Sea-Serpent. 1841 



lusca bore into wood and other materials. — Prof. E. Forbes stated that some of the 

 Gasteropoda had tongues covered with silica to enable them to bore, and it was pro- 

 bably by some process of this kind that all the Mollusca bored. — Mr. Peach had 

 never observed the species of Pholas to turn round in their holes, as had been stated 

 by some observers, although he had watched them with great attention. — Mr. 

 Charlesworth referred to the fact that, in one species of shell, not only did the hole 

 in the rock which the animal occupied increase in size, but also the hole through which 

 it projected its siphons. 



1 On the genera Nebalia (Leach), and Chirocephalus (Prevost) ; Brachipus 

 (Schcejfer)] by Dr. Baird. — Upon an attentive examination of the species of the genus 

 Nebalia, described by different authors, the writer is induced to reduce them to two : 

 — 1st. Nebalia bipes, Cancer bipes (Fabricius and Herbst.), Monoculus rostratus (Mon- 

 tagu) ; Nebalia Herbstii (Leach). 2nd. Nebalia Geoffroyi (Milne-Edwards), Nebalia 

 Straussi (Risso). With regard to the Chirocephalus of Prevost, it appears evident that 

 the genus Branchipus, as originally described by Schsffer, and minutely figured by 

 him in all its details, is quite distinct from the species found in England, and 

 described by authors under that name. The differences are so great and well marked, 

 that it is necessary to refer them to the genus Chirocephalus of Prevost, so beautifully 

 figured at the end of Jurine's work on the Monoculi of Geneva. 



A Plea for the North -Atlantic Sea-Serpent. By Charles Cogswell, M.D. 



" Every generation of man is born to stare at something, which so long as it 

 eludes their understanding, is a very African fetishe to the many, and a Gordian knot 

 to the few." — Hawkins's Memoirs of Ichthyosauri and Plesiosauri. 



Of the numerous contributions supplied through the press to support the cause of 

 the subject of this article, one of the most recent has arrested my attention, because of 

 the particulars having been long since familiar to me by oral communication from the 

 writer in person. I allude to the interesting narrative contained in the 'Zoologist' for 

 May last, describing a meeting with such an animal off the coast of one of the Bri- 

 tish provinces, stretching out into the Atlantic to the north-east of New England. It 

 is worthy of notice that several animals of the Cetaceous kind (sometimes conjectured 

 to have been a source of deception) were seen and scanned in limine, and an opportu- 

 nity was thus afforded for immediate discrimination. Immediately subjoined is 

 another statement, copied from a foreign newspaper, being the tribute of a French sea- 

 captain to the same object, but qualified with so much of the characteristic national 

 precision in the detail of certain forms and measurements, as rather to display an ela- 

 borate view of disjointed parts, than represent them all in harmony together as belong- 

 ing to one individual. It betrays the caution of a witness, who would fain keep an 

 opening in reserve for escape from a precarious position. The former adventure took 

 place in 1833, the latter in 1840, and now they are related almost simultaneously 

 within the last few months. 



Nor is this delay to be wondered at, when we consider how much the reverse of 

 unbiassed is the tribunal of public opinion, before which they appear. It will 

 hardly be denied that there is no debateable point in the modern records of observa- 



