260 Mr. Redfield’s Second Reply to Dr. Hare. 
stood ata minimum,” ... “ extended from southwest to north- 
east more than two thousand miles.”’ Now, in all storms which 
I have noticed in this part of America, the course and progress 
of the barometric minimum appears coincident with that of the 
body or axis of the storm; and as the length of the track thus 
passed over, is quite a distinct thing from the length of the storm 
itself, or from the “area” of the barometric minimum aé any 
given moment of time, it appears to follow from Dr. Hare’s own 
statement, that the course of the proper body or axis of the gale 
was northeasterly ; coinciding with the course of other storms. 
Moreover, I have not yet seen any evidence which shows that 
even one storm of magnitude in the United States has proceeded 
in a southeasterly course; although such a conclusion has been 
suddenly adopted, ere now,* apparently with the hope of escap- 
ing from a dilemma in which some favorite hypothesis had be- 
come involved. 
I am aware that in his elaborate account of this storm and its 
attendant phenomena, which I greatly value, although dissent- 
ing from some of his conclusions, Professor Loomis alleges that 
‘‘in this case there was no whirlwind.” I will only remark, that 
to me the characteristics of this storm appear to be those of a 
diffused overland gale of the whirlwind character ; the only ob- 
servations obtained being on the right hand of the path of its 
axis. I understand, also, that other inquirers have been led by 
the evidence to the same result. e 
The manner in which Dr. Hare has described this case, shows 
very strongly the importance of the inquiry, What are storms ? 
For, was it the area of the minimum depression of the barome 
ter—or the area of violent winds—or the area of the rain— 
or the area passed over by the wave of barometric oscillation— 
or the area of extraordinary changes of temperature—which con- 
stituted the proper limits or identity of this storm ?+ 
__ ™ Not, however, by Prof. Loomis. 
_ + So fur as definitions only are concerned, and these are important i 
it may be proper to adduce the following from Webster, our lexicograpber- 
. “STORM, n. A violent wind; a tempest, Thus a storm of wind, is correct 
science, 
guage, as the proper sense of the word is rushing, violence. It has panty 
Ro reference to a fall of rain or snow. But as a violent wind is often atten 
with Tain or snow, the word storm has come to be used, most improperly, ie* 
