Jan. 7. 1886 



NA TURE 



suppose, so thoroughly established that the notable absence of 

 them on these occasions may fairly be taken to suggest a possi- 

 bility that the phenomena weve not truly auroral. If so, their 

 coincidence with the star-shower becomes more noteworthy. 

 Rugby, January 5 J. B. Haslam 



A SPLENDID shower of meteors occurred on the night of 

 November 27, 18S5. Seen from Ava, near Mandalay, .at 

 10 p.m. mean time of place, the point of emergence was near 

 the zenith, and the shower radiated to each point of the horizon. 

 The rate at that hour was 450 to 600 per minute, as near as I 

 could judge lying on my back on the steamer's awning. It is 

 probable, however, that I missed a great many. The point of 

 emergence was at one-fifth the distance from 7 Andromedje 

 (Almach) towards & Andromedfe (Mirach). The following 

 night the shower was still plentiful, but I did not count them. 

 The nights h.ive been very clear and beautiful here. 



December i, 1SS5 Alfred Carpenter 



Deposits of the Nile Delta 



I.N the abstract of the Report of the Committee of the Royal 

 Society, on recent borings in the Nile Delta (Nature, Dec. 

 ID, 18S5, p. 142), there is a reference to my "Notes on the 

 Geology of the Nile Valley" {Geological Mtisraziiu; 18S4), which 

 calls for some explanation in the interests of Egyptian geology. 

 When I saw a portion of the borings in Cairo, in the early part 

 of 1884, the work had extended to a depth of only about 40 

 feet. At a depth of between 30 and 40 feet the boring-rod, 

 after passing through continuous Nile mud, had entered into 

 quicksand, consisting of polished and rounded grains of quartz 

 and other hard rocks (desert sand), and the diffictdties incident 

 to this material had for the time arrested the operations. In 

 connection with this and with the insufficiency of the funds on 

 hand for overcoming the difficulties of the work, I wrote a letter 

 at the time to the President of the Royal Society, strongly 

 urging an additi nal grant, in order that greater depths might 

 be reached. 



I then believed, and still believe, that the quicksand marks 

 the true base of the modern Delta alluvium, and corresponds 

 with the similar sand which in certain parts of the Delta pro- 

 trudes itself from beneath the fluviatile deposit. I did not, 

 however, suppose that this sand rests directly on the rocky Hoor 

 of the valley. On the contiary, as might be inferred from my 

 short statement in the Gcolo£;kal Mnoasine (July 1884, p. 292 

 and footnote), I anticipated that below the sand would be found 

 the Pleistocene clays, marls, sands, and concretionary lime- 

 stones of the " Isthmian" formation seen at El Guisr on the 

 Suez Canal, and the equivalents of which rise from under 

 the alluvium in several places on the sides of the Nile Valley. 

 These also constitute the lower strata of the borings reported 

 by Figari Bey ; and it appeared to me that in the colour and 

 texture of the setliment mixed w'ith the lower samples of the 

 sand there were indications of the approach to these deposits. 



Though I have not seen the borings between 40 and 80 feet, 

 I still think that the question whether these are modern, or 

 belong to the Pleistocene, remains to be disposed of, and 

 will require comparison of the lower samples, if they can 

 be separated from the mud and sand introduced from above, with 

 the overlying deposit. This may have already been attended to, 

 but if so, the fact is not stated in the published abstract. With 

 reference to such comparisons I would ask particular attention 

 to the chemical character and depth of the specimens containing 

 calcareous concretions, which are characteristic of the Isthmian 

 rather than of the Ndotic formation. 



Of course I do not affirm that the modern deposit of the Delta 

 is in no place thicker than 40 feet, on the contrary, on my view 

 of the history of the district, there must be old buried channels 

 of the Nile in which it is much thicker, but it should be possible 

 to recognise these by the character of the material filling them. 



The softness of the Nile water and the minutely arenaceous 

 character of the Nile mud, as well as the connection of this with 

 its fertility, have been remarked from the most ancient times , 

 and the microscopic details given by Prof Judd have done much 

 to give precision to our views on these points. With respect 

 however to the causes and geological significance of these 

 phenomena, the conclusions stated in the abstract seem open to 

 serious objections, suggested by the physical features of the area 

 drained by the Nile, and the conditions under which the 

 fluviatile deposits are laid down. As this subject is of some 



importance both with reference to the geology of Egypt and 

 general geology, I would ask your permission to refer to it in a 

 second short communication. J. William Dawson 



McGill College, Montreal, December 24, 1885 



The Discovery of the Source of the Mississippi 



It is a m.atter of little importance or interest in what spot is 

 located the ultimate spring of the longest branch of even the 

 greatest river. Especially is this the case with the Mississippi, 

 where it may easily be an open question which of a dozen 

 branches is the longest, when traced through its innumerable 

 lakes and windings. By common consent, however, a certain 

 branch of the Mississippi has been assumed as the river proper, 

 and its head as Lake Itasca, in northern central Minnesota. 

 The river was explored to this point, and the lake discovered in 

 1832 by Schoolcraft, who published a map of the lake, and of 

 the river from this point downwards. He spent but one night 

 on the lake, and did not explore its tributaries. Four years 

 later Nicollet led an expedition to the head waters of this stream, 

 reached Lake Itasca, and spent several days in making a 

 thorough exploration of the country about it. In his narrative, 

 publi-hed in 1841, he gives a full description of the tributaries 

 to the lake which constituted, according to general acceptation, 

 the extreme head waters of the river. The report is accom- 

 panied by a map, on which the geographic features described in 

 the narrative are delineated, and which agrees in general with 

 later and more accurate maps. 



During the half century which has passed since the time of 

 these explorers, settlement has crowded upon this region, rail- 

 roads have been built in close proximity to it, and the country 

 has been explored in every direction in the interest of the lumber 

 industry. Furthermore, in 1876, the surveys of the General 

 Land Office were extended over it. Lines were run at intervals 

 of a mile over the whole region, and every lake and pond of 

 any importance was mapped by traverse survey. In short, the 

 country has long since ceased to be a Urra incoi;iii/a. 



It is therefore with astonishment, not unmixed with a feeling akin 

 to disgust, that we read in the daily papers, in certain magazines, 

 and finally in the Joitrnal of the Royal Geographical Society, an 

 account of the alleged "discovery" of the source of the Mis- 

 sissippi, made by a Capt. Glazier, in the summer of 1881. It 

 appears from his narrative, published in great fulness of detail 

 \aX\\t American Meteorological jfoiirnal, September to Decem- 

 ber, 1S84, that his expedition started at St. Paul and pushed its 

 way manfully by rail and st.age to the Leech Lake Indian 

 agency. After obtaining at this place a full complement of 

 men and material (except provisions) for a life in the wilderness, 

 they started westward for Lake Itasca. They fortunately escaped 

 all the perils of the journey, and arrived there on' the third day 

 safely. Coasting along the shore of the lake, they found a 

 stream coming in at the head of the south-west arm, up which 

 they journeyed, some two hundred yards, when they entered a 

 second lake, which Capt. Glazier claims to be the ultimate 

 source of the Mississippi, and to which, probably in virtue of 

 his heroic achievement in being paddled to it, he claims the 

 right to give his own name. The failure of provisions prevented 

 him from making any further exploration or discovery, and the 

 expedition returned to settlements. 



It appears from the explorer's description and from the 

 extremely incorrect map which accompanies his narrative — 

 made, as he naively informs the reader, from information 

 furnished by his Indian guide — that his so-called Glazier Lake is 

 identical with a lake in Township 143 north. Range 36 west, 

 which had been carefully mapped by traverse survey by the 

 General Land Office in 1S76, or five years prior to his "dis- 

 covery." This lake, or pond, has an area of about half a square 

 mile. On the Land Office plat it is called Elk Lake, and its 

 connection with Lake Itasca is plainly indicated. By a mere 

 inspection of this plat Capt. Glazier might have made his dis- 

 covery, and thus have avoided all the hardships and labours of 

 his perilous journey. Since his claim to the discovery of this 

 lake must be c nsidered as altogether baseless, his desire that 

 his name shall be for ever associated with it as the source of the 

 Mississippi River is preposterous, especially as he cannot be 

 ignorant of the above facts. Henry Gannett 



Washington, D.C. 



Chaetoderma 



Your biological readers will probably be interested to learn 

 that I dredged a specimen of Clhi/oilernia last August off the 



