VII.-The Cabots.

Notes addressed to the Royal Society of Canada in rectification of some statements in papers contributed by Mr. S. E. Dawson to the Transactions

of 1894, 1895 and 1897.

By HENRY HARRISSE.

(Presented by Sir John Bourinot and read May 25th, 1898.)

I.

"Mr. Harrisse, who, in his 'John and Sebastian Cabot,' had written in favour of Cape Breton, has, in his latest book, The Discovery of North America,' gone back to Labrador. He [had previously] decided for Cape Percy." (Dr. Dawson's monograph of 1894, p. 54; of 1896, p. 10; of 1898, p. 141.)

If during many years Dr. Dawson believed the land fall of John Cabot to have been in Newfoundland, and afterwards believed that it was at Cape Breton, I do not see why I could not believe as well in 1896 Cabot's landfall to have been in Labrador, supposing that in 1882 I believed it was at Cape Breton. But, as luck will have it, I happen never to have written "in favour of Cape Breton," and still less to have "decided for Cape Percy."

What I have said is, that the map of 1544 located the landfall in Cape Breton, or at Cape Percy. And at the same time, I expressed my lack of confidence either in that cartographical averment or in the map itself. Here are the very words written by me on the subject in 1882, in the "John and Sebastian Cabot: ""La localité indiquée sur la mappemonde de 1544 comme atterrissement de Jean et de Sébastien Cabot en 1497, ne peut être, d'après ce document, que le pays correspondant sur nos cartes à l'île du Cap Breton." (Jean et Sébastien Cabot, Paris, 1882, p. 64.)

"C'est donc au Cap Percé, et nulle part ailleurs que, selon la carte de 1544, Jean et Sébastien Cabot ont atterri; c'est là que, les premiers entre les navigateurs du XVe siècle, ils auraient [sic, and not 'ils ont'] foulé le sol du continent américain." (Op. cit., p. 66.)

"Cette analyse repose sur la présomption que les profils de la mappemonde de Cabot proviennent de documents cartographiques contemporains de la découverte. Peut-on cependant affirmer ce fait et voir dans ces délinéations une fidèle copie des épures de Jean Cabot ou de son fils?" (Loc. cit.)

"Il importe de résoudre cette question, car si la carte de 1544 a été dressée entièrement de mémoire, ou d'après des relevés faits par des carto

graphes français ou portugais, trente ou quarante ans après la découverte, toutes les analyses de ce document pêchent par la base, et c'est peine perdue de s'évertuer pour en résoudre les points douteux." (Op. cit., p. 67.)

I then proceeded to show that the Canadian portion of Cabot's planisphere has been plagiarized from a Dieppe map, adding the following remark:

"Si notre théorie est exacte, le lecteur se rendra compte du peu de garantie qu'offre un point d'atterrissement établi dans ces conditions, et combien peuvent être contestables les contours qui servent de base à une approximation aussi tardive." (Op. cit., p. 84.)

"Il est donc possible que, malgré les assertions, Cabot ait atterri en 1497, non à l'île du Cap Breton, mais sur la côte du Labrador. Il était même dans la nature des choses que, partis de Bristol, les Cabots vinssent y aborder, plutôt qu'à l'entrée du golfe St-Laurent. (Op. cit., p. 96.)

II.

"In his latter books Mr. Harrisse transferred the landfall to the absolutely impossible Cape Chidley. In dwelling upon the amazing quantity of codfish as a crucial indication of the true landfall, Mr. Harrisse has conclusively disproved his main thesis, for the codfish do not arrive at Cape Chidley until August 15th, five days after John Cabot is known to have been in London." (Dr. Dawson's monograph of 1896, p. 10.)

This argument of Dr. Dawson has found great favour with Canadian critics, who have not failed to herald it, and in very disobliging terms, as a complete refutation of whatever opinions I may have held regarding Cabot's landfall.

Unfortunately, Dr. Dawson to-day frankly confesses that he "has fallen into error" when he stated that I had "transferred the landfall to Cape Chidley," and in his further statement that I had "dwelled upon the amazing quantity of codfish as a crucial indication of the landfall." (Dr. Dawson's monograph of 1898, pp. 154–5.)

So far, so good.

III.

If John Cabot could have got there [i.e., Labrador] 'two or three weeks before June 24th,' which is Mr. Harrisse's last theory, or even on June 24 or July 3, there would have been no fish, for the fish does not strike at that latitude until about July 15." (Monograph of 1898, p. 155.)

Prof. H. Y. Hind's table, quoted by Dr. Dawson, gives as the mean date of arrival of cod in southern Labrador, at Chateau Bay, 20th June. Now, John Cabot does not say when and where he first observed the amaz