74, WOULD-BE SEA-SERPENTS. 
although they were, has the squalus a fin extending from the 
shoulder to the tail.” 
“A drawing which was sent to me by our very active and 
obliging Secretary, Mr. Neill, was executed, I am told, from the 
original, by Mr. Urquhart; and its accuracy is confirmed by the 
dried specimen now before us. It represents the sternum and two 
parts corresponding two scapulae, and those organs which are 
named paws. Mr. Home says, that these organs resemble the pect- 
oral fins of his squalus. But the length of the pectoral fins, 
Measuring along the upper margin, is four feet, the length of 
the paw cannot be determined, as part of it is wanting; the part 
that remains, measures seventeen inches.” 
“The breadth of the fin, measuring across the radii, is three 
feet and seven inches; while the greatest breadth of the paw in 
its dried state, is only five inches and three quarters.” 
“Those parts which in form resemble the scapulae and exhibit 
articular surfaces at each extremity, were probably ribs.” 
“Mr. Home concludes by observing, that “it is of importance 
to science, that it should be ascertained, that this fish is not a 
new animal, unlike any of the ordinary productions of nature.” 
Of what importance it is to science to admit no new genera or 
species into our catalogues of natural history, I cannot conceive. 
But it is certainly of much importance to science, that the natur- 
alist should be cautious not to determine the species of an animal 
upon vague evidence. Now what evidence had Mr. Home that this 
animal was a squalus, and even to suppose that it was a squalus 
maximus?” 
I may be allowed to make the following remark: Mr. Barcnay 
does not seem to make any difference between “a head” of a 
Squalus and “a skull.” It is true that the “head” of a Sgualus 
maximus of thirty feet and a half measures five feet and a half, 
but its “skull” has only a length of ten inches. It is true that the 
diameter of the “head” of such a shark measures from right to 
left about five feet, but its “skull” would have only a few inches 
in breadth. It is true that the diameter of the larger vertebrae 
near the head of such an individual may be about seven inches, 
but what is indicated by Mr. Barcuay in the head of his “animal 
of Stronsa” to be the “first cervical vertrebra’, is (don’t laugh!) 
the cartilaginous nose tip with its two contorted cartilaginous append- 
ages! — No wonder that the animal of Stronsa had “a neck”, 
for all the parts between the skull and the pectoral fins, except 
