1884.] 
On Thunderbolts. 
yig 
every new idea, obstinately defending his conviftion, yet 
grateful to whoever convinced him of his error. 
Wohler cool, deliberate, expressing his opinion, but aftei 
elaborate examination which seems to exclude the possibility 
of his being mistaken. 
Liebig nervous, flying into a passion at a slight provoca- 
tion, and consequently often engaged in violent contioversy. 
Wohler passionless, imperturbable, a sworn enemy 0 
quarrels and disputes. . 
The qualities, however, which they both possessed in an 
equally high degree were love of truth and loyalty. Is it 
then astonishing that between these two men, that were so 
entirely dissimilar, there should have blossomed up a friend- 
ship which both reckoned among the greatest blessings 0 
their lives. Their mutual attachment, which was based on 
the highest personal respedt, has become to all who have 
beerflgranted the favour of knowing them more intimate y 
a model for emulation. 
III. ON THUNDERBOLTS. 
Bv Colonel the Honourable Arthur Parnell (late Royal 
y Engineers.) 
fl N reeard to the true meaning of the expression which 
ft forms the title of this paper a very erroneous idea 
— seems to be prevalent, and especially among men 
nossessed in other respefts of scientific attainments. I o illus- 
f, ate this Statement I would refer to the fol owing instances. 
In “Symons’s Meteorological the 
says Thunderbolts do not 
exist I have been trying to find one for * i quarter of a 
, have always failed. At a meeting oi uie 
North of England Mining Engineers’ Institute at Newcastle- 
on Tvne in December, 1883, at which I was present, Pro- 
r T T ebour of the Durham University College of Physical 
Science,^ informed the audience that a thunderbolt was a 
