Feb. 15, 1883] 
NATURE 
365 
a plant of a very different family, viz. Solanum rostratum 
(American Naturalist, April, 1882, p. 281): one stamen and 
the pistil are very long and strangely curved ; four stamens are 
short and straight, and serve only to furnish pollen to the visiting 
insects ; all the anthers, as I am informed by Prof. Todd, are of 
the same dull yellow colour. Fritz MULLER 
Blumenau, Santa Cattarina, Brazil, December 27, 1882 
The Markings on Jupiter 
AFTER heavy storms of hail on January 30, the sky cleared 
and the night was exceptionally fine. I observed Jupiter with 
my 10-inch reflector about 11h. 30m., and watched the chief 
markings pass the central meridian of the planet. The well- 
known equatorial white spot came to transit at 11h. 44m., and 
it was followed 5 minutes later—at 11h. 49m,.—by the great red 
spot. These objects, therefore, must have been in conjunction 
on January 30, at 2h. 47m., as the greater velocity of the white 
spot enables it to gain 13m. 24s. on the red spot daily, 
In NATURE, vol. xxv. p. 225, I stated that during the 4ood. 
oh. 20m. elapsed between 1880, November 19, gh. 23m. and 
1881, December 24, gh. 43m., the white spot had completed 9 
revolutions of Jupiter relatively to the red spot ; the number of 
rotations performed by the former being 976, and by the latter 
967. Since 1881, December 24, I have continued to watch the 
anomalous velocity of these curious markings, and find that 
between that date and 1883, January 30, the white spot has com- 
pleted 9 further revolutions of Jupiter. From 1881, December 
24, gh. 43m., to 1883, January 30, 2h. 47m., is g4o1d. 17h. 4m., 
during which the white spot has rotated 980 times, while 
the number for the red spot is 971. In fact my observations 
since 1880, November 19, show that up to 1883, January 30, 
the white spot had performed 1956 rotations, as against 1938 
by the red spot in the interval of 801d. 17h. 24m. 
On January 30, when I last saw these markings, the red spot 
was remarkable on account of its great faintness. On the other 
hand, the equatorial white spot was extremely brilliant and 
conspicuous, and formed one of the most noticeable features on 
the planet. Observers should now keep a close watch on the 
red spot, as it seems likely to be on the point of disappearance, 
though this disappearance need not necessarily be of final cha- 
racter. It fortunately happens that a curious irregularity in the 
formation of the great southern belt will probably enable the 
exact position of the spot to be watched for a considerable time. 
This particular region of the planet, as I drew it on January 30 
at midnight, was as follows :— 
1883, January 30, 12h. 
The region south of the equator of Jupiter. 
red spot; 4, white spot. 
a, The 
The sketch shows that the great south belt is now double, and 
a very conspicuous object on Jupiter. The south half of this 
belt is bent abruptly to north, and nuns into the other half 
exactly north of the preceding and following ends of the red 
spot. There is some explanation to this interesting feature, 
though it is at present involved in mystery ; in any case it may 
possibly serve as a very accurate indication of the place of the 
red spot long after that object has become obliterated alto- 
gether. W. F. DENNING 
Bristol, January 31 
Meteor of November 17 
I THINK now that more observations of the remarkable phe- 
nomenon of November 17 have been brought forward, that we 
cannot but candidly acknowledge that the evidence is extremely 
contradictory and impossible to reconcile, that is as applying to 
one and the same object. Altogether there is something 
mysterious about it. It is evident that since it appeared to 
reach the greatest apparent length of about 30° at York, then 
from all places further south it ought to have attained a length 
exceeding this, the more so the further south they are. The 
ends of the beam appeared very well defined from here, and 
there was very little room for estimates varying according to the 
observer’s sensitiveness to light. If we take the observations 
made from Clifton, Cirencester, East Clevedon, Woodbridge, 
and Windsor, as they nearly all agree in estimating the length 
as over 30°, some considerably over, then these may all relate to 
the same object. But its appearance from York is flatly contra- 
dicted by Mr, Batson’s observation from Hungerford, that from 
Halstead, Essex (which seems to agree with Mr. Batson’s), also 
those from Lincoln’s Inn Fields, Greenwich, and Cambridge. 
All these agree in contradicting the others named above, by 
assigning a much s/a//ey angular length. Mr. Batson describes 
a sudden foreshortening which the meteoroid underwent when 
passing the moon, and since I saw it pass below the moon at 
practically the same time, then (on the supposition that we 
beheld the same object) the same shortening ought to have 
been visible to me ; but there was not the slightest trace of any 
such thing. I noticed that it very gradually shortened in length 
(after allowing for perspective) in its journey towards the west, 
which is significant, and explainable if we suppose the body to 
have been encountering resistance to its momentum. It is im- 
possible to reconcile all the observations, and yet most extra- 
ordinary that no single observer is known to have witnessed 
more than one such phenomenon at about that time except Mr. 
Worthington, who says he saw two a¢ once. I have reason to 
believe that a rather similar thing was seen below the moon at 
about 5.30 on that night from here. TI see that from Ziericksee, 
in Holland, a similar phenomenon was seen to transit a 
Pezasi (which would be at about 50° altitude, and on 
the magnetic meridian from there). If this was the 
one that I saw, then at the time that it was seen to 
transit a Pegasi, from Holland, it would appear to me to be just 
forming in the south-east, where it appeared to be about 10° 
above the horizon, it which case it would have to be under 
seventy miles high when over Belgium. But it is almost certain 
that it attained a height of over 150 miles during the latter part 
of its course. As yet (figuratively speaking) the spectra of these 
auroral phenomena have not thrown as much light on these things 
as that which enters the narrow slip of the spectroscope to print its 
uncertain record on the retina. I only hope that some one with 
a clear head and much patience will succeed in unravelling the 
tangled skeins of evidence which surround the mysterious 
meteoroid of November 17, 1882. H. DENNIS TAYLOR 
Heworth Green, York, February 11 
Aino Ethnology 
In an article on ‘‘Aino Ethnology” which appeared in 
NATURE, vol. xxvi, p. 524, and which I happened to read only 
a few days ago, Mr. A. H. Keane makes the following state- 
ment :—‘‘ Until the appearance of Herr Rein’s large work on 
Japan, one of the most universally-accepted of these conclusions 
was that, whatever be their affinities, the Ainos must certainly 
be separated from the Mongolic connection. No little surprise 
was accordingly produced by Rein’s attempt to affiliate them to 
the surrounding members of the yellow race. But it was soon 
seen that his arguments, apparently inspired by a love of para- 
dox, were sufficiently refuted by the very .illustrations of the 
Aino type introduced into his work.” 
I submit that one who has read my work upon Japan will 
decide, with me, that the spirit of the matter quoted is unfair, 
in so far as it charges me with ‘‘attempts” at affiliation, and 
with being ‘‘ inspired” otherwise than by a love of truth—this 
motive being, as stated in my preface, that which induced me to 
write. 
It is repeatedly mentioned in my book that I had never been 
in the island of Yezo, and those who have carefully read the 
whole work—including Mr. Keane, if he has done so—cannot 
reasonably jail to observe that I speak of the Aino tribe as one 
who had never visited them in their proper home, nor made 
them a special subject of study in any respect. My remarks 
upon their probable racial affinities were based upon good, and 
the then latest, authorities, whose names I was careful to men- 
tion. Thus, on p. 444, occurs a passage of which the following 
is a rendering :—“ Doenitz and Hilgendorf have made thorough 
investigations of their (the Ainos) physical peculiarities, and have 
published the results thereof in the Mzttheilungen der Deutschen 
Gesellschaft Ostasiens. It appeared as an undoubted fact ‘that 
the Ainos are Mongolians, who are separated from the Japanese 
in a perhaps less degree than the Germans from the Romans,’ ” 
