1868. | Astronomy. 67 
the fourth satellite hid a small part of the third satellite’s shadow 
‘on the disc,—but, of course, an eclipse of one satellite by another 
would be indicated by the coalescing of the two shadows, which did 
not and could not happen on August 21st last, since the apparent 
paths of the shadows across the disc were separated by a considerable 
interval. 
Lastly, a strange dark space divided by a narrow channel of 
light occupied one-half of the third satellite’s disc, and this space 
resembled one seen in 1860 by the same observer—Mr. Dawes— 
but was on the opposite side of the disc. This observation seems 
conclusively to overthrow Sir W. Herschel’s theory, that the satellites 
turn always the same face towards the planet, as our moon towards 
the earth. 
A strange amount of doubt still clings to the supposed discovery 
of volcanic action within the lunar crater Linné. At a late meeting 
of the Astronomical Society Captam Noble expressed the opinion 
that the changes supposed to have taken place in Linné are due 
entirely to variations in the state of the earth’s atmosphere, and of 
the moon’s illumination and libration. Mr. Buckingham, on the 
contrary, judged from his observations that real changes had taken 
place. On August 6, he detected a convexity in the white cloud, 
which after it entered the terminator appeared as an egg-shaped 
convex disc. On October 19, he saw parts of the whole ring and 
fragments of a broken ring with his 20-inch refractor. On Novem- 
ber 5, he could still see the summit of the small crater, which seemed 
larger than before. He considers that the crater is considerably 
larger than at the beginning of the year, and nearer the centre of 
the cloudy spot. Mr. De la Rue controverted the opinion expressed 
by Mr. Proctor, that photographs of the Moon afford evidence of 
change (the photographs referred to beg those by Messrs. De la 
Rue and Buckingham). 
' At the same meeting the discussion of the circumstances 
attending the eclipse of the Moon on September 13, elicited from 
Mr. Buckingham the interesting statement that a portion of the 
unobscured part of the Moon was absent from the photographs. 
Mr. De la Rue, who has before observed this peculiarity, expressed its 
nature by saying that more of the Moon is eclipsed chemically than 
optically. 
It is perhaps hardly necessary that we should make even a 
passing reference to the so-called Newton and Pascal controversy. 
Never before, we imagine, has so barefaced an attempt been made 
to impose upon the scientific world. The chief care of the author 
of this contemptible affair appears to have been devoted to the con- 
centration of every possible absurdity and blunder within the range 
allotted to the correspondence he has been at the pains to invent. 
French scientific men, generally, have acted in this matter in a 
r 2 
