_Herschel Anticipated_ (Vol. iv., p. 233., &c.).--It was not Herschel's
discoveries relative to the sun's motion, but his theory relative to its
physical constitutions, which was anticipated by a person, who was
declared to be mad for holding such opinions. Sir David Brewster, in a
note to his edition of Ferguson's _Astronomy_, vol. ii. p. 144., says:
"It is a curious fact that the opinions of Dr. Herschel,
respecting the nature of the sun, were maintained by a Dr. Elliot,
who was tried at the Old Bailey for shooting Miss Boydell. The
friends of the Doctor maintained that he was insane, and called
several witnesses to establish this point. Among these was Dr.
Simmons, who declared that Dr. Elliot had, for some months before,
shown a fondness for the most extravagant opinions; and that in
particular, he had sent to him a letter on the light of the
celestial bodies, to be communicated to the Royal Society. This
letter confirmed Dr. Simmons in the belief that this unhappy man
was under the influence of this mental derangement; and, as a
proof of the correctness of this opinion, he directed the
attention of the court to a passage of the letter, in which Dr.
Elliot states, 'that the light of the sun proceeds from a dense
and universal aurora, which may afford ample light to the
inhabitants of the surface (of the sun) beneath, and yet be at
such a distance aloft as not to annoy them.' No objection, says
he, ariseth to that great luminary being inhabited; vegetation may
obtain there, as well as with us. There may be water and dry land,
hills and dales, rain and fair weather; and as the light, so the
season, must be eternal; consequently it may easily be conceived
to be by far the most blissful habitation of the whole system."
(See the _Gentleman's Magazine_, 1787, p. 636.)