1604 Reptiles. 



it into an open space where I could observe its motions ; the first thing that struck me 

 was a peculiar vibration of the tail, as though it would claim relationship to the rattle- 

 snake ; at the same time, it showed very little inclination to bite, and had not that 

 curling of the upper lip which a viper shows when it is angry. I soon contrived to get 

 it by the nape of the neck, and to examine it more closely, I found the pupils of its 

 eyes were round, as in the common snake, not cat-like as in the viper, and it had no 

 poison-fangs ; it had a meeker appearance than the viper, but in colouring much more 

 resembled it than the snake. I must just add with reference to what I called the 

 " grotto del cano " that it is situated in a thicket, and is a little depression in the soil, 

 perhaps 6 feet across, and 3 feet deep, in the bottom of which is a hole like a mouse- 

 hole from which issues the carbonic acid (?) gas ; I saw at the bottom a common toad 

 in a state of putridity, upon which were settled several golden-bodied meat-flies, stand- 

 ing as if alive, though upon examination they proved to be dead. I held the puppy 

 in the hole, breathing quicker and quicker, till it was to all appearance nearly dead, 

 but it recovered almost immediately on being restored to good air. It had, I believe, 

 accidentally followed my juvenile guide. — /. Wolley. 



The Great Sea Serpent. 



It has been the fashion for so many years to deride all records of this very cele- 

 brated monster, that it is not without hesitation I venture to quote the following 

 paragraphs in his defence. A month only has elapsed since I had occasion to quote 

 with approbation, a very marked passage from the pen of Sir J. W. Herschell, [Zool. 

 1586] : I may apply it with equal propriety to the enquiry of the era of the Irish deer, 

 or the existence of the great Sea Serpent. Naturalists, or rather those who choose thus 

 to designate themselves, set up an authority above that of fact and observation, the gist 

 of their enquiries is whether such things ought to be, and whether such things ought 

 not to be ; now fact-naturalists take a different road to knowledge, they inquire whether 

 such things are, and,whether such things are not. The ' Zoologist,' if not in itself the 

 fountain-head of this/ac£ movement, may at least claim to be the only public advocate 

 of that movement ; and it is therefore most desirable, that it should call the attention 

 of its readers to the following remarkable paragraphs. They are quoted from one of 

 our daily papers, which give them as literal translations from the Norse papers, in 

 which they originally appeared ; the localities mentioned are intimately known to all 

 travellers in Norway ; and the witnesses are generally highly respectable, and of un- 

 impeachable veracity. The very discrepancies in the accounts prove the entire absence 

 of any preconcerted scheme of deception. The only question therefore for the fact- 

 naturalist to decide, is simply, whether all of the records now collected, can refer to 

 whales, fishes, or any other marine animals with which we are at present acquainted. 



" In the neighbourhood of Cbristiansand and Molde, in the province of Romsdal, 

 several persons, highly respectable and credible witnesses, have reported that they have 

 seen this animal. In general they state that it has been seen in the larger Norwegian 

 fjords, seldom in the open sea. In the large bight of the sea at Christiansand, it has 

 been seen every year, though only in the warmest season, in the dog-days, and then 

 only when the weather was perfectly calm and the surface of the water unruffled. The 

 following pcsions whose names are heir mentioned, give the subjoined testimony: — 



