ON METEOROLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE* 2\\ 



Unskil fulness, it is not for me to decide; but it was chiefly On Meteoro* 

 on this account, and partly from its connection with a pe- ^ lca , no " 

 culiar hypothesis, that I neglected it, and not from any 

 selfish desire " of making way for my own" in opposition 

 to it. 



Mr. Howard refers me to an article in Dr. Rees's Cyclo* 

 pedia, where I may find his ideas on the subject, detached 

 from the theory with which they were before united, and 

 resting on observation alone. This essay I shall not fail to 

 take the first opportunity of perusing, and I shall probably 

 find, that it will remove part of my objections to the new 

 nomenclature. With respect to the other objection, arising 

 from its want ot minuteness and comprehension, I think the 

 only in ethod of effectually answering it will be for Mr. 

 Howard himself to give a specimen of a diary constructed 

 as mine is, so as to afford a complete history of the atmos- 

 pherical phenomena of .each day, expressed in his own lan- 

 guage. I feel confident, that Mr. Howard will agree with 

 me in thinking, that such a series of observations will tend 

 very much to improve the science of meteorology ; and I 

 have no doubt, that he will have sufficient candour to ac- 

 knowledge, that the diary, which he formerly furnished for 

 the Athenaeum was by no means sufficiently copious for the 

 purpose. 



I am so desirous of carrying my project into execution, 

 that I shall be happy to enter upon any plan of cooperation, 

 that shall be suggested by any of your correspondents, and 

 none more so than by Mr. Howard. So far from having 

 any partiality for my peculiar phraseology, no one can be 

 more aware of its defects than myself, or more desirous, 

 that it should be exchanged for a language that may be more 

 scientific^ and more correct. 



I am, Sir, 



Your obedient servant, 



J. BOSTOCK. 



xir. 



