190 
BULLETIN OF THE NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY. 
tween report and map, Dr. Ells, as earlier noted (Note 5), dis- 
claimed responsibility for the greater height given on the map. 
Later, however. Dr. Chalmers wrote me that he had made the 
mountain over 2,700 feet, as a result of the re-calculation of Ells’ 
data (Note 25), whence I conclude that Dr. Chalmers is author- 
ity for this height on the map. 
Our measurements of Big Bald were made on August 22, 23 
and 24, 1903, and consisted of six independent observations made 
exactly synchronously with the regular barometric readings at 
Fredericton and Chatham. The instruments were the two excel- 
lent aneroids, used with precisely the same precautions as to 
correction for index error, temperature and weather, as pre- 
viously described (Note No. 53), and the results were calculated 
in the same manner from the same tables. One of the readings 
was rejected because of a thunder storm prevailing at the time, 
and the other five corrected from the Eredericton base gave 2,373, 
2,341, 2,364, 2,331, and 2,345, averaging 2,351 feet above sea level. 
The five corrected from Chatham gave 2,272, 2,292, 2,250, 2,235, 
and 2,250, averaging 2,259. The cause of the discrepancy in the 
results calculated from the two bases will be noted later (Note 
76), as will the reasons why greater weight must be given to the 
Chatham than to the Eredericton results. The height must, 
therefore, fall in the vicinity of 2,300 feet, and under rather than 
'Over that figure. Thus Big Bald is proven to be very much lower 
than Carleton. 
So unexpected and altogether surprising is this result that it 
will naturally be questioned. It may be argued that my figures 
are somewhere in error ; but not only were they all made with a 
care commensurate with the interest and importance of the pro- 
blem, but they are all consistent with one another, and could 
hardly all be in error in the same degree. Again, it may be 
assumed that my instruments are out of order ; but not only 
were they carefully compared with the standard mercurial baro- 
meters at Fredericton and St. John, both before and after the 
journey, and the index errors taken into account, but also 
they are the same instruments used in precisely the same manner 
as for the determination of the height of Mount Carleton, so that 
