CHAPTER IV.

THE DEVIL-FISH OF FICTION AND OF FACT.

Bearing in mind that the famous story of “The Toilers of the Sea”

should be regarded as a romance and not as a scientific treatise, I

will now endeavour to compare the “devil-fish” of the author with

the octopus of nature, and to indicate the points on which M. Hugo’s

representation of his “monster” is either substantially correct,

partly true, or entirely unreal.

His description of the seizure of Gilliatt by the _pieuvre_ shows

that he was tolerably well acquainted with its habits, mode of

attack, and external form. The half terrifying, half disgusting

grasp of one of the animal’s sucker-furnished arms, “supple as

leather, tough as steel, cold as night;” the issuing of a second from

the crevice, “like a tongue from out a mouth,” and the successive

application of a third, fourth, and fifth, to various parts of his

body, whilst the other three retained firm hold of the rock, is

powerfully, and, so far, correctly, depicted, if highly-coloured.

And, although, when the octopus desires to alter the position of

the suckers and to change its hold, it generally effects that by an

instantaneous relaxation and renewal of the suction, by protrusion

or retraction of the muscular piston within each, yet the gliding

of the cupping discs over the surface of a man’s wet skin is also

in accordance with possibility, for I have tested it with a living

octopus on my own arm. This will be easily understood by anyone who

has watched the movements of the entomostracous parasites of fishes.

The so-called river-louse, _Argulus foliaceus_, which infests all

freshwater fishes, can run over their scales without loosening the

hold of the two great suckers with which it is furnished; and others

which, like _Caligus_ and _Lepeotheirus_, have a water-tight carapace

with a flexible margin, are able to move rapidly over the body of the

fish in the same way.

In his relation of the manner in which the octopus captures its prey,

the novelist is therefore substantially in accord with nature. The

points on which he chiefly errs, are—

1st. The structure, use, capability, and effect on its victim, of its

arms and suckers.

2nd. Its general organisation.

3rd. Its mode of progression when swimming.

4th. The manner in which it devours and digests its food.

The arms are described as “encircling Gilliatt’s whole body,

cutting into his ribs like cord; ... forming a ligature about his

stomach; ... enfolding and constricting his diaphragm like straps;

producing such compression that he could hardly breathe; ... his

body almost disappearing under the folds of this horrible bandage;

its knots garotting him, its contact paralysing him.” The suckers

are represented as being “like so many lips trying to drink your

blood; ... they bury themselves to the depth of an inch in the flesh

of their prisoner; ... on contact with them your muscles swell, the

fibres are wrenched, and your blood gushes forth, and mixes horribly

with the lymph of the mollusc.”

The whole of this is fallacious. The arms of the octopus are not used

as weapons of constriction, compression, or suffocation. They are

eight radiating, supple, tapering thongs, in ordinary specimens from

eighteen inches to two feet long, on each of which are mounted, in a

double row, numerous sucking discs, which decrease in size towards

the tips of the limbs, and act as so many dry cupping-glasses. There

are normally about 240 of these suckers on each arm, making a total

of about 1,920. I have counted more in some individuals. M. Hugo

gives their number as “fifty on each arm, 400 in all;” so on this

point he very much understates his case.

[Illustration: Fig. 2. Sucker of the Octopus. (_O. vulgaris_).]

The cups themselves, by their internal mechanism for air exhaustion,

and consequent pressure of the outer atmosphere, adhere firmly to any

substance to which they are applied, whether stone, fish, crustacean,

or flesh of man; but in the octopus they have no power to puncture

or lacerate the skin, or to cause blood to flow. They are merely

pneumatically prehensile organs, by which the animal’s prey is caught

and held; not by “harpooning,” as the novelist supposes, but by their

atmospheric adhesion to the surface of its body. In this genus the

sucking discs are composed of a muscular membrane, the circumference

of which is thick and fleshy, and in some species cartilaginous, but

in all unarmed, and only adapted to secure close, air-tight contact

with any object it may touch. When experimenting on the holding force

of an octopus I have allowed it to fix its suckers firmly on my arm

and the back of my hand, and by pretending to try to pull them away

from its grasp have caused it to exert its utmost power of resistance

and retention. The only effect of this has been that the vacuum

produced an almost indistinguishable circular mark, corresponding

with the edge of the larger discs, and not nearly so distinct as

would be caused by the application of a glass tube to the skin, and

the partial exhaustion of the air in it by drawing it from the other

end by the mouth and tongue. In some of the Cephalopods the outer

circle of the cups is a horny ring, sharply serrated or dentated

around its edge; and in others—for instance, _Onychoteuthis_—the

centre of each cup is provided with a sharp, strong hook, capable of

being extended or sheathed, like the claws of a cat, which is plunged

deeply into the flesh of slippery prey for the better security of its

hold; but the cuttle-fishes thus furnished are, unlike the octopus,

habitually swimmers, instead of rock-crawlers. The sessile arms of

the octopods are considerably longer than those of the decapods, or

ten-armed cuttle-fishes; but the latter have, in addition to the

eight corresponding limbs, two long tentacular arms, which, in some

genera, are marvellous in the perfection of their compound apparatus

for securing and holding a struggling captive. This arrangement

is well suited to their habits and mode of life. Animals purely

swimmers, and which hunt and overtake their prey by speed, would be

impeded by having to drag after them a bundle of lengthy appendages

trailing heavily astern. But a long reach of arm is an advantage,

instead of a hindrance, to the octopus; for, although it can swim

on occasion, its ordinary habit is, either to rest suspended to the

side of a rock, to which it clings with the suckers of several of

its arms, in the position shewn in the frontispiece, or to remain

lurking in some favourite cranny; its body thrust for protection

and concealment well back in the interior of the recess; its bright

eyes keenly on the watch; three or four of its limbs firmly attached

to the walls of its hiding-place—the others gently waving, gliding,

and feeling about in the water, as if to maintain its vigilance,

and keep itself always on the alert, and in readiness to pounce on

any unfortunate wayfarer that may pass near its den. To small fish,

crustacean or mollusc, the slightest contact with even one of those

lithe arms is fatal. Instantaneously as pull of trigger brings down

a bird, or touch of electric wire explodes a torpedo or a mining

fuse, the pistons of the series of suckers are simultaneously drawn

inward, the air is removed from the pneumatic holders, and a vacuum

created in each; the victim strives to escape; a further retraction

of the central part of the disc makes all secure; and, as arm after

arm, containing a perfect mitrailleuse of inverted air-guns, takes

horrid hold, battery after battery of them is brought to bear, and

the pressure of the air is so great that nothing can effect the

relaxation of their retentive power but the destruction of the air

pump that works them, or the closing of the throttle-valve by which

they are connected with it.[12]

Desiring to have a better view than I had previously been able to

obtain of that which follows the seizure of a crab by an octopus,

I fastened one to a string, by which an attendant was to lower it

in the water close to the glass, whilst I stood watching in front.

The crab had hardly descended to the depth of two feet before an

octopus for which it was not intended, and which I had not observed

(so exactly had he assumed the hue of the surface to which he

clung), shot out like a rocket from one side of the tank, opened

his membranous umbrella, shut up the suspended crab within it, and

darted back again to the ledge of rock on which he had been lying in

ambush. There he held on, with the crab firmly pressed between his

body and the stone work. As this was not what I wished, I directed

my assistant to gently try to pull the bait away from him. As soon

as he felt the strain, he took a firm grasp of the rock with all

the suckers of seven of his arms, and, stretching the eighth aloft,

coiled it round the tautened line, the suckers actually closing on

the line also, as a caterpillar’s foot gripes a thin twig, or a

cobbler’s leather pad folds round his thread when he is making a

wax-end. It then became a game of “pull devil, pull baker,” and the

“devil-fish” won it. Noticing several jerks on the string, I thought

at first they were given by the man overhead, and told him not to

use too much force; but he called out, “It’s not me, sir, it’s the

octopus: I can’t move him; and he’s pulling so hard that, if I don’t

let go, he’ll break the line.” “Hold on, then, and let him break it,”

I replied. Tug! tug! dragged the tough, strong arm of the octopus;

and at the third tug the line broke, and the crab was all his own.

The twine was that used for mending the seine net, and was therefore

not particularly weak.

Although this experiment furnished a fresh illustration of the

holding power of an octopus, it had not taught me exactly that which

I wanted to know. I wished to be underneath that umbrella with the

crab, or (which was decidedly preferable) to be able to see what

happened beneath it without getting wet. My plan, therefore, was to

procure the seizure of the crab against the front glass, instead of

against the rock-work. Our next endeavour was successful. A second

crab was so fastened that the string could be withdrawn if desired,

and was lowered near to a great male octopus, who generally dwelt in

a nook in the west front corner of the tank. He was sleepy, and not

very hungry, and required a great deal of tempting to rouse him to

activity; but the sight of his favourite food overcame his laziness,

and, after some demonstrative panting, puffing, and erection of his

tubercles, he lunged out an arm to seize the precious morsel. It was

withdrawn from his reach; and so, at last, he turned out of bed,

rushed at it, and got it under him against the plate-glass, just

as I desired. In a second the crab was completely pinioned. Not a

movement, not a struggle was visible or possible: each leg, each

claw, was grasped all over by suckers—enfolded in them—stretched out

to its full extent by them. The back of the carapace was covered

all over with the tenacious vacuum-discs, brought together by the

adaptable contraction of the limb, and ranged in close order,

shoulder to shoulder, touching each other; whilst, between those

which dragged the abdominal plates towards the mouth, the black tip

of the hard, horny beak was seen for a single instant protruding from

the circular orifice in the centre of the radiation of the arms, and,

the next, had crunched through the shell, and was buried deep in the

flesh of the victim.

The action of an octopus when seizing its prey for its necessary food

is very like that of a cat pouncing on a mouse, and holding it down

beneath its paws. The movement is as sudden, the scuffle as brief,

and the escape of the prisoner even less probable. The fate of the

crab is not, really, more terrible than that of the mouse, or of a

minnow swallowed by a perch; but there is a repulsiveness about the

form, colour, and attitudes of its captor which invests it with a

kind of tragic horror.

In the next chapter the author writes:—

“To believe in the existence of the _pieuvre_ one must have seen

it. Compared to it the ancient hydras were insignificant. Orpheus,

Homer, and Hesiod imagined only the chimæra:—Providence created

the devil-fish. If terror was the object of its creation, it is

perfection.

“The ‘pieuvre’ has _no muscular organisation_, no menacing cry,

no breast-plate, no horn, no dart, no tail with which to hold or

bruise, no cutting fins, or wings with claws, no prickles, no

sword, no electric discharge, no venom, no talons, _no beak_, no

teeth.... It has no bones, _no blood_, _no flesh_. It is soft and

flabby. _It is an empty flask; a skin with nothing inside it. Its

eight tentacles may be turned inside out, like the fingers of a

glove. It has a single orifice, which is both vent and mouth. The

same opening performs both functions._”

[Illustration: Fig. 3. Mandibles of Octopus. (_O. vulgaris_).]

So says the novelist. The naturalist knows that it has a complete

and perfect muscular organisation; muscles which serve to retract

and depress the funnel, bundles of strong muscles passing along

the arms and branching to each of the suckers, within which other

_fasciculi_ of muscular fibres converge from the circumference to

the centre, and by their contraction produce the vacuum which gives

to the animal its power of adhesion,—muscles all over its body, and

a mass of muscles of such strength to work the powerful beak, that

if anyone, believing the fictionist, were to place his finger in the

small circular orifice in the centre of the base of the arms, he

would possibly learn practically that it is not “an empty flask with

nothing in it.” A sharp nip might perhaps teach him that it has not

only muscles, but a mouth and head also. For just within the oral

cavity lie, retracted and hidden, but ready for use when wanted, a

pair of horny mandibles which bite vertically, like the beak of a

parrot or turtle, except that the lower mandible is the longest and

overlaps the upper, and are so hard that they can not only tear the

softer animals the octopus is able to catch, but also break up the

shells of lobsters, crabs, and mussels, which are its usual food.

The head contains a brain, from which arises the system of nerves;

and the animal has a sense of smell, and organs of hearing and

taste, besides those which are apparent on its exterior, namely,

of sight and touch. Instead of having “no blood,” it is furnished

with a complete circulatory apparatus consisting of one systemic and

two branchial hearts, arteries which distribute the blood through

all parts of the body, and a system of veins or canals by which it

returns towards the gills, of which breathing organs the animal has

two—one on each side. By the alternate expansion and contraction

of the bladder-like mantle-sac—an action resembling that of a pair

of bellows—the water is pumped into contact with these gills,

which convey to the blood the oxygen contained in it; and when its

life-giving, purifying gas has been extracted from it, it is expelled

by the muscular, valved funnel, or syphon tube, which has also

another function, to be presently described. Far from being “a skin

with nothing inside it,” from the beak and mouth (within which is a

tongue like a rasp, having recurved spines or teeth) is continued the

alimentary canal, œsophagus, crop, gizzard, stomach, and intestines;

and within this so-called “empty pouch” are also the liver, and the

organs of reproduction and respiration. The “tentacles,” or arms,

cannot be “turned inside out like the fingers of a glove.” On making

a section across one of them, it will be seen that it is composed

of close muscles, the fibres of some of which run longitudinally,

and others transversely. The arm, therefore, is more like the strong

flexible lash of a stout hunting whip than the finger of a glove, and

is solid, except that it has a perforation along the centre of its

axis for the lodgment of its nerve and artery.

[Illustration: Fig. 4. Tongue of the Octopus (_O. vulgaris_).

Magnified 12 diameters.]

The author accurately describes the action and movement of the

octopus, and its utilisation of its eight arms when crawling at

the bottom, or on ledges of rocks. The globose body is then turned

upward, the mouth downward, and the arms sprawl along, and by

grappling some fresh object drag the body after them. But he is

mistaken concerning its mode of progression when swimming. After

stating that in swimming, it, so to speak, sheaths and draws close

together its arms, which is quite true, he continues:—

“Figure to yourself a sleeve sewn up with a fist in it. This fist,

_which is the head_, pushes through the water, and advances with an

undulating movement.”

That which M. Hugo supposes to be the head is the body of the

animal. He appears to have received this impression from Pliny,[13]

who writes:—“The head, which is directed obliquely when they swim,

is, in the living animal, hard and distended like a balloon.” The

cuttle-fishes, and the octopus amongst them, propel themselves

rapidly _backward_, when swimming, by the forcible expulsion from

the funnel, in sudden and frequent jets, of the water drawn in at

the branchial, or gill openings. Thus the organs of respiration

become those of locomotion as well, and the funnel has also another

function, being the orifice from which the excreta are expelled.

It has been asserted by various writers—and the statement has been

repeated by many able naturalists—that the octopus swims by vigorous

flappings of the expanded membrane which extends from the sheath of

the mouth along the arms, and connects the bases of the latter like

the web of a duck’s foot. It is true that this sometimes, though very

rarely, takes place, but its proper and usual mode of progression

is with the body in advance, the arms closely packed together, and

directed backward horizontally in its wake, whilst the jets of water,

pumped out at frequent intervals from the funnel, propel it at a

considerable speed. I have had opportunities of watching the habits

of at least a hundred individuals of this species, yet have only

three or four times seen them progress, when swimming, by powerful

contraction of the web-like membrane, and then but for a very short

distance. Still less frequently does the octopus reverse its usual

course; but I have twice seen one swim with its arms extended in

advance of it, by bending the syphon tube beneath its body so as to

present the orifice in a direction exactly contrary to its normal

position.

[Illustration: Fig. 5. The Octopus swimming.]

M. Hugo forcibly refers to the remarkable property of rapidly

changing its colour possessed by this animal. He writes:—

“Its under surface is yellowish; its upper, earthy. Its dusty

hue can neither be imitated nor explained: it might be called a

‘a beast made of ashes, which inhabits the water.’ Irritated, it

becomes violet. It is a spider in form, a chameleon in coloration.”

When quiescent, the general tone of colour of the octopus is a

mottled brown, but it assimilates itself as much as possible to

the rock to which for the time it may be holding. The moment it

commences to swim it assumes a deeper hue, which usually becomes

a dark, dingy red, but sometimes tends to purple. Mr. Darwin, in

his delightful “Journal of Researches made during the Voyage of

H.M.S. Beagle,” mentions his having noticed its endeavour to escape

detection by the use of this chameleon-like power of changing colour

so quickly as to cause it to vary with the nature of the ground

over which it passes. This is effected in the same manner as the

similar mutation of colour in the chameleon. Through the thin and

transparent outer skin are visible cells in the inner layer beneath

it, which contain pigment-matter of yellow, blue, red, and brown.

By the contraction and expansion of the cells, prominence is given

to one or another of these colours, at the will of the owner; and

not only do the spots appear, and fade, and alternate in position,

but, like human beings, the octopus turns pale when exhausted, and

flushes red under the influence of anger or excitement. A curious

play of colour, which I have elsewhere compared with the flashing

and dying out of sparks in tinder, often takes place on the skin of

the cephalopods by the continued action of the pigment cells, long

after the death of the animal. The ancients were well acquainted with

this colour-changing habit of the octopus. Aristotle mentions it, and

Oppian describes it as follows:—

“All fishers know the changing prekes’ deceit,

How, clung to rocks, when coming dangers threat

New forms they take, and wear a borrowed dress,

Mock the true stone, and colours well express.

As the rock looks they take a different stain,

Dapple with grey, or branch the livid vein.

Thus they, concealed, the dreaded danger shun

By borrowed shapes obscured, and lost in seeming stone.”

It was also frequently referred to by other writers. Athenæus quotes

Theognis of Megara as saying in his Elegies:—

“Remark the tricks of that most wary polypus,

Who always seems of the same colour and hue

As is the rock on which he lies;”

and Ion the tragedian, who wrote in his “Phœnix”:—

“I hate the colour-changing polypus

Clinging with bloodless feelers to the rocks.”

It was also the subject of a maxim equivalent to our “When you’re at

Rome, do as Rome does.” A proverb cited by Clearchus runs thus:—

“My son, my excellent Amphilocus,

Copy the shrewd device o’ the polypus

And make yourself as like as possible

To those whose land you chance to visit.”

M. Hugo poetically alludes to the phosphorescent glow said to be

emitted by the octopus in the dark:—

“By night, and especially in the rutting season, it is

phosphorescent. Awaiting its spouse, it beautifies, kindles,

illuminates itself; and, from the height of some rock, it may be

perceived in the profound darkness beneath, blossoming in wan

irradiation—a spectre sun.”

I have never been fortunate enough to witness the exhibition of this

phosphorescence by the living octopus, although in dead specimens,

as is the case with other marine animals, it becomes apparent as

soon as decomposition has commenced; but D’Orbigny mentions it, and

Mr. Darwin says, “I observed that one which I kept in the cabin

was slightly phosphorescent in the dark.”[14] No doubt concerning

this can, therefore, exist; for a more competent observer, or more

accurate recorder of facts than Mr. Darwin, never put pen to paper.

In his description of the manner in which the devil-fish absorbs its

victim, the author of “The Toilers of the Sea” releases his ardent

imagination from the few restraining ties by which it was bound to

reality. He writes:—

“You enter into the beast, the hydra incorporates itself with the

man: the man is amalgamated with the hydra. You become one. The

tiger can only devour you; the devil-fish inhales you. He draws

you to him, into him; and, bound and helpless, you feel yourself

slowly emptied into this frightful sac, which is a monster. To

be eaten alive is more than terrible; but to be drunk alive is

inexpressible.”

M. Hugo fortunately gives us the means of estimating the size of

the body of the octopus which attacked Gilliatt. He tells us that

its arms were “nearly a metre (thirty-nine inches) long.” None of

quite so great dimensions have, I believe, been found in the English

Channel, but it is not impossible that such exist. Granting this,

the body of such an octopus would not be very much larger than a

soda-water bottle or a Florence-flask, such as olive-oil is sold in:

and so the “horrible bag, which is a monster,” and into which you are

to be inhaled and drawn alive, is but a small affair after all. The

plain truth is, that the octopus and other cephalopods obtain and eat

their food very much like the rapacious birds. They are the falcons

of the sea. Some of them, like Onychoteuthis, strike their prey with

talons and suckers also; others, like the octopus, lay hold of it

with suckers alone; but they all tear the flesh with their beaks, and

swallow and digest their food in as unromantic a fashion as does hawk

or vulture.

But it is when the author indulges in what he is pleased to call

“philosophical meditation” on such animals that he arrives at the

highest point of hyperbolical mystery. He tells us:—

“They are the chosen forms of evil. What are we to do in presence

of these blasphemies of creation against itself?... The possible

is a formidable matrix. Mystery concretes itself in monsters.

Portions of shades come forth from this block, the perpetual; tear

themselves, divide themselves, roll, float, condense, borrow from

the ambient blackness, undergo unknown polarizations, assume life,

compose for themselves who can tell what forms with obscurity, what

souls with miasma; and issue from them larvæ, athwart the course of

vitality. They are as the darkness converted into beasts. Of what

use, for what purpose, are such creatures?—relapse of the eternal

question! These animals are phantoms as much as monsters. They are

the amphibiæ of death, the visible extremities of black circles.

They mark the transition of our reality to another.”

To analyse this is beyond my powers. One can only wonder what it

all means. The language is sententious, and would, no doubt, be

impressive if it were not incomprehensible. It reminds one of Mr.

Maccabe’s “Welsh sermon,” which, delivered with solemn earnestness,

rolls forth in grandly sonorous tones, but has not a word of Welsh

or sense in it; or of the “nonsense-problem” which Mark Twain says

was propounded to him by Artemus Ward, and which seemed so full of

thought and so clearly put that he blamed his “wooden head” because

he got into a hopeless tangle over it, until he found he had been

entrapped into pondering over “a string of plausibly worded sentences

that did not mean anything under the sun.”

Let us now take evidence concerning the dimensions to which the

octopus is known to attain, and the degree in which it may be

regarded as dangerous to man.

An octopus from our own coasts having arms two feet in length may

be considered a rather large specimen; and Dr. J. E. Gray, who was

always most kindly ready to place at the disposal of any sincere

inquirer the vast store of knowledge laid up in his wonderful memory,

told me that “there is not one in the British museum which exceeds

this size, or which would not go into a quart pot, body, arms and

all.” The largest British specimen I have hitherto seen had arms 2

ft. 6 in. long.

If, however, the octopus seldom or never arrives at a length of arm

of three feet on the northern coasts of France, we have sufficient

evidence that it exceeds it on her southern borders, and along the

Spanish and Italian shores of the Mediterranean.

M. Verany, of Nice, an able naturalist, mentions having seen an

octopus which weighed 33 lbs. and measured three metres from tip to

tip of its outstretched arms. This would make the length of each

arm about four-and-a-half feet. A fisherman who noticed it affixed

to the mole of the port of Nice had the hardihood to grasp it with

his hands, and made himself master of it, though not without much

difficulty.

Mr. Sylvanus Hanley, the well-known conchologist, and joint author

with Professor Edward Forbes of their standard work on the British

Mollusca, who passes every winter in Italy, has personally informed

me that there are living in the harbour of Leghorn several octopods

having arms at least four feet long, and as thick at their base as

a man’s wrist. They lie with their bodies squeezed into, and hidden

in, crevices in the stone-work of the mole and sea-wall, two or three

of their arms extended and waving about in the water in readiness

to seize passing prey, and the others holding fast to the blocks of

stone. Mr. Hanley says that his son, who is a practised shore-hunter,

and no coward, having frequent occasion, whilst in search of shells,

to climb along a ledge of the rough masonry near the surface of the

water, just beneath which was the lurking-place of one of these great

creatures, was for some time afraid to pass the spot, in consequence

of the animal’s formidable appearance; for, as he approached, it

would thrust one or two of its disc-studded arms out of water, and

stretch them towards him in a threatening manner, in its endeavours

to reach him. The Italian divers and bathers are said to fear these

creatures.

My deceased friend John Keast Lord gives in his book, “The Naturalist

in British Columbia,” some particulars of the dimensions attained

by the octopus in North-Western America. He writes:—“The octopus,

as seen on our own coasts (of England), although even here called a

‘man-sucker’ by the fishermen, is a mere Tom Thumb—a tiny dwarf—as

compared with the Brobdingnagian proportions he attains in the sunny

bays and long inland canals of Vancouver’s Island, as well as on the

mainland. These places afford lurking-dens, strongholds, and natural

sea-nurseries, where the octopus grows to an enormous size, fattens,

and wages war with insatiable ferocity on all and everything it can

catch. The size, of course, varies. I have seen and measured the arm

five feet long, and as large at the base, where it joins the central

disc, as my wrist.” He adds that the Indians, when spearing them for

food, take care to keep them at a distance till they have stabbed

them to death; knowing that if an octopus were once to get some of

its huge arms over the side of the canoe, it could as easily haul it

over as a child could upset a basket. But we know that a canoe is

very crank, and easily upset.

I have often been asked whether an octopus of the ordinary size

can really be dangerous to bathers. Decidedly “Yes,” in certain

situations. The octopus would not seize a man for the purpose of

devouring him; nor do I believe that the act would be prompted by a

deliberate intention to drown him, that his dead body might become

an attractive bait for crabs, which are the animal’s favourite food;

but rather by an instinctive desire to lay hold on anything moving

within reach. The holding power of its numerous suckers is enormous.

It is almost impossible forcibly to detach it from its adhesion to a

rock or the flat bottom of a tank; and if a large one happened to fix

one or more of its strong, tough arms on the leg of a swimmer whilst

the others held firmly to a rock, I doubt if the man could disengage

himself under water by mere strength, before being exhausted.

Fortunately, it can be made to relax its hold by grasping it tightly

round the “throat” (if I may so call it), and it may be well that

this should be known.

That men are occasionally drowned by these creatures is,

unfortunately, a fact too well attested. In August, 1867, the _Genoa

Gazette_ mentioned that a carter of Sampierdarena, who had gone to

bathe near the reef of San Andria, was seized by an octopus, which,

in spite of all his efforts, dragged him under water and drowned him.

Not one of the bathers who witnessed the occurrence dared to go to

the assistance of the unfortunate man.

Admiral Baillie Hamilton has kindly furnished me with some

information on the subject. He tells me that in his time, many years

ago, it was an understood thing that there existed amongst the rocks

of Gibraltar Bay an octopus of large size; and that during the last

half-century one soldier at least of the garrison has been drowned

whilst bathing there by being grasped under water by one of these

“devil-fishes.”

Major Newsome, R.E., has also been so kind as to send me the

following description of an incident which happened to himself.

“In the years 1856-7,” he writes, “I was stationed at East London,

a landing place about 900 miles from the Cape, up the east coast

of Africa;—I speak from memory, having no map at hand. It is a

rock-bound coast with the exception of the river’s mouth, which

consists of a small space of sand. The landing is most dangerous,

and, conducted in surf boats, hatched over, is only then practicable

in very calm weather. The ordinary practice amongst the officers,

both for comfort and saving of labour, is to bathe on the sea shore.

Such was my custom each morning. There was one quadrangular cavity

in the rocks which, at low water and in calm weather, formed a very

desirable bath; but in rough weather, or at any time of tide except

near about low water, it was unapproachable. At the best of times it

was generally in a boil, and I have known a strong swimmer washed

clean out of it on to the adjoining rocks, cut most grievously about

the body by barnacles. Nevertheless, we mostly took a dip there when

practicable, on account of the freshness of the water. At other

times the plunge took place in smooth pools left in the rocks by

the receding tide, which, though not quite so fresh, yet formed a

very acceptable bath. One morning I took a header into one of these

pools, which was, perhaps, 20 feet long, 7 to 8 feet wide, and deep

in the centre—8 or 9 feet. As I swam from one end to the other, I

was horrified at feeling something around my ancle, and made for the

side as speedily as I could. I thought at first it was only seaweed;

but as I landed, and trod with my foot on the rock, my disgust was

heightened at feeling a fleshy and slippery substance under me. I

was, I confess, alarmed, and so, apparently, was the beast on whom

I trod, and whom, I suspect, I thereby discomfited, as he quickly

detached himself and made again for the water. Some fellow-bathers,

whom I hailed, came to my assistance, and with a boat-hook, on to

which the brute clung, he was, eventually, safely landed. When

extended he would have filled a hoop of five feet diameter. The grasp

of an ordinary sized octopus holding to a rock would, I suppose, in

lat. 30°, be not less than 30 lb. to 40 lb. The floating power of a

man is between 5 lb. and 6 lb., and it takes a very strong swimmer to

convey an ordinary fowling-piece, which weighs only 7 lb., across a

river, dry. Had I not kept mid-channel, I believe it would have been

a life-and-death struggle between myself and the beast on my ancle.

In the open water I was the best man; but near the bottom or sides,

which I could not have reached with my arms, but which he could have

reached with his, he would, certainly, have drowned me.”

Major Newsome has not over-estimated the holding power of an octopus.

One in the Brighton Aquarium was seen dragging towards it a huge

stone, from 40 lb. to 50 lb. in weight. It is not uncommon for one to

haul up to a ledge of rock, four or five feet from the bottom, two

or three heavy oysters simultaneously; and it unfortunately happened

in the early days of the Institution, and before precautions were

taken to avert such accidents, that an octopus drew up, by night, the

waste-valve of his tank, and let all the water run out of it; thus,

by his strength, like Samson at Gaza, bringing death upon himself and

all his companions.

The octopus · 第 4 / 10 章