342 



NATURE 



\_August 9, 1888 



now know that Darwin denounced this interpretation of them, 

 and saw that if the doctrine of prophetic germs could be 

 established, his own theory would be reduced to rubbish. 



Accordingly the more advanced Darwinians always consider 

 functionless organs or structures as relics of a past in which 

 they were useful. They are never interpreted as utilities which 

 are yet to be. 



1 have always thought that if the doctrine of development be 

 true, functionless organs must be, as often as not, the germs of 

 potential use, and not necessarily at all the remains of past 

 actual use. 



What we want in this great question is physiological facts to 

 indicate the one interpretation or the other. Hitherto I have 

 never met with a case in which any expert interprets function- 

 less organs as structures on the way to uc Perhaps no organ in 

 any creature is more wonderful than the electric organs of certain 

 fish. Any light cast upon their origin is a light cast on all organic 

 apparatus. Here we have a case in which a distinguished 

 physiologist detects, or thinks he can detect, an organ in process 

 of being built up for the discharge of a very definite and peculiar 

 function — a function for which it is not yet fit, or is but very 

 imperfectly fitted. 



This fact does not tell against development or evolution. But 

 it does tell, and tells fatally, against the element of fortuity, 

 which is inseparable from the idea of "natural selection," and 

 to which Darwin attached so much importance, at one period of 

 his life, and to which many of his disciples attach equal import- 

 ance still. The fortuitous element is, in fact, the main ground 

 on which they value it. But everywhere, in reasoning and in 

 observation, it is breaking down. Argyll. 



" Syrrhaptes paradoxus." 



Concerning Prof. Newton's remark in Nature, July 26, 

 p. 295, on the occurrence of Syrrhaptes paradoxus in France, I 

 beg to communicate that I picked the following dates out of 

 several journals : — 



May 28 : On the sand-downs of Noirmoutier, Dieu, and 

 Olonne, in the Vendee (several hundreds ; three were killed). 



May 31 : Calais (ten specimens ; one was killed). 



Commencement of June: Nantes, Bretagne (one killed). 



Middle of June : North of the country. 



I am sure that we shall get much more news from France. 



Dresden, August 2. A. B. Meyer. 



The Red Spot on Jupiter. 



An observation with my 10-inch reflector, power 252, on 

 August 5, 1888, showed the red spot passing the planet's 

 central meridian at about 7I1. 48m. Comparing this with the 

 first observation I obtained of this object during the present 

 opposition, viz. on December 28, 1887, at 2oh. 23m., I find 

 that the rotation-period of the spot during the 22od. nh. 

 25m. elapsed during the period referred to was cjh. 55m. 

 40 - 34s. (533 rotations), which is slightly less than what I derived 

 from the preceding opposition, 1886-87, when the figures were 

 9h. 55m. 40"5s. (609 rotations). 



If the entire interval is taken between observations secured 

 here on November 23, 1886, and August 5, 1888 (embracing 

 620J days), I find that the mean rotation-period has been 

 9h. 55m. 39'7s. (1500 rotations). This clearly proves that the 

 velocity of the spot is increasing, for at the opposition of 

 1885-86 the period was 9I1. 55m. 41 "is. (659 rotations), and it 

 had been increasing since 1879, when it was only 9I1. 55m. 34s. 

 The inference now seems tenable that its accelerated motion 

 may so reduce the rotation-period in a few years that it will 

 return to the rate it had in 1879. There is also great prob- 

 ability that the spot is affected by cyclic variations, the period of 

 which may be determined by further observations. 



It is desirable to obtain views of the central passages of the 

 red spot as late as possible in every opposition. A good tele- 

 scope directed to the planet at the following times will show the 

 spot very near its mid-transit : — 



Milk v. Fire. 



In Mr. Rust's note in Nature, vol. xxxvii. p. 583,' there 

 is mention of a superstition that milk alone can extinguish 

 a fire kindled by lightning — a belief that existed in Cambridge- 

 shire, and which is entertained by the Sudan Arabs. 



The Sinhalese (natives of Ceylon) have a similar belief in the 

 efficacy of milk. When an epidemic such as small-pox breaks 

 out in a village, two games of a religious character, An-Edima 

 ' (horn pulling) and Pol-gchima (striking cocoa-nuts together), are 

 played in public for a couple of days. Then the Kapurala (lay 

 priest), and those who have taken part in the games, go in , pro- 

 cession with music, &c, to every house in the village, where 

 arrangements have been made for the Kapurala's reception. , The 

 house and grounds are cleaned ; the inmates wear newly- washed 

 clothes ; and portions of the "ceiling and floor are covered with 

 white cloths. A lamp is lit at the threshold of the building. The 

 Kapurala carries an earthen pot containing either cocoa-nut 

 milk or water medicated with saffron leaves, and over which 

 charms have been pronounced. On his arrival at the door he 

 chants a song about a fire in Madurapura (Madura, South India) 

 which was quenched by the goddess Pattini with milk.. He then 

 pours the fluid from the earthern vessel upon the lighted lamp 

 and extinguishes it. \ . 



The Sinhalese use the expression " May milk be poured on 

 him [or her]," when desiring to avert from some one an impend- 

 ing calamity, or to counteract a curse or prophecy of evil 

 pronounced against him. 



The idea of employing milk to quench the fire of an epidemic 

 (typified by the flame of a lamp), and the idea of the deity pour- 

 ing milk on an individual in order to protect him from malignant 

 influences, appear to be somewhat analogous to the belief that 

 milk alone will extinguish a conflagration kindled by the fire 

 from heaven. F. M. Wickramasingha. 



Colombo Museum, Ceylon, June 30. 



The low position of Jupiter during the present year has some- 

 what hindered the successful observation of his more delicate 

 features, and during the next opposition of 1889 the planet will 

 be in 23 S. declination, so that the study of his surface ought 

 to be undertaken in southern latitudes, where the conditions are 

 more favourable. W. F. Denning. 



Bristol, August 6. 



Circles of Light. 



The appearance described below was visible in Penrith and 

 the surrounding district on Thursday, the 2nd inst., from 5 p.m. 

 nearly till sunset. Round the sun as centre, at a distance of 

 about 28 , about three-quarters of a circle of light were visible, the 

 lowest quarter being absent. About a quarter of a circle of 

 equal size touched this circle at its highest point. In the region 

 of contact of the circles a space about 4 long and ^° broad 

 seemed common to the two circles, as if they there overlapped, 

 and this part was very bright, and bordered with red on the side 

 towards the sun. The remaining parts of the circles were faint, 

 and only to be seen when the disk of the sun was hidden by some 

 obstacle ; they were about 4° wide. 



Edmund Catchpool. . 



Westleigh, Weston-super-Mare, August 6. 



Michell's Problem. 



. The issue of Nature of July 19 (p. 272) contains a com- 

 munication from Mr. Sydney Lupton on " Michell's Problem." 

 I regret the author has not seen my paper on the same subject 

 published in the Philosophical Magazine, November 1887, "On 

 Random Scattering of Points on a Surface." The objections 

 put forward by the late Prof. Forbes to the argument of Michell 

 concerning the physical connection of double stars are there 

 analyze!, and it is shown that the experiments by which Prof. 

 Forbes assumed to invalidate it are on the contrary a very 

 decisive experimental proof for and illustration of this arguments 

 Mr. Lupton says, " The probability of exactly uniform distribu- 

 tion i< nil. Michell, however, seems to assume this probability 

 to be 1, or certainty." I fully agree with the former part of the 

 statement. But never did Michell assume the obviously erro- 

 neous view on the distribution of stars ascribed to him by Mr. 

 Lupton in the letter. It is true that it is a common error — not 

 only of the 0760; fjLerpt]ro\ — to confound random scattering with 

 uniform distribution, but Michell has not fallen into this error. 

 London, August 3. Joseph Kleiber. 



