At the time of M. Deloncle’s proposal the largest refracting telescope was the Yerkes’ at William’s Bay, Wisconsin, with an object-glass forty inches in diameter; and next to it the 36-inch Lick instrument on Mount Hamilton, California, built by Messrs. Alvan Clark of Cambridgeport, Massachusetts. Among reflecting telescopes the prior place is still held by Lord Rosse’s, set up on the lawn of Birr Castle half a century ago. Its speculum, or mirror, weighing three tons, lies at the lower end of a tube six feet across and sixty feet long. This huge reflector, being mounted in meridian, moves only in a vertical direction. A refracting telescope is one of the ordinary pocket type, having an object-lens at one end and an eyepiece at the other. A reflector, on the other hand, has no object-lens, its place being taken by a mirror that gathers the rays entering the tube and reflects them back into the eyepiece, which is situated nearer the mouth end of the tube than the mirror itself. Each system has its peculiar disadvantages. In reflectors the image is more or less distorted by “spherical aberration.” In refractors the image is approximately perfect in shape, but liable to “chromatic aberration,” a phenomenon especially noticeable in cheap telescopes and field-glasses, which often show objects fringed with some of the colours of the spectrum. This defect arises from the different refrangibility of different light rays. Thus, violet rays come to a focus at a shorter distance from the lens than red rays, and when one set is in focus to the eye the other must be out of focus. In carefully-made and expensive instruments compound lenses are used, which by the employment of different kinds of glass bring all the colours to practically the same focus, and so do away with chromatic aberration.