Mr. Redjield^s Second Reply to Dr. Hare. 257 



ginal state and connexion are perhaps sufficiently correct ; and 

 he would make the statement of an exception which " sometimes 

 happens/' to be a contradiction or neutralization of the " evidence," 

 or general result. Had he observed sufficiently he might have 

 found, that his fancied analogy derived from the rotary action of a 

 solid, is entirely inapplicable to the case of natural eddies and 

 whirls, produced in part by a gravitating or centripetal force act- 

 ing from the exterior. He might thus have learned that his hy- 

 pothetical statement of the law of rotation in fluids does not, at 

 least in all cases, agree with fact, and can in no way alter or aflect 

 the vorticular or other rotative action exhibited in nature. Nor 

 can he disprove or annul the fact, that an immediate or a sudden 

 change does takes place only at the circular inner margin of the 

 violent part of a regular and extensive whirlwind storm. 



His implied allegation [69] that " there is no evidence" that 

 the wind was more violent on the southeastern* side of the gale 

 of August 17th, 1830, than on its northwestern side, is opposed 

 by the testimony of Capt. Waterman of the Illinois and the log- 

 book of the ship, as compared with observations made at the same 

 time on the opposite or northwestern side of the gale. — It was on 

 or near the central line or axis of this storm, that only southeast- 

 erly and northwesterly winds were exhibited. 



Dr. Hare has inferred that " in no case would the inner portion 

 of the southeastern and more violent limb" of a gale or hurricane 

 "be beyond the cognizance of our merchants and insurers;" and 

 then says, that " experience shews, that every northeaster brings in 

 a crowd of vessels having only to complain of the violence not the 

 direction of the wind." [70.] But, do the alleged " crowd of ves- 

 sels" come from far in the southeastern offing ? The storm of 

 August 17th, 1830, was at New York a strong " northeaster ^^^ and 

 would the lUinois, in the Gulf Stream off Nantucket, have found 

 no cause to complain of the " direction of the wind" if bound to 

 New York or Philadelphia? — this ship having had the wind set 

 in at " south," and veering " first to southwest, then to west and 

 northwest," a "perfect hurricane!" ^^ Experience^' has shown, 



* This I believe to be Dr. Hare's meaning; for the word "southwestern," I 

 deem to be a misprint : else Dr. H. fails to understand himself in this passage; 

 for there is nothing in my views or in the nature of the case, which requires the 

 wind to 'be stronger on the " southwestern" side of a storm than on the " south- 

 eastern" side. 



Vol. xLiii, No. 2.— July-Sept. 1842. 33 



