420 THE VARIOUS EXPLANATIONS. [The 10th. | 
the ridicule they were not able to escape — may sober down to 
the legitimate standard of reason.” 
Mr. Newman, the Editor of the Zoologist, too, could not forego 
the pleasure to publish a second time his favourite explanation of 
the Hnaliosaurians. In the Preface to the year 1848 of his Journal, 
which appeared together with Mr. Cocsweui’s above mentioned 
dissertation, he filled some pages about the subject: 
“The communications made to the Admiralty by Captam M’Quhae » 
has turned public attention to the possibility of the existence of a 
Sea-Serpent (Zool. 2307). My own views on this subject have long 
been known: two years have elapsed since I expressed an opinion 
(Zool. 1604), that although the evidence then before the public 
was perhaps insufficient to convince those who had hypotheses on 
their own to support, yet that it was far too strong for the fact- 
naturalist, the inquirer after truth, to dismiss without investiga- 
tion. T'o advance such an opinion as this, — to admit the possi- 
bility of the existence of a sea-serpent in so enlightened an age 
as the nineteenth century, — of course led to my being loaded 
with ridicule; loaded, but not overwhelmed, for I immediately 
afterwards ventured on expressing a still bolder opinion, — no 
less than that of suggesting its affinity to a tribe of animals sup- 
posed to be extinct. I stated on the wrapper of n°. 54 that the 
Enaliosauri of authors would, if living, present the appearances 
described. Almost immediately after this I published the statement 
of Captain Sullivan and five other British officers, who deliberately 
assert (Zool. 1715) that they saw — while on a fishmg excursion 
on the coast of British America — a sea-serpent, which they sup- 
posed to be eighty or a hundred feet in length; its head, six feet 
in length, and its neck, also six feet in length, were the only 
part constantly above water, and resembled those of a common 
snake: the creature passed them with great rapidity, “leaving a 
regular wake’. Nothing is said of any undulating movement, or 
of any appearance of portions or coils of the body. The statement 
of Captain M’Quhae (Zool. 2307), and that obligingly furnished 
expressly for the “Zoologist’ by Lieut. Drummond (Zool. 2306), 
essentially corroborate the evidence of Captain Sullivan and his 
companions: the length and position of the head and neck, and 
their bemg kept constantly above water, closely correspond; the 
estimated total length corresponds; the non-observance of any un- 
dulation corresponds, — indeed Captain M’Quhae expressly states 
that no portion of the animal appeared to be used in “propelling 
