-ll'l' Sir X.niiiaii L<>-kyri am! I >r. \V. .1. S. l....-ky-r. 



Comparing the times of occurrence of the two pulses of rainfall at 

 Mauritius with the times of the crossings of the known and unknown 

 lines, it is found that the Mauritius maximum rainfall of 1877 occurs 

 about a year after the rise of the known lines in 1876. The next 

 Mauritius pulse of rainfall in 1882 follows the succeeding crossing, 

 when the unknown lines are going up, also about a year later. 



Comparison of the Mauritius Rainfall mth those of Leh, Murrte <m<f 

 .\. Nwra AY///" for the peiiod 1877-1886. 



The most prominent feature of the Mauritius rainfall for this period 

 was the great excess in the years 1877 and 1882. 



Both of these pulses have corresponding maxima in the curves for 

 the rainfalls of Leh, Murree and Newera Kliya, the dates of these in all 

 three cases being 1878 and 1882. 



The delay of about a year in the effect of the Mauritius pulse being 

 felt in Ceylon and India, is exactly what would l>e expected if the 

 rain at sun-spot minimum comes from the south, as has been surmised. 



The fact that the pulses at Mauritius, Ceylon, and India in 1882 

 occur simultaneously, is very strong evidence in favour of an origin in 

 the equatorial region itself for the Indian rain at sun-spot maximum. 

 The pulse at maximum in the Indian south-west monsoon may depend 

 to a large extent upon the action of the excess of solar heat on the 

 equatorial waters to the south of India, and not on an abnormal effect 

 on the south-east trade. * 



We have found that there was ;i defect of the usual rainfall at 

 Mauritius in 1892-93, and yet the rain supply in India was in excess. 





KKSl'LT OF THE COMPARISON OF RAINFALL. 



Tli>' + (tnJ - Pa 



It seems quite certain that we are justified in associating the 1 >7S 

 pulse of rainfall during the south-west monsoon in India with the rain- 

 fall common to Mauritius, Batavia, and the Cape at that date ; that in 



