Part 31

Evidently the animal remained under water for a long time, and struck the vessel in coming to the surface. Seen from very near the colour evidently did not seem dark brown, but of a lighter hue. The absence of visible fins, the pointed tail, the brown spotted skin (no scales are mentioned, so it must have been smooth), the pointed head, the appearance of shoulders, the large eyes, its astonishing rapidity in swimming, all these statements characterize the sea-serpent. Alarmed at its having struck the vessel, off it went! Evidently Captain EDWARDS did not see the tip of the tail, which is rather pointed; he described, it is clear, what he took for the end of it, the extreme end being under water. No latitude is given in this report, but we may conclude that the appearance took place more towards the south than Melbourne is situated. This town is situated at about 38° S. lat., so the appearance may have taken place between 40° and 45° S. lat., and of course between 110° and 145° W. longitude, in the common track of vessels.

* * * * *

=123=.--1849, September 15.--(_Illustrated London News_ for 1850, January 12).--Extract from a letter, dated “H. M. S. _Cleopatra_, Singapore, Oct. 26, 1849”, from an officer of that ship:--“Sept. 15. This evening they reported the _Sea-Serpent_: several of the men, as well as the officer of the forecastle, saw the monster; and they all ran aft to see it from the stern: they say it was about _thirty feet long_. After the report, all hands came to deck; but the evening was fast drawing to a close, and the ship going at eight knots, soon left the monster astern, going through the water very quickly to the N. W.”--(_From a Correspondent._)

Most probably this appearance took place in the Indian Ocean between latitude 10 and 20 S. and longitude 50 and 70 E.

If one of the gentlemen of the _Cleopatra_ is still in the land of the living, he will greatly oblige me by sending me some more details of the external appearance of the animal, and of the place where the animal was seen.

* * * * *

“The Rev. Alfred Charles Smith, M. A., an excellent naturalist, who passed the three summer months of 1850 in Norway, and who published” his _Notes on Observations in Natural History during a Tour in Norway_ “in the _Zoologist_ for that and the following year, thus alludes to his own inquiries, which, if they add nothing to the amount of fact accumulated, add weight to the testimonies already adduced”. (GOSSE, _Romance of Natural History_, 13th. Ed., Vol. I., p. 282.)

“Being in the country of the renowned Bishop Pontoppidan, and in the fjords which are generally claimed as the home, or, at any rate, as one of the habitations of the sea-serpent, whose existence seems yet to be a disputed point in England, I lost no opportunity of making inquiries of all I could see, as to the general belief in the country regarding the animal in question; but all, with one single exception--naval officers, sailors, boatmen, and fishermen--concurred in affirming most positively that such an animal did exist, and had been repeatedly seen off their coasts and fjords, though I was never fortunate enough to meet a man who could boast of having seen him with his own eyes. All, however, agreed in unhesitating belief as to his existence and frequent appearance; and all seemed to marvel very much at the scepticism of the English, for refusing credence to what to the minds of the Norwegians seemed so incontrovertible. The single exception to which I have alluded, was a Norwegian officer, who ridiculed what he called the credulity or gullibility of his countrymen; though I am bound to add my belief, that he did this, not from any decided opinion of his own, but to make a show of superior shrewdness in the eyes of an Englishman, who, he at once concluded, must undoubtedly disbelieve the existence of the marine monster. That Englishman, however, certainly partakes of the credulity of the Northmen, and cannot withhold his belief in the existence of some huge inhabitant of those northern seas, when, to his mind, the fact of his existence has been so clearly proved by numerous eye-witnesses, many of whom were too intelligent to be deceived, and too honest to be doubted.”

* * * * *

The reader will remember the splendid hoax of the _New York Tribune_ (1852); now Mr. ROBERT FRORIEP in his _Tagsberichte über die Fortschritte der Natur- und Heilkunde_, no 486, already doubted this report. After some time (n^o. 491) he communicated to his readers that according to the _Philadelphia Bulletin_, the whole was a hoax, but to show them how firm a believer Mr. FRORIEP, nevertheless, remained, he adds:

“This, however, will not prevent us from bestowing further attention on the subject of the Sea-Serpent.”

* * * * *

=124=.--1850?--The following evidence may be called one of the more interesting which tell about the habits of the sea-serpent. In the _Zoologist_ of 1862, p. 7850, we read:

“Off Madeira, on board R. M. S. _Thames_. Made acquaintance with a Captain Christmas, of the Danish Navy, a proprietor in Santa Cruz, and holding some office about the Danish Court. He told me he once saw a sea-serpent between Iceland and the Faroe Islands. He was lying in to a gale of wind, in a frigate of which he had the command, when an immense shoal of porpoises rushed by the ship, as if pursued, and lo and behold a creature with a neck moving like that of a swan, about the thickness of a man’s waist, with a head like a horse, raised itself slowly and gracefully from the deep, and seeing the ship it immediately disappeared again, head foremost, like a duck diving. He saw it only for a few seconds; the part above water seemed about eighteen feet in length. He is a singularly intelligent man, and by no means one to allow his imagination to run away with him.--_Stephen Cave, M. P. for Shoreham; 35, Wilson Place, April 29, 1861, in a letter to Mr. Gosse._”

It is a very remarkable fact that we meet here the sea-serpent between Iceland and the Far-Oer, a place situated between the two most frequented parts of the North Atlantic, i. e. the coasts of Norway and the coasts of the United States. But it is not the first time; the readers will remember the report of HANS EGEDE (n^o. 5) and that of Capt. BROWN (n^o. 56). Remarkable, too, is the fact that the sea-serpent now made its appearance in a gale of wind. Is this not a matter of surprise as everywhere else is stated that it appears only in fine weather? Is it not reasonable therefore, to conclude that the animal feels comfortable in fine weather, but that, being an air-breathing animal it must come to the surface from time to time and may consequently be seen at times when there is wind? There is the statement of Captain M’QUHAE, who speaks of a “breeze” and here we meet with “a gale of wind”. It is also worthy of our notice that Capt. CRISTMAS mentions the immense shoal of porpoises rushing by the ship, as if pursued, and a sea-serpent making its appearance. I need not remind my readers of the same observation of some gentlemen near Nova Scotia (n^o. 97). Later on we shall have the report in which a sea-serpent gripped “a whale” (of the smaller kind) in its fin, and we have already learned that a sea-serpent (n^o. 54) was engaged with “a whale” (of the smaller kind).

Not less important is the description of the long neck, moving like that of a swan, and disappearing head foremost like a duck diving. Nearly exactly the same thing was observed in 1879, April 5.

The thickness of the neck was that of a man’s waist, the part above the water measured eighteen feet in length, and yet the foreflappers remained hidden under water. The head is described as resembling that of a horse, which may be the result of the animal bearing a mane, and when first rising out of the water, holding its head in a nearly right angle with the neck. Moreover the nostrils might have been widely opened. The animal of Capt. M’QUHAE had also a neck of one foot and a third in diameter; head and neck had a length of about twenty feet, for at about twenty feet in the rear of the head was seen the animal’s fore flapper. So we may conclude that these two individuals were of the same or nearly of the same length.

* * * * *

=125=.--1853?--Dr. TRAILL says in the _Proceedings of the Royal Society at Edinburgh_, n^o. 44, May, 1854, that it “is said to have been seen lately in some of their fjords.”

* * * * *

=126=.--1854, September 4.--(_Illustrated London News_, for 1855, February 17.--)

“It is reported by the British Brig _Albeona_, arrived at Liverpool, that on the 4th. of September last, about five in the afternoon, in lat. 38 S., long 13 E., while the ship was under a light wind and in smooth water, a sea-monster of great size and singular appearance was descried. Attention was first directed to it by the broken action of the water, which otherwise was smooth all around. The animal was discovered protruding its head above water to the length of about 30 feet, at an angle of 60 degrees to the horizon. His head was about 12 feet long and was marked by a white stripe or streak down each side. At about six feet from the termination of the streaks, which were presumed to be its jaws, there was a protuberance on its back like a small water-cask. The creature kept its mouth shut, but its eyes were plainly visible. At the point of contact with the water the body seemed about as much as the ship’s long-boat round. The general colour of the body was black, but under the jaw was a quantity of loose skin, like a pouch, of a lighter colour than the rest of the animal. While under observation he dipped under water three times, remaining submerged about a minute each time. From the broken action of the water at different points, it seemed as if protuberances, similar to that on the back existed on various parts of the body. From the best conjecture that could be made, it was computed at 180 feet in length over all.”

The length of the head may be somewhat exaggerated, the largest dimensions admissible are 6 feet in breadth and about 8 feet in length, as we shall afterwards observe from one of the most recent reports. It is a remarkable fact that here mention is made of a white stripe or streak down on each side of the head, presumed to be its jaws. In the deposition of Captain FINNEY (n^o. 34) too, we read “It had a white stripe extending the whole length of the head just above the water, there where the underjaw must have been”. And in the figures of the animal seen by the gentlemen of the _Daedalus_ (fig. 28, 29, 30) the underjaw is drawn white, and described whitish brown or yellowish white. The protuberance on its back (read on the back of its neck) was a fold in the animal’s skin, as may be seen in the sea-lions in our Zoological Gardens, when they contract their long necks, and then the other “protuberances, similar to that on the back” were of the same character. This character of having bunches occasionally, is well known to us. Or all these protuberances were merely vertical undulations.

Attention was first paid to it by the broken action of the water, which otherwise was smooth all around. So the animal first swam for a moment just below the surface, a habit which we have often observed in foregoing reports. The general colour of the body was black, but under the jaw was a quantity of loose skin, like a pouch, of a lighter colour than the rest of the animal. As to the description of the colour of the animal’s throat, it agreed with foregoing statements. As to the loose skin, and the pouch, this is also only explicable by the animal’s having a skin just like sea-lions. It is so loose and folds so easily, that if the head is bent a little downward, or if the neck is somewhat contracted, several folds are seen, which led Captain BROWN (n^o. 56) to mention “eight gills under the neck”. He had better have written “gill-splits”, meaning the furrows between the folds.--The length of 180 feet may be somewhat exaggerated, though we will afterwards prove that individuals of still greater length must exist.

* * * * *

=127=.--1855, August?--In the letter from Capt. G. H. HARRINGTON to Rear-Admiral W. A. B. HAMILTON, dated Liverpool, February 8, 1858, which letter will be inserted afterwards, we read:

“I am informed by Messrs. Lamport and Holt, shipowners of this place, that one of their captains reported a similar thing about two years ago, off the Island of St. Helena, but they took no further notice of it, supposing that he might have been deceived.”

I am convinced that the captain really saw a sea-serpent. The reader will, I hope, be convinced of it himself, after having read Captain HARRINGTON’s report (n^o. 131).

* * * * *

=128=.--1856, March 30.--_(Illustrated London News_ of the 3d. of May, 1856).

“To the Editor of the Illustrated London News.”

“_Imogen_, Channel, 15th. April, 1856.”

“Sir.--We beg to hand you the enclosed Sketch of a Sea-Serpent we had the good fortune to sight on the 30th. of March last.”

“Imogen, from Algoa Bay, towards London. Sunday 30th. March, 1856. Lat. 29 deg., 11 min. N., Long. 34 deg., 36 min. W., bar. 30.50; calm and clear. Four vessels visible to southward and westward.”

“About five minutes past eleven A. M., the helmsman drew our attention to something moving through the water, and causing a strong ripple about 400 yards distant from our starboard quarter.”

“In a few moments it became more distinct, presenting the appearance in fig. 1., and showing an apparent length of about forty feet (above the surface of the sea), the undulations of the water extending on each side to a considerable distance in its wake. Mr. Statham immediately ascended to the maintopsailyard, Captain Guy and Mr. Harries watching the animal from the deck with the telescope. After passing the ship about half a mile, the serpent “rounded to” and raised its head, seemingly to look at us (fig. 2), and then steered away to the northward (N. E.), possibly to the neighbourhood of the Western Islands, frequently lifting its head (fig. 3). We traced its course until nearly on the horizon, from the topsailyard, and lost sight of it from deck about 11 h. 45 m. A. M. No doubt remained on our minds as to its being an immense snake, as the undulations of its body were clearly perceptible, although we were unable to distinguish its eyes.”

“The weather being fine and the glossy surface of the sea only occasionally disturbed by slight flaws (catspaws) of wind, we had a perfect opportunity of noticing its movements.”

“In conformity to your regulations we inclose our references, and remain,

“Sir, your obedient servants,

“James Guy, Commander,

“J. H. Statham, Julian B. Harries, D. J. Williamson, Passengers.”

After the figures of Capt. M’QUHAE of the _Daedalus_ (n^o. 118, fig. 28, 29, 30), which show the animal swimming with its body in a straight line, these four figures of the animal are the best we have, but here it is swimming with vertical undulations. To the description I can add nothing, nor need I explain anything. Description and figures complete each other and give an accurate and very natural idea of a sight of the animal seen from afar.--

* * * * *

=129=.--1856, July 8.--(The _Illustrated London News_ of the 4th. of October, 1856.)

“To the Editor of the Illustrated London News.”

“Colonial Agency, 4, Cullum-street, London, September 25th. 1856.”

“We hand you the following extract from the log-book of our ship _Princess_, Captain A. R. N. Tremearne, in London Docks 15th. inst., from China, viz:--”

““Thuesday, July 8, 1856.--Latitude accurate 34° 56′ S.; Longitude accurate 18° 14′ E. At one P. M. saw a very large fish, with a head like a walrus, and twelve fins, similar to those in a black fish, but turned the contrary way. The back was from 20 to 30 feet long; also a great length of tail. It is not improbable that this monster has been taken for the great sea-serpent. Fired and hit it near the head with rifle-ball. At eight, fresh wind and fine.””

“We submit that the repeated accounts of seeing a marine monster, whatever be its correct name or kind, yet harmonising in some leading descriptions forbid longer doubt of one such creature existing, and we inclose you a rough sketch as this one appeared, signed by Captain Tremearne, who has been six years in our employ, and is otherwise well known. His own private log contains a similar record, and we have interrogated others of the _Princess_ crew, who assert the fact of such appearance.”

“Captain Tremearne states that Captain Morgan, a passenger by the _Princess_, but who at St. Helena joined the ship _Senator_, to command her to Liverpool (where she is daily expected), also saw this monster, and can corroborate the statements.”

“Until 13th. of October the _Princess_ will be at London Dock jetty, loading for Melbourne, and naturalists and other scientific persons can there make further inquiries, provided they do not subject Captain Tremearne to correspondence or interrupt ship’s duties, which are urgent for her speedy departure. The ship’s log-book and the rough sketch of the fish can also be inspected at our office.”

“Edmund J. Wheeler and Co.”

Though the description is very short, the figure enables us to make the following conjecture. Captain TREMEARNE really saw a sea-serpent, swimming with extraordinary speed, most probably because, on coming to the surface, it was alarmed by the unexpected presence of the ship. Having remained under water a long time it suddenly exhaled on coming to the surface, and blew like a whale, as the figure shows. The extreme velocity of its motion is cause that the impression of the head was that of a walrus. But this is a remarkable fact. We have already observed that a Norwegian fisherman described the head as resembling that of a seal (n^o. 8), and that Mr. CUMMINGS (n^o. 29), too described at first sight the head to resemble that of a seal. Afterwards Mr. KRIUKOF (n^o. 36) better acquainted with sea-lions, described it as resembling a sea-lion’s; more than once the bristles on the upper lip are mentioned; one of the gentlemen of the _Daedalus_ drew a head distinctly that of a Pinniped, and Captain TREMEARNE declares that it had the head of a walrus. Most probably he has seen the animal close to him and in its face, and saw the upper-lip with bristly whiskers, though this is neither mentioned nor figured. The same uncommonly rapid motion of the animal caused the captain to draw the neck too short and to see “twelve fins”. He was the dupe of an optical illusion, resulting from the very rapid paddling of the animal’s fore-flappers. But he has very well observed that the posture of the flappers when directed as upward as possible is “turned the contrary way to those in a black fish”. The head is described by him as that of a mammal, belonging to the order of Pinnipeds, the posture of the flappers is exactly that which pinnipedian mammals, as sea-lions and walruses, would exhibit, when swimming with extreme velocity. No reptile is able to lift up its fore-limbs to such a height. The animal in this position, but seen from behind, would have the external features as shown in the figure of Lieutenant HAYNES (fig. 45, n^o. 148). And captain TREMEARNE has also very well observed and delineated that six of the fins were on the left, and six on the right sight of the animal as if rising out of the water, and that the twelve were not situated on the animal’s back. The rough back, too, is a proof that the animal had a mane. The violent motions of the flappers must have caused a severe splashing and foaming of the water; it is clear that this is omitted by captain TREMEARNE when drawing his figure. So this report, though apparently of no worth, is, with the figure, one of the most valuable reports of an appearance of the sea-serpent, throwing light upon its rank in the system of nature. Remarkable is the fact that captain TREMEARNE writes: “it is not improbable that this monster has been taken for the great sea-serpent”.

* * * * *

=130=.--1857, February 16.--The following letter was forwarded by Dr. Biccard to his friend Mr. FAIRBRIDGE, at his request, was then published in the _Cape Argus_ of the 14th. of March, 1857, and reprinted, with the figure, in the _Illustrated London News_ of 1857, June 13.--

“Cape Town, 11th. March, 1857.

“My dear Fairbridge,--According to your wish, I give you a short description of the Sea-Serpent seen by me and others opposite the old light-house at Green Point.”

“On Monday, the 16th. of February last, I went out to Green Point in the afternoon. At about 5 p. m., or a little after, I was called by Mr. Murray, the light-house-keeper, to “come and see a sea monster”. I proceeded to the light-house, and from thence I saw on the water, about 150 yards from the shore, the serpent, of which some details have already appeared in print. It was lying in the position shown in the accompanying sketch n^o. 1. I borrowed a rifle from Mr. Flail (Mr. Murray’s father-in-law), and fired at the animal. The ball fell short in front of it by about four yards, as shown in the sketch. The animal did not move, and I then fired a second shot, the ball striking about a foot and a half from it. The serpent, then apparently startled, moved from his position, straightened himself out, and went under water, evidently getting out of the way. He was invisible for about ten minutes, at the expiration of which interval he reappeared at about two hundred yards distance, and I should say about forty yards further off. He then came right on towards the place where I first saw him; but, before arriving there, my son, who had joined me, fired at the animal. Unluckily, the discharge broke the nipple of the rifle, and I was thus prevented from further firing. Upon reaching the place he had first occupied, the serpent formed himself into the position delineated in Sketch n^o. 2. He then stood right into the bay, and soon afterwards we lost sight of him altogether.”

“As I have stated, the distance the animal kept from shore was not more than 200 yards; its length was about 200 feet, but its thickness I cannot tell, the upper part of the body only being visible. The head could be seen but indistinctly, as he raised it at intervals, as shown in the sketch. I consider the protuberance to be the upper part of the head, but I could not discover the eyes, notwithstanding the short distance, and the telescope which was a pretty good one. The colour of the animal was a dark dull colour, except the head, which was maculated with large white spots. The weather at this time was very calm, with a light northwesterly breeze. Besides myself, the serpent was seen by Mr. Hall, Mr. Murray, Mrs. and Miss Biccard, my two sons, and my coachman, who all saw it distinctly.”

“Yours, &c.,

“Biccard.”