comparative Brightness of the Stars. 323 
vations of it on page 167, 445, 477, and 478., Mr. Wollaston 
not being acquainted with the existence of 21 Coronas in its 
right place, supposes zone 55 0 , that I have made a mistake in 
calling my double star VI . 18, very unequal ; but in his correc- 
tions he gives us the place of a star, as he calls it “ near vf 
which is the real second 1/ of F lam steed ; who very particu- 
larly describes it on page 167, “ Duarum ad v sequens et clarior” 
and this is the double star I have given in my catalogue as 
21 Coronae. 
Notes to Navis. 
1 There is no observation of this star : but in Miss Her- 
schel’s manuscript catalogue, No. 92, is a star 2 0 more south, 
which has probably been calculated wrong, and has given oc- 
casion for its insertion ; correcting, therefore, the PD of 1 Navis 
-j- 2 0 , the expression of its brightness is as I have given it. 
17 There is no observation of this star; but if we correct the 
PD -{- 3 0 , it will then agree with No. 238 in Miss Herschel's 
manuscript catalogue. 
21 By Flamsteed's observation page 431, the PD of the 
British catalogue requires + 18'. 
Notes to Orion. 
12 Flamsteed never observed this star. It does not appear 
how it came to be inserted in the British catalogue. 
26 Flamsteed never observed this star. An error of 20' in 
PD in the calculation of one of the four observations of 25 
Orionis, may have occasioned the insertion of it. 
35 Is marked : : in the British catalogue; but Flamsteed 
mdccxcvii. U u 
