[ 40I ] 



thus a fouthern current is efiabliflied on the weftern fide of ou5. 

 hemifphere. 



Instances to fupport or contradid this theory do not often oc- 

 cur, yet I have found fome that appear to me decifive, indepen- 

 dently of the general reafon alleged. Thus I find in the 9th 

 table of the third vol. of Cook's Voy. that in north latitude 59°; 

 and eaft longitude 207, on the 25th of May, 1778, a flrong north- 

 weft wind prevailed ; and on the 29th day of the fame month a,nd 

 and year, an equally ftrong S. W. wind prevailed at Peterlburgh^ 

 latitude 60*', and longitude 30 E. Now the places of obfervation 

 were 177 degrees diftant, one on the eaftern and the other on the 

 weftern fide of our hemifphere, (which, at this proximity to the 

 pole, argues not, a fuperior diftance to that I have mentioned) and 

 four days is as fliort a time as can be allowed to the S. W. to fup- 

 ply the more eaftern N. W. Mem. Peterlburgh, 1778, p, 92. 

 So alfo in the fame journal I find, that from the 4th to the 30th 

 of May, a north wind prevailed in the eaftern part of our hemif- 

 phere from latitude 58^ to 61°, except feventeen days of variable 

 winds ; but in London it blew from the S. W. during the firft fif- 

 teen days of June, thus replacing the northern air. And to replace 

 the conftant N. E. wind, on the Indian Peninfula to the Moluccas, 

 there is a conftant draught from the fouth in the weftern parts of 

 our hemifphere ; accordingly Lelke obferved, that on an average 



of 



