458 



sciujsrcu. 



[Vol. VIII., No. 198 



by whicli the small crystals of lard and other fats 

 might be absorbed and thereby escape detection. In 

 the case of a true oleomargarine, which consists al- 

 most wholly of ' oleo,' the process of boiling would 

 develop beef-fat crystals without cross, which would 

 not be modified in form by the small quantity of but- 

 ter in the comiDOund. 



Science further says : " Under these conditions, he 

 now finds, in accordance with Professor Weber, that 

 butter, lard, and beef-fat all give globular crystal- 

 line bodies which (apparently with the exception of 

 lard) show the St. Andrew's cross." Answer: Science 

 is misinformed in this case. The above statement is 

 not in accordance with the facts. Professor Weber's 

 language, in bulletin 13, is : " The biitter revealed a 

 well marked black cross;" "the lard, small irregu- 

 lar stellated bodies;" "beef-fat, only small stellate 

 crystals." The last is an erroneous des-^ription of 

 beef-fat, however, which has a branched and foliated 

 crystal. It must be confessed that Professor Weber 

 has an odd way of ' corroborating ' the correctness of 

 my experiments, — employing ' oleo oil ' instead of 

 rendered beef kidney fat, according to the statement 

 in my ' abstract.' ' Oleo,' a substance not mentioned 

 in my experiments, is no more beef-fat than phenic 

 alcohol is coal-tar, although the one is a product of 

 the other. Science says: "The above account of 

 Dr. Taylor's method, as at present described by him, 

 is drawn mainly from his last annual report to the 

 commissioner of agriculture." Answer : Science is 

 in error on this point. The points referred to by 

 Science are taken mostly from my open letter to Pro- 

 fessor Sturtevant, and from Professor Weber's bul- 

 letins 13 and 15, of the Ohio experiment station. My 

 method of detecting oleomargarine has nowhere ap- 

 peared in the columns q^ Science^ nor in the reports 

 of Professor Weber. My official report for 1885 was 

 not issued when Professor Weber published the paper 

 of March 1, 1886, nor does he seem to have been 

 aware of my other publications mentioned in this 

 paper. In point of fact, Professor Weber, unfortu- 

 nately, undertook to discuss my method of detecting 

 oleornargarine, by reviewing an abstract that did not 

 so much as mention the subject. In conclusion. 

 Science says : " We shall endeavor to keep our 

 readers informed of the changes which the method 

 undergoes in the future." This last is to me the 

 most gratifying sentence in the whole article. 



Thomas Tayloe, M.D., 

 Microscopist, U.S. dept. of agric. 



Anemometer exposure. 



I have been allowed space in recent issues of 

 Science to call attention to errors which may arise 

 from the position of thermometers and barometers 

 relative to surrounding objects : may I now call 

 attention to similar errors which may arise from 

 badly placed anemometers ? The subject is not a 

 new one, but I wish to urge the necessity of a more 

 uniform exposure than that now used by our signal 

 service. According to the Associated press reports 

 of the storm of Oct. 14 and 15 in the lake region, the 

 wind tore through the trees of the Chicago public 

 parks, on the morning of the 14th, with the fury of 

 a hurricane, twisting saplings off and hurling them 

 over the tops of large trees, littering the streets with 

 broken trees and shattered sign-boards, and demolish- 

 ing at least two buildings ; and all this, according to 

 the same despatch, while the wind was "blowing 



with a velocity of 20 miles an hour." Similar reports 

 came from surrounding towns. The production of 

 all this damage by a 20-mile wind seemed so absurd 

 that I wrote to the signal ofiicer at Chicago for the 

 observed wind velocities on Oct. 14, and received the 

 following : " Oct. 14, 1886, max. vel. of wind, S.W., 

 27 at 12.58 p.m.; vel. at 7 a.m., S.E., 11 ; ab 3 p.m., 

 S.W., 28 ; at 11 p.m., S.W., 11." Wind velocities of 

 40 miles per hour are not unfrequently recorded in 

 Boston. On Oct. 31 the anemograph at the Boston 

 signal ofiice showed a maximiim velocity of 40 miles, 

 and on April 6 a maximum velocity of 51 miles ; yet 

 in neither case was there any record of broken or 

 overturned trees and injured or wrecked buildings. 

 This seems to show that wind velocities reported 

 from Boston cannot be compared with wind velocities 

 reported from Chicago. Not only can we not com- 

 pare two stations of the signal office together, but we 

 cannot comiaare wind velocities obtained during 

 different years at the same station. During recent 

 years high wind velocities have been much more fre- 

 qiiently recorded at the Boston signal office than 

 previously, and we find that while the average 

 monthly wind movement at Boston from 1870 to 1881 

 was 6,630 miles (see Report chief signal office. 1883), 

 the mean monthly movement during the last two 

 years has been 8,120. Are we hence to conclude 

 that Boston is becoming a windier place ? I think 

 not. The signal office at Boston was moved 

 from one building to another building in 1884, and 

 since then the velocities have been higher than 

 previously, and are no doubt dxae to the changed 

 position of the anemometer. But even with a con- 

 tinuous exposure of an anemometer at the same place, 

 it is doubtful, as anemometers are now exposed, 

 whether wind velocities from different directions can 

 be compared with one another. There are two ane- 

 mometers — a Draper and a Hahl — on the tower of 

 the observatory at Blue Hill. These rise about eleven 

 feet above the roof of the tower and about eight feet 

 above the pai'apet. The Hahl anemometer is situated 

 on the south side of the tower, and the Draper on 

 the east side of the tower, which is sixteen feet in 

 diameter. During the last three months there have 

 been seventeen days on which the prevailing wind 

 was from the west ; and on all of these except four 

 the total daily movement shown by the Hahl was 

 larger than that shown by the Draper. On these 

 seventeen days the average daily movement shown, 

 by the Hahl was 438 miles, and by the Draper 426. 

 During the last six months there has been ten days 

 on which the prevailing wind was from the north, and 

 on all but three the Draper recorded more than the 

 Hahl. On these ten days the average daily move- 

 ment shown by the Draper was 353 miles, and by the 

 Hahl, 346. This seems to show that wind velocities 

 from different directions recorded by either instru- 

 ment cannot be compared with each other, though 

 the differences in this case are not large. Yet I 

 think the Blue Hill anemometers are better exposed 

 than many of those of the signal service which are 

 near the edge of tall buildings, and have an abrupt 

 descent on one side of them, and a long roof or 

 series of roofs on the other. 



As a sequel to this, I might call attention to the 

 large errors which may arise from the bad exposure 

 of the signal service rain-gauges on roofs, but I think 

 this is generally recognized. 



H. Helm Claxton.. 

 Blue Hill meteor, observ., Nov. 10. 



