[o'brien] CABOT'S LANDFALL AND CHART 451 



actual proof. We ask those interested in the' question to read carefully 

 the arguments in the Address. It may appear at first sight arbitrary, 

 to some, perhaps, reckless, to assert La Cosa tacked on Cabot's chart in 

 a str^aight line, rather that at right angles to his own map. Dr. Dawson 

 thinks it the "quintessence of hyjjothetical geography." Scarcely, 

 since' we have an exact counterpart of it in Ptolemy. In his day the 

 British Islands were more familiar to him and the learned world, than 

 Korth America was to scholars in 1500. Yet he set Scotland at right 

 angles to the north of -England, instead of continuing it in a straight 

 line. The reproduction from Tabula 8 of Europe (Pig. 9) proves this. 

 It is not necessary to print a map of Great Britain for the purpose of 

 comparison. 



I do not undertake to explain why Ptolemy so placed Scotland. 

 It may be, as Dr. Dawson argues in regard to La Cosa, due to an "ex- 

 aggeration of the east and west coast lines," seen, as he says, on some 

 early charts. Whilst I do not know the cause, or reason, for this mis- 

 placement, I know the fact, that to make Ptolemy's map of Great 

 Britain intelligible and in keeping with our ideas of geography, we must 

 wheel Scotland up, placing it north and south. To do so will not be 

 the! essence, much less the "quintessence of hypothetical geography.'' 

 Equally am I unable to explain why La Cosa misplaced Cabot's chart, 

 but equally am I certain that we must treat it as we treat Ptolemy's 

 Scotland. Then, and then only, does it become intelligible, and in 

 keeping with what we know to have been Cabot's northward coasting 

 on his second voyage. 



In the Address unsuspected testimony from six different sources 

 was adduced to show that Cabot had gone as far north as 67 or 67.30, 

 " in the reign of Henry VII." That was during the' voyage of 1498. 

 I am not aware whether Dr. Dawson admits these proofs or not. They 

 are, however, proofs which cannot be gainsaid. As Cabot was avowedly 

 seeking an outlet to the northwest, and as he could not find one until 

 he had reached Cape Chidley, he of course entered Ungava Bay. We 

 need not, I take it, emphasize' this. Keeping on his course he would 

 be led into Hudson's Bay, and in seeking an outlet to the west he would 

 ■encounter land at about 67.30 "trending ,to the east," where he turned 

 back and ran down south to about 36.30. This is the; story and 

 the course of the second voyage handed down to us on authority that 

 is not likely to be successfully confuted. Moreover, Francis Bacon 

 tells us that not only did Cabot sail on the "other side of Terra de 

 Labrador, until he came to the latitude of sixty-seven degrees and a 

 half," but also he "made a card thereof."^ This and the other testi- 



^ History of the Reigne of King Henry the Seventh, pp. 196, 197. 



Sec. II , 1899. 29; 



