84 REVIEW. 



At page 31, Captain P. refutes, in the clearest manner, what Mr. 

 H. has advanced in support of his argument, in the United Service 

 Journal, for November, 1833, respecting the pitching and sending 

 motions of a ship. To bring what he has advanced, as Captain 

 P. says, within the limits of possibility, Mr. H. has introduced 

 the outlines of a solid,, of such a form as no one would ever think 

 of giving to a ship. Moreover, the solid is minus keel, and dead- 

 wood, and the addition of those absolutely necessary parts, will, 

 as Capt. P. shews, completely upset and derange every point 

 which Mr. H. has attempted to prove. 



Several illustrations of experiments are given, which shew 

 plainly, and mechanically, the various results which different dis- 

 positions of the weights in a ship will produce ; and which prove 

 the fallacy of Mr. H.'s arguments respecting the " moments of 

 inertia" of the weights. And we shall conclude our observations 

 on this paper, with a brief notice of the discrepancies which result 

 from a comparison which Capt. P. has made of Mr. H.*s argu- 

 ments with his definition of the term " moment." 



As a ship is supported by the vertical pressure of the water, 

 Capt. P. very properly observes, that the point which serves as a 

 fulcrum must, in accordance with existing laws, be in the vertical 

 of the mean direction of that support. And, according to Mr. 

 PI/s arguments respecting Capt. P/s experiments, the model and 

 the inclining power balance each other round a point in that ver- 

 tical ; and \\\e fulcrum is situated in the same vertical, according 

 to his own definition of the term " moment." But, notwithstand- 

 ing this, it seems, with respect to the metacentre, and the centre . 

 of gravity of displacement, that, extraordinary as it may appear, 

 Mr. H. has asserted, "that no support whatever can, with pro- 

 priety, be said to be afforded at either of those points." And, 

 yet, as Capt. P. observes, both those points are situated in the 

 very vertical, in which, according to Mr. H.'s own definition of 

 the term "moment," the fulcrum is situated. # 



Again, Mr. II. denies that the centre of gravity of the ship can 

 be the point of support; and, yet, in his equation of equilibrium 

 of a ship in an inclined position, he, according to his own defini- 

 tion of the term "moment," actually takes the centre of gravity 

 of the ship as a fulcrum. 



At page 54, an illustration of an experiment is given, which 

 shews that the laws of mechanics are as unerring when applied 

 to a body seated in the water, as when applied to the same body 

 suspended .out of the water. And here, as Capt. P. observes, we 



