13?> Notices refipeclhig New Books. 



opinion of the Nautical Almanac to a certain degree of respect. 

 He is therefore requested to state on what authority he lias as- 

 serted, in the last Number, that " Dr. Young has puhiicly ac- 

 knowledged a blunder in his Postscript on Refraction, published 

 in the Nautical Almanac for 1S22." 

 London, Feb. 10, 182 1. 



The above request, though anonymous, is entitled to an answer, 

 because the article alluded to (namely, the Notice respecting 

 I\I. Wronski's Address to the Board of Longitude, which ap- 

 peared in our last Number) was incorrect. Dr. Young's acknow- 

 ledgement was not publicly made, but was transmitted to M. 

 Wronski in a private letter, in his capacity of secretary to a. Ptili- 

 lic Board ; and was published by the gentleman to whom it was 

 addressed. Our mistake, we beg to say, was not intentional : 

 the acknowledgement was before the public when we wrote the ar- 

 ticle alluded to ; and, having been made by Dr. Young, the fact 

 for which we noticed it is no way affected by our inadvertency. 

 Of this the public will judge from the following extract from 

 M. Wronski's " Advice" prefixed to his Address : — 



" Now, for reasons which will be learned in the present Ad- 

 dress, the same [the Theory of Refractions] was returned to us, 

 without even undergoing an examination by the Board ; as is 

 proved by Dr. Young's letter, dated the 27th of April, which ac- 

 companied the returned Theory. Nevertheless, from the same 

 proposition, some advantage resulted to the Board, who has de- 

 clared to have perceived bv it, that the New Table of Refractions 

 which had just been produced in its Nautical Ahnanac for the 

 year 1822, was false ; as is proved by the letter of Dr. Young, 

 dated the ISth of April, at the time of the reception of the above 

 theory, where, on acknowledging the same, he confesses imme- 

 diately this error in the following terms : — 



" ' I shall give no opinion of my own to the Board, except so 

 far as to acknowledge that you have detected a blunder in mv 

 hasty Postscript on Refractions. 



" ' Signed Thomas Young.' " 



Our article on M. Wronski's Address was originally of greater 

 length than given in our pages. It concluded with an observa- 

 tion or two on a paragraph in his 5)6th page, *' concerning new 

 mathematical tnethods promised in the Nautical Almanac for 

 1822, as being to be inserted in the Philosophical Transactions 



for I8l9 from Dr. Young, Secretary of the Board of 



Longitude and of the Royal Society." This j)aper, which had 

 " for its object astronomical refractions, and according to which 

 Has been calculated the Table of Refractions in the Nautical Al- 

 manac above cited^" did not appear in the Philosophical Truns- 



actit^ns 



I 



