ESSAY ON THE CARDINAL POINTS: BEING A COLLECTION OF AUTHORITIES IN EXPLANATION OF THE TERMS, “DUE NORTH,” “DUE SOUTH," "DUE EAST," AND "DUE WEST," AS APPLIED TO LAND SURVEYING. COMPILED AND ARRANGED BY NOAH BARKER, LAND SURVEYOR, AND LATE "LAND AGENT OF MAINE." BANGOR: PRINTED BY SAMUEL S. SMITH. fectly to understand. I will therefore quote from "Euclid's Elements of Geometry" a few plain definitions in relation to ANGLES: "If two straight lines diverge from the same point, the opening between them is called an angle." Or, “An angle is formed by the meeting, or intersection of two lines. The point of concourse of the two lines is called the vertex, or angular point And further, "When an angle is expressed by three letters, (as ABC, or BAC,) the middle one is that at the angular point.” With these definitions and remarks well committed to memory, we may be able to comprehend the distinction between anangle' and a 'triangle,' the latter having three angles, and three sides, or courses. It will be seen that in quoting my demonstration aforesaid, on page 6, the order of the letters" BAC," which I had used to denote an angle, was changed in Mr. Pitman's "Reply," to "ABC," thereby rendering the quotation meaningless. Since I have already shown that a "polar course" is the same as a magnetic course, his question in regard to 'courses,' is entitled to no further consideration. We shall next consider IV. Mr. Pitman's "Extracts from Books on Surveying." It will be noticed that Mr. Pitman in making his "Extracts," refers to "Davis' Elements of Surveying." But, it is probable that this is an error of the press made by mis-spelling the name of his author; and that he really meant to refer to the "Elements of Surveying and Navigation" by Charles Davies, LL.D., Professor of Mathematics at West Point. If so, he has entirely misinterpreted the author's language; as he refers to the self-same articles which Professor Davies, himself, explained in his Letter of June 3rd, 1864, being "Letter No. 2," in Part IV, of my "Essay on the Cardinal Points." Having heard Mr. Pitman, during the partial trial of this Case' at Lancaster, in April, 1864, make allusions to Davies' Surveying" in support of theories which I felt confident were never taught by that author, I took occasion, on returning home, to review this Book on Surveying, and to open a correspondence with the author in order to obtain his views in regard to the points in controversy. The result was, that my own understanding of the principles laid down in that work was fully sustained by the author, himself. This led the way to a correspondence with other distinguished authors, Professors, and Engineers, on the same subject, and the result was equally satisfactory. Several of those Letters were collected and published in Part IV, of my Essay, aforesaid; and which I consider unanswerable; at least, |