[29] HISTORY OF THE TILE-FISH. 265 



miles off-sbore from Baruegat, he sailed for 40 miles through waters 

 filled with these dead fish." * * * 



" From my log I find that the exact locality was 39^ 07' N. latitude, 

 and the longitude 73° 10' W. We had been sailing all the morning 

 north by west, and were well inside of the Gulf Stream." 



This may appear to be definite, but is exactly the reverse. The ques- 

 tion is, what part of his track through the dead fish was the position 

 so exactly given above to mark? Was this observation taken, and the 

 locality noted, when the fish were first seen, when the ship was half 

 way through them, or as she neared their northern boundary and was 

 about to leave them behind her ? Of course, it is now impossible to get 

 satisfactory replies to the above questions, and all, therefore, that can 

 be done is to work out the problem as correctly as possible from the 

 data at hand. Captain Lamb throws some light on the subject by say- 

 ing : " We found these tish when we could not get soundings." As there 

 is a depth of only 35 fathoms at the point where the position he gave 

 (latitude 39° 07' X., longitude 73° 10' W.) would place the ship, it seems 

 entirely probable that she was nearing the northern edge of the belt of 

 dead fish when this observation of the vessel's position was made. I 

 have, therefore, laid out the ship's track in accordance with this belief. 

 In considering these questions, however, and in forming conclusions in 

 regard to the tracks made by the different vessels through the floating 

 Lopholatilus, I have been enabled, I think, to arrive more nearly at 

 correct conclusions, because of the many reports which have beeu 

 studied. Thus, the error of one report may be corrected by another, 

 and vice versa j until a result is reached which can vary little from abso- 

 lute exactness. 



In consideration of the above I have felt compelled, though reluct- 

 antly, to depend to some extent on my own judgment in laying out the 

 various tracks pursued by the different vessels and in estimating the 

 area covered by the dead fish. 



The conclusions arrived at have, however, been reached only after 

 mature deliberation and a careful consideration of all the data bearing 

 on this subject, and, though these may appear more or less arbitrary, 

 1 trust the explanations given will be suflftcient to show that there are 

 good reasons therefor. Following are the names of the vessels that re- 

 ported the presence of dead fish — at least, those of which we have sufli- 

 cient information to determine their positions — and a discussion of the 

 probabilities of their sailing on the tracks through the Tile-fish that 

 I have marked on the accompanying plate. 



Taken in their chronological order we come first to the bark Plymouth, 

 which sailed through dead fish on JMarch 3, 1882, a distance of 69 miles, 

 from latitude 40° 01' N. and longitude 69° 51' W., to latitude 40° 08' N. 

 and longitude 71^27' W., by estimation. 



The published account gives no position other than that "we were 

 sailing off the George's Bank." * * # " From G o'clock in the 



