CEVA AME Raaxe: 
STATISTICAL. 
PERHAPS one of the most striking features revealed by the 
systematic observations of earthquakes is the large number 
detected by seismographs as compared with those earthquakes 
which obtain notoriety in the public press. This is owing to 
the fact that a large number of earthquakes are of but small 
intensity, while of the large earthquakes or megaseisms the 
majority fortunately occur at the bottom of the sea or in un- 
populated regions without causing loss of human life. 
Earthquakes whether large or small are of interest to the 
seismologist. 
The number recorded at any given station depends on the 
position of the station, as well as the sensitiveness of the 
instruments. As illustrating the number recorded in a non- 
seismic region I give the numbers recorded at Eskdalemuir on 
the Galitzin Seismographs in 1911. 
Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June Jul. Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. 
16 Io 8 19 19 20 24 23 28 32 16 20 
The total for the year is 235. Most of these were small, 
but sixteen at least deserved to be called megaseismic. In 
particular the earthquake of 3 January which occurred in 
Turkestan (41° N 77° E) wasso violent that the seismographs 
at Pulkowa were broken, and even at Eskdalemuir the needle 
of one of the galvanometers was thrown out of action. 
I ought perhaps to say that none of the above earthquakes 
were of local character. I was never able at Eskdalemuir to 
detect any indication of earthquakes reported to have taken 
place in Perthshire, and even the Glasgow earthquake of 
December, 1910, which caused considerable public excitement 
83 Onn 
