5. The writer at Edmonton seems to make coruscations, “incessant and remarkably bright,” dart from his “broad streak, curved;” while the writer at Deptford seems only anxious to place his “two red beams,” as perpendicular pillars, standing on either side of the magnetic meridian.

VII. And, from the whole of this, from the total silence of four accounts, and from the extreme discordance of the other three, the present writer presumes to draw the following inferences, including that of the accuracy of his own original statement:

1. That the two perpendicular red beams of light, of the writer at Deptford, should be joined with broad curved streaks of a deep copper, or red hue, of the writer at Edmonton, to complete the arch which has been spoken of in the foregoing pages.

2. That this arch, or curved streak, with its feet east and west, sent forth no coruscations itself; but that the coruscations rose beneath it, and passed above it.

3. That it was described upon the clouds only; was no part of the Aurora; and, from its connexion with the clouds only, had an evanescence which, on the one hand, was the cause of the various descriptions, and, on the other, of no descriptions at all. The present writer observed this part of the phenomenon from its beginning to its ending. He saw it rise in the west, extend itself from the north, and descend in the east; and he thinks it reasonable to ascribe the variations concerning it, in the coincident narratives, to the different points of time to which alone they really refer. The writers at Edmonton [p403] and Deptford seem to have had their attention fixed upon it at different epochs of its progress; and all the four other writers, who have been cited, seem to speak of a time subsequent to its disappearance. The present writer does not recollect the small cloud below it, spoken of by Mr. Adams; but he well remembers the clouds above it, and along and near the northern edge of which it seems to be formed. He does not recollect seeing its definite southern outline contrasted with the azure sky; but he well remembers seeing that outline contrasted with the dark clouds above it, or to its southward; and also the contrast of its definite, northern outline, as contrasted with the azure sky beneath.

VIII. It is necessary to take notice, also, of what is said above, by the astronomical observer at Deptford, as to the “flashes converging to the zenith,” and, further, of the omission, both by this writer and by Mr. Adams, to speak of the curved beam, streamer, or coruscation, to the east of north, as described above. The whole veracity of the foregoing description depends upon the denial of a uniform convergence of the streamers, pillars, columns, or coruscations toward the zenith; nor was it, in all probability, the intention of the writer at Deptford, to assert any such convergence, but only to speak of those coruscations, or shifting lights, in the zenith, which are described by Mr. Adams as crossing each other from east to west. It is remarkable, at the same time, that neither the one nor the other of these writers have mentioned that direct reverse of convergence which marked the general figure and arrangement of the streamers or columns of the Aurora, and which was so opposite to what would have been given to it by the phenomenon of convergence. Indeed, the violent curve of the extreme column to the N. E. or N. N. E., shrouded, too, as that column was with a body of dense vapour through which its light appeared of a deep and dull red colour, might make the description of this itself answer to the “broad streak, curved,” of Mr. Adams, if we were not certain, from other particulars mentioned, that Mr. Adams really refers to the curve which formed part of the arch. For the rest, no mention of the real directions of the several columns having been made by any observer of the Aurora of the 25th [p404] of September but himself, and especially none of the outward curve of the easternmost column, it is satisfactory to the writer to have found an account of an appearance similar to this last, in an Aurora of which he will presently have occasion to speak.

IX. Finally, there is an observation to be made upon that part of the description, by the second correspondent of the newspapers, where it is said, that during the appearance of the coruscations in the zenith, “the wind blew gently from the south,” and the spectator “frequently observed, that when it freshened a little, the Aurora Borealis became more brilliant in its appearance;” to which it may also seem the writer’s intention to add,—“sending beautiful coruscations of light, in rapid succession toward the zenith, and frequently passing that point, ten or fifteen degrees to the southward.” Now the reality of any dependence of the light and motion of the Aurora upon the freshening of the breeze, would seem too strongly to affect the question of the nature and action of the auroral matter, to be admitted without cautious examination. In truth, what was it that constituted the luminous matter which we saw in the zenith? The stars were visible through it. But for luminous appearances that flew or skimmed along the heavens, we should have said, that the latter were clear, and that there was nothing but the purest atmosphere between the earth and the heavens. Was it, then, the atmospherical matter which was thus illuminated, and which, being ruffled by the breeze, can be supposed to have really exhibited the appearances described by this writer, or, was it not, rather, illuminated auroral matter, which was shot through the atmosphere; and, if this last, how are we to understand that its brilliance, and still less the frequency and vigour of its coruscations, could have been affected by the freshening of the breeze?