Sales by Auction. MONDAY, APRIL 14. IMPORTANT SALE OF SCIENTIFIC BOOKS. MR. J. C. STEVENS will Sell by Auction at his Great Rooms, 38 King Street, Covent Garden, on MONDAY, APRIL 14, at half-past 12 precisely, the Library of the late Dr. ARTHUR WALLER, of Gibson Square, Islington, together with other Valuable Natural History Work, comprising Sharpe's "Monograph of Aloedinida," Shelley's "Monograph of Nectarinida." Latham's "General Synopsis of Birds." Levaillant's "Histoire Naturelle des Perroquets," De Souauce's "Iconographie des Perroquets," Gould's Mammals of Australia," Birds of Asia," "Monograph of Trochilida.**** Monograph of Khamphastida," Gould's and Sharpe's "Birds of New Guinea, Sowerby's English Botany edited by J. T. B. SYME, Reeve's "Conchologia Iconica," Vols. I. to X., and many other Important Illustrated Works. On View Saturday prior from 10 to 4, and Morning of Sale, and Catalogues had. TUESDAY AND WEDNESDAY, APRIL 22 AND 23. THE EXTENSIVE COLLECTION OF LEPIDOPTERA FORMED BY HOWARD VAUGHAN, Esq., F.E.S. MR. J. C. STEVENS will Sell by Auction at his Great Rooms, 38 King Street, Covent Garden, on TUESDAY and WEDNESDAY, APRIL 22 and 23, at half-past 12 precisely each day, the above-named Valuable and Well known Collection, made with great care, and in which the Specimens are all Authentic, and mostly Labelled, and in the finest condition, and is remarkably rich in VARIETIES and LOCAL FORMS, and comprises Fine Series of Chrysophanus dispar. Noctua subrosea, and many other Rare and Extinct Species, Valuable Hermaphrodites. Scoparia, and Pterophori. The excellent Cab.nets in which the Collection is contained will be included in the Sale. On View the Day prior, 10 to 5, and Morning of Sale, and Catalogues had. F. H. BUTLER, M.A. Oxon., Assoc.R.S Mines, NATURAL HISTORY AGENCY, 158 BROMPTON ROAD, LONDON, Dealer in Rocks, Minerals, Fossils, and other Objects of Scientific Interest, Begs to announce that he has REMOVED his extensive Collections to more Commodious Premises at the above Address, and has thus secured greatly increased facilities for the execution of Orders. A Large Assortment of Hammers of New Pattern, for all classes of Rock-collectors, has just been added to Stock, also a fresh Series of Microsections illustrative of Teall's "British Petrography." MINERALOGY AND GEOLOGY. SPECIAL AND TYPICAL COLLECTIONS FOR STUDENTS, The Largest Stock in England of Rocks, Rock-Sections, New Catalogues and Lists now ready, Free, of JAMES R. GREGORY, 88 CHARLOTTE STREET, FITZROY SQUARE, LONDON. J. T. CROCKETT, Maker of every description of Entomological Cabinets and Apparatus ; Store- and Book-boxes, fitted with Camphor-cells; Setting Boards, Oval or Flat, &c. Cabinets of every description kept in stock. SPECIAL INSECT CABINETS, with Drawers fitted with Glass Tops and Bottoms to show upper and under side without removing insect. Store-boxes specially made for Continental Setting, highly recommended for Beetles. All best work. Lowest possible terms for cash. Prices on Application. Estimates supplied. Trade supplied. Established since 1847. Show Rooms-7A Prince's Street, Cavendish Square, W. (7 doors from Oxford Circus). Factories-34 Ridinghouse Street, and Ogle Street, W. Excellent Copies of the actual, natural Handwriting, also of Drawings, Music, even of elaborate Sketches, Programmes, Plans (up to Double-Elephant size), Shorthand, and Type-Writing, are easily, quickly, and cheaply produced by the AUTOCOPYIST WILLIAM WESLEY AND SON, A Classified Catalogue of NEW and SECOND-HAND WORKS in ASTRONOMY, W. WESLEY & SON, 28 Essex Street, Strand, London. By A. N. PEARSON. 8vo. Price 5s. "It is so fresh, original, and suggestive, that one luxuriates in it, as in some invigorating mental bath."-Mr. R. M. JOHNSTON, of Tasmania. "A colossal and truly magnificent thesis "-Mr. DAVID BLAIR in the Melbourne Argus. MELVILLE, MULLEN, & SLADE, Collins Street, Melbourne. DIGEST OF MR. HERBERT SPENCER'S WORKS. AN EPITOME OF THE SYNTHETIC by HERBERT SPENCER. With a Preface STANLEY Mathematical Instrument Manufacturer to H.M. Government, Council of India, Science and Art Department, Admiralty, &c. Mathematical, Drawing, and Surveying Instruments of every Description, Of the Highest Quality and Finish, at the most Moderate Prices Illustrated Price List Post Free. W. F. S. obtained the only Medal in the Great Exhibition of 1862 for Excellence of Construction of Mathematical Instruments, and the only GOLD MEDAL in the International Inventions Exhibition 1885 for Mathe matical Work. Silver Medal, Architects' Exhibition, 1886. Address:-GREAT TURNSTILE, HOLBORN, LONDON, W.C MADE WITH BOILING WATER, EPPS'S GRATEFUL-COMFORTING. COCOA MADE WITH BOILING MILK. NOW MADE IN FLAT WATCH SIZE. ANEROID BAROMETER. ROBT. J. ELLERY. Amongst several unsolicited Testimonials the two following have been received by the maker : The result has been EDINBURGH, May 31, 1889. DEAR SIR,-I have just returned from a six weeks' stay at the Ben Nevis Observatory, and while there had an opportunity of testing the admirable qualities of most satisfactory, the extreme error noted being only about the one-hundredth of an inch. During my stay at the Observatory the Aneroid was frequently tested by taking it down a couple of thousand feet and then comparing it with the standard on my return. The results obtained speak volumes for the high-class workmanship and great accuracy you have attained in the R. C. MOSSMAN, F.R.M.S., your new "Watkin" Aneroid. manufacture of this instrument. (Signed) J. J. HICKS, 8, 9, & 10 Hatton Garden, London. Je to obtained of all Opticians. THURSDAY, APRIL 10, 1890. NEW LIGHT FROM SOLAR ECLIPSEs. New Light from Solar Eclipses; or Chronology corrected by the Rectification of Errors in the received Astronomical Tables. By William M. Page. With an Introduction by the Rev. J. Brookes, D.D. (St. Louis: Barns Publishing Co., 1890.) a with a considerable portion of which in the author's own words, for fear we should not do it justice : "Our present lunation is too long by a fraction of a second, amounting in the course of a century, to about six minutes of time. In the same length of time, the sun's anomaly is too long by about seven minutes ten seconds of space, the moon's anomaly too long by eight minutes twenty seconds of space, and the sun's mean distance from the node is too short by about eight minutes thirty-five seconds of space." After an attentive perusal we have not been able to discover any additional explanation or reason for the introduction of these terms. Neither have we discovered to what assumed values of the mean the mean THIS is a book with a comer, for it treats largely of anomaly, and the argument of latitude these corrections theological matters of a disputed kind. It is the production, no doubt, of a devout and pious mind, but of one not scientifically trained. Indeed, we are informed, in an introduction by a St. Louis divine, that it is "written by a brother actively engaged in the ordinary pursuits of life," and an attempt is made to enlist our sympathies with the author on that account. This appeal would have been more effectual if the scientific conclusions at which the author has arrived, and for which he hopes to gain attention, were put forward either with more modesty on his own part, or with greater respect for recognized authorities. But the contrary is the case. Our prejudices are not respected, and while the crudest statements are made on the smallest possible evidence, the work so bristles with errors that it is difficult to present typical examples. We should have been tempted to leave this volume to the obscurity it merits from a scientific point of view, but for two circumstances. One is, that this book will probably circulate largely among readers not qualified to judge of the rashness of statement and inaccuracy of detail that characterize its astronomical portion, and that consequently a very erroneous and exaggerated opinion may be formed of the character and amount of the errors that still exist in one of the most exact of sciences. The second inducement to look a little closely into its pages is this: that another and more instructed class of readers may imagine that on matters of chronology astronomy speaks with an uncertain sound, and consequently be led to undervalue the very substantial advantages that history has derived from astronomical sources. The main object of the book is the arrangement of a system that shall bring the narrative contained in the Gospels into the chronological order conceived by the author as correct, and to render consistent, the facts recorded in sacred and secular history, with this system. How far this method and system will satisfy competent theological critics it is, as we have said, not our duty to inquire; we can only hope that the service rendered to religion is greater than that to science, for from the latter point of view we have no hesitation in saying that his heory is erroneous in its conception and unwarranted in its application. The means employed to produce this chronological harmony is based on the assumption that the places of the sun and moon cannot be correctly computed for distant dates from the existing tables, and that consequently additional terms, empirically determined, must be introduced. This new theory had best be described VOL. XLI.-No. 1067. are to be applied. The only references to authorities are apparently those of Baily's "Tables" and Fergusson's "Astronomy," and the author does not appear to have had access or thought it worth while to examine more modern and trustworthy sources. We cannot be quite sure that we have described correctly the elements of the lunar and solar orbits to which these corrections are to be made, but it is asserted that, when introduced into the tables, all the eclipses recorded by the ancients can be represented correctly within a few minutes of time. It is much to be regretted that no rigorous comparison between the observed and computed times of all the ancient eclipses has been attempted, in order that a correct judgment might be formed of the value of this assertion. This was the more necessary as the few cases selected are, we think, very infelicitous, and the incapacity of modern tables to represent these eclipses is unjustifiably, but no doubt unintentionally, exaggerated. It is curious to notice that the author does not recognize any other criterion of accuracy than the possibility of satisfying these ancient eclipses, the records of which are so imperfect, and the interpretation so doubtful, that they are gradually being discarded in the discussion of the one question for which they at one time seemed peculiarly fitted-namely, the determination of the amount of the secular acceleration of the moon's mean motion. The whole mass of modern observation is ignored. The careful records of eclipses made at Bagdad and Cairo in the ninth and tenth centuries share the same fate. It would seem that any observation made after the first half of the first century does not appear to the author to possess any value. It will scarcely be believed that this is a correct description of the author's method. No one will imagine that any sane man would attempt to construct a lunar theory from ancient eclipses alone, and expect that the results at which he has arrived will be generally admitted, because, forsooth, he is able to represent a few facts by the introduction of nearly as many variables. It is true that the tables founded on this vicious reasoning do not appear in their integrity, and probably do not exist; but there are given many pages of computation, which are well calculated to mislead the uninstructed, and to give an air of accuracy to the results, to which they are not entitled. We can imagine nothing better adapted to bring astronomy into disrepute with thoughtful, but not mathematically trained minds, than the unwarranted conclusions presented in the slovenly manner in which they appear here. A A Some grounds must be given for the severe stricture here passed, and the only difficulty is to select the most fitting examples from so much worthless matter. On p. 18 the author says: "It is considered sufficiently near to the truth, if our calculations came within a few hours of the time and near enough to the quantity of the eclipse to identify it as being in all probability the obscuration mentioned by the historian in connection with a certain event." The italics are our own, and the statement to which they call attention is absolutely a misrepresentation. It is scarcely necessary to say in these columns that no astronomer of repute would be satisfied with a discrepancy of anything like this amount between history and computation in any case in which the phenomenon is clearly indicated and accurately described. In the annexed table is given the comparison of the computations of various astronomers of the times of historic eclipses with the recorded times. To keep the table to a moderate length it is confined to those dates between which the examples have been worked out by the writer. In estimating the accuracy of representation, there are two circumstances to be taken into account. One is that an eclipse, being a phenomenon the exact time of whose occurrence could not be accurately predicted by the observer or recorder, must have been in progress some time before detection, or, all observations of the first geometrical contact, the phase computed from the tables, would be observed too late; and though the error from this cause would not be so large in the observation of the end of the total phase, it is probable that this phenomenon would be recorded too soon. The other circumstance is that we cannot regard Ptolemy, from whose work the times here given have been taken, as a totally unprejudiced witness. He was anxious to establish a theory, and it is probable that he selected those instances which most nearly fitted his preconceived system. In other words he may have-what is not unknown in these days, -rejected a discordant observation. of detail, employing his "new and corrected tables." F these two eclipses, 382, Dec., and 200, Sept., he gre the London mean times of the true full moon 15h. 5 m and 3h. 16.n. respectively. There is no attempt to dere: mine the exact phase observed, and it may be remarked that the longitude given for Babylon is grievously error. These two eclipses have been selected with the particular purpose of demonstrating that no secu acceleration of the moon's motion exists. This selection with this view, is unhappy. With regard to the ear eclipse, it is very doubtful if it was really seen Babylon. The account given in the Almagest ("Halma," p. 275) rather suggests that Athens, or of the Ionic colonies, was the place of observation, since the description of the date is by means of the Grees calendar; and Hipparchus says that this eclipse with the two immediately following are added to the catalogue the Babylonian eclipses as though they had been observat in that place (ws èkei Tetŋpnμévas yeyovéval). This sugges tion that the record of the eclipse was made elsewhee than at Babylon is strengthened by the addition of the note that "the moon set eclipsed." In an eclipse whit commenced only half an hour before the setting of t moon, these words would have little meaning, but if the note was added by the observer at Athens, its purpose intelligible, for the eclipse would be more than half og before the moon touched the horizon. It is very posat therefore, that some allowance for longitude was made Hipparchus, but with such a doubt overhanging the re corded time of observation, the selection of this eclips from the long catalogue collected by Ptolemy gives a vers doubtful support to any hypothesis. The second eclyquoted was doubtless observed at Alexandria, but, Hipparchus is correctly rendered by Ptolemy, he is m to say that the eclipse began half an hour before moon rose. The record, therefore, refers to a calculate. and not an observed, phenomenon, and on that groun alone should not have been selected. ་་ But it is in solar eclipses, the total phase being contres || to a comparatively narrow zone of country, that the feebleness of the author's method is most conspicuou exhibited. The eclipse known as that of Xerxes serve for an example. To adequately explain the c cumstances as recorded by Herodotus and Aristides s exercised the ingenuity, but baffled the efforts, of mar experts. It offers no difficulties to Mr. Page, though vr cannot think that his rendering will be generally appre ciated. Herodotus's description runs, "The army bay". come out of their winter-quarters in the opening of spritz In the latitude of Sardis the opening of spring coll hardly be put as late as April 18, but this is the date selected by Mr. Page, because on that day - 480 there was undoubtedly a total eclipse of the sun. The write does not mention, what is equally the fact, that the shad of the moon first touched the earth in the Indian Oct. passed over the Himalayan peninsula, through Chat, and disappeared in the Pacific. Such a path is 2013, inadequate to explain the further description of Herodo that "night came on instead of day." A still greater absurdity is introduced when the auth wishes to prove that the death of Augustus happened the year 13, by means of a solar eclipse which is said have occurred just before the death of that Emperor He finds that there was a solar eclipse on 13, April 28, and an THE EVOLUTION OF SEX. The Evolution of Sex. By Prof. Patrick Geddes and J. 1 Or, again, on p. 27 : "As a special case of natural selection Darwin's minor theory (e. sexual selection) is open to the objection of being teleological, i.e. of accounting for structures in terms of a final advantage. It is quite open to the logical critic to urge, as a few have done, that the structures to be explained have to be accounted for before, as well as after, the stage when they were developed enough to be useful. The origin, or in other words, the fundamental physiological import, of the structures, must be explained before we have a complete or adequate theory of organic evolution." Now there can be no doubt of the question here at issue. Readers of NATURE may remember that some time ago (NATURE, December 12, 1889, p. 129) Prof. Ray Lankester natural selection,' asked: "How can Mr. Cope presume à propos of Cope's supposed contribution to the theory of to tell us this? Who has ignored it? When? and where?" It is clear that Prof. Geddes and Mr. Thomson imagine "HIS book, say the authors in the preface, has "the that Darwin has ignored this, and that he has done so in al student, although primarily addressing itself to the general reader or beginner." In attempting to meet these 140 interests the authors have aimed high: they have aimed at producing a classic. They have brought to the *isk-as indeed their names guarantee-a wealth of knowledge, a lucid and attractive method of treatment, and nich vein of picturesque language. The illustrations are pertinent, and sometimes very good. The index and table of contents are copious, and the summaries and references literature at the end of each chapter are most useful. in matters of history they are especially good, and advanced biological students will find the abstracts of the Views of Eimer, Weismann, Brooks, Hertwig, Haeckel, Vallace, Spencer, Geddes, and many others exceedingly seful. But as writers for the general public the authors Save serious if not prohibitive disadvantages. General readers demand, with right, that those who, weak to them with the voice of authority shall give en the authoritative views. Controversial matter hey are only remotely interested in, and when it not be avoided they must have it carefully distinshed from matter beyond controversy. These authors e controversialists from the first page of their book to le last: they are partisan controversialists offering their ares and their wisdom as accredited doctrine and etermined result. This is no quarrel with the views of se authors. Prof. Geddes and Mr. Thomson are workers eli able to command the attention of biologists for their octributions to any controversy. It is a quarrel with the Fering of personal views, generalizations, and theories as ial, in a series "designed to bring within the reach of le English-speaking public the best that is known and ought in all departments of modern scientific research." is is the fashion with neo-Lamarckians, the authors ught in obtruding their misconceptions of Darwin. ake, for instance, the following statements: Arguing from the bad effects of close-breeding among Higher animals, Darwin and others have called attention the numerous contrivances among plants which are said render self-fertilization impossible. It must again be add that this survival of a very old way of explaining facts In terms of their final advantage-is not really a causal planation at all” (p. 74). of in this accounts of contrivances in plants to prevent self-fertilization. In a set of works the definite and reiterated purpose of which is to show (1) that variations do occur, (2) that from these, by selection, varieties, species, organs are elaborated and adapted, it is fortunately easy to find chapter and verse conclusive against the view that Darwin could have imagined that selection teleologically causes the variations that give it scope. Will Prof. Geddes and Mr. Thomson refer to the "Descent of Man" (the writer has the second edition before him)? On p. 240 it is written : "Not only are the laws of inheritance extremely complex, but so are the causes which induce and govern variability. The variations thus induced are preserved and accumulated by sexual selection." On Will Prof. Geddes and Mr. Thomson refer to the "Fertilization of Orchids" (also second edition)? p. 284 it is written : "Thus throughout nature almost every part of each living being has probably served in a slightly modified condition for diverse purposes, and has acted in the living machinery of many ancient and distinct specific forms." Or, again, on the same page: "This change" (labellum assuming its normal position) "it is obvious might be simply effected by the continual selection of varieties which had their ovaries less and less twisted; but if the plant only afforded varieties with the the selection of such variations until the flower was turned ovarium more twisted, the same end could be attained by completely round on its axis." Can there be the faintest suspicion that the man who material for selection and the causes producing that wrote these sentences did not distinguish between the material? One more quotation from the authors to show how they misunderstand Darwin's spirit and writings: "The first of these is the still curiously prevalent opinion that, when you have explained the utility or the advantage of a fact, you have accounted for the fact, an opinion which the theory of natural selection has done more to foster than to rebuff. Darwin was indeed himself characteristically silent in regard to the origin of sex as well as of many other 'big lifts' in the organic series (p. 126). The key-note of Cope's imagined contribution was, "Selection cannot explain the origin of any hing." |