The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Three Voyages of Captain James Cook Round the World. Vol V. Being the First of the Third Voyage.

74. Soon after our departure from England, I was instructed by Captain Cook to complete a map of the world as a general chart, from the best materials he was in possession of for that purpose; and before his death this business was in a great measure accomplished: That is, the grand outline of the whole was arranged, leaving only those parts vacant or unfinished, which he expected to fall in with and explore. But on our return home, when the fruits of our voyage were ordered by the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty to be published, the care of the general chart being consigned to me, I was directed to prepare it from the latest and best authorities; and also to introduce Captain Cook’s three successive tracts, that all his discoveries, and the different routs he had taken might appear together; by this means to give a general idea of the whole. This task having been performed by me, it is necessary, for the information of the reader, to state the heads of the several authorities which I have followed in such parts of the chart as differ from what was drawn up immediately under the inspection of Captain Cook. And when the public are made acquainted, that many materials, necessary to complete and elucidate the work, were not at the time on board the Resolution, or in his possession, the reason will appear very obvious, why these alterations and additions were introduced contrary to the original drawing.

First, then, I have followed closely the very excellent and correct charts of the Northern Atlantic Ocean, published by Messrs. de Verdun de la Crenne, de Borda, et Pringre in 1775 and 1776; which comprise the coast of Norway from the Sud Hoek, in the latitude of 62 degrees north, to Trelleburg, Denmark, the coast of Holland, north coast of Great Britain, Orkneys, Shetland, Ferro Isles, Iceland, coasts of France, Spain, and Portugal, to Cape St. Maria on the coast of Africa; including the Azores, Canaries, Cape de Verd, Antilles, and West Indian islands from Barbadoes to the east end of Cuba; the north part of Newfoundland and the Labradore coast, as far as the latitude of 57° north.

Ireland, and part of the coast of Scotland, is laid down from Mr. Mackenzie’s late surveys; and the south coast of England from a chart published by Mr. Faden in 1780, taken from M. l’Abbé Dicquemare.

The north part of the coast of Labradore, from the latitude of 57° north, to Button’s Islands in the entrance of Hudson’s Strait, is taken from Monsieur Bellin’s chart, as is also the north coast of Norway and Lapland, including the White Sea, Gulph of Bothnia, Baltic Sea, and the east coast of Greenland.

The Gulf of Finland, from a large (MS.) chart, now engraving for the use of some private merchants.

The West India islands, from the east end of Cuba to the west end, including Jamaica and the Bahama islands, are from a chart published in London by Sayer and Bennett in 1779.

The south side of Cuba, from Point Gorda to Cape de Cruz, is laid down from Monsieur Bellin, in 1762.

The coasts of Newfoundland, and the Gulf of St. Laurence, from the surveys made by Captain Cook, and Messrs. Gilbert and Lane.

Nova Scotia, Cape Breton, Island of St. John, River St. Laurence, Canada, and New England to the River Delaware, from J. F. W. des Barres, Esq. in 1777 and 1778; and charts published in France by order of the King, in 1780, intituled, Neptune Americo-Septrentrional, &c. And from these charts also are taken the coast of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Maryland, Virginia, North and South Carolina, Georgia, East and West Florida, as well as the interior parts of the country to the east side of Lake Ontario.

The other parts of this lake, as likewise Lakes Erie, Hurons, Michigan, and Superior, were copied from Mr. Green’s maps of America: The northern part of this last-mentioned lake is fixed from the astronomical observations made by order of the Hudson’s Bay Company, at Mishippicotton House.

The whole of Hudson’s Bay I took from a chart, compiled by Mr. Marly, from all the most authentic maps he could procure of those parts, with which I was favoured by Samuel Wegg, Esq. F. R. S. and Governor of that Company, who also politely furnished me with Mr. Hearne’s Journals, and the map of his route to the Coppermine River, which is faithfully inserted on the chart, together with the survey of Chesterfield Inlet made by Captain Christopher and Mr. Moses Norton, in 1762; and the discoveries from York Fort to Cumberland, and Hudson Houses (this last is the most western settlement belonging to the company), extending to Lake Winipeg, from the drafts of Mr. Philip Turnor, made in 1778 and 1779, corrected by astronomical observations. And from this lake, the disposition of the other lakes to the southward of it, and which communicate with it, is formed, and laid down from a map constructed by Mr. Spurrel, in the company’s service. The Albany and Moose rivers to Gloucester House, and to Lake Abitibbe and Superior, are also drawn from a map of Mr. Turnor’s, adjusted by observations for the longitudes.

The west coast of Greenland, as chiefly laid down from the observations made by Lieut. R. Pickersgill in the Lion brig in 1776, which determine the line of the coast only, as the immense quantities of ice choke up every bay and inlet on this coast, which formerly were, in the summer season, quite free and open.

From the mouth of the Mississippi River, including its source, and the other rivers branching from it; all the coast of New Leon to Cape Rozo, and the western coast of America, from Cape Corrienties to the Great Bay of Tecoantepec, is taken from Monsieur D’Anville.

The Gulf of California I have laid down from a German publication in 1773, put into my hands by Sir Joseph Banks, Bart. P. R. S.; and the western side of it is brought together from a Spanish MS. chart with which A. Dalrymple, Esq. F. R. S. obliged me.

The coast of Brazil, from Sera to Cape Frio, is copied from a small chart of that part by Mr. Dalrymple.

For the southern part of Africa, from the Cape of Good Hope to Point Natal, I have taken the authority of the chart of Major J. Rennels, F. R. S. shewing the extent of the bank of Lagullus.

For the existence of the small islands, shoals, and banks to the eastward of Madagascar, together with the Archipelago of the Maldive and Laccidive islands; for the coasts of Mallacca, part of Cambodia, and the island Sumatra, I have used the latest authority of Monsieur D’Après de Mannevillette’s publications in the Neptune Oriental.

The coasts of Guzerat, Malabar, Coromandel, and the opposite shore, containing the Great Bay of Bengal, and the Island of Ceylon, and exhibiting the Heads of the Ganges, and Barampooter or Sanpoo rivers, are inserted from the work of the ingenious author of the map of Hindoostan, published in 1782.

The China sea is laid down from the chart published by Mr. Dalrymple; but the longitude of Pula Sapara, Pulo Condore, Pulo Timoan, Straits of Banca and Sunda, and the parts we saw are, as settled by us, together with the east coast of Niphon, the principal of the Japanese islands.

The Jeso and Kurile islands, the east coast of Asia and Kamtschatka, as well as the sea of Okotsk, and the islands lying between Kamtschatka and America that were not seen in the voyage, are taken from a Russian MS. chart, got by us at the island of Oonalashka.

The northern countries from Cape Kanin, near the White Sea, as far east of the River Lena, I have given from the Great Russian map, published at Petersburgh in 1776, including the Euxine, Caspian, and Aral Seas, as also the principal lakes to the eastward; the intent of which is to show the source of the large rivers that empty themselves into the different oceans and seas.

Every other part of the chart not mentioned in this account, is as originally placed by Captain Cook.

The whole has been corrected from the latest astronomical observations, selected from the tables compiled by Mr. William Wales, F. R. S. and mathematical master of Christ’s Hospital, for the Nautical Almanacs: from those in the Mariner’s Guide by the Rev. Dr. Maskelyne, F. R. S. and Astronomer Royal, published in 1763; from the Connoissance des Tems for 1780 and 1781; From Professor Mayer’s Geographical Table; from the Voyages of Messrs. d’Eveux de Fleurieu, Verdun, de Borda, and Chabet, &c.; from the Table lately published by Mr. Dalrymple for the use of the East India ships; from the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society; and from the Observations of our late Navigators.

HEN. ROBERTS.

Shoreham, Sussex, May 18. 1784.

75. The very copious Vocabulary of the language of Otaheite, and the comparative specimen of the languages of the several other islands visited during the former voyage, and published in Captain Cook’s account of it, were furnished by Mr. Anderson.

76. The late Sir Joseph.

77. See the instructions in the Introduction.

78. Captain Le Crass, Admiral Amherst having struck his flag some days before.

79. It appears from Captain Cook’s log-book, that he began his judicious operations for preserving the health of his crew, very early in the voyage. On the 17th, the ship was smoked between decks with gun-powder. The spare sails also were then well aired.

80. Though no such instance was known to those from whom Captain Cook had this information, we learn from Glas, that some years before he was at Teneriffe, almost all the shipping in the road were driven on shore. See Glas’s Hist. of the Canary Islands, p. 235. We may well suppose the precautions now used, have prevented any more such accidents happening. This will sufficiently justify Captain Cook’s account.

81. Formerly, there was made at Teneriffe a great quantity of Canary sack, which the French call Vin de Malvesie; and we, corruptly after them, name Malmsey (from Malvesia, a town in the Morea, famous for such luscious wine). In the last century, and still later, much of this was imported into England; but little wine is now made there, but of the sort described by Captain Cook. Not more than fifty pipes of the rich Canary was annually made in Glas’s time; and he says, they now gather the grapes when green, and make a dry hard wine of them, fit for hot climates, p. 262.

82. See an account of a journey to the top of the Pic of Teneriffe, in Sprat’s History of the Royal Society, p. 200, &c. Glas also went to the top of it. History of the Canary Islands, p. 252 to 259. In the Philosophical Transactions, vol. xlvii. p. 353-356, we have Observations made, in going up the Pic of Teneriffe, by Dr. T. Heberden. The Doctor makes its height, about the level of the sea, to be 2566 fathoms, or 15,396 English feet; and says, that this was confirmed by two subsequent observations by himself, and another made by Mr. Crosse, the consul. And yet, I find, that the Chevalier de Borda, who measured the height of this mountain in August 1776, makes it to be only 1931 French toises, or 12,340 English feet. See Dr. Forster’s Observations during a Voyage round the World, p. 32.

83. Glas, p. 231., speaking of this plant, says, that he cannot imagine why the natives of the Canaries do not extract the juice, and use it instead of pitch, for the bottoms of their boats. We now learn from Mr. Anderson their reason for not using it.

84. Its extended name is St. Christobal de la Laguna; and it used to be reckoned the capital of the island, the gentry and lawyers living there; though the Governor-General of the Canary Islands resides at Santa Cruz, as being the centre of their trade, both with Europe and America. See Glas’s Hist. p. 248.

85. The writer of the Relation of Teneriffe, in Sprat’s History, p. 207, takes notice of this lemon as produced here, and calls it Pregnada. Probably, emprennada, the Spanish word for impregnated, is the name it goes by.

86. This agrees with Dr. T. Heberden’s account, who says that the sugar-loaf part of the mountain, or la pericosa (as it is called), which is an eighth part of a league (or 1980 feet) to the top, is covered with snow the greatest part of the year. See Philosophical Transactions, as quoted above.

87. This port was then filled up by the rivers of burning lava that flowed into it from a volcano; insomuch that houses are now built where ships formerly lay at anchor. See Glas’s Hist. p. 244.

88. Glas, p. 342., says, that they annually export no less than fifteen thousand pipes of wine and brandy. In another place, p. 252, he tells us, that the number of the inhabitants of Teneriffe, when the last account was taken, was no less than 96,000. We may reasonably suppose that there has been a considerable increase of population since Glas visited the island, which is above thirty years ago. The quantity of wine annually consumed, as the common beverage of at least one hundred thousand persons, must amount to several thousand pipes. There must be a vast expenditure of it, by conversion into brandy; to produce one pipe of which, five or six pipes of wine must be distilled. An attention to these particulars will enable every one to judge, that the account given to Mr. Anderson, of an annual produce of 40,000 pipes of wine, has a foundation in truth.

89. It was otherwise in Glas’s time, when a few families of the Guanches (as they are called) remained still in Teneriffe, not blended with the Spaniards. Glas, p. 240.

90. As a proof of Captain Cook’s attention, both to the discipline and to the health of his ship’s company, it may be worth while to observe here, that it appears from his log-book, he exercised them at great guns and small arms, and cleared and smoked the ship below decks, twice in the interval between the 4th and the 10th of August.

91. On board his Majesty’s ship Elizabeth, from 1758 to 1764; by William Nichelson, master of the said ship. London, 1773.

92. Dampier’s Voyages, vol. iii. p. 10.

93. On the 18th, I sunk a bucket with a thermometer seventy fathoms below the surface of the sea, where it remained two minutes; and it took three minutes more to haul it up. The mercury in the thermometer was at 66, which before, in the air, stood at 78, and in the surface of the sea at 79. The water which came up in the bucket contained, by Mr. Cavendish’s table, ¹⁄₂₅, 7 part salt; and that at the surface of the sea ¹⁄₂₉, 4. As this last was taken up after a smart shower of rain, it might be lighter on that account. Captain Cook’s log-book.

94. The particulars are mentioned in his log-book. On the 14th of August, a fire was made in the well, to air the ship below. On the 15th, the spare-sails were aired upon deck, and a fire made to air the sail-room. On the 17th, cleaned and smoked betwixt decks, and the bread-room aired with fires. On the 21st, cleaned and smoked betwixt decks; and on the 22d, the men’s bedding was spread on deck to air.

95. The afternoon, as appears from Mr. Anderson’s Journal, was spent in performing the old and ridiculous ceremony of ducking those who had not crossed the equator before. Though Captain Cook did not suppress the custom, he thought it too trifling to deserve the least mention of it in his Journal, or even in his log-book. Pernetty, the writer of Bougainville’s Voyage to the Falkland Islands, in 1763 and 1764, thought differently; for his account of the celebration of this childish festival on board his ship, is extended through seventeen pages, and makes the subject of an entire chapter, under the title of Baptême de la Ligne.

It may be worth while to transcribe his introduction to the description of it. “C’est un usage qui ne remonte pas plus haut que ce voyage célébre de Gama, qui a fourni au Camoens le sujet de la Lusiade. L’Idée qu’on ne sçauroit être un bon marin, sans avoir traversé l’Equateur, l’ennui inséparable d’une longue navigation, un certain esprit republicain qui regne dans toutes les petites societés, peut-être toutes ces causes reunies, on pu donner naissance à ces especes de saturnales. Quoiqu’il en soit, elles furent adoptées, en un instant, dans toutes les nations, et les hommes les plus eclairés furent obligés de se soumettre à une coutume dont ils reconnoissoient l’absurdité. Car, partout, des que le peuple parle, il faut que le sage se mette à l’unison.” Histoire d’un Voyage aux Isles Malouines, p. 107, 108.

96. See vol. IV. p. 252.

98. See Hawkesworth’s Collection of Voyages, vol. ii. p. 15.

99. “The most remarkable thing in the Cape sheep, is the length and thickness of their tails, which weigh from fifteen to twenty pounds. The fat is not so tallowish as that of European mutton, and the poorer sort use it for butter.” Kolben’s Cape of Good Hope [English translation], vol. ii. p. 65. De la Caille, who finds every thing wrong in Kolben, says, the weight of the tails of the Cape sheep is not above five or six pounds. Voyage de la Caille, p. 343. If the information given to Captain Cook may be depended upon, it will prove that, in this instance at least, Kolben is unjustly accused of exaggeration.

100. In the Philosophical Transactions, vol. lxvi. p. 268 to 319, is an Account of Three Journies from the Cape Town into the Southern parts of Africa, in 1772, 1773, and 1774; by Mr. Francis Masson, who had been sent from England for the discovery of new plants, towards the improvement of the Royal Botanical Garden at Kew. Much curious information is contained in Mr. Masson’s account of these journies. M. de Pagés, who was at the Cape in 1773, gives some remarks on the state of that settlement, and also the particulars of his journey from False Bay to the Cape Town. Voyage vers le Pole du Sud, p. 17 to 32.

101. In the Philosophical Transactions, vol. lxviii. part I. p. 102, we have a Letter from Mr. Anderson to Sir John Pringle, describing this remarkable stone. The account sent home from the Cape, and read before the Royal Society, is much the same with that now published, but rather fuller. In particular, he tells Sir John, that he went to see it at Mr. Mason’s desire, who, probably, had not had an opportunity of sufficiently examining it himself. In the account of his journies, above referred to, p. 270, he only says, “there are two large solid rocks on the Perel Berg, each of which (he believes) is more than a mile in circumference at the base, and upwards of two hundred feet high. Their surfaces are nearly smooth, without chink or fissures; and they are found to be a species of granite, different from that which composes the neighbouring mountains.”

Mr. Anderson having, with his letter to Sir John Pringle, also sent home a specimen of the rock, it was examined by Sir William Hamilton, whose opinion is, that “this singular, immense fragment of granite, most probably has been raised by a volcanic explosion, or some such cause.” See his Letter to Sir John Pringle, annexed to Mr. Anderson’s, in the Philosophical Transactions.

102. It is strange that neither Kolben nor de la Caille should have thought the Tower of Babylon worthy of a particular description. The former [vol. ii. p. 52, 53, English Translation,] only mentions it as a high mountain. The latter contents himself with telling us, that it is a very low hillock, un très-bas monticule. Voyage de la Caille, p. 341. We are much obliged to Mr. Anderson for his very accurate account of this remarkable rock, which agrees with Mr. Sonnerat’s, who was at the Cape of Good Hope so late as 1781. His words are, “La Montagne de la Perle, merite d’être observée. C’est un des plus hautes des environs du Cap. Elle n’est composée que d’un seul bloc de granit crévassé dans plusieurs endroits.” Voyage aux Indes, tom. ii. p. 91.

Mr. Sonnerat tells us, that Mr. Gordon, commander of the troops at the Cape, had lately made three journies up the country, from which, when he publishes his Journal, we may expect much curious information.

103. Vol. III. p. 35.

106. See Vol. IV. p. 243. These islands are there said to be in the latitude of 48° S., that is, two degrees farther south, than what here appears to be their real position.

107. See Vol. IV. as above. Dr. Forster, in his observations made during that voyage, p. 30., gives us this description of the chart then communicated by Monsieur Crozet; that it was published under the patronage of the Duke de Croye, by Robert de Vaugondy. Captain Cook tells us lower in this chapter that it was published in 1773.

108. Captain Cook’s proceedings, as related in the remaining part of this chapter, and in the next, being upon a coast newly discovered by the French, it could not but be an object of his attention to trace the footsteps of the original explorers. But no superiority of professional skill, nor diligence in exerting it, could possibly qualify him to do this successfully, without possessing, at the same time, full and authentic intelligence of all that had been performed here by his predecessors in the discovery. But that he was not so fortunate as to be thus sufficiently instructed, will appear from the following facts, which the reader is requested to attend to, before he proceeds to the perusal of this part of the journal.

How very little was known, with any precision, about the operations of Kerguelen, when Captain Cook sailed in 1776, may be inferred from the following paragraph of his instructions: “You are to proceed in search of some islands said to have been lately seen by the French in the latitude of 48° S., and in the meridian of Mauritius.”^[109] This was, barely, the amount of the very indefinite and imperfect information, which Captain Cook himself had received from Baron Plettenberg at the Cape of Good Hope, in November 1772 ^[110]; in the beginning of which year Kerguelen’s first voyage had taken place.

The Captain, on his return homeward, in March 1775, heard, a second time, something about this French discovery at the Cape, where he met with Monsieur Crozet, who very obligingly communicated to him a chart of the southern hemisphere, wherein were delineated not only his own discoveries, but also that of Captain Kerguelen.^[111] But what little information that chart could convey, was still necessarily confined to the operations of the first voyage; the chart here referred to, having been published in France in 1773; that is, before any intelligence could possibly be conveyed from the southern hemisphere of the result of Kerguelen’s second visit to this new land; which we now know happened towards the close of the same year.

Of these latter operations, the only account (if that can be called an account which conveys no particular information) received by Captain Cook from Monsieur Crozet was, that a later voyage had been undertaken by the French, under the command of Captain Kerguelen, which had ended much to the disgrace of that commander.^[112]

What Crozet had not communicated to our author, and what we are sure, from a variety of circumstances, he had never heard of from any other quarter, he missed an opportunity of learning at Teneriffe. He expresses his being sorry, as we have just read, that he did not know sooner that there was on board the frigate an officer who had been with Kerguelen, as he might have obtained from him more interesting information about this land than its situation. And, indeed, if he had conversed with that officer he might have obtained information more interesting than he was aware of; he might have learnt that Kerguelen had actually visited this southern land a second time, and that the little isle of which he then received the name and position from the Chevalier de Borda, was a discovery of this later voyage. But the account conveyed to him being, as the reader will observe, unaccompanied with any date, or other distinguishing circumstance, he left Teneriffe, and arrived on the coasts of Kerguelen’s Land, under a full persuasion that it had been visited only once before. And, even with regard to the operations of that first voyage, he had nothing to guide him, but the very scanty materials afforded to him by Baron Plettenberg and Monsieur Crozet.

The truth is, the French seem, for some reason or other, not surely founded on the importance of Kerguelen’s discovery, to have been very shy of publishing a full and distinct account of it. No such account had been published while Captain Cook lived. Nay, even after the return of his ships in 1780, the gentleman who obligingly lent his assistance to give a view of the prior observations of the French, and to connect them on the same chart with those of our author, though his assiduity in procuring geographical information can be equalled only by his readiness in communicating it, had not, it should seem, been able to procure any materials for that purpose, but such as mark the operations of the first French voyage; and even for these, he was indebted to a MS. drawing.

But this veil of unnecessary secrecy is at length drawn aside. Kerguelen himself has, very lately, published the journal of his proceedings in two successive voyages in the years 1772 and 1773; and has annexed to his Narrative a chart of the coasts of this land, as far as he had explored them in both voyages. Monsieur de Pagés also, much about the same time, favoured us with another account of the second voyage, in some respects fuller than Kerguelen’s own, on board whose ship he was then an officer.

From these sources of authentic information we are enabled to draw every necessary material to correct what is erroneous, and to illustrate what, otherwise, would have remained obscure, in this part of Captain Cook’s Journal. We shall take occasion to do this in separate notes on the passages as they occur, and conclude this tedious, but, it is hoped, not unnecessary detail of facts, with one general remark, fully expressive of the disadvantages our author laboured under. He never saw that part of the coast upon which the French had been in 1772; and he never knew that they had been upon another part of it in 1773, which was the very scene of his own operations. Consequently, what he knew of the former voyage, as delineated upon Crozet’s chart, only served to perplex and mislead his judgment; and his total ignorance of the latter, put it out of his power to compare his own observations with those then made by Kerguelen; though we, who are better instructed, can do this, by tracing the plainest marks of coincidence and agreement.

109. See the Instructions in the Introduction.

110. See Vol. III. p. 36.

111. Vol. IV. p. 243.

112. Vol. IV. p. 244.

113. Captain Cook was not the original discoverer of these small islands which he now fell in with. It is certain that they had been seen and named by Kerguelen, on his second voyage, in December, 1773. Their position, relatively to each other, and to the adjoining coasts of the greater land, as represented on the annexed chart, bears a striking resemblance to Kerguelen’s delineation of them; whose chart, however, the public may be assured, was unknown in England till after our’s had been engraved.

114. This is the isle to which Kerguelen gave the name of Croy or Crouy. Besides delineating it upon his chart, he has added a particular view of it, exactly corresponding with Captain Cook’s account of its being of considerable height.

115. Kerguelen called this Isle Rolland, after the name of his own ship. There is also a particular view of it on the French chart.

116. The observations of the French and English navigators agree exactly, as to the position of these smaller isles.

117. The situation of Kerguelen’s Isle de Clugny, as marked on his chart, shows it to be the third high island seen by Captain Cook.

118. This isle, or rock, was the single point about which Captain Cook had received the least information at Teneriffe; and we may observe how sagacious he was in tracing it. What he could only speak of as probable, a comparison of his chart with that lately published by Kerguelen, proves to be certain; and if he had even read and copied what his predecessors in the discovery says of it, he could scarcely have varied his account of its shape. Kerguelen’s words are, “Isle de Réunion, qui n’est qu’une roche, nous servoit de rendezvous, ou de point de ralliement; et resemble à un coin de mire.”

119. The French and English agree very nearly (as might be expected) in their accounts of the latitude of this island; but the observations by which they fix its longitude, vary considerably.

The pilot at Teneriffe made it only 64° 57ʹ E. from Paris, which is about 67° 16ʹ E. from London; or 1° 24ʹ more, westerly than Captain Cook’s observations fix it.

Monsieur de Pagés says it is 66° 47ʹ E. from Paris, that is 69° 6ʹ E. from London, or twenty-six miles more easterly than it is placed by Captain Cook.

Kerguelen himself only says that it is about 68° of E. longitude, par 68° de longitude.

120. Hitherto, we have only had occasion to supply defects, owing to Captain Cook’s entire ignorance of Kerguelen’s second voyage in 1773; we must now correct errors, owing to his very limited knowledge of the operations of the first voyage in 1772. The chart of the southern hemisphere, his only guide, having given him, as he tells us, the name of Cape St. Louis (or Cape Louis) as the most northerly promontory then seen by the French; and his own observations now satisfying him that no part of the main land stretched further N. than the left extreme now before him; from this supposed similarity of situation, he judged that his own perpendicular rock must be the Cape Lewis of the first discoverers. By looking upon our chart, we shall find Cape Louis lying upon a very different part of the coast; and by comparing this chart with that lately published by Kerguelen, it will appear, in the clearest manner, that the northern point now described by Captain Cook, is the very same to which the French have given the name of Cape François.

121. This right extreme of the coast, as it now showed itself to Captain Cook, seems to be what is represented on Kerguelen’s chart under the name of Cape Aubert. It may be proper to observe here, that all that extent of coast lying between Cape Louis and Cape François, of which the French saw very little during their first visit in 1772, and may be called the N. W. side of this land, they had it in their power to trace the position of in 1773, and have assigned names to some of its bays, rivers, and promontories, upon their chart.

122. Kerguelen’s Isle de Clugny.

123. Cape François, as already observed.

124. The observations of the French, round Cape François, remarkably coincide with Captain Cook’s in this paragraph; and the rocks and islands here mentioned by him, also appear upon their chart.

125. The (d), no doubt, is a contraction of the word Domino. The French Secretary of the Marine was then Monsieur de Boynes.

126. On perusing this paragraph of the Journal, it will be natural to ask, How could Monsieur de Boisguehenneu, in the beginning of 1772, leave an inscription, which, upon the very face of it, commemorates a transaction of the following year? Captain Cook’s manner of expressing himself here, strongly marks, that he made this supposition only for want of information to enable him to make any other. He had no idea that the French had visited this land a second time; and, reduced to the necessity of trying to accommodate what he saw himself, to what little he had heard of their proceedings, he confounds a transaction which we, who have been better instructed, know, for a certainty, belongs to the second voyage, with a similar one, which his chart of the Southern Hemisphere has recorded, and which happened in a different year, and at a different place.

The bay, indeed, in which Monsieur de Boisguehenneu landed, is upon the west side of this land, considerably to the south of Cape Louis, and not far from another more southerly promontory, called Cape Bourbon; a part of the coast which our ships were not upon. Its situation is marked upon our chart; and a particular view of the bay du Lion Marin (for so Boisguehenneu called it), with the soundings, is preserved by Kerguelen.

But if the bottle and inscription, found by Captain Cook’s people, were not left here by Boisguehenneu, by whom and when were they left? This we learn most satisfactorily, from the accounts of Kerguelen’s second voyage, as published by himself and Monsieur de Pagés, which present us with the following particulars: That they arrived on the west side of this land on the 14th of December, 1773; that, steering to the north-east, they discovered, on the 16th, the Isle de Réunion, and the other small islands as mentioned above; that, on the 17th, they had before them the principal land (which they were sure was connected with that seen by them on the 14th), and a high point of that land, named by them Cape François; that beyond this Cape the coast took a south-easterly direction, and behind it they found a bay, called by them Baie de l’Oiseau, from the name of their frigate; that they then endeavoured to enter it, but were prevented by contrary winds and blowing weather, which drove them off the coast eastward; but that, at last, on the 6th of January, Monsieur de Rosnevet, Captain of the Oiseau, was able to send his boat on shore into this bay, under the command of Monsieur de Rochegude, one of his officers, who took possession of that bay, and of all the country, in the name of the King of France, with all the requisite formalities.

Here, then, we trace, by the most unexceptionable evidence, the history of the bottle and inscription; the leaving of which was, no doubt, one of the requisite formalities observed by Monsieur de Rochegude on this occasion. And though he did not land till the 6th of January, 1774, yet, as Kerguelen’s ships arrived upon the coast on the 14th of December, 1773, and had discovered and looked into this very bay on the 17th of that month, it was with the strictest propriety and truth that 1773, and not 1774, was mentioned as the date of the discovery.

We need only look at Kerguelen’s and Cook’s charts, to judge that the Baie de l’Oiseau, and the harbour where the French inscription was found, is one and the same place. But besides this agreement as to the general position, the same conclusion results more decisively still, from another circumstance worth mentioning: the French, as well as the English visitors of this bay and harbour, have given us a particular plan of it; and whoever compares ours, published in this volume, with that to be met with in Kerguelen’s and de Pagés’s voyages, must be struck with a resemblance that could only be produced by copying one common original with fidelity. Nay, even the soundings are the same upon the same spots in both plans, being forty-five fathoms between the two Capes, before the entrance of the bay; sixteen fathoms farther in, where the shores begin to contract; and eight fathoms up, near the bottom of the harbour.

To these particulars, which throw abundant light on this part of our author’s Journal, I shall only add, that the distance of our harbour from that where Boisguehenneu landed, in 1772, is forty leagues. For this we have the authority of Kerguelen, in the following passage: “Monsieur de Boisguehenneu descendit le 13 de Février, 1772, dans un baie, qu il nommé Baie du Lion Marin, et prit possession de cette terre au nom de Roi; il n’y vit aucune trace d’habitants. Monsieur de Rochegude, en 1774, a descendu dans un autre baie, que nous avons nommé Baie de l’Oiseau, et cette seconde rade est à quarantes lieues de la première. Il en a également pris possession, et il n’y trouva également aucune trace d’habitants.” Kerguelen, p. 92.