186 H. HENS0LDT ON CAVITIES IN METEORITES. 



the fields years even after every trace of the foundry had disap- 

 peared. Then, indirectly, through the medium of a F.R.M.S. 

 who communicated with Dr. Sorby on the subject, I have been in- 

 formed that in the opinion of the latter gentleman the so-called 

 meteorite was a species of ferruginous quartz, and that not a 

 single one of the many supposed meteorites which had from time 

 to time been sent to him for inspection, had turned out to be a 

 real meteorite. I have also been told by observers whose opinions 

 are at least worth quoting, that the specimen in question could not 

 possibly be a meteorite, because, apart from the fluid cavities, it 

 presented features which had never before been observed in 

 meteorites, that it was not " like " a meteorite, and that the trans- 

 parent mineral which I had declared to be Phenacite, or some- 

 thing closely allied to it, was really quartz. A few others have 

 even ventured to express it as their opinion that the mere presence 

 of the fluid cavities precluded the possibility of the meteoric origin 

 of the material. 



How far these various adverse criticisms are correct, it does 

 not behove me to determine; they must rest on their own merits, 

 and on whatever superior convictions they may carry with them. 

 To gainsay such men as Dr. Sorby and Mr. Fletcher would be 

 looked upon as highly presumptuous on my part, and would cer- 

 tainly not advance my cause. I will therefore content myself in 

 the first, place by analysing the more important of the statements 

 contained in my paper, by tracing the conclusions which I arrived 

 at from the facts as they presented themselves to me, and finally 

 I by comparing the opinions of some of the authorities which I 

 have mentioned with mine, and with, each other. 



To begin with, there are the remarkable circumstances under 

 which the meteoric mass (I must continue to call it so, for in my 

 own mind I am quite satisfied of its meteoric origin) was obtained. 

 Were I in a position to prove beyond the shadow of a doubt the 

 absolute accuracy of the account given in my paper of the discovery 

 of the mass, this would at once and for ever dispose of every argu- 

 ment advanced against its meteoric character. This the most 

 eminent authority on meteorites would doubtless admit. Unfor- 

 tunately, I am not in such a position, for neither my father nor 

 myself have personally witnessed the occurrence described in the 

 beginning of my paper. And I am afraid that, even if either or 

 both of us had been present, the testimony of an additional pair of 



