•mitk reference to the WJdrlwind Theory of Storms. 357 



moving power. 2. It is an error to say that I admit no other 

 cause of winds besides gravitation, if by this is meant that I 

 reject the influence of heat, as is alleged in the American 

 Journal. 3. I consider the influences of momentum, centri- 

 fugal force, and centripetal action, as being comprised in the 

 laws of gravitation. 4. It is true that I do not consider 

 " electricity" as a general cause of atmospheric currents; for 

 the reason, that so far as I know, this has never been shown. 

 5. That the only effect of gravitation, without calorific or 

 electrical reaction, would be to produce " a state of inert qui- 

 escence " in the atmosphere of a moving and rotative planet 

 like our own, is to me inconceivable. 6. I have never con- 

 sidered nor asserted " momentum" to be " the antagonist of 

 gravitation." In the paragraph quoted by Dr. Hare, I had 

 suggested, the courses of great storms as indicating the law of 

 circulatio7i in our atmosphere, aiid which I deemed to be founded 

 mainly on the laws of gravitation. By some mistake, he has 

 given the phrase " causes of great storms " instead of courses ; 

 and ])roceeding on this error, he calls it a summing up of the 

 "causes" of atmospheric currents; although he alleges that 

 I here admit but one cause. 



It is next asked, " If the minuteness of the altitude of the 

 atmosphere, when compared with its horizontal extent, be an 

 objection to any available currents being induced by calorific 

 rarefaction," as he states I have alleged, " wherefore, for the 

 same reason, should not momentum, or any other cause di- 

 minishing or counteracting the irifluence of gravity, be equally 

 inefficient?" To this I answer, — 1. Momentum, and the 

 other modifications of the gravitating power, are of far greater 

 magnitude and force than the influence of the mere difference 

 of temperature in the several geographical or climatorial zones. 

 2. The main tendency or result of this greater force is to pro- 

 duce horizo7ital, not vertical motion. 3. The words which I 

 have italicised, show only the misapprehension corrected above, 

 and which appears to run through the strictures which I am 

 noticing. By " available currents," as above quoted, I here 

 understand the great currents of the atmosphere constituting 

 the trade-winds, &c. 



In succeeding paragraphs (12 — 14-) Dr. Hare criticises the 

 terms by which I have endeavoured to point out, that a whirl- 

 ing or rotative movement is the only known cause of a violent 

 and destructive force in winds or tempests, as the last clause of 

 the paragraph quoted by him should read. There is little 

 probability ti)at my meaning has been misunderstood by ge- 

 neral readers; and it appears afterwards to have been divined 

 by Dr. Hare liimself. 



