30 
SIE J. F. W. HEESCHEL’S CATALOGUE 
No. 
3075 h. 1329=1. 31=1. 38. H. describes I. 31 as “between two bright stars.” The 
places differ 15' in P.D. ; h. describes I. 38 (the place well agreeing with that 
of H.) in one observation as having a large star f, and in two others as having 
a star 9m, p ; that is, in effect, as lying between two bright stars. N.B. The 
star used for I. 31 is 31 d 1 Virginis, and for I. 38, 32 d 2 Yirginis. The decli- 
nation of 31 d 1 is 30' wrong in A.S.C. (No. 1469). In B.A.C. it is right. The 
P.D.’s of the two nebulae of H. differ, as already remarked, by 15'. The P.A.’s 
agree. They must be identical with a mistake of 15' in I. 31. D’Arrest says 
he is sure there are not two nebulae here. 
3078 III. 26. Place as per C.H., 12 h 25 m 32 s , 68° 32' for 1830 ; as per Auwers, 
12 h 25 m 40 s , 68° 47' (see List of Errata). The correction of the place in P.T. 
is not, properly speaking, an erratum, but the substitution of a good observa- 
tion for a bad one. In the obs. sw. 177 (H.), where 20 Comae was used as 
the determining star, the place is given only by description. In a sweep long 
subsequent (sw. 944) it was compared with 26 Comae in the regular form of 
observation, and this is of course to be preferred. Auwers’s place is deduced 
from the earlier, and that of C.H. from the later observation, rejecting the 
other. 
3079 h. 1322 = 8 Canum. This very remarkable object occurs among the list of those 
observed by Lord Posse in his paper in P.T. 1861, but without a word of 
remark or description; and it does not occur among his list of nebulosities 
looked for but not perceived. Surely it might be inferred from this that the 
nebulosity surrounding the star was seen, or its absence would have been noticed, 
as in the instance of 55 Andromedae. Yet Mr. Lassell saw no nebulosity about 
8 Canum. 
3097 h. 1348=M. 89. Lord Posse has h. 1343 and 1348, and in his account of them 
says, “ two others, about 20' s. of 1348 one of these must have been h. 1343, 
and the other h. 1349. 
3103 h. 1353=1. 119. This nebula was barely perceptible, with straining the atten- 
tion, by M. D’Arrest with the 4^-inch Leipzig refractor. It is described in this 
Catalogue as “ considerably bright ” by two observations. 
3108Vh. 1358, 1359, 1363=IV. 8, 9. The obs. of 1363 in my Catalogue of 1833, in 
3109 J which the P.A. is uncertain, undoubtedly refers to the same very remarkable 
double nebula, IY. 8, 9. D’Arrest is sure that there is no other double nebula 
in this neighbourhood. 
3111 M. 90. The place is from two observations by W.H., as also the description. 
3127 h. 1374=1. 273. The descriptions of H. differ so much that it is not impossible 
there may be another bright nebula near this place. 
3138 h. 1379=11. 577. Two diagrams by h. in sweeps 141, 143, agreeing, represent 
this nebula as making a considerably acute-angled, nearly isosceles triangle with 
