Corrections and Clarifications

On the Rule for Leap Year

Science  11 May 1956:
Vol. 123, Issue 3202, pp. 850
DOI: 10.1126/science.123.3202.850-a


Harold F. Gray, of Corning, Calif., has calledmy attention to an error in the note "On the rulefor 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; but2000 is divisible by 400 and, hence, is a leap year."