io8 THE OCTOPUS. 



the source whence Molina had derived his information on this 

 subject, but M. de Ferussac* found that he had taken it from a 

 translation of the narrative of Captain Cook's first voyage, and 

 had dishonestly transferred to Chili a specimen (to which I shall 

 presently refer), described by Sir Joseph Banks as captured in the 

 South Seas, and which is now in the museum of the Royal College 

 of Surgeons. De Montfort quoted Molina, and, with his usual 

 love of exaggeration, greatly embelhshed his description. Shaw 

 reproduced De Montfort's figure, and Leach and Lesueur accepted 

 Molina's statements.t 



In a manuscript by Paulsen, referred to by Professor Steenstrup, 

 of Copenhagen, is a description of a large calamary cast ashore 

 on the Danish coast, which the latter named Architeuthis monacJins. 

 Its body measured 21 feet, and its tentacles 18 feet, making a total 

 of 39 feet. 



In 1854 another was stranded at the Skag in Jutland, which 

 Professor Steenstrup believed to belong to the same genus as the 

 preceding, but to be of a different species, and called it Archi- 

 teitthis dux. The body v\'as cut in pieces by the fishermen, and 

 furnished many wheelbarrow-loads. Mr. Gwyn Jeffreys X says 



* "Note sur la Seiche a six pattes, Scpa hexcpodia de Molina, et sur deux 

 aiitres especes de Seiches signalees par cet auteur." 



+ De Ferussac severely denounces Molina's lack of truthfulness, and ad- 

 ministers- a rebuke which may be useful to some writers of the present day. 

 Whilst avoiding the imputation of wilful repetition and propagation of false- 

 hood, he gravely censures the acceptance of error as truth. He says : — " This 

 suggests sad reflections on the amplifications, reticences, and fantastic inven- 

 tions of some savans, and on the absence of scrutiny apparent in some scientific 

 works. It should serve to prove, more and more, the necessity of careful 

 examination before accepting or rejecting doubtful species, although it is more 

 convenient to accept statements as they are found, without taking the trouble 

 to verify them by proper research. We know very well that the majority of 

 naturalists, -svith the exception of a small number of especially pains -taking 

 men, are unawai-e of the negligence, the double use of incidents, and the 

 repetition of innumerable errors to which those who are content thus to work 

 expose themselves." 



X " British Conch ology," vol. v., p. 124. 



