scholarly journals Observations on the permanency of the variation of the compass at Jamaica. In a letter from Mr. James Robertson to the Right Hon. Sir Joseph Banks, K. B. P. R. S. &c

The object of Mr. Robertson, who resided in Jamaica, as a King’s Surveyor of Land, upwards of twenty years, is to show that no alteration has, for a considerable period, taken place there in the va­riation of the compass. In that island all grants of land have a dia­gram thereof annexed to the patent, which diagram is delineated from an actual survey of the land to be granted, and has a meridional line, according to the magnetical needle, laid down upon it; but no notice is taken of the true meridian. The boundary lines are marked upon the land; and in all disputes where the keeping up of these lines been neglected, surveyors are appointed to make actual re­surveys, which are compared with those preserved in the secretary of the island’s office; and it is expected that the lines and meridians of the former will coincide with those of the latter. It is evident, however, that this coincidence could not happen if any alteration in the variation had taken place in the interval between the two sur­veys. Mr. Robertson’s business, as a surveyor, having been very ex­tensive, he has had many opportunities of investigating the fact here treated of; and it appears from his observations, that the courses of the lines and meridians delineated on diagrams annexed to patents granted so long ago as the year 1660, coincide with, and are parallel to, the lines and meridians delineated on the re-surveys annexed to deeds, &c., or on the new diagrams, from recent surveys made by means of the magnetical needle, consequently no variation of the needle could have taken place, in Jamaica, during the above period of time. Our author subjoins to his paper a short history of the practice of surveying in Jamaica, from the Restoration to the present time, in order to obviate any doubt whether the quantity of the magnetical variation was not ascertained and allowed for in the first diagrams annexed to patents; and whether the present variation of 65 degrees east, might not then have agreed with the true meridian. He re­marks, that until the year 1700, when Dr. Halley published his theory of the variation of the compass, no observations to ascertain the quantity of the variation in the West Indies had (so far as he knows) been published; and the variation at Jamaica, as laid down by Dr. Halley, appears to have been the same as it is at present. Be­sides, had the first surveyors allowed for the variation, in delineating their diagrams, they would not have omitted to mention it; and the same system of surveying would have been continued, since a dif­ference of 65° would have so totally deranged all boundaries, as to have demanded legislative interference and correction. But no in­ stance of this kind has occurred.

1957 ◽  
Vol 62 (3) ◽  
pp. 649
Author(s):  
Lowell Ragatz ◽  
J. H. Parry ◽  
P. M. Sherlock

1957 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 390-390
Author(s):  
Arturo Santana

1958 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 402
Author(s):  
Robert Neil McLarty ◽  
J. H. Parry ◽  
P. M. Sherlock

Author(s):  
Deep K. Datta-Ray

The history of Indian diplomacy conceptualises diplomacy racially—as invented by the West—and restrictively—to offence. This is ‘analytic-violence’ and it explains the berating of Indians for mimicking diplomacy incorrectly or unthinkingly, and the deleting, dismissing, or denigrating, of diplomatic practices contradicting history’s conception. To relieve history from these offences, a new method is presented, ‘Producer-Centred Research’ (PCR). Initiating with abduction, an insight into a problem—in this case Indian diplomacy’s compromised historicisation—PCR solves it by converting history’s racist rationality into ‘rationalities’. The plurality renders rationality one of many, permitting PCR’s searching for rationalities not as a function of rationality but robust practices explicable in producer’s terms. Doing so is exegesis. It reveals India’s nuclear diplomacy as unique, for being organised by defence, not offence. Moreover, offence’s premise of security as exceeding opponent’s hostility renders it chimerical for such a security is, paradoxically, reliant on expanding arsenals. Additionally, doing so is a response to opponents. This fragments sovereignty and abdicates control for one is dependent on opponent’s choices. Defence, however, does not instigate opponents and so really delivers security by minimising arsenals since offence is eschewed. Doing so is not a response to opponents and so maintains sovereignty and retains control by denying others the right to offense. The cost of defence is courage, for instance, choosing to live in the shadow of nuclear annihilation. Exegesis discloses Balakot as a shift from defence to offence, so to relieve the Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) leadership of having to be courageous. The intensity of the intention to discard courage is apparent in the price the BJP paid. This included equating India with Pakistan, permitting it to escalate the conflict, and so imperiling all humanity in a manner beyond history.


1982 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 141-149 ◽  
Author(s):  
David D. Mays

On Monday, October 16, 1758., Hugh Gaine reported a novelty. “Friday last,” he told his readers in the New-York Mercury, “arrived here from the West Indies, a Company of Comedians; some Part of which were here in the Year 1753.” This brief notice, which went on to assure its readers that the company had “an ample Certificate of their Private as well as publick Qualifications,” marks the beginning of the most significant event in American theatre history: the establishment of the professional theatre on this continent. The achievements of the Company of Comedians during its sixteen-year residence in North America are virtually without parallel in the history of the theatre, and have not received sufficient recognition by historians and scholars.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document