14 
s= +0",5782 
p= +0,0950 
r= 40,4295 
e= —0,1688 
1 
This value of x also may be considered as not differing = of a 
second from the truth. * 
Taking the solar nutation =, 48 sin (20—A.R.) as known, the 
three equations are 
Cl) = 144e + 15,632 —6,99p+13,76=0 
(2) 15,63e+42,2115”+25,5393p—17,6855—0 
(3) —6,99e+25,5393x+ 71,0775p—18,5022—0 
Then 
p= +,1003 or 2p= 0",20 
*— +,4083 or const. aberr.=20",66 
e— —1350 or mean N. P. D. Jan. 1, 1819=39¢ 46’ 47”,23. 
It appears difficult to imagine, that the results relative to the con- 
stants of aberration for this star and y Draconis, considering the 
exactness of the values of z, should be so inexact as to differ by 3 of 
a second, if they were really the same. The different values of the 
constant of aberration for these two stars appear to shew an actual 
difference in the velocities of the light of the two stars. 
* The observations of this star were not made at the times best adapted for giving the value 
of z. The original intention being only to ascertain x and p, the observations were made as far 
as could be done when the coefficients of « and p were considerable as to both positive and 
negative values. In consequence of this, it has happened, that, for several high stars, the 
observations that have been made cannot be applied to find z. In this star, 1 Urs Majoris, 
the coefficient of z in the first equation being so great as -++ 64, 56 in only 144 observations 
shews that they have been principally made when the coefficients of z were positive. The con. 
sequence is, that z has a tendency to confound itself with e. However, in this instance, this 
inconvenience has not arisen. For « Lyre, y Draconis, « Cygni,and « Aquilz, the observations 
are as well adapted for finding z as for finding « or p. 
