134 ' Scientific Intelligence. 
Comparison with Lalande’s Observations. 
Date, 1795. ln ee a os ¢ Nentune, Epiomatis Vil. 
Mean time, Paris. | RA. Tec. apr Dec. 
May 8th—11 10 57 pig on ae 89\South 11° 35! 4//-96)4+ 1417-1) 39-5 
ay 10th—11 2 55 213 ‘16\South 11 34 oe pea 8+ 36 -4 
Obse rved motion in two 4 be 591-3 
Computed do. Elements VII, 185 -42 62 es 
iscrepancy, ' 6'-69| 317-06 
- The small difference of three minutes of arc between theory and 
observation for 1795, may | be ascribed to the perturbations for that date, 
and for the fifty-two years’ interval, which have been neglected. 
bn 3 Lon period falls short by nearly a year of that which Profes- 
ree has pointed out as necessary, in order that the Laplacian 
Libration should take effect. It is quite possible that a more full dis- 
cussion of the perturbations may show the necessity of the Libration. 
The Airing doo of Venus is 0-007, the smallest before known; that 
of Neptune is 0-005. 
ai a that the orbit of nepsine approaches nearer to a 
perfect circle than that of any other planet. I regard this value of 
the eccentricity of Neptune as onclusively. aitlabes and with this 
view will te from LeVerrier’s communication made to the Institute 
of France on the 29th of March last on the occasion of announcing 
my discovery. M. LeVerrier remarks: 
** We confine ourselves for the present to the remark that this small- 
ness of the eccentricity, which would result from the calculations of 
M. Walker, would be incompatible with the nature of the per rturba- 
tions of the planes of Herschel. But it may be that this smallness of 
prmorieigas is not a neeassary consequence of the representation of 
alande’s observation.” 
While | feel myself honored by the notice taken of my labors by the 
French astronomers, I think it just to express my full belief that when 
Says have bestowed on its present orbit the same pains as myself, they 
will agree with me that this smallness of eccentricity is an unavoidable 
consequence of the direct observations. 
fia we __ sat the moment that my views are correct, then LeVer- 
Neptune a mass of three-fourths of the amount predicted by Le Verrier, 
it will have the best possible effect in reducing the residual pertu 
tions of Uranus below their former value; but will nevertheless leave 
them on the average two-thirds as great as 
It is indeed remarkable that the two distinguished European astrono- 
mers, LeVerrier and Adams, should, by a wrong hypothesis, have 
been led to a right conclusion respecting the actual position of a planet 
