shadow produced from the equator, 
but rather tend to enlarge the sum total 
°f the shadow of the earth, on the disc of 
the moon, and thus make the eclipse 
more total than ordinary,—especially if 
the earth’s shadow had so crossed over the 
disc of the moon, as to cause the shadow 
of such elongated poles, to fall on her disc 
and not extend beyond it. 
Now, as the eclipse was less total than 
was calculated, and the shadow was (be¬ 
lieved to be) oblong, it follows, that the 
oblong shape of the shadow, must be ow¬ 
ing to a depression at the poles; and that 
either the observer of the eclipse was mis¬ 
taken in supposing the shadow to be most 
narrow in a direction parallel to ihe 
earth’s equator; or Childrey must have 
been mistaken in his record of the circum¬ 
stances. 
My principal object in summing up the 
above argument, was to prove by the re¬ 
corded circumstances relative to the 
eclipse, that its shortness could not have 
been owing to an elongation, but to a 
great degree of flatness at the poles. 
JNO. CLEVES SYMMES. 
