“That is simple,” he said, “when there is such a liberal supply of data.”
“True,” responded the Sepoy. “That was an oversight on my part. Still, your constructive application, too, is no less convincing.”
“But to what does all this lead?” inquired Gratz with a degree of impatience. “Suppose we admit that there is an exquisite balance maintained between my analysis and my synthesis, and have done with it. You have some appeal to make to one or both of these faculties.”
“Your penetration is the peer of your reasoning. Listen: Will you do me the favor of assuming that your comprehensive résumé of a few moments ago is all I care to hear on the subject?” asked the Sepoy.
“I understand,” replied Gratz.
“Very well, then,” continued the Sepoy. “I will extend to you the courtesy of offering no denial to anything you have said.”
“That,” laughed Gratz, “is the height of affability, under the circumstances; but proceed.”
“Good!” responded the Sepoy. “I have a suggestion to make. It is understood, in the first place, that Raikes is to recover his coin; on that point he will be fully satisfied. But there still remains the recognition of your services to him; you will have more difficulty in convincing him of his obligation than you had in persuading me of your acumen.”
“Ah!” murmured Gratz; “it is coming.”
“Are you any judge of brilliants?” inquired the Sepoy abruptly.