234 CONGRESSIONAL PROCEEDINGS. 



uated instruments. I know no maker who can be considered as successor 

 to Troughton in originality and boldness of ideas. 



The whole annual expense of the observatory to the Government, includ- 

 ing salaries, additions and repairs to buildings, additions and repairs to 

 instruments, and printing, exceeds 3,000. 



Miscellaneous information relating to other observatories. 



1. The observatory at Cambridge was built, partly by private subscrip- 

 tion, partly by grant from the funds of the university, in 1820, at an ex- 

 pense of about 20,000. It is maintained at the expense of tbe university. 



That at Oxford, I believe, was built from the funds bequeathed for that 

 purpose by Dr. Radcliffe. 



Those at Edinburgh and Glasgow were commenced by private subscrip- 

 tion, and afterwards assisted by the Government. 



That at Armagh was built from funds bequeathed. 



That at Dublin in like manner. 



I know not how those of Oxford, Armagh, and Dublin, are maintained ; 

 but I believe that the salaries of the observers, as well as the general sup- 

 port and repairs of the buildings and instruments, are defrayed from the 

 bequests. 



2. In the whole of these, (Glasgow excepted, which is not much ad- 

 vanced,) there is a dwelling-house for the astronomer, and in gome tin n- 

 are dwellings for assistants ; connected in all cases by building under the 

 same roof, or by enclosed passages, with the observatory. 



The enclosure of land about the Cambridge observatory is scvi-n aero. 



That at Oxford, a field, perhaps not so large. 



That at Dublin, about thirty acres. 



The new Russian observatory, at Pulkowa, about fifty acres. 



3. I do not think that either of the observatories which I have men- 

 tioned has undergone great alteration. The Cambridge observatory, Imilt 

 in 1820, has not itself undergone any alteration ; but, on occasions of the 

 presentation of a large telescope, (20 feet long and 12 inches in aperture,) 

 a new detached building was erected for it. I may remark, that the Cam- 

 bridge observatory was built on a plan architecturally symmetrical ; which 

 arrangement I should deprecate in any new observatory, on account of the 

 difficulties which it presents to all future alterations. 



4. The astronomer at Cambridge is the Plumian professor. This officer 

 is elected by the trustees of the estate bequeathed by a Dr. Plume, and is 

 paid by the rent of the estate, amounting to about 300 per annum. When 

 I was elected to that office in 1827, I represented to the senate of the Cam- 

 bridge University that this sum was not sufficient remuneration for the 

 duties of the observatory, and the senate increased the payment to 500 by 

 annual grant from the funds of the university. 



The astronomers at Oxford and Dublin are appointed by the trustees of 

 certain estates, and are paid from their rents. I believe that the astrono- 

 mer at Armagh is elected and paid in the same manner. 



For the appointment of the astronomer at Edinburgh, the consent of the 

 Government is necessary. I know not how he is paid. 



5. I do not think that in any of these instances there is any distinct set 

 of instructions or definition of duties. At Cambridge, there is a board of 

 visitors, which meets at least three times in each year at the observatory ; 

 one of these meetings being attended also by other members of the uni- 

 versity and strangers. I introduced at Cambridge the custom of reading 

 a report to the visitors at each regular meeting. The visitors are required 

 to make a report once a year to the senate of the university. 



In instituting a new observatory, it appears to me very desirable that 

 there should be appointed a body like the board of visitors at Greenwich 

 and at Cambridge, with power to require reports from the astronomer, and- 



