[The 15th. ] THE VARIOUS EXPLANATIONS. AAT 
and of very aquatic habits — carried out to sea by one of the 
creat South American rivers, and brought by the Gulf Stream to 
the spot where it was seen. If I am warranted in this conclusion 
it affords us no help in the identification of the great unknown.” 
“J do not attach much value to the assertions of observers, that 
the head of the animal seen by them respectively was “undoubtedly 
that of a snake.” Such comparisons made by persons unaccustomed 
to mark the characteristic peculiarities which distinguish one ani- 
mal from another, are vague and unsatisfactory. Their value, at 
all events, is rather negative than positive. For example, if a per- 
son of liberal education and general information, but no natural- 
ist, were to tell me he had seen a creature with a head “exactly 
like that of a snake’, I should understand him, that the head 
was not that of an ordinary beast, nor of a bird, nor that of the 
generality of fishes; but I should have no confidence at all that it 
was not as like that of a lizard as of a serpent, and should en- 
tertain doubt whether, if I showed him the form of head, even 
of certain fishes, he would not say, “Yes, it was something 
like that.” 
“There does not seem, then, any sufficient evidence that the 
colossal animal seen from the Daedalus, and on other occasions, 
is a serpent, in the sense in which zoologists use that term. A 
lengthened cylindrical form it seems to have; but, for anything 
that appears, it may as well be a monstrous eel, or a slender 
cetacean, as anything. All analogies and probabilities are against 
its being an ophidian.” 
It is remarkable that Mr. Gossz is disposed to believe that the sea- 
serpent of the General Coole was a boa, because the report speaks 
of “a snake’, and that he cannot believe that the sea-serpent of 
the Daedalus was a boa, though the captain, Mr. M’Quuaz, 
clearly tells that he saw “a serpent, the head of which, without 
any doubt, was that of a snake’. Now I ask what is the difference 
between “a snake’ and “a serpent with a head of a snake’ !? 
What, in short, is the difference between a snake and a serpent? 
Though he attaches a considerable value to the assertion of the 
captain of the General Coole who speaks of “a snake, and nothing 
more’, Mr. Gossz “does not attach much value to the assertions 
of observers, that the head of the animal seen by them was uz- 
doubtedly that of a snake’. How to make this agree? 
Mr. Lex in his Sea Monsters Unmasked says: “a marine snake 
of enormous size may, really, have been seen’. As I think he 
