Reviews— Earthquake Predictions. bol 
135° ;” and that the influence of these two planets is due to their 
passages through meteoric swarms situated in these mean longitudes. 
He also gives an approximate table of future earthquake-years, 
mentioning especially the years 1886, 1891, 1898, 1900, ete. 
In La Nature for Oct. 25, 1880, M. Delauney gives a new table of 
these epochs up to the year 1920, distinguishing those which would 
be epochs of peculiar agitation. The year 1883 is mentioned, though 
not under the latter heading. The note concludes with the words: 
“The coming seismic tempest should be due to the meeting of 
Jupiter and the August swarm; the date of 1883-5 [7.e. July 1st or 
2nd, 1883] should be that of the commencement of the phenomenon.” 
Almost exactly at the time mentioned came the great Ischian 
earthquake of July 28, 1883, followed about a month afterwards by 
the terrible disturbances in Java, and later by earthquakes in Asia 
Minor and other places. The peculiar coincidence between his 
prediction and the event called forth M. Delauney’s second note, and 
has even, according to M. Faye, occasioned inquietude in the minds 
of some people, it having been stated in the French newspapers 
that, according to M. Delauney, the most critical epoch would be in 
April, 1886. 
M. Faye argues that if the Moon produces scarcely any appreciable 
effect upon the occurrence of earthquakes, still less should Jupiter 
and Saturn, on account of their enormously greater distances. If, 
again, the August shooting-stars, when coming in contact with the 
earth, exercise no influence upon seismic disturbances, much less 
should they when the meteor-ring is traversed by Jupiter or Saturn. 
He shows also that, though this ring does meet the plane of the orbit 
of Jupiter in the longitude of 138°; yet, at the time of the Ischian 
earthquake, Jupiter and the meteor-ring were separated by a distance 
three times as great as that which separates the earth from the sun. 
He points out, in conclusion, that direct observation alone will lead 
us to the means of prediction, for it is well known that great earth- 
quake-shocks never take place without giving some warnings in 
advance. 
M. Delauney, in reply, very justly remarks that he had stated 
a law, and afterwards interpreted it; that M. Faye had only shown 
the hypothesis to be inadmissible, but in no way shook the founda- 
tions of the law. 
The truth of the law itself is, however, attacked by M. Daubrée. 
He asserts that our earthquake-statistics are as yet far too incomplete 
to establish general laws of chronological distribution of earthquakes 
over the whole surface of the globe; for, even admitting that we 
are well-informed as to European earthquakes, we must remember 
that our continent forms only one-fiftieth of the earth’s surface, while 
earthquakes may take place unknown to us on other land-areas, and 
are almost unperceived in oceanic areas, which are nevertheless 
studded or lined with the principal volcanic groups. 
It cannot be said that attempts to connect the occurrence of earth- 
quakes with a cosmical cause have been very successful. The 
tendency of physical geologists at present is to consider them as 
