72 KANSAS CITY REVIEW OF SCIENCE. 
ed to render a thorough discussion of the comet possible, but nevertheless it is 
none too early to begin the accumulation of such facts, as this may at a later time 
be a much more serious undertaking. The story of the discovery of Comet I. 
1880, is given in an extract from a letter from Dr. Gould to Prof. Peters, which is 
in the Astvonomische Nachrichten, No. 2303. 
On the evening of February 2, Dr. Gould saw, during twilight, a bright streak 
of light in the southwest, which he immediately supposed to be the tail of a huge 
comet. An attempt to sketch the object was made, but, owing to the murkiness 
of the sky, it was unsuccessful. The approximate position of this streak of light 
was from R. A. 22h. 4om.— 45° to less than R. A. 23h. om.— 50°. On the 
3d of February, the object appeared somewhat brighter, and had moved north- 
wards throughout its entire length, and was evidently the tail of a comet which 
seemed to be approaching perihelion. All attempts to detect a nucleus were un- 
availing, and the equality in the brightness of the tail throughout its visible length 
of fully 40° and the remarkably small decrease of its breadth toward the horizon 
prevented any safe conjecture as to the position of the nucleus. On the 4th, the 
comet seemed to be a little brighter, and the tail preserved the same peculiarities 
as before, and in brilliancy was inno part equal to the milky way. This evening, 
Dr. Gould observed what he considercd to be the head of the comet, which 
through the haze and twilight appeared to be a coarse; ill-defined mass of dull 
light, some 2’ or 3’ in diameter and without any visible nucleus. 
Observations made by Mr. Gill, at the same time, are noted in the Odserv- 
atory for March, although not fully. Among the early newspaper items may be 
quoted that of Prof. Peirce, who lost no time in comparing the data of Gould’s 
comet with those of the comet of 1843, and announced himself as fully persuaded 
that it was a return of the earlier comet. 
Quite early in the field was the Observatory of Rio Janeiro, the Director of 
which, Prof. Liais, in the Astronomische Nachrichten, No. 2304, under the date of 
February 20, makes a report of the same. At Rio, the weather was unfavorable, 
and, save the 4th and 8th of February, the comet was not observed. In other 
parts of the Empire, however, observations had been made sufficiently numerous 
to justify the statement of an approximate orbit, which, in view of later data, it is 
not necessary to give in detail. 
According to WVatnre, No. 540, Mr. Gill saw the tail of the comet even as 
early as Fehruary 1. No. 541 of the same periodical contains an extract from a 
letter by Mr. Gill, specifying his observations up to the 9th of February. As 
Table Mountain interfered with the view of the comet from the Royal Observa- 
tory at Cape Town, Mr. Gill went over to Seapoint, on the west side of the 
mountain, and sketched the position of the tail, on several evenings. The next 
issue of /Vature contains elements of the comet, by Mr. Gill, which, however, 
may be considered as in error, in consideration of the elements given in No. 544 
of the same periodical. These elements were computed by Mr. Hind from the 
