[ 466 ]j 
LXXIII. Intelligence and Miscellaneous Articles. 
On the Nautical Almanac. 
To Mr. Tilloch. 
Sir, — Oxz of your correspondents has, in a former number 
of your valuable Miscellany (Vol. LI. page 186) suggested some 
improvements in the future Nautical Almanacs, to be published 
under the direction of the New Board of Longitude, which I hope 
will be attended to. There is one circumstance however con- 
nected with this subject, to which he has not drawn the attention 
of the New Board, but which I think would be highly useful ; 
namely, the place of the moon in right ascension and declination 
to seconds of a degree. At present the place of the moon is given 
to the nearest minute only, which is not sufficiently correct for 
many useful purposes. In the Connaissance des Tems the right 
ascension is given to the nearest second; and I hope the editors 
of that valuable work will, in the future volumes, pursue the same 
plan with respect to the declination.—It is well known that the 
moon’s parallax in right ascension and declination may be much 
more readily found, than her parallax in longitude and latitude; 
as in the former case we need not have recourse to finding the 
Jongitude and height of the nonagesimal: and consequently all 
problems relative to her apparent place may be much more easily 
and expeditiously solved.—The late elegant formule of M. Ol- 
bers, for this purpose, have also given an additional interest to 
the subject: and it will readily occur to your astronomical readers, 
that this method of determining the apparent place of the moon 
is the one best adapted for determining the various circumstances 
relative to occultations of the fixed stars, as well as other phe- 
nomena in which the apparent place of the moon is involved. 
I am, sir, your obedient servant, 
Dec. 15, 1818. PTOLEMY. 
P.S. I observe that the publisher of the Nautical Almanac 
has printed and distributed a list of what he calls additional cor- 
rections for the Nautical Almanac for 1819. May I request some 
of your numerous correspondents to inform me where the pri- 
mary, or preceding, corrections are to be found? as I observe 
three very remarkable errors, not at all noticed in these additional 
corrections, viz. the entire omission of two solar eclipses (one on 
March 25, the other on October 18th), and the insertion of an 
occultation of Antares on December 15th as visible at Greenwich, 
which cannot be the case: besides several ofher errors which | 
have never yet seen published. 
ON 
— 
