mfih n'A •^si^-R^ \lr^!f^!n ^^^:AAHr mdM mir^ mmmmi if LIBRARY OF CONGRESS. I ^'fta/) nn UNITED STATES OP AMERICA. 1 1 rw% m ^^l/^l7^^i frtH r\ ^ '^'' 0^ AArv mm^^- j^ ^. - '/^ /?\ ^R'&mmm ':m00rmm/^ '/^V.'^i/^i ^'r=mc 'Ar ,^:ir\i sr^ ^^A ^■A^ -N A :^ A A^'-ya^P ^m. '^■'^i^fe^g .'-,Ar\ ,r\/JWU'AAA« [FROM THE IJ. S. COAST SURVEY REPORT FOR 1875, APPENDIX NO. , PRINTED JULY, 1875.] REPORT ON MT. ST. ELIAS. BY W. H }^LL, Acting Assistant., U. S. C. S. ^t^ V^i SiSjJt \ ^ ■^ MOUNT ST EI.LXS -i;o COAST-RANGE TO CAPE SPENCER To aceoiiipaiiT Rei)ort ofWH.DaTl.Atting Assist to C. P PattersOTi.Supt. US Coast Sixrvey- [From the United States Coast Survey Report for 1875. REPORT ON MOUNT SAINT ELIAS, MOUNT FAIKWEATHER, AND SOME OF THE ADJACENT MOUNTAINS, BY WILLIAM H. DALL, ACTING ASSISTANT, UNITED STATES COAST SURVEY. I.- HISTORICAL NOTES. On the 20tb of July, 1741, (old style) Bering and bis associates made the continental shore of Northwest America, and, in what they estimated as latitude 59° 15' and longitude 121o 40' west from Ferro, they saw a great mountain, and under it a point, which they named after Saint Elias, the patron saint of the day. It is probable that they saw, about the same time, all the other high peaks of tlie adjacent region, though the fact is not mentioned in the imperfect records existing of this expedition. On the 3d of May, 1778, Capt. James Cook, in search of a northeast passage, saw a beautiful peak, which he named Mount Fairweather, and which he placed in latitude .58° 52' north, and lon- gitude 138° west from Greenwich. The next day he raised a great peak to the northward, and, believing it to be that seen by Bering, he placed it on his chart as Mount Saint Elias, in latitude G0'= 27' and longitude 141° west. Considering the great advance in nautical instruments and tables since the days of Cook, these results are extremely creditable. Cook did not attempt to measure the heights of either of these mountains, as far as we can learn from the authorized edition of his voyage. In 178(5, the celebrated La Perouse saw Saint Elias, on the 23d of June, and his astronomer, d'Agelet, essayed to measure it with sextant angles from the vessel. The height resulting from his observations was 1,890 toises,or about 12,000 feet. As the latitude assigned for the vessel's position, however, was indubitably ten or twelve miles in error, no weight can be assigned to his result. Shortly afterward he saw Mount Fairweather, and another high mountain, which he named Mount Crillon, after the French minister of marine; but it does not appear from his narrative that the height of either was determined by his party. The positions he assigned to them are never- theless quite neffl- to the latest determinations. In 1787, Douglas saw Mount Saint Elias, on the 2d of August, and in this year the first Rus- sian explorations of this part of the coast were made by Bechareff and Ismyloff. They are not recorded as passing to the south of Lituya Bay, where they had already been preceded by La Perouse. About this time numerous English and American trading-vessels were fitted out for commercial operations in this region. Though much incidental geographical information was thus obtained, I have discovered nothing of importance relative to the present subject. On the 19th of June, 1791, Seuor Don Alessandro Malesi)ina saw Saint Elias, and attempted from on shipboard to measure its height. He found it to be 17,851 feet, which in the round num- bers of 17,800 anil 17,800 feet has been adopted on many charts, and is nearer the truth thau the estimates of any other navigator which have been published. For Fairweather he obtained a height of 14,695 feet, which is also not very far from the truth. 14() 139 i:^n MOUNT ST ELL\S COAS'l'-RAN(;i<: TO CAPK SPENCER To acroiiipaiiY Report of A\^HDaU.Ai:tiug Assist to C. E Pattersoii. S\ipt . U. S Coast Siir'vt;\'. S9 Ou the L'Stli of Jiiue, 1794, Vancouver saw Saiut Elias, and gives in bis voyage the first view of it which was ever published. This was taken from the vicinity of Icy Bay, and bears some resemblance to the mountain, though much seems in the plate to have been sacrificed to artistic effect. Vancouver placed the peak in latitude 00° 22'.5 and longitude 140° 39' west, being very near the recent determinations in latitude, but too far to the eastward. The same may be said of his position for Mount Fairweather, which he located July 25th, 1794, in latitude 58° 57' and lon- gitude 137° 13' west. lie appears to have made no attempt to measure the elevation of either peak. Sir Edward, now Admiral Belcher, in 1837, was the next navigator of importance to visit this region, and from his narrative it would seem that he placed special importance on the determina- tion of the position and height of Saint Elias. He failed, however, to get observations of precision from on shore at Point Eiou, as he had intended, and that his results were satisfactory we may doubt, as he does not give any elevation or position for the mountain in his narrative, and even omits it entirely from his chart. This, notwithstanding his mention of having obtained satisfactory observations. Whatever the'results may have been, most unfortunately they do not appear to have been made public under his name, except a view which he gives of the mountain, which is hardly moi'e satisfactory than that of Vancouver. Tebenkoff visited this region in 1S47, and from his bydrographic notes we learn that he placed the peak in latitude 00° 22'.6 and longitude 140° 54' west, with a height of 17,000 feet. He men- tions that Vasilieff, from his vessel, determined the height of Mount Fairweatber as 13,946 feet, and placed it in latitude 58° 57' and longitude 137° 27' west. Since that time the coast has been annually visited by whalers and traders; but their observa- tions, if any, have not been made public, and it has been reserved for the Coast Survey, through one of its parties, to make the latest, and, we have reason to believe, the most precise contribution to our knowledge of the subject. The United States Coast Survey schooner Yukon, under my charge, with Mr. Marcus Baker as astronomical observer, left Sitka ou the 11th of May, 1874. We rated our eight chronometers on the 5th, by means of very satisfactory observations of equal a. m. and p. m. altitudes of the sun. Ou the 13th we obtained forenoon sextant altitudes, from a sea position, on Mounts Fair- weather and Crillon ; similar observations in the afternoon and on the following day. On the 15th we entered Lituya Bay, where we remained until the morning of the 19th. Here an astronomical position and azimuth were well determined on shore with the sextant, vertical circle, and theodolite, and connected with a triangulation including Mounts Fairweather and Crillon. Vertical angles for the altitude of these mountains were obtained with the theodolite. On leaving Lituya Bay, while becalmed in its immediate vicinity, and with our position well fixed by bearings on known points of the shore, additional sextant altitudes were obtained on Mounts Crillon, Fairweather, and Saiut Elias. On the 20th, in the vicinity of Dry Bay, with a position well fixed by a large series of obser- vations for time and latitude, additional observations with the sextant were obtained on Mount Saint Elias. On the 21st we entered Port Mulgrave. On the 22d, a series of observations similar to those mentioned at Lituya were obtained, and completed on the 23d, together with the remainder of the triangulation on Mount Fairweather, and a portion of one on Saiut Elias. A full and careful series of double-zenith distaRces, on Mounts Saint Elias, Fairweather, and several other mountains, was obtained and connected with the astro- nomical azimuth line. On the 24th, additional astronomical observations were made; the 25th being occupied with a reconnaissance survey of the port, and on the 2Cth we sailed from Port Mulgrave. On our way out, intersections on Mounts Cook and Vancouver were made by compass-bearings, from a position fixed by bearings on the laud. At the same time a sketch was obtained of Mount Saint Elias. Ou the 27th, from a position at sea determined by sextant observations for time and latitude, we obtained a series of sextant altitudes ou Mount Saint Elias ; and an azimuth was observed directly between the mountain and the suu with the same instrument. Ou the 7th of June we were enabled to rate our chronometers again with good success, at Saint Paul, Kadiak. From the material thus obtained, the results, tabulated with previous measurements, below, have been arrived at. Mount Saint Ulias. 1786 1791 1794 1847 1847 1849 1872 1874 Authority, La r6rou3e Malespiua VancouTcr EuB. Hydr. Cb., 1378 Tebenkoff, (notes) Tebenkoff, Cbart VII Buch. Can. Inscln Eng. Adm. Cb., 2172 ■United States Coast Survey Height. Feet. 12, 672 17, 851 None. 17, 854 16, 938 16, 938 16, 758 14, 970 19, 500 ± 400 Latitude. 60 22 30 60 21 00 60 23 36 60 21 30 60 17 30 60 21 00 60 20 45 Longitude. 140 39 00 W. 141 00 00 140 54 00 140 54 00 140 51 00 141 00 00 141 00 12 Date. 1791 1794 1847 1847 1848 1849 1855 1874 Mount Fairiceatiier, Authority. Maleapina Vancouver Vasiliefif Tebenlioff (Iljdr. notes) ... Kus. Hydr. Cb., 1396 Tebenlioff, Cb. No. VII Eng. Adra. Cbart United States Coast Survey Height. Feet. 14, 589 None. 13, 946 14, 000 14, 708 13, 864 14,708 15, 500 ± 150 Latitude. 58 57 00 N. « 58 57 00 58 58 00 58 57 00 58 53 00 58 54 54 Longitude. 137 13 00 "W. ? 137 27 00 137 32 00 137 27 00 137 32 00 137 30 59 Other mountains. V. s. c. s. Name. Height. Latitude. Longitude. 1874 1H74 1874 1874 Feet. 15, 900 ± 500 16, 000 13, 100 11,300 o / 58 40 60 15 60 1.3.7 58 34 o / 137 02. 7 W. 140 00 139 43 136 58 Mount Cook and Mount Vancouver are two high peaks of the Saint Elias Eange, to the south- ward and eastward of Mount Saint Elias ; and by the authority of the Superintendent of the United States Coast Survey, as they have been hitherto without distinct appellations, are now named iu honor of those distinguished navigators. In like manner, to a high peak near tlie sea at Icy Cape, just south and east of Lituya Bay, is now applied the name of La Perouse. Of this we were only able approximately to fix the position and height. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS. The elevation heretofore assigned to Mount Saint Elias has varied greatly. When the circum- stances under which previous observations have been obtained are considered, this is not surpris- ing. No publication has been made of any augles for elevation taken with any instrument but a scxtaut. These were almost invariably obtained from on shipboard, with no means of estimating the refraction, and with positions often greatly in error, especially in longitude. Thus Tebenkoff gives a height of 1G,9.3S feet ; but we know that his position at Port Mulgrave was about six miles in error. La Ptironse, with a position now known to be ten miles iu error in latitude alone, obtained 12,G72 feet. The Admiralty chart gives the height of 14,970, and others vary between 1G,700 and 17,800 feet. Since the data by which all these results were obtained are iuaccessible, and in most cases only tbe result of the original computations was preserved, it is hardly worth while to attempt any farther reconciliation of these discrepancies. It is possible, however, that part of them may be dne to a hitherto unsuspected cause, namely, that of mistaken identity. Off shore. Mount Saint Elias is unmistakable. Risiug above the fogs, which at some seasons envelop its base, it may be seen when all other land is far below the horizon. But in approaching the coast at Port Mulgrave, it is often lost sight of before its position, relative to the port, can be recognized. This was the case on the occasion of our visit. After being a few hours in port, the fog cleared up considerably, and we saw a very high peak in about the direction in which we sup- posed Saint Elias to bear. My sailing-master identified it as that mountain, as he had seen it for sev- eral weeks on a previous visit. Judge, then, of our surprise when, later, the distant haze disap- peared, and the majestic peak of the true Saint Elias became visible. He then declared that during his previous stay at Port Mulgrave, hazy weather prevailing, he bad never seen the real mountain at all, and had ascribed the dilference in its ai>pearance from that of Saint Elias, as seen from the sea, to his different point of view. The error might easily occur, as the second mountain (Mount Cook) seems to be upward of 10,000 feet in height. It is also nearer Port iVFulgrave, and its position more easterly than that of Mount Saint Elias, as is the position given by some of the authorities for the great peak, to the eastward of its true position. Some details as to the appearance of Mount Saint Elias and Mount Fairweather, and the characteristics of this great uplift, may not be out of place here. Mount Saint Elias, from the entrance of Yakutat Bay, as represented in the accompanying sketch, rises from a confused mass of broken mountains behind an elevated table-land. This plateau is apparently two or three hundred feet in height, and, as mentioned by La Perouse, in some places the sea breaks against its base, and in others, a low and narrow strip of flat beach, formed by streams cutting through the escai'pnient, intervenes between the cliff and the sea. These flats are green, and ofteu covered with spruce and alders. The top of the table-land appears quite destitute of vegetation, resembling a plowed field, with heaps of bowlders and gravel iri'egularly distributed upon it. This is probably glacial detritus. The face of the clifl'ou the northwest shore of the Bay of Yakutat is evidently composed of nearly horizontal stratified rocks. These we sup- posed to be similar to the horizontal Tertiary strata found at various points near Port Mulgrave on the ojiposite side of the bay. Large patches of clean, undisturbed snow lay in various places on the top of the table-land; but we saw nothing resembling a glacier there. The surface of the plateau rises a little from the edges of the cliffs, and then fiills to the axis of a valley parallel with the trend of the mountains, which is interjiosed between the table-land and the base of the range. In this valley several small glaciers terminate, having their sources on the lower part of the mountain sides. A considerable stream, the waters of which are probably derived from the melting of the glaciers, falls hence into the bay. At the head of the Bay of Yakutat is a small inlet called Disenchantment Bay, where glaciers come down to the sea, and send their floating fragments, laden with earth and stones, out into the sea. But from the mountains which border on the Bay of Yakutat itself no such ice comes down. To the east of the peak the range is continuous with Saint Elias, and also apparently to the northwest of it, reaching to at least two-thirds the height of the peak itself. Separated from Elias by a deep trough, in which two large beds of snow and ice lie, one some- what below the other, and with their axis in a northwesterly direction, some small, rather rounded mountains descend toward the plateau. Toward the bottom of the east-southeast flank of Saint Elias is a great rocky amphitheater, with high, ragged sides, open to the south and east. In this is a similar snow-bed. These beds, being destitute of lateral or other moraines, and apparently unable to move, from the peculiarities of the topography, we supposed were not true glaciers, and, indeed, from our position we could see nothing on the flanks of the peak which was unmistakably a glacier. The great amphitheater may be the crater of an extinct volcano ; but the fact that bedded strata, without the curves usual in beds of igneous rocks, were plainly visible in the face of its cliffs, and conformable with those on the adjacent rock-face of Elias, rendered this doubtful. The Impression it left on our minds was that it was not a crater. Pre-eminent in grandeur is the soiitbern face of the mountain. With few and but insignificant foot-hills, it rises abruptly from the valley; and, at about five thonsand feet above its base, the entire side of the mountain is formed of an immense rock-face, inclined at an angle of 45° to the sea, rising eight or ten thousand feet without a break in its continuity. It terminates somewhat irregularly above, and the upper contours of the peak remind one of the granite peaks of the Cali- foruian Sierras. The apex is pyramidal, sharp, and clearly cut, leading to the inference that it is precipitous on the invisible northern side. The whole of the great rock-face is marked by straight, rigid lines of bedding, which are inclined uniformly to the eastward, at an angle of about ten degrees. There seemed to be but little snow on the upper portions of the raonntain, though the lower peaks to the eastward were of a uniform white. We ascribed this to the topographical features which afford the wind every facility for carrying away any snow almost as rapidly as it falls. At the apex there was no crater, nor anj' appearance of one; nor did any sign of smoke or steam appear in the vicinity of the mountain during the whole time it was visible to us. Mount Eairweather presents somewhat similar characteristics. Like Ebas, it is separated from the sea by a plateau, with a valley behind the latter parallel with the shore and the trend of the range. But the upper surface of this table-land is more irregular, and is covered in parts with a dense forest, which creeps up the side of the mountain for four thousand feet, and fades away near the snow-line. The mountain is more extended east and west than Saint Elias, and consists of a small, angular peak, with a long, high shoulder on either hand. The sides are seamed with rifts and valleys of denudation, in whose lower parts at least four large glaciers were evident. The angular cliff-forming structure so marked in the Yosemite region of California, seemed especially to characterize this and its adjacent mountains. Their upper portions were abundantly supplied with snow; but here, again, was nothing which, by any stretch of the imagination, could be taken for a crater. By a reference to the map, it will be seen that the portion of the range in which these great elevations occur is at the apex, so to speak, of a deep curve in the shore of the continent, forming what has been termed by the Coast Survey the Gulf of Alaska. The curve of the range is sharper than that of the coast, as lowlands intervene between the mountains and the shore. The greater pressure occurs in the region of sharper curves in all mountain-building, arid here we have, as might naturally be expected, the greatest elevations on the continent in the region of unsurpassed mount- ain-folding. The extraordinary roughness of the topography is, in a general way, the result of two systems of plication, subsidiary to the greater flexures of the range as a whole. One, the primary system, is of plications parallel to the axis of the range; and the other, a secondary system, with plications at right angles to that axis. The fissure valleys of the second series are less conspicuous than the more extensive but proportionately shallower folds of the first series. The main direction of the coast-Une is coincident with the primary series. The chief features of the local topography are determined by the secondary series. Only the strongest of these cross, from the mountains, the inner primary folds, and form bays in the shore-line beyond. Most of the glaciers for which this region is remarkable take origin in the snows of the higher elevations ; are molded in the upper portion of the secondary valleys, and, arriving at the first primary valley, are turned aside, and for the rest of their course run parallel with the axis of the mountains and the trend of the shore. A few, invariably the largest, find a path ready hewn for them in the stronger secondary valleys above mentioned, which conducts them across the first primary fold to the sea-shpre. None of those on the main coast, between Cape Spencer and Point Kiou, appear to cross the beach. When the terminus of the secondary fold is snfiBciently pronounced to form a deep bay, then the glacier may reach the water, and its cast-off fragments appear as mimic bergs. In these cases the slope is always much steeper and sharper than when the furrow is too wide to form a marked indentation of the shore-line. The character of the topography is such that it is inconceivable that a continuous glacier, mov- ing in any direction, could have ever covered the western slope of these mountains. That it did not, we have abundant proof, which may more properly find a place elsewhere. 6 We are able to contribute some facts of importance to the knowledge of the material of which this range was built, and to the character of its peaks. Wherever we were able to reach the bedrock of the range, as at Lituya Bay and Port Mul- grave, we found it to be syenite, often associated with garnets. Here and there, as at Point Fair- weather, apparently at points of greatest lateral pressure, were small, low craters, rarely conical, usually partaking more or less of the character of fissures, from which basalt and recent red lavas have been sparingly emitted. These small vents are near the bases of the mountains, and seldom greatly disturbed the horizontal Tertiary beds of sandstones and conglomerates which border on the mountain masses of syenite uuconformably. The bare lowland which has been formed by sub- aerial and glacial wear, is often tinged with red by the lavas. The detritus overlies the Tertiary strata, but where the bedrock of the range comes down to the sea, volcanic material is entirely absent from the talus. At Port Mulgrave, the lower portion of the foot-hills contains beds of lime- stone, metamorphosed into coarsely crystalline marble, such as was found further south by the Coast Survey party of 1867 under Assistant George Davidson, and is not infrequent in the Sierras. There are also quartzites, much metamorphosed, uiulerlyiug the nearly-horizontal and sparingly- fossiliferous Tertiary beds. The conclusions, then, to which these facts would seem to lead us are as follows: That these Alps are, like the high Sierra of California, mainly composed of crystalline rocks, and in their topography, their small, pustular, basaltic vents, their associated marbles, quartzites, and later conglomerates, exhibit a close parallel to the Sierras ; that parallelism in structure and composi- tion implies iiarallelism iu age and method of formation ; and, finally, that the volcanic origin of ^he high peaks is opposed not only by analogy, but by the known facts. A glance at the accom- panying sketches will lead any one, familiar with the types of mountain structui'e, toward the con- clusion that these peaks are not of the volcanic type, and, even without confirmatory evidence, would lead to the suspicion that they were composed of crystalline rocks. I do not doubt that small eruptions have taken iilace iu comparatively recent times from the vents alluded to, which may have led unscientific observers to suppose that the peaks themselves were volcanic, especially if they examined only the detritus, which in some localities is largely composed of basalt and lava. With regard to volcanic activity, I find no recorded observations of any relating to these peaks, except Saint Elias, and that only as follows. In a manuscript translation of TebenkofiPs hydro- graphic notes on this region, (most of which, by the by, are incompatible with recent observations,) I find this statement: "In 1839 Saint Elias peak began to send forth, occasionally, smoke and ashes from a crater on its northeast side. According to reports collected by Tebenkoff, during the earthquake in Sitka, in 1819, the peak of Saint Elias sent forth flame and ashes." — (Notes on Chart VII.) Now no civilized man has yet beheld the northeast side of Mount Saint Elias, and, therefore, if smoke and ashes appeared from that quarter, it could not have been determined whether they came from that mountain, or some lower peak beyond. But as there were at that time no civilized inhab- itants at Yakutat, I agree with Grcwingk, who had all the material before him, in placing no cre- dence in the statements above quoted. After thorough search, I have been able to find no trust- worthy account of any eruption. I was informed by one Eussian that he had, on a voyage from Sitka, seen smoke and flame issuing from the peak of Saint Elias, and he gave a glowing account of the magnificent spectacle it presented. Another person, a passenger on the same voyage and vessel, afterward told me that indeed he had seen the mountain very plainly, but that the story of an eruption was a complete fiction. It is, therefore, not impossible that Tebenkoff might have been similarly deceived. Grewingk,. discussing the same question, argues that since no trustworthy account exists of an eruption, it becomes unsafe to assert that it has occurred, and suggests that it may be placed in the same category with a volcano reported by Spanish navigators on Cape Mendocino, which has loug since been proved to have no existence. lie says: " Though Saint Elias stands in the volcanic line of Iliamna, Nuuivak, and Saint Mathew's Island, nevertheless we believe its volcanic nature may justly be doubted, since the absence of a crater or conical form, and its ragged crest, make it very probable that it has never been penetrated by a volcanic chimney." * * * "The proximity of the active volcano of Wrangell to Saint Elias, ren- ders it improbable tbat tlie subterranean fires would seek, so near, an indubitably difficult egress through the giant of American mountains." The great height of Saint Elias is also opposed to its asserted volcanic nature, and the recent determination of the sedimentary (Cretaceous) structure of Aconcagua, and other high peaks of South America, which have always hitherto ranked among volcanoes, is worthy of being noted in the present connection. We may therefore say, at least, that the presumption is in favor of the non-volcanic character of Saint Elias, and that the burden of proof rests with those who may still be inclined to assert its volcanic origin. II.— DISCUSSION OF THE DATA. In the computations accompanying this report are given, first, all the data necessary to the computer, followed by the computations of the positions of the peaks in question ; and, lastly, the computations of the heights, resulting from the vertical angles and double-zenith distances meas- ured on the several peaks, and their computed distances from the points at which the observations were taken. Hence any one, with the data here furnished, can pursue the computations according to the method he may prefer, and have all the material necessary for forming an independent judgment on the value of our results. The mountains referred to are Mount Crillon, Mount Fairweather; two peaks of great height in the range to the eastward of Mount Saint Elias, now first named by the United States Coast Survey Mount Cook and Mount Vancouver, respectively, and Mount Saint Elias itself. The means by which the positions of these mountains were obtained are of different values. Mount Crillon was determhied by a triangulation from Lituya Bay, connected with a measured base and an astro- nomically-determined azimuth line. The angle at the peak was of course unobserved, and being very small, I regard the results as of only secondary value. Mount Fairweather was determined by horizontal angles, referred to an astronomical azimuth from the astronomical stations at Lituya Bay and Port Mulgrave. The angle of intersection, though not observed, being not far from a right angle, the included error cannot greatly afl'ect the computation for position, and I believe the results to be as satis£;ictory as the method will allow. The positions of Mounts Cook and Yancouver were determined by horizontal angles, referred to the azimuth line from the astronomical station at Port Mulgrave, and intersected by bearings taken from the vessel when in a -well-determined position in the western portion of the Bay of Yakutat. The intersecting angles are moderately large, but the method is much less satisfactory than if both angles had been measured with the theodolite, and I regard the results as approximate onlj-;. The position of Mount Saint Elias was fixed by horizontal angles connected with the azimuth line at Port Mulgrave ; by azimuth observations taken directly on the peak from a well-determined sea position ; and by confirmatory bearings from a very well determined sea position at Dry Bay. The latter, however, have not been used in the computations. The unobserved angle being nearly 00^, the liability to eiror is reasonably small. Our position for the mountain is within a third of a mile of that assigned to it by Captain Cook, and is, in my opinion, sufliciently satisfactory to remove any doubt as to the probability of serious error arising in the results from uncertainty of position. The vertical angles for elevation are. also of different classes. The first of these comprises sextant angles. Except under the most favorable circumstances, and especially unless within a comparatively short distance of the object- measured, I do not con- sider these as being of .any great value. The uncertainties of position and refraction are so great as to render the result in most cases of only the most general character. I have, therefore, rejected a large number of these observa- tions. Those which I have admitted, in most cases, I do not consider of sufiflcient precision to unite with the results of vertical-circle or theodolite observations for the purpose of obtaining a mean. 8 III oue case only — tliat of Mouut Fairweatbor, where tbe elevation was lueasured from woll- determiued positions close to the base of tbe uionutain, and not far from the stations at whicb tbe otlier class of observations were obtained — have I ventured to use them iu such a manner. I have inserted some computations of^snch observations in separate columns; but, with the exception already noted, rather as a matter of curiosity than as a source of reliable informa- tion. Mount Crillon was measured from five or six different points with tbe sextant. I have given the best of these observations, but place no confidence in them. It was also measured from Lituya Bay with the theodolite, and were it not for the extremely small angle of intersection, which throws some doubt on the position, I should be tolerably well satisfied with the resulting height. The impression made on our minds from viewing this mountain from a multitude of positions was that it is slightly higher than Mount Fairweather. I think it probable that when better observations are practicable it may be found a few hundred feet lower than our theodolite determination. Mount Fairweather was measured from Lituya Bay by theodolite, and from Port Mulgrave by vertical-circle observations of double-zenith distances. Also, from a number of points close to Lituya Bay by sextant angles. The mean of all tbe Lituya Bay observations is l.j, 402 feet. The mean of all observations with sextant is 15, 443 feet. The mean of Tertical-circle and theodolite observations is 15, 388 feet. The mean of all observations is - 15, 423 ± 120. And this result, I am convinced, is not far from the truth. The altitudes of ^Mounts Cook and Vancouver were determined by a series of double-zenith distances, observed at the Port Mulgrave astronomical station, and the resulting heights are regarded by me as approximate, only because of the doubt resting on the precision of the compass- bearings, by whicb, partly, their positions were determined. Mount Saint Elias was measured by a particularly large series of double-zenith distances from Port Mulgrave; and also by a large number of sextant observations from various localities. Part of the latter have been computed for the sake of showing that all tbe observations point to a greater height than has been previously claimed for the mountain. I give them no weight in the result, as they were all taken at great distances from the peak, and subject to various disturbing influ- ences and uncertainty in most of tbe positions. It, has occurred to me, in view of the unanimity in the Lituya Bay observations, that we might apply tbe difference between the height of Mount Fairweather, as there obtained, and that obtained from Port Mulgrave, in the ratio of the square of tbe distances, as a correction for tbe undeter- mined error of the refraction in the case of Mount Saint Elias. All the Port Mulgrave observations were taken about the same time, at the same place, with the same instrument, aud'subject to the same influences. As the meau of tbe Lituya observations on Fairweather is greater than tbe result of the Port Mulgrave observations, the correction for Mount Saint Elias would be additive. The ratio being 147,!)07.24'' : 111,212.P : : 192 : 108.5, which is the resulting correction for Saint Elias, 192 feet being the difference between the two series on Mount Fairweather. The height of Saint Elias, as obtained at Port Mulgrave, being 19,464 feet, when corrected it would be 19,572 feet. Unfortunately Port Mulgrave is so completely encircled by land as to have rendered it impos- sible to obtain a back sight at the opposite sea-horizon, which would have given us an approxima- tion to.tbe true refraction. In the following computations 0.08 has been taken as the coefficient, which is nearly tbe average found in the ordnance survey of Great Britain, with a not very dis- similar latitude and climate. The observations of all kinds have been computed by Coast-Survey methods. Tbe heights have been computed by a special formula supplied by Assistant C. A. Scliott, chief of the computing division. The formulas for the computation of distances are from Appendix No. 36, Coast Survey L. M. Z. tables, computed inversely; the radius of curvature from Appendix jSTo. 11, Coast Survey Eeport 1871, carried out to GO'^ north latitude. The computations have been made by Mr. Marcus Baker, and reviewed by Mr. Schott. 9 I wouUl recommeml for adoption the following values : Mount Saint Elias 19, 500 feet ± 400 feet. Mount Cook - . - IC, 000 feet approximately. Mount Vancouver .*.'. .' 13, 100 feet approximately. Mount Fairweatber 15, 500 feet ± 150 feet. Mount Crillou - 15, 900 foet ± 500 feet. The accompanying sketch-map will facilitate the comprehension of the data for commitatiou aud the method employed. Reduction of ohscrvations made in 1874 by Aciing Assistant W. E. Ball and inirty, to determine the heights of Mount Saint Elias, Goolc, Crillon, Fairiveather, and Vancouver. All the longitudes used in these reductions depend upon G chronometers, rated at Sitka May 5, and again at Kadiak June C, 1874. The rates of the chronometers arc assumed uniform during this interval. The corrections to the chronometers at Sitka depend upon 24 pairs of equal altitudes of the suu, measured with the sextant and artificial horizon. The corrections to the chronometers at Kadiak depend upon 4G pairs of equal altitudes of the sun, measured with the sextant and artificial horizon. 1. Lituya Bay. Time depends upon 33 pairs of equal altitudes of the suu ; latitude depends upon 44 single altitudes of the sun, with the sextant and artificial horizon; azimuth depends upou 7 sets, of G cnch, of observations upon the sun with O. S. theodolite No. 97. Five of these sets were observed and reduced by the method given in "IJ 10, Appendix 11, to the Coast Survey Eeport of 18CG, by Assistant Schott, and two sets by If 19 of the same Appendix. 2. Port Mulgrave. Time depends upon 33 pairs of equal altitudes of the sun ; latitude depends upou 18 altitudes of the sua with the sextant, and 32 double zenith distances with Gambey vertical-circle No. 75; azimuth depends upou 8 sets, of G each, of observations upon the sun, with C. S. theodolite No. 97, and by method IG of the Appendix al)ove referred to. 3. Station "At sea," upon which the position of Mount Saint Elias depends. Time depends upon 12 altitudes of the sun from sea-horizon; latitude reckoned by log from noon ; determined at noon by the usual sextant observations ; azimuth depends upon two sets, of 5 each, of obser- vations upon the sun. The angular distance of the sun from Mount Saint Elias was measured with the sextant, and the time noted. From the known latitude and hour-angle the altitude and azimuth were deduced, and from these the azimuth of Mount Saint Elias. In all the observations with the sextant the /rtr7ej;-conec<(0>t has been determined in connection with each series of observations and properly allowed for, and, also, proper allowance has been made for dlp,2>aralla.r, and refraction, including the barometric and thermometric factors. In all the sextant-work the sextant used is No. 95, by Troughton & Siinms, of London. The adjustments of all the instruments used have been constantly examined and found cor- rect, and the instruments kept level whenever used. And wherever the priucipal of reversal hns been available for the elimination of error, it has been employed. Slounts Cook and Vancouver are determined in position only a[)proximately. *The determina- tion was made as follows : Tiie true bearing of the magnetic mark from the astronomical station was determined astronomically, and the angles between the mountains and the mark measured with theodolite No. 97. This gave the true bearing of the mountains from Ast. ■■:^, Tort Mulgrave. When the vessel left Port Mulgrave and had reached the mouth of Yakutat Bay, its position was lixed by compass-bearings upon objects determined by us on shore and at the same time the com- ])ass-bearings of Mounts Cook and Vancouver were taken. From these data the mountains were platted upon a chart made from our own observations, aud lh(^ residting latitudes and longitudes were used in determining tlie distances of the mountains. 2 Ai- 10 Keduction of obncirations-for altitude of Mount Fail icvai her. O I II II Tlio astroiioiiiical station at Lituya Bay is in loiigitiule .... + 137 40 04. 6 ± 10. G and latitude + 58 30 57.0 ± 1.2 TLe aziiuuth of tie line Astronomical A to Village A is + 175 41 08. i 4.4 The angle at Astronomical A, between Village A and Woody Point A, is. + 98 21 15. The azimuth of the line Astronomical a to Woody Point A, is + 274 02 23. Woody I'oint A is in longitude +137 37 40. 9 and latitude + 58 36 51.7 The aziniutli of the line Woody Point A to Astronomical A is. + 94 04 25. 6 The angle at Woody Point A, between Astronomical A and Mount Fair- weather, is + 97 05 55. The azimuth of the line Woody Point a to Mount Fairweather is + 191 10 20. 6 The azimuth of the line Woody Point a to Astronomical A, Port Mulgrave, is +131 33 20.44 The distance from Woody Point A to Mount Fairweather is 33184. 53'" The vertical angle of Mount Fairweather from Woody Point A is 7 58 40. The vertical angle was measured at 2 p. m., May 15, 1874; barometer 30.11, attached thermometer, 75° Fahrenheit, external thermometer, 59° Fahrenheit. The astronomical station at Pcit INIulgiave is in longitude + 139 40 15.9 ± 18.3 and latitude + 59 33 42. ± 2. 1 The azimuth of the line Astronomical a, Port Mulgrave, to Magnetic Mark, is + 133 24 57. 5 ± C. 7 The angle at Astronomical A, Port Mulgrave, between Mount Fair- weather and Magnetic Mark, is 1C5 08 35. The azimuth of the line Astronomical a, Port Mulgrave to Monnt Fair- weather, is 298 33 32. 5 The azimuth of the line Astronomical A, Port jNIulgrave to Woody Point A, is 309 43 07. 3 The distance from Astronomical A, Port Mulgrave, to Woody Point A, is. 161895. 56™ The distance from Astronomical A, Port Mulgrave, to Mount Fair- weather, is 147907. 24"" TLe zenith distance of Mount Fairweather fiom Astronomical A, Port JIulgrave, Is 88 45 17. 1 The zenith distance was measured with Gambey vertical circle, No. 75, at 6 p. m.. May 23, 1874 : Barometer at 6 p.m., 29. 92; attached thermometer, 68^ Fahrenheit ; external thermometer, 644° Fahrenheit. ' 11 Triangidation at Lituija Buy. Denomination. Astronomical i to Village a : Woody Point a Aatrouoraical a Villaso A I liaso . Tillage a to Wooily Point a Woody Point a to Astronomical , Observed angles. 90 44' 30" 98 21 16.8 71 54 n. 5 Corr. -1" -1.8 -1.5 Plane angles and distances. 413. 789 go 44. 29" 98 21 13 71 54 11; 2419.590 2324. 585 Logaritbnis. 2. 61G7790 0.7715961 9. 9953671 9. 9779703 3. 3837422 3. 36G3454 Z (2Z 180° Z' Determination of ])osition of Woody Foint /> Astronomical station to Village a Village A and Woody Point a Astronomical station to Woody Point A . Woody Point a to Astronomical station . 175 98 58 36 58 36 57.0 - 5. 315 51.685 Astronomical station . 2324'".585 Woody Point . , M 137 40 M' — 2 137 37 A = 58° 36' 54" 1st term. 2d and 3d terms. -dL + 5". 293 + . 022 + 5 .315 K I! COS Z 3. 3663454 8. 5095133 8. 8478690 C sin' Z 0. 7237277 6. 73269 1.01744 9. 99784 8. 34797 K sin Z A' cos L' ar. comp. 3. 3663454 9. 998919711 8. 5087229 0. 2833326 2. 1573206n — 143". 655 dM sin A -dZ 2. 15732n 9. 93130 2. 08862)1 — 122". 6 23 02.6 04.6 23.655 40. 945 12 Computation of diittancc from M'oody roint a, Lituya Buy, to Astronomical a, Port Mnh/ravc. z dZ Z' to .. . and . "Woody Point l , Lituj'.a Bay, to Astrouomical a , Port Mulgr.avo. Astronomical fi , Port Mulgrare, to Woody Point c , Lituya Bay. 131 - 1 309 43 26.44 19.10 L (iL 30 + 50 51. 085 50. 315 Woody Point a , Lituya Bay 1C1695'".50 = 100.59 statute miles . Astxouomical a , Port Mulgrave . o / M 137 37 rtM M' + 2 08 139 46 40. 945 34. 9Rd 1st term. '2d and 3d terms -liL — 3471". 393 + til . 07H B K cos Z 8.5095135 5. 03a9903>l c K' sin' Z sin Z Ksln Z 1.C174I 0. 16661 1. 78402 GO. 816 9.8740712 5. 0833061 D cos Z KcosZ 2. 3372 7. 0809 9.4181 0. 263 9. 821755471 5. 0309903?t 5. 2092349 Z tfiZ Iv cos Z K sin Z A' cos L' ar. couip. dM - 48° 26' 33". 56 0. 0523158)1 5. 0309903)1 5. 0833061 8. 508701C 0. 2953257 3. 8873334 + 7714". 955 dM sin A 3. 8873334 9. 9334059 3. 8207993 + 6619". 10 13 Solution of irlangle Mount Fair weather, Woody roint ^, and Astronomicnl /:^, Tort Mulgravc. o ' " Z Woody roint A to Astronomical A, Lituya Bay 9-4 Oi 25. G / Astronomical A and Mount Fairweather 97 05 55 Z Woody Point a to Mount Fairweather 191 10 20. G Z Woody Point a to Astronomical a, Port Mulgrave 131 33 26. 44 _/ At Woody Point ^, between Astronomical a. Tort ° Mulgrave, and Mount Fairweather - - - (A) 59 3G 54. 2 Z Astronomical a to Magnetic Mark, Port Mulgrave. . 133 24 57. 5 Z Magnetic Mark and Mount Fairweather 1G5 OS 35. Z Astronomical A) Port Mulgrave, to Mount Fairweather 298 33 32. 5 Z Astronomical a, Port Mulgrave, to Woody Point, Lituya Bay 309 43 07. 34 / At Astronomical a, Port Mulgrave, between Woody Point a, Lituya Bay, and Mount Fairweather (^) H 09 34. 8 180O-(A+B) (C)109 13 3L0 Denomination. Woody Point a to Astronomical i , Port Mulgravo. Mount Fairweatlier, (C) Astronomical a , Port Mulgrave, (B) Woody Point a , (A) Astronomical a , Port Mulgrave, to Mount Fairweather. . Mount Fairweatlier to Woody Point a Plane angles and distances. lC189f ■». 56 109° 13' 31". 11 09 34 .8 59 30 51 . 9 147907"'. 24 33184. 53 Logarithms. 5. 2092349 0. 0249210 9. 9807792 9. 9358329 5. 1699894 4. 5209357 14 Determination of position of Mount Fainccather. z dZ 180° "Woocly Point a , Litaya Bay, to Astronouiical a , Lituya Bay. Astronomical i , Lituya Bay, aud ilount Fairweather Woody Point a , Lituya Bay, to Mount Fairweather. 04 05 10 + 5 25.6 55 20.6 43.4 Mount Fairweather to Woody Point a , Litaya Bay . L dL 36 + 17 51. 685 32. 105 Woody Point a , Lituya Bay . 33184'".53 Mount Fairweather . M tJM M' 137 37 - 6 30 40. 045 41.702 5D. 243 \ — 58° 45' 37". 7 Ist terra. 3d and 3d terms. — 1052". 300 + .195 — 1052 . 105 K B cos Z 4. 5209357 8. 5095135 9. 991690611 3.'0221398?l K2 C sin' Z 9. 04187 1.61741 8. 57453 9. 23381 .1713 2. 3373 G. 0443 8. 3815 .0241 K sin Z A' cos L' ar. com p. dM 4. 5209357 9. 2872677« 8. 5087163 0. 2869847 2. 6039044)1 -401". 702 dM sin A -dZ 2. 60390»i 9. 93197 2. 53587)1 - 343". 4 15 Computation of distance from Moiont Fairweather to " 0_ff Cape Spencer.^' z dZ . to .. and . Mount Fairweather to "Oft' Cape Spencer* 330 01 + 12 34.00 46.98 "Ofif Cape Spencer" to Monnt Fairweather . no 14 21.58 o „ L 58 54 23. 790 riL —45 03. 790 L' .58 09 20 Mount Fairweather . 84903"'.75 "Oil' Cape Spencer' M i 137 dM. 16 59. 243 59. 243 X = 58° 31' 52" 1st term. Man(13il temis. -dL + 2702". 726 + 1 . 004 + 2703 . 790 B Kcos Z 8. 5094937 4. 9223083 3. 4318020 C K2 sin2 Z sin Z K sin Z 1. 622381 8. 33492 9. 95730 0.906 9. 238S39hi 4. 167460S»l 4. 9289217 D cos Z KcosZ 2. 3349 6. 86.36 9. 1985 0.158 9. 9933865 4. 9223083 Z tgZ KcosZ Ksin Z A' cos L' ar. comp. (JM ' 58' 25". 40 9. 245152.'!n 4. 9223083 4. 1674608JI 8. 5087333 0. 2776829 dM sin A 2, 9538770« — 899". 243 — dZ 2. 953877« 9. 930910 2. e847877» - 766". 98 1(5 Computation of distance J'rom Movnt Fainccatlicr to " Off Lituya Bay.^' z dZ 180° Z' .to... .and . Mount Fairwcathor to "Oil' Lituya Bay' 52. 33 50.54 " OS Lituya Bay " to Mount Fairweatlier . 38 01.79 o , ,, L 58 54 23.790 riL -18 43.790 L' 58 35 40 Mount Fairweather. 36498».7fi " Off Lituya Bay " o f M 137 30 dM M' + 11 137 42 59. 243 30. 757 30 A II 58° 45' 02" 1st tiirm. 2il and 3d terms. -liL + 1123". 241 h . 519 I- 1123 .790 B K cos Z Z tgZ Kcos Z K sin Z A' cos L' ar. comp. 8. 5094937 4. 5409793 3. 0504730 17° 47' 52". 33 9. .5065374 4. 5409793 4. 0475167 8. 5087233 0. 2830853 2. 8393253 1 690". 757 c K^sin'Z sin Z K sin Z dM sin \ 1. 622381 8. 095033 9.717114 0. 5217 0. 4852385 4. 0475167 D cos Z KcosZ 2. 3349 C. 1009 I. 4358 .0273 9.97.-7011 4. 5409793 4. 3622782 2. 839325 9. 931924 2. 771249 -I 590". 54 17 Coinputatiuii of distance from Mount Fairweather to " Off Lituya, May 19." z dZ 180° Z' .to .. anil . Mount Faivvvfittbt-r to " Oti Lituya, May 19 ' " Off Lituya, May IS,' to Mount Fairweather j 20U 3d 40.5 40. S L dL , 5a 54 -20 5S 33 23. 700 53. 790 Mount Falrweatber. 44698 •".72 " Oil' Lituya, May 19 ' o , M 137 30 M' + 23 137 54 59. 243 00. 757 00. 000 A = 5t<° 4.3' 57' iRt terra. ■2(1 and 3d terms. (iL + 1251". 667 + 2 . 123 + l!i53 . 790 B Kcos Z 8. 5094937 4. 5879951 c K^'sin'Z sin Z K sin Z 1. 622381 8. 697512 0. 319893 2. 0888 ft! 9. 69S4608 cos Z 4.3487559 KcosZ 2. 3349 6. 1950 8. 5299 .0339 9. 9377001 4. 5879951 Z tgz K cosZ K sin Z A' cosL' ar. comp. W° 57' 40". 49 9. 7607608 4. 5879951 4. 3487559 8. 5087241 0. 2826373 3. 1401173 + 1380". 757 sin A -dZ 3. 140117 9.931841 3. 071958 +1180". 2 3 AP 18 Computation of height of Mount Fairweather. Set. Off Cape Spen- cer. Off Litiiya Bay. Ofi' Litu.va, May 19. 1 2 3 < logs log cot ( log 1st term log J (1 —2 in) = lug .42 logs' a. c. log p log 2(1 term log (1 — »i.) = Iug .92 log 1 l8t terinJ2 a c. log p log 3d term Ist term 2<1 term 3d term h log h constant log k iu feet A 87° 01' 54". 3 4. 9289217 8. 7147666 82° 53' 02". 7 4. 5622782 9. 0963493 84° 17' 51". 4. 6502950 8. 9993800 3. 6436883 n. 6232493 9 8578434 3. 195012 3. 6586275 9. 6232493 9. 1245564 3. 194946 3. 6496750 9. 6232493 9. 300.5900 3. 194823 2. 6761047 9. 9637878 7. 2873766 3. 195012 1.9427517 9. 9637878 7. 3172550 3. 194946 a. 1186023 9. 9637878 7. 2993500 3. 194823 0. 4461764 44U3. 388 474. 356 2.794 0. 4759888 4556. 459 87. 650 2. 992 0. 4579B08 4-163. 495 131. 420 2. 8T0 4879. 538 3. 6883787 0. 515S1929 4647. 101 3. 6671821 0. 5159929 4597. 785 3. 0625487 0. 5159929 4. 2043716 16009. 4.1831750 15247, 4. 1785416 15085. Set. Woody Point & , Litiiya. AstrononjicalA, Port Mulgrave. 4 3 C logs log cot <; log 1st term log i (1— 2 m) =log .42 logs' a. c. log p log 2d term log (1 — m) = log.92 log [1st term)' a. c. log p log 3d term 1st term 2d term 3d term h log h constaut log k iu feet h 82° 01' 20". 4. 5209357 9. 1465787 88° 45' 17". 1 5. 1699894 8. 3372023 3. 6675144 9. 6232493 9.0418714 3. 194988 3. 5071917 9. 6232493 0. 3399788 3. 194392 1. 8601087 9. 9637878 7. 3350288 3. 194988 3. 1576201 9. 9637878 7. 0143834 3. 194392 0. 4938046 4650. 658 72. 462 3.117 0. 1725632 3215.079 1437. 540 1.488 4726. 237 3. 6745155 0. 5159929 4654. 107 3. 6678363 0. 5159929 4. 1905084 15506. 4. 1838292 15270. Set I. Mean of six altitudes from sea horizon with Troujihton sextant, No. 93. Instrument in adjustmeut. Set 2. One altitude from sea horizon with Trou^htou sextant, No. 95. Instrument in adjustment. Set 3. Mean of eight altitudes from sea horizon with Trou^ihton sextant, No. 95. Instrument in adjustment. Set 4. Mean of twelve altitudes, six direct and six reversed, with Casella theodolite, No. 3.J00, in adjustment and level. Set 5. Mean of nine double zenith distances, with (iambey vertieal circle, No. 75, in adjustmeut and level. Reduction of observations for height of Mount Crillon, TRIANGULATION AT LITUYA liAY. Denomination. AVoody Point a to Tillage a . Mount Crillon "Woody Points Village A Village A to Mount Crillon Mount Crillon to Woody Point A. Observed angles. rem. 1B0° 3550 59' 40" Sa 27 m Corr. Plane angles and distances. 2419. 590 lo 32' 34" 155 59 40 23 27 46 36561. 3 34337. 75 Logarithms. 3. 3837422 1. 5698717 9. 6094079 9. 5821579 4. 5630218 4. 5357718 Woody Point a ia in longitude -f 137 and latitude, The azimuth of the line Woody Point a to Astronomical -f 58 4- 94 The angle at Woody Point a , between Astronomical a and Mount Crillon, is 165 The vertical angle on Mount Crillon, from Woody Point a . is 7 Measured at 2.30 p.m., May 15, 1874. Barometer, 30.11 ; ter)ial theimoraeter, 59'^ Fahrenheit. 40.9 51/7 25.6 00. 37.5 atached thermometer, 75" Fahrenheit; ex- 19 Determination of poaition of Mount Crillon. z dZ 180° Woody Point £. to Astronomical station , Astronomical station and Mount Crillon , Woody Point A to Mount Crillon 94 16S 04 44 48 +29 09 34. C 50.4 Mount Crillon to Woody Point a . o , L 58 36 dL +3 L' 58 40 61. 685 11. 631 03. 316 Woody Point 34337 "1.75 Mount Crillon . M If M 37 -34 40. 945 56. 994 A=58°37'57" Ist term. 2d and 3d terms. -dL -190". 364 + 4. 733 K B cos Z 4. .'5357718 8. 5095135 9. 2477700» K C sin' Z 9. 07154 1. 61741 9. 98619 D K 4.335 7 9. 9930945n 8. 5087917 0. 2839947 A' cos L' ar. coiup. dM d M sin A -dZ 3. 32158(t 9, 93138 3 3215827(1 -2096". 924 3. 25296)1 -1790. "4 20 Coiiqnitation of dhtanee from Mount CriUon to " Off Cape (S^enee/-." z z z dZ 180° Z' to ' " • Mount CriUon to " 00' Cape ^^pl■^c V 12 51 -11 44. 29 18.04 "Off Cape Spencer" to Mouut Cril 192 40 26.25 L dL L' o 58 40 -30 03. 316 43. 31C M dM M' o 137 1 02 + 13 44.021 15. 979 5t - 5. 09 20. 000 "OflCape.S n7 16 00. 000 •X=58° 24' 42" B TC ens Z h 8. 5095099 4. 7550068 c K^.Hin^Z 1. 618312 8. 228971 D 2. 33680 6. 53083 1st tenn. 2(1 uud3il tei'ius. — dL 1 1842". 5:iil + . 777 3. ■ii;.''i4ir.7 9. 817283 .7035 9. 3475421 4. 1144854 8. 867liH .0737 9. 9889635 4. 7559068 sinZ Ksin Z K cos Z KcosZ + 1843.316 4. 7669433 K 4. 7609433 z tgZ K cos Z £ sin Z A' cos L' ar. comp. dM 12= 51' 44". 29 9. 3585786 4. 7559068 4. 1144854 8. 5087333 0. 2776829 2. 9009016 + 795. "979 dM sin A 2. 900902 9. 930354 2. 831256 + 678. "04 21 Comimlation of distance from Blount Crillon to "0^ Lituya.^' z z z dZ 180° to... anil. Mount Crilloa to "Off Litnya". 20 —33 OG. a 57.2 'Otf Lituj-a" to Mount Crillon 257 I. o , 58 40 — 4 58 35 03. 316 23. 31C Mount Crillon 30347"'.88 'OH' Lituia" . o , M 137 03 dU +39 W 137 42 44. 021 45. 979 A=:5e° 37' 52" I B K CCS Z l.st tLTQl. 2d anil 3d terms. +257". 148 + C. 168 ^ 2C3. 316 8. 5C9.5099 3. 9006732 2. 4101831 K» .'iin» 7. sinZ K sin Z I. 618312 9. 171716 0. 790028 6. 1663 9. 99093CO 4. 5858580 D cos Z KcosZ 2. 33680 4. 82037 7. l.")717 .0014 9. 3057518 3. 9006732 Z tgZ KcosZ Ksin Z A' cos L' ar. comp. 78° 20' 06".58 0. 6851848 3. 9006732 4. 5858580 8. 5087233 0. 2830853 3. 3776666 +2385". 979 dM sin A -dZ 3. 37760'; 9. 931373 3. 309040 +2037". 2 22 Com;putatlo)i of distance from Blount CriUon to '■'■Off Lititya May 19, 1S74, with Gambey vertical-circle, I^o. 75; 18 repetitions, Barometer 29.92; external thermometer 01^ Fahrenheit; attached thermometer, (IS^ Fahrenheit •Weather clear; wind calm. Altitude of at time of observation=17o. + 139 46 15. 9 ± 18. 3 + 59 33 42. ± 2. 1 + 133 24 57. 5 ± (!. 7 + 8 52 20. + 142 17 17. 5 + 54 22 24.8 87 54 52. 7 + 142 14 01. ± 24. + 58 37 + 199 23 22. 5 + 232 15 38. S 32 52 IG. 3 17C030'". 1 204768. 2 111212. 1 o ' '/ 87 21 59. SoUdioH of iri(iii<)Ic, A Al sen, Axtronomintl A, Poit Miilynd-c and Mount tSuint Eihin. Z A At sea to Astronomical A, Port Mulgrave. Z A At sea to Mount Saint Elias . . . o ' // 232 15 38. 85 199 23 22.5 / At A At sea between Blount Saint Elias and A.strouomical A, Port ° ' " Mulgrave (A) 32 52 16. 35 Z Astronomical A, Port Mulgrave to Magnetic Mark 133 24 57. 5 / At Astronomical A, Port Mulgrave, between Maguetic Mark and Mount Saint Elias + 8 52 20. Z Astronomical A, Port Mulgrave to Jlouut Saint Elias 142 17 17. 5 Z Astronomical A, Port Mulgrave, to A At sea 54 22 24. 83 / At Astronomical A, Port Mulgrave, between A At sea and Mount Saint Elias (B). 87 54 52.68 ]80O— (A+B) (C). 59 12.j0.97 Denomiiiation. Astronomical 2 , Port Mulgrave to a At sea. Mount Saint Eliaa, (C) Astronomical a , Port Mulgrave, (B) A At sea, (A) A At sea to Mount Saint Elias Mount Saint Elias to Astronomical A , Port Mulgrave , Plane angles and distances. iveoaO". 1 590 12' 50". 97 87 54 .52. 68 32 52 IS. 35 204768.»'2 111212. 1 Logarithms. 5. 2455870 0. 0659632 9. 9997123 9. 7316018 5. 3112625 5. 0161520 25 V7:fc^! I^i»^^ \ /i - w "^ W,: uMiyfe ■i^^as^ki^ an,' ^^iwi;^ ywuv /,v^. v^: M- ^i \J-: W\vc/-kvl\wlM /WUi '.u,u, ^IwM UH '^UUi 'ajmju}j^^m m:iMm4P^ yuyi \^lvi ^v:;^^ ;^^;.k /kj :V:M m Mdi 'sJU m^Sas&Mm .wy yMm. U©^\^^^,^, >=^.Wi »mimM HWU' WJUj^ Bfo^M' !^^yyy^y^ Uuv/aftHi ^v- ^- RlnlW MIHW IK&ll M^^yyyey^M K^A^ W 'fJjW: m^p,k^ V^i\J iVj.wiT jyUMyM--i^i"i- w'lW.:'i';\^,N;^ ,:^.^\ yyy ^i w/i^v^^iM H^id: i:^Mi0^l jw .wM^a^HW- MyyyuwQQ; i^^t:^ LVlMKHi UMU .1 n-»,' W^k i/ ! 1 I i' ■ '■' ''Mim i. ''■•"'!;i';st"/'-' 017 297 778 9