1849.] Remarks on the Snoiv line in the Himalaya. 963 



Were the upward or northward passage of the moist air effected 

 slowly and gently, no doubt we might expect a heavier fall of snow on 

 the southern aspect of the chain, provided always the temperature 

 beyond it was, as Lieut, Strachey supposes, hotter than on the Indian 

 side ; but this is not the case, as is most convincingly proved by the ad- 

 mission that snow always lies longer on the northern aspects of all hills 

 and ranges, than on the south, and I need only cite Lieut. Strachey's 

 own black range as an instance of the fact. — He likewise admits that 

 " southerly winds blow throughout the year over the Himalaya," and 

 "in the winter," which is of course the season of snow, "with 

 the peculiar violence" This is recorded also by Gerard and by Cap- 

 tain Cunningham, and every traveller can confirm the same. But this 

 very violence of the southern winds must necessarily carry the snow 

 across the southern range and accumulate it deeply to the north, and 

 this is clearly shown to be the case by Captain Cunningham, who re- 

 lates that while during winter and " indeed at all times, the violent 

 southerly winds kept southern exposures free from snow" — " on the 

 north it was I don't know how deep." Moreover, if the temperature of 

 the air was hotter to the north than to the south of the high peaks, 

 we ought as we approach the plains of Tibet to find no snow on the 

 northernmost range ; yet the black range, rising from those plains 

 retains the snow on the northern even when there is none on the south- 

 ern slope, — a fact which, while it militates strongly against Lieut. 

 Strachey's views, tends much to corroborate Captain Cunningham's 

 observations. But granting that Lieut. Strachey were correct in these 

 particulars, does it necessarily follow that what is fact in the neigh- 

 bourhood of Kumaon, may not be pure fiction when applied to the 

 western tracts? Can the assumptions of one who confesses that he 

 never set foot within the limits of the district where his opponent's 

 observations were made, in any way affect those observations ? He is 

 evidently disposed to disregard the question of one of his own sup- 

 porters, who asks — " how can any facts of one observer in one 

 place falsify the facts of another observer in another place?"* 

 Now I and my supporters have long since received Captain Webb's 

 Kumaon facts as true, when applied to the places wherein he observed 



* Cal. Journ. Nat. Hist. No. 19, p. 383. 



