Mr. Lowell points out one of the reasons why so many observers and astronomers have not seen the canals. In the third volume of the "Annals of the Lowell Observatory" he refers to a certain series of observations of Mars, made in 1894, and says: "Not only was there no sign of a canal, but even the main markings showed disheartingly indefinite." "This vacancy of expression was due to the Martian date." "It was the very nick of time to see nothing, for the part of the planet most presented to the Earth was then at the height of the dead season, and in this fact lies the key to much past undetection and present unbelief in the phenomenon of the canals." VIII VARIATION IN DRAWING _Let us not cheat ourselves with words. Conservatism sounds finely and covers any amount of ignorance and fear._ PERCIVAL LOWELL. Much doubt has been expressed as to the existence of the so-called canals in Mars and other surface markings of that planet in consequence of the discrepancy seen in the drawings of the more delicate features by various observers. While in the main a certain general resemblance is seen in the topographical character of the network of lines, and a more close resemblance in the darker markings, notably the Syrtis Major, the disagreement in the minor details has led certain astronomers to deny their existence altogether, or to insist that most of the markings were subjective, or due to poor focusing, or the result of aberration of the eye or lens. Professor Simon Newcomb, in his "New Astronomy for Everybody," in speaking of the work of the observers at the Lick Observatory and the great telescope at their command coupled with favorable situation, says: "It is therefore noteworthy that the markings on the face of Mars as presented by Barnard do not quite correspond to the channels of Schiaparelli and Lowell." Newcomb also reproduces in his book the drawings of a region in Mars known as Solis Lacus, made by Campbell and Hussey, and finds they do not show an exact agreement between them. Now such objections might have some weight if drawings made by different observers of the Solar Corona, for example, or the Nebula of Orion, or the Milky Way had any close resemblance. As a matter of fact, these various drawings depart far more widely from the originals, as shown by photographic reproduction, than do the various drawings of Mars. Mr. Fison, in his "Recent Advances in Astronomy," in speaking of the divergence in the drawings made by different observers, says: "In inspecting sketches of the delicate details of the Corona of the Sun made at the same place by different observers, it is difficult to believe that the same object has been represented." To appreciate how widely divergent such drawings are one has only to refer to the United States Naval Observatory publication on the Total Eclipse of the Sun, July 29, 1878. [Illustration: PLATE II DRAWINGS OF THE SOLAR CORONA BY VARIOUS OBSERVERS]