A rude sketch from these uncertain data gives its perihelion 10 Oct. 16 in m not 1-10 of the magnus orbis from the sun; a direct comet, with its ascending node in Libra," & 50 or 60 degrees inclination. If this should prove to be the true elements, it may possibly be seen again about 3 weeks or a month hence in its ascent from the sun, in the sw after sunset; in that case, having passed so near the sun, its tail would probably be pretty long, but would not be so near the earth as in its descent. Comparing these data with Table i. in my book I find it most like the comet of 1593 of any of them. I return you thanks for the book you have sent to my uncle for me, which however, he having been out on a journey, & we not having had any parcel down lately, I have not yet received. About 2 months ago I wrote you a letter with 2 draughts of & a description of a small animal I had taken notice of, which you not mentioning in this letter, I was in some doubt whether it might not have miscarried. The same animal I suppose Mr. Parnham, 12 of Ufford, I find seems to have seen in greater numbers than I have, but his remarks on them I have not seen. It is remarkable that the expected comet, at its descent to the sun past nearly in conjunction both with Saturn & Jupiter, both in going down & going up again; those who are masters of the doctrine of gravity would do well to examine how far four such powerful attractions might affect the comet's orbit. With all due compliments, I remain, Rev. Sir, Your very humble servant, T. BARKER. 13 10 The comet of 1757. Perihelion passage. (Greenwich mean time) Oct. 21, 7h. 55m., Longitude of Perihelion 122° 58′; Ascending Node 230° 50′; Inclination 68 19; Perihelion Distance 0-21535. Motion direct. Calculated by Pingré. From J. R. Hind, on Comets, p. 130. "The elements just given shew that this will mean the constellation Libra, and not the Sign. 12 Vide separate account of Parnham, in Appendix. 1 Samuel Barker, the father of this gentleman, was the descendant of an ancient and respectable family at Lyndon, in Rutlandshire, of which frequent notices may be seen in the memoirs of the learned William Whiston, and was remarkable for a critical knowledge of languages, particularly the Hebrew; and his mother was Sarah, Mr. Whiston's daughter. Mr. Thos, Barker was a In its descent, May, 1680. 9 2° S. 12° S. 18 Descent, August, 1681. п 22 S. 10 Ascent, November, 1683. my 11 S. 17 remarkable instance of abstemiousness, having totally refrained from animal food, not through prejudice of any kind, or from an idea that such a regimen was conducive to longevity, as some of the newspapers improperly stated, but from a peculiarity of constitution which discovered itself in his infancy. Till within a few years of his death he enjoyed uncommon health and spirits, but was distinguished more than by any other circumstance by his exemplary conduct in all respects through the whole of a long life. He died in his 88th year, at his house at Lyndon, December 29, 1809. He was the author of several tracts on religion, and philosophical subjects, particularly one on the discoveries concerning comets, 1757, which contains a Table of the Parabola, much valued by competent judges, and reprinted by Sir H. Eaglefield in his excellent Treatise on the same subject; but he was most known as an assiduous and accurate observer in meteorology, and his annual journals on this subject were many years published in the Philos. Trans. He wrote also (1) "An account of a meteor seen in Rutland, resembling a water-spout," (Phil. Tr., 1756, p. 248); (2) "Account of the Discoveries concerning Comets, with the way to find their orbits, and some improvements in constructing their places, with Tables, 1757," 4to.; (3) "On the return of the comet expected in 1757 or 1758," (Phil. Tr. 1759, p. 347); (4)“ On the mutation of the stars,” (1b. 1761, p. 498) ; (5) “Account of a remarkable halo, May 20, 1737,” (Ib. 1762, p. 3); (6) “ Observations on the quantities of rain fallen at Lyndon for several years; with observations for determining the latitude of Stamford,” (Ib. 1771, pp. 221, 227) ; (7) “ The duty, circumstance, and benefits of Baptism, determined by evidence," 1771, 8vo.; (8) "The Messiah being the Prophecies concerning Him methodised, with their accomplishment," 1780, 8vo.; (9)" The nature and circumstances of the demoniacs in the Gospel stated, methodised, and considered in the several particulars, 1780," 8vo. Mr. Barker's Philos. Treatises redound highly to his credit; and in his theological pieces, though his sentiments on some occasions are not in conformity to the Orthodox, or Calvinistical, tenets, the firmness of his faith, the integrity of his heart, and his honest desire to promote the interests of genuine Christianity, are very apparent. When Mr. Wm. Harrod (the industrious historian of Stamford, Mansfield, and Market Harborough,) projected a republication and continuation of Wright's "Hist. and Antiq. of Rutland," in 1788, Barker was one of his kindest patrons; and though the work was discontinued after the appearance of two numbers, from want of proper encouragement, the "History of the Parish of Lyndon," by Barker, was one of the few parts that were given to the public.-Nichols's Literary Anecdotes, iii., 112). CLXXVII. T. BARKER "TO THE REV. DR. STUKELEY, RECTOR OF ST. GEORGE'S, QUEEN SQUARE."-H. F. ST. J. Revd. Sir, Lyndon, April 20, 1759. You cannot wonder that I have not sooner taken notice of the kind information you sent me about the comet in your letter of March 3, when you consider that it came to my hands in my father's last illness," in whom I have just lost a good parent, a true friend, & a learned man to consult & converse with on what occurred in reading, which is of great use to one who lives retired in the country. But what avails complaint? I shall go to him, but he will not return to me. May God so teach us all to number our days that by applying our hearts to true wisdom we may be found prepared whenever the most certain, though unknown, hour of death approaches, knowing that nothing so disarms the sting of it as the reflection that we have lived the life, & shall therefore die the death, of the righteous. In the letter you refer to, I had only given a general account of the position of the comet with respect to & h, mentioning it as remarkable that the last time of its appearance the comet both came down toward, & went up from the sun, nearly in conjunction both with 2 &, & proposed (what I find M. Clairaut was already about) that some master of the doctrine of gravity should consider what influence that might have on the comet's motion, it being, I own, a thing beyond my depth to determine. The substance of what I there said has been since printed in the General Evening Post, about the end of August last, & I here add at the end of this letter. 14 This was Samuel Barker, of Lyndon. He was born December 27, 1686; died March 14, 1759, and is buried in Lyndon churchyard by the side of his wife, and son Thomas (the writer of this letter). There is a marble tablet, inserted in the wall of the church, which gives the above dates, and speaking of him as possessing "critical skill in languages, especially Hebrew, added to considerable knowledge in many other parts of learning." His wife was Sarah, daughter of William Whiston, editor of Josephus, and sometime Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at Cambridge, (successor to Sir Isaac Newton in that clair). William Whiston is also buried at Lyndon. A portrait of Thomas Barker is in the Hall at Lyndon, where his descendants still live, who have kindly communicated this information. M. Clairaut has undertaken a calculation, both curious & very laborious,15 since he considers the influence of & hon the comet, not only in such near approaches as it made to them in the years, 1680, 81, 83, & 85, but in the remoter parts of its orbit also, & finds a greater variation than one should have expected, & as far as is at present known in great conformity to fact, & this discovery may, perhaps, give light to the cause of those lesser irregularitys still found in the motions of the planets. The lesser planets may also have some influence on the comet's motion. Planets beyond Saturn' there may be, as he 13 See Notes on Letter of Peter Wyche. 16 It is rather surprising that such a man as Thomas Barker should draw such an unwarrantable conclusion as that there is little or no reason to suppose the existence of any more planets. The invention of the telescope, which speedily induced the discovery of Jupiter's satellites, and the improvements which had been made in these instruments, and which might very probably be carried to a still higher degree of excellence, should have suggested that at that time there was no sufficient reason to decide either one way or the other. Uranus was discovered by Sir W. Herschel in 1781, March 13; and it was detected by shewing a disc under a telescope of high magnifying power. It had been seen before on many occasions, but had been catalogued as a star, the telescopes used not having been sufficiently powerful to shew its disc. The first of the asteroids was discovered on January 1, 1801. Neptune was first observed by Dr. Galle, of Berlin, on September 23, 1846, he having been directed to search by Leverrier's calculations; it had been seen at Cambridge by Professor Challis on August 4 and 12, 1846, in accordance with Mr. Adams's calculations, he noted its place for re-observation. He, however, postponed the comparison of the places observed, and not possessing Dr. Bèrmiker's chart, (which would have at once indicated the presence of an unmapped star), remained in ignorance of the planet's existence as a visible object till its announcement as such by Dr. Galle. (Herschel's Astron. Art., 505). It is supposed that there is a planet between Mercury and the sun, to which has been given the name of Vulcan. Lescarbault made an observation of it in transit across the sun, but it has never been confirmed by any other such observation. Leverrier, however, believed in this, and people were invited in the summer of 1879 to closely watch the sun on two specifie ddays; but no result has been obtained. Leverrier thought that more than one interior planet would be needed to account for the disturbances of Mercury. An American observer believed he saw two objects near the sun, during a recent eclipse, which could not have been stars; but no great faith is attached to this remark. In "Astronomische Nachrichten," No. 2254, Professor Peters discusses some of the oft-quoted observations of black round spots passing on the sun, nearly always made by obscure amateurs, and it would seem that he concludes these to have been ordinary sun-spots. (See "Observatory," December, 1880). The existence therefore of Vulcan, and another planet, is as yet uncertain. mentions, for ought we know, but as none have ever been seen, we have no authority to suppose there are. So many comets as there are moving all ways may sometimes cross one another;that of 1680, going up from the sun, met this coming down about Oct., 1681, but in contrary latitude, about Feb. 1682-3, this going from the sun might pass 15 of the sun's distance from that of 1683 coming down, both in south latitude. The comet of 1684 in its descent about midsummer, 1683, past by this in its ascent, but at 4 times the sun's distance asunder. These remarks I do not give by calculation, but only by inspection of my grandfather Whiston's Solar System, so are not accurate. Since all the comets' orbits meet near the sun, & disperse from thence to all quarters, it is a great chance whether in remoter parts two orbits meet both in the same longitude & latitude, & a still greater whether both comets are in that part of their orbit at the same time. I sent you the draught & description of the Book-spider, because not having Hooke's" Micrographia, I did not know he gave any large account of it; all I had met with about it being in a 12 supplement to a 12 description of 300 animals, which says Dr. Hooke saw it but once, & that crawling over his book, a place so far as I have observed not natural to it, living in cranies of wainscot, or perhaps as M. Parnham seems to have seen them, about the stone work of windows; & my draught, though pretty much like Dr. Hooke's, has several variations, particularly the bristlyness of the legs & claws. That the lesser legs seem not to end in points, but in a cluster of bristles, though the greater claws are sharp pointed for what I know, & that it seems to be a creature that is not to be seen much more than a quarter of a year. St. Nicolas's church at Leicester is a very old building, formerly much larger than at present, the north wall consisting of arches standing on pillars now filled up with more modern work; & without the west end there is a great old wall, probably at first a part of the structure; hollowed into one or more round domes, & built as many old walls at Leicester are, with a mixture of brick & what they call forrest stone, which is very hard, 1: Robert Hooke, a celebrated mathematician. Vide p. 97 n. |