No. 469] 



FLYING-FISH FLIGHT 



3 



weatherboard, where they are caught by the curn iit .)t" ;iif ami 

 carried upwards to the height of 20 feet al)()ve the -iiit'a<c of the 

 water, whilst under onhiiary circimistaiiccvs they k(M'|) r\n^r to ii." 



The above is fairly ivprcscntativc of tli." aeroplane tlieorv. 

 There are, however, several variants to it, the most iioiaMe Keinn- 

 the addition by lnt(M- writers of the ii>e of the tail. l)oth as a propeller 

 in air, and also as an explanation of the lo.xl l>n/,/ing soniul aluaw 

 heard wh«Mi (he lisl, lly near or <.v(m- a boat, and whieli is ivally 



of the wings. 



Of this whirring or Happing motion I'rofessor Whitinaii writ. s: 

 "It is so rapid that it is not easily reeogni/ed at any great distaiiee 

 until experience has sharpened the eye." Th(M'eiii lies, I think, 

 the cause of the l)irtli of the aero[)lane theory, though I must add 

 that experience need not necessarily sharpen even good natural 

 sight into l)eing able to see the wing-nioveinent. Knack or chance 



was astonished, whilst testing the shnotinu' of ;< sh, ,(-and-l,all u-mi 

 at the butts, to (ind (hat in certain liuhts 1 eonl.l plainly se(> the 

 ball during its whol(< fliulK. whilst iUc att<'ndant. wIiom' dailv busi- 

 ness it ^^as to test riiles and uiiiis, and x\liose sinj,, u;,. far supe- 



So ha\c 1 smi maiiN uatch the uhirring uings and de'chire thein 

 to be still. 



It is coininonly acce})ted that in matters of observation an affirm- 

 ative evidence is superior to a negative one. In the special ca.se 

 under consideration, the value of the afhrniative true flight evi- 

 dence is very greatly increased by the fact that (he aeroplane 

 contradiction thereof must be in proof of a inii(jne aet in nature 

 without a known parallel. P'lying li/ards ami fhinn Mjiiirrels 

 are perhaps the nearest, but in both eases the aeroplane is, 1 lielie\e. 

 greater by far conijjaivd with the weight borne, and of more 

 importance — the con i-se is certainly far less and fallinn-, not hori- 

 zontal, or rising, as is that of the tlyinu-lish. 



Surely, therefore, it is not too much to ask froin the aeroplanists 

 either a reference to some mechanical j)ar.illel, or els(> ahsoliitely 

 overwhelming evidence in favor of tlu> marvellous— a fair 

 expression if no parallel be produced. We do not receive the 



