On the Rule for Leap Year.
Harold F. Gray, of Corning, Calif., has called my attention to an error in the note "On the rule for leap year" [Science 123, 544 (30 Mar. 1956)]. In the sixth paragraph of the article (page 545), the end of the second sentence should read ". . . the century years 1800, 1900, and 2100 are not divisible by 400 and, hence, are not leap years; but 2000 is divisible by 400 and, hence, is a leap year."
Wylie
C C
CC