathematician, and perhaps the belt practical one that 
ever exifted. 
E e 2 
Befides 
