ENPages
p.1
Ans Dec 18
Office Lake Survey, Detroit, Mich. Dec. 13th, 1871
Dr. I. A. Lapham Milwaukee, Wis.
Dear Sir:
Yours of Dec. 4th and also comparisons of Chicago and Milwaukee water levels by means of curves have been received. These were very useful to me in suggesting where the former reductions may have been wrong.
The tracing from the curves you sent me herewith enclosed as corrected from the published repot of 1870 will I trust be quite satisfactory to you.
I enclose also a copy of results as requested by you.
The correction of one foot has already been applied so that you need to subtract from 4.00 and not from 5.00. This reduction will make the curves for 1870 & 1871 harmonize more nearly with other years.
In the year 1866 the Self Register must have been near the Light house and in the month of August it was upset by a vessel. The staff gauge immediately afterwards read larger. Was the zero of this staff gauge also disturbed? When was the gauge moved to the canal?
[begin crossed out] Was it then as when established by Gen. Meade just 1 ft above High Water of 1838? Is it now at the same level as when established by Gen. Meade? Has it always been [end crossed out]
I see that you answered me these questions before
p.2
[Left Page]
Has the zero of the rod always been "downwards" or intended to float at the surfact of the water? Is the Self Register changeable or reversible so that the pencil may run towards you on the sheet to represent either high or low water when you stand with the hours increasing towards the righthand? Either the staff gauge Rod has been inverted so as to have the zero at the top or the pencil is reversible in its direction across the paper while representing high or low water.
In 1866 the comparisons differed by a constant quantity - but in 1869, 1870 & 1871 the sums of the readings for a comparison are a constant.
The discrepancy I first wrote you about still exists.
Excuse the many questions and haste in writing this
Yours very truly
P. B. Wheeler
[Right Page]
Milwaukee Wis.
Water Level Monthly Mean below H. W. 1838 [High Water 1838]
Jan F. M. Apr M J J A. S O N D 1865 4.13 4.04 3.83 3.59 2.83 2.65 3.03 2.82 2.86 2.96 3.65 3.97 1866 4.22 4.46 4.41 --- 3.63 3.30 3.27 3.21 3.35 3.46 3.55 3.74 1867 3.79 3.75 3.57 3.30 3.12 2.74 2.61 2.70 2.91 3.20 3.71 --1868 3.66 3.41 3.19 3.24 3.52 3.76 4.16 4.17 --1869 4.26 3.93 3.39 3.01 2.76 2.87 3.23 3.30 --1870 2.12 {not 2.72} 1871 3.62
p.1
Dr J W. Foster
Terre Haute Dec. 16, 1871
My Dear Dr. Lapham,
I am down here in the block-coat region scribbling some notes for the New York Tribune.
My wife has forwarded me your letter, newspaper article, & photograph of the Wisconsin meteorite. Many thanks, for this evidence of your kindess.
I never intended to publish an elaborate paper on meteorites, that is what you ought to do. In marking up some scientific notes for the Lakeside Monthly some time ago, I gave a very brief descrciption of your meteorite and of the facts which you had accumulated. I requested the Editors at the time to send you a copy.
p.1
A. G. Wetherby
Woodburn. Dec. 23d 1871.
I. A. Lapham, Milwaukee Wis.
Dear Sir,
Yours enclosing photograph of the meteorite and yourself came duly to hand, and, inasmuch as your letter seems to demand more than mere formal acknowledgment by me, I wish to say that I will put up, and send you by express, a set of our Unionidae, to which, at a future time, I will add many rare and curious univalaes and helices. Your generous remark, in a former letter, about the propriety of "distributing specimens," struck me very forcibly, especially when we take into consideration the vast number of irreparable losses that scientific associations have sustained, by reason of the "devouring fire." But I have another object. When I
