158 



W. R. v. Haidinger on the Phenomena [Dec. 10, 



tended surface, by which, being foremost, they forced their way through the 

 opposing atmosphere. In regard to this position I had long ago advanced 

 that it must have been a necessary result, while the rectilinear movement of 

 the meteorite was in the way of being checked, of part of the force having 

 been expended in producing a rotatory motion, perpendicular to the direc- 

 tion of the course. This I did in particular, in a paper on the meteoric 

 iron of Hraschina, on the 14th of April 1859, then on an aerolite from 

 Stannern on the 22nd of May 1862, and in other instances. 



The above-mentioned quotations of M, Danbree's views are now compared 

 with the successive periods of progress in the fall of meteorites, nearly in 

 the same words as I proposed them in 1861. 



In the arrival of meteorites on our earth : — 



1 . Single or agglomerated fragments, in their cosmical course, come into 

 contact with our globe. 



2. The fragments are arrested by the resistance of atmospheric air. 



3. Pressure, in their progress through the atmospheric air, elicits 

 light and heat ; rotation ensues, and a melted crust is formed. 



4. The white-hot compressed air is spread out in the form of a fireball, 

 closed up behind, and enclosing the fragment, or fragments, and a vacuum- 

 space. 



5. The cosmic course is at an end when the fragment, or the fragments, 

 have been arrested by air. 



6. Light and heat are no longer generated ; the vacuum-ball will col- 

 lapse with a loud report, or several reports following each other. 



7. The cosmic cold within the aerolite assists in reducing the heat of the 

 melted crust. 



8. The meteorite falls down upon the earth like any other ponderous 

 body, the hotter the better conducting material it consists of. 



In this way I believe it was my duty again to lay before the public the 

 differences of the views newly taken by M. Daubree from those which I 

 hitherto had advocated. 



But while I was engaged in contrasting them I found myself conspicu- 

 ously supported by a number of recent publications relative to the subject 

 in question. In one of his own papers M. Daubree had to register the state- 

 ment of M. Leymerie, of Toulouse, who considered the fall of Orgueil as 

 presenting not one meteoric mass exploded, but a swarm of aerolites ar- 

 rived at the same moment. 



But above all, two reports of the fall of 30th January 1868, near Pul- 

 tusk, both of them kindly presented to me by their respective authors, 

 bore ample testimony in favour of a number of my theses, and enlarged them 

 by deeper and more accurate investigation beyond what I formerly proposed. 



These are the memoir " On the Course of the Pultusk Meteorite" *, by 



* Ueber die Balm des am 30. Januar 1868 beobacbteten und bei Pultusk im Konig- 

 reiche Polen als Steinregen niedergefallenen Meteors durch die Atmospbare. Vom 

 Professor Dr. C. Gr. Gialle, Direktor der Sternwarte zu Breslau. Vorgetragen am 4. 



