Strictures on Prof. Dove's Essay. 385 



cal action. Indeed, my cursory explanation of the " violence" 

 of whirlwind storms, had been founded mainly on the obvious 

 fact that in the mere turning movement of a body of air, there 

 could be no " collision" or obstruction to rapidity of motion, such 

 as would obstruct or wholly restrain the rectilinear movement of 

 the body, through the surrounding atmosphere. 



Dr. Hare says, (par. 100,) "I have not been enabled to discov- 

 er that Prof. Dove attempts to assign any cause for violent winds." 

 I am far from viewing this as a blemish or defect. Had more 

 strict attention been given to the actual movements of winds, 

 with fewer attempts to '■ make" or "invent" a theory by which 

 to account for all atmospheric phenomena, it is probable that 

 greater progress would have been made in our knowledge of the 

 causes by which they are controlled. 1 deem it profitable to ad- 

 here to that philosophy which patiently investigates effects, in 

 order to " ascend," on a firm basis, " from these to causes." 



Dr. H. again alleges, that " the velocities of the aeriform parti- 

 cles in a whirlwind, must be greater as they are farther from 

 their axis," as is seen in the revolution of a solid, (par. 101.) 

 This allegation is so directly opposed to observation, in whirl- 

 wind storms and in minor vortices, as to require no further exam- 

 ination. Nor are the rotative forces "uniform," at all distances 

 from the rotative axis, as Dr. H. seems to assume, (par. 101.) 



We next find the sweeping allegations, that "agreeably to the 

 most ample and satisfactory evidence adduced by Prof. Loomis, 

 as well as by general experience, some of the most violent 

 storms of this continent travel from the northwest towards the 

 southeast." (par. 102.) What is here meant by "general expe- 

 rience," I cannot divine ; and the evidence adduced by Prof. 

 Loomis, whatever may be its bearing, relates only to the storm of 

 Dec. 21, 1836. But I trust it has been sufficiently shown, that 

 the evidence thus adduced, and particularly the northeasterly 

 range of "the area of minimum pressure," as set forth by Dr. 

 Hare himself in his previous article, disproves the alleged south- 

 easterly course of this gale, and shows its progress to have been 

 northeasterly on this continent. The objection which it is at- 

 tempted to support by these allegations must therefore fail. (See 

 October number of this Journal, Vol. xliii, p. 259, et seq.) 



In par. 106 it is complained of Prof. Dove and myself that we 

 attempt to explain only the " curvilinear direction" of the wind, 



Vol. xliv, No. 2 — Jan.-March, 1843. 49 



