comparative Brightness of the Stars . 139 
40 The estimation “ 40 — 41" was made with a 7-feet 
reflector, power 460. 
56 Does not exist. Flamsteed has no observation of it. 
My double star II, 31, called 36 Draconis, is a star situated be- 
tween 59 and 50, about if degree from 59 towards 50.* 
6 2 Does not exist. Flamsteed has no observation of it; 
but, if an error of two hours be supposed in the calculation of 
one of the observations of 31 Draconis, it will account for the 
insertion of this star. 
72 Does not exist. There is an observation, page 173, which 
produced it ; but, if we admit an error of 3' in time in that ob- 
servation, it will then belong to 7 1 . 
Notes to Lynx. 
7 Does not exist in the place pointed out by the British cata- 
logue; but, in Flamsteed’s observations, page 28 6, its time is 
marked : : and there is probably some considerable error. 
20, 21, 22 The place of these stars in the heavens does not 
seem to agree with their situation in the Atlas. 
* When I say if degree from 59 towards 50, it is to be understood that I express 
myself in degrees of a great circle. I have always used the same method of description 
in my catalogues of double stars ; and, as these objects were pointed out for being 
viewed with telescopes of great magnifying power, which are generally not fixed, and 
therefore can give no right ascension, I am rather surprised to find that, in a catalogue 
published not many years ago, the author has taken my degrees of a great circle for 
degrees of right ascension. For instance, the double star IV, 82, where, in pointing 
out its place, I say, “ above | degree following the 16 Cephei, in a line parallel to £ 
*'■ and ot. Cassiopeas,” is placed in the zone from 15 to 19 0 of that author’s catalogue, 
only 2 ' 47",5 of time following 16 . Cephei, when it ought to have been at least I © 1 or 
1 1' following. 
I take this opportunity to mention that, in general, the same author’s account of 
my double stars is extremely erroneous. 
T 2 
