Part 47

“A. I thought it smooth, when I was endeavouring to take aim at him, and will not say positively, that he was smooth, though that is still my belief.”

“Q. Does he turn quick and short, and if so, what is the form of path that he makes, in turning?”

“A. He turns quick and short, and the first part of the curve that he makes in turning, is in the form of the staple; but his head seems to approach rapidly towards his body, his head and tail moving in opposite directions, and when his head and tail came parallel, they appear almost to touch each other.”

“Q. Did he appear more shy, after you had fired at him?”

“A. He did not; but continued playing as before.”

“Q. Who was in the boat with you, when you fired at the serpent?”

“A. My brother Daniel, and Augustin M. Webber.

“Matthew Gaffney.”

“Essex, ss. August 28, 1817. Then Matthew Gaffney made oath that the foregoing, by him subscribed, is true according to his best knowledge and belief.

“Before Lonson Nash, Jus. of Peace”

As we have already seen Mr. LONSON NASH in his letter to the Committee wrote:

“His manner of turning is well described in Mr. Gaffney’s description...... I have questioned Daniel Gaffney, who was in the boat with his brother Matthew when he fired at the animal, and Daniel’s answer corroborate Matthew’s testimony.”

We read here that the underpart of the head appeared almost white, and several feet of its belly too (read of the underpart of its neck, or of its throat). Further Mr. GAFFNEY goes on: “I supposed and do believe that the whole of his belly was nearly white”. This is very remarkable, for Mr. GAFFNEY seems to be familiar with sea-animals, as porpoises, &c., and a very good observer, and his conclusion is quite right from a zoological point of view. Very remarkable is the animal’s demeanor after the shot. Apparently furious, it directed itself suddenly to the shooter, but when very near to him, it sank down like a rock and appeared again far away. This manner of acting will afterwards be described again in Norway. Again its manner of disappearing is described as sinking like a rock. The mode of turning too is just the same as is mentioned every where.

* * * * *

=41=.--1817, August 14.--(See also n^o. 41 on p. 164, p. 167, p. 168, p. 168.) (Report of a Committee, 1817.)

We read in the letter from Mr. LONSON NASH to the Committee that he himself saw the animal:

“I saw him on the 14th. instant, for nearly half an hour. I should judge he was two hundred and fifty yards from me, when the nearest. I saw him twice with a glass for a short time, and at other times, with the naked eye. At that distance, I could not take in the two extremities of the animal, that were visible, at one view with a glass...... His motion is vertical..... His manner of turning is well described in Messrs. Pearson’s and Gaffney’s descriptions..... I saw, at no time, more than eight distinct portions; though more may have been visible..... I believe the animal to be straight, and that the apparent bunches were caused by his vertical motion.”

The Chairman of the Committee, the Hon. JOHN DAVIS immediately wrote to Mr. LONSON NASH the following letter:

“Boston, September 2, 1817.”

“Sir”,

“Your letter of the 28th. ult. to the Committee of the Linnaean Society, and the accompanying depositions, were duly received, and were yesterday communicated to the Society. The Committee are greatly obliged to you for your ready compliance with their request. In these sentiments the Society unite, and I am charged with the agreeable office of communicating to you their vote of thanks for your very acceptable labours. What you have thus accomplished will go far in giving some precise and accurate conceptions on a subject, peculiarly exposed to exaggeration and mistake. This evidence, with some additional documents, will probably be published. The Committee will not make their final report on the subject of their Commission until evidence shall be procured respecting some other reputed appearances of like description, particularly one at Plymouth in 1815.”

“We have been informed that the animal at Gloucester was once seen, and it was said by a woman, lying dormant very near the shore. The Committee wished this intimation to be given to you, that if it should point to any material circumstances, the evidence might be taken.”

“The last we hear of the object of our inquiry is of his appearance off East Point on the 28th. ult. This we gather from the testimony of captain Toppan, and his crew, of the schooner Laura, coming from Newburyport to Boston.”

“It appears by your letter, that you had sight of the animal. A letter from you, giving a detailed account of your observations, would be particularly acceptable.”

“We understand that a gentleman in Gloucester, (Captain Beach) has a drawing, supposed to be a good representation of the animal. Some information respecting this drawing would be agreeable; how far it is considered by those who had the best view of the animal as a correct representation, and whether the person possessing it would be disposed to permit an engraving from it to be annexed to the publication of the evidence, and on what terms. Yours very respectfully,

“Jno Davis.”

“We have already read the report of the appearance of 1815 (n^o. 34 and 35); the intelligence of the encounter on the 28th. of August we will communicate afterwards (n^o. 48). The answer of Judge NASH, omitting the intelligence about the animal reposing on the rocks (this report has been discussed some pages further on, n^o. 45) runs as follows (See Report of a Committee, 1817):

“Gloucester, September 9, 1817.”