On the Meteors of 13th November. 405 
rection might also be somewhat modified by the course of the wind. 
On the supposition that their origin was in a region of space beyond 
the limits of the atmosphere, where they would not partake of the 
diurnal motion, then on descending to the earth, they would receive a 
westerly tendency by their inertia, (not instantly acquiring the east- 
erly motion of the earth,) which relative tendency would be still 
farther modified by the motion of the earth in its orbit, and by the 
proper motion belonging to the bodies themselves, if they had such 
a motion in space. In short, the actual direction would be the resul- 
tant of all these forces. On either of the foregoing suppositions the 
apparent might become very different, and even directly opposite to 
the actual directions, by the manner in which they were projected on 
the celestial vault in consequence of the position of the’ spectator, a 
point which may be more fully illustrated hereafter by means of dia- 
grams. 
6. The fired position, in respect to the stars of the apparent ra- 
diant, we may now consider as established by the concurrent testi- 
mony of all those observers who noted its place among the stars, so 
far as we have been able to obtain their statements. We subjoin ex- 
tracts from several letters which we have received, in relation to this 
point, it being premised that all our correspondents had, in their com- 
munications, previously mentioned that the radiant point was observ- 
ed in the constellation Leo. 
Mr. Twining of West Point, in a letter dated Nov. 30th, says, 
‘my opinion is, and has been, that although the luminous appearan- 
ces were within our atmosphere, the source or cause lay far beyond. 
My own impressions were, that the radiant point did not partake of the 
earth’s rotation, and I named them on the day of the 13th, to a Pro- 
fessor in the West Point Academy. In the course of debate, we 
both thought it so improbable, that I was about giving up the idea, 
as the light had dimmed the phenomenon before I attempted a second 
location of the radiant.” 
Mr. Barber, of Frederick, Md., under date of Nov. 20th, ob- 
serves : ‘In answer to your question, I say with confidence that, from 
my first observation, at a little before half past 5 o’clock, till the me- 
teors were overpowered by the light of day, there was to the eye no 
perceptible variation of the seeming radiant point.” 
Professor Aiken, of Emmittsburg, Md., in a letter of Dec. 18th, 
says, “the radiant point was first noticed by myself about a quarter 
before 5 o’clock, at the latest, and it might have been a few moments 
