32 
SIE J. F. W. HEESCHEL’S CATALOGUE 
No. 
3216) 
3224j^' ^ ee note 011 
3228 I. 8= III. 6. The later of these nebulae is expressly stated in the register (H. 38) 
to be of the 1st class, though set down (it does not appear why) in the 3rd. 
3254 h. 1452=1. 41. The case of this nebula is a very odd one. H. has two obser- 
vations of it. One on April 5, 1784, where it is described as a 44 L ; B ; r neb ; 
sbM; iRFig; Class I.” Another on March 3, 1789, calls it “pB; cL; iFig; 
er. Many of the st. visible.” So that it may be called a cluster. Both the 
places of H. and that of h. agree so well, that the object in all must have been 
the same. Here seems evidence of change. 
3256 h. 1453=11. 73. Contradictory descriptions, and possibly two nebulse differing 
l ra in R.A. 
3311 h. 1480=1. 141. Query if not changed, h.’s observations are positive as to the 
clearness of the sky. But query as to the state of the speculum. 
3319 h. 1485 = 11. 384. Not seen by Lord Rosse in two observations (hazy). 
u 1497=1. 68; II. 299; h. 1511=1. 69; h. 1536=11. 301; h. 1574=111. 382. 
Auwers finds 5' A. P.D. between H. I. 68 and h. 1497. His place is from P.T. 
53 Virginis n. 1° 4', whereas C.H. in her reductions uses n. 1° 11', and my 
observations of this and the other nebulse in this list justify the departure. I 
subjoin her note on this nebula (in zone 103° C.H.): — 
“ I. 68, I. 69, III. 282 are each 7' more north than they are given in the 
“ printed Catalogue. The disagreement is the result of the recalculation, and 
“ is probably owing to my attempting more accuracy in valuing the 4 numbers 
44 ‘ to a degree,’ &c. &c.” (i. e. in the index reductions of the Polar distance 
readings which were parts of an arbitrary scale). And in the next zone (104° 
C.H.) occurs, 
44 II. 299 and II. 301 require the same memorandum.” In point of fact, com- 
paring my own observations with those reduced by M. Auwers, the differences, 
as stated by him, run thus : 
I. 68 . . . A.P.D. H-h=+5' 
I. 69 +7' 
III. 282 +7' 
II. 299 
II. 301 +6' 
so that in each case, where I have observed the object, the alteration is justified. 
This is only one out of the innumerable instances of painstaking and laborious 
scrutiny bestowed by her upon these reductions which have occurred to me in 
the collation of her zone catalogue with the original observations and with my 
own results. 
3356 h. 1509=1. 143. Auwers places this nebula 1° 13' too much to the south in con- 
sequence of an erratum in P.T. (see List of Errata). 
3338 
3358 
3420 
3483 
