Burnham: Measures of Proper Motion Stars 
These measures are not consistent, and therefore any derived 
proper motion, must be considered as more or less uncertain. 
A mean of the first two, compared with the last, gives for the 
large star: 
Measures 
o"o6o 
in 
I 9 I -3 
Auwers 
0.104 
in 
227.1 
Newcomb 
0.080 
in 
199-3 
Boss 
0.103 
in 
21X.5 
34 Ophiuchi ( 6 . 2 . .. 10 . 3 ) 
R. A. i6 h 58"’ 27 s Decl. + 13 ° 44' 
A and B 
1909.148 
267?50 
iSi "52 
.151 
267.63 
I 5 I- 7 S 
.167 
267.77 
151.59 
1909.15 
267.63 
151.62 
B and C (10.5) 
1909.167 
209 ?57 
98"64 
.227 
209.28 
98.38 
.304 
209.27 
98.50 
1909.23 
209.37 
98.51 
No other measures of C. 
Of the other we have: 
1887.52 266?55 
I 5 i "44 
2n 
Eng 
1894.69 267.03 
152.11 
2n 
Eng 
From these positions the proper motion of the large star is: 
0" 124 
in i78?7 
The first values from meridian observations differ 
tion, and show a reverse motion in R. A. 
in direc- 
Auwers 
o"i34 in 
185^6 
Porter 
0.134 in 
199.4 
Boss 
O.I 3 S in 
173-8 
The principal star is the 
following and smaller member of 
the wide pair, 2 33, App. I. 
DM (42° 
) 2810 (9.4.. 
.9.2) 
R. A. I7 h 9 m 22 s Decl. + 
A and B 
42 ° 29 ' 
1912.236 
279-32 
209^96 
• 255 
279.42 
209.33 
• 274 
279.07 
209.13 
.296 
279.23 
209.07 
1912.26 
279.26 
209.37 
From a comparison of photographic plates, this small star is 
given an unusually large proper motion (Bui. Acad. Sci., St. 
Petersburg, Feb. 1912) : 
i"iii in 25o?5 
No careful meridian position of both stars found. The 
approximate DM places give: 
1855 275° 255" 
B is DM (42 0 ) 2808. Measures after a short interval will 
show whether this large motion is real. 
Lalande 31478 ( 7 . 8 ... 9 . 8 ) 
R. A. 17" 13"’ 30” Decl. — 7 0 53' 
1908.252 
222?8o 
I02"73 
.266 
223.23 
102.88 
.288 
223.25 
103.01 
•331 
222.87 
103.05 
1908.28 
223.04 
102.92 
The only earlier measure 
is: 
1893.61 222°60 
105"48 
2n 
Eng 
1908.28 223.04 
102.92 
4 n 
P 
These positions give for the proper motion of A: 
Measures 
0"183 in 
205 ?4 
Porter 
0.203 in 
183.8 
Paris 
0.196 in 
180.0 
DM (52°) 2058 (8.0...11.1) 
R. A. I7 h 24 m 21 s Decl. + 51° 59' 
1910.148 io5?55 I23"22 
.164 105.87 123.56 
.184 105.84 123.65 
1910.16 105.75 123.48 
The only other measures show no change. 
1879.98 I05?93 i23"oo 2n B 1 
DM (18°) 3424 (9.0...10.3) 
R. A. 17" 33 m 32 s Decl. + 18 0 38' 
1912.274 264? 50 267". 77 
.351 264.73 267.94 
1912.31 264.61 267.85 
This star is supposed to have a large proper motion: 
A. G. Berlin F'255 in 314^5 
For comparison the nearest available star is measured. The 
nearest DM star is the following: 
A and DM (18 0 ) 3423 (9.0) 
1875 AR. A. — 25! 7 ADecl. — 22"2 A. G. Ber. 
1912.27 —24.9 — 4.0 |3 
These positions imply a proper motion principally in declina¬ 
tion. 
DM (68°) 946 (9.1...7.9) 
R. A. I 7 h 37 m 8 1 Decl. + 68° 27' 
1907.293 62?37 67"9i 
.312 61.78 67.30 
.329 62.23 67.73 
1907.31 62.13 67.64 
In this instance the proper motion is in the smaller star. B 
is DM (68°)947. For comparison we have: 
1877.7 99°7 49"64 A. G. Chris 
1892.76 77.68 55.93 2n Eng 
1907.31 62.13 67.64 311 (3 
