358 Mr. Redfield's Reply to Dr. Hare, 



After a short comment on the functions of gravitation, Dr. 

 Hare next inquires, " But if neither gravitj', nor calorific ex- 

 pansion, nor electricity be the cause of winds, by what are 

 they produced?" I answer, — 1. According to my apprehen- 

 sion, the gravity which induces a nearly equal " distribution 

 of the atmosphere over the surface of the globe," may and 

 does, in its modified influences, constitute the main basis of 

 winds and storms. 2. That calorific expansion is a " cause 

 of winds," is universally admitted; but that it is the chief 

 cause, I cannot perceive. 3. If " electricity " be the cause of 

 winds, it seems incumbent on Dr. Hare to show it. 



For my own part, having never attempted to write out or 

 establish a theory of the winds, in the common acceptation of 

 the term, nor yet of the origin or first cause of storms, I have 

 no occasion to go into these inquiries any further than relates 

 to my present purpose. It is true that I entertained some de- 

 finite views on these points, which have resulted from obser- 

 vation and inquiry ; but the choice of time and occasion for 

 their more full development, and also of the evidence on which 

 they rest, belongs to myself rather than to another. I do not 

 intend being diverted from my ordinary business, or from the 

 results of direct observations in storms, by engaging in a con- 

 troversial discussion of those general views of the alleged cause 

 of winds, and of the physico-mechanics of the atmosphere, 

 which now prevail, and which are held by men of the highest 

 attainments in physical science. And in relation to storms, 

 I have long held the proper inquiry to be. What are storms ? 

 and not Ho-iSO are storms producedP as has been well expressed 

 by another. It is only when the former of these inquiries is 

 solved, that we can enter advantageously upon the latter. 



I have stated, incidentally, that all fluid matter has a ten- 

 dency to run into whirls or circuits, when subject to the in- 

 fluence of unequal or opposing forces, &c. Dr. Hare says, 

 that " if this were true, evidently whirlpools, or vortices of 

 some kind, ought to be as frequent in the ocean, as, agreeably 

 to my observation, they are found to be in the atmosphere;" 

 that " the aquatic gulf-stream, resulting from the impetus 

 of the trade-winds, ought to produce as many vortices in its 

 course as the aerial currents derived from the same source;" 

 and he adds, " there are few vortices or whirlpools in tlie 

 ocean," for reasons which he has chosen to assign. (17-18.) 



Now the alleging of an equal tendency of aqueous currents 

 to run into " vortices " with the aerial ones, belongs to Dr. 

 Hare, not to me. In the ocean, we can but partially observe 

 the upper surface of superficial currents, moving apparently 

 unobstructed on the more quiescent waters beneath ; and with 



