14 ATTEMPTS TO DISCREDIT THE SEA-SERPENT. 
Thirty years afterwards Mr. Epwarp Newman, the editor of The 
Zoologist, published it in his journal of 1848, p. 2028, without, 
however, mentioning the source from which he copied it! Why did 
not he do so? Apparently because he felt ashamed of giving such 
an old story, and because he was aware of the fact, that the whole 
account was wonderful, and contained many impossibilities! 
Astonishing enough, Mr. FRorrep translated this piece from the 
Zoologist, and incerted it in his journal (Wotizen, Third Series, Vol. VI, 
n°. 131, p. 328), and ends this article with the following remark : ') 
“This communication tallies with those about the sea-serpent, 
published in our 3d. volume p. 148, which are also taken from 
the Zoologist. Some German newspapers have then amused them- 
selves with our communications, as with a newspaper-hoax. We, 
however, shall go on to gather whatever from time to time will 
still come to us to solve an apparently fabulous matter in Zoology.” 
The story, however, roused the indignation of Mr. W. W. Coo- 
pER, of Worcester (see Z’he Zoologist, 1848, p. 2192). I will let 
him speak himself: 
“IT have waited anxiously to see whether any more competent 
person than myself would offer any observation upon the statement 
of Captain Woodward, published in the March number of the 
Zoologist, relating to the Great “Sea-serpent”. As no one has done 
so, I beg to offer you the following: In a note which you added 
in this statement, you say, “The foregoing statement was formally 
signed and sworn to at Hingham, by captain Woodward, on the 
12th of May”. What 12th of May? You should have told your 
readers. Now, evidence given upon oath is generally considered as 
conclusive, except where the party swearing is known to be un- 
worthy of credit, or the evidence given is not consistent with itself, 
Of Captain Woodward I know nothing; I never heard of him till 
I read the “Zoologist’” for last March. It is, therefore, upon the 
latter ground that I venture to attack his statement, and I do so 
because in a disputed question it is necessary to throw aside all 
evidence that will not stand the stricktest scrutiny. Captain Wood- 
ward tells us nothing of his where-abouts, except that he was 
sailing from Penobscot to Hingham, steering W.N. W., nor of the 
date when he says he saw the serpent, except that it was on 
“Sunday last at 2. p.m.” This is not sufficiently accurate. But 
these are trifling pomts. The most extraordinary part of the state- 
1) The translations are done as literally as possible. 
