WITH A FOURTEEN FEET REFLECTOR. 213 



that he quotes from his catalogue under the title of V. 14, which I have shown 

 corresponds to the network only, — and assigns, as in that catalogue, an extent 

 of 52' in a meridional direction, a quantity entirely too small to include the 

 whole nebula, especially when we consider that in other particulars of 

 dimension he has rather over, than under estimated. I am therefore unable to 

 decide this point. At the time of our own observations, and until quite 

 recently, I did not know that there was any ground for attributing to the 

 elder Herschel a full view of the whole nebula; and the remarks of the younger 

 Herschel, show conclusively, that he was not aware of their being united, nor 

 so understood his father's observations. 



65. It will be seen, by reference to the figured nebulae of Sir J. Herschel, 

 that his figure 34 represents that portion of our largest nebula, included be- 

 tween the parallels 30° 55' and 31° 20' in Plate VII. Figure 82 represents the 

 general character of the portion between 30° 10' and 30° 40'. 



66. The N. P. D. of ^. 2093, as given by Herschel, is 60° 26' 6", or in decli- 

 nation + 29° 34'. A reference to the map or catalogue will show the brightest 

 portion to be about -f- 30° 28' 40". The place assigned by Sir J. Herschel is 

 therefore nearly a degree in error. I was led on this account, in early obser- 

 vations, to attribute to the nebula a greater extent than actually belongs to it. 

 It does not much exceed a degree in declination, and it is between 3™ and 4"' 

 broad in right ascension. It would be very absurd to account for the error in 

 Herschel's place, by supposing that not this, but some nebula about a degree 

 farther south, and unseen in our observations, is the one recorded by him. I 

 think it probable that the confusion I have above alluded to in the synonyms 

 of different portions of the whole nebula is chiefly owing to this mistake 

 in P. D. 



VII. — 3 D 



