important of the planets, and the centre of creation. Although their opinions were not based upon scientific facts, they _arrived at the truth nevertheless_." (Italics ours.) Familiar as every one is with the attitude of theologians for the last several centuries concerning astronomical discovery I think it may be safely said that this is the first instance on record where they have been credited with an induction not based on observed facts worth quoting in an astronomical paper. And this contribution also appeared in the publications of the "Astronomical Society of the Pacific," Volume VI, No. 25, without a word of comment! How different was the behavior of the "Journal" when a report of Percival Lowell's lecture on Mars, written by Dr. Edward Everett Hale, was reproduced in its pages. The following comments were made by Edward S. Holden, then Director of the Lick Observatory: "Something is seen, no doubt, but I may add that nothing has been observed at the Lick Observatory during the years 1888-1895, so far as I know, which goes to confirm the very striking conclusions here described." It may be added that during the years 1888-1892 nothing was seen of the fifth moon of Jupiter. The discovery of this satellite with the Lick telescope was not due to any special efforts on the part of the Director. The Rev. E. Ledger, "Nineteenth Century Magazine," Volume LIII, 1903, p. 773, in an article entitled "The Canals of Mars--Are they Real?" presents an excellent account of the successive observers of Mars, and the results of their work, and the objections of those who could not see the canals, or saw them imperfectly. He recalls Maunder's childish experiments, and is greatly impressed by them. He then says: "Astronomers are no doubt very well acquainted with the laws of optics as applied to the eye. They have made, and may yet make, many experiments connected with their action. They are accustomed to allow for individual peculiarities in observation, as, for instance, when what is termed personal equation affects the rapidity with which different observers touch a key to record what they see. They may therefore skilfully judge of the effect produced in observations of Mars by such processes of the eye, or of the brain, or nervous system as I have referred to." He strongly thinks it would be well "if some skilful nerve specialist and oculist could work in conjunction with some of these practised observers who have seen the canals. They might both assist in observing, and at the same time carry out careful researches into the optical delusions which brain or eye may experience in connection with telescopic observation." This is certainly a happy thought of the reverend author, only it would seem in this case that a larger and more diversified corps of specialists, including alienists, is needed to attend to that class of astronomers who are suffering with mental strabismus. It might be advisable to call in the services of