32 ATTEMPTS TO DISCREDIT THE SEA-SERPENT. 
And he comes to the conclusion that the greater part of the bones 
belonged to the genus Basilosaurus of Harian, 1824, an animal — 
allied to the seals. The same genus is called Zeuglodon by Prof. 
RicoarD Owen in 1839, Dorudon by Prof. Grpprs in 1845, and 
Saurocetus by Prot. Acassiz. 
In the same Proceedings, of Dec. 1845, Vol. Il, p. 73, Prof. 
H. D. Rogzrs too states, that according to the form and structure 
of some loose bones, the skeleton must be of at least two individuals 
of Basilosaurus. : 
In the same periodical (of Jan. 1846, Vol. IT, p. 94) we read 
that Dr. Koc# also told the public that the bones had been found 
together, in a position which proved that they belonged to one 
individual, and that the vertebrae formed an integral series , arranged 
in the order in which they were lying when discovered. That this 
assertion too was a mere fabrication, is not only shown by Prof. 
Wyman, as we have seen above, but also in a letter by Dr. Lisrur , 
who stated that Dr. Kocu had dug up the bones in different places 
in Alabama. 
A little notice on this imposture was written by the New York 
correspondent in the Cincinnatc Gazette which, translated into Ger- 
man, appeared in Frortgp’s Neue Notizen of Febr. 1846, Vol. 37, 
n° 801, p. 134. 
In the Jiustrated London News of Oct. 28, 1848, we read that 
Prof. Srutimman attested: “that the spinal column belongs to the 
same individual, that the skeleton differs, most essentially, from . 
any existing or fossil serpent, although it may countenance the 
popular (and I believe well founded) impression of the existence in 
our modern seas of huge animals, to which the name of Sea-Serpent 
had been attached”. 
‘hese words were undoubtedly taken from another newspaper or 
journal, but I can hardly believe that Prof. Sinmiman bad a share 
in this imposture. 
In the J/lustrated London News of Nov. 4, 1848, the Editor 
published a letter directed to him by the well-known Geologist and 
Palaeontologist MANTEL : 
“Sir, — Will you allow me to correct a statement that appeared 
in the last Number of your interesting publication? The fossil men- 
tioned at the conclusion of the admirable notice of the so-called 
Sea-Serpent, as having been exhibited in America under the name 
of Hydrarchos Sillimannii, was constructed by the exhibitor Koch, 
from bones collected in various parts of Alabama, and which belonged 
