[The 13th. ] THE VARIOUS EXPLANATIONS, | 443 
or steam from its mouth”. Now I ask my readers (drawing their 
attention to the fact that the figure represents the animal’s head 
seen from aside), whether a column, spouted from the animal's nose 
or mouth, when seen from aside could ever have been decided to 
be single or double! If we look at the breath of a horse, standing 
just on one side of him, it will be observed to be single. This 
optical illusion will be dispelled as soon as we stand in front of 
the horse. Brne’s figure would have been incorrect, if he had 
drawn two columns, though in reality — if the animal exhaled 
through its nostrils, — the column must have been double. — 
It is remarkable that Mr. Woop does not say anything of the 
great difference between the figure of the Kiushiw Maru (with a 
cetacean tail) and that of Mr. Brine, (with a long and pointed 
one). — Again, he asserts that both the Bishop’s figures represent 
only preposterous conceptions of his own description ! 
Finally he compares the animal seen from the Osborne with a 
manatee! Surely we must be a Mr. Srartes V. Woop Jun. to 
find this conception wot preposterous! _ 
In a second paper in Wature of February 10, 1881, Mr. Woop 
quotes the report of the City of Baltimore, and correcting his second 
error, writes in parentheses “not City of Washington, as 1 had mis- 
understood.” — In treating of this report and of the accompanying 
figure he is again mistaken, for the figure shows the animal moving 
at a rapid rate with its neck high in the air, and the two splashes 
were evidently caused by the animal’s fore-flappers and hind-flappers , 
whilst the splash “like a pair of wings” described in the report, 1s 
caused by the dropping of the immense neck like a log of wood in 
the act of disappearing suddenly in the water. This act, and conse- 
quently this splash too, is not represented in the figure! According 
to his idea of the sea-serpent being a dolphin or porpoise with a very 
long neck (called by him Zeuglodon), he ascribes the splash, caus- 
ed by the hind flappers, to his “cetacean tail” of the animal. 
Remarkable is his third error; for after having first confounded 
the foremost splash, drawn in the figure, with that described in 
the report as caused by the dropping of the neck, he now writes: 
“the foam around the neck may be due to the splash of the hu- 
meroid” (i e. fore) “paddles which a cetacean should possess.” 
_ Mr. Woop further sees in the figure of the head of the Daedalus 
animal (fig. 30) the alleged “bulldog appearance of the forehead 
and eye-brow”. I can only express my opinion that this compari- 
son is far fetched. 
