Satellites of the Georgium Sidus , & c. 69 
« was before, so that the defect is not in the speculum, nor is 
“ it in the eye-glass. But still it is now also pretty evident 
« that it arises from some external cause ; for it is now in the 
“ same situation, with regard to the tube, in which it was g-j 
“ hours ago : whereas, the parallel is differently situated, and 
££ the ring, of course, ought to be so too.” 
£C March 5, 1792. I viewed the Georgian planet with a newly 
££ polished speculum, of an excellent figure. It shewed the pla- 
££ net very well defined, and without any suspicion of a ring. 
££ I viewed it successively with 240, 300, 480, 6 00, 800, 1200, 
££ and 2400 ; all which powers my speculum bore with great dis- 
££ tinctness. I am pretty well convinced that the disk is flat- 
££ tened.” The moon was pretty near the planet. 
££ Dec. 4, 1793. 7-feet reflector, power 287. The Georgian 
££ planet is not so well defined as, from the extraordinary dis- 
££ tinctness of my present 7-feet telescope, it ought to be. There 
£ ‘ is a suspicion of some apparatus about the planet.” 
“ Feb. 2 6, 1794. 20-feet reflector, power 480. The planet 
££ seems to be a little lengthened out, in the direction of the 
£C longer axis of the satellites' orbits.” 
££ April 21, 1795. 10-feet reflector, power 400. The telescope 
££ adjusted to a neighbouring star, so as to make it perfectly 
££ round. The disk of the planet seems to be a little elliptical. 
“ With 600, also adjusted upon the neighbouring star, the disk 
££ still seems elliptical.” 
Remarks upon the foregoing Observations. 
With regard to the phenomena which gave rise to the sus- 
picion of one or more rings, it must be noticed, that few spe- 
cula or object-glasses are so very perfect as not to be affected 
