Forbes goes on to call for a greater emphasis on theory, and the replacement of the many small-scale observatories with "a few great Registers" to be adequately maintained by "great Societies" or by the government. He suggests that the time for pursuit of theory might be gained from "the vague mechanical task to which at present they generally devote their time, namely the search for great numerical accuracy, to a superfluity of decimal places exceeding the compass of the instrument to verify."
From its founding the British Association sponsored systematic observation at various places. In 1842 it initiated observations at the Kew Observatory, which has continued until today to be the premier meteorological observatory in the British Empire. The American scientist Joseph Henry observed the functioning of an observatory maintained by the British Association at Plymouth in 1837, and when he became Secretary of the new Smithsonian Institution a few years later he made the furtherance of meteorology one of its first objectives.
The Kew Observatory set a pattern for systematic observation in England as, from 1855, did the Smithsonian Institution in the United States. The instruments used differed little from those in use at Mannheim over half a century earlier[6] (fig. 1). They were undoubtedly more accurate, but this should not be overstressed. Forbes had noted in his report of 1832 that some scientists were then calling for a return to Torricelli, for the construction of a temporary barometer on the site in preference to reliance on the then existing manufactured instruments.
The First Self-Registering Instruments
From the middle of the 17th century meteorological observations were recorded in manuscript books known as "registers," many of which were published in the early scientific journals. The most effective utilization of these observations was in the compilation of the history of particular storms, but where a larger synthesis was concerned they tended, as Forbes has shown, to show themselves unsystematic and non-comparable. The principal problems of meteorological observation have been from the outset the construction of precisely comparable instruments and their use to produce comparable records. The former problem has been frequently discussed, and perhaps, as Forbes suggests, overemphasized. It is the latter problem with which we are here concerned.
The idea of mechanizing the process of observation, not yet accomplished in Forbes' time, had been put forward within a little over a decade of the first use of the thermometer and barometer in meteorology. On December 9, 1663, Christopher Wren presented the Royal Society with a design for a "weather clock," of which a drawing is extant.[7] This drawing (fig. 2) shows an ordinary clock to which is attached a pencil-carrying rack, geared to the hour pinion. A discussion of the clock's "reduction to practice" began the involvement of Robert Hooke, who was "instructed" in September 1664 to make "a pendulum clock applicable to the observing of the changes in the weather."[8] This tribute to Hooke's reputation—and to the versatility of the mechanic arts at this time—was slightly overoptimistic, as 15 years ensued before the clock made its appearance.
Figure 2.—A contemporary drawing of Wren's "weather clock." (Photo courtesy Royal Society of London.)
References to this clock are frequent in the records of the Royal Society—being mainly periodic injunctions to Hooke to get on with the work—until its completion in May 1679. The description which Hooke was asked to supply was subsequently found among his papers and printed by William Derham as follows:[9]
The weather-clock consists of two parts; first, that which measures the time, which is a strong and large pendulum-clock, which moves a week, with once winding up, and is sufficient to turn a cylinder (upon which the paper is rolled) twice round in a day, and also to lift a hammer for striking the punches, once every quarter of an hour.