€ 
Mr. Redfield’s Second Reply to Dr. Hare. 253 
certain facts or results which I had stated ;* and if the pretended 
accusation and “denunciation” (!) of the meteorologists, which 
is now charged upon me, can be made to cover Dr. Hare’s seem- 
ing didevintnenss perhaps I need not complain. By the ill cho- 
sen phrase “whole school,” was simply meant, all meteorologists 
to whose writings I had obtained access. It was an inadvertent 
form of expression, not particularly noticed by me till after pub- 
lication, and has probably given more pain to myself than to 
any one else. 
In adducing the quotation which refers to Sir John Herschel, 
my opponent chooses to omit the preceding sentence, which no- 
tices his recognition of the influence of the earth’s rotation on the 
general winds ; this being the very cause which I then ventured 
to suggest as “tlhe most influential in their production. That 
Sir John Herschel has not thought himself accused and denoun- 
ced in any of my remarks, I have good reason to believe. 
It may be well to inform my opponent that I am not one who 
has “ forgotten” that the aqueous ocean of the globe, no less than 
the superincumbent atmosphere, is subject “to the gravitating 
power” and the influence of “the rotary and orbitual motions of 
our planet :”+ But does he mean to maintain that these influences 
must produce aqueous movements of equal velocity with those 
of the same influences in the atmosphere—even as apart from 
the question of gyration? At a proper time there can be shown 
him, not “torrents in the ocean,” but a system of currents in the 
several oceans, which fully exemplify the great physical truth 
mee he has volunteered to aid me in asserting. {Par. 45.] Nor 
peep pronene se y conflict on my part with the views of 
io a ogists : While his ont equilibrium” will be 
found to preclude a “ perfect” repose, either of the aerial or aque- 
ous coverings of the planet. 
I had noticed Dr. Hare’s error in alegtie that I reject the in- 
fluence of heat. In repeating this allegation, he now intimates 
that “It is very possible that his opinions may have changed 
since he read my “ objections ;” but that he pimp REJECT THE 
INrLUENcE or HEATt when the preceding and following opin- 
* This Journal, Vol. xxvm, p. 316. 
+ See this Journal, ; I, Vol. 3XV,P- 131, also this volume, p- 152. 
t T 
or phrases, I | edince fae in small ¢ capi itals, as above ; but have not, felt ats at 
liberty to follow the example of Dr. Mule: “fs italicising sentences and 
qrotaticte, if they had been put forth in the same em phatic forms by the writer. 
