ARTICLES 603 



all these aspects to be at variance with facts ; and consequently 

 an adherence to former assumption meets trouble in every 

 direction. How different the character of the curve becomes 

 when traced by the hand of Drayson ! The position of the 

 pole of the heavens in its movement round the newly found 

 permanent, 1 and therefore real, centre at once explains the 

 decrease in the obliquity. Ambiguity is no longer necessary. 

 No need for the paradox of a movable centre nor for the 

 changes in the orbital plane. One by one the enigmas of 

 astronomy and geology are cleared up, and in the matter of 

 glacial periods the two sciences have mutual support, and are 

 brought into harmony with each other. 



The extraordinary corroboration of Drayson supplied by 

 Newcomb's formula, coupled with Dr. Hoist's independent 

 geological computation, are the most dramatic evidences as to 

 the correctness of his discovery. The strongest evidence is 

 perhaps that Dra} r son, with his knowledge of the true move- 

 ment of the pole, can account for the " acceleration of the 

 moon's mean motion," a most baffling enigma to astrono- 

 mers — I am told that only three persons in the United Kingdom 

 can attempt to work it out. This should be sufficient to stamp 

 his interpretation of the curve followed by the precession 

 movement as the correct one, apart from the simplifications 

 which can be thereby introduced in the framing of nautical 

 tables by the easy determination of stellar positions. There 

 are also various matters now requiring elaborate computations 

 which would fall into place without any difficulty at all. 



The strength of Drayson's position hitherto has been that 

 his opponents could only assert categorically that he was wrong, 

 without attempting to meet his challenge by demonstration 

 of their ability to make equally concise calculations. 2 They 

 could only take refuge in stating that acceptance of his views 

 was tantamount to opposing the Laws of Gravity. Sir R. Ball 

 said once in conversation that it would upset the whole frame- 

 work of astronomy. 



The tables have now been turned, with the result that it 



1 The permanence is not claimed by Drayson to be indefinite, but only 

 relative. 



2 Sir G. Airy acknowledged to Drayson that his formula was correct, but 

 could not conceive how he had obtained it. I believe Drayson at the time kept 

 this a secret. 



