1788-01-09 (static/transcriptions/1788/01/085.jpg)

did not permit the accot in Mr. Killican’s book to be read which we offered, because it was not sufficiently proved that it came, as we said, from Bulram; yet there are circumstances in evidence which tend to prove the same thing.
The entry in the Rokon a. y. tho’ Deft says it wsa in Killican Saheb’s own Accot – yet he says afterwards in [same?] Entry that it was in part of Int due fm D. K. on his honds. Now on that