in the relative Situation of double Stars. 
377 
FI. 4 6 Herculis. I, 79. 
There is a small change in the distance of the two stars of 
this double star. Feb. 5, 1783, the interval between them, with 
227,* was nearly 1 diameter of L, and with 460, if diameter 
of L. Sept. 2 g, 1802, it was 2f- or 3 diameters of L. The position, 
Feb. 5, 1783, was 66 ° 3 6' south-following. Sept. 2 g, 1802, it 
Was 76° 18'. The alteration is g° 42', in ig years and 236 days; 
but cannot be owing to parallactic motion. 
* Cygni. I, 94. 
This double star, I believe, has furnished us with a second 
instance of a conjunction, resembling that of f Herculis. The 
position, Sept. 22, 1783, was 18 0 21' north-following. Jan. 3,. 
10, and 11, 1802, I could no longer perceive the small star; 
which must have been at least so near the large one as to be 
lost in its brightness. Jan. 29, 1804, I examined this star with 
powers from 527 to 1500, and saw it as a lengthened star, but 
not with sufficient clearness to take a measure of its position. 
May 22, 1804, in a very clear evening, I tried 527 and 1500, 
with the 10-feet reflector, which acted remarkably well on other 
double stars, but I could not perceive the small star of $ Cygni. 
In hopes that the superior light of a 20-feet reflector would 
show it, I examined the star, May 29, 1804, with the powers 
157 and 360, but could not perceive the small one. A parallactic 
motion of $ will perfectly account for this occultation ; for the 
situation of the two stars, in 1783, was such, that this motion 
* In my Catalogue, the power is called 460, instead of 227, as it should have 
been ; and the rest of the observation, with' 460, was by mistake omitted. 
3 C 2 
