78 
Dr. Brinkley on the 
POSTSCRIPT. 
Since the above was written, the kindness of a friend has 
communicated to me, by letter, Mr. Pond’s Paper, read in 
June last, and which has appeared in the Second Part of the 
Transactions recently published : the volume itself has not 
reached me, and therefore I have not seen the Tables. I find 
Mr. Pond has referred to the Palermo Catalogue, as contained 
in the Philosophical Transactions, 1806. That Catalogue 
has been long rejected by the author. The improved places 
of the principal stars, as given in the great Catalogue, are 
those to which I have referred. This explanation appears 
necessary. 
The exact Catalogue was first published, probably about 
1807, as the Conn, des Terns. 1809, p. 458, which was pub- 
lished in 1807, contains the principal stars agreeing with 
the great Catalogue very nearly. The observations were 
therefore made prior to 1807. Indeed it is probable both 
Catalogues were founded on nearly the same observations. 
I beg leave to refer here to Mr. Bessel’s “ Astron. Fundam. 
p. 297 and 298,” for some remarks relative to the improved 
Catalogue of M. Piazzi. 
Mr. Pond states, that unless the southern motion be ad- 
mitted, the Greenwich observations of 1813 will appear very 
erroneous, and those of Dublin still more so. As I am un- 
acquainted with the arguments by which he supports this 
opinion, I cannot reply to them. But I think quite the con- 
trary, as far as regards my observations, will appear from 
the preceding pages. The southern motion will change every 
