Sept. 14, 1871] 
IMA RU RE 
385 

the radiating power of the solar materials may be compared to 
that of pure lamp-black, as he assumes at the end of the note. 
Mr. Ericsson spends a great part of the note in proving that the 
law of the diminution of radiation according to the square of the 
distance is accurate, which certainly I have never questioned. 
The difference between his own result and mine may perhaps be 
due to a difference in the use or construction of the instrument ; 
but as, unhappily, I have no information of this construction, I 
cannot attempt any discussion of his principles. I can only say 
that his table cannot be used in all seasons indifferently, since I 
have proved that at the same zenith distance, the absorption of 
solar heat is very different in summer and in winter, on account 
of the different quantity of aqueous vapour which is found 
in the atmosphere. And hence the deductions which he makes 
about the difference of radiation in aphelion and perihelion may 
be merely accidentally accurate, and not very conclusive. 
On the whole, however, I see that the researches of M. Erics- 
son approach my results a great deal more nearly than those of M. 
Zollner, who fixes the temperature of the lower stratum of the 
solar atmosphere in contact with the photosphere at 68, 400° C. 
only. And this is a number sixty times less than that of Mr. 
Ericsson, while mine is only thirty-seven times greater. 
The conclusion which spontaneously flows from such extra- 
ordinary differences is, that we are yet far from having any exact 
information on the subject, and I hope that this question will 
now be better discussed, and that I may be able to find some 
improvement to be made in my book. 
Rome A. SECCHI 
Neologisms 
I THINK the most suitable word to indicate plane-direction is 
“*position,”’ though the word ‘‘ pose” would serve, and has, in- 
deed, been used in that sense. The word “ position” bears the 
same relation to the word “‘ direction” that ‘‘ Stellung ” bears to 
**Richtung,” or ‘‘set” to ‘‘righting.” ‘‘ Position ” is often (but 
incorrectly) used to indicate A/ace, but we may reason with 
Colonel Mannering, Adzzsus non tollit usum—the abuse of any- 
thing doth not abrogate the lawful use thereof. This recognised, 
the words ‘‘ position of a plane” can bear no other meaning than 
that referred to by Mr. Wilson. For the purpose of indicating 
place, the word ‘‘location” would be convenient, but that it 
suggests to the Latinist a ‘‘setting to hire.” Our American 
cousins (very wisely, I think) neglect such trifles. 
By the way, is not the word ‘‘neologism” very ugly and un- 
necessary? We must have new words, but need we call them 
neologisms ? 
As to the invention of new words, I take it that every author 
who has anything new to say must sometimes want a new word, 
in which case he has as fair a right to invent and use such a word 
as to describe new ideas. If this is not the case, I must plead 
guilty to a grievous series of offences. In fact, I have received 
during the past year about a ream of letters rebuking a practice 
which I consider fully ‘‘in my right.” You should not speak, 
writes one, of ‘‘a limitless expanse,” but of an ‘‘ unlimited ex- 
panse ;” you must not say ‘‘ forceful analogy,” urges another, 
but ‘‘ forcible analogy ; ” not ‘‘star-cloudlet” says a third, but 
“nebula ;” not *‘ square to” but either ‘‘ perpendicular” or ‘‘at 
right angles to” says a fourth, and so on. So must you write if 
you wish to be understood, say these critics ; or rather they say, 
“*Tt is indispensable for the adequate conveyance of your meaning 
that you should thus conform to established usage.” 
Iam not jesting ; these words have not only been employed 
by one of my anonymous critics, but have been seriously sug- 
gested for my own use. In some cases modes of expression 
are vilified : for instance, it seems you must not say of Venus 
that she is ‘‘ nearer to the sun than the earth is,” for this is in- 
elegant ; you must say that she is ‘‘nearer to the sun than the 
earth ;” and, in like manner, for the sake of cuphony, oneshould 
say of Mercury that he is ‘‘nearer to the sun than the earth,” 
rather than that he is ‘‘nearer to the sun than to the earth.” My 
attention has been directed to each of the expressions here cor- 
rected as characterised by a vice of style. So that, since Venus 
in inferior conjunction js nearer to the earth than to the sun, but 
nearer to the sun than the earth is, she is (when so placed) at 
once nearer to the earth than the sun, and nearer to the sun than 
the earth,—a statement which appears to me less instruct.ve 
than might be desired. But possibly I am prejudiced. 
It is well to keep (where one may) within dictionary pre- 
cincts, nor need the writer neglect the rounding of his periods ; 



but, in my judgment, he should set before both these things 
what the above quoted critic calls ‘‘ the adequate conveyance of 
his meaning.” Ricup, A, PROCTOR 
Brighton, September 9 
THERE remains but one point to notice in reference to the 
hybrid (or monster) Arodificness. Dr. Latham pretty well ex- 
hausts its etymological bearings. There remains its phonological 
bearings to consider. No new word has a chance of being 
naturalised unless it can be pronounced as well as written ; and 
the greater the difficulty of pronunciation the less is that chance. 
Now, in order to render Mr, Wallace’s word acceptable, it must 
be pronounced as if it were written, Avol/yfickness, in which pho- 
netic form we almost lose the parent adjective. The reason of 
this is, that the syllables ze and zess will not inosculate. To use 
Mr. Sylvester’s phraseology, there is not a perfect anastomosis, 
and this imperfection is remediable only by change of accent, 
viz., passing on the accent from if to ic; otherwise we 
must sacrifice anastomosis, and write the word as a compound, 
prolific-ness, te, with a hyphen to indicate the necessity of a 
pause in that place. Surely on all accounts frolificence is by far 
the better word. 
Yoxford, September 7 C. M. INGLEBY 
The Aurora 
I HAVE just read Mr. Wilson’s interesting paper entitled 
‘*Some Speculations on the Auroras,” published in your periodi- 
cal for September 7. In the Philosophical Magazine for July 
1870 I made a suggestion as to the origin of auroras similar to 
that just published by Mr. Wilson. 
The periodicity in auroral displays noticed by Mr. Wilson had 
not attracted my attention. It would doubtless, if it were well 
established, be confirmatory of the views independently put 
forward by Mr. Wilson and myself. A. S. Davis 
Meteor 
On Saturday, September 2, at 8.14 or 8.15 p.M., I saw a fine 
meteor under very favourable circumstances. I was standing 
with several friends at the door of Mr. W. F. Moore’s house at 
Croakbourne, in the Isle of Man, and we were looking up at the 
western sky at the moment when the meteor came. It started 
between, I think, y and w Herculis (it was too cloudy to see 
those stars), descended nearly vertically, passing through Corona 
Borealis, and vanished a little below ¢ Bootis, at about 15° above 
the horizon. It moved slowly but continuously, taking from two 
to three seconds in travelling over 45°. It broke into three, 
which followed one another, connected and followed by a 
luminous train which was visible for about one second. The 
first part of the three was brilliant white, and was estimated by 
Mr. A. W. Moore and myself independently as equal in size to 
ith of the moon’s surface. It was very brilliant, being mistaken 
by the Rev. John Howard, who was looking in another direc- 
tion, for a flash of lightning. The two latter globes were blue. 
Rugby, September 6 J. M. WILson 

The Earthquake at Worthing 
In your issue of the 31st ult. is an extract from a letter which 
appeared in the 7imes a day or two before, giving a very circum- 
stantial and a somewhat sensational account of an earthquake 
which took place at Worthing, at 3.45 on Monday morning, the 
28th of August. Is it not possible that there may be some con- 
nection between the said earthquake and the circumstances 
narrated as under in the Lrighton Gazette of the Thursday fol- 
lowing ? If so, might it not be on the whole more prudent of 
correspondents of the 7Zimes or other papers, before they rush 
frantically into print on such subjects, just to put a question or two to 
some imperturbable old fisherman (if they be shaken out of their 
wits again at a watering place) instead of appealing to hysterical 
ladies and excitable old gentlemen for their notes of an event of 
great scientific interest ? 
“*What’s that? Anearthquake! There it is again! Now 
again! And now again!’ These were the exclamations which 
paterfamilias and materfamilias and lots of juveniles, roused from 
their slumbers, uttered on Monday at 3.40 A.M., just before the 
break of day. It was a strange noise ; lights flashed from win- 
