from the Clouds, or Aerolites. 223 



have so intimate a connection with balls of fire, that we may be 

 almost certain tiiat in seasons during which abundance of ionite J 

 meteors has been seen, there have been also one or more foils of 

 stones. In the same way as ignited meteors precede or accom- 

 pany earthquakes, aerolites also meet with these great phaeno- 

 niena. In fact, seasons remarkal)lc for violent storms, earth- 

 quakes, or other plia?nomena, have also been productive of falls 

 of stones. We may cite as a proof the years 1618, IG50, 1G54, 

 166S, 1674, 1723,' 1743, 1/53, 1755, '1768, 1812, &c. Fre- 

 quently also the j)eriod of an enrthquake has coincided perfectly 

 with a fall of aerv>lites, as in 1784, when in the island of Funeii 

 in the north of (jerrnany, there were in the sanie week violent 

 shocks of an earthciuake, and a shower of meteorolites was pre- 

 cipitated. The same effects have been witnessed in Germany 

 and Switzerland: thus on the 7th of November 1742, the day 

 on which the city of Basle suffered so much damage from an 

 earthquake, an aerolite fell at Ensisheim, a short distance oif. 



We liave already remarked, that the principal hypotheses pro- 

 posed to explain uU these pli-snom-ena are reducible to two funda- 

 mental propositions ; the one maybe called cosmic, and the other 

 telluric. The former has been most generally adopted, parti- 

 cularly that branch of it which considers aerolites as bodies 

 darted from the rnoon, and which have exceeded the point at 

 which the attractions of the earth and of the moon are in equili- 

 brium. We may say on this subject, that by adopting this 

 hypothesis, it does not appear that the least attention has been 

 given to the difference of t!ia weather, or to the state of tlic 

 barometer and thermometer, to the season, or the time of the 

 day when these aerolites have most usually fallen. Nevertheless 

 there exist on this subject very striking differences, and wliich 

 can hardly be accounted for by adopting the theory which makes 

 aerolites come from the moon. Nor does this tiicory show the 

 relation which exists between the fall of these stones and the 

 cloud which always accompauies tlieir fall. This cloud even pre- 

 cedes in certain circumstances the fall of the meteorolites, which 

 proves that it is not formed by the vapours exhaled i)v the stones, 

 as some have asserted. This exjihnation would besides be in- 

 admissible on account of the quantity of vapours, which must be 

 in the ratio of the size of the stones. Finally, tliese bodies, if 

 they came from the moon, would certainly be consumed to tiie 

 last atom, on account of the length of way which they have to 

 oome, and yet they never explode until very near the ground. 

 Those who adopt this theory regard atmospheric stones a;i lava, 

 which agree* badly witb the always slight and superficial oxida- 

 tion of those bodies. Xor does this tbeory account for the ex- 

 plosions which always accompany the fail of aerolites ; whereas 



in 



