FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 1886.

COMMENT AND CRITICISM.

THE SMITHSONIAN REPORT for 1885, which we may hope will be issued with less delay than its predecessors have been, will contain an account of the progress in astronomy for that year, by Mr. William C. Winlock of Washington, which has already appeared with sufficient promptness as a separatum. Mr. Winlock forestalls at once any criticism we might otherwise like to make by pleading the brief time necessarily available as an excuse for any shortcomings that may be found, and remarks that his record is intended primarily for the large and increasing class of those who have a general rather than a special interest in the progress of astronomy, while it may be of use to the professional astronomer also, as a convenient collection of reviews and notes. Abstracts of the most important papers are given, while other papers appear by title only, and free use has been made of reviews in such periodicals as Science, The athenaeum, The observatory, and Bulletin astronomique. Comets, a specialty of Mr. Winlock's, are very fully and accurately dealt with; and his method of indicating the names of all these objects, now become so numerous with every year, is an important advance.

Independently of the excellences or shortcomings of the present work, we think the question may fairly be raised whether these annual reports are worthy of continuance or not. They are, through no fault of the author, rather tame reading for those having only a general interest in astronomy, being largely a mere recital of the new facts of the year's finding out, with no connecting-link to the astronomy of the past. To be sure, the developments of astronomy within a twelvemonth are rarely sufficiently far-reaching for even the practical astronomer to keep in mind the precise relations of past and present research. Again, if these reports are prepared for the convenience of the professional astronomer, it may well be doubted whether they are worth what they cost the astronomer who undertakes to prepare them; for the work is no ap

No. 188.-1886.

proach, in point of serviceableness, to a complete bibliography for the year, such, in fact, as Mr. Winlock himself broaches the preparation of, perhaps through the co-operation of astronomers. If this is found practicable, then the editor of the Smithsonian report might well confine himself to the presentation of a quinquennial history of astronomical progress, to be prepared by the ablest astronomer who would undertake the task, and who would be expected to indicate clearly the bearings of recent research upon that of previous years, and weld the scattering links into a continuous chain. It is easy to see that the work executed in this manner would have an im

portant bearing upon the diffusion of knowledge among men,' which, in its present form, it does not possess.

JUDGING BY THE SCIENTIFIC AGITATION which has shaken England for so many years, one would hardly credit the statement made by Sir John Lubbock in his address at the unveiling of the statue of the founder of the Mason science college, that, in 54 of 240 endowed schools for boys which have reported, no science whatever is taught; in 50, one hour is devoted to it per week; in 76, less than three hours; while only 56 devoted as many as six hours to it. According to the report of the Technical commission last year, there were only three schools in Great Britain in which science is fully and adequately taught. In urging the benefits of science, Sir John Lubbock says, "In the first place, science adds immensely to the interest and happiness of life. It is altogether a mistake to regard science as dry or prosaic. The technical works, descriptions of species, etc., bear the same relations to science as dictionaries to literature.

fats seems destined to assume as many shapes as Proteus. At first the globose forms, obtained by the boiling and subsequent slow cooling of butter, and exhibiting the Saint Andrew's cross under polarized light, were brought prominently forward as distinguishing marks of pure butter. Prof. H. H. Weber, however, upon testing the method as described by Dr. Taylor, found, that, although the so-called butter crystals could be readily prepared from butter, they could be as readily prepared from beef-fat, or mixtures of beef-fat and lard, under like conditions. The necessary conditions are, the slow cooling of the melted fat in the presence of minute solid particles about which the fat may crystallize, the so-called 'butter crystals' being aggregations of minute crystals radiating from a centre. In the test as described by Dr. Taylor, the butter is boiled for one minute, and then slowly cooled. During the boiling, some of the water of the butter evaporates, and a corresponding portion of its salt solidifies, and the minute crystals thus formed serve as centres of crystallization for the fat during the subsequent cooling.

After the publication of these results, the 'butter crystal' and its Saint Andrew's cross were relegated to a subordinate position, and in several publications Dr. Taylor insisted that his most important test had been neglected, viz., the appearance of the unboiled material under polarized light with a selenite plate. According to Dr. Taylor, butter shows a uniform tint, while lard and tallow show prismatic colors. Here, again, however, he has been pursued by Professor Weber, who shows that either butter-fat or lard or tallow, when cooled quickly, will show a uniform tint, while if cooled slowly, so as to admit of the formation of larger crystals, prismatic tints are shown by both. Since imitation butter is cooled rapidly when made, and since both genuine and imitation butter are liable to undergo sufficient changes of temperature after manufacture to allow of a partial re-crystallization, the test is plainly fallacious. Apparently, Dr. Taylor prepared his annual report with these results in mind, for there, and in his paper before the annual meeting of the American society of microscopists at Chautauqua, Aug. 10-16, he gives his method a still different exposition.

Dr. Taylor's first step is now to search for fat crystals in the test sample by plain transmitted

light. By the application of polarized light, 'amorphous crystals,' whatever these may be, may be detected. To determine whether these 'amorphous crystals' are of beef-fat or lard, the sample is boiled and slowly cooled, as already described, and mounted in oil. Under these conditions, he now finds, in accordance with Professor Weber, that butter, lard, and beef-fat all give globular crystalline bodies which (apparently with the exception of lard) show the Saint Andrew's cross. These bodies are to be distinguished by their forms, lard giving a stellar form, butter the well-known butter crystals,' and beef-fat a stellar form with biserrated spines. Dr. Taylor has also discovered the noteworthy fact that Tennessee butter of a certain grade yields globules which are flattened or indented on one side! The above account of Dr. Taylor's method, as at present described by him, is drawn mainly from his last annual report to the commissioner of agriculture, - his Chautauqua paper, to judge from the published abstract, having been chiefly a criticism on Professor Weber's experiments. We shall endeavor to keep our readers informed of the changes which the method undergoes in the future.

THE EARTHQUAKE OF AUG. 31, 1886. THE accompanying map has been hastily compiled from the great mass of conflicting data from all sources now available, and probably gives a fair general idea of the origin of the shock, the limits of the area disturbed, and the intensity at many points within this area (plotted on the American scale of intensity, 1 to 5). It will be readily appreciated by every one that in this preliminary report all that is or can be arrived at is to give a general outline, as determined by the most probable evidence at hand, to serve as a good working hypothesis: to attempt any thing further at present would be to make a mere pretence at accuracy.

A line of weakness in the earth's crust extends from Troy, N.Y., south-westward, along the line of tidewater, past Baltimore, Washington, and Richmond, losing itself in a broad flexure south of Raleigh. The cause of the shock seems to have been a renewed faulting or displacement along the line where it crosses the Carolinas. This severe shock appears to have had its origin along this line in central North Carolina and eastern South Carolina, at 9.49 P.M. (75th meridian time), Aug. 31. It was not without warning. For a long time slight shocks have been occasionally felt in North Carolina, and only a few

days previously moderate shocks were felt near Charleston. From the Carolinas it radiated with great rapidity (from 20 to 60 miles a minute) throughout the great area bounded on the south by the Gulf of Mexico; on the north by Michigan, the province of Ontario, New York, and southern New England; on the east by the Atlantic ocean, where it was probably felt nearly 500 miles at sea; and on the west by the central Mississippi valley. The limits are, so far as now known, as follows: central Florida; eastern Louisiana, Arkansas, Missouri, and Iowa; southern Michigan and province of Ontario; northern New York; and southern New England. It was not felt at Bermuda. The limits of the shock, as here stated and as indicated in the accompanying map, it is particularly desirable to verify, as well as the correct time at which the shock was first felt at all points within the disturbed area. It often happens that there are places within an earthquake area where the shock is not perceptible, owing probably to some local peculiarity in the geological formation, although decidedly noticeable at places not far away. There are already points of this kind mentioned, in Florida, Indiana, and Connecticut, for instance, - and such information is very interesting.

The hypothesis has been advanced by Perrey that earthquakes are connected with subterranean tides due to the combined influence of the sun and moon, and analogous to those in the ocean. At a given point the earth's strata are under the accumulated tension of centuries, and this pressure is slowly but steadily increasing, until it reaches a point when fracture is imminent. Twice a day the great oceanic tidal waves sweep along the coast, the tremendous changes of pressure due to them being possibly augmented by analogous movements beneath the crust; and at a critical moment they add 'the last straw' that determines the fracture. It is very interesting to notice in this connection that at the time of the severe shock at Charleston this tidal influence was at its maximum. The moon was in perigee at 2 A.M., Aug. 29; new moon at 8 A.M. the same day, acting in a direct line with the sun (the eclipse of the sun occurred at 5 A.M., Aug. 29): extremely high tides occurred, therefore, for several days following. The moon's upper transit at Charleston occurred at 2.22 P.M., on Aug. 31. The high tide following (the higher of the two daily tides) was at 9.35 P.M., just twenty minutes before the shock occurred. This remarkable coincidence is of course extremely interesting.

It seems remarkable that no sea-wave followed the shock; and indeed it was providential that it did not, as the resulting destruction and loss of life

would have been a hundredfold greater. A seawave (often very incorrectly called a tidal wave) of greater or less size is the almost invariable accompaniment of a severe shock occurring near the seacoast.

It is unnecessary to enlarge here and now upon the general effects of this severe earthquake, or to theorize upon the causes of earthquakes in general or of this one in particular, more than has already been done. Such a study, to be of any value, must await the compilation and elaboration of a vast amount of material, and the final reports of the geologists who are now at work in the region of greatest disturbance.

STUDY OF THE EARTHQUAKE.

THE U. S. geological survey has undertaken to make a study of the severe earthquake of Aug. 31, which caused such great destruction and loss of life at Charleston, S.C. It was the most severe on record in the United States, both as to the effects produced and the area disturbed.

The study of phenomena of this kind is of the greatest value to science as a guide to the knowledge of the nature of the interior of the globe, and in its bearing upon every branch of physics and geology. In it there is needed a vast amount of reliable information, not only from points within the disturbed area, but also from adjacent points, in order to accurately define its limits; and it is not only skilled observers who can furnish such information, but almost every one can contribute valuable facts. It is therefore confidently hoped that facts of interest will be sent in at once to the U. S. geological survey at Washington while they are still fresh in the memory. Newspapers can render great assistance by giving wide publicity to this call, and by sending copies of their issues containing information about the local effects of the shock. Attention to the points mentioned below will add greatly to the value of the information, and facilitate its elaboration and study.

Write on one side only of the paper. After dating the letter as usual (giving also the locality where the observation was made, if not the same), write 'Answers to circular No. 2.' State the observer's situation (whether in the house or out of doors, up stairs or down, sitting, standing, walking, reading, etc.); also, if possible, the character of the ground (whether rocky, earthy, sandy, etc.) Then answer the following questions, referring to them by number only:

1. Was an earthquake felt at your place the evening of Aug. 31, 1886, or within a few days of that time? Negative answers to this will be of great

interest from any points within the disturbed area, and especially from points near its limits; that is, southern Florida; central Mississippi, Arkansas, Missouri, and Iowa; south-eastern Minnesota and Wisconsin; central Michigan; southern portion of the province of Ontario; northern New York; southern Vermont and New Hampshire; and eastern Massachusetts; also from the western part of the Atlantic and northern part of the Gulf.

2. At what hour, minute, and second of standard time was it felt? When this can be accurately given, it is of the very greatest importance. Be particularly careful to state whether it is standard (railway) time or local time; whether the watch or clock was compared with some standard clock at a railway-station or elsewhere, how soon, what the error was, and whether you corrected your observation by this comparison or not.

3. How long did its perceptible motion continue?

4. Was it accompanied by any unusual noise? If so, describe it.

5. Was there more than one shock felt? If so, how many? Where several were felt, give accurately, or even roughly, the number, duration, and character of each, and the interval between them. 6. Which of the following measures of intensity would best describe what happened in your vicinity? No. 1. Very light; noticed by a few persons; not generally felt. No. 2. Light; felt by the majority of persons; rattling of windows and crockery. No. 3. Moderate; sufficient to set suspended objects, chandeliers, etc., swinging, or to overthrow light objects. No. 4. Strong; sufficient to crack the plaster in houses or to throw down some bricks from chimneys. No. 5. Severe ; overthrowing chimneys, and injuring the walls of houses.

year, alluding to the Grenoble meeting and the excursions made in the neighborhood, mentioning the names of deceased members: Bouquet, Bonley, Jamin, Robin, Dechambre, Courty, and others. M. A. Volland, mayor of Nancy, greeted the association with heartfelt words. M. E. Galante spoke on the financial state of the association, which is very satisfactory. The expenses are for the publication of the yearly volume recording the acts of the association and the different works submitted; many grants for scientific researches are also included.

Some interesting discussions have been held in the meetings of the different sections. One of the best took place in the agricultural section, and the topic was wheat-production. Many experimenters and able specialists took part in this discussion, such as Frederic Passy, Levasseur, Alglave, Dehérain, Grandeau, Raffalovich, etc. M. Dehérain spoke on the best manner of getting the most wheat at least cost price, which is, I think, the universal desideratum, applying not only to wheat, but to all that can be manufactured or grown. M. Dehérain said that the great objection to the use of a large amount of manure is the 'laying' which usually occurs. But the laying' can very well be avoided if some trouble is taken in selecting the wheat species. According to M. Dehérain's experiments, the Scotch red wheat, the Shirley, and the Browick are not subject to 'laying,' and the crop is a very fine one when manure is liberally used; 35 or 40 quintaux of wheat, and 60 or 80 of straw, sometimes bringing more than 500 francs per hectare. M. Porion has even been able, in the Pas-de-Calais, to obtain crops four times more abundant than the mean average of French crops. M. Sagnier spoke of Indian wheat, the hero of the day, but a very unwelcome one. It seems that India is growing wheat very successfully, and the increased extension of railways helps this production in a marked manner. 1876, ten years ago, India had twelve thousand kilometres of railway, and one and a half million hectares planted with wheat. At present there are thirty thousand kilometres of the former, and twelve million hectares of the latter. In ten years the wheat-crop has increased eightfold: it has doubled in the last three years. But this cannot be all, and the wheat-crop must certainly become greater still. M. Sagnier believes it may certainly become double what it is at present, and four times as large as that of France at this time. M. Alglave agrees with M. Sagnier, because, he says, although the inhabitants of North India have taken to using wheat for their food, those of the south keep eating rice, which does not sell so easily; and all their wheat they willingly sell, in

In

asmuch as rice-culture does not interfere with wheat. Rice requires a watery soil, which does not suit wheat; so that they will continue growing rice in the valleys, and wheat on the hillsides. At all events, the enormous extension of wheatculture in India is a matter of no little anxiety to European agriculturists.

In the anthropological section, M. Cartailhac read a paper concerning primitive burial rites. In 1830 some Danish anthropologists, Bruzelius, Boye, and Hildebrand, believed that in many cases primitive men were accustomed to bury only the bones, after the flesh had disappeared. M. Cartailhac, following up this idea, remarked that in many savage countries the fact is quite true. In the Andaman Islands, for instance, as E. H. Man has recently noticed, the body is buried for a time only, then unearthed when the flesh has been decomposed; and a similar custom is met with in many instances. M. Cartailhac proves that this fact is also established in regard to primitive mankind, and that at the age du Reune — nothing being known of the burial rites of the stone age the real burial was performed only when the body was deprived of flesh. In the Menton caves, for instance, the bodies were certainly buried in the skeleton state. The same is true of the age de la pierre polie. Upon the whole, M. Cartailhac believes that the custom of letting corpses putrefy before giving them a definitive burial has been a very prevalent one. It is curious enough to notice that in Spain no king is laid in his burialground before the death of his successor: the dead king remains in the Putrido, as it is called, till his successor comes to take his place.

In the medical section I notice no very interesting papers yet, that is, none of general interest. There have been no general meetings at this session, as there usually are, none save the general assembly of the first day. Some interesting excursions have been made in the neighborhood. One had been projected to Mount Douon, a mountain on the German territory; but the German authorities, not knowing the nature of the French association, had asked that no excursion should be made so it was deemed better to abandon the project. Only two or three persons went up, and found a small body of troops and some local German authorities. But it was ascertained that the intentions of the association had been entirely misunderstood, the German authorities knowing nothing of the association, and believing it to have political objects. The absurdity of the notion was ridiculed, and no more was thought about it.

The next meeting will take place in Toulouse, and the following one, for 1888, in Oran (Algeria).