A. E. Verrill — North American Cephalopods. 183 



No. 3.— Coombs' Cove specimen, 1872. {A. ffarmji?, ?.) 



Another specimen (No. 3), probably considerably larger than the 

 last, was captured at Coombs' Cove, Fortiine Bay, Newfoundland. 

 The following account has been taken from a newspaper article of 

 which I do not know the precise date,* forwarded to me by Professor 

 Baird, together with a letter, dated June 15, 1873, from the Hon. 

 T. 11. Bennett, of English Harbor, N. F., who states that he M-rote 

 the article, and that the measurements were made by him, and are 

 perfectly reliable. f 



" Three days ago, there was quite a large squid run almost ashore 

 at Coombs' Cove, and some of the inhabitants secured it. The body 

 measured 10 feet in length and was nearly as large round as a hogs- 

 head. One arm was about the size of a man's wrist, and measured 42 

 feet in length ; the other arms were only 6 feet in length, but about 

 9 inches in diameter, very stout and strong. The skin and flesh 

 were 2*25 inches thick, and reddish inside as well as out. The suc- 

 tion cups were all clustered together, near the extremity of the long 

 arm, and each cup was surrounded by a serrated edge, almost like 

 the teeth of a hand-saw. I presume it made use of this arm for a 

 cable, and the cu])s for anchors, when it wanted to come to, as well 

 as to secui'e its prey, for this individual, finding a heavy sea was 

 driving it ashore, tail first, seized hold of a rock and moored itself 

 quite safely until the men pulled it on shore." 



Mr. Bennett, in a memorandum subsequently given to Mr. Sander- 

 son Smith, and communicated to me by him, states that both the 

 tentaculax*-arms were present and that the shorter one was 41*5 feet 

 in length. The large diameter of the short arms, compared with 

 their length, and with that of the long arms, and their shortness 

 compared with the length of the body, are points in which this 

 specimen apparently diifered essentially from those that have been 

 preserved and are better known. It was probably a female. The 



total length, as I understand the measurements, was 52 feet. 



j 



* The exact date of this capture I do not know, but it was probably in the autumn 

 or winter of 18'72. 



f Tlirough Mr. Sanderson Smith, who visited Mr. Bennett after the publication of 

 my former articles, I learn that this specimen is tlie same as the one designated as 

 N'o. 6 in my previous papers, and that the measurements of No. 6, as given -to me by 

 Mr. Harvey, are incorrect, owing to a mistake in supposing that 42 feet was the total 

 length, instead of the length of the longer tentacular-arm. 



