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 incerted it in his journal (Notizen, Third Series, Vol. VI, n°. 131, p. 328), and ends this article with the following remark: (1)

"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 of 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!  (l am not in the habit of using notes of admiration, but the present occasion seems to require one).  The sailors, however, armed, 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.

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.  Yon 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. Mitchell'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°. 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 Massachusets, 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 adressed 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 allmighty 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°. 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°. 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.

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° 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, 2d. 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. l848".

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.  Müller 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° 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 snubbled 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 archievement."

"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, 13, The Times for 1852, March 10, The Zoologist for 1852 p. 3426-3429, Spenerishe 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 18, when in lat. 13 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 daylight 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 everything in and about the boats was in perfect order.  I had already jumped into my boat w hen 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 topgallant 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 boatsteerer, 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 adeep 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 spareline 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 abreath 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°. 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 spoutholes 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°. 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 upperpart 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 eve 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 hash of lightning, striking the vessel with his tail, and staving in all the starboard quarter gally.  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, were 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 Hingston, his brother, Mr. John Hingston (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 Hingston, 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. Hingston.  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 landsnake 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: