II.

Attempts to discredit the Sea-Serpent. Cheats and Hoaxes.

Home from their first voyage, sailor-lads, as Mr. Gosse says, are

commonly eagerly beset for wonders. And what tales do they palm upon

their credulous listeners? If they do not draw on their own invention,

they tell the old stories they have heard when on fine evenings they

were together with the old tars talking and chatting on the fore-deck.

Of the latter many have no other origin than the imagination of a

sailor’s brain; they are merely hoaxes; others again are exaggerated

and garbled reports of what they have seen with their own eyes, or of

what their comrades or their captain saw! There are the tales of the

Unicorn, of the White Whale, that terrible “Moby Dick” of the Polar

Regions, there are the fables of the Mermaids and Mermen, there are the

exaggerations of the Kraken and the Sea-Serpent!

Except the last, all the other animals that gave rise to the terrible

tales are known to Zoologists, and by their enlightenment even to the

sailors themselves. This probably explains sufficiently why our sailors

do not report any more encounters with Mermaids, or with the Kraken.

They know now that they saw, or harpooned, manatees, or dugongs, and

gigantic squids, or calamaries.

But suddenly the newspapers spread the rumour of a Sea-Serpent having

been seen by Captain So and So, of the Royal Navy, and by the master,

several midshipmen, and some men of the crew! The news is printed in

hundreds of newspapers, and passes from mouth to mouth, in short,

it becomes the topic of the day! A schooner, or a brig runs into a

harbour, say that of Liverpool, and the Captain, and the crew are

immediately asked if they have seen the sea-serpent. Unaware of the

existence of such an animal they of course answer in the negative!

But soon convinced by the affidavits printed in the newspapers, they

swear that when on their next voyage they meet with it, they will

bring it home! But on the next voyage, though they are constantly on

the watch, the sea-serpent does not appear, and the time for returning

home arrives. One of the sailors, perhaps even the captain hits upon

an idea, a splendid one! Though he did not meet with the serpent, yet

he has seen it with his own eyes! but the beast swam so rapidly that

he could not pursue it! So in a moment he is resolved on hoaxing the

gullible!

It is clear that the unbeliever must have had a great pleasure in

inventing the hoax upon the subject, and in playing some splendid

tricks on the believers!

Some of these hoaxes are admirably set up, and I will begin by telling

my readers some of them, which I met with in the various works I had

the opportunity to consult.

* * * * *

The earliest hoax or exaggerated report is that, published for the

first time in the _Report_ of 1817. There we find in a letter from the

Rev. Mr. WILLIAM JENKS the following:

“He” (Mr. STAPLES of Prospect) “told me also that about 1780, as a

schooner was lying at a mouth of the river, or in the bay, one of these

enormous creatures leaped over it between the masts--that the men ran

into the hold for fright, and that the weight of the serpent sunk the

vessel “one streak” or plank. The schooner was of about eighteen tons.”

* * * * *

Now follows the hoax of a JOSEPH WOODWARD, who had reason to be

satisfied, for his tale appeared in many newspapers at Boston, New

York, etc. It runs as follows:

“Another sea-serpent, different to the one first seen near Cape Anne,

is said to have been seen, and the following declaration has been drawn

up and attested in proper form.”

“I, the undersigned, Joseph Woodward, captain of the Adamant schooner

of Hingham, being on my route from Penobscot to Hingham, steering W. N.

W., and being about 10 leagues from the coast, perceived last Sunday,

at two P. M. something on the surface of the water, which seemed to

me to be of the size of a large boat. Supposing that it might be part

of the wreck of a ship, I approached it; but when I was within a few

fathoms of it, it appeared, to my great surprise, and that of my whole

crew, that it was a monstrous serpent. When I approached nearer, it

coiled itself up, instantly uncoiling itself again, and withdrew with

extreme rapidity. On my approaching again, it coiled itself a second

time, and placed itself at the distance of 60 feet at most from the bow

of the ship.”

“I had one of my guns loaded with a cannon ball and musket bullets.

I fired it at the head of the monster; my crew and myself distinctly

heard the _ball_ and bullets strike against his body, from which they

rebounded, as if they had struck against a rock. The serpent shook his

head and tail in an extraordinary manner, and advanced towards the ship

with open jaws. I had caused the cannon to be reloaded, and pointed it

at his throat; but he had come so near, that all the crew were seized

with terror, and we thought only of getting out of his way. He almost

touched the vessel; and had not I tacked as I did, he would certainly

have come on board. He dived; but in a moment we saw him appear again,

with his head on one side of the vessel, and his tail on the other, as

if he was going to lift us up and upset us. However, we did not feel

any shock. He remained five hours near us, only going backward and

forward.”

“The fears with which he at first inspired us having subsided, we were

able to examine him attentively. I estimate that his length is at least

twice that of my schooner, that is to say, 130 feet; his head is full

12 or 14; the diameter of the body below the neck is not less than six

feet; the size of the head is in proportion to that of his body. He is

of a blackish colour; his ear-holes (ouies), are about 12 feet from the

extremity of his head. In short, the whole has a terrible look.”

“When he coils himself up, he places his tail in such a manner, that

it aids him in darting forward with great force: he moves in all

directions with the greatest facility and astonishing rapidity.”

“(Signed)”

“Joseph Woodward.”

“Hingham, May 12, 1818.”

“This declaration is attested by Peter Holmes and John Mayo, who made

affidavit of the truth of it before a justice of peace.”

This hoax was reprinted in the _Quarterly Journal of Science,

Literature and the Arts of the Royal Institute at London_, Vol. VI,

1818, and was apparently believed in by the sender. Mr. OKEN also

inserted the tale of WOODWARD in his _Isis_, of 1818, p. 2100.--Thirty

years afterwards Mr. EDWARD NEWMAN, the editor of _The Zoologist_,

published it in his journal of 1848, p. 2028, without, however,

mentioning the source from which he copied it! Why did not he do so?

Apparently because he felt ashamed of giving such an old story, and

because he was aware of the fact, that the whole account was wonderful,

and contained many impossibilities!

Astonishing enough, Mr. FRORIEP translated this piece from the

_Zoologist_, and inserted it in his journal (_Notizen_, Third Series,

Vol. VI, n^o 131, p. 328), and ends this article with the following

remark:[1]

[1] The translations are done as literally as possible.

“This communication tallies with those about the sea-serpent,

published in our 3d. volume p. 148, which are also taken from the

_Zoologist_. Some German newspapers have then amused themselves with

our communications, as with a newspaper-hoax. We, however, shall go on

to gather whatever from time to time will still come to us to solve an

apparently fabulous matter in Zoology.”

The story, however, roused the indignation of Mr. W. W. COOPER, of

Worcester (see _The Zoologist_, 1848, p. 2192). I will let him speak

himself:

“I have waited anxiously to see whether any more competent person

than myself would offer any observation upon the statement of Captain

Woodward, published in the March number of the Zoologist, relating to

the Great “Sea-serpent”. As no one has done so, I beg to offer you the

following: In a note which you added in this statement, you say, “The

foregoing statement was formally signed and sworn to at Hingham, by

captain Woodward, on the 12th of May”. What 12th of May? You should

have told your readers. Now, evidence given upon oath is generally

considered as conclusive, except where the party swearing is known to

be unworthy of credit, or the evidence given is not consistent with

itself. Of Captain Woodward I know nothing; I never heard of him till I

read the “Zoologist” for last March. It is, therefore, upon the latter

ground that I venture to attack his statement, and I do so because in

a disputed question it is necessary to throw aside all evidence that

will not stand the stricktest scrutiny. Captain Woodward tells us

nothing of his where-abouts, except that he was sailing from Penobscot

to Hingham, steering W. N. W., nor of the date when he says he saw

the serpent, except that it was on “Sunday last at 2 p. m.” This is

not sufficiently accurate. But these are trifling points. The most

extraordinary part of the statement will appear from this: Captain

Woodward says, the beast moved with _extreme_, or, as he afterwards

expressed himself, _astonishing_ rapidity; that when he fired at the

monster it was sixty feet at the most from the bow of the ship, which

appears to have been the nearest part of the vessel to the animal; but

after he fired the beast advanced towards his ship; that he had caused

his cannon to be reloaded and pointed at its throat,--of course while

it was advancing towards his vessel,--but before he could fire his crew

were seized with terror; that he tacked and got out of its way. So here

we have an animal sixty feet from the ship, moving with astonishing

rapidity _towards the ship_, which it appears was also moving _towards

the animal_, and yet allowing time to load a cannon, point it at its

throat, and afterwards to tack to get out of its way. Truly a most

accommodating serpent! But again, the animal remained five hours

near the ship, allowing itself to be minutely examined, but yet no

further attempt to kill the beast! And what is almost equally strange,

though even the position of the ear-holes is mentioned,--such minute

observation does Capt. Woodward seem to have made,--yet no description

is given of any scales, or anything else, to account for what is before

stated, that Capt. Woodward and his crew “distinctly heard the ball and

bullets strike against his body, from which they rebounded as though

they had struck against a rock”. It is much to be regretted that these

inconsistencies did not strike you before you made public the statement

in question; it is also to be regretted that no one better able than

myself to point them out has undertaken to do so. But it is highly

desirable, in the present state of our ignorance upon this subject,

that none but the most inexceptionable evidence should be received. Let

us have “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.” I need

hardly add, that in these observations I am actuated by no unfriendly

feeling towards Captain Woodward: my desire is to get at the truth of

the matter; and I should hail with delight the day when one of these

monsters of the deep, whatever they may be (for some animal with which

we are unacquainted has, I firmly believe, been seen), is brought to

our shores and lodged in one of our museums, to be at once the wonder

and admiration of naturalists.--W. W. Cooper; Claines, Worcester, June

2, 1848.”

Here ends the history of this hoax, utterly smashed!

Mr. Edward Newman has never answered to this attack!

* * * * *

In 1818, when again notice was given of the presence of a sea-serpent

in the neighbourhood of Boston, a reward of 5000 dollars was offered to

the whalers for securing it, and bringing it home dead or alive. I will

insert here the whole history of these attempts, for they finished with

a trick.

In the copy of the _Report of the Committee_ of 1817, which I have

borrowed from the Library of the Royal University of Göttingen, there

is a paragraph from a newspaper of August, 21, 1818, the head or title

of which is wanting; it runs as follows:

“Boston, Aug. 21.”

“Transmitted by our N. Y. Correspondents.

“Capt. Rich, who went from here a few days since, in pursuit of the

Sea-serpent, writes the concern as follows:

“_Squam River, Aug. 20th. 12 o’clock._--After several unsuccessful

attempts, we have at length fastened to this strange thing called the

Sea-Serpent. We struck him fairly but the harpoon soon drew out. He has

not been seen since, and I fear the wound he received will make him

more cautious how he approaches these shores. Since my last, yesterday,

we have been constantly in pursuit of him; by day he always keeps a

proper distance from us, to prevent our striking oars. But a few hours

since, I thought we were sure of him, for I hove the harpoon into him

as fairly as ever a whale was struck; took from us about 20 fathoms of

warp before we could wind the boat, with as much swiftness as a whale.

We had but a short ride when we were all loose from him to our sore

disappointment.”

“Rich’d. Rich”.

“Gloucester, Aug. 20.--As I thought it would be interesting to you to

hear from Capt. Rich, and as he is at some distance, I will give you

some particulars of his cruise. On Monday last, he sailed from this

in a large whale boat, and two smaller ones well manned. My brother

commanded one of the boats. Yesterday they met the Serpent off Squam,

and chased him about seven hours, when they closed with him. He passed

directly under the bows of Capt. Rich’s boat; he immediately threw

the harpoon, which pierced him about two feet; he drew the boat a

considerable distance but went with such a velocity that he broke

that part of the boat through which the rope passed and drew out the

harpoon. I hope they will have another opportunity before they give up

the chase.”

“He has _no_ scales on him, and no bunches on his back, but his skin

is smooth, and looks similar to an eel. In the attack, Capt. Rich had

one of his hands wounded. These particulars I have in a letter from my

brother”.

“Saml. Dexter”.

After the perusal of this work my readers will know why I am disposed

to believe that the animal struck by Captain RICH was really a

Sea-Serpent. As far as I can judge, after having read all that I have

found about the sea-serpent, this is the only time that the animal

was struck with a harpoon. Balls have often been fired at it, but it

has never been killed yet. In the same copy of the _Report of the

Committee_ of 1817, there was a letter from Mr. ANDREWS NORTON to Mr.

GEORGE BANCROFT, at that time a resident at Göttingen. I give here an

extract from this letter concerning the matter in question.

“Last Friday morning upon going to breakfast at Dr. Ware’s, I

found there the papers of the day, in which was announced the most

interesting fact, that the Sea-Serpent had been taken by the expedition

fitted out for that purpose. In the Daily Advertiser in particular

nearly a column was filled with the circumstances of his capture, and

of the manner in which the information had been received, viz. from a

person whose name was given, and who had come express from Gloucester,

the evening before, to bring the news. He was said to be 120 feet

long, and the Board of Health had sent down two boats to stop him in

the Harbour. After talking about it all breakfast time, I immediately

went to Reed’s stable, got a horse and chaise, put a news-paper in my

pocket, rode to Professor Peck’s, showed him the paper, and offered to

carry him into Boston, and to procure a boat to go out with him into

the Harbour, that he might examine it. He was not well, and said at

first that he could not go; but gradually grew warm upon the subject,

and concluded at last that it would never do for him not to see it.

When I had fairly got him into the chaise, his spirits rose with the

exertion he had made, with the thoughts of the memoir and letters

which he should write, and with the triumph which he anticipated

over the Linnaean Society and their “diseased black snake”, as he

contemptuously called it (meaning the small serpent, killed near the

shore at Gloucester); for he pledged himself that we should find that

the sea-serpent had no bunches on his back. I too anticipated with

great satisfaction the honorable mention of me, which his gratitude

would induce him to make in his memoir upon the subject, and expected

confidently to float down to posterity behind Mr. Peck, upon this

enormous animal. We entered Boston, and rode immediately to the end

of Central Wharf to the store of a Mr. Rich, who had fitted out the

expedition. The first person we saw was Judge Davis, whose countenance

foreboded evil. His first words were to inform us that we had come in

to be disappointed, for that the serpent was not taken! (I am not in

the habit of using notes of admiration, but the present occasion seems

to require one). The sailors, however, affirmed, as he said, that they

had taken some most extraordinary fish of very large size, which he

was going to see. I had little appetite left for seeing extraordinary

fishes, but went to accompany Mr. Peck. We proceeded a wharf to the

South End, and making our way through a croud, obtained admission into

the dark lower room of a store where we found a considerable number

of other gentlemen waiting. After some delay the fish was dragged

in from the small vessel in which it had been brought, wrapped in

sail. As soon as it was uncovered and fairly exposed to view, it was

pronounced by all who knew any thing on the subject to be nothing but

a Thunny, or Horse Mackerel, of a common size.--We had been gradually

prepared for the disappointment, so that the shock was not so great as

you might suppose. The report in the morning’s paper had arisen from

a _mystification_ performed upon the person who brought it to Boston,

by the crew of the vessel engaged in the expedition. The sailors who

dragged in the fish were part of this crew; and instead of their being

tossed over the wharf into the water, by way of punishment for their

imposition, and to teach them better morals, as they infallibly would

have been by any mob out of Boston, there was actually a collection

made to reward them for their trouble in taking the fish and bringing

it to exhibit. This fact, I think, deserves to be recorded for the

honor of Boston, and particularly of us gentlemen present.--I have only

to add that if you should learn that any one of the German literati is

writing a volume upon Sea-Serpents, I beg you will assure him, that we

do not consider the circumstance, connected with the deception just

mentioned, as affecting the evidence before obtained for their real

existence.--In the Messenger of this week which I will send by the next

opportunity you will find one or two notices of this affair p. 756 and

p. 758.”

I have had no opportunity to consult the above mentioned passage from

this _Messenger_. I think most of my readers know a tunny (_Thynnus

thynnus_ (_Linn._)). For those, however, who don’t, I give here a

figure of it.

[Illustration: Fig. 1. ~Thynnus thynnus~ (Linn.).]

In the _Philosophical Magazine_, Vol. LIII, p. 71, of January 1819, we

read:

“T. Say, Esq., of Philadelphia, in a letter received from him by Dr.

Leach, announces that a Captain Rich had fitted out an expedition

purposely to take this leviathan, of which so much has been said in

the newspapers and even in some scientific journals. He succeeded in

“fastening his harpoon in what was acknowledged by all the crew to be

the veritable Sea-serpent (and which several of them had previously

seen and made oath to): but when drawn from the water, and full within

the sphere of their vision, it proved that this serpent, which fear had

loomed to the gigantic length of 100 feet, was no other than a harmless

Tunny (_Scombrus Thynnus_) nine or ten feet long!”

We see that Mr. NORTON and Prof. PECK immediately recognized the whole

story as a Yankee-trick, but that Prof. T. SAY was the dupe of it!

From a letter from Prof. JACOB BIGELOW to Prof. BENJAMIN SILLIMAN (_Am.

Journ. Sc. Arts_, Vol. II, Boston, 1820) I conclude that Prof. SAY’S

letter was printed in THOMSON’S _Annals_ for Jan. 1819. If anybody

can tell me the exact title of THOMSON’S _Annals_, he will oblige me,

indeed. I have had no opportunity to consult it. A part of this letter

was translated into German, and inserted in OKEN’S _Isis_ of 1819, p.

653. I will try to translate this part into English again:

“I regret that many scientific journals in Europe have in good earnest

treated of the absurd story of the Great Sea-Serpent, which is nothing

but a result of defective observation connected with an extravagant

degree of fear. You will already know, that Capt. RICH has thrown light

upon the subject; out of his own means he fitted out a ship to catch

this Leviathan. He succeeded.....” (etc., the rest of the letter runs

like the part from the _Philosophical Magazine_, quoted above).

Mr. RAFINESQUE SCHMALTZ, however, says, (see _Phil. Mag._ Vol. LIV,

1819):

“The _Pelamis megophias_, or Great Sea-Snake, appears to have left the

shores of Massachusetts, and to have baffled the attempts to catch

it, probably because those attempts were conducted with very little

judgment. But a smaller snake, or fish, nine feet long, and a strange

shark, have been taken, of which the papers give no description: let us

hope that they will be described by the naturalists at Boston”.

And Prof. JACOB BIGELOW, of Boston (SILLIMAN’S _Am. Journ. Sc. Arts_,

Vol. II, Boston, 1820):

“In the following year” (1818) “Capt. Rich of Boston, went on an

expedition fitted out for the purpose of taking the Sea-Serpent, and

after a fruitless cruise of some weeks, brought into port a fish of the

species commonly known to mariners and fishermen by the name of Tunny,

Albicore or Horse Mackerel, the _Scomber Thynnus_ of Linnaeus, and

which fish he asserted to be the same as that denominated Sea-Serpent.

This disappointment of public curiosity was attended at the time by a

disbelief on the part of many, of the existence of a distinct marine

animal of the serpent-kind, or of the dimensions and shape represented

by the witnesses of Gloucester and elsewhere.”

“It is hoped that the unsuccessful termination of Capt. Rich’s cruise

will not deter others from improving any future opportunities which

may occur for solving what may now perhaps be considered the most

interesting problem in the science of Natural History.”

This was written in 1820, and the problem is not quite solved yet!

The trick of Capt. RICH is also mentioned in the paper of Mr. MITCHILL,

spoken of further on.

Again Colonel T. H. PERKINS relates in the _Boston Daily Advertiser_ of

November 25, 1848, the trick of Capt. RICH as follows (copied from the

_Zoologist_ of 1849, p. 2361).

“As it happened, a circumstance took place which did not do much credit

to the actors in it, but which served to fortify the unbelief of our

southern brethern. Believing that the possession of the sea-serpent

would be a fortune to those who should have him in their power,

many boats were fitted out from Cape Ann and other places in the

neighbourhood of his haunts, armed with harpoons and other implements,

and manned with persons used to the whale fishery, in hopes of getting

near enough to him to fasten their harpoons in his side. Among others a

Captain Rich (not Benjamin Rich), of Boston, took command of a party,

which was fitted out at some expense, and went into the bay, where they

cruised along shore two or three days without seeing the serpent. With

a view, however, to keep the joke from themselves, they determined to

throw or attempt to throw it upon others, though at the _expense of

truth_! They spread a report that they had caught the serpent, or what

had been taken for one, and that he was to be seen at a place mentioned

in the advertisement.”

“Thousands were flocking to see this wonder, when it was found to be

no other than a large horse macquerel, which (though a great natural

curiosity, weighing sometimes 600 or 700 pounds) very much disappointed

those, who had been induced to visit it. Those who had declared their

disbelief of the existence of the Sea-serpent amongst ourselves were

delighted to find their opinions were confirmed, and gave themselves

great credit for their judgment and discrimination. The report spread

from Boston to New Orleans, that what had been thought by some persons

to be a sea-serpent had proved to be a horse macquerel, and even

those who had been believers now supposed that those who had reported

that they had seen the serpent had either misrepresented or had been

themselves deceived. As no report of the snake having been seen after

the capture of the macquerel was made, during that year, Captain Rich

had the laugh with him, until circumstances, which have transpired

since, have borne rather against him. Thus much for the transactions of

the past years.”

* * * * *

_The Lake Erie Serpent._--In Mr. RAFINESQUE’S _Dissertation on

Sea-Snakes_, we read (See _Phil. Mag._ Vol. LIV, 1819):

“It appears that our large lakes have huge serpents or fishes, as well

as the sea. On the 3d. of July, 1817, one was seen in Lake Erie, three

miles from land, by the crew of a schooner, which was 35 or 40 feet

long, and one foot in diameter; its colour was a dark mahogany, nearly

black. This account is very imperfect, and does not even notice if it

had scales; therefore it must remain doubtful whether it was a snake

or a fish. I am inclined to believe it was a fish, until otherwise

convinced: it might be a gigantic species of eel, or a species of the

above genus _Octipos_. Until seen again, and better described, it may

be recorded under the name of _Anguilla gigas_ or Gigantic Eel.”

And in the _Additions_ to this dissertation:

“The Water-Snake of Lake Erie has been seen again, and described to be

of a copper colour, with bright eyes, and 60 feet long. It is added,

that at a short distance balls had no effect on him: but it is omitted

to mention whether it was owing to have hard scales (in which case it

might be a real snake of the genus _Enhydris_ or _Pelamis_), or to the

indexterity of the marksman.”

Every one feels that Mr. RAFINESQUE was the dupe of a hoax, and that

he was so, indeed, will be seen from Mr. MITCHILL’S dissertation (see

below) in which more hoaxes are to be found.

* * * * *

Unbelievers not only invented tales to play a trick to believers, but

when scientific men, they even read papers before learned assemblies,

with a view of ridiculing the matter. I believe there has been no

greater attempt to throw discredit on the sea-serpent, than that of

Mr. SAMUEL L. MITCHILL. I am obliged to communicate to my readers his

whole paper, even at the risk of wearying them. It was published in

SILLIMAN’S _Am. Journ. Sc. Arts_, 1829, and runs as follows:

“The History of Sea-Serpentism, extracted from Samuel L. Mitchill’s

Summary of the progress of Natural Science within our United States,

for a few years past; read before the New York Lyceum, at a succession

of sittings during October, 1828.--N^o. 35.--The Sea-Serpent.

(Communicated for this Journal).”

“This subject, the author observed, would scarcely be worthy of notice,

before this learned and respectable assembly, if it had not happened,

that during several years, it, or something so imagined and so called,

had frequently been presented for public consideration; and that

paragraphs and statements in the newspapers and journals, do yet, from

time to time, attract the attention of their readers.”

“This alleged monster of the deep first haunted the coast of

Massachusetts, and frightened more particularly the neighbourhood of

Gloucester with his presence. Observations were made, and evidence

was collected to a large amount. These were so considerable and

imposing, that the Linnean Society of New England published a book on

the subject, with the figure of the enormous reptile under the name of

_Scoliophis_. As the fishermen and naturalists could not catch him and

bring him ashore for inspection, it was concluded to fortify the story

by oaths. Accordingly, affidavits were made to great extent, containing

the particulars of what the several deponents believed they had seen,

and, as far as swearing went, such solemn declarations presented a

strong case. Their operation however upon my mind was, that there was

nothing better to show than those statements upon paper, which were, in

no sense of the words, proofs of the fact, but merely expressions of

the opinions formed by the deposing witnesses of what they had observed

in the water. I who was a believer in the first instance, was gradually

sworn into scepticism, which finally ended in incredulity.”

“About this stage of the panic, General David Humphreys did me

the honor of a visit, and requested me to listen while he read a

manuscript. To this I instantly consented. I discovered that my

distinguished friend had visited Massachusetts for the express

purpose of collecting all the testimony he could find concerning

the sea-serpent. He was highly delighted with his success; and had

reduced his researches into the form of letters addressed to Sir

Joseph Banks, then President of the London Royal Society. He evidently

intended to take the lead of the Linnean Society, and to acquire the

honor and glory of making the wonderful intelligence known first to

the sçavans of Europe. He did not vouchsafe, even to name me in the

communication. After a very pleasant interview, during which I found

that he positively considered himself right in the investigation,

and I determined on my part to enter into no discussion about it, he

requested me to receive the writing, and engage some bookseller to

cause it to be put to press without delay. The reason for this was,

that he was obliged to return forthwith to New-Haven. I made a contract

in his behalf, and directed the proofsheets to be sent to him there. I

had a lucky escape from an association with the extraordinary creature.”

“Afterwards, a mutilated specimen of a snake, killed on the land,

somewhere thereabout, was brought to me preserved in alcoholic spirit.

This had been exhibited as the spawn or young of the Great Scoliophis.

The head, which contains the strong _ophiological_ characters, had been

crushed and destroyed. But, as far as I could judge, from the formation

of the belly and tail, it had been a native of the land, (apparently a

_coluber_,) and had, of course, no pretention to claim kindred with its

pretended parent of the ocean.”

“I was the better enabled, I thought, to form a more correct opinion,

relative to the matter, by reason of my possessing in my museum, at the

time, four true sea-serpents, which my navigating friends had brought

me from the Gulf of Mexico, and the Chinese Sea.”

“The history of Sea Serpentism is a very memorable part of the sayings

and doings in this enlightened age and country. For the benefit of

the present generation, and of posterity, it ought to be written.

In proceeding to pen a short sketch of it, I must premise, that I

am one of the last persons in existence who would presume to put a

limit to creative power. I admit that the all-mighty being could make

a water-snake as easily as a fish; and that such an animal might

be as big as a _Kraken_, as easily as the diminutive size of the

_Stickleback_. Yet, on reviewing these legends of the times, there

is found such a propensity towards the strange and the marvellous,

that the men of the present day show a credulity very much resembling

that of the remote ages, when the terraqueous globe was peopled with

gorgons, mermaids, chimeras, hydras, dragons, and all the monsters of

fabulous zoology.”

“(a). The first tale I remember to have considered seriously relative

to it was this: it had been determined, they said, to put a steam boat

in operation at Boston to coast along shore and to convey passengers.

It was foreseen that such a vessel would traverse the currents and pass

among the islands with an ease and a speed unknown to boats moved by

oars and sails; and of course, much of the business of transporting

passengers would be taken away from the small craft heretofore

employed. The large boat would thus destroy the small ones, or, as

was expressed by another word, devour them. Under these forebodings,

the steam-vessel made a trip, with favourable auspices. Some wag,

the account proceeds, wrote for one of the gazettes, an allegorical

description of a sea-serpent, that had been descried off Nahant and

Gloucester, and had probably come there to consume all the small fish

in the place. The narrative, given with such grave diction and imposing

seriousness, was received by many as an actual and literal occurrence,

and credited accordingly.”

“(b). Long Island Sound put in a claim for a sea-serpent. On this

fiction I am well satisfied of the particulars that follow. An active

young fellow who had become weary of ploughing the land, bought a

little sloop of about fifteen tons, which I remember to have seen;

and resolved to try his luck in ploughing the waves. He named his

vessel the _Sea-Serpent_. She was mostly employed in carrying country

produce to the New-York market and in bringing manure back, with the

advantage of passengers when any offered. This boat was on her way from

Mamaroneck harbor or thereabout toward the city, and was met by a sloop

from that place, a short distance from City-Island. The captain of the

latter, on arriving at home, was eagerly interrogated by a quidnunc

for news; and being a man of some humor and fancy, told his neighbor,

the querist, he had just seen the sea-serpent. He then described how

(alluding to the barrels on deck) he had seen the bunches on his back;

how high the head (meaning the bowsprit) was out of water; how the

black and white colours (meaning the painted waist) were variegated;

how he saw the lashing of the tail (meaning the motion of the boom in

jibing as she was going along before a fair easterly wind); that this

sea-serpent was proceeding with a speed equalling at least from five to

six knots an hour, which made all white before him (meaning the foam

at the bows). The good man took the joke in real earnest, went away

and told it to a sensible acquaintance. This latter wrote a formal

and solemn account of it; which, travelling an extensive round in the

sheets of intelligence, was finally embodied in the aforesaid book,

where it is registered as a part of the evidence.”

“(c). It was about this period of these transactions that I received

from Boston an ichthyological production, enclosed in a letter,

respectfully written, and with postage paid, submitting to me whether

that article was not a piece of a sea-serpent’s hide? It had been found

on the shore of the region which the alarming visitor frequented; and

was supposed to have been separated from his body by one of the musket

balls which had been fired at him and washed ashore. To this serious

communication I returned for answer that it was simply a portion of

skin with closely adhering scales, belonging to the bony scaled pike

(Esox osseus), an inhabitant of the Atlantic Ocean.”

“(d). So much curiosity and excitement were now raised about the

sea-serpent, that he was a prominent topic of conversation. The

feeling was more intense, inasmuch as it was confidently declared he

had been frequently observed near boats and vessels. It was at length

concluded to fit an expedition, expressly for the purpose of catching

him, with a select crew, under the command of Captain Rich. Day after

day he cruised over tracts where the sea-serpent had, according to

information, been observed, without discovering anything like him. At

length, a creature was descried, which some of the men on board said

they had seen before, and that it was the sea-serpent. The captain

pursued the game a considerable time longer, with much vigilance and

patience, until it was at a distance near enough to be harpooned. He

was taken on board, and found to be a fish of the Mackerel family. I

saw the preparation of it in the Greenwood Museum, and satisfied myself

that it was an individual of a well known species called _Tunny_ in the

Mediterranean, and _Albicore_ in the Atlantic sea.”

“After the capture of the fish, the persons who, when they saw him in

the water, declared positively that he was the sea-serpent, now changed

their minds, and swore he was not.”

“At length the man of successful exertion arrived with his prize; and

unexpectedly and unfortunately drew upon him the displeasure of his

employers for attempting to impose upon them a _Horse-Mackerel_ (as

they call it) for a _Sea-Serpent_! He told me the story himself.”

“(e). In this fervor of opinion, it was supposed for a time that a

sea-serpent existed in Lake Ontario. A coasting navigator, somewhere

between Kingston and York, had several times during his trips observed

among the islands and rocks something that appeared to be a long animal

with vertical flexures of the back, resembling lumps or humps of

variegated black and white hues. He told some of his acquaintances what

peculiar appearances had presented themselves to his view; and that he

intended the next opportunity to take a more close and correct survey.

He did so, shortly after, when the whole phenomenon ascended into the

air! It turned out to be a speckled mother duck, with a numerous brood

of young ones. They swam in a line, with the parent bird at the head.

And as they rose and descended on the undulations, gave an appearance

so like that ascribed to the sea-serpent, that the captain, though a

wary man, would have solemnly declared, until he was undeceived, his

belief in the existence of a sea-serpent there!”

“(f). Lake Erie brought forward pretensions too for a sea-serpent. One

of the coasting vessels, navigated by three men, as she was steering

eastward from Detroit, discovered something afloat on the hither side

of the islands called “The Sisters”, which, when she arrived at the

place of her destination on the southern shore, was reported by the

men at the tavern and the printing office, to be the very creature.

Mr. Printer wrote a paragraph on the subject, and inserted it in his

paper, in which it travelled far and wide. It may be relied on that

this alleged inhabitant of that inland sea, has been reduced to genus

and species, by a distinguished naturalist, and registered very orderly

in zoology. Now let us find what the production really turned out to

be. The sheriff of the county, a sensible man, heard of the marvel, and

conceiving that he knew as much about the lake as any person whatever,

went on board full of curiosity, to make inquiry about it. He found but

one of the people on board, whom he interrogated closely concerning

the wonderful sight, with which he and his associates had entertained

the neighbourhood. The sailor was soon implicated in contradictions.

The querist, aware of the fellow’s confusion, asked him if he was not

ashamed to propagate such falsehoods? He then said, if the sheriff

would not be affronted, he would relate the whole story just as it was.

At the place aforesaid, they passed a dry tree afloat; and concluding

that the butt or root would do for a head, some knots on the trunk for

knobs or bunches, and the top for a tail, they would have a little

pastime by telling a story of a sea-serpent, which they thought their

lake was as much entitled to as any other water. The whole three had

agreed to tell the same tale and support it!”

“(g). When the skin, &c. of the huge basking shark, that had straggled

from the Northern Ocean and had been killed in Raritan Bay (Squalus

Maximus), was exhibited in New York City, the inhabitants were openly

and earnestly invited by notice in words at length displayed in front

of the house, to enter and behold the sea-serpent. The conceit took

very well!”

“Now, after all these mistakes, deceptions and wilful perversions on

the subject, every person of consideration may admit that the gambols

of porpoises, the slow motions of basking sharks, and the yet different

appearances of balaenopterous whales, all of which have fins on their

backs, may have given rise to those parts of the narrations, not

already herein commented upon.”

Professor SILLIMAN, the editor of the journal, could not help saying in

a note:

“We give place to the _scepticism_ of the learned author, although

not ourselves _sceptical_ on this subject. We do not see how such

evidence as that presented by Dr. Bigelow Vol. II p. 147 of this

Journal--particularly in the statements of Capt. Little of the Boston

Frigate, and of Marshall Prince and family, and of Mr. Cabot, can be

set aside--although we have no doubt that there have been on this

subject both error and imposition; and we are far from believing that

every thing that has been called a sea-serpent has really been such.”

Now in the whole dissertation there is not one single _proof_ of the

non-existence of the sea-serpent. Mr. MITCHILL gathered some _hoaxes_,

which no doubt greatly amused his audience, but his statements are

sadly wanting in correctness. He says, that the sea-serpent _first_

haunted the coast of Massachusetts, while if he in October 1828, had

taken the trouble to look up the literature on the subject, he would

have found that the sea-serpent had already appeared on the coasts of

Norway, in the Northern Atlantic, in Davis’ Straits, in the Northern

Pacific near Behring’s Isle, and all along the Eastern coasts of the

United States. The Linnaean Society, he further asserts “published a

book on the subject, with the figure of the enormous reptile under

the name of _Scoliophis_”. This is also untrue, for the Society only

figured an individual of a sick and ill-formed _Coluber constrictor_,

the so-called Black Snake, having only the length of about one yard!

The “mutilated specimen of a snake” which was brought to him in

alcoholic spirit, was the same figured by the Linnaean Society; and

where Mr. MITCHILL says that he is convinced that the snake was a

common native of the land, “apparently a _Coluber_”, he expresses

an opinion which the Society already printed in their little book.

Consequently he cannot claim priority in this matter. And finally,

where he says that the story of the active young fellow with his sloop,

called “the sea-serpent” is published in the aforesaid book of the

Linnaean Society, he has told his audience and his readers what is

commonly called “a falsehood”, for in the whole book there is not one

“formal and solemn account” in which there is question of “white and

black colours” which “were variegated”, of a “tail” which “lashed” the

water, and of a motion of “six knots an hour, which made all white

before him”.

I may safely express here my opinion that the whole paper of Mr.

MITCHILL is an unscientific, deceptive dissertation, unworthy of

notice, and that the way in which he ridiculed the endeavours of the

Committee was unfair.

* * * * *

Another hoax which appeared in some American newspapers I have found,

translated into German, in FRORIEP’S _Notizen_, of 1830, June, Vol.

XXVII, n^o. 589, p. 265:

“Again a story about the sea-serpent will be found in American

newspapers. Capt. DELAND with the schooner _Eagle_ ran into Charlston

on the 27th. of March” (1830) “from Turtle River, and with his crew

is willing to confirm by oath the truth of the following declaration:

On the 23d. of March, at 11 o’clock A. M., at about a mile from

Simons Bay, we perceived at the distance of about 300 yards a large

body, resembling an alligator, which sometimes moved with the vessel,

sometimes lay motionless on the surface. Capt. DELAND, who perceived

that he approached the animal, loaded a musket with a ball, and steered

so, that he approached it within 20 or 25 yards at a moment that it

lay quite still and apparently careless. Capt. DELAND aimed with great

sagacity at the hindpart of the head, the only part that was just

visible, and the ball evidently struck. At this moment the monster,

to the great terror of the crew, came directly up to the vessel, and

in passing dealt her two or three heavy blows with its tail, of which

the first struck the stem, and caused a shaking, felt by every-one

on board. The Captain, as soon as he perceived the animal approach,

jumped upon the load of cotton which lay on deck, and the whole crew,

the mate not excepted, only thought of their safety. They all had

opportunity to see their enemy and agree that its length was about 70

feet. The body was as thick as or thicker than a sixty-gallon keg, of

a grey colour, eel-shaped, without visible fins and apparently covered

with scales, the back full of joints or bunches, the head and beak

resembled an alligator’s, the former 10 feet long, and as big as a

hogshead. A smaller individual was observed at a great distance (!),

which, however, disappeared at the shot, afterwards, however, both were

seen again together, when they passed the North-Breaker where they

disappeared.--Captain D. says, that four years ago he saw a similar

creature at some distance off Doboy and had fired four times at it;

without, however, causing such a visit as in the present case. He

believes, that this terrible undescribed animal has strength enough to

damage a vessel of the size of the _Eagle_, if not to destroy it, and

feels happy to have got rid of it in this way. He further asserts that

he has certainly not erred with regard to the shape of the sea-monster,

and that it was different from whales and other inhabitants of the

deep, which he has ever witnessed” (_Chronicle_).

Though the description of the form might lead to the belief that what

is reported to have been seen was a real sea-serpent, yet I consider

the whole account as a story, because it is not the habit of the

sea-serpent to attack a ship after having been struck by a ball, but to

plunge down and to disappear.

* * * * *

Again the sea-serpent was said to have appeared in Lake Ontario. In

FRORIEP’S _Notizen_ of August 1835, Vol. 45, n^o. 980, p. 186, we read:

“The Colossal Sea-Serpent is again reported in the American newspapers.

Now it is even told that it has been seen in Lake Ontario, 78 feet

long, as thick as a large flour-barrel, and of a blue colour spotted

with brown. If this is not an illusion, the sea-serpent at last ought

to have been explained or will be so very soon”.

It seems that Mr. FRORIEP really believes, that if this report is not

the result of an optical illusion, it is trustworthy, and that the

appearance of the Sea-Serpent in Lake Ontario does not belong to the

impossibilities! Every one will agree with me, that the report can only

be the result of an illusion, or that it is a hoax.

* * * * *

In 1845 Dr. ALBERT C. KOCH “exhibited a large skeleton of a fossil

animal, under the name of _Hydrarchos Sillimanni_ in Broadway, New

York, purporting to be that of an extinct marine serpent. These remains

consisted of a head and vertebral column, measuring in all 114 feet, of

a few ribs attached to the thoracic portion of the latter, and of parts

of supposed paddles” (see _Proc. Boston Soc. of Nat. Hist._ Nov. 1845,

Vol. II, p. 65). I show here to my readers the figure of this skeleton,

which I have found in the _Wochenblatt für das Christliche Volk_ of

1878. The description of this skeleton in full particulars is given by

Prof. WYMAN in the above mentioned American Journal. I will not trouble

my readers with it, but only mention that Prof. WYMAN in the same

paper proved that “these remains never belonged to one and the same

individual, and that the anatomical characters of the teeth indicate

that they are not those of a reptile, but of a warm blooded mammal”.

And he comes to the conclusion that the greater part of the bones

belonged to the genus _Basilosaurus_ of HARLAN, 1824, an animal allied

to the seals. The same genus is called _Zeuglodon_ by Prof. RICHARD

OWEN in 1839, _Dorudon_ by Prof. GIBBES in 1845, and _Saurocetus_ by

Prof. AGASSIZ.

[Illustration: Fig. 2.--~Hydrarchos Sillimanni~, Koch.]

In the same _Proceedings_, of Dec. 1845, Vol. II, p. 73, Prof. H. D.

ROGERS too states, that according to the form and structure of some

loose bones, the skeleton must be of at least two individuals of

_Basilosaurus_.

In the same periodical (of Jan. 1846, Vol. II, p. 94) we read that Dr.

KOCH also told the public that the bones had been found together, in a

position which proved that they belonged to one individual, and that

the vertebrae formed an integral series, arranged in the order in which

they were lying when discovered. That this assertion too was a mere

fabrication, is not only shown by Prof. WYMAN, as we have seen above,

but also in a letter by Dr. LISTER, who stated that Dr. KOCH had dug up

the bones in _different_ places in Alabama.

A little notice on this imposture was written by the New York

correspondent in the _Cincinnati Gazette_ which, translated into

German, appeared in FRORIEP’S _Neue Notizen_ of Febr. 1846, Vol. 37,

n^o 801, p. 134.

In the _Illustrated London News_ of Oct. 28, 1848, we read that

Prof. SILLIMAN attested: “that the spinal column belongs to the same

individual, that the skeleton differs, most essentially, from any

existing or fossil serpent, although it may countenance the popular

(and I believe well founded) impression of the existence in our modern

seas of huge animals, to which the name of Sea-Serpent had been

attached”.

These words were undoubtedly taken from another newspaper or journal,

but I can hardly believe that Prof. SILLIMAN had a share in this

imposture.

In the _Illustrated London News_ of Nov. 4, 1848, the Editor

published a letter directed to him by the well-known Geologist and

Palaeontologist MANTELL:

“Sir,--Will you allow me to correct a statement that appeared in the

last Number of your interesting publication? The fossil mentioned at

the conclusion of the admirable notice of the so-called Sea-Serpent,

as having been exhibited in America under the name of _Hydrarchos

Sillimannii_, was constructed by the exhibitor Koch, from bones

collected in various parts of Alabama, and which belonged to

several individual skeletons of an extinct marine cetacean, termed

_Basilosaurus_ by the American naturalists, and better known in this

country by that of _Zeuglodon_, a term signifying _yoked teeth_. Mr.

Koch is the person who, a few years ago, had a fine collection of

fossil bones of elephants and mastodons, out of which he made up an

enormous skeleton, and exhibited it in the Egyptian Hall, Piccadilly,

under the name of _Missourium_. This collection was purchased by the

trustees of the British Museum, and from it were selected the bones

which now constitute the matchless skeleton of a Mastodon in our

National Gallery of Organic Remains”.

“Not content with the interest which the fossils which he collected

in various parts of the United States really possess, Mr. Koch, with

the view of exciting the curiosity of the ignorant multitude, strung

together all the vertebrae he could obtain of the _Basilosaurus_, and

arranged them in a serpentine form; manufactured a skull and claws, and

exhibited the monster as a fossil Sea-Serpent, under the name above

mentioned--_Hydrarchos_. But the trick was immediately exposed by the

American naturalists, and the true nature of the fossil bones pointed

out.”

“Bones of the _Basilosaurus_ have been found in many parts of Alabama

and South Carolina, in green sand belonging to a very ancient (Eocene)

tertiary formation. Hundreds of vertebrae, bones of the extremities,

portions of the cranium, and of the jaws with teeth, have from time to

time been collected. Remains of species of the same genus have also

been found near Bordeaux and in Malta”.

“Professor Owen has shown that the original animal was a marine

cetacean, holding an intermediate place between the Cachelots and the

herbivorous species. It must have attained a length equal to that of

the largest living whales; for a series of vertebrae was observed

_in situ_, that extended in a line 65 feet. An interesting Memoir on

the _Basilosaurus_ by Dr. Gibbes, of Columbia, was published in the

Journal of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, Vol. I,

2^d. Series, 1847; and a Memoir on the remains of the same animal, by

Prof. Owen appeared in the “Transactions of the Geological Society of

London”, Vol. VI; a brief notice of which is inserted in my “Medals of

Creation” p. 826, under the name of _Zeuglodon cetoides_”.

“Gideon Algernon Mantell”.

“19, Chestersquare, Pimlico, Oct. 31. 1848”.

In the _Proc. Bost. Soc. Nat, Hist._ (Vol. III, p. 328, Dec. 1850) we

read:

“This animal” (the _Basilosaurus_) “was supposed by Dr. KOCH to be a

reptile, a marine serpent, but Dr. Wyman has exposed the fallacy of

this opinion, and shown that it was a warm blooded mammal”.

I do not think this to be the true view of the matter. I firmly believe

that Dr. KOCH knew very well what he did, and that he was in every way

an impostor who cheated the credulous people of their money. The honour

of the discovery that the _Basilosaurus_ is a warm blooded mammal is

due to Prof. OWEN. Dr. WYMAN has only recognized that the bones were of

the _Basilosaurus_.

The further history of the large skeleton exhibited in New York is

related to us in that same Journal:

“Koch’s sea-serpent was carried to Dresden, where it was described by

Carus, who figured it and even restored the cranium, of which then only

a portion had been found. Carus restored the cranium of a reptile, but

this was a mere fiction of his imagination; for an entire cranium has

since been found, proving beyond a doubt that the Zeuglodon was not a

reptile but a cetacean; the teeth being inserted by double roots into

double alveoli is positive evidence that it was a warmblooded mammal.

Muller has also carefully studied this specimen, and pronounces it

unquestionably a cetacean.”

* * * * *

The reader will further on see mention made of a report, generally

known as that of the _Daedalus_. It appeared in the newspapers of

October, 1848. As soon as it was published, the following letter was

addressed to the Editor of the _Globe_. It first appeared in the number

of 21. Oct., 1848, of that journal, next in the _Times_ of 23d. Oct.

and in the _Illustrated London News_ of 28 Oct. It runs as follows:

“Mary Ann, of Glasgow, Glasgow, October 19”.

“I have just reached this port, on a voyage from Malta and Lisbon,

and my attention having been called to a report relative to an animal

seen by the master and crew of Her Majesty’s ship Daedalus, I take the

liberty of communicating the following circumstance:--

“When clearing out of the port of Lisbon, on the 30th of September

last, we spoke the American brig Daphne, of Boston, Mark Trelawney

master. He signalled for us to heave to, which we did; and standing

close round her counter, lay-to while the mate boarded us with the

jolly boat, and handed a packet of letters to be despatched per first

steamer for Boston on our arrival in England. The mate told me that

when in lat. 4° 11′ S., long. 10° 15′ E., wind dead north, upon the

20th of September, a most extraordinary animal had been seen: from

his description it had the appearance of a huge serpent or snake,

with a dragon’s head. Immediately upon its being seen, one of the

deck guns was brought to bear upon it, which having been charged with

spike-nails, and whatever other pieces of iron could be got at the

moment, was discharged at the animal, then only distant about forty

yards from the ship; it immediately reared its head in the air, and

plunged violently with its body, showing evidently that the charge

had taken effect. The Daphne was to leeward at the time, but was put

about on the starboard tack and stood towards the brute, which was seen

foaming and lashing the water at a fearful rate: upon the brig nearing,

however, it disappeared, and, though evidently wounded, made rapidly

off at the rate of 15 or 16 knots an hour, as was judged from its

appearing several times upon the surface. The Daphne pursued for some

time, but the night coming on the master was obliged to put about and

continue his voyage”.

“From the description given by the mate, the brute must have been

nearly 100 feet long, and his account of it agrees in every respect

with that lately forwarded to the admiralty by the captain of the

Daedalus. The packet of letters to Boston, I have no doubt, contains

the full particulars, which, I suppose, will be made public”.

“There are letters from captain Trelawney to a friend in Liverpool,

which will probably contain some further particulars, and I have

written to get a copy for the purpose of getting the full account.

James Henderson, Master, Broomielaw, Berth, n^o 4”.

The same story was inserted in the _Zoologist_ of 27 Nov. 1848, and Mr.

NEWMAN the Editor who half a year before had fallen into the snare laid

by the so-called captain WOODWARD, and who was taken to task by Mr.

COOPER, grown more careful, now added:

“Doubtless the sagacious production of some selfstyled philosophical

naturalist, who is pledged to one of the hypothetical modes of

explaining away the existence of a sea-serpent, and who hopes by a hoax

of this kind to throw discredit on Captain M’Quhae’s statement”.

Now, I think, Mr. NEWMAN was on the right track!

* * * * *

In the _Illustrated London News_ for 1850, April 20, Supplement, we

read:

“The following we extract from the _Christian_ (United States)

_Mercury_.--The following letter from a gentleman of Beaufort gives

exciting news of what may, by this time, be the “seat of war”. The

old fellow has got into close quarter, and if he does not make a

sudden and fortunate dash, has nothing better than offering himself

as an oblation on the altar of science:--Beaufort, March 15, 1850.

The report of Captain Bankenship and passengers has been verified by

many other witnesses. This formidable sea-monster has been seen again

to day, we understand, in our waters. When discovered by those on

board the steamer, his “eminence” was in Port Royal Sound, a distance

of seven or eight miles from this town. Since that time he has been

lazily making his way up Broad-River, and was seen by a gentleman, we

understand, to-day in White Branch River, an arm of the Broad, he is

reported to be making his way higher up still, when, perhaps, he may

be captured. He is described as being from 120 to 150 feet in length,

and of proportionate bulk; has the head of a serpent, which he carries,

when in motion, five or six feet out of the water, about ten feet from

his head is a hump, resembling a huge hogshead, and as far as he could

be seen, out of the water a succession of humps was observed. He was

pursued for several miles along the bank of the river, at times the

party in pursuit coming very near to him. He was shot at with a rifle

and shot gun, which had the effect of making him timid, and caused

him to sink below the surface of the water when nearly approached. We

understand that a party from this place has been made up to capture

him, if possible. The plan is to man two large flats with a cannon to

each, one going below where he is represented to be, and the other

above, and then approach each other, and, when he is discovered, to

fire into him. In this way he may be taken if, peradventure, he does

not take them first. The Whale Branch is not more than 100 yards wide,

and there is every probability of an animated conflict with this king

of the waters within his own dominions; and I suppose it is admitted

that the battle must be waged upon his own terms. The “Charlestown

Courier” has a letter from Beaufort, of the same date, and of a similar

tenor to which is appended the following:--Information has just reached

us that the said sea-serpent is ashore at the mouth of Skull Creek. If

so, the prize is certain, and Beaufort immortalized.”

Mr. NEWMAN inserted this tale in his _Zoologist_ of 1850, p. 2803,

however, not without the following introduction:

“Ever since Prof. OWEN attempted to confound this leviathan with the

seals, on which he probably feeds, taking in whole shoals of them

at a mouthful, and draining of the water with his _seaserpentbone_

apparatus in the manner of a whale filling his stomach with medusae and

shrimps: ever since the promulgation of this humilating hypothesis,

the great sea-serpent has felt himself snubbed and has doggedly

kept in deep water, pertinatiously resolved, no doubt, to withhold

himself in future from the incredulous malevolence of men. But he has

relented: the recurrence of St. Valentine has warmed his heart: he has

once more risen to the surface, and has wisely concluded to shun the

disparaging Britishers, and to select, as of yore, for the scene of his

auto-exhibition, the shores of a nation, at once the smartest and most

credulous on earth. The papers of the United States are fraught with

intelligence respecting him; cannon have been discharged, and reports

say that he is actually ashore. My first extract is from a religious

newspaper, entitled the “Christian Mercury.””

The reader will afterwards get acquainted with Prof. OWEN’S

suggestions; it is not now the right moment to enter into them; I will

only observe that Mr. NEWMAN also wrote the following last word:

“The London papers have repeated all this, intermixed with a perfect

flood of wit: the shafts of which are directed against believers and

unbelievers, in a very pleasing and impartial manner. Is it still a

hoax, or a Brachioptilon Hamiltoni?--EDWARD NEWMAN, London, April 20,

1850.”

I must confess that I too am much inclined to believe, that all that

has above been mentioned is a mere hoax, though the description of the

animal agrees with that of the Sea-serpent. It is striking that the

arm of the Broad-River is first called White-River, and a few lines

afterwards Whale-River.--As to the _Brachioptilon Hamiltoni_, it is a

kind of shark.

* * * * *

Again in the _Illustrated London News_ for 1850, Sept. 7, appeared a

hoax in the following terms:

“The _Cork Constitution_ publishes the following circumstantial letter:

Courtmasherry, Aug. 29.--Sir,--The following particulars, the accuracy

of which need not to be questioned, will, I doubt not, interest many

of your readers:--The different fishing establishments on the shore of

this extensive bay, extending from the Old Head of Kinsale to the Seven

Heads, have been within the last few days abundantly supplied with fish

of every description, and the greatest activity prevails to profit by

the bounty which has been thus sent to us literally in shoals. It has

been noticed too, that some description of fish, haak for instance,

has been captured further within the limits of the inner harbour than

was ever known before. In fact, as I heard it observed, the fish was

literally leaping ashore. These novel appearances, however, it was

my lot to see fully accounted for yesterday (August 28). At about

1 o’clock A. M. when sailing in my yacht, with a slight breeze off

shore, about two miles to the south of the beacon erected to the Barrel

rocks, one of the party of four gentlemen on board (M. B. of Bandon)

drew attention towards the structure, with the interrogatory of: “Do

you see anything queer about the Barrels?” In an instant the attention

of all on board was rivetted on an object which at first struck me as

like the upheaved thick end of a large mast, but which, as it made out

plainer, proved to be the head of some huge fish or monster. On bearing

down towards the object we could distinctly see, with the naked eye,

what I can best describe as an enormous serpent without mane or fur

or any like appendage. The portion of the body above water, and which

appeared to be rubbing or scratching itself against the beacon, was

fully thirty feet long, and in diameter I should say about a fathom.

With the aid of a glass it was observed that the eyes were of immense

size, about nine inches across the ball, and the upper part of the back

appeared covered with a furrowed shell-like substance. We were now

within rifle shot of the animal, and, although some on board exhibited

pardonable nervousness at the suggestion, it was resolved to fire a

ball at the under portion of the body whenever the creature’s unwieldy

evolutions would expose its vulnerable part. The instant the piece was

discharged the monster rose as if impelled by a painful impulse to a

height which may appear incredible, say at least thirty fathoms, and

culminating with the most rapid motion dived or dashed itself under

water with a splash that almost stopped our breath with amazement. In

a few moments all disturbance of the water subsided, and the strange

visitor evidently pursued his course to seaward. On coming up to the

beacon we were gratified to find adhering to the supports numerous

connecting scaly masses, such as one would think to be rubbed from

a creature “coating” or changing its old skin for a new one. These

interesting objects can be seen at the Horse Rock Coast Guard station,

and will repay a visit. These particulars I have narrated in the

clearest manner I am able, and if others, in other boats, who had not

so good an opportunity of seeing the entire appearance of the animal as

those in my boat had, should send you a more readable account of it,

I pledge myself none will more strictly adhere to the real facts. I

am, Sir, your very obedient servant, “Roger W. Travers””, in the _Cork

Constitution_, Sept. 2.

And in the number of September 14 of the same year, we read:

“The mysterious stranger has been again seen by Mr. Travers and his

enterprising yachtsmen. They have brought four rifles to bear upon his

left eye which, it seems, he most merrily winked at his pursuers. He

would have laughed in his sleeve at the pleasant conceit, but we learn

that he had just put off his coat. He, however, wished them a polite

good morning, and descended to unknown depths”.

“On Saturday last (August 31), the weather having the appearance

of being settled fine, I put out to sea, determined, as far as the

capabilities of my little craft would permit, to go any length in

finding out the position of the stranger, hoping, by keeping a constant

look out in every direction, to discover him. Nor was I disappointed,

the animal, lured no doubt by the dense masses of fish now off the

coast, having remained within a comparatively short distance of the

land. At about 11. o’clock A. M., when off Dunwordy-head, one of my

crew on the look out sang out: “The sea-serpent on starboard bow!”

and on looking in the direction indicated, I had the pleasure of

at once recognizing the same monster that I had before seen, and

greatly do I regret, indeed, that you or some person conversant with

natural history were not on board with me. We drew as close as I

thought consistent with safety, and had ample proof of the creature

being piscivorous, he being at the time engaged in bolting a great

number of large haak or congereels. I had now for the first time a

view of his tail, which entirely differs from the usual form of that

extremity in most descriptions of fish, being furnished with no fin,

but somewhat resembling a huge elephant’s trunk or proboscis, the end

long drawn out and curling and twisting in a very remarkable manner.

I really feel afraid to hazard expressing in figures what I judge to

be the dimensions of the animal, but I do believe that if it were

stretched straight from head to tail it would be rather over than

under thirty fathoms long, and of that length I am satisfied fully

half is seven feet in diameter. The mouth is a most capacious organ,

and opens something like that of an alligator. The small size of the

gills, for I could discern nothing like the blowing holes of a whale,

rather surprised me. The nose, I think, is formed of a soft flesh-like

substance, not bony; and from the broken condition of the external

coat of scales I am satisfied, as before observed, that the beast is

now in its “coating” state. After a little time it appeared evident

that he had fallen asleep, as we could perceive him rapidly drifting

on shore at the east side of Dunworly-head; and I once more, although

I now feel with more rashness than discretion, resolved to try the

effect of firearms in capturing him. Four rifles were prepared, brought

simultaneously to bear on the animal’s head, and, giving the word

myself, and directing all to aim for the eye turned towards us, bang

went the pieces in a volley, the shots taking evident effect. His first

movement was to shake his head and wink the wounded eye in a rapid

manner, and then, as if to cool the painful wound, he suddenly dived,

since when I have not had the slightest trace of him either by my own

observation or through others”. _Cork Constitution_, Sept. 7.

“The _Cork Constitution_, referring to the foregoing says:--Since

the above letter was received, the following information on the same

subject came to hand. Monday last a party of gentlemen belonging to

this city were enjoying a sailing excursion in the Antelope yacht,

belonging to Mr. Wheeler, along the coast from Glandore to Kinsale.

Passing the Old Head of Kinsale, the day unusually fine, they observed

an extraordinary commotion in the sea, apparent to every one on board.

The bay at Kinsale was at the time filled with fish. In a few moments

they perceived a large serpent-like fish on the surface, that could not

be less than 120 feet in length. In shape it resembled a long funnel

of an immense steamer. Unfortunately they were not sufficiently near

the monster to give a description, of the head and body. After lying

on the surface for a few minutes, it suddenly dashed ahead with a

velocity, as far as could be seen for a distance of two miles, of at

least sixty miles an hour. It then disappeared. It was believed that

the sea-serpent must have been in pursuit of the shoals of fish that

thronged the bay. It is a singular circumstance that, notwithstanding

the unusual quantity of fish that was observable, the Kinsale hookers

were most unsuccessful, as it was stated they did not obtain a single

take during the evening. The gentlemen who have witnessed the visit of

the monster, and whose statement is detailed above, may be relied on as

above all suspicion”.--_Cork Constitution_ Sept. 7.--

The _Zoologist_ of course could not overlook such statements. In the

year 1850 this journal inserted the three reports (see p. 2925):

“The Great Sea-Serpent has again appeared with immense _éclât_ in the

newspapers. Most respectable witnesses are called to speak a word

in his favour, as will be seen by the following extracts from the

daily press. It should, however, be premised that a number of brief

and analogous paragraphs had previously located him “at Howth”, “off

Wexford”, and “off Cork”; so that he made the grand demonstration at

Kinsale, he appeared to be taking a coasting trip round the shores of

old Ireland.”

Here follow the above mentioned three hoaxes, of Courtmasherry, August

29, August 31, and September 2. Further we read in the _Zoologist_:

“A few friends accompanied me on a boating excursion this day (_Sept.

9_) whose names are William Silk, John Hunt, George Williams, Henry

Seymour, and Edward Barry, and, being off the Souverein-Islands,

our attention was directed by one of the party to an extraordinary

appearance ahead of the boat; immediately all eyes were turned to see

what it was, when, to our astonishment and fright, the above monster of

the deep was bearing down to us; we were at once thrown into an awful

fright, and thought it best to retreat for the shore; on our landing,

Mr. W. Silk, who was armed with a double barrelled gun, discharged

both barrels at the monster, but without effect. I need not describe

his appearance, as you are aware of it before, but from inquiries from

various boatmen I am told he has been off the harbour the last three

days.”--John Good, of Kinsale.” in _Cork Reporter_, Sept. 11.

Mr. NEWMAN, the Editor of the _Zoologist_, adds:

“The next account states that a party encountered the monster in

Ballycotton Bay, fired into him, and made him disgorge a shoal of

fishes, some of which fell into the boat, and being handled, gave the

crew the most terrific electric shocks; where upon the naturalist of

the party immediately concluded, and I think, with great judgment,

that the sea-serpent is neither more nor less than the electric eel

(_Gymnotus electricus_).”

“The last account published in London, on this day (September 24),

reports his capture and death at Youghal, in the county of Cork,

together with full admeasurements, and the names of the parties

concerned in the galant achievement.”

“There was something that struck me as unsatisfactory about several

parts of this highly exciting narrative. One o’clock in the morning,

and without the assistance of a moon, was rather a strange time to

make such exact observations. Again, about the scales; why not sent

some to London or Dublin?--why keep them at the light-house? And

again, the bearing of Kinsale bay did not quite correspond with my

remembrance of the place: so I epistolized the chief actors, and

particularly entreated Mr. Travers to send me a handful of scales,

and a more detailed account: alas! there was no response. After a

while I bethought myself of a friend in London who corresponds with

the accountant of the Principal Bank at Bandon. To this gentleman my

friend, with prompt kindness, applied, and I have now the pleasure of

laying his most explicit answer before the readers of the “Zoologist”.”

“Dear Sir,--I reply to your note relative to the Sea-Serpent, there is

not one word of truth in the statements put forward in the newspapers:

there is no such person as Roger W. Travers, but there is a person

named James W. Travers, to whom I believe it has been done to annoy

(and indeed with great effect). Mr. Thomson’s family has been staying

in the neighbourhood, but do not hear a word of it except what is

to be seen in the papers about it. Dear Sir, yours truly, H. O.’

Callaghan.”--Bandon, Sep. 18, 1850.

“Any comment on this would be superfluous.--Edward Newman.”

The trouble Mr. NEWMAN gave himself to get possession of the scales,

and to know whether the reports were true or not, is the best proof

that he was caught in the snare!

* * * * *

_The Sea-Serpent caught at last!_ (See _The New York Tribune_ for 1852,

February, GALIGNANI’S _Messenger_ for 1852, Februari, _The Illustrated

London News_ for 1852, March, 18, _The Times_ for 1852, March 10, _The

Zoologist_ for 1852 p. 3426--3429, _Spenerische Zeitung_ for 1852,

March).

“Ship Monongahela, at Sea, Feb. 6.--A small vessel has just been

reported from my mast-head, and as she is apparently bound into some

of the northern parts, I intend to speak her, purposely to acquaint,

through your widely diffused journal, the people of the United States,

of the fact of the existence and capture of the sea-serpent--a monster

deemed fabulous by many--but the truth of whose existence is for

ever settled, and, I trust I shall be excused in saying, by Yankee

intrepidity. On the morning of January 13, when in lat. 3 deg. 10

min. south, and long. 131 deg. 50 min. west, the man on the look out,

seated on the foretopmast cross-trees, sang out: “White Water” and in

reply to my “Where away?” said “Two points on the lee bow”. Supposing

it to be made by sperm whales, and being very anxious to obtain oil,

I ordered my ship to be kept off, and immediately went aloft with my

spyglass. I will observe that for several days we had been struggling

along with very light and baffling winds, but at day-light of the

morning of the 13th. the wind had drawn to the south-south-west, become

steady, and threatened to blow a gale. I was aloft nearly half an hour

before I observed anything like “white water” and then I presumed it

to be made by a “school”, or rather schoal of porpoises; but wishing

to be certain, I ordered the mate, as it was seven bells, to turn up

all hands, square in the yards, and send out the port studding sails.

It being my breakfast hour I urged the man to keep both eyes open, and

came down; but before I reached the deck my attention was called to

the sudden and vehement cry of Onnetu Vanjau, a Marquesan Islander,

“Oh! look! look! Me see!--too much--too much!” All eyes were instantly

directed to the savage to ascertain where he was looking, and then

all eyes turned to the lee quarter. I had just time to see “black

skin” when it disappeared. The native was excited, and in reply to

my question said: “No whale--too much--too big--too long. Me no see

all same dat fellar--me fraid”. Not being able to tell which way the

animal or fish was bound, I luffed and came aback, ordering the lines

into the boat and the crews to “stand by”. The horizon was scanned in

every direction for nearly an hour, when giving up all hopes I braced

forward and went below. The native continued to look with eagerness,

pushed on by the observations of the crew, who asserted that he had

seen nothing, but he proved the truth of his sight in a few minutes

by uttering another cry, and with more vehemence than the first. I

rushed on deck, and the first look, not a mile to leeward, rested on

the strangest creature I had ever seen in the ocean. It was apparently

still, but “shobbing” up and down, as we say of sperm whales. I knew it

was not a whale. The head I could not see, but the body had a motion

like the waving of a rope when shaken and held in the hand. Every eye

in the ship regarded it attentively, and not a word was spoken or

sound uttered. In a few minutes the whole length of the body rose and

lay on the water; it was of an enormous length. Presently the extremity

or tail moved or vibrated, agitating the water, and then the head rose

entirely above the water, and moved sideways slowly, as if the monster

was in agony or suffocating. “It is a sea-serpent” I exclaimed; “stand

by the boats”. There was a hesitancy, and the mate said, “of what

use is there lowering for him? We only lose time, and gain nothing

besides”. I abruptly checked him, and ordered all hand to be called

aft. When they had mustered I told them I wished to “try” that fellow.

I urged them with all the eloquence I possessed, telling them there

were but few who believed in the existence of a sea-serpent, and that

a wish had been expressed that a whale ship might fall in with one of

them--that if we did not attack him, and should tell of seeing him when

we got home, we should be laughed at and derided--and the very first

question would be: “Why didn’t you try him?” I told them our courage

was at stake--our manhood, and even the credit of the whole American

whalefishery, and concluded by appealing to their cupidity--holding

out that we might possibly get him into some southern port. “I do not

order one of you to go in the boats”, I said “but who will volunteer?”

Let me say to their credit, every American in the ship stepped out at

once, followed by all but one native and two Englishmen. I ordered the

boat-steerers and officers to examine and see that every thing in and

about the boats was in perfect order. I had already jumped into my

boat when the serpent began to move very rapidly, and it was necessary

to stand after him. The wind was piping up strongly, but as we gained

I continued to carry all sail, hoping to be able to lower before the

gale rendered it impossible. The serpent worked to windward, which

compelled me to haul on the wind, and soon after I carried away my

fore top-gallant mast; this was most unlucky for us, and, what was

still worse, we lost sight of the monster. We repaired damages with

all possible despatch, and still kept on the wind, hoping to see his

snakeship. In less than an hour we saw him again, but some way to

windward; soon ascertaining that he partly turned, and was headed

baft for beam, I put the ship about on the other tack. The wind had

increased so much, that I was obliged to put a single reef in the fore

and mizen topsails. The serpent disappeared for a few minutes again,

but when he rose he was a mile ahead of the ship, and going slowly to

leeward, having made a complete circuit. I frankly admit my hopes were

feeble of ever really capturing him, and the gale made me hesitate

about lowering; but the time arrived, the serpent was still, and we

nearly half a mile to windward. I came to with the head yards aback

to have a better control of all the ship, and told the ship-keeper to

keep close to us, and by no means to lose sight of us for an instant.

We lowered, myself taking the lead, and in a few strokes--the wind and

sea carrying us to leeward--I told the boat-steerer, James Wittemore,

of Vermont, to “stand up”. With calm and cool intrepidity he laid hold

of his iron (harpoon), and, when I beckoned with a movement of my hand,

quick as thought both of his weapons were buried to the socket in the

repulsive body before us. I shouted ’stern, but there was no visible

motion of his snakeship. I shifted ends with the boat-steerer, and

cleared away a lance as quickly as possible, beckoning them to pull

up, that I might get a lance, when a movement of the body was visible,

and the head and tail of the monster rushed as it were to “touch

the wound”. The frightfulness of the head as it approached to boat,

filled the crew with terror, and three of them jumped over board. I

instinctively held out my lance, and its sharp point entered the eye.

I was knocked over and felt a deep churning off the water around me. I

rose to the surface and caught a glimpse of the writhing body, and was

again struck and carried down. I partly lost my consciousness under

water but recovered it; when I rose again in the bloody foam, the snake

had disappeared, and I shouted, “pick up the line”. The third mate Mr.

Benson, caught a bight at my line near the end, and bent on his, which

in an instant began to be taken out rapidly. The mate picked me up as

soon as I rose to the surface, and in a few minutes all were picked

up--one was severely bruised and another insensible, but he recovered

and both are now well. The snake had taken my line, the third mate’s,

and was taking the second mate’s, when I ordered the mate to bend on

and give his line to the ship. The snake was sounding, and I cautioned

the officers not to hold on too hard, for fear of drawing the irons. At

first the line went out rapidly, but decreased gradually, nevertheless

I was obliged to get up a spare-line out of the fore hold and bend

on. For fear that the ship would by its weight on the line draw the

irons, I put on several drags and gave the line to the mate, when it

became stationary. There were now out four boats’ lines, 225 fathoms

in a boat, and two-thirds of another line, 100 fathoms more--in all

1,000 fathoms, six feet in a fathom, 6,000 feet--better than one mile

and an eighth, an enormous depth, and the pressure at that distance

is inconceivable. It was now blowing furiously, and I scarcely dared

to carry sail enough to keep the ship up, the boat was in peril, and

I was obliged to take the line to the ship again, and run the risk of

the irons drawing. I made the end of the line fast and took in all

sail but enough to keep her steady, and waited in alarm the snake’s

rising, the parting of the line, or the irons drawing. At 4 p. m. the

wind began to shift, which favoured us a little; at 5 p. m. it, to

our great joy, began to abate. At 8 p. m. a sudden lull; line taut.

The night was beautiful, sky clear, wind scarcely a breath and sea

rapidly falling, no eye was closed in the ship--we were speculating on

our prey. It was evident he was on the bottom. He stayed down a long

time; but on reflection I considered that was his _forte_--that he was

at home there. At 4 a. m. of the 14th., 16 hours after he went down,

the line began to slack, I had it taken to the windlass, when we got

nearly two lines “hand over hand”, then there came a strain again. This

strain continuing, I told every body to bear a hand and get breakfast,

and just before we were through, the cook cried out, “Here he is”. In

no time all were on deck, and sure enough he had risen; but all that

was visible was a bunch, apparently the bight of the snake, where he

had been fastened to. I lowered three boats, and we lanced the body

repeatedly without eliciting any sign of life. While we were at work he

gradually rose to the surface, and around him floated what I took to

be pieces of his lungs which we cut with our lances. To make our work

sure we continued to lance, eagerly seeking for his life, when he drew

himself up and we pulled away, and then witnessed the terrific dying

struggles of the monster. None of the crew who witnessed that terrible

scene will ever forget it; the evolutions of the body were rapid as

lightning, seeming like the revolving of a thousand enormous black

wheels. The tail and head would occasionally appear in the surging

bloody foam, and a sound was heard, so dead, unearthy, and expressive

of acute agony, that a shrill of horror ran through our veins. The

convulsive efforts lasted 10 or 15 minutes, when they suddenly stopped,

the head was partially raised--it fell--the body partly turned, and lay

still. I took off my hat, and nine terrific cheers broke simultaneously

from our throats. Our prey was dead. Luckily he floated buoyantly, and

we took him alongside, and while doing so he turned over, lying belly

up. Every eye beamed with joy as we looked at him over the rail, and

the crew again cheered vociferously, and I joined them. We now held a

consultation as to what we should do, and I had requested all hands to

offer their opinions. After a short talk, all of us felt convinced that

it would be impossible to get him into port, and then we concluded to

try and save his skin, head, and bones, if possible. In the first place

I requested a Scotchman, who could draw tolerably, to take a sketch

of him as he lay, and the mate to measure him. It was now quite calm,

and we could work to advantage. As I am preparing a minute description

of the serpent, I will merely give you a few general points. It was a

male; the length 103 feet 7 inches; 19 feet 1 inch around the neck; 24

feet 6 inches around the shoulders; and the largest part of the body,

which appeared somewhat distended, 49 feet 4 inches. The head was long

and flat, with ridges; the bones of the lower jaw are seperate; the

tongue had its end like the head of a heart. The tail ran nearly to

a point, on the end of which was a flat firm cartilage. The back was

black, turning brown on the sides; then yellow, and on the centre of

the belly a narrow white streak two-thirds of its length; there were

also scattered over the body dark spots. On examining the skin we

found, to our surprise, that the body was covered with blubber, like

that of a whale, but it was only four inches thick. The oil was clear

as water, and burnt nearly as fast as spirits of turpentine. We cut

the snake up, but found great difficulty, and had to “flense” him, the

body would not roll, and the blubber was so very elastic, that when

stretched 20 feet by the blocks, it would, when cut off, shrink to 5 or

6 feet. We took in the head, a frightful object, and are endeavouring

to preserve it with salt. We have saved all the bones, which the men

are not done clearing yet. In cutting open the serpent we found pieces

of squid and a large blackfish, the flesh of which dropped from the

bones. One of the serpent’s lungs was three feet longer than the other.

I should have observed that there were 94 teeth in the jaws, very

sharp, all pointing backward and as large as one’s thumb at the gum,

but deeply and firmly set. We found it had two spoutholes or spiracles,

so it must breathe like a whale; it also had four swimming paws, or

imitations of paws, for they were like hard, loose flesh. The joints

of the back were loose, and it seemed as if, when it was swimming

that it moved two ribs and a joint at a time, almost like feet. The

muscular movement of the serpent after it was dead made the body look

as if it were encircled by longitudinal ridges. We were nearly three

days in getting the bones in, but they are now nearly clean, and are

very porous and dark coloured. The heart I was enabled to preserve in

liquor, and one of the eyes, but the head, notwithstanding it is cool,

begins to emit an offensive odour; but I am so near the coast now

that I shall hold on to it as it is; unless it is likely to breed a

distemper. Every man in the ship participates in my anxiety. 2 p. m. I

have just spoken the vessel; she proves to be the brig Gipsy, Captain

Sturges, eight days from Ponce, P. R., with oranges and merchandise,

bound to Bridgeport. He has kindly offered to put these sheets in the

post office when he arrives. As soon as I get in I shall be enabled to

furnish you a more detailed account.--I am, Sir, your obedient servant,

Charles Seabury, Master, Whale-ship Monongahela, of New Bedford.”

Mr. NEWMAN, the Editor of the _Zoologist_, adds:

“Very well like a hoax, but well drawn up.”

Mr. ROBERT FRORIEP, the Editor of the _Tagsberichte über die

Fortschritte der Natur- und Heilkunde_, (Abtheilung Zoologie und

Palaeontologie n^o. 486, 1852, March), says:

“The picturesque description of the adventure is lively and reads

pleasantly, yet it makes the impression, as if the whole is one of

the stories, so often occurring in American newspapers. Nothing can

be concluded with any certainty from the description of the animal of

104 feet length and 16 feet thickness, with two spout-holes and a skin

like that of whales. The intrepid captor of the monster says that he

has preserved the bones, the skin, the skull with its flesh adhering to

it, an eye and the heart, and as he must come back ashore, a naturalist

will at last have opportunity to examine and determine these remains,

and we shall learn then, whether the fable of the Sea-Serpent is

founded, and what the Sea-Serpent may probably be. As soon as possible

we will mention more accurate reports.”

Some time afterwards Mr. ROBERT FRORIEP wrote, (same journal n^o. 491):

“As it was supposed, we learn from a communication of the _Philadelphia

Bulletin_ that the story of the capture of the Sea-Serpent is a

fiction. The crew that was said by the _New York Tribune_ to have met

with the ship of Captain SEABURY in the open sea and to have taken

home the report, has declared, that it has nowhere met with a ship

_Monongahela_, Captain SEABURY.”

* * * * *

Another reported capture of a sea-serpent was published in the _Buffalo

Daily Republic_, of the 13th. of August, 1855, partly inserted in the

_Illustrated London News_ of the 15th. of September, of that year, and

_in toto_ in the _Zoologist_ of that year, p. 4896, and in the _Times_

of October, 1, 1855:

“The “Buffalo Daily Republic” of the 13th. of August, announces the

capture of the great American water-snake on that day in the Silver

Lake, near Perry village, New York. On Sunday, the 12th. the snake

came to the surface, displaying 30 feet length of his body. On Monday

morning all were on the alert. At nine o’clock the snake appeared

between the whaleman’s boat and the shore: he lay quiescent on the

surface, and the whaleman’s boat moved slowly towards him, Mr. Smith,

of Covington, pointing his patent harpoon. On reaching within ten feet

of the snake, the iron whistled in the air, and he darted off towards

the upper part of the lake, almost dragging the boat under water by his

movement. Line was given him, and in half an hour his strength seemed

much exhausted. The whaleman then went ashore and gradually hauled the

line in. When within fifty feet of the shore, the snake showed renewed

life, and with one dart nearly carried off the whole line; but he was

dragged slowly ashore amid excitement unexampled in the district. Four

or five ladies fainted on seeing the snake, who, although ashore,

lashed his body into tremendous folds, and then straightened himself

out in agony with a noise that made the earth tremble. The harpoon

had penetrated a thick muscular part, eight feet from his head. He is

59 feet 8 inches in length, and has a most disgusting look. A slime a

quarter of an inch thick covers his body, and if removed is instantly

replaced by exudation. The body is variable in size. The head is the

size of a full grown calf. Within eight feet from the head the neck

gradually swells to the thickness of a foot in diameter; it then

tapers down, and again gradually swells to a diameter of two feet in

the centre, giving about six feet girth; it then tapers off towards

the tail, and ends in a fin, which can expand in fan-shape three feet

across, or close in a sheath. Double rows of fins are alternately

placed along the belly. The head is most singular. The eyes are large,

staring and terrific, with a transparent membrane attached to the lids,

protecting the eye without impeding the vision. No gills appear. The

mouth is like that of the fish called a sucker; it can stretch so as

to swallow a body a foot and a half in diameter: there are no teeth; a

bony substance, extending in two parallel lines, covers the upper and

lower part of the head. The sides and back are dusky brown; the belly

is dirty white. Although sinuous like a snake, there are hard knot-like

substances along the back. The harpoon is still in him. He lies in the

water, confined with ropes, which keep his body in a curve, so that

he cannot get away. He can use his head and tail, with which he stirs

the water all around. When he rears his head (which he generally keeps

under water) he presents a fearful aspect. In expanding his mouth he

exhibits a blood-red cavity, horribly to look at, and the air rushes

forth with a heavy short puff.”

The well known Mr. SPENCER F. BAIRD, the late zealous Secretary of the

_Smithsonian Institution_, Washington, U. S. on reading this in the

_Zoologist_, sent to the Editor the following letter (_Zoologist_,

1856, p. 4998):

“In the November number of the “_Zoologist_” (Zool. 4896) I notice an

extract from an American paper, respecting the capture of the “Great

American Snake”. You have probably since learned that the account is an

unmitigated hoax, manufactured by a newspaper-editor, while on a summer

vacation, for the purpose of furnishing material for his editorial

correspondence.--SPENCER F. BAIRD, Smithsonian Institution Washington,

U. S. December 28, 1855.”

* * * * *

The following splendid trick is of Captain TAYLOR, who is even called

“a respectable and trustworthy gentleman”, nay, who, when the truth of

it was inquired into, even “confirmed the statement”!

In the _Zoologist_ of 1860, p. 6985, we read:

“The following extract from the log of the “British Banner”, which

arrived at Liverpool on Sunday, 18 March, last, appeared in the

Liverpool Daily Post of March 20. “On the 25th. April in lat. 12° 7′

east, and longitude 93° 52′ south, felt a strong sensation as if the

ship were trembling. Sent second mate to see what was up; the latter

called out to me to go up the fore rigging and look over the bows.

I did so, and saw an enormous serpent shaking the bowsprit with his

mouth. There was about thirty feet of the serpent out of the water,

and I could see in the water abaft of our stern; must have been at

least three hundred feet long; was about the circumference of a very

wide crinoline petticoat, with black back, shaggy mane, horn on his

forehead, and large glaring eyes, placed rather near the nose, and jaws

about eight feet long; he did not observe me, and continued to shake

the bowsprit and to throw the sea alongside into a foam, until the

former came clear away of the ship. The serpent was powerful enough,

although the ship was carrying all sail, and going at about six knots

at the time, he attacked us, to stop her way completely. When the

bowsprit with the jibboom sails and rigging went by the board, the

monster swallowed the foretopmast staysail and flying jib, with the

greatest apparent ease; he also snapped the thickest of the rigging

asunder like thread. He sheered off a little after this, and returned

apparently to scratch himself against the side of the ship, making a

most extraordinary noise, resembling that on board a steamer when the

boilers are blowing off. A whale breached within a mile of the ship

at this time, and the serpent darted off after it like a flash of

lightning, striking the vessel with his tail, and staving in all the

starboard quarter gaily. Saw no more of it, but caught a young one

in the afternoon, and brought it on to Melbourne.--_William Taylor,

Master, “British Banner”.”_

“[The British Banner arrived here on Sunday, and is now in the Albert

Dock. Captain Taylor declares that the above statement is perfectly

correct.--_Editor Daily Post._]”

Mr. EDWARD NEWMAN, the Editor of the _Zoologist_, adds hereto:

“It is impossible for any story to read more like a hoax than this,

but I had ready means of procuring, through a friend at Lloyd’s, the

information that there is such a ship as the “British Banner”, that

she is commanded by Mr. William Taylor, a respectable and trustworthy

gentleman, and that she did arrive at Liverpool on Sunday, 18 March,

last past, and is now in the Albert Dock. Armed with this information

I wrote to Capt. Taylor, who has replied in the most courteous manner;

he confirms the above statement, adding that he sent it to the Daily

Post himself, and adding also that the young one reported to have

been caught was presented to the Museum at Melbourne, where it was

thoroughly inspected and pronounced to be a veritable sea-serpent.”--

It is not quite clear whether Mr. NEWMAN was a second time the dupe of

a trick, or not, but I think he really was!

Mr. GEORGE GUYON, Ventnor, Isle of Wight, on the contrary, wrote the

following poem (see _Zoologist_, p. 7051, 1860):

“I’ve a story to tell--I don’t say that it’s true--

But just as I heard it I tell it to you.

A ship there was sailing upon the blue sea

With her canvas all set, when the captain, said he

“I feel that the vessel is all of a tremble,

A sort of sea earthquake it seems to resemble;

Send forward the mate to see what is the matter.”

When lo! what he saw would have made your teeth shatter,

An enormous big snake rising out of the sea,

Some three hundred feet long it might possibly be,

And in bulk it might equal a “wide crinoline”

(At least seven yards round that description must mean).

With jaws eight feet long, and with eyes fiercely glaring,

A horn and a mane; he looked horribly daring,

While the bowsprit he shook in his terrible mouth.

’T was in Latitude east and in Longitude south,

This is somewhat obscure, but I think on the whole

It occurred th’ other side of the Antarctic pole,

The ship making six knots--leaving foam in her wake,

Yet she stopped at the touch of this wonderful snake;

And the jibboom and bowsprit were snapped like a straw;

But his strength was outdone by his marvellous maw;

For he swallowed the stay-sail and also the jib,

Like a boy gulping oysters--they went down to glib.

With his stay to his stomac he turned him about,

And gave with his tail such a vigorous flout,

That some timbers to atoms were crushed by the blow,

And what more might have happened we none of us know,

When an object appeared for the which he set sail,

And both object and story were much like a whale.”

Afterwards, (_Zoologist_, p. 7278, of the same year) we find the

following about the young sea-serpent of Captain TAYLOR:

“Captain Taylor’s Sea-Serpent.--A friend, who has the opportunity of

communicating with Melbourne on the subject of the young sea-serpent

which Captain Taylor says (Zool. 6985) he presented to the Museum at

Melbourne, has ascertained through Mr. Coates, of that town, that

Captain Taylor is so far correct, that he did at the time specified

present a specimen of Pelamys bicolor to the Museum in question, and

Professor M’Coy exhibited the same to Mr. Coates. Of course there is no

rational ground for concluding that this small sea snake is the young

of any such gigantic creature as Captain Taylor has described.--_Edward

Newman._”

But of a _great_ Sea-Serpent of Captain TAYLOR we don’t find any more

statements!

* * * * *

We have read the various hoaxes which appeared in the _Cork

Constitution_ of 1850; the _Skibbereen Eagle_ too is not averse to

publishing a similar hoax (See _Zoologist_, 1861, p. 7354):

“As Samuel Townsend, Esq., J. P., of Whitehall, was sailing in

Whitehall Harbour, he saw, following his wake, what appeared to him

(from the many descriptions he had read of the monster) to be a

sea-serpent about twenty five or thirty feet in length; and being

in a small boat he endeavoured to keep as respectful a distance as

possible. There was, however, another boat in the harbour at the time,

in which was Mr. Samuel Kingston, his brother, Mr. John Kingston (of

Trinity College, Dublin), and a party of ladies. These parties also saw

the huge monster; and upon raising its neck about six feet above the

surface the females became greatly alarmed, when Mr. John Kingston,

who is a remarkably good shot, fired at it, upon which it immediately

disappeared. Mr. Townsend informed us the serpent presented a beautiful

appearance, having large, brilliant scales of a yellow hue, and is

of opinion it was struck by the shot fired by Mr. Kingston. It was

likewise distinctly seen from the windows of Whitehall-House. Mr.

Robert Atkins told us he saw it the day before of Barlogue.”--

* * * * *

The following hoax is not inferior to any of the foregoing (Nature, of

13th. of June 1872):

“Mr. J. COBBIN of Durban, forwards to the _Natal Colonist_ the

following account of a “sea-serpent” seen by him:--“During my last

passage from London, I saw no less than three sea-serpents, but an

account of the last will suffice. On 30th. December last, on board

the _Silvery Wave_, in lat. about 35′ 0″ S., and long. 33′ 30″ E., at

6.20 P. M. solar time, an enormous sea-serpent passing nearly across

our bows compelled the alteration of our course. He was at least

one thousand yards long, of which about one third appeared on the

surface of the water at every stroke of his enormous fan-shaped tail,

with which he propelled himself, raising it high above the waves,

and arching his back like a land-snake or a caterpillar. In shape

and proportion he much resembled the cobra, being marked by the same

knotty and swollen protuberance at the back of the head on the neck.

The latter was the thickest part of the serpent. His head was like a

bull’s in shape, his eyes large and glowing, his ears had circular tips

and were level with his eyes, and his head was surrounded by a horny

crest, which he erected and depressed at pleasure. He swam with great

rapidity and lashed the sea into a foam, like breakers dashing over

jagged rocks. The sun shone brightly upon him; and with a good glass I

saw his overlapping scales open and shut with every arch of his sinuous

back coloured like the rainbow.”

* * * * *

I don’t know whether the following, taken from the _Graphic_, is a true

hoax, or an optical illusion, but I think it is a hoax. There we read

in the number of August, 17th., 1872:

“Concerning this much discussed animal, whose existence mariners from

the earliest times have firmly asserted, and landsmen as obstinately

persisted in doubting, we have received the following from Mr. Walthew,

a well-known ship-owner and merchant in Liverpool:--“Report of Captain

A. Hassel, of barque _St. Olaf_, from Newport to Galveston, Texas.--Two

days before arrival at Galveston, and about 4.30 P. M. on May 13,

weather calm, smooth sea, lat. 26° 52′, long. 91° 20′, I saw a shoal

of sharks passing the ship. Five or six came under the vessel’s stern,

but before we could get out a line they went off with the rest. About

two minutes after, one of the men sang out that he saw something on the

weather bow, like a cask on its end. Presently another one called out

that he saw something rising out of the water like a tall man. On a

nearer approach we saw it was an immense serpent, with its head out of

the water, about 200 ft. from the vessel. He lay still on the surface

of the water, lifting his head up, and moving the body in a serpentine

manner. Could not see all of it; but what we could see, from the after

part of the head, was about 70 ft. long and of the same thickness all

the way, excepting about the head and neck, which were smaller, and the

former flat, like the head of a serpent. It had four fins on its back,

and the body of a yellow greenish colour, with brown spots all over

the upper part and underneath white. The whole crew were looking at it

for fully ten minutes before it moved away. It was about six feet in

diameter. One of the mates has drawn a slight sketch of the serpent,

which will give some notion of its appearance.--A. Hassel, master of

Norwegian barque St. Olaf.--Witness to signature, J. Fredk. Walthew.”--

[Illustration: Fig. 3 and 4. Would be Sea-Serpent seen near Galveston.]

The accompanying engravings are also published, and I give facsimiles

of them in Fig. 3 and 4.--I think that Captain HASSEL after having

seen the shoal of sharks, two minutes afterwards saw four of these

individuals swimming perfectly in a line, the foremost occasionally

lifting its head above the surface, and the backs with the backfin of

each animal being visible. The distance between the first and the last

being about seventy feet, the whole row looked like a huge serpent,

and gave thus rise to the story, which, as I have already said above,

may be a hoax, or a true statement of what they saw. Evidently one of

the mates first drew the sketch exactly as he saw the four sharks, but

afterwards, answering his own question: “how would the serpent look, if

floating on the surface?” sketched the second figure, where a boa or

python with four fins is represented floating on the water like a cork,

or better like the skin of such an animal puffed up!

* * * * *

A splendid hoax was again communicated by a correspondent of the _Monde

Illustré_ to the Editor, and published in the number of October, 8,

1881, of that journal.

“On board the steamer _The Don_, of the Royal Mail Steam Packet

Company.--Captain ROBERT WOOLWARD.”

“Sunday, August 14, 1881”.

“To the Editor.”

“I commence my letter by asking you a correspondent’s diploma of

the journal _Le Monde Illustré_ for my friend Mr. E. DE CONTRERAS Y

ALCANTARA, an inhabitant of Ponce, Isle of Porto Rico, Spanish colony.”

“I owe to Mr. DE CONTRERAS the subjoined sketch, the exactness of which

is guaranteed by the seven signatures of the eye witnesses, who are:

“Mr. E. DE CONTRERAS Y ALCANTARA, of Ponce, Isle of Porto Rico,

Mr. CARLO LOPEZ ALDANA, of Lima, Peru,

Mr. HENRIQUE ROMAN, of Cartagena, Columbia,

Mr. A. E. XIMENES DE SAN JOSÉ, of Costa Rica,

Mr. MAURICE RENARD, of Paris,

Mr. C. RENARD, of Paris, your correspondent.

[Illustration: Fig. 5.--The sea-monster, as Mr. C. Renard supposed to

have seen it.]

“The appearance lasted for ten minutes, in full moonlight. As I made

the sketch, my son noted down his observations, Mr. CONTRERAS too; we

compared and exchanged our several observations, these gentlemen at the

little window of the smoking-saloon, and I just above, resting upon the

port-hole and supported by a rope.”

“The monster seemed to measure about forty or fifty meters, from the

head to the tail, as far as the numerous coils made an approximative

estimation possible. The body from the dorsal ridge to the midst of

the belly seemed to be covered by several ranges of scales, or a rough

skin like that of sharks, but forming overlapping layers of scales. The

back is very darkish and gradually growing lighter towards the belly,

where it is a dirty grey. The entire body is marked with alternating

transversal stripes, darkish green, chesnut coloured, and grey; the

tail seems to taper in a point, like that of eels. I preserve for the

end the description of the head, which we have properly examined, and

which is very remarkable. This head is not oval, and rather pointed, as

in most of the snakes; it forms at its cranium a great mass with rough

and irregular outlines. From the occiput it is provided with a hard and

movable crest, with very sharp points; this crest may be lowered on the

neck so as to become invisible. The upper jaw projects, as is shown in

the sketch, the end is doubled up, and a dark hollow, like a nostril

is visible there; the lower jaw, more pointed, shows below hollow

and convex outlines, like sacs, doubtless for the act of swallowing.

The teeth are sharp, enormous, and white. From the throat, attached

to a kind of cushion, projects a hard tongue, pointed, provided with

suckers, and glittering like steel, and phosphorescing as the sea

occasionally does; the eye is round, very glittering, very movable, and

seems to be able to look backward, so rapid and “_bien combinées_” are

the animal’s evolutions; the orbit is bordered by a ring of lighter

colour and seems to be overarched by an eye-brow provided with hairs or

bristles.”

“The face, from the snout to the neck presents a lateral oblique line,

grey in colour, on both sides of which three other similar lines run

towards it.”

“The movement of the animal in the water, seems to produce no sound at

all, but undulating waves and a very slight ripple.”

“It caused a stench enough to make one ill; this smell, which hung

about us for more than half an hour, was like that of a fermentation

by heat on a large scale of the house of LESAGE, the great gatherers

of Asnières, mingled with that of a dozen of charcoal-black works of

Billancourt.”

“To neutralize it, all the shops of several of our best perfumers would

be wanted.”

“The monster seems to be old, judging partly from its dimensions, and

partly from its colour and the roughness of its integument.”

“This is not the first time that similar animals are observed.”

“The first time it was seen in 1847 by the Portuguese ship _Ville de

Lissabonne_, captain JUAN ALPHONSO ZARCO Y CAPEDA.”

“This date coincides with the buffooneries of the _Charivari_ on the

_Constitutionel_, and with the first disease of the potatoes.”

“In 1864, the second of _The Don_ observed a similar animal near the

coast of Japan; he tattooed it on his arm.”

“I end this series of reports by assuring you that the monster was seen

on Wednesday evening, August 10, 1881, by the undersigned, at a quarter

to ten P. M. in

latitude 29° 60′

longitude 42° 40′

reckoning the degrees, according to the log-book on board, from the

meridian of Greenwich.”

“C. RENARD.”

“(Here follow the seven signatures above-mentioned).”

The Editor of the _Monde Illustré_ adds:

“We leave to the author of this letter and of the subjoined sketch all

the responsibility of an assertion which seems to us, least to say,

strange, and the details of which we communicate to our readers with

due reserve.”

* * * * *

Let us now pass on to reports of would-be sea-serpents.