Part 59

“As evening fell, a breeze sprang up, and we reached Loch Hourn Head early next morning. After paying a visit to the Barrasdale oyster beds, we set sail for home in the afternoon, with a nice breeze on the quarter, but on reaching the mouth of the loch the wind died away again and we had to take to the sweeps. Just about the place where the animal was last seen, my attention was called by someone to a peculiar swirling of the water not far off, and I immediately noticed what was evidently the same creature swimming up to the yacht at a very rapid rate. When a short distance off it dived beneath the surface, quickly re-appearing off the starboard beam nearer than at any previous time, and going at such a great speed that I could distinctly hear the rushing sound of the breaking water. At this time there were no bumps to be seen, and I can only liken the appearance of our visitor to a log almost entirely submerged and dragged very rapidly through the sea, the water falling over each side of the head in a kind of cascade, while a series of broken waves formed immediately behind, gradually subsiding in the wake.”

“It afterwards kept swimming about for a considerable time, and I had an opportunity of judging of its length so far as visible, compared with the hulls of two trading schooners of about 100 tons each some little distance from us. When apparently the same distance away as the traders, and going slowly, it appeared fully as long from the head to the eighth bump as the length of one of the schooners on waterline, which would be at least sixty feet; but how much of the animal remained under water I had no means of estimating. The head seemed to be square or blunt, but I did not see under it, and did not notice its eye or mouth. The bumps, or dark raised portions, appeared to me to be about eighteen inches above the water, and three or four feet long, with a distance of four or six feet between each bump. I could not say whether the bumps were the convolutions of a snake-like body or the raised portions of a large body underneath the water. I am inclined to think the latter, as the bumps always kept the same distance apart, and appeared to be protuberances on the back of, possibly, a lizard shaped reptile. That it caused a large displacement was evident from the waves and commotion raised when swimming at or near the surface, as I could distinctly trace its progress with the naked eye at a distance of from two to three miles.”

“We lost sight of the creature after leaving the mouth of Loch Hourn, but just as night fell I noticed it going past at a rapid rate in the direction of Kyle Rhea, a narrow strait which separates Skye from the mainland. I afterwards heard that it was seen that same evening by fishermen and others passing through these narrows, and it struck them all at the time as being quite different from anything they had been accustomed to.”

“The above is a bare statement of fact, and was written down by me immediately after getting ashore, while my recollection of the creature’s appearance was perfectly fresh and vivid. Having cruised for many summers amongst the West Highland lochs, I am perfectly familiar with the appearance and habits of whales, seals, porpoises, &c., which can often be seen in great numbers. To these, the creature I have described bore no resemblance whatever.”

“GILBERT BOGLE, Newcastle.”

From this gentleman I received three splendid pen-drawings, representing the animal witnessed by him on that occasion, but alas too late to be reproduced for this edition.

1872, August 22 and 23. (N^o. 139 and 140, see p. 322).--On one of these days it seems also to have been seen by Lord MACDONALD’S steam yacht in Loch Hourn.--Eye-witnesses: Lord MACDONALD, of Armadale, Skye, Rev. Mr. MC. NEILL, minister of Skye, Mrs. G. C. LYSONS, of Painswick, Strand, and others.--(R. P. G.)

1873, March.--Mr. BASIL CLOCHRANE, Capt. R. N., of Windlesham House, Bagshot, Surrey, on board the _Orontes_, from the West Indies to England saw a sea-serpent.--Letter from eye-witness to Capt. GEO. DREVAR (see p. 329).--(R. P. G.)

1875, July 8 and 13. (N^o. 144 and 145, see p. 329).--The letter from Capt. GEO. DREVAR to the Editor of _The Calcutta Gentleman_, 1876, February (?), contains no news about the two appearances.--(R. P. G.)

1875, July 17.--Off Plymouth, Cape Cod Bay.--Captain GARTON of the ss. _Norman_, and several people on board the ss. _Roman_.--_Atlantic Monthly_ of June, 1884.--(R. P. G).

1875, July 30.--On board the yacht _Princess_, between Nahant and Egg-Rock.--Mr. FRANCIS W. LAWRENCE, Mrs. LAWRENCE, Rev. ARTHUR LAWRENCE, rector of St. Paul’s Church, Stockbridge, Mass., Miss MARY FOSDICK, ALBION W. REED, ROBERT O. REED, Mr. J. KELSOE and Mr. J. P. THOMAS, both of Swampscott.--_Atlantic Monthly_ of June, 1884.--(R. P. G.)

1876, September 11. (N^o. 146, see p. 341).--An account in the _Times_ of 1876, December 28, furnishes no news.--A rough drawing made by Mr. ANDERSON, and now in the possession of ROBERT HOLT, of Liverpool, owner of the steamer, hardly agrees with the depositions, and cannot give the idea of a salamander, a newt, or a frog.--(R. P. G.)

1876.--Some Pitcairn islanders saw a sea-serpent near Norfolk Island.--Letter from one of the Pitcairn islanders to Mr. PALMER of Liverpool.--_Liverpool Mercury_, 24 February, 1877.--“Mr. JOHN ADAMS and his boat’s crew saw it near Norfolk-Islands”.--Letter from Mr. MARCUS LOWTHER, Capt. R. N. of Penge, London, S. E., to Capt. GEO. DREVAR (see p. 329).--(R. P. G.)

1877, March.--Mr. R. A. PROCTOR, in his “_Strange Sea-Monsters_” (_Gentleman’s Magazine_) says amongst other assertions: “naturalists have been far less disposed to be incredulous than the general public”. If it were only true! Hitherto at least _zoologists_ have not admitted even the possibility of the existence of a still unknown species, called “sea-serpent”.--(R. P. G.)

1877, July 15.--About two miles off the mouth of Gloucester Harbour, Mass.--Mr. GEORGE S. WASSON and Mr. B. L. FERNALD.--_Atlantic Monthly_ of June, 1884.--(R. P. G.)

1878, summer.--Fjord near Aalesund.--_Naturen_, 1884, n^o. 2.--(Forwarded to me by Prof. R. COLLETT).

1882, October 11.--Near Bude, Cornwall.--Eye-witnesses: Rev. E. HIGHTON, Vicar of Bude, with several friends.--The _Times_ of October 12, 1882.--(R. P. G.)

1883, August 1.--The _Evening News_ of this date communicates and gives partly a review of Mr. LEE’S _Sea Monsters Unmasked_.--(R. P. G.).

1884, February.--Prof. R. COLLETT, of Christiania, wrote a paper in the Norwegian language headed _Something on the sea-serpent_ (_Naturen_, 1884, n^o 2).--The writer does not seem to be a believer in the existence of a sea-serpent. The arguments against its existence are 1. A sea-serpent of considerable dimensions would in the course of centuries not have failed to have been observed and caught. 2. In the depth of the Ocean there are undoubtedly creatures, which as yet are unknown, but all specimens caught, be they as abnormal as possible, are referred to existing well-known forms. 3. No known vertebrated animal, can, on account of its structure, move in vertical undulations.--Against these arguments I may say: 1. Before, 1861, and 1873 the krakens were _fables_, and yet they existed! Mr. RAFINESQUE SCHMALTZ &c., see p. 431, line 6 from below to p. 432, line 5 from above. 2. Do “naturalists” not constantly refer the sea-serpents to existing well-known forms? 3. Among Reptiles the _Plesiosaurians_ had a long neck and this neck could certainly be bent vertically; among Birds the _swans_ are able to bend the long neck vertically, and _all Mammals_ can move in vertical undulations, especially the _Mustelina_, _Lutrina_, and _Pinnipedia_; and the horizontal position of the tail of the _Sirenia_ and _Plagiuri_ is a strong proof that their ancestors moved in vertical undulations.--Prof. COLLETT’S private opinion is that the sea-serpents observed in the fjords of Norway, were mostly specimens of the basking shark. I, however, firmly believe that the Norwegian fishermen know the basking shark so well, that such an animal would never have been taken by them for a sea-serpent! They know these sharks and their habits far better, I should think, than Prof. MITCHILL, Prof. MANTELL, Prof. MELVILLE, Mr. BUCKLAND and Prof. LÜTKEN all together. Moreover in none of their descriptions there is question of a backfin, or of backfins, which are the first visible parts of a basking shark!

1884, June.--_The Trail of the Sea-Serpent_, by Mr. J. G. WOOD, in the _Atlantic Monthly_.--A very interesting paper, with historical notes and many new appearances, however, not without some zoological inaccuracies. He believes the sea-serpent to be an elongated whale, a _Basilosaurus_ or an animal allied to it, and that the short neck of the _Basilosaurus_ may be an error of the restorer (_nota bene!_).--(R. P. G.).

1884, June 2.--_The Manchester Guardian_ gives a review of Mr. J. G. WOOD’S paper, and as Mr. WOOD comes to the conclusion that the animal must be an elongated whale, the _Manchester Guardian_ ends (how insipid!): “Very like a whale”.--(R. P. G.).

1885, October 4.--Near Umhlali (Umlazi?) in Morewood’s Bay, South Africa.--(R. P. G.).

1886(?), summer.--Prof. HEDDLE informs me that a few summers ago, (and from one sentence of his letter I deduce that it was before 1887) a sea-serpent was seen in Loch Duich. “The description was very much what we are familiar with”.

1886, August. (N^o 158, see p. 376).--The description of the eyes as having a greenish hue struck me so, that I at first did not attach belief to the assertion (see p. 377 and 497), but now I know that this is not an impossibility, as I since observed that the _tapetum lucidum_ of the eye of a dog may reflect the daylight as well in a reddish as in a greenish hue.

1887, July 30.--Prof. HEDDLE wrote to me on May 6th., 1892:

“I would just say that having taken bearings on the land, in order to estimate--(of course roughly)--the _length_, and the _speed_, I set down the length at from 60 to 65 feet. There was a very low flat head like a large skate, say 4¹⁄₂ feet--a gap not so great,--ten “hummocks” increasing in bulk and altitude towards the central one, but not much--gaps not so great as the size of the hummocks, next a space, about equal to two hummocks, then three hummocks, the central one largest, the last small”.

“The thing I saw appear three times--first time end on was a worthless observation, except that on this occasion the whole was _rushing_ through the water. On the other two occasions there was hardly any forward motion at all. The whole disappeared at the same moment, and reappeared also at the same moment, about two seconds thereafter more than its own length in advance; so that there must have been either an exceedingly rapid rush under water--_or_ a second animal. The disappearance and reappearance were both without the _least_ splash; but at the moment of disappearance the second time _the foremost two of the last three hummocks coalesced into one_”.

“During one of the appearances I got the focus of the binoculars so sharp that I distinctly saw water falling over towards me, between some of the hummocks and myself. There was no consecutive filling up of the interspaces whatever, or appearance of vacuities where the hummocks had but now been”.

“There was certainly no _vertical_ serpentine motion--and I could see no _lateral_ one”.

“My impression was that, setting aside the quiescent low head, I _did not see a solid substance at all_,--except when the tail hummocks momentarily appeared--and that what I did see was water being thrown over laterally by the undulous lashings of a long back fin of a dark colour, which gave opacity”.

“I cannot set the “hummocks” down to _surge waves_ of a rushing short fish; because I cannot so explain such surges being always the same both in _number_ and in _place_: nor can I so explain the appearance of an apparently solid head--and an apparently continuous tail”.

“The above is all from memory”.

The following is the

“Relation regarding a _Phenomenon_ seen by the crew and Owner and guests of the yacht Shiantelle on the W. coast of Scotland on 30th. July 1887 as told by J. A. HARVIE BROWN, and seen by him, and written in his Journals of that date”.

“At 10″ to 15″ to 10 am. I was called quickly on deck by Cowell, and I went up from breakfast. “What is that”? said Cowell. After some time I saw between me and the shore to the E., which shore was about one mile distant, undulations upon almost calm water (The ship was moving at the rate of about half a knot an hour) being similar in appearance, and having the motions of the (described and supposed) Sea-Serpent. I counted with the binoculars twelve or perhaps thirteen humps at almost perfectly regular distances the one from the others. The first of these humps appeared to be moving rapidly through the water across the line of vision, and to be breaking and spraying water, and the other eleven or twelve (I had only time to count them once) maintained all their relative positions with one another and collectively with the first, _yet_ did not appear in themselves to me to move, though slight ripples of water were visible, nearly throughout the whole length. The whole disappeared and reappeared at least four times to me, apparently simultaneously or almost so throughout its length. When last it was seen, it was moving on a course almost parallel with the shore, which shore runs N. E. or thereby. The distance from the ship at which time I first saw it, and from that time to its final disappearance was estimated by me at about half a mile by eye (but this may have been an over-estimate of distance)”.

“John Campbell, seaman, and mate on board the yacht, standing at the helm, deposes in a seperate document--drawn up and written by R. L. Cowell, Steward, from his oral statement--which seperate statement, was at once closed, without being read by either Dr. Heddle or myself, and still remains so”.

“R. L. Cowell, Steward, who was on deck at the same time as John Campbell (having laid and served our breakfast) deposes in similar manner in a seperate statement, also closed and not read by Dr. Heddle and myself”.

“But John Campbell on being examined by us deposes on cross-examination that:--While we were at breakfast in the Saloon, he saw approaching from the direction of Corrie Chreachan a series of large undulations which passed “within 40 yards” then “within 30 yards” and again “within the length of the ship” (which is 56 feet) from the stern of the vessel, and travelling at a great pace; that he saw nothing above the surface of the water except broken water in front of the first or foremost undulation. That except this, he saw nothing but the perpendicular swellings (vertical swellings), as it were “skins of water” pushed up from beneath, and a long track or wake of slightly disturbed water, left for a long distance behind. It was seen approaching from the direction of the Sound between Scarba and Jura, or Corrie Chreacan, and passed the stern of the vessel. It was therefore heading at the time nearly E. The Ship’s head was lying about E. half N.”

“R. L. Cowell saw it almost or quite simultaneously with John Campbell on its first appearance.”

“N. B. The time between his calling me on deck and the time I first observed the appearance, I have described, I put down at _about half_ a minute (as, before seeing it, after getting on deck, I asked one or two questions as to bearings, before I could get sight of it with my glasses). After my first look I called up Dr. Heddle. It was after calling up Dr. Heddle, that I made out the counting of the humps, and the other appearances described. I may have been 5 to 10 seconds between my being called up, and my reaching the deck, aft of the companion, and I then got the glasses and unscrewed them to focus, while I was asking the questions as to bearings. Roughly speaking, I calculate, that from the first appearance to Campbell and Cowell, till its final disappearance, it must have been, inclusive of disappearances and reappearances, about 15 minutes in sight or observation. When _they_ saw it, it must have been travelling very rapidly; and not nearly _so_ rapidly when we observed it at the greater distance. My estimate of distance when I saw it, _may_ be an over-estimate put at half a mile.”

“Before J. Campbell saw it he heard a heavy splash, and saw the marks of the same, near the vessel--about half an hour before he saw what he describes--but no importance is attached to this, as a heavy fish some time after the disappearance, was seen shortly after to splash near the vessel; and Pellocks were also seen in the vicinity. The Pellocks however did not splash but rolled in their usual way. Not for one moment can their motion be compared by any of us, with the other appearances observed.” (Here Mr. BROWN has drawn a bunch, then a gap, larger than the bunch, and then eleven smaller bunches, separated one from the other by a gap as large as the half of one of these smaller bunches, the whole drawing representing exactly the animal swimming with vertical undulations and seen at a considerable distance.)

“Without actually fixing the position of the ship we consulted the chart and as nearly as we could arrived at it by bearings. It will be seen that the deepest water runs from the E. extremity of Corrie Chreacan very much along the line which the object or objects seen, was seen to follow; and that where its appearance was last noted the soundings show a very rapid shoaling from 30 fathoms to 17 about the position of our ship, being in from 15 to 17 fathoms.--”

“I think it right to add to the above account as written down on the spot, that after the statements which were kept sealed for a long time after, were consulted and every consideration given to the whole tale and phenomenon personally I came to the conclusion, and feel very certain still, that it was simply a _Tide-rip_ or _Tidal wave_ coming from the direction of Corrievreachan between Scarba and Jura running Easterly and then N. Easterly along the smooth water where soundings showed the meeting of the shallow of the deep. I have questioned Light-house-keepers since who have the most continuous chances of observation, within often, calm seas, and they have assured me such a phenomenon is not at all rare or unusual “under certain conditions of tides in certain localities”. Sailors have less chance to witness these phenomena perhaps than light-house-keepers, as they are seldom and long stationary at all states of tides.”

Notwithstanding this conclusion of Mr. BROWN, I feel persuaded that he, Prof. HEDDLE and others really saw the same appearance as did the Rev. J. MACRAE and others (see n^o 137 and 138). The long back fin of a dark colour, which gave opacity and threw water over laterally by its lashings, of course was one of the animal’s fore-flappers.

1889, August 15.--A good little paper on the subject, and partly a plea for the existence of the creature is in the _Standard_ of that date.--(R. P. G.)

1891, July 24.--East coast of North Island, New-Zealand.--_The Standard_, 1891, September 22.--(R. P. G.):--

“Mr. ALFRED FORD MATHEWS, a surveyor, living at Gisborne, on the east coast of the North Island, wrote to the papers to the effect that while on board the _Manopouri_, another of the Union Company’s steamers, on the voyage from Auckland to Gisborne, on Friday, July 24th., he and several others distinctly saw a sea-serpent resembling the one seen from the _Rotomahana_ off Portland Island. This time it appeared north of the East Cape, which is some distance to the north of where it was seen by the _Rotomahana_ a week later. The time, Mr. MATHEWS states, was between eight and nine in the morning. The “monster” was also seen by the ship’s officer in charge. It would from time to time lift its head and part of its body to a great height perpendicularly, and when in that position would turn its body round in a most peculiar manner, displaying a black back, white belly, and two armlet appendages of great length, which appeared to dangle about like a broken limb on a human being. It would then suddenly drop back into the water, scattering it in all directions. It had a flat head, and was about half a mile distant from the ship. The reason, Mr. MATHEWS added, that he had not mentioned the matter before was that people were likely to treat it with derision.”

1891, August 1.--Off the East-coast of North Island, New Zealand, on board the _Rotomahana_, a steamer of the Union Steam-Shipping Company.--_Standard_ of 22th. September, 1891; _Newcastle Evening Chronicle_ of September 23, 1891.--(R. P. G. and GILBERT BOGLE.)

“The Chief Officer, Mr. ALEXANDER LINDSAY KERR, on being interviewed by a newspaper reporter said:--

“On Saturday morning last, August 1st., about 6.30 o’clock, we were off Portland Light, between Gisborne and Napier. I was on deck looking over the weather side, to see if I could see the land, when I saw the object, whatever it was, rise out of the water to the height of about 30ft. Its shape was for all the world like a huge conger eel, with the exception that it had two large fins that appeared to be about 10 feet long. The creature was not more than 100 yards away at the outside, and I should estimate its girth at between ten and twelve feet. I could not see its back as it was coming straight towards the steamer, but its belly and fins were pure white. The creature’s head did not appear to be particularly definite, the neck running right up to the head the same as that of a large eel. It was broad daylight at the time, and the sun was shining clearly. When it went beneath the water it did not fall forward like a fish that is jumping, but drew itself back as if with a contortion. I only saw it the once which was the last time it rose. I looked out for it, thinking it might pass under the ship and reappear on the other side, but I did not see it again. Had the weather not been so rough the steamer might have gone alongside and ascertained its dimensions. One of the Quartermasters Peter Nelson, was watching the thing, and it so startled him that he took upon himself to rush on to the bridge and ask me if I had seen it, a thing a sea-man never does unless something very exceptional occurs. A landsman might do so, but a sea-man never, unless under exceptional circumstances, such as these. I have been to sea for twenty seven years, and have been engaged in nearly every known trade from whaling in Greenland to the slave trade, and have been in almost every part of the world, but I never saw any object at sea like the one that rivetted my attention on Saturday morning last. I have always been sceptical with regard to the sea-serpent stories, I have heard and read, and a smile has always come across my face at them, but I have been too long at sea, and have seen too many remarkable things, to deny positively that there was such a thing, had a landsman or a lady told me about the creature on Saturday, while I should have given them credit for being quite sincere, I should have taken no notice of it, as they are so apt to make mistakes at sea. I am too much accustomed at sea, however, to have made any mistake. When we got to Napier, I mentioned the circumstance there, when they pointed out that there had been a shock of earthquake shortly before the time we saw the creature, which may have been the cause of sending it to the surface. As to its length I could give no opinion, but as the creature rose some 30ft. out of the water I should imagine there were still two-thirds of it in the water, but that is only my supposition.”

“PETER NELSON, the Quartermaster, referred to gave his story as follows:--