type of a new genus, Ictis, allied to Acteonia, but differing in having dorsal tentacles and in the absence of the groove and angles at the sides of the head. The animal is limaciform. The head is scarcely angulated, and bears two linear tentacles on its dorsal aspect, behind and a little anterior to which are the eyes; frons a little behind the centre of the back. A single species, Ictis Cocksii, from Falmouth. The authors propose to unite the genera, Elysia, Placobranchus, Acteonia, Chalidis, Limapontia, and Ictis in a new order, characterized by the absence of specialized breathing organs or other dorsal appendages, and for which they propose the name of Pellibranchiata. 'Notice of Dredging Researches in Progress,' by Prof. E. FORBES.—A number of specimens of remarkable British animals were laid on the table, preserved in a very perfect condition by Mr. Goadby, who is at present accompanying Mr. M'Andrew on a dredging voyage in the seas of the Zetlands and Hebrides. Mr. M'Andrew has forwarded to the Meeting specimens of a living Terebratula, dredged off Skye; identical with the crag fossil, T. cistellula, of Mr. Searles Wood. A new Holothuria, discovered by Mr. Gwynn Jeffreys, was also laid on the table. 'On the Animal of Lepton squamosum,' by J. Alder.- The mantle of this hitherto undescribed mollusk is very large, extending much beyond the shell, and is fringed with filaments; one of which is much longer than the rest. The mantle is open, except before and behind; where it forms a short siphon, with a single aperture. The foot is very large, thick and tapering; and has a disk like the foot of Nucula. It forms a fine byssus. The branchial leaflets are two on each side. Mr. WATERHOUSE read a paper 'On the Geographical Distribution of the Rodentia.' Mr. WESTWOOD read a paper ‘On the Habits of some Blind Insects.' The PRINCE of CANINO read a paper On the Classification of the Testudinata.'The three principal groups into which he divided the whole of the species were,1. Testudinideæ ; 2. Trionycideæ; 3. Chelonideæ. Prof. NILLSON read a paper 'On the Disappearance of certain Mammalia from particular districts of the continent of Europe.' Mr. PEACH announced some additions to the Cornish Fauna. The whole of the species of Zoophytes found in the British islands are 224, of which 150 have been found in Cornwall. He now added Corymorphasys nutans. In shells he had found Lepton squamosum, Pleurotoma teres-in other departments, Planaria vittata, Oniscus ceruleatus. He also exhibited specimens of Botrylli, preserved in Canada balsam, with all the colours perfect; also the nidus of the Gurmellus, attached to the under-side of stones found in Fowey Harbour. Mr. WESTWOOD stated that Oniscus ceruleatus was an interesting discovery, and described its structure, and drew particular attention to the enormous development of the thoracic segments. Mr. CHARLESWORTH inquired the particulars of the finding Lepton squamosum, as this had been hitherto regarded as an extinct species, belonging to the older Tertiaries.- Prof. E. FORBES drew attention to the Pleurotoma teres. He had first dredged it in the Ægean; it had since been found in Norway, by Prof. Löven, and now in Cornwall. He believed it was always found in what he called the glacial outliers of modern seas—those places he had recommended for cod-fishing. Mr. W. THOMPSON announced the discovery of species of Teredo, Limnoria, Xylophaga and Chelura, in Ireland, all of which were found contributing to the destruction of a pier. A discussion followed the reading of this paper, on the mode in which the Mol lusca bore into wood and other materials. Prof. E. FORBES stated that some of the Gasteropoda had tongues covered with silica to enable them to bore, and it was probably by some process of this kind that all the Mollusca bored. Mr. PEACH had never observed the species of Pholas to turn round in their holes, as had been stated by some observers, although he had watched them with great attention. Mr. CHARLESWORTH referred to the fact that, in one species of shell, not only did the hole in the rock which the animal occupied increase in size, but also the hole through which it projected its siphons. - 'On the genera Nebalia (Leach), and Chirocephalus (Prevost); Brachipus (Schaffer),' by Dr. BAIRD.-Upon an attentive examination of the species of the genus Nebalia, described by different authors, the writer is induced to reduce them to two: -1st. Nebalia bipes, Cancer bipes (Fabricius and Herbst.), Monoculus rostratus (Montagu); Nebalia Herbstii (Leach). 2nd. Nebalia Geoffroyi (Milne-Edwards), Nebalia Straussi (Risso). With regard to the Chirocephalus of Prevost, it appears evident that the genus Branchipus, as originally described by Schæffer, and minutely figured by him in all its details, is quite distinct from the species found in England, and described by authors under that name. The differences are so great and well marked, that it is necessary to refer them to the genus Chirocephalus of Prevost, so beautifully figured at the end of Jurine's work on the Monoculi of Geneva. A Plea for the North-Atlantic Sea-Serpent. By CHARLES COGSWELL, M.D. "EVERY generation of man is born to stare at something, which so long as it eludes their understanding, is a very African fetishe to the many, and a Gordian knot to the few."-Hawkins's Memoirs of Ichthyosauri and Plesiosauri. Of the numerous contributions supplied through the press to support the cause of the subject of this article, one of the most recent has arrested my attention, because of the particulars having been long since familiar to me by oral communication from the writer in person. I allude to the interesting narrative contained in the 'Zoologist' for May last, describing a meeting with such an animal off the coast of one of the British provinces, stretching out into the Atlantic to the north-east of New England. It is worthy of notice that several animals of the Cetaceous kind (sometimes conjectured to have been a source of deception) were seen and scanned in limine, and an opportunity was thus afforded for immediate discrimination. Immediately subjoined is another statement, copied from a foreign newspaper, being the tribute of a French seacaptain to the same object, but qualified with so much of the characteristic national precision in the detail of certain forms and measurements, as rather to display an elaborate view of disjointed parts, than represent them all in harmony together as belonging to one individual. It betrays the caution of a witness, who would fain keep an opening in reserve for escape from a precarious position. The former adventure took place in 1833, the latter in 1840, and now they are related almost simultaneously within the last few months. Nor is this delay to be wondered at, when we consider how much the reverse of unbiassed is the tribunal of public opinion, before which they appear. It will hardly be denied that there is no debateable point in the modern records of observa tion more complacently devoted to ridicule by all but universal consent, than that of the existence of huge serpent-like animals in the North Atlantic Ocean. The very mention of the name of sea-serpent in the singular number with the definite article prefixed, suggests to most minds an idea of some anomalous monster, without parentage or congeners, feigned to haunt the recesses of the deep, and, like the ghost of vulgar superstition, manifesting itself now and again for the sole conceivable end of adorning some wonderful legend. This impression, favoured by the circumstance of no actual specimen having ever occurred to the observation of a naturalist, much less been obtained for deliberate examination, has caused the subject of our notice to rank with the mermaid, the unicorn, the griffin, and other prodigies of the olden faith. It does not fail to be objected that Norway, a locality most fruitful in accounts of the appearances in question, has been immemorially distinguished for a vivid perception of the marvellous. Nor, after hearing the other side of the Atlantic, are we much better able to divest our minds of suspicion with regard to the trustworthy character of the witnesses; our relative in the west having acquired nearly as much celebrity for the endowment of a grand inventive genius as his Scandinavian ally in the cause of seaserpents. They differ indeed, in so far as the latter believes and venerates his own creations, while the American indulges his fancy for the purely benevolent purpose of what is called "hoaxing" the unwary public. Not many years since, it may be recollected, one of these pleasant philosophers enlightened his fellow-mortals with a "true and particular" description of certain winged inhabitants assumed to have been discovered in the moon by an eminent living astronomer, giving the details with so much simplicity and affected candour with regard to some particulars, in the manner of 'Gulliver's Travels,' that many readers were not aware of its being a fabrication. Such proofs of a disposition to practise on the public credulity, too often repeated, necessarily communicate a colouring of insincerity to all other reports of strange events emanating from the same source, and certainly demand the exercise of an unusual amount of circumspection, though they do not justify scepticism, in the case now before us. Making due allowance for these peculiarities in the testimony, we may, nevertheless, proceed in a spirit of induction to examine into the tendency of the collateral evidence. The question after all, when reduced to its simplest form, comes to be little more than one of geographical distribution. That is to say, that even if we choose to confine the animal to the true serpents, which has been the ordinary conception heretofore, there is no obvious impediment to oppose it, either on the score of want of analogy, or of structural incapacity. Amphibiousness, to commence with, in its popular acceptation, or the capability of spending a considerable time in the water, is one of the most familiar properties of serpents, as illustrated in the common snake (Coluber natrix) and the viper, the only two species, if we except the blindworm, ascertained to be indigenous to these islands. "Snakes," observes Professor Bell ('History of British Reptiles') "are extremely fond of the water, taking to it readily, and swimming with great elegance and ease, holding the head and neck above the surface. It is extremely probable that they resort to the water in search of frogs." In the learned system of Schlegel, translated by Professor Traill—the 'Physiognomy of Serpents'-members of various ophidian groups are characterised as living near and inhabiting lakes and rivers. Some belong to the genera Tropidonotus (which here includes the first named British species), and Homalopsis, comprised under the head of Fresh-water Serpents.' Of the Boas, this author says, "several species frequent fresh water, and there are some of them essentially aquatic," among them the Boa murina, the largest of known serpents, and his two species of Acrochordus. Further, and what completely sets at rest the part of the case we are now consider. ing, there are swarms of marine ophidians inhabiting the warm latitudes of the Pacific. These " 'appear to have been partly known to the ancients. Elian informs us that Hydræ with flat tails were found in the Indian Seas, and that they also existed in the marshes. He also tells us that these reptiles had very sharp teeth, and appeared to be venomous. According to Ctesias, the serpents of the river Argada, in the province of Sittacene, remain concealed at the bottom of the water during the day, and by night they attack persons who go to bathe or wash linen." (Griffith in Cuvier). Schlegel has no less than seven species collected under the generic name of Hydrophis, constituting his family of sea-snakes; they are especially fitted for aquatic life, having the nostrils directed vertically and furnished with valves, and the tail flattened like an oar; they reside in the sea exclusively, never going on land, and are supposed to prey on fishes. Their limits belong to the intertropical regions of the Indian Seas, or of the great Pacific Ocean. The existence of bonâ fide sea-serpents being therefore a matter of notoriety, (and preserved specimens are to be seen at any time on the shelves of the British Museum), we have but to address ourselves to the subordinate inquiry, whether there be sufficient reason for assigning to any of the family a habitat in the North Atlantic Ocean. And here it is necessary to put away all that idea of deviation from the common order of nature, which would connect the evidence heretofore given with some isolated excrescence, so to speak, of the animal kingdom. The great size attributed to them has, doubtless, served very materially to produce an unfavorable impression. Schlegel limits the extreme length of the greatest known serpent to twenty-five feet, although such naturalists as Cuvier and Milne-Edwards, allow an extension of thirty or forty feet to some of the Boas. These estimates do not fall so far short of those contended for in the present instance as to form an insuperable ground of objection. Many witnesses, whose character and station in life command respect, whatever judgment may be formed of their powers of correct observation, profess to be fully persuaded that they have seen immense creatures, resembling serpents, in the vicinity of the European or the American shores. The several depositions from Norway that appeared in the 'Zoologist' for February last, comprise the testimony not only of fishermen, drawing their subsistence from the sea, and familiar with the more prevalent forms of its inhabitants, but of a class commonly presumed to be well educated, as merchants, clergymen, and a surgeon. Their observations indeed vary on the subject of length (varying between forty and one hundred feet), and likewise on some of the details of outline, so that they may either relate to different specimens, or to deceptive phenomena producing dissimilar impressions, whichever alternative the critic may be inclined to prefer. The first notice, transmitted by an English gentleman, holding a responsible appointment under the Crown in one of our transatlantic dependencies, is calculated to supply any deficiency on the part of the new hemisphere, so far as a faithful representation of what was submitted to the eye alone may remain a desideratum. But for the resolution manifested in this periodical, to allow the question a fair hearing on its sterling merits, there can be little doubt that this testimony would not have been forthcoming; like, in all probability, more of the same ingenuous stamp, which the unwillingness of the principals to oppose the current of public opinion, directly proportioned to the value of the character they run the risk of compromising for no obvious use, induces them to withhold. But it may be asked, how is it possible to explain the circumstance of these monstra natantia being encountered no farther South than about the sixtieth or fiftyfifth parallel on the European boundary, while in the American waters their domain approaches so much nearer the Equator, as Nova Scotia (or New Scotland) and New England? By a curious and happy coincidence, of like significance to many that are constantly springing up to confirm the results of independent research, such for instance as the print of the piscivorous gavials in a prior leaf of the "stone book" to the mammalivorous crocodiles; it happens that precisely a line swerving from Norway in a southerly direction to Massachusetts, is the boundary likewise of other marine animals of corresponding types. Among the divisions of the North Atlantic, recently marked out by Professor Edward Forbes, as determined by the presence of similar forms of animal life, occurs what is called the "Arctic and Boreal" province, which "sweeps across the northernmost part of the North Atlantic from Europe, extending down the coast of North America as far as Massachusetts, but nothing like so far on the European side as the American." (Lecture at the Royal Institution, May 14th, 1847). Thus copiously backed by the most affirmative evidence, both positive and circumstantial, all contributing to establish his lawful claim to entity, the "great unknown" of the North Atlantic has still to overcome the strong feeling of discredit so widely associated with his past history, before he can hope to be understood as seriously claiming to be a subject of the animal kingdom. If men of the highest name in science condescend to notice him at all, it is most probably with a smile at the expense of what they consider a crude invention, to which no importance should be attached. But authority, however exalted, has no patent of final adjudication in cases where its means of information are confessedly imperfect, as compared with those enjoyed by the supporters of a disputed position. The learned world was centuries in believing the story of Herodotus about little birds resorting to feed on insects within the "stretched jaws" of the crocodile. Bruce all but ruined his credit for a time by relating that he had seen the Abyssinians eat the raw flesh cut from one of the haunches of a living cow; and there are some who, with no more reason, pretend to doubt the good faith of a contemporary traveller, who declares that he once made a brief excursion on the back of an alligator. The conflicts of discovery and opinion, engross indeed no small share of the history of human knowledge. There are cases, no doubt, in which both the senses and the judgment of incompetent persons are liable to be imposed upon by irrelevant facts created or qualified for the occasion. But here there is no hypothesis concerned requiring nature to be tortured into its service; physiology can have no latent objections, ready to start up unawares and make a mockery of belief, because some of the serpent kind are indubitably organized for an aquatic medium; the laws of geographical distribution, deduced irrespectively, yield their consent; and the integrity of not a few of the narrators is unimpeachable. Are we justified in rejecting the text because the interpretation may not harmonize with our views; in imputing wilful dishonesty to those who merely describe to the best of their ability what their eyes have disclosed to them? We do not despise the mermaid, the triton, and syren, as altogether imaginary, but endeavour to reconcile at least their physical attributes with those of the the seal or oriental dugong. The unicorn is |