[The 20th. | THE VARIOUS EXPLANATIONS. 473 
In Nature of January 25, 1883, an alleged appearance of a sea- 
serpent is published. In the following number of Febr. Ist., a cor- 
respondent says that he often has witnessed a row of porpoises in 
the same locality; “I never, however, saw the head’. Now another 
correspondent thinking that Ze had solved the problem, wrote the 
following article in the next issue of the same journal: 
“In the summer of 1881 I was staying for some weeks at Veu- 
lettes, on the coast of Normandy. While there, on several occasions, 
several members of my party, as well as myself, saw, at a distance 
of three or four miles out at sea, what had the appearance of a 
huge serpent. Its length was many times that of the largest steamer 
that ever passed, and its velocity equally exceeded that of the 
swiftest. What seemed its head was lifted and lowered, and some- 
times appeared to show signs of an open mouth. The general ap- 
pearance of the monster was almost exactly similar to that of the 
figure in your correspondent’s letter published on the 25th. ult. 
Not the slightest appearance of this continuity in its structure could 
be perceived by the eye, although it seemed incredible that any 
muscular mechanism could really drive such an enormous mass 
through the water with such a prodigious velocity. I carefully 
watched all that any of us caught sight of, and one day, just as 
one of these serpent forms was nearly opposite our hotel, it im- 
stantaneously turned through a right angle, but instead of going 
forward in the new direction of its length, proceeded with the same 
velocity broad side forward. With the same movement it resolved 
itself into a flock of birds.” , 
“We often saw the sea-serpent again without this resolution being 
effected, and, knowimg what it was, could with difficulty still 
perceive that it was not a contmuous body; thus having a new 
illustration of Hersheli’s remark, that it is easier to see what has 
been once discovered than to discover what is unknown. Possibly 
this experience may afford the solution of your correspondent’s diff- 
culty.” — W. Srzapman ALpis. — 
As to the figure, it is our fig. 51.— In the next issue of JVa- 
ture again another correspondent asserts : 
“On reading the letter of W. Steadman Aldis in Nature yes- 
terday, | was reminded by a person present that some years ago, 
when in Orkney, I pointed out an appearance that most people 
unaccustomed to witness it might have taken for a great sea-mon- 
ster. This was nothing more or less than some hundred of cormo- 
rants or “skarps’ flying in a continuous line close to the water, 
