Графични страници
PDF файл
ePub

one of each at the top, of the hill. By the experiments at Schehallien, the mountain attracted a plummet. Will not a mountain, therefore, attract the air? And will not the air round the top of a mountain, three miles high, be more dense than the air would be at the fame height above a plain? If this be the cafe, and there is every reafon to think that it is, then M. de Luc's rules will not be general. We formerly approved of these rules, and we do not even now fee any reason for difapproving them when they are confined to measure heights, independent of huge maffes of mountains; but the Schehallien experiments induce us to fufpect, that the quantity of matter in mountains must affect the denfity of the air in their neighbourhood. M. de Sauffure has given us the height of the barometer on the top of Mont-Blanc. Auguft 3. at noon, 16 inches, o lines, and of a line, French measure; (i. e. 16.181 Englifh); and Reaumur's thermometer was 2.3 below the freezing point. M. Sennebier, at the fame time, obferved (at Geneva) the barometer 27 2 1988 (29.020 inches English); and the thermometer 22.6 above freezing. From thefe data he makes the height of Mont-Blanc 2218 toifes, or 14180 English feet (about 2 miles) according to M. de Luc's rule; and 2272 toifes, or 14525 English feet, according to M. Trembley's. To thefe heights 13 toifes, or 83 feet, the height of M. Sennebier's room above the Lake of Geneva, muft be added, to give the height of the mountain above the level of the lake 14263 feet, according to M. de Luc, and 14608 feet, according to M. Trembley. Sir George Shuckburgh made the height of Mont-Blanc, by trigonometrical measurement, 14429 above the lake, which is almoft the mean between the other two. The refult of the obfervations made at Chamouni, contemporary with thofe on Mont-Blanc, agrees ftill nearer with Sir George's measurement. The general mean refult makes the fummit of Mont-Blanc 2450 toiles, 15673 English feet, or three miles nearly, above the level of the fea.

1085

The hygrometrical obfervations fhewed the air on MontBlanc to be extremely dry. The refults of thefe experiments are fufpicious; and from the fhort account given of them in the work before us, we must fufpend our opinion about them till we fee them farther illuftrated. They feem contrary to that excellent fyftem of meteorology + lately published by M. de Luc, whofe arguments require to be refuted before we can affent to M. de Sauflure's affertion, when he fays, I fhall fhortly make it appear, that M. de Luc's objections to this method [that used by

*See Monthly Rev. vol. xlviii. p. 576.; vol. xlix. p. 579.; and vol. 1. p. 567.

† See Reviews for April and August laft.

[ocr errors]

M. de

M. de Sauffure] of obtaining the measure of extreme humidity, are ill founded, and that his new hygrometer is a faulty and fallacious inftrument."

. M. de Sauffure found by his electrometer, that the electricity of the air on the fummit of the mountain was pofitive.

Water boiled at 68.993 degrees of a thermometer, which rifes to 80 with the barometer 27 French inches high.

[ocr errors]

The wind was.north and extremely piercing on the fummit; but, fouthward of the ridge, the temperature of the air was agreeable.

The experiments with lime water, and with the cauftic alkali, fhew that the air was mixed with atmospheric acid, or fixed air.

The quickness of the pulfe, after remaining four hours on the fummit, was, in one of the guides, 98; in the fervant, 112; and in M. de S. himself, 100 in a minute. At Chamouni they were 49, 60, and 72, refpectively. The effect of the rarefied air on the human body, is little noticed by M. de Sauffure among his other obfervations. The internal air would moft probably fwell the body univerfally. This circumftance is not mentioned. The quickness and difficulty of breathing, must be attributed to the dilatation of the air contained in the cavity of the thorax, between the lungs and the pleura: this dilated air, the external compreffion being nearly half, would prefs the lungs together, and alfo impede the action of the diaphragm, and other mufcles of refpiration it would alfo prefs the heart, and a greater exertion would confequently be required in that vifcus to expel the blood; whence the increafed quickness of the pulfe. No mention is made of its fulness or ftrength.

From the foregoing account, M. de Sauffure feems to have made few difcoveries. The narrative of the journey is entertaining; and though the difficulties and dangers attending it would diffuade many people from vifiting thofe dreary regions, yet our philofopher promifes to reafcend the mountain, and favour the public with farther obfervations in that elevated fituation. We with him fuccefs in his labours, and hope that he will, after his fecond journey, be able to relate, in a more fatisfactory manner, the various phenomena which his limited time on the fummit of Mont-Blanc prevented him from attending to, in the manner he wished.

As Mont-Blanc is confpicuous at a vaft distance, we should recommend it to philofophers who go thither, to make several aftronomical and geographical obfervations, efpecially to afcertain its latitude and longitude-to find the refraction of the atmosphere-to take the angles fubtended by different remarkable objects, and the angles which thofe objects make with the meridian-to measure the length of a pendulum-and many more, which must present themselves to a diligent obferver.

R-m.

ART.

ART. IV.

Ger. Nicolai Heerkens Groningani Aves Frifica; i. e. The Birds of
Friesland, by Ger. Nic. Heerkens. of Groningen. 8vo. pp. 298.
Rotterdam. 1787.

HEERKENS here defcribes, in Latin verfe, ten dif

M. ferent birds, viz. the lark, the cross-bill, the magpye,

the fwallow, the goofe, the crefted wren, the quail, the ftarling, the thrush, and the black-bird.

The Author informs us, in his preface, that his fituation in the country afforded him ample opportunities of obferving feveral of the indigenous birds, and his love of the Mufes induced him to record his obfervations in Latin poetry. He appears to have read Ovid with attention, to have feen the beauties of that poet in a proper light, and, in many inftances, to have happily imitated his juftly admired bard. The following extract is part of the introduction to his poem on the lark:

• Prima avium noftris dicetur alauda libellis,
Omen felici nomine quod det avis,

Quodque licet multum de frigore, deque malignis
Aucupibus tulerit, mox tamen aftra petit.
Prima avium fimulac de frigore bruma remifit;
Sol fimulac pifcis tangit, alauda canit.

Nec placet ulla magis, quam quæ fuper æthera fummum
Vecta canens, hiemem præteriiffe monet.
Sufpicit ad primas, quas audit ab æthere voces,

Ac ceciniffe domi narrat arator avem.

Eftque dies anni pro tempore lucida, cantu
Quam recreat, pluvio non fubit aftra die.
Unica tam recto contendit in æthera gyro,
Unica dulce, volans, inter et aftra, canit.
Singula quæque dies, non folo ut tefte refertur,
Septena volucrem ducit in astra vice.
Temporaque obfervat, Sicula mefforibus ora
Ceffandi tempus voce filente dabat.
Poftque dies medios audita messor alauda

Ad falcem rediit & grave ruris opus.'

The Author proceeds to defcribe their marriage ceremonies, the manner of building their nefts, the tutelage and education of their young, &c.

In fome parts of his poems, M. Heerkens enters largely into fubjects which have been much controverted among naturalifts. He speaks in pofitive terms of the torpid ftate of certain birds during the winter. Of the fwallow he says:

Conditur ante hiemem, femeftri obnoxia fomno,
Conditur, et variis condita vifa locis.
Eft, ubi fe fcopulis per frigora fopit, et antris,
Eft, ubi ftructuris ruderibufque latet.
Connexas quandoque vides, roitra indita roftris.
Eft quoque fola, fuo quæ jacet orba viro.

Res

Res eft mira, latet gelidis quandoque fub undis,

Ut prope cognatam pifcibus effe putes.'

After reciting many inftances, and producing in his notes feveral authorities of fwallows having been found in a torpid ftate, he thus defcribes their afcent out of the waters:

Pars quafi mentis inops, fopitaque litore ftabat,
Captabatque auras, pifcis ut exul aquis.
Scabere pars alas, pars altera pene refecta,
Roftello focios vifa juvare fenes.

Tandem ubi multa dies recreaverat omnibus alas,
Omnis in æthereas fparfa caterva vias.'

In his Notes to this poem, he enumerates feveral obfervations on the periods of the fwallows' firft appearance in Spring, and of their disappearance in Autumn, in different countries.

Among other curious circumftances which this Author introduces into his notes, is a long difquifition concerning the antiquity of goofe-quills for writing-pens. He thinks that a manufcript of Virgil, in the Medicean library, fupposed to have been written a little after the time of Honorius, was written with a quill. The arguments which he brings in fupport of his opinion are taken from the form and the unequal thickness of different parts of the letters. Much conjecture fupplies the place of proof. The fubject may perhaps be rerefumed by fome of our English antiquaries. The English pen, the German feder, or fchreib-feder, the Danish penn, the Swedish penna, the French plume, the Italian penna, evidently denote that the inftrument was formed of a quill. The Roman calamus was, doubtless, originally made of a reed:-but we shall leave the enquiry for those who have more leisure than we can at prefent afford to this fubject.

The naturalift will find many facts relative to the birds here defcribed by M. Heerkens, that have not been recorded by former writers. His obfervations feem to have been made with judgment. He has elucidated many particulars concerning the ceconomy of the birds which he defcribes; and he promises a continuation of his agreeable work. R-m

ART. V.

Effai fur les Etablissemens, &c. i. e. An Effay on Hospital Establishments, fhewing how they may, at the leaft Expence, be made fubfervient to the Relief of the Sick, and advantageous to Mankind. By M. Dulaurens, Senior Phyfician to the Army and Navy. 8vo. Pp. 158. Paris. 1787.

Ho

OSPITALS, though originally intended to afford affiftance to the fick, have also been eminently useful as forming medical schools; and the practice of phyfic has, by their means, been greatly improved in many parts of Europe.

As thefe inftitutions may be calculated to ferve two fuch ufeful purposes at the fame time, M. Dulaurens has judiciously thought that he could not employ himself better than in confidering the state of hofpitals in France, examining their defects, propofing amendments, and sketching out fuch plans of. eftablishments as would, at the leaft expence, and in an effectual manner, render them fubfervient to the relief of fick individuals; and, by improving medical practice, be of great benefit to mankind in general.

In his introductory chapter, the Author enlarges on the neceffity for hofpitals, and the great utility accruing from them, both to the ftate and to individuals. Here we meet with many common ideas, which muft neceffarily occur to writers on fuch a fubject.

M. Dulaurens defcribes what fituation is the moft eligible for the building; and having determined this material point, he proceeds to defcribe the building itself, the arrangement of the wards, the difpofitions of the beds, and other particulars reJative to the houfe. Moft of his directions feem judicious; fome of them, however, may be controvertible; at leaft they are confired to the place. The hofpital at Rochefort is given as a model, yet we do not think it the moft perfect. It is certainly preferable to either the Hotel-Dieu, or la Charité at Paris; but we 'are of opinion that a minute infpection, and attentive obfervation of fome of our English hofpitals, would have enabled M. Dulaurens to have made many ufeful additions to the Rochefort hofpital; which, nevertheless, appears, from the description here given, to be much fuperior to any other in France.

With respect to the government of the hofpital, the Author's remarks are fuch as evidently fhew that he has carefully attended to the fubject. His plan, however, can only be adopted, in its 'full extent, in particular places. The Soeurs de Charité are an advantage not common to all countries, and without their affiftance the expences of the hofpitals in France would be much greater than they are at prefent.

M. Dulaurens then treats of the practice in hofpitals, and fhews how hospitals may become the beft fchools of phyfic. He is juft in his cenfures on the ufual mode of conducting the practice in the French hofpitals; and gives many excellent directions for facilitating the labours of the attending phyficians. While the Author is engaged in this part of his work, he takes frequent opportunities of blaming the prefent medical fchools in France. Montpelier is extremely cenfured, and, according to the defcription which M. Dulaurens gives of the lectures in that univerfity, not without caufe; but we believe that he exaggerates the abufes with which he charges Montpelier. He fays, the pupils are not conftrained to attend any of the lectures;

« ПредишнаНапред »