" Additional Objections " relating to Whirlwind Storms. 485 



Paragraphs 66 to 70 Dr. Hare has devoted to some super- 

 fluous suggestions found in my earliest paper, 1831, which 

 were virtually withdrawn more than three years since*. He 

 has also joined [§ 68] a passage from that paper with another 

 from a subsequent one, and quotes both as from the latter. 

 The " unresisted rotation " here refers to the seeming non-re- 

 sistance of the air to a body turning on its own axis ; and the 

 rotative velocity of a moving body was correctly viewed as 

 being sometimes " accelerated " by the oblique " resistances " 

 of other bodies. 



In § 70-73 my opponent labours to convict me of inconsist- 

 encies in passages culled from my reply to Mr. Espy; as if 

 any inconsistencies of mine could disprove the rotative cha- 

 racter of storms. The alleged inconsistencies result from his 

 confounding cases which I view as distinct, and from some 

 inaccuracies in my choice of terms. The like purpose is 

 evinced in § 74-78, with a collection of passages on the baro- 

 meter, where Dr. H. seems to confound the space "around 

 the exterior border " of the gale with its " first portion " and 

 "last portion." 



In his criticisms on my statements of the changes of wind 

 in storms [§ 79-85], Dr. Hare fails to appreciate the proper 

 distinction between "suddenly" and immediately, in passages 

 which in their original state and connection are perhaps suffi- 

 ciently correct ; and he would make the statement of an ex- 

 ception which " sometimes happens," to be a contradiction or 

 neutralization of the " evidence," or general result. Had he 

 observed carefully he might have found that his fancied ana- 

 logy derived from the rotary action of a solid is entirely in- 

 applicable to the case of natural eddies and whirls, which are 

 produced by a gravitating force acting from the exterior. He 

 might thus have learned that his hypothetical statement of 

 the law of rotation in fluids does not, at least in all cases, agree 

 with fact, and can in no way alter or affect the vorticular or 

 other rotative action exhibited in nature. Nor can he dis- 

 prove or annul the fact, that an immediate or a sudden change 

 takes place at the inner margin of the violent part of a regular 

 and extensive whirlwind storm, at the border of the central 

 lull or remission of the gale. 



His implied allegation [§ 86] that "there is no evidence" 

 that the wind was more violent on the south-eastern f side of 



* See note prefixed to my article on Hurricanes in the Nautical Maga- 

 zine for January 1839, and Silliman's Journal, vol. xxxv. p. 201-202. 



f This I believe to be Dr. Hare's meaning; for the word "south-west- 

 ern," which he here uses, I deem to be a misprint; else Dr. H. fails to un- 

 derstand himself in this passage; for there is nothing in my views, as set 



