Apbh. 24, 1908] 



SCIENCE 



667 



statements; the first concerning tlie discovery 

 of the satellites of Mars: 



It was an accidental discovery, interesting be- 

 c;.use it concerns tlie system of our nearest neigh- 

 bor in space, useful because it has furnished a new 

 means of considering certain problems in astron- 

 omy, but not to him a crowning achievement. 



He was not easily carried away by any of the 

 psychological waves that come and go in astron- 

 omy. During one of these at the Naval Observa- 

 tory it was quite the fad to observe the com- 

 panions of a certain well-known star. Each man, 

 it proved, had his o^vni companion that he thought 

 he saw, and comparison showed later that no two 

 had the same one. Only Hall of all the staff re- 

 sisted the opportunity, and only he, it afterwards 

 proved, was right, for all of the little companion 

 stars were of tlie imagination. 



The above statements were so inconsistent 

 with the facts that I wrote to the editor on 

 December 4, 1907, giving him a brief but true 

 account of the matters at issue, asking that 

 my communication be given as wide a circula- 

 tion as was given to the incorrect article. It 

 was not printed. When asked if my article 

 had been received the editor replied, on De- 

 cember 17, that it had, and had been referred 

 to the author of the article printed November 

 26, 1907. Nothing has since been heard from 

 the editor or the author, and apparently 

 neither is willing that the facts be known. 

 Therefore, in the interest of truth and also 

 of justice to Professor Hall I ask that the 

 following comments on the Traiiscript article 

 be printed in Science. 



The statement that the discovery of the 

 satellites of Mars was an accident is not only 

 entirely without foundation but it is unjust 

 to the professional reputation of Professor 

 Hall. I knew Professor Hall intimately, had 

 worked in the same building with him for fif- 

 teen years, we lived in adjoining houses and 

 ■we walked together to and from the observa- 

 tory nearly every day and frequently at night. 

 His scheme for observing Mars was discussed 

 with him in these walks and in his home, and 

 I know that the discovery was the definite 

 result of a carefully devised plan for an ex- 

 haustive search for satellites. At the time of 

 the discovery an effort was made to divert the 

 honor of the discovery from Professor Hall, 



but, fortunately, that attempt failed. To say 

 now that the discovery was an accident is a 

 wide departure from historic truth. 



With regard to the statements : " it was 

 quite the fad to observe the companions of a 

 certain well-known star " ; " each man had 

 his own companion that he thought he saw," 

 and " only Hall of all the staff resisted the 

 opportunity," it may be said, briefly, that they 

 are absolutely untrue. None of the trained 

 observers of the Naval Observatory saw these 

 " companions." The discovery of these com- 

 panions was made by an amateur, not a mem- 

 ber of the observatory staff. The note books 

 of that period will show the folly of the state- 

 ment in the Transcript. 



Another recent statement concerning 'the 

 discovery of the satellites of Mars may be 

 mentioned in this connection. In the March 

 number of the Cosmopolitan magazine, page 

 343, Professor Todd, of Amherst College, tells 

 a curious story of the discovei-y of Phobos, 

 the inner satellite of Mars. He writes : " So 

 mine was the first human eye that ever saw 

 Phobos, recognizing it as a satellite." 



This statement is remarkable in two ways: 

 Pirst, because this information has been with- 

 held from the public and from astronomers 

 for thirty years and only published after the 

 death of Professor Hall; second, the statement 

 will not deceive trained astronomical observers, 

 but the general public ought to know that 

 hefore and since that event it has been impos- 

 sible for an astronomer to recognize the dif- 

 ference between a small star and a satellite, 

 near the limit of vision, without extended 

 observation or careful measures, which were 

 not employed at the time mentioned in the 

 magazine. John E. Eastman, 



Professor of Mathematics 

 U. 8. N, (retired) 



Andover, N. H., 

 April 2, 1908 



SPECIAL ARTICLES 



PRE-CAMBRIAN SEDIMENTS AND FAULTS IN THE 

 GRAND CANYON OF THE COLORADO^ 



The work of Powell, Walcott and others 

 ^ Published by permission of the director of the 

 U. S. Greological Survey. 



