Dr. John russell hind, f. R. S

ABSTRACT IT is with deep regret that we announce the death of Dr. J. R. Hind, whose name and whose work were possibly more familiar to astronomical students of the last generation than they

are to those of to-day. By this we do not mean to imply that Dr. Hind had outlived his reputation, but that circumstances forced him to the front early in life and in connection with

subjects that have long since ceased to attract or to interest. His claim to scientific reputation and remembrance will mainly rest on his long connection with the _Nautical Almanac_, and

the steady character for accuracy and efficiency that it maintained under his direction. But to the production of the _National Ephemeris_, while one is responsible, many contribute, and no

one would admit more readily than the late chief of that department, how much he was indebted to the invaluable aid he received from such assistants as Messrs. Richard Farley, Godward, and

others, or more willingly share the credit with those less well-known authorities. For these and other reasons, it is not a little difficult to assign to Dr. Hind his proper place among

astronomers. He never devoted himself in any way to the higher branches of physical astronomy; the mathematical training that is sufficient for an engineer is not of that character that is

required to advance our knowledge of planetary theories, or to assist their development by new functions. He will rank rather with the school of Argelander, to whom he was deeply attached,

than with that of Bessel or Le Verrier. It is equally true that he never had occasion to employ the newer methods of observation that spectroscopy and photography demand, or to discuss the

results obtained by their means, since the habits of his life and the direction of his work were settled before these methods of investigation were generally employed. Looked at, therefore,

from the broader ground that astronomy now occupies, his scientific life seems somewhat cramped; but to conclude that his career was misspent, would be to read the history of astronomy for

the last half-century very incorrectly. He was emphatically a practical astronomer, and whether as an observer or in making the mathematical work of others available for practical ends, he

had few equals. He knew his capacity very well; he attempted nothing beyond his powers, and few men have made fewer mistakes. Access through your institution Buy or subscribe This is a

preview of subscription content, access via your institution ACCESS OPTIONS Access through your institution Subscribe to this journal Receive 51 print issues and online access $199.00 per

year only $3.90 per issue Learn more Buy this article * Purchase on SpringerLink * Instant access to full article PDF Buy now Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during

checkout ADDITIONAL ACCESS OPTIONS: * Log in * Learn about institutional subscriptions * Read our FAQs * Contact customer support Authors * WILLIAM E. PLUMMER View author publications You

can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar RIGHTS AND PERMISSIONS Reprints and permissions ABOUT THIS ARTICLE CITE THIS ARTICLE PLUMMER, W. Dr. John Russell Hind, F.R.S.

_Nature_ 53, 201–202 (1896). https://doi.org/10.1038/053201a0 Download citation * Issue Date: 02 January 1896 * DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/053201a0 SHARE THIS ARTICLE Anyone you share the

following link with will be able to read this content: Get shareable link Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article. Copy to clipboard Provided by the Springer

Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative