132 Notices of Boohs . [January 
ship’s captain, when told that some of his crew had sighted one 
of these mysterious monsters, absolutely refused to come on deck, 
since, to use his own words, ‘ Had I said I had seen the sea- 
serpent I should have been considered to be a warranted liar all 
my life after.’ ” It is surely much to be regretted that the eluci- 
dation of an interesting scientific question should be impeded or 
frustrated by childish ridicule. Following in the track of our late 
lamented Edward Newman, but with the advantage of having at 
his command much additional evidence, Dr. Wilson examines 
some of the principal alleged appearances of unknown sea- 
monsters, and points out the insufficiency of the explanations 
ordinarily given. 
It is, in the first place, well known to zoologists — though per- 
haps not to the outside public — that veritable marine snakes 
inhabit the Indian and Chinese seas. These creatures are known 
to be very venomous, and have compressed fin-like tails adapted 
for swimming. More than forty distindt species have been cap- 
tured and examined. Here, therefore, we have the proof that 
serpents inhabit the sea, and are met with at great distances from 
the coast. The only point, then, at issue is the size which a sea- 
serpent may attain. What length can we accept as possible, and 
what, on mere preconceived grounds, warrants us in pronouncing 
the narrator a liar ? It must be remembered that marine animals 
are usually found larger than their nearest terrestrial allies. We 
know that boas and pythons have been found in South America 
and India not less than 30 feet in length. If, then, there are 
marine Ophidians bearing the same proportion to these that the 
whale does to the elephant, their size would not be smaller than 
that of the monster described by the crew of the Pauline. The 
only really valid piece of evidence against the existence of huge 
marine serpents is the fadt that none of their bones have as yet 
been dredged up. Whether such a negative fadt is sufficient to 
overpower the positive testimony of the various eye-witnesses 
may at least be doubted. Except there can be found in the nar- 
ratives themselves something self-contradidtory, we for one should 
at any rate lay aside our a priori notions, and vote for a suspension 
of judgment and the calm dispassionate colledtion of further 
evidence. 
Dr. Wilson quotes from a weekly contemporary an explanation 
lately suggested. Dr. Jos. Drew saw a column of birds flying 
rapidly along the surface of the English Channel, and describes 
them as presenting the appearance of “ an immense serpent, 
about a furlong in length, rushing furiously along at the rate of 
15 or 20 miles an hour.” Floating barrels, pieces of wreck to 
which sea-weed has become attached, and porpoises swimming 
in line are all said to have been, at first sight, mistaken for some 
huge ocernic serpent. Mr. Williams, in his interesting work 
“ Through Norway with Ladies,”* suggests that low ridges of 
* See Quarterly Journal of Science, vol. vii., p. 539* 
