 = +0.6 for all \[Fe/H\] $\leq$ –1.0. Since, at the abundance of And I derived here, $M_{V}$(RR) on our adopted scale is very close to 0.6, no adjustment of the MK90 result is required.

To compare our distance to And I with that for M31 however, requires an M31 modulus that is on the same distance scale. There are two appropriate determinations. First, Pritchet & van den Bergh (1988) have determined the mean magnitudes of RR Lyrae stars in an M31 halo field. Adopting a mean abundance of \[Fe/H\] $\approx$ –1.0 for these stars (Pritchet & van den Bergh 1988), then yields an M31 distance modulus $(m-M)_{0}$ = 24.35 $\pm$ 0.15 on our adopted scale[^6]. Second, Mould & Kristian (1986) give I = 20.55 $\pm$ 0.15 mag for the apparent I magnitude of the red giant branch tip in their M31 halo field. Assuming a reddening of E(B–V) = 0.08 $\pm$ 0.02 for this field and noting that $M_{I}(RGB_{tip}) \approx$ –4.05 $\pm$ 0.10 for old metal-poor red giants (Da Costa & Armandroff 1990), then yields $(m-M)_{0}$ = 24.45 $\pm$ 0.20 for M31 on our adopted distance scale. Together these determinations suggest $(m-M)_{0}$ = 24.40 $\pm$ 0.13 for M31 or a distance of 760 $\pm$ 45 kpc. Thus, on the basis of these data, And I is apparently some 50 $\pm$ 50 kpc beyond M31 along the line-of-sight.

The recent HST results of Ajhar [*et al. *]{}(1996) however, give a somewhat contradictory picture. Ajhar [*et al. *]{}(1996) give $V_{HB}$ values for three globular clusters and two field regions in M31 based on WFPC2 images in the F555W and F814W filters. Considering first the two metal-poor globular clusters (K105 and K219) where no adjustment is necessary to convert $V_{HB}$ to $V_{RR}$, and noting that we adopt a reddening E(B
= +0.6 for all \[Fe / H\ ] $ \leq$ – 1.0. Since, at the abundance of And I derived here, $ M_{V}$(RR) on our adopted scale is very close to 0.6, no allowance of the MK90 resultant role is required. 

 To compare our distance to And I with that for M31 however, requires an M31 modulus that is on the same distance plate. There are two appropriate determinations. First, Pritchet & van den Bergh (1988) have decide the mean magnitudes of RR Lyrae star in an M31 halo field. assume a mean abundance of \[Fe / H\ ] $ \approx$ – 1.0 for these stars (Pritchet & van den Bergh 1988), then render an M31 distance modulus $ (m - M)_{0}$ = 24.35 $ \pm$ 0.15 on our adopted scale[^6 ]. Second, Mould & Kristian (1986) give I = 20.55 $ \pm$ 0.15 mag for the apparent I magnitude of the red giant outgrowth tip in their M31 halo field. bear a reddening of E(B – V) = 0.08 $ \pm$ 0.02 for this field and noting that $ M_{I}(RGB_{tip }) \approx$ – 4.05 $ \pm$ 0.10 for old metallic element - poor red giants (Da Costa & Armandroff 1990), then yields $ (m - M)_{0}$ = 24.45 $ \pm$ 0.20 for M31 on our espouse distance scale. Together these determinations suggest $ (m - M)_{0}$ = 24.40 $ \pm$ 0.13 for M31 or a distance of 760 $ \pm$ 45 kpc. Thus, on the basis of these data, And I is apparently some 50 $ \pm$ 50 kpc beyond M31 along the line - of - sight. 

 The recent HST results of Ajhar [ * et al.   * ] { } (1996) however, give a somewhat contradictory picture. Ajhar [ * et al.   * ] { } (1996) move over $ V_{HB}$ values for three globular bunch and two sphere region in M31 based on WFPC2 images in the F555W and F814W filters. Considering first the two metal - poor ball-shaped clusters (K105 and K219) where no adjustment is necessary to convert $ V_{HB}$ to $ V_{RR}$, and noting that we adopt a reddening E(B
 = +0.6 vor all \[Fe/H\] $\leq$ –1.0. Since, au the abundance oy And I derivsd here, $O_{V}$(RR) on our adopted scale is vwry coose to 0.6, no adjustment of the MN90 result is cequired.

To compacs our dlftandc to Cnv I with that fpr M31 howevar, requires an M31 mldulus that is on the same distance scale. Yhfre are two apkroprpaee dsnevminations. First, Pritchet & van dsn Bergi (1988) have determimed the mean magnitudes of RR Pyrae stars in an L31 halo fiele. Adjpting a mean abundance of \[Fe/H\] $\apprkx$ –1.0 for these stars (Pritchet & vxn deu Bergh 1988), thgu yifnds an M31 diwtancv modulus $(m-M)_{0}$ = 24.35 $\pm$ 0.15 on our adppted scale[^6]. Segond, Kouod & Kristian (1986) give I = 20.55 $\pm$ 0.15 mag for the wpparent H jagnitude of the eee giatt bsancf tio ih vhejr M31 hwlo field. Asshming a redeening of E(B–V) = 0.08 $\pm$ 0.02 fjg this field znd noeigg that $M_{I}(RGB_{tip}) \approx$ –4.05 $\pm$ 0.10 for old meual-pokr red giants (Da Costa & Armandroff 1990), then yiepds $(m-M)_{0}$ = 24.45 $\[m$ 0.20 for M31 on our adopted distance scale. Together dhese aettrninatkind suggest $(m-M)_{0}$ = 24.40 $\pm$ 0.13 for M31 or a distance of 760 $\pm$ 45 kkc. Nhus, on the basis of these dstw, Sgd I is appargntly some 50 $\pm$ 50 kpc beyond M31 along jhe libe-of-sight.

Uhe rrcent HST results of Ajhar [*wt al. *]{}(1996) howeveg, gice a somewhat contxadictory pieture. Sjhar [*et al. *]{}(1996) give $V_{HB}$ values yor thdee globulag clustera and two field rdgipnv in M31 based on WFPC2 imagef in the H555W anb F814W filgers. Consiqering firdt thc two metal-poor glohular cnusters (K105 wnd K219) where no adjustment is nerxssary to confest $N_{HB}$ to $V_{RX}$, and koting that we wdopt a reddennng E(B
= +0.6 for all \[Fe/H\] $\leq$ –1.0. the of And derived here, $M_{V}$(RR) very to 0.6, no of the MK90 is required. To compare our distance And I with that for M31 however, requires an M31 modulus that is the same distance scale. There are two appropriate determinations. First, Pritchet & van Bergh have the magnitudes of RR Lyrae stars in an M31 halo field. Adopting a mean abundance of \[Fe/H\] –1.0 for these stars (Pritchet & van den 1988), then yields an distance modulus $(m-M)_{0}$ = 24.35 0.15 our adopted Second, & (1986) give I 20.55 $\pm$ 0.15 mag for the apparent I magnitude of the red giant branch tip in their halo field. reddening of = $\pm$ for this field that $M_{I}(RGB_{tip}) \approx$ –4.05 $\pm$ 0.10 red giants (Da Costa & Armandroff 1990), then $(m-M)_{0}$ = $\pm$ 0.20 for M31 on our distance scale. Together these determinations suggest $(m-M)_{0}$ = $\pm$ 0.13 for M31 or a distance of 760 $\pm$ 45 kpc. Thus, on the these data, And I apparently some 50 50 beyond along line-of-sight. The HST results of Ajhar [*et al. *]{}(1996) however, give a somewhat picture. Ajhar [*et al. *]{}(1996) give $V_{HB}$ values for three and field regions in based on WFPC2 images the and F814W filters. Considering two globular K219) no is necessary to convert to $V_{RR}$, and noting that adopt a reddening E(B
 = +0.6 for all \[Fe/H\] $\leq$ –1.0. Since, at the abuNdance of AnD I derIveD heRe, $m_{V}$(RR) On ouR adopted scale iS Very Close to 0.6, no adjustment of tHe MK90 rEsULt is REqUired.

to compaRE oUR DisTaNcE to anD i wIth thAt fOr M31 howeVer, requireS an m31 mOdulus that is ON tHe same distAncE scale. There aRe tWo apprOpRiaTE deteRmiNatioNs. FirsT, pritchEt & van den BErGH (1988) have dETermineD THe Mean Magnitudes of RR LyrAE sTArs in an M31 halo fiEld. AdoPtINg A MEan AbuNdance of \[Fe/h\] $\aPprox$ –1.0 FOr these STaRS (pRitCHet & van den BergH 1988), then yields AN M31 dIstancE mOduLUs $(m-M)_{0}$ = 24.35 $\pm$ 0.15 On our AdOPteD scale[^6]. SeconD, MouLd & KristiaN (1986) give I = 20.55 $\PM$ 0.15 mag for THe apparEnt I maGniTudE of tHE rEd GiaNt BRanCH tIp iN TheIr M31 halo fIeLd. assumIng a REDDEninG of e(B–V) = 0.08 $\pM$ 0.02 for tHis field and noTinG thaT $m_{I}(RgB_{tip}) \ApproX$ –4.05 $\pm$ 0.10 fOr Old meTal-pooR red gIaNts (Da Costa & ArmanDrofF 1990), then yielDs $(m-m)_{0}$ = 24.45 $\pM$ 0.20 foR M31 On our ADopted DisTanCe scale. togetheR TheSe DETErMinations suggest $(m-M)_{0}$ = 24.40 $\Pm$ 0.13 FOR M31 Or a distaNce of 760 $\pM$ 45 KpC. THUs, on the bAsIs oF theSE Data, ANd I iS ApParently Some 50 $\pm$ 50 KPc BeYond M31 alOnG the liNe-Of-sIghT.

The rECent hST resUlts of AjHar [*et AL. *]{}(1996) however, give a sOMewhat contradICtORY pICturE. AjHar [*et al. *]{}(1996) give $v_{HB}$ vALues For tHReE glOBular ClustErS AnD Two field regions in M31 bAsEd on WFpC2 imaGes in the F555W and f814W filters. CONSIdering fIrst THe TWo metal-poor gloBular Clusters (K105 aND K219) where nO adjuStment is Necessary TO Convert $V_{hB}$ tO $V_{Rr}$, anD noTINg That we adopt a rEDDeniNg e(B
 = +0.6 for all \[Fe/H\] $ \leq$ –1.0 . Sin ce,  at  t he a bund ance of And Id eriv ed here, $M_{V}$(RR) o n our  a d opte d  s caleis very cl o s e t o0. 6,no ad justm ent  of the  MK90 resu ltis  required.
T ocompare ou r d istance to A ndI with  t hat for M 31howev er, re q uiresan M31 mo du l us tha t  is ont h esame  distance scale.T he r e are two appr opriat ed et e r min ati ons. First ,Pritc h et & va n  d e n Ber g h (1988) have  determined the  meanma gni t udes o f RRLy r aestars in an  M31  halo fie ld. Ad o pting a mean ab undanc e o f \ [Fe/ H \]  $ \ap pr o x$– 1. 0 f o r t hese sta rs  ( Pritc het& v a n de n B ergh  1988 ), then yield s a n M3 1  di stanc e mod ulus  $ (m-M) _{0}$= 24. 35  $\pm$ 0.15 onouradopted s cal e[ ^6] .Secon d , Moul d &  Kr istian(1986)g ive  I = 20 .55 $\pm$ 0.15 mag  f o r  t he appar ent Im ag ni t ude of t he  re d gi a n t bra ncht ip  in thei r M31h al ofield.As suming  a  re dde ningo f E( B–V) =  0.08 $\ pm$ 0 . 02 for this fi e ld and noting th a t  $ M _{I} (RG B_{tip}) \a ppro x $ –4 .05$ \p m$0 .10 f or ol dm et a l-poor red giants ( Da  Costa  & Ar mandroff 1990 ), then yi e l d s $(m-M) _{0} $  = 24.45 $\pm$ 0. 20 fo r M31 on o u r adopte d dis tance sc ale. Toge t h er these  de ter min ati o n ssuggest $(m-M ) _ {0}$  =  24.40$\p m$ 0.13  fo r M 31oradistanceof 760 $ \p m$  4 5kpc . Thu s , on the  b asi softhese data,And I  isap pa r ent ly some 50 $ \pm$  5 0kpcbey on d M31  alo n g t he line -of-sight .
T he r ec en t HST r esults of Ajh ar  [*et al.*] {}( 1996)h o wever, g ive a somewhat contradi c tory pi ctu re. A jhar  [*et al.  *] {}(199 6)g ive $V _{HB}$  valu es  fo r three g lo bul ar  clustersa n d t wo fi el d re gions i n M31 based on WFP C 2 i mages in theF55 5W a n d  F 814 W  f i lte rs .  Co n s idering first t he two met al - po or globula r  cl us ters (K 105 and  K219 )  whereno adjust ment is n ec essa r y  to  convert $ V_{HB}$to $V_{RR } $, an d  n oting  th at wead opt  a re ddenin g  E( B
 =_+0.6 for_all \[Fe/H\] $\leq$ –1.0._Since, at_the_abundance of_And_I derived here,_$M_{V}$(RR) on our_adopted scale is very_close to 0.6,_no_adjustment of the MK90 result is required.

To compare our distance to And I with_that_for M31_however,_requires_an M31 modulus that is_on the same distance scale._There are_two appropriate determinations. First, Pritchet & van den_Bergh_(1988) have determined_the mean magnitudes of RR Lyrae stars in an_M31 halo field. Adopting a mean_abundance of \[Fe/H\]_$\approx$_–1.0_for these stars (Pritchet_& van den Bergh 1988), then_yields an M31 distance modulus $(m-M)_{0}$_= 24.35 $\pm$ 0.15 on our adopted_scale[^6]. Second, Mould & Kristian (1986)_give I = 20.55 $\pm$_0.15 mag_for the apparent I magnitude_of the red_giant branch_tip in their_M31 halo field. Assuming a reddening_of E(B–V) =_0.08 $\pm$ 0.02 for this field_and_noting that $M_{I}(RGB_{tip})_\approx$_–4.05_$\pm$ 0.10_for old metal-poor_red_giants (Da_Costa_& Armandroff 1990), then yields $(m-M)_{0}$_=_24.45 $\pm$ 0.20 for M31 on our_adopted distance scale. Together_these_determinations suggest $(m-M)_{0}$ =_24.40 $\pm$ 0.13 for M31_or a distance of 760 $\pm$_45 kpc._Thus, on_the basis of these data, And I is apparently some 50_$\pm$ 50 kpc beyond M31 along_the line-of-sight.

The recent HST_results of_Ajhar_[*et al. *]{}(1996) however,_give_a somewhat_contradictory picture. Ajhar [*et al. *]{}(1996) give $V_{HB}$_values for_three globular clusters and two field_regions in M31 based_on_WFPC2 images in the F555W and_F814W filters. Considering first the two_metal-poor globular clusters (K105 and_K219)_where_no adjustment is necessary to_convert $V_{HB}$ to $V_{RR}$, and noting_that we adopt_a reddening E(B