Mr. Redfield’s Second Reply to Dr. Hare. 257 
ginal state and connexion are perhaps sufficiently correct; and 
he would make the statement of an exception which “ sometimes 
happens,” to be a contradiction or neutralization of the “evidence,” 
or general result. Had he observed sufficiently he might have 
found, that his fancied analogy derived from the rotary action of a 
solid, is entirely inapplicable to the case of natural eddies and 
whirls, produced in part by a gravitating or centripetal force act- 
ing from the exterior. He might thus have learned that his hy- 
pothetical statement of the law of rotation in fluids does not, at 
least in all cases, agree with fact, and can in no way alter or affect 
the vorticular or other rotative action exhibited in nature. Nor 
can he disprove or annul the fact, that an immediate or a sudden 
change does takes place only at the circular enner margin of the 
violent part of a regular and extensive whirlwind storm. 
His implied allegation [69] that “there is no evidence” that 
the wind was more violent on the southeastern® side of the gale 
of August 17th, 1830, than on its northwestern side, is opposed 
by the testimony of Capt. Waterman of the Illinois and the log- 
book of the ship, as compared with observations made at the same 
time on the opposite or northwestern side of the gale.—It was on 
or near the central line or axis of this storm, that only southeast- 
erly and northwesterly winds were exhibited. 
Dr. Hare has inferred that “in no case would the inner portion 
of the southeastern and more violent limb” of a gale or hurricane 
“be beyond the cognizance of our merchants and insurers ;” and 
then says, that “ experience shews, that every northeaster brings in 
a crowd of vessels having only to complain of the violence not the 
direction of the wind.” {70.] But, do the alleged “crowd of ves- 
sels” come from far in the southeastern offing? The storm of 
August 17th, 1830, was at New York a strong “ northeaster,” and 
would the Illinois, in the Gulf Stream off Nantucket, have found 
No cause to complain of the “ direction of the wind” if bound to 
New York or Philadelphia ?—this ship having had the wind set 
in at south,” and veering “ first to southwest, then to west and 
northwest,” a “perfect hurricane!” “ Experience” has shown, 
* "This I believe to be Dr. Hare’s meaning; for the word “ southwestern,” I 
deem to be a misprint: else Dr. H. fails to understand himself in this passage 5 
or in the nature of the case, which requires the 
wind @ be siitinger on the “ southwestern” sade of a storm than on te pone 
a. 
Vol. xxam, No. 2.—July—Sept. 1842. 33 
& 
