146 MINNESOTA STATE HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. 
just here is where the weather may be truly said to be fickle, for if the 
comparisons are continued it will be found that there is no rule governing 
this recurrence of hot and cold, dry and wet seasons that can be relied on 
for practical purposes. 
Now, in order that we may learn more about the cold weather in the 
early part of 1899, I lave selected some figures from the records of the 
St. Paul and Minneapolis offices of the Weather Bureau taken since 1875. 
That the comparison may be made without the use of too many figures, 
I have taken the average hourly temperature of the three consecutive cold- 
est days in the different months, and I shall mention only those that were 
unusually cold. These figures show the average of all the hours in the 
three consecutive days, and for the present the lowest temperatures will not 
be considered. January and February of 1875 each had one of these three- 
day periods, during which the average was —14°. In 1883, January had one 
of these periods with an average of —20°. In 1886 the record for January was. 
—16°, and for February —15°. January, 1887, had —19°. In the cold win- 
ter of 1888, January had —22°, followed by —16° in February. February, 
1893, had —15°. February, 1895, had —15°. January, 1897, had —17°, and 
January, 1899, had —11°, followed by —21° in February. 
These figures show that the winters of 1888 and 1899 were not only the 
coldest, but that the cold was‘long continued. In other winters there were 
cold snaps, but the cold did not continue so long and with such severity. 
Minimum temperatures of —25° are not at all unusual in our Minne- 
sota winters, so I will confine my remarks now to discussing only the win- 
ters of 1888 and 1899. In January of 1888 from the 8th to the 26th, the 
minimum temperature ranged from —4° to —41°, the latter temperature oc- 
curring on the 21st, being the lowest temperature recorded in this part 
of the state at Weather Bureau offices. This long period of intense cold 
was followed by a cold February, with cold periods from the 6th to the 11th, 
with minimums ranging from —7° to —33°, and again from the 14th to the 
16th, with —18° as the coldest. 
In 1899 there were cold snaps early in January and again late in the 
month, the latter period extending from the 26th to the end of the month, 
and into February till the 13th, with the mercury below zero some time in 
the 24 hours on every day during the period. The coldest part of the snap 
was from January 27th to the end of the month, and from February 7th to 
the 12th, and the lowest temperatures were —26° on January 30th, —29° on 
February 8th, —33° on February 9th and —31° on February 11th. There 
was below-zero weather again part of the first ten days of March, and —7° 
as late as March 2oth. It will be noticed that the temperatures in 1888 were 
lower than in 1899. 
It is not claimed that these figures represent the lowest temperature 
reached in the most exposed places, for the instruments were placed on 
the tops of heated city buildings; they are very valuable for purposes of com-. 
parison, for the exposure has always been very nearly the same. 
I think it safe to say that on the ground under these instruments the 
temperature would be at least six degrees lower, and in many places in 
the open country the difference might be fully ten degrees, while on bright 
and nearly calm nights the difference between the temperatures of these 
instruments and the temperature at the surface of clean snow might be 
even considerably more. Bousingault, a noted French physicist, made: 
Pas 
“, me 
