4.04. THE VARIOUS EXPLANATIONS. , [The 10th. 
characteristic national precision in the detail of certain forms and 
measurements, as rather to display an elaborate view of disjoined 
parts, than represent them all in harmony together as belonging 
to one individual. It betrays the caution of a witness, who would 
fain keep an opening in reserve for escape from a precarions posi- 
tion. 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 reserve 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 observation more 
complacently devoted to ridicule by all but universal consent, than 
that of the existence of huge serpent-like animals in the North 
Atlantic Ocean. The very mention of the name of sea-serpent in 
the singular number with the definite article prefixed, suggests to 
most minds an idea of some anomalous monster, without parentage 
or congeners, feigned to haunt the recesses of the deep, and, like 
the ghost of vulgar superstition, manifesting itself now and again 
for the sole conceivable end of adorning some wonderful legend. 
This impression, favoured by the circumstance of no actual speci- 
men having ever occurred to the observation of a naturalist, much 
less been obtained for deliberate examination, has caused the sub- 
ject of our notice to rank with the mermaid, the unicorn, the 
oriffin, and other prodigies of the olden faith. It does not fail to 
be objected that Norway, a locality most fruitful in accounts of 
the appearance in question, has been immemorially distinguished 
for a vivid perception of the marvellous. Nor, after hearing the 
other side of the Atlantic, are we much better able to divest our 
minds of suspicion with regard to the trustworthy character of the 
witnesses; our relative in the West having acquired nearly as much 
celebrity for the endowment of a grand inventive genius as his 
Scandinavian ally in the cause of sea-serpents. They defer indeed, 
in so far as the latter believes and venerates his own creations, 
while the American indulges his fancy for the purely benevolent 
purpose of what is called “hoaxing” the unwary public. Not many 
years since, it may be recollected, one of these pleasant philosoph- 
ers enlightened his fellow-mortals with a “true and_ peculiar’ 
description of certain winged inhabitants assumed to have been 
discovered in the moon by an eminent living astronomer, giving 
the details with so much simplicity and effected candour with re- 
