•with reference to the Whirlwind Theory of Storms. 367 



as a known cause of storms. My cursory explanations of the 

 action of a whirlwind or tornado, even as shown up by Dr. 

 Hare, are, in my view, better suited to the observed facts of 

 the case than any which he or Mr, Espy has offered. 



I do not solicit for my views even that "smallest import- 

 ance " which is denied them in the mind of my critic; but the 

 attention with which he has treated them, on both sides the 

 Atlantic, does not appear to agree well with the disavowment. 

 With the facts before him which are shown in my survey of 

 the tornado, and also with the numerous observations made 

 in great storms, which I have published, it is vain to pretend 

 that my views of their rotation are either " abortive," or 

 founded only in imagination. I am not conscious of having 

 "built" or' indicated any " theorj*," views, suggestions or 

 explanations of storms or whirlwinds which have not been 

 based on observations of my own and facts otherwise ascer- 

 tained, sufficient in my view to warrant them, the " unequal 

 and opposing forces " even included ; although I have not al- 

 ways urged these facts upon the attention of my readers, ha- 

 ving not unfrequently reserved them for more appropriate oc- 

 casions. Hence my alleged proofs have been chiefly confined 

 to the progressive course and rotative action developed in 

 storms, which last, strangely enough, has been so pertina- 

 ciously denied by Mr. Espy, and now by Dr. Hare. 



My opponent next attempts to show, that " a deficit of 

 pressure about the axis" of a whirlwind " consequent to the 

 resulting centrifugal force, could only cause a descending 

 aerial current, while it could not tend in the slightest degree 

 to carry solids or liquids aloft." (29-30.) I was also sur- 

 prised to find this hypothetical downward current in the midst 

 of a whirlwind alleged as a necessary condition, on former oc- 

 casions, by Mr. Espy. If the allegation be true, it must be 

 easy to show that the ascending currents in chimneys should 

 become inverted; for, so far as simple gravitation is concerned, 

 it can make little difference whether the rarefaction be me- 

 chanical or calorific. 



But the ascending effects in the interior of a whirlwind have 

 been too often witnessed by myself and others to require dis- 

 cussion. Indeed, it would almost seem that the objectors had 

 been precluded from all opportunities for correct observation. 

 There are numerous cases, however, in which the upward 

 movement of the objects elevated cannot be seen in the cen- 

 tral and lower parts of the whirlwind, owing, as I have had 

 good occasion to know, to the great angular velocity of the 

 central gyrations. 



Dr. Hare appears to suppose, that gyration in a revolving 



