470 
INA TORE 
~ 
4, 
| Sept. 16, 1886 
sidered to be amongst those who are exceptionally com- 
petent to give an opinion on this point, to be most 
probably due to the corona. Plates taken in England 
about the time of the eclipse of May 6, 1883, and drawn 
by Mr. Wesley before any information reached _ this 
country of the observations of the eclipse, presented not 
only a general resemblance to those taken during the 
eclips2, but showed the remarkably-formed rift on the 
east of the sun’s north pole which is the main feature of 
the corona, as photographed at Caroline Island. It is 
true that since the summer of 1883 I have not been able 
to obtain in England photographs which show satis- 
factory indications of the corona; but the abnormally 
large amount of air-glare from finely-divided matter of 
some sort, which has been present in the higher regions 
of the air since the autumn of 1883, might well be con- 
sidered a sufficient cause of the want of success. This 
well-known state of the sky rendered the plates taken by 
Mr. Ray Woods in Switzerland in the summer of 1834 
inconclusive as to the success of the method. During the 
past year photographs of the sun have been taken at the 
Cape of Good Hope, and are under discussion by Dr. 
Gill. 
Such was the state of things before the eclipse of 
August 29. The partial phases of this eclipse furnished 
conditions which would put the success of the method 
beyond doubt if the plates showed the corona cut off 
partially by the moon during its approach to and passage 
over the sun. As the telegrams received from Grenada 
and a telegram I have this day received from Dr. Gill at 
the Cape of Good Hope state that this partial cutting off 
of the corona by the moon is not shown upon the plates, 
I wish to be the first to make known this untoward result. 
I regret greatly that a method which seemed to promise 
so much new knowledge of the corona, which under 
ordinary circumstances of observation shows itself only 
during total eclipses, would seem to have failed. At the 
same time, I am not able to offer any sufficient explana- 
tion of the early favourable results to which I have 
referred briefly in the opening sentences of this letter. 
WILLIAM HUGGINS 
Upper Tulse Hill, S.W., September 11 
In reply to a similar communication which appeared in 
the Zzmes, Mr. A. A. Common writes to that journal as 
follows :— 
“ Dr. Huggins, in his letter in to-day’s issue, seems to 
consider that the failure to get a picture of the moon pro- 
jected on the corona of the sun during the partial phases 
of the last eclipse is fatal to his method of photographing 
the corona ; but it is quite possible, and, indeed, probable, 
that this is due entirely to the state of the sky, for against 
such unfavourable negative as this we have the positive 
evidence that the moon has been seen so projected in 
various solar eclipses, and in one case it has been so 
photographed. This was by Liais, at Paranagua, in 
1858, under conditions that were not, as far as concerns 
the processes employed, nearly so favourable as those 
now in use. This single piece of positive evidence, if 
correct, is of vital importance in showing that the present 
failure is probably due only to such temporary causes as 
have prevented Dr. Huggins getting lately such promising 
plates as those he obtained in 1883. 
“Ealing, September 13 “ A, A, COMMON ” 
THE RECENT AMERICAN EARTHQUAKE? 
HE author gave a brief account of the earthquakes 
in Eastern Europe of August 27, which seem to 
have travelled eastwards from Malta to the south of Italy. 
™ “ Notes on the Recent Earthquake in the United States; including a 
Yelegraphic Despatch from Major Powell, Director of the United States 
Geological Survey.” Read at the British Association by W. Topley, F.G.S., 
Geological Survey of England, President of the Geologists’ Association. 
It is a curious coincidence that the first important indica- 
tions of earthquake disturbance in the United States took 
place on that date, when the geyser of the Yellowstone 
spouted forth and when the first moderately severe shock 
at Charleston occurred. The principal shock was on 
Tuesday night, August 31. This is the one which has 
done most damage, and which was felt over a wider area 
than any previously recorded in North America. It has, 
however, been succeeded by shocks, fortunately of less 
intensity, which have been felt over a still wider area. 
The later shocks of Thursday and Friday were felt in 
Nevada and California. 
The author gave a description of the earthquake, 
founded upon the newspaper telegrams and upon a tele- 
graphic despatch which Major Powell had kindly for- 
warded at the author’s request. The latter is as 
follows :— 
“The earthquake is the most severe on record in the 
United States, and affected the greatest area. Origin 
along line of post-Quaternary dislocation on the eastern 
flanks of the Appalachian, especially where it crosses 
central North Carolina. There were slight premonitory 
shocks in the Carolinas for several days, moderately 
severe shocks occurring near Charleston on August 27 
and 28. The principal shock, causing great destruction 
in Charleston, originated in central North Carolina on 
August 31, 7-50 p.m., 75th meridian time. Thence the 
shocks spread with great rapidity in all directions, with 
velocity varying from 25 to 65 miles a minute, over an 
area of 900,000 square miles, or one quarter of the United 
States—from the Gulf of Mexico to the Great Lakes and 
Southern New England, and from the Atlantic seaboard 
to the Central Mississippi Valley. In the Carolinas it 
was accompanied by landslides, crevasses, and great 
destruction of property. Half of Charleston is in ruins ; 
about 4o lives were lost. No sea-wave has yet been re- 
ported. A second moderately severe shock occurred at 
Charleston at 8.25 a.m. September 1. Minor shocks 
followed at increasing intervals. The principal shock 
was felt over this vast area in intervals of 15 minutes, and 
recorded at some principal points on a scale of intensity 
of 5 as follows :—Raleigh, 4, 9.50 p.m.; Charleston, 5, 
9.54; Cedar Keys, Florida, 2, 10.05 ; Knoxville, 3, 9.55 ; 
Memphis, 4, 9.55 ; St. Louis, 1°2, 10.00; Milwaukee, 3, 
10.06 ; Pittsburg, 4, 10.00; Albany, 2, 10.00 ; Springfield, 
Mass., I, 10.00; New York, 2, 9.53.” 
Prof. Carvill Lewis has studied a previous earthquake ~ 
in the North-Eastern States. This ranged along the 
north-eastern flanks of the Appalachian Chain. The 
author described the structure of Eastern North America, 
and the lines of old earth-movements therein to which 
both earthquakes seem to be related. 
The local phenomena of the recent earthquake may be 
summarised as follows:—Fissures were formed, some 
running north to south, some east to west, out of which 
mud and sand were ejected. Several telegrams speak of 
stones falling from the air, which (if true) must previously 
have been ejected from such fissures. No tidal wave has 
been recorded, nor has any alteration of level of land or 
depth of sea occurred, although the earthquake was 
noticed at sea off Charleston ; but some passing disturb- 
ance of the water seems to have occurred at Sullivan’s 
Island near Charleston, for the high water spoken of 
could not be a spring tide, as the tides then were the neap 
tides. The accounts agree in the earthquake being 
accompanied by rumbling noises. Accounts differ as to 
the direction of the vibratory movement, but it was 
probably from the south or south-south-west to north or 
north-north-east, both at Charleston and New York. As 
usual in earthquakes, wells and springs have been 
affected ; some dried up, whilst water has appeared where 
before there was none. The natural gas wells of Penn- 
sylvania have been affected, and the supply much dimin- 
ished. Perhaps the most interesting phenomenon is the 
ae 
ws 
™ ee ee ee 
ee 
