VOL. LXXXVIl/j PHILOSOPHICAL TRANSACTIONS. 181 



-}- 3°. — 7 1 Has never been observed by Flamsteed, nor does it exist. A small 

 error, in the calculation of one of the 4 observations of 70, may have produced 

 it. — 80 and 81 were never observed. The 2 stars v 24 and 25 Draconis, miscalled 

 » in Flamsteed's observations, page 55 and 175, with an error of pd, accounts for 

 the insertion of these stars. See Mr. Bode's Jahr-Buch for 1787, page 1Q4. — 

 93. The pd is marked : : (doubtful,) in the British catalogue; but the observation 

 of Flamsteed, page 520, is complete. 



Pegasus. — 6 Is the same star with 25 Aquarii. — 1 1 Is the same star with 27 

 Aquarii. 



Additional Notes to the Stars* in the id Catalogue of the Comparative Brightness 



of the Stars. 



Aries. — 1 There is an observation of a star by Flamsteed, which being calculated 

 with an error of 10 m of time in ra., would produce 1 Arietis; we may therefore 

 correct the British catalogue ra -f 10 m , and the star will be found to exist. In 

 Miss Herschel's manuscript catalogue it is N° U3. — 2 Is the same star with J 07 

 Piscium. — 38 is the same star with 88 Ceti. In 3 observations, page 85, 285, and 

 485, Flamsteed has called it Arietis; and on page 481 he has called it Ceti. See 

 also Mr. Bode's Jahr-Buch for 1793, page 200. — 50; By Flamsteed'3 observation, 

 page 273, the catalogue requires — l m in time of ra. 



Cassiopea. — 3. The place in the catalogue by 2 observations of Flamsteed re- 

 quires -f 5 m \ of time in ra, and + 7' of pd. — 8 Is marked : :, but has 4 com- 

 plete observations on page 1 40, 144, 145, and 147. — 29; There is an observation 

 of Flamsteed on page 144 which has produced this star, but the time of it re- 

 quires a correction of -f- 6 m , and it will then belong to 32. That this correction 

 should be used, will appear when we compare this observation with another on page 

 213. In both places a star, which is not inserted in the British catalogue, but which 

 is N° 384 of Miss Herschel's manuscript catalogue, was taken at the same time. 

 On page 144 it is " Duarum infra y, versus polum, borealis. Simul fere transit, 

 austrea;" and on page 213 we have " post transitum" for the new star, and f cum 

 priore" for 32; and in both places the zenith-distance perfectly shows that they 

 were the same stars: the 32d and a star south of it. And they are now both in 

 the places where Flamsteed has observed them. — 30: Flamsteed has no observation 

 of this star. It is y. 21 Cassiopeae Hevelii. — 33: Flamsteed observed no ra of this 

 star. It is 9 23 Cassiopeae Hevelii. — 34 Is wrong in the catalogue. By 2 obser- 

 vations of Flamsteed, page 144 and 521, it requires a mean correction of — 9 m of 

 time in ra. In this case my double star 111, 23, will no longer be <p 34 Cassiopeae, 

 but a star 9 m of time preceding <p; for it exists in the place where 34 is set in the 

 Atlas, according to the erroneous catalogue, and is rather larger than Flamsteed's 

 star (p. — 35: The ra is marked : :. The single observation, page 207, has the 

 time marked circiter, being probably set down to the nearest minute only; and by 

 the same observation the pd requires -f 20'. — 47 Is also marked : :; but has one 

 complete observation, page 149. — 51: The observation of Flamsteed which pro- 



