[The 10th. ] THE VARIOUS EXPLANATIONS. | 413 
of any of these species (sea-serpents) imhabiting the “American 
Ferry’, as we see that world of waters now named since the 
steaming days of the British Queen and the Great Western. Mr. 
Schlegel characterizes the statement as an assertion gue je puis 
_ contredire avec certitude: and the author adds: “we shall content 
ourselves by stating that sea-serpents have not yet been observed 
in the Atlantic Ocean”. The following notice occurs in a popular 
compilation of the animal kingdom just issued from the press 
(1848): “Sea-serpent (or the Kraken). The appearance of this 
fabulous monster is thus accounted for by Mr. A. Adams. In the 
Sooloo seas I have often watched the phenomenon which first gave 
rise to the marvellous stories of the great sea-serpent, viz., lines 
of rollg porpoises resembling a long string of buoys oftentimes 
extending seventy, eighty, or one hundred yards. These constitute 
the so-named protuberances of the monster’s back, keep im close 
single file progressing rapidly along the calm surface of the water.” 
&c. Had the fabulous serpent in Aesop, who complained of being 
“a multis hominibus pessumdatus’, been aware of what laid up 
in the fates for his aquatic relative, no doubt he would have 
ceased to repine at his own hard lot.” 
“The official corroboration of the fundamental truth of these 
“marvellous stories’ is important, not only because the author 
under the circumstances must at least receive credit for the most 
entire sincerety, but from the encouragement thus given to other 
credible witnesses to bring forward their evidence. There is no 
reason to suppose that even this would have been readily laid 
before the public, but for the desire expressed by the Board of 
Admiralty to learn the truth of an accidental rumour. As regards 
any additional light thrown on the natural history of the animal, 
it is not more satisfactory than many of the accounts we already 
possess. Indeed the paragraphs which precede the captain’s letter 
in the “Zoologist” viz., the extract from the journal of Lieut. 
Drummond, and the first public rumour as it appeared in the 
“Times”, tend rather to confuse the official statement, and will no 
doubt be used to create suspicious of its accuracy. The commuca- 
tion which follows it, purporting to give a report of another spec- 
imen seen by an American captain, is supposed to be “a hoax’, 
and as such is worthy of preservation from the ingenuity it displays.” 
“When a doctrine is assumed to be fanciful, people seldom take 
the trouble to inquire into its history and merits. This may account 
for the sea-serpent being commonly confounded with a very different 
