floor, wherever they please to lie down; the unmarried men and women
apart from each other; or, if the family be large, there are small huts
adjoining to which the servants retire in the night; so that privacy is
as much observed here, as one could expect. They have mats made on
purpose for sleeping on; and the clothes that they wear in the day,
serve for their covering in the night. Their whole furniture consists of
a bowl or two, in which they make _kava_; a few gourds; cocoa-nut
shells; some small wooden stools which serve them for pillows; and,
perhaps, a large stool for the chief or master of the family to sit
upon.

The only probable reason I can assign for their neglect of ornamental
architecture in the construction of their houses, is their being fond of
living much in the open air. Indeed, they seem to consider their houses,
within which they seldom eat, as of little use but to sleep in, and to
retire to in bad weather. And the lower sort of people who spend a great
part of their time in close attendance upon the chiefs, can have little
use for their own houses, but in the last case.

They make amends for the defects of their houses, by their great
attention to, and dexterity in naval architecture, if I may be allowed
to give it that name. But I refer to the narrative of my last voyage for
an account of their canoes, and their manner of building and navigating
them.[206]

The only tools which they use to construct these boats, are hatchets, or
rather thick adzes, of a smooth black stone that abounds at Toofoa;
augres, made of shark’s teeth, fixed on small handles; and rasps of a
rough skin of a fish, fastened on flat pieces of wood thinner on one
side, which also have handles. The labour and time employed in finishing
their canoes, which are the most perfect of their mechanical productions
will account for their being very careful of them. For they are built
and preserved under sheds; or they cover the decked part of them with
cocoa-leaves, when they are hauled on shore to prevent their being hurt
by the sun.

The same tools are all they have for other works; if we except different
shells, which they use as knives. But there are few of their productions
that require these, unless it be some of their weapons; the other
articles being chiefly their fishing materials, and cordage.

The cordage is made from the fibres of the cocoa-nut husk, which, though
not more than nine or ten inches long, they plat about the size of a
quill or less, to any length that they please, and roll it up in balls;
from which the larger ropes are made, by twisting several of these
together. The lines that they fish with are as strong and even as the
best cord we make, resembling it almost in every respect. The other
fishing implements are large and small hooks. The last are composed
entirely of pearl-shell; but the first are only covered with it on the
back; and the points of both commonly of tortoise-shell; those of the
small being plain, and the others barbed. With the large ones they catch
bonnetos and albicores, by putting them to a bamboo rod twelve or
fourteen feet long, with a line of the same length, which rests in a
notch of a piece of wood, fixed in the stern of the canoe for that
purpose, and is dragged on the surface of the sea, as she rows along,
without any other bait than a tuft of flaxy stuff near the point. They
have also great numbers of pretty small seines, some of which are of a
very delicate texture. These they use to catch fish with, in the holes
on the reefs when the tide ebbs.

The other manual employments consist chiefly in making musical reeds,
flutes, warlike weapons, and stools, or rather pillows, to sleep on. The
reeds have eight, nine, or ten pieces placed parallel to each other, but
not in any regular progression; having the longest sometimes in the
middle, and several of the same length; so that I have seen none with
more than six notes; and they seem incapable of playing any music on
them that is distinguishable by our ears. The flutes are a joint of
bamboo, close at both ends, with a hole near each, and four others; two
of which, and one of the first only, are used in playing. They apply the
thumb of the left hand to close the left nostril, and blow into the hole
at one end with the other. The middle finger of the left hand is applied
to the first hole on the left, and the fore-finger of the right to the
lowest hole on that side. In this manner, though the notes are only
three, they produce a pleasing, yet simple music, which they vary much
more than one would think possible with so imperfect an instrument.
Their being accustomed to a music which consists of so few notes, is
perhaps the reason why they do not seem to relish any of ours, which is
so complex. But they can taste what is more deficient than their own;
for we observed that they used to be well pleased with hearing the chant
of our two young New Zealanders, which consisted rather in mere strength
than in melody of expression.

The weapons which they make are clubs of different sorts (in the
ornamenting of which they spend much time), spears, and darts. They have
also bows and arrows; but these seemed to be designed only for
amusement, such as shooting at birds, and not for military purposes. The
stools are about two feet long, but only four or five inches high, and
near four broad, bending downward in the middle, with four strong legs
and circular feet; the whole made of one piece of black or brown wood,
neatly polished, and sometimes inlaid with bits of ivory. They also
inlay the handles of fly-flaps with ivory, after being neatly carved;
and they shape bones into small figures of men, birds, and other things,
which must be very difficult, as their carving instrument is only a
shark’s tooth.

Yams, plantains, and cocoa-nuts, compose the greatest part of their
vegetable diet. Of their animal food, the chief articles are hogs,
fowls, fish, and all sorts of shell-fish; but the lower people eat rats.
The two first vegetable articles, with bread-fruit, are what may be
called the basis of their food, at different times of the year, with
fish and shell-fish; for hogs, fowls, and turtle, seem only to be
occasional dainties reserved for their chiefs. The intervals between the
seasons of these vegetable productions must be, sometimes, considerable,
as they prepare a sort of artificial bread from plantains, which they
put under ground before ripe, and suffer them to remain, till they
ferment, when they are taken out, and made up into small balls; but so
sour and indifferent, that they often said our bread was preferable,
though somewhat musty.

Their food is generally dressed by baking, in the same manner as at
Otaheite; and they have the art of making, from different kinds of
fruit, several dishes, which most of us esteemed very good. I never saw
them make use of any kind of sauce; nor drink any thing at their meals
but water, or the juice of the cocoa-nut; for the _kava_ is only their
morning draught. I cannot say that they are cleanly either in their
cookery or manner of eating. The generality of them will lay their
victuals upon the first leaf they meet with, however dirty it may be;
but when food is served up to the chiefs, it is commonly laid upon green
plantain leaves. When the king made a meal, he was, for the most part,
attended upon by three or four persons. One cut large pieces of the
joint, or of the fish; another divided it into mouthfuls; and others
stood by with cocoa-nuts, and whatever else he might want. I never saw a
large company sit down to what we should call a sociable meal, by eating
from the same dish. The food, be what it will, is always divided into
portions, each to serve a certain number; these portions are again
subdivided; so that one seldom sees above two or three persons eating
together. The women are not excluded from eating with the men; but there
are certain ranks or orders amongst them, that can neither eat nor drink
together. This distinction begins with the king; but where it ends I
cannot say.

They seem to have no set time for meals; though it should be observed,
that, during our stay amongst them, their domestic economy was much
disturbed by their constant attention to us. As far as we could remark,
those of the superior rank only drink _kava_ in the forenoon, and the
others eat perhaps a bit of yam; but we commonly saw all of them eat
something in the afternoon. It is probable that the practice of making a
meal in the night is pretty common; and their rest being thus
interrupted, they frequently sleep in the day. They go to bed as soon as
it is dark, and rise with the dawn in the morning.[207]

They are very fond of associating together; so that it is common to find
several houses empty, and the owners of them convened in some other one,
or rather upon a convenient spot in the neighbourhood, where they
recreate themselves by conversing, and other amusements. Their private
diversions are chiefly singing, dancing, and music performed by the
women. When two or three women sing in concert, and snap their fingers,
it is called _oobai_; but when there is a greater number, they divide
into several parties, each of which sings on a different key, which
makes a very agreeable music, and is called _heeva_ or _haiva_. In the
same manner, they vary the music of their flutes, by playing on those of
a different size; but their dancing is much the same as when they
perform publicly. The dancing of the men (if it is to be called
dancing), although it does not consist much in moving the feet, as we
do, has a thousand different motions with the hands, to which we are
entire strangers; and they are performed with an ease and grace which
are not to be described, nor even conceived, but by those who have seen
them. But I need add nothing to what has been already said on this
subject, in the account of the incidents that happened during our stay
at the islands.[208]

Whether their marriages be made lasting by any kind of solemn contract,
we could not determine with precision; but it is certain, that the bulk
of the people satisfied themselves with one wife. The chiefs, however,
have commonly several women[209]; though some of us were of opinion that
there was only one that was looked upon as the mistress of the family.

As female chastity at first sight seemed to be held in no great
estimation, we expected to have found frequent breaches of their
conjugal fidelity; but we did them great injustice. I do not know that a
single instance happened during our whole stay.[210] Neither are those
of the better sort, that are unmarried, more free of their favours. It
is true there was no want of those of a different character; and,
perhaps, such are more frequently met with here, in proportion to the
number of people, than in many other countries. But it appeared to me
that the most, if not all of them, were of the lowest class; and such of
them as permitted familiarities to our people, were prostitutes by
profession.

Nothing can be a greater proof of the humanity of these people, than the
concern they show for the dead.[211] To use a common expression, their
mourning is not in words but deeds. For, besides the _tooge_ mentioned
before, and burnt circles and scars, they beat the teeth with stones,
strike a shark’s tooth into the head until the blood flows in streams,
and thrust spears into the inner part of the thigh, into their sides
below the arm-pits, and through the cheeks into the mouth. All these
operations convey an idea of such rigorous discipline, as must require
either an uncommon degree of affection or the grossest superstition, to
exact. I will not say that the last has no share in it; for, sometimes,
it is so universal, that many could not have any knowledge of the person
for whom the concern is expressed. Thus we saw the people of Tongataboo
mourning the death of a chief at Vavaoo; and other similar instances
occurred during our stay. It should be observed, however, that the more
painful operations are only practised on account of the death of those
most nearly connected with the mourners. When a person dies, he is
buried, after being wrapped up in mats and cloth, much after our manner.
The chiefs seem to have the _fiatookas_ appropriated to them as their
burial-places; but the common people are interred in no particular
spot.[212] What part of the mourning ceremony follows immediately after,
is uncertain; but, that there is something besides the general one,
which is continued for a considerable length of time, we could infer,
from being informed, that the funeral of Mareewagee’s wife, as mentioned
before, was to be attended with ceremonies that were to last five days;
and in which all the principal people were to commemorate her.

Their long and general mourning, proves that they consider death as a
very great evil. And this is confirmed by a very odd custom which they
practise to avert it. When I first visited these Islands, during my last
voyage, I observed that many of the inhabitants had one or both of their
little fingers cut off; and we could not then receive any satisfactory
account of the reason of this mutilation.[213] But we now learned that
this operation is performed when they labour under some grievous
disease, and think themselves in danger of dying. They suppose that the
deity will accept of the little finger, as a sort of sacrifice
efficacious enough to procure the recovery of their health. They cut it
off with one of their stone hatchets. There was scarcely one in ten of
them whom we did not find thus mutilated in one or both hands; which has
a disagreeable effect, especially as they sometimes cut so close, that
they encroach upon the bone of the hand which joins to the amputated
finger.[214]

From the rigid severity with which some of these mourning and religious
ceremonies are executed, one would expect to find that they meant
thereby to secure to themselves felicity beyond the grave; but their
principal object relates to things merely temporal. For they seem to
have little conception of future punishment for faults committed in this
life. They believe, however, that they are justly punished upon earth;
and, consequently, use every method to render their divinities
propitious. The Supreme Author of most things they call _Kallafootonga_;
who, they say, is a female residing in the sky, and directing the
thunder, wind, rain; and, in general, all the changes of weather. They
believe, that when she is angry with them, the productions of the earth
are blasted; that many things are destroyed by lightning; and that they
themselves are afflicted with sickness and death, as well as their hogs
and other animals. When this anger abates, they suppose that every thing
is restored to its natural order; and it should seem, that they have a
great reliance on the efficacy of their endeavours to appease their
offended divinity. They also admit a plurality of deities, though all
inferior to _Kallafootonga_. Amongst them, they mention
_Toofooa-boolootoo_, God of the clouds and fog; _Talleteboo_, and some
others, residing in the heavens. The first in rank and power, who has
the government of the sea and its productions, is called _Futtafaihe_,
or, as it was sometimes pronounced, _Footafooa_; who, they say, is a
male, and has for his wife _Fykava kajeea_; and here, as in heaven,
there are several inferior potentates, such as _Vahaa fonooa_,
_Tareeava_, _Mattaba_, _Evaroo_, and others. The same religious system,
however, does not extend all over the cluster of the Friendly Isles; for
the supreme god of _Hapaee_, for instance, is called _Alo Alo_; and
other isles have two or three, of different names. But their notions of
the power and other attributes of these beings, are so very absurd, that
they suppose they have no farther concern with them after death.

They have, however, very proper sentiments about the immateriality and
the immortality of the soul. They call it life, the living principle,
or, what is more agreeable to their notions of it, an _Otooa_; that is,
a divinity, or invisible being. They say, that, immediately upon death,
the souls of their chiefs separate from their bodies, and go to a place
called _Boolootoo_; the chief, or god of which is _Goleho_. This
_Gooleho_ seems to be a personification of death; for they used to say
to us, “You, and the men of Feejee (by this junction, meaning to pay a
compliment, expressive of their confession of our superiority over
themselves,) are also subject to the power and dominion of _Gooleho_.”
His country, the general receptacle of the dead, according to their
mythology, was never seen by any person; and yet, it seems, they know
that it lies to the westward of Feejee; and that they who are once
transported thither, live for ever; or, to use their own expression, are
not subject to death again; but feast upon all the favourite products of
their own country, with which this everlasting abode is supposed to
abound. As to the souls of the lower sort of people, they undergo a sort
of transmigration; or, as they say, are eaten up by a bird called
_loata_, which walks upon their graves for that purpose.

I think I may venture to assert, that they do not worship any thing that
is the work of their own hands, or any visible part of the creation.
They do not make offerings of hogs, dogs, and fruit, as at Otaheite,
unless it be emblematically; for their _morais_ were perfectly free from
every thing of the kind. But that they offer real human sacrifices, is
with me beyond a doubt. Their _morais_ or _fiatookas_ (for they are
called by both names, but mostly by the latter), are, as at Otaheite and
many other parts of the world, burying-grounds, and places of worship;
though some of them seemed to be only appropriated to the first purpose;
but these were small, and in every other respect inferior to the others.

Of the nature of their government, we know no more than the general
outline. A subordination is established among them, that resembles the
feudal system of our progenitors in Europe. But of its subdivisions, of
the constituent parts, and in what manner they are connected, so as to
form a body politic, I confess myself totally ignorant. Some of them
told us that the power of the king is unlimited, and that the life and
property of the subject is at his disposal. But the few circumstances
that fell under our observation, rather contradicted than confirmed the
idea of a despotic government. Mareewagee, old Tooboo, and Feenou, acted
each like petty sovereigns, and frequently thwarted the measures of the
king; of which he often complained. Neither was his court more splendid
than those of the two first, who are the most powerful chiefs in the
islands; and next to them, Feenou, Mareewagee’s son, seemed to stand
highest in authority. But, however independent on the despotic power of
the king the great men may be, we saw instances enough to prove, that
the lower order of people have no property, nor safety for their
persons, but at the will of the chiefs to whom they respectively belong.

Tongataboo is divided into many districts; of above thirty of which we
learned the names. Each of these has its particular chief, who decides
differences, and distributes justice within his own district. But we
could not form any satisfactory judgment about the extent of their power
in general, or their mode of proportioning punishments to crimes. Most
of these chiefs have possessions in other islands, from whence they draw
supplies. At least, we know this is so with respect to the king, who, at
certain established times, receives the product of his distant domains
at Tongataboo; which is not only the principal place of his residence,
but seemingly of all the people of consequence amongst these isles. Its
inhabitants, in common conversation, call it the Land of Chiefs; while
the subordinate isles are distinguished by the appellation of Lands of
Servants.

These chiefs are, by the people, styled not only lords of the earth, but
of the sun and sky; and the king’s family assume the name of Futtafaihe,
from the god so called, who is probably their tutelary patron, and
perhaps their common ancestor. The sovereign’s peculiar earthly title
is, however, simply _Tooee Tonga_.

There is a decorum observed in the presence of their principal men, and
particularly of their king, that is truly admirable. Whenever he sits
down, whether it be in a house or without, all the attendants seat
themselves at the same time, in a semicircle before him; leaving always
a convenient space between him and them, into which no one attempts to
come, unless he has some particular business. Neither is any one allowed
to pass or sit behind him, nor even near him, without his order or
permission; so that our having been indulged with this privilege, was a
significant proof of the great respect that was paid us. When any one
wants to speak with the king, he advances and sits down before him,
delivers what he has to say in a few words, and having received his
answer, retires again to the circle. But if the king speaks to any one,
that person answers from his seat, unless he is to receive some order,
in which case he gets up from his place and sits down before the chief
with his legs across; which is a posture to which they are so much
accustomed, that any other mode of sitting is disagreeable to them.[215]
To speak to the king standing would be accounted here as striking a mark
of rudeness, as it would be with us, for one to sit down and put on his
hat, when he addresses himself to his superior, and that superior on his
feet, and uncovered.

It does not indeed appear that any of the most civilized nations, have
ever exceeded this people in the great order observed on all occasions;
in ready compliance with the commands of their chiefs; and in the
harmony that subsists throughout all ranks, and unites them as if they
were all one man, informed with and directed by the same principle. Such
a behaviour is remarkably obvious, whenever it is requisite that their
chief should harangue any body of them collected together, which is
frequently done. The most profound silence and attention is observed
during the harangue, even to a much greater degree than is practised
amongst us, on the most interesting and serious deliberations of our
most respectable assemblies. And whatever might have been the subject of
the speech delivered, we never saw an instance when any individual
present showed signs of his being displeased, or that indicated the
least inclination to dispute the declared will of a person who had a
right to command. Nay, such is the force of these verbal laws, as I may
call them, that I have seen one of their chiefs express his being
astonished at a person’s having acted contrary to such orders; though it
appeared that the poor man could not possibly have been informed in time
to have observed them.[216]

Though some of the more potent chiefs may vie with the king in point of
actual possessions, they fall very short in rank, and in certain marks
of respect, which the collective body have agreed to pay the monarch. It
is a particular privilege annexed to his sovereignty, not to be
punctured nor circumcised as all his subjects are. Whenever he walks
out, every one whom he meets must sit down till he has passed. No one is
allowed to be over his head; on the contrary, all must come under his
feet; for there cannot be a greater outward mark of submission, than
that which is paid to the sovereign, and other great people of these
islands, by their inferiors. The method is this; the person who is to
pay obeisance squats down before the chief, and bows the head to the
sole of his foot; which, when he sits, is so placed that it can be
easily come at; and having tapped, or touched it with the under and
upper side of the fingers of both hands, he rises up and retires. It
should seem, that the king cannot refuse any one who chooses to pay him
this homage, which is called _moe moea_; for the common people would
frequently take it into their heads to do it when he was walking; and he
was always obliged to stop, and hold up one of his feet behind him, till
they had performed the ceremony. This, to a heavy unwieldy man, like
Poulaho, must be attended with some trouble and pain; and I have
sometimes seen him make a run, though very unable, to get out of the
way, or to reach a place where he might conveniently sit down. The
hands, after this application of them to the chief’s feet, are, in some
cases, rendered useless for a time; for, until they be washed, they must
not touch any kind of food. This interdiction in a country where water
is so scarce, would seem to be attended with some inconvenience; but
they are never at a loss for a succedaneum; and a piece of any juicy
plant, which they can easily procure immediately, being rubbed upon
them, this serves for the purpose of purification, as well as washing
them with water. When the hands are in this state, they call it _taboo
rema_. _Taboo_, in general, signifies forbidden, and _rema_ is their
word for hand.

When the _taboo_ is incurred by paying obeisance to a great personage,
it is thus easily washed off. But in some other cases it must
necessarily continue for a certain time. We have frequently seen women,
who have been _taboo rema_, fed by others. At the expiration of the
time, the interdicted person washes herself in one of their baths, which
are dirty holes, for the most part, of brackish water. She then waits
upon the king, and after making her obeisance in the usual way, lays
hold of his foot and applies it to her breast, shoulders, and other
parts of her body. He then embraces her on each shoulder; after which
she retires purified from her uncleanness. I do not know that it is
always necessary to come to the king for this purpose, though Omai
assured me it was. If this be so, it may be one reason why he is, for
the most part, travelling from island to island. I saw this ceremony
performed by him two or three times; and once by Feenou, to one of his
own women; but as Omai was not then with me, I could not ask the
occasion.

_Taboo_, as I have before observed, is a word of an extensive
signification. Human sacrifices are called _tangata taboo_; and when any
thing is forbidden to be eaten, or made use of, they say that it is
_taboo_. They tell us, that if the king should happen to go into a house
belonging to a subject, that house would be _taboo_, and could never
more be inhabited by the owner; so that wherever he travels, there are
particular houses for his reception. Old Toobou, at this time, presided
over the _taboo_; that is, if Omai comprehended the matter rightly, he
and his deputies inspected all the produce of the island; taking care
that every man should cultivate and plant his quota; and ordering what
should be eaten, and what not. By this wise regulation they effectually
guard against a famine; a sufficient quantity of ground is employed in
raising provisions; and every article thus raised, is secured from
unnecessary waste.

By another prudent regulation in their government, they have an officer
over the police, or something like it. This department, when we were
amongst them, was administered by Feenou; whose business we were told it
was to punish all offenders, whether against the state or against
individuals. He was also generalissimo, and commanded the warriors, when
called out upon service; but, by all accounts, this is very seldom. The
king frequently took some pains to inform us of Feenou’s office; and
among other things, told us that if he himself should become a bad man,
Feenou would kill him. What I understood by this expression of being a
bad man, was, that if he did not govern according to law or custom,
Feenou would be ordered, by the other great men, or by the people at
large, to put him to death. There should seem to be no doubt, that a
sovereign, thus liable to be controled and punished for an abuse of
power, cannot be called a despotic monarch.

When we consider the number of islands that compose this little state,
and the distance at which some of them lie from the seat of government,
attempts to throw off the yoke, and to acquire independency, it should
seem, might be apprehended; but they tell us that this never happens.
One reason why they are not thus disturbed, by domestic quarrels, may be
this; that all the powerful chiefs, as we have already mentioned, reside
at Tongataboo. They also secure the dependence of the other islands by
the celerity of their operations; for if, at any time, a troublesome and
popular man should start up in any of them, Feenou, or whoever holds his
office, is immediately dispatched thither to kill him. By this means,
they crush a rebellion in its very infancy.

The orders or classes amongst their chiefs, or those who call themselves
such, seemed to be almost as numerous as amongst us; but there are few
in comparison that are lords of large districts of territory, the rest
holding their lands under those principal barons, as they may be called.
I was indeed told that when a man of property dies, every thing he
leaves behind him falls to the king; but that it is usual to give it to
the eldest son of the deceased, with an obligation to make a provision
out of it for the rest of the children. It is not the custom here, as at
Otaheite, for the son, the moment he is born, to take from the father
the homage and title; but he succeeds to them at his decease; so that
their form of government is not only monarchical but hereditary.

The order of succession to the crown has not been of late interrupted;
for we know from a particular circumstance, that the Futtafaihes
(Poulaho being only an addition to distinguish the king from the rest of
his family) have reigned in a direct line, for at least one hundred and
thirty-five years. Upon inquiring whether any account had been preserved
amongst them of the arrival of Tasman’s ships, we found that this
history had been handed down to them from their ancestors, with an
accuracy which marks that oral tradition may sometimes be depended upon.
For they described the two ships as resembling ours, mentioning the
place where they had anchored; their having staid but a few days; and
their moving from that station to Annamooka. And by way of informing us
how long ago this had happened, they told us the name of the Futtafaihe
who was then king, and of those who had succeeded down to Poulaho, who
is the fifth since that period; the first being an old man, at the time
of the arrival of the ships.

From what has been said of the present king, it would be natural to
suppose, that he had the highest rank of any person in the islands. But
to our great surprise, we found it is not so; for Latoolibooloo, the
person who was pointed out to me as king when I first visited
Tongataboo, and three women, are, in some respects, superior to Poulaho
himself. On our inquiring who these extraordinary personages were, whom
they distinguish by the name and title of _Tammaha_[217]? we were told
that the late king, Poulaho’s father, had a sister of equal rank, and
elder than himself; that she, by a man who came from the island of
Feejee, had a son and two daughters; and that these three persons, as
well as their mother, rank above Futtafaihe the king. We endeavoured, in
vain, to trace the reason of this singular preeminence of the
_Tammahas_; for we could learn nothing besides this account of their
pedigree. The mother and one of the daughters, called Tooeela-kaipa,
live at Vavaoo. Latoolibooloo, the son, and the other daughter, whose
name is Moungoula-kaipa, reside at Tongataboo. The latter is the woman
who is mentioned to have dined with me on the 21st of June. This gave
occasion to our discovering her superiority over the king, who would not
eat in her presence, though she made no scruple to do so before him, and
received from him the customary obeisance, by touching her foot. We
never had an opportunity of seeing him pay this mark of respect to
Latoolibooloo; but we have observed him leave off eating, and have his
victuals put aside, when the latter came into the same house.
Latoolibooloo assumed the privilege of taking any thing from the people,
even if it belonged to the king; and yet in the ceremony called
_Natche_, he assisted only in the same manner as the other principal
men. He was looked upon by his countrymen, as a madman; and many of his
actions seemed to confirm this judgment. At Eooa, they showed me a good
deal of land, said to belong to him; and I saw there a son of his, a
child whom they distinguished by the same title as his father. The son
of the greatest Prince in Europe could not be more humoured and caressed
than this little _Tammaha_ was.

The language of the Friendly Islands has the greatest affinity
imaginable to that of New Zealand, of Wateeoo, and Mangeea; and,
consequently, to that of Otaheite, and the Society islands. There are
also many of their words the same with those used by the natives of
Cocos Island, as appears from the vocabulary collected there by Le Maire
and Schouten.[218] The mode of pronunciation differs, indeed,
considerably, in many instances, from that both of New Zealand and
Otaheite; but still a great number of words are either exactly the same,
or so little changed, that their common original may be satisfactorily
traced. The language, as spoken at the Friendly Islands, is sufficiently
copious for all the ideas of the people; and we had many proofs of its
being easily adapted to all musical purposes, both in song and in
recitative; besides being harmonious enough in common conversation. Its
component parts, as far as our scanty acquaintance with it enabled us to
judge, are not numerous; and in some of its rules, it agrees with other
known languages. As, for instance, we could easily discern the several
degrees of comparison, as used in the Latin; but none of the inflections
of nouns and verbs.

We were able to collect several hundreds of the words; and, amongst
these, are terms that express numbers as far as a hundred thousand;
beyond which they never would reckon. It is probable, indeed, that they
are not able to go farther; for, after having got thus far, we observed
that they commonly used a word which expresses an indefinite number. A
short specimen, selected from the larger vocabulary, is here inserted,
with the corresponding words, of the same signification as used at
Otaheite, on the opposite column; which, while it will give, as we may
say, ocular demonstration of their being dialects of the same language,
will, at the same time, point out the particular letters by the
insertion, omission, or alteration of which the variations of the two
dialects from each other have been effected.

It must be observed, however, that our vocabularies of this sort must
necessarily be liable to great mistakes. The ideas of those from whom we
were to learn the words were so different from ours, that it was
difficult to fix them to the object of inquiry. Or, if this could be
obtained, to learn an unknown tongue from an instructor who did not know
a single word of any language that his scholar was conversant with,
could not promise to produce much. But even, when these difficulties
were surmounted, there still remained a fruitful source of mistake. I
mean, inaccuracy in catching exactly the true sound of a word to which
our ears had never been accustomed, from persons whose mode of
pronunciation was, in general, so indistinct, that it seldom happened
that any two of us, in writing down the same word from the same mouth,
made use of the same vowels in representing it. Nay, we even very
commonly differed about consonants, the sounds of which are least liable
to ambiguity. Besides all this, we found, by experience, that we had
been led into strange corruptions of some of the most common words,
either from the natives endeavouring to imitate us, or from our having
misunderstood them. Thus, _cheeto_ was universally used by us to express
a thief, though totally different from the real word in the language of
Tongataboo. The mistake arose from a prior one into which we had ran
when at New Zealand; for though the word that signifies thief there, be
absolutely the same that belongs to the dialect of the Friendly Islands
(being _kaeehaa_ at both places), yet, by some blunder, we had used the
word _teete_ first at New Zealand, and afterward at Tongataboo, on our
arrival there. The natives, endeavouring to imitate us as nearly as they
could, and so fabricating the word _cheeto_, this, by a complication of
mistakes, was adopted by us as their own. All possible care has been
taken to make the following table as correct as possible:

     English.             _Friendly Islands._  _Otaheite._

     _The sun_,           Elaa,                Eraa.

     _Fire_,              Eafoi,               Eahoi.

     _Thunder_,           Fatoore,             Pateere.

     _Rain_,              Ooha,                Eooa.

     _The wind_,          Matangee,            Mataee.

     _Warm_,              Mafanna,             Mahanna.

     _The clouds_,        Ao,                  Eao.

     _Land_,              Fonooa,              Fenooa.

     _Water_,             Avy,                 Evy.

     _Sleep_,             Mohe,                Moe.

     _A man_,             Tangata,             Taata.

     _A woman_,           Vefaine,             Waheine.

     _A young girl_,      Taheine,             Toonea.

     _A servant_, or
     _person of mean
     rank_,               Tooa,                Toutou, _or_ teou.

     _The dawn_, or
     _day-break_,         Aho,                 Aou.

     _The hair_,          Fooroo,              Eroroo.

     _The tongue_,        Elelo,               Erero.

     _The ear_,           Tareenga,            Tareea.

     _The beard_,         Koomoo,              Ooma.

     _The sea_,           Tahee,               Taee.

     _A boat_, or
     _canoe_,             Wakka,               Evaa.

     _Black_,             Oole,                Ere.

     _Red_,               Goola,               Oora, oora.

     _A lance or spear_,  Tao,                 Tao.

     _A parent_,          Motooa,              Madooa.

     _What is that?_      Kohaeea?             Yahaeea?

     _To hold fast_,      Amou,                Mou.

     _To wipe or clean
     any thing_           Horo,                Horoee.

     _To rise up_,        Etoo,                Atoo.

     _To cry or shed
     tears_,              Tangee,              Taee.

     _To eat_ or _chew_,  Eky,                 Ey.

     _Yes_,               Ai,                  Ai.

     _No_,                Kaee,                Aee.

     _You_,               Koe,                 Oe.

     _I_,                 Ou,                  Wou.

     _Ten_,               Ongofooro,           Ahooroo.

Having now concluded my remarks on these islands and people, I shall
take my final leave of them, after giving some account of the
astronomical and nautical observations that were made during our stay.

And first I must take notice, that the difference of longitude between
Annamooka and Tongataboo, is somewhat less than was marked in the chart
and narrative of my last voyage. This error might easily arise, as the
longitude of each was then found without any connection with the other.
But now the distance between them is determined to a degree of precision
that excludes all possibility of mistake; which the following table will
illustrate:

 The latitude of the observatory at Tongataboo, by
   the mean of several observations,                 21°   8ʹ  19ʺ south.

 The longitude, by the mean of one hundred and
   thirty-one sets of lunar observations, amounting
   to above a thousand observed distances, between
   the moon, sun, and stars,                        184°  55ʹ  18ʺ east.

 The difference of longitude, made by the
   time-keeper, between the above observatory, and
   that at Annamooka,                                  0   16    0

 Hence, the longitude of Annamooka is                185   11   18 east.

 By the time-keeper it is, Greenwich rate,           186   12   27

 New Zealand rate,                                   184   37    0

 Its latitude                                         20   15    0

N. B.—The observatory at Tongataboo was near the middle of the north
side of the island; and that it Annamooka, on its west side; but the
chart will elucidate this.

The time-keeper was too slow for mean time at Greenwich, on the first of
July at noon, by 12^h 34^m 33^s,2; and her daily rate, at that time, was
loosing, on mean time, 1^m,783 _per_ day. This rate will now be used for
finding the longitude by the time-keeper; and 184° 55ʹ 18ʺ, or 12^h 19^m
41^s,2, will be taken as the true longitude of Tongataboo, east from
Greenwich.

By the mean of several observations, the south end of the needle was
found to dip

    {Lefooga, one of the Hapaee
 At {  islands,                      36° 55ʹ
    {Tongataboo,                     39   1-1/2

The variation of the compass was found to be,

    {Annamooka, on board,             8° 30ʹ  3-1/2ʺ east.
    {Anchor off Kotoo, between }
 At {  Annamooka and Hapaee,   }      8  12  29-1/2
    {Anchor off Lefooga,             10  11  40
    {Tongataboo, on board,            9  44   5-1/2
    {Ditto, on shore,                10  12  58

The variation of the compass was found to be,

I can assign no reason why the variation is so much less at and near
Annamooka, than at either of the other two places. I can only say, that
there is no fault in the observations; and that the variation ought to
be more at Annamooka than the above, as it has been found to be so to
the northward, southward, eastward, and westward of it. But
disagreements in the variation, greater than this, even in the same
needle, have been often observed. And I should not have taken notice of
this instance, but from a belief that the cause, whatever it is, exists
in the place, and not in the needles; for Mr. Bayly found the same, or
rather more difference.

The tides are more considerable at these islands, than at any other of
my discoveries in this ocean, that lie within the tropics. At Annamooka
it is high water, on the full and change days, nearly at six o’clock;
and the tide rises and falls there, upon a perpendicular, about six
feet. In the harbour of Tongataboo, it is high water, on the full and
change days, at fifty minutes past six. The tide rises and falls on
those days, four feet nine inches; and three feet six inches at the
Quadratures. In the channels between the islands, which lie in this
harbour, it flows near tide and half-tide; that is, the flood continues
to run up near three hours, after it is high water by the shore; and the
ebb continues to run down, after it is flood by the shore. It is only in
these channels, and in a few other places near the shores, that the
motion of the water or tide is perceivable; so that I can only guess at
the quarter from which the flood comes. In the road of Annamooka, it
sets west south-west, and the ebb the contrary; but it tails into the
harbour of Tongataboo from the north-west, passes through the two narrow
channels, on each side of Hoolaiva, where it runs with considerable
rapidity, and then spends itself in the _lagoon_. The ebb returns the
same way, and runs with rather greater force. The north-west tide is met
at the entrance of the _lagoon_, by one from the east; but this, as I
have before observed, was found to be very inconsiderable.

                        END OF THE FIFTH VOLUME.

                                LONDON:

                    Printed by A. & R. Spottiswoode,
                           New-Street-Square.

                               Footnotes

Footnote 1:

  Two voyages for discovering a North-West passage, through Hudson’s
  Bay, were then performed; one under the command of Captain Middleton,
  in his Majesty’s ships the Furnace, and the Discovery Pink, in 1741
  and 1742; the other under the direction of Captains Smith and Moore,
  in the ships Dobbs and California, fitted out by subscription, in 1746
  and 1747.

Footnote 2:

  Captain, now Admiral, Byron had under his command the Dolphin and
  Tamer. He sailed in June, 1764, and returned in May, 1766.

Footnote 3:

  Captain Wallis had under his command the Dolphin and Swallow. He
  sailed in August, 1766, and returned, with the Dolphin, in May, 1768.

Footnote 4:

  The Swallow, commanded by Captain Carteret, having been separated from
  Wallis, and, by keeping a different route, having made different
  discoveries, this may be considered as a distinct voyage. The Swallow
  returned to England in March 1769.

Footnote 5:

  Captain Cook, in the Endeavour, sailed in August 1768, and returned in
  July, 1771.

  In his second voyage, he had the Resolution and Adventure under his
  command. They sailed from England in July, 1772, and returned on the
  30th of July, 1775.

Footnote 6:

  The account of the four first of these voyages, compiled by Dr.
  Hawkesworth, from the Journals of the several commanders, was
  published in 1772, in three volumes quarto; and Captain Cook’s own
  account of the fifth, in 1777, in two volumes quarto.

Footnote 7:

  See Lord Anson’s Voyage, quarto edition, p. 91.

Footnote 8:

  These are Captain Cook’s words, _Introduction to his Voyage_, vol.
  iii. p. 7.; and the evidence on which he forms this judgment may be
  met with in Hawkesworth’s Journal of Byron’s Voyage, vol. i. p. 23,
  24, 51, 52, 53, 54.

Footnote 9:

  See the Chart of Discoveries in the South Atlantic. Cook’s Voyage,
  vol. iv. p. 211.

Footnote 10:

  Magalhaen’s Voyage was undertaken in 1519.

Footnote 11:

  See the particulars of their discoveries in Mr. Dalrymple’s valuable
  Collection of Voyages in the South Pacific Ocean.

Footnote 12:

  Bougainville, in 1768, did no more than discover that the land here
  was not connected but composed of islands. Captain Cook, in 1774,
  explored the whole group. See vol. iv. p. 88.

Footnote 13:

  Vol. iv. p. 219.

Footnote 14:

  See vols. i. and ii.

Footnote 15:

  See vol. ii. p. 69.

Footnote 16:

  Vol. iii. chap. 7.

Footnote 17:

  Vol. ii. p. 202.

Footnote 18:

  From October 6. 1769, to March 31. 1770.

Footnote 19:

  Its southern extremity nearly in latitude 47°, and its northern in
  35-1/2°. See Captain Cook’s chart, in Hawkesworth, vol. ii. p. 281.

Footnote 20:

  See the track of Torré, in one of Quiros’s ships, in 1606, between New
  Holland and New Guinea, upon Mr. Dalrymple’s Chart of Discoveries in
  the South Pacific Ocean, before 1764.

Footnote 21:

  M. de Brosses says of New Guinea: “C’est une longue isle, ou presqu’
  isle, si elle touche à la Nouvelle Hollande.” _Navigations aux Terres
  Australes_, tom. i. p. 434.

Footnote 22:

  “Le triste état où nous étions réduits, ne nous permettoit de chercher
  en faisant route a l’ouest, un passage au sud de la Nouvelle Guinée,
  qui nous frayât par le Golfe de la Carpenterie une route nouvelle &
  courte aux iles Moluques. _Rien n’étoit à la vérité plus problématique
  que l’existence de ce passage._” Voyage autour du Monde, p. 259.

Footnote 23:

  Hawkesworth, vol. iii. p. 660.

Footnote 24:

  Hawkesworth, vol. i. p. 563.

Footnote 25:

  The position of the Solomon Islands, Mendana’s celebrated discovery,
  will no longer remain a matter in debate amongst geographers, Mr.
  Dalrymple having, on the most satisfactory evidence, proved, that they
  are the cluster of islands which comprizes what has since been called
  New Britain, New Ireland, &c. The great light thrown on that cluster
  by Captain Carteret’s discovery, is a strong confirmation of this. See
  Mr. Dalrymple’s Collection of Voyages, vol. i. p. 16-21.

Footnote 26:

  It must be observed, however, that Monsieur le Monier, in the Memoirs
  of the French Academy of Sciences for 1776, pleads for the existence
  of Cape Circumcision, seen by Bouvet in 1738, which our English
  navigator sought for in vain, and supposes to have been only an island
  of ice. Mr. Wales, in a paper read before the Royal Society, very
  forcibly replied to M. le Monier’s objections; and the attack having
  been repeated, he has drawn up a more extended defence of this part of
  Captain Cook’s Journal, which he hath very obligingly communicated,
  and is here inserted.

  _Arguments, tending to prove that Captain Cook sought for Cape
  Circumcision under the proper Meridian; and that the objections which
  have been made to his conduct, in this respect, are not well founded._

  In the Memoirs of the Royal Academy of Sciences at Paris for 1776,
  printed in 1779, _M. Le Monier_ has made some remarks with a design to
  show that Captain Cook sought the land, usually called Cape
  Circumcision, in a wrong place; and that, instead of looking for it
  under the meridian of 9-1/2° or 10° of east longitude, he ought to
  have looked for it under a meridian which is only 3°, or 3-1/2° to the
  eastward of the meridian of Greenwich; and consequently that this land
  may exist, notwithstanding all that has yet been done to find it. _M.
  Le Monier_ has also two additional Memoirs on the same subject, in the
  volume for 1779, occasioned, as it appears, by some objections which
  have been made to his former Memoir before the Academy. For some
  reason or other, the Academy has not thought proper to print the
  objections which have been made to _M. Le Monier_’s hypothesis; nor
  has he been particular enough in his two Memoirs which reply to them,
  to enable me to say of what importance the objections are. I can only
  gather, that they contain some exceptions to the quantity by which _M.
  Le Monier_ asserts the variation alters in 10° of longitude, under the
  parallel of 54° south; and which, I conceive, has little to do in the
  dispute.

  Whether the land, usually called Cape Circumcision, exists or not, is
  a point of small importance to geography; as the most strenuous
  asserters of its existence must allow it to be a very inconsiderable
  island, and of no use. This, therefore, is not in itself a matter
  worthy of dispute; but in asserting this, _M. Le Monier_ has, and I am
  sorry to observe it, with some asperity too, particularly in his
  second Memoir, endeavoured to censure the judgment and conduct of
  Captain Cook, whose memory I have every reason to revere, as well as
  the judgment of those who were with him; and, on this account, I
  cannot help feeling myself called on to explain the motives which
  induced _Captain Cook_ to place no dependence on the arguments now
  adduced by _M. Le Monier_ in support of his supposition; and which,
  _M. Le Monier_ must know, were not unattended to at that time, from
  what the Captain has said, p. 236. Vol. II. of his account of the
  voyage. And it may be proper to observe here, that what fell from
  _Captain Cook_ on this subject, was to show that this circumstance was
  then attended to, and not to throw blame on _M. Bouvet_, for whose
  memory and abilities _Captain Cook_ entertained great respect: nor is
  it incompatible with the utmost respect, for a man to have a
  favourable opinion of his own labours; or to endeavour to show why he
  thinks the disagreement between them and those of another person, when
  there is one, does not arise from an error committed by himself. There
  could, therefore, be no occasion for _M. Le Monier_ to express himself
  as he has done in several parts of his second Memoir.

  The substance of _M. Le Monier_’s argument is this. In 1739, when _M.
  Bouvet_’s discovery is supposed to have been made, the methods for
  determining the longitude of a ship at sea were very defective; and,
  of course, the longitude of any land which happened accidentally to be
  seen by one, was equally uncertain. On a presumption that this was the
  case with respect to Cape Circumcision, _M. Le Monier_ enquires into
  the quantity of the variation of the magnetic needle, observed by M.
  Bouvet at that place, and also into observations of the same kind,
  made at other places in the neighbourhood of it, about the same time,
  as well as both before and since. And by comparing these observations
  together, he concludes, that at the time when Captain Cook was in
  these seas, the variation of the needle at Cape Circumcision must have
  been 10° westerly: whereas, in the most westerly point of Captain
  Cook’s track, where he was sufficiently near the parallel of 54°
  south, to have seen land situated in it, the variation was 13-1/2°
  westerly. This difference of 3-1/2°, in the variation, answers to
  about 7° of longitude, in this part of the parallel of 54° south: and
  by so much did Captain Cook fall in with this parallel to the eastward
  of what he ought to have done to see the land in question. “Hence (M.
  Le Monier infers), that it is not surprising the British navigator
  should not find Cape Circumcision under a meridian which is 28-1/2° to
  the eastward of Ferro, when it is really situated under a meridian
  which is but 21-1/2° to the eastward of it.”

  In replying to these allegations, I shall first show, that, granting
  the dependence which _M. Le Monier_ supposes may be placed on
  observations of the variation made at sea, he has stated the quantity
  of the variation observed on board the Resolution, very erroneously.

  Secondly, I shall prove, beyond contradiction, that observations of
  the variation, made at sea, cannot be depended on for the purposes to
  which _M. Le Monier_ has applied them.

  And, lastly, that no material error had crept into _M. Bouvet_’s
  reckoning; but that if any error did exist, it must have been of a
  contrary nature to that which _M. Le Monier_ supposes.

  That _M. Le Monier_ has not given altogether a true representation of
  the matter, will appear from hence. On the 16th of February, at
  noon[27], the Resolution was in latitude 54° 31-1/2ʹ south, which is
  sufficiently near the parallel of 54° south, to see high land, the
  northern extremity of which lies to the southward of that parallel;
  and at that time we were in 6° east of Greenwich, or 23-3/4° east of
  the island of Ferro: that is, 4-3/4° less than is assigned for our
  situation by _M. Le Monier_. On the evening of the same day, the ship
  being in latitude 54° 24ʹ, and longitude 6° 30ʹ, or 24-1/4° east of
  Ferro, the variation was no more than 12° 7ʹ west, which also is near
  a degree and a half less then _M. Le Monier_ says it was, when we
  first arrived in a proper parallel for seeing Cape Circumcision. It is
  true, the next morning, in latitude 54° 21-1/2ʹ south, longitude 8° 6ʹ
  east, we had 13° 42ʹ west variation; but this was after we had run
  more than two degrees within sight of the parallel of 54° south. It
  is, moreover, highly probable, that both these variations were too
  great; for, on the 17th, in the evening, latitude 54° 25ʹ south, and
  longitude 9° 20ʹ east; that is, 1-1/4° more to the eastward, and after
  we had run 3-1/3° on the parallel we were then on, the variation was
  no more than 13° 16ʹ west. It is also worthy of remark, that on the
  14th, in the evening, latitude 56° 14-1/2ʹ south, and longitude 4° 50ʹ
  east, which is but 1° 10ʹ to the westward of the point, where the
  Resolution came first into a proper situation to see land, situated in
  the parallel of 54° south, the variation observed was no more than 6°
  50ʹ west. And we may further add, that on the 1st of March, 1774, the
  Adventure had no more than 12-3/4° west variation, though she was then
  considerably both to the northward and eastward of our situation on
  the 17th of February in the morning, on both which accounts the
  variation ought to have been greater, instead of a whole degree less.
  From all these circumstances, there can be little doubt but that the
  two variations, observed by us on the 16th and 17th of February, were
  too great; or that the variation, at the point where the Resolution
  first came sufficiently near the parallel of 54° south, to see land,
  the northern extremity of which is situated in that parallel, could
  not be more than 11-1/2° west, instead of 13-1/2°, as _M. le Monier_
  has represented it.

  Under this head of enquiry, I may also observe, that, although the
  Resolution was too much to the southward of the parallel of 54° south,
  when she crossed the meridian which is 21-1/2° to the eastward of
  Ferro, that is, 3-3/4° east of Greenwich, the longitude which _M. Le
  Monier_ assigns for Cape Circumcision, to see if it had been in that
  situation, yet her consort, the Adventure, was for several degrees on
  each side of that meridian; and especially when she had 10-1/2° of
  west variation, full as near to the parallel of 54° south as _M.
  Bouvet_ was to the land when he saw it[28]; and on the day that she
  actually passed that meridian, had fine clear weather.[29] Hence,
  therefore, granting _M. Le Monier_ his own arguments, which, however,
  I have proved to be erroneous, and that observations made at sea, for
  the variation of the compass, may be depended on for the purpose of
  finding the longitude, it is utterly impossible that both the
  Resolution and Adventure could have passed Cape Circumcision without
  seeing it. But I shall now show, that these observations are liable to
  a much greater error than the whole quantity, so vigorously insisted
  on by this gentleman.

  I will not here run the risk of incurring _M. Le Monier_’s
  displeasure, by calling the accuracy of _M. Bouvet_’s observations in
  question; but will admit every thing that he himself can think due to
  the instruments and observations of that deserving navigator. It is
  enough for my argument, and it is but too evident from the
  observations themselves, that ours were by no means capable of
  determining the variation to so small a quantity as that which _M. Le
  Monier_ rests his whole cause upon; and if so, his arguments, which
  depend wholly on a supposition, that not only they, but _M. Bouvet_’s
  also, were capable of determining it with the utmost exactness, must
  fall to the ground.

  1st, It appears, from various instances, that the variations observed
  by the same compass would differ 3° to 5°, 6°, and sometimes even 10°,
  from no other cause whatever, but putting the ship’s head a contrary
  way.[30]

  2d, That the same compass, in the same situation in every respect,
  within a few miles, but at two different times of the same day, would
  give variations differing from one another, 3°, 4°, 5°, 6°, and even
  7°[31].

  3d, That the same compass, on the same day, and in the hands of the
  same observer, will give variations differing from one another by 5°,
  on board the same ship, when under sail, and when at anchor in a
  road-stead.[32]

  4th, Compasses made by the same artists at the same time and place,
  but on board different ships, differed 3°, 4°, and even 5° in the
  variation.[33]

  5th, The same compasses, on board the same ship, and within a few
  miles of the same situation, but at different times of our being
  there, gave variations differing by 4° and 5°, or upwards.[34]

  6th, Different compasses, at the same time, on board the same ship,
  and in every respect under the same circumstances, will give
  variations differing from one another, 3°, 4°, 5°, and 6°.[35]

  These differences, several of which happened very near the place in
  question, are all of them at least equal to, most of them much
  greater, and some of them double that which _M. Le Monier_ founds his
  argument on, even according to his own account of it, which I have
  already shown is by no means admissible, and, therefore, totally
  invalidate it. To allege that the instruments made use of in Captain
  Cook’s two voyages were bad, or that the observers were not expert in
  the use of them, will answer no purpose: they are the instruments and
  observers which _M. Le Monier_’s argument must rest on; and,
  therefore, let those of the French, or any other navigator, have been
  ever so much better than they were (which few will be hardy enough to
  assert, and fewer still found weak enough to believe), it will avail
  nothing to the point in dispute, which must evidently fall to the
  ground, if the observations made for finding the variation in Captain
  Cook’s voyage are not sufficient to support it. What then must become
  of it, if _M. Bouvet_’s observations, of this kind, were liable to an
  equal, or a greater error? which, without any reasonable cause for
  offence, we might suppose they were.

  It is not necessary to account for these differences in the observed
  variations in this place, nor yet to point out the reasons why such
  anomalies have not been noticed in observations of this kind before. I
  shall, however, remark, that I have hinted at some of the causes in my
  introduction to the observations which were made in Captain Cook’s
  second voyage; and many others will readily offer themselves to
  persons who have had much practice in making these observations, and
  who have attentively considered the principles on which the
  instruments are constructed, and the manner in which they are
  fabricated. Nor is it at all surprising, that the errors to which the
  instruments and observations of this kind are liable, should not have
  been discovered before, since no navigators before us ever gave the
  same opportunity, by multiplying their observations, and making them
  under such a variety of circumstances as we did.

  Having now fully shown, that the circumstances, brought forward by _M.
  Le Monier_, in support of his argument, are neither such as can be
  depended on, nor yet fairly represented, I shall next attempt to
  demonstrate, that it is utterly improbable M. Bouvet could be out, in
  his account of longitude, so much as is here supposed, in the short
  run which had been made from the island of St. Catherine, the place
  they took their departure from: on the contrary, that there is
  sufficient reason to believe the error, of whatever magnitude it might
  be, was of a different nature from that contended for, and that the
  two ships, instead of being to the westward of their account of
  longitude, were actually to the eastward of it. For according to their
  journals, extracted from the archives of the French East-India
  Company, by _M. D’ Apres_, printed under his inspection, and published
  by Mr. Dalrymple, F. R. S. amongst other voyages made for the purpose
  of examining the southern parts of the Atlantic Ocean, the longitude,
  according to the Eagle’s run from St. Catherine’s, was, 26° 27ʹ, and
  according to the Mary’s, 26° 20ʹ east of Teneriff; that is, 9° 57ʹ,
  and 9° 50ʹ east of Greenwich, or 27° 43ʹ, and 27° 36ʹ east of Ferro.
  But the Mary, which went to the Cape of Good Hope, made 7° 13ʹ east
  longitude from the land in question, to that place. Consequently the
  Cape of Good Hope being in longitude 18° 23ʹ east of Greenwich, Cape
  Circumcision will be in 11° 10ʹ east of Greenwich, or 1° 20ʹ more to
  the eastward than the run by the same ship from the island of St.
  Catherine’s makes it. Again the Eagle made the difference of longitude
  between Cape Circumcision and the island of Rodrigues 49° 44ʹ; and by
  the observations of _M. Pingre_, this island is in 62° 50ʹ of east
  longitude from Greenwich: Cape Circumcision is therefore in 13° 6ʹ
  east of Greenwich, or 2° 9ʹ more to the eastward than by the Eagle’s
  run from St. Catherine’s. Hence, therefore, as the longitude of this
  land resulting from a comparison of that shown by each of the ships,
  on their making land at places where the longitude is exceedingly well
  determined, is greater than that which results from their run from St.
  Catherine’s, the longitude of which is not known with certainty within
  several degrees, we may infer, with great safety, that whatever the
  quantity of M. Bouvet’s error might be, when he is supposed to have
  seen Cape Circumcision, it must have been in defect, and not in
  excess, as _M. Le Monier_ supposes it.

  CHRIST’S HOSPITAL,
  April 20. 1784.         W. WALES.

Footnote 27:

  I here go by the dates in “The Original Astronomical Observations,”
  printed by order of the Board of Longitude; which, after the 14th of
  February, 1775, differ one day from Captain Cook’s date.

Footnote 28:

  See The Original Astronomical Observations, p. 185., and Bouvet’s
  Voyage, published by Mr. Dalrymple, p. 4. and 11.

Footnote 29:

  See the Observations p. 218.

Footnote 30:

  See the Original Astronomical Observations, made in the second voyage,
  March 11. 1773, p. 372., January 24. 1774, p. 375., and July 28. p.
  378.

Footnote 31:

  Observations in the second voyage, February 2. 1773, p. 371., and
  January 19. 1775, p. 382. Also observations in last voyage, July 17.
  1776, p. 179 August 30. p. 131., January 24. 1777, p. 192., and
  September 15. 1778 p. 205.

Footnote 32:

  Astronomical Observations of second voyage, July 14. 1775, p. 385.

Footnote 33:

  Compare the Astronomical Observations, made in the second voyage,
  August 8. and 9. and September 4. 1772, p. 181., with those of the
  same dates, p. 369. Those of January 11. and 14. and February 7. 1773,
  p. 182., with those of the same dates, p. 371. Also Astronomical
  Observations, made in the last voyage, of December 27. 1776, p. 191,
  February 22. 1778, p. 201., May 5. and 8. p. 102, July 9. and 24.
  1779, p. 209., and January 16. 1780, p. 212., with those of the same
  dates, p. 291., 293., 294., 297., and 298.

Footnote 34:

  Compare Astronomical Observations, made in the second Voyage, February
  10. p. 375., with Observations of December 11. 1774, p. 381. Also
  Observations made in the last Voyage, May 3. and June 18. 1779, p.
  208.

Footnote 35:

  Observations made in the second Voyage, February 2. 1773. p. 371.
  March 18. p. 372., and January 24. 1774, p. 375. See also Observations
  made last Voyage, August 18. 1776, p. 180. October 7. and 14. p. 189,
  and 190. December 12. p. ibid. January 24. 1777, p. 192. March 10. p.
  195. July 9. and 17. 1779, p. 209. January 16. 1780, p. 212. March 24.
  p. 213. and May 19. p. 214.

Footnote 36:

  The judgment of the ingenious Author of _Recherches sur les
  Américains_, on this question, seems to be very deserving of a place
  here: “Qu’on calcule, comme on voudra, on sera toujours contraint
  d’avouer, qu’il y a une plus grande portion de continent située dans
  la latitude septentrionale, que dans la latitude australe.

  “C’est fort mal à-propos, qu’on a soutenu que cette répartition
  inégale ne sauroit exister, sous prétexte que le globe perdroit son
  équilibre, faute d’un contrepoids suffisant au pole méridionale. Il
  est vrai qu’un pied cube d’eau salée ne pese pas autant qu’un pied
  cube de terre; mais on auroit dû réfléchir, qu’il peut y avoir sous
  l’ocean des lits & des couches de matières, dont la pésanteur
  spécifique varie à l’infini, & que le peu de profondeur d’une mer,
  versée sur une grande surface, contrebalance les endroits où il y a
  moins de mer, mais où elle est plus profonde.” _Recherches
  Philosophiques_, tom. ii. p. 375.

Footnote 37:

  See Vol. IV. p. 219.

Footnote 38:

  See the history of former attempts to sail toward the north pole, in
  the introduction to Lord Mulgrave’s Journal. Mr. Barrington has
  collected several instances of ships advancing to very high latitudes.
  See his Miscellanies, p. 1-124.

Footnote 39:

  See the Statutes at Large, 18 George II. chap. 17.

Footnote 40:

  See the Statutes at Large, 1776, 16 George III. chap. 6.

Footnote 41:

  From his MS. Instructions, dated May 14. 1776.

Footnote 42:

  In the Philosophical Transactions, Vol. lxviii. p. 1057, we have the
  track of Pickersgill’s voyage, which, probably, may be of use to our
  Greenland ships, as it contains many observations for fixing the
  longitude and latitude of the coasts in Davis’s Straits. But it
  appears that he never entered Baffin’s Bay, the highest northern
  latitude to which he advanced being 68° 14ʹ. As to Young’s
  proceedings, having failed absolutely in making any discovery, it is
  of less consequence, that no communication of his journal could be
  procured.

Footnote 43:

  See the Abstract of his Journal, published by Mr. Dobbs.

Footnote 44:

  Ellis’s Voyage, p. 328.

Footnote 45:

  Ibid. p. 330.

Footnote 46:

  Account of the voyage, by the clerk of the California, Vol. ii. p.
  273. Mr. Dobbs himself says, that _he thought the passage would be
  impracticable, or, at least, very difficult, in case there was one
  farther North than 67°_.—Account of Hudson’s Bay, p. 99.

Footnote 47:

  Printed for Jeffreys, in 1768. His words are, “There remains then to
  be searched for the discovery of a passage, the opening called Pistol
  Bay, in Hudson’s Bay.” P. 122.

Footnote 48:

  Mr. Hearne’s Journey, back from the Copper-mine river, to Fort Prince
  of Wales, lasted till June 30. 1772. From his first setting out till
  his return, he had employed near a year and seven months. The
  unparalleled hardships he suffered, and the essential service he
  performed, met with a suitable reward from his masters, and he is now
  the Governor of Fort Prince of Wales, where he was taken prisoner by
  the French in 1782; and last summer returned to his station.

Footnote 49:

  The Hudson’s Bay Company have a trading post called _Hudson’s House_,
  above five hundred miles up the country, in lat. 53° 0ʹ 32ʺ, and in
  long. 106° 27ʹ 30ʺ.

Footnote 50:

  This day, Jan. 11. 1772, as the Indians were hunting, some of them saw
  a strange snow-shoe track, which they followed, and at a considerable
  distance came to a little hut, where they found a young woman sitting
  alone. They brought her to the tents; and, on examining her, found
  that she was one of the western _Dog-ribbed_ Indians, and had been
  taken prisoner by the _Arathapescow_ Indians in the summer 1770; and,
  when the Indians who took her prisoner, were near this part in the
  summer 1771, she eloped from them, with an intent to return to her own
  country; but _it being so far off_, and, after being taken prisoner,
  having come the whole way in canoes, with the winding of rivers and
  lakes, she had forgot the way; and had been in this little hut ever
  since the first setting in of the fall. By her account of the moons
  past since her elopement, it appears to be the middle of last July
  when she left the Arathapescow Indians, and had not seen a human face
  ever since. She supported herself very well by snaring of rabbits,
  partridges, and squirrels, and was now in good health and flesh; and,
  I think, as fine a woman of a real Indian, as I have seen in any part
  of North America. She had nothing to make snares of but the sinews of
  rabbits’ legs and feet, which she twisted together for that purpose;
  and of the rabbits’ skins had made herself a neat and warm winter’s
  clothing. The stock of materials she took with her when she eloped,
  consisted of about five inches of an iron hoop for a knife; a stone
  steel, and other hard stones as flints, together with other
  fire-tackle, as tinder, &c.; about an inch and half of the shank of
  the shoeing of an arrow of iron, of which she made an awl. She had not
  been long at the tents, when half a score of men wrestled to see who
  should have her for their wife. She says, when the Arathapescow
  Indians took her prisoner, that they stole on the tents in the night,
  when the inhabitants were all asleep, and killed every soul except
  herself and three other young women. Her father, mother, and husband
  were in the same tent with her, and they were all killed. Her child,
  of about five months old, she took with her, wrapped in a bundle of
  her clothing, undiscovered, in the night. But, when arrived at the
  place where the Arathapescows had left their wives, which was not far
  off, it being then day-break, these Indian women immediately began to
  examine her bundle; and having there found the child, took it from her
  and killed it immediately. The relation of this shocking scene only
  served the savages of my gang for laughter. _Her country is so far to
  the Westward_, that she says she never saw any iron, or other kind of
  metal, till taken prisoner; those of her tribe making their hatchets
  and chisels of deers’ horns, and knives of stone and bone; their
  arrows are shod with a kind of slate, bones, and deers’ horns; and
  their instruments, to make their wood work, are nothing but beavers’
  teeth. They have frequently heard of the useful materials the nations
  to the east of them are supplied with from the English; but, instead
  of drawing nearer to be in the way of trading for iron work, &c. are
  obliged to retreat farther back, to avoid the Arathapescow Indians, as
  they make surprising slaughter amongst them every year, both winter
  and summer. HEARNE’s MS. Journal.

Footnote 51:

  Journal of a Voyage in 1775 by Don Francisco Antonio Maurelle, in Mr.
  Barrington’s Miscellanies, p. 508.

Footnote 52:

  _Ibid._ p. 507. We learn from Maurelle’s Journal that another voyage
  had been some time before performed upon the coast of America; but the
  utmost northern progress of it was to latitude 55.

Footnote 53:

  Dr. Campbell, speaking of Beering’s voyage in 1741, says, “Nothing can
  be plainer than this truth, that his discovery does not warrant any
  such supposition, as that the country he touched at was a great
  continent making part of North America.”

Footnote 54:

  See Coxe’s Russian Discoveries, pp. 26, 27, &c. The fictions of
  speculative geographers in the Southern hemisphere, have been
  continents; in the northern hemisphere, they have been seas. It may be
  observed, therefore, that if Captain Cook in his first voyages
  annihilated imaginary southern lands, he has made amends for the
  havock in his third voyage, by annihilating imaginary northern seas,
  and filling up the vast space, which had been allotted to them, with
  the solid continents of his new discoveries of American land farther
  west and north than had hitherto been traced.

Footnote 55:

  The Russians seem to owe much to England in matters of this sort. It
  is singular enough that one of our countrymen, Dr. Campbell [See his
  edition of Harris’s voyages, vol. ii. p. 1021.] has preserved many
  valuable particulars of Beering’s first voyage, of which Muller
  himself, the historian of their earlier discoveries, makes no mention;
  that it should be another of our countrymen, Mr. Coxe, who first
  published a satisfactory account of their later discoveries; and that
  the King of Great Britain’s ships should traverse the globe in 1778,
  to confirm to the Russian empire the possession of near thirty
  degrees, or above six hundred miles of continent, which Mr. Engel, in
  his zeal for the practicability of a north-east passage, would prune
  away from the length of Asia to the eastward. See his _Mémoires
  Geographiques_, &c. Lausanne, 1765; which, however, contains much real
  information; and many parts of which are confirmed by Captain Cook’s
  American discoveries.

Footnote 56:

  See Maupertuis’s Letter to the King of Prussia. The author of the
  Preliminary Discourse to Bougainville’s _Voyage aux Isles Malouines_,
  computes that the southern continent (for the existence of which, he
  owns, we must depend more on the conjectures of philosophers, than on
  the testimony of voyagers) contains eight or ten millions of square
  leagues.

Footnote 57:

  See Vol. III. p. 107.

Footnote 58:

  Messrs. Hodges and Webber.

Footnote 59:

  Mr. Green, in the Endeavour; Messrs. Wales and Bayly, in the
  Resolution and Adventure; Mr. Bayly, a second time, jointly with
  Captains Cook and King in this voyage; and Mr. Lyons, who accompanied
  Lord Mulgrave. The observations of Messrs. Wales and Bayly during
  Captain Cook’s second voyage are already in the hands of the public,
  by the favour of the Board of Longitude; and those of Captains Cook
  and King, and Mr. Bayly, during this last, will appear immediately
  after our publication. [First Edit.]

Footnote 60:

  The Abbe’s words are, “Si ceux qui promettent une si grande precision
  dans ces sortes de methodes, avoient navigué quelque tems, ils
  auroient vû souvent, que dans l’observation la plus simple de toutes,
  qui est celle de la hauteur du soleil à midi, deux observations, munis
  de bons quartiers de reflexion, bien rectifiés, different entr’eux,
  lorsqu’ils observent chacun à part, de 5ʹ, 6ʹ, 7ʹ, & 8ʹ.”

                            _Ephémer_. 1755-1765. _Introduction_, p. 32.

  It must be however mentioned, in justice to M. de la Caille, that he
  attempted to introduce the lunar method of discovering the longitude,
  and proposed a plan of calculations of the moon’s distance from the
  sun and fixed stars; but, through the imperfection of his instruments,
  his success was much less than that method was capable of affording.
  The bringing it into general use was reserved for Dr. Maskelyne, our
  astronomer royal. See the preface to the _Tables for correcting the
  Effects of Refraction and Parallax_, published by the Board of
  Longitude, under the direction of Dr. Shepherd, Plumian Professor of
  Astronomy and Experimental Philosophy at Cambridge, in 1772.

Footnote 61:

  In addition to Mr. Wales’s Remark, it may be observed, that the
  proficiency of our naval officers in taking observations at sea, must
  ultimately be attributed to the great attention paid to this important
  object by the Board of Longitude at home; liberal rewards having been
  given to mathematicians for perfecting the lunar tables, and
  facilitating calculations; to artists for constructing more accurate
  instruments for observing, and watches better adapted to keeping time
  at sea. It appears, therefore, that the voyages of discovery, and the
  operations of the Board of Longitude went hand in hand; and they must
  be combined in order to form a just estimate of the extent of the plan
  carried into execution since his Majesty’s accession, for improving
  astronomy and navigation. But, besides the establishment of the Board
  of Longitude on its present footing, which has had such important
  consequences, it must also be ever acknowledged, that his present
  Majesty has extended his royal patronage to every branch of the
  liberal arts and useful science. The munificent present to the Royal
  Society for defraying the expence of observing the _transit_ of
  Venus;—the institution of the Academy of Painting and Sculpture;—the
  magnificent apartments allotted to the Royal and Antiquary Societies,
  and to the Royal Academy, at Somerset Place;—the support of the Garden
  of Exotics at Kew, to improve which, Mr. Mason was sent to the
  extremities of Africa;—the _substantial_ encouragement afforded to
  learned men and learned works, in various departments; and
  particularly that afforded to Mr. Herschell, which has enabled him to
  devote himself entirely to the improvement of astronomy; these and
  many other instances which might be enumerated, would have greatly
  distinguished his Majesty’s reign, even if he had not been the patron
  of those successful attempts to perfect geography and navigation by so
  many voyages of discovery.

Footnote 62:

  See Dr. Shepherd’s Preface, as above.

Footnote 63:

  Dr. Solander, Dr. Foster and his son, and Dr. Sparman. Dr. Foster has
  given us a specimen of the botanical discoveries of his voyage in the
  _Characteres Generum Plantarum_, &c.; and much curious philosophical
  matter is contained in his _Observations made on a Voyage round the
  World_. Dr. Sparman also, on his return to Sweden, favoured us with a
  publication, in which he expatiates on the advantages accruing to
  natural history, to astronomy, geography, general physic, and
  navigation, from our South-Sea voyages.

Footnote 64:

  See Vol. IV. p. 266.

Footnote 65:

  Preface to his History of English Poetry.

Footnote 66:

  Tom. i. p. 331.

Footnote 67:

  History of Japan, vol. i. p. 93.

Footnote 68:

  That the Malayans have not only frequented Madagascar, but have also
  been the progenitors of some of the present race of inhabitants there,
  is confirmed to us by the testimony of Monsieur de Pages, who visited
  that island so late as 1774. “Ils m’ont paru provenir des diverses
  Races; leur couleur, leurs cheveux, et leur corps l’indiquent. Ceux
  que je n’ai pas cru originaires des anciens naturels du pays, sont
  petits et trapus; ils ont les cheveux presque unis, et sont _olivâtres
  comme les Malayes, avec qui ils ont, en général, une espece de
  resemblance_.”

                               _Voyages des M._ des Pages, T. ii. p. 90.

Footnote 69:

  Archæolog. vol. vi. p. 155. See also his History of Sumatra, p. 166,
  from which the following passage is transcribed. “Besides the Malaye,
  there are a variety of languages spoken on Sumatra, which, however,
  have not only a manifest affinity among themselves, but also to that
  general language which is found to prevail in, and to be indigenous
  to, all the islands of the eastern seas; from Madagascar to the
  remotest of Captain Cook’s discoveries, comprehending a wider extent
  than the Roman or any other tongue has yet boasted. In different
  places, it has been more or less mixed and corrupted; but between the
  most dissimilar branches, an eminent sameness of many radical words is
  apparent; and in some very distant from each other, in point of
  situation: As, for instance, the Philippines and Madagascar, the
  deviation of the words is scarcely more than is observed in the
  dialects of neighbouring provinces of the same kingdom.”

Footnote 70:

  We are indebted to Sir Joseph Banks, for a general outline of this, in
  Hawkesworth’s Collection, vol. iii. p. 777. The reader will find our
  enlarged Table at the end of the third volume, Appendix, No. 2.

Footnote 71:

  See Crantz’s History of Greenland, vol. i. p. 262.; where we are told
  that the Moravian Brethren, who, with the consent and furtherance of
  Sir Hugh Palliser, then Governor of Newfoundland, visited the
  Esquimaux on the Labradore coast, found that their language, and that
  of the Greenlanders, do not differ so much as that of the High and Low
  Dutch.

Footnote 72:

  See Appendix, No. 6. The Greenlanders, as Crantz tells us, call
  themselves _Karalit_; a word not very unlike _Kanagyst_, the name
  assumed by the inhabitants of Kodiack, one of the Schumagin islands,
  as Stæhlin informs us.

Footnote 73:

  A contempt of revelation is generally the result of ignorance,
  conceited of its possessing superior knowledge. Observe how the Author
  of _Recherches Philosophiques sur les Américains_, expresses himself
  on this very point. “Cette distance que Mr. Antermony veut trouver si
  peu importante, est à-peu-près _de huit cent lieues Gauloises au
  travers d’un ocean perilleux_, et impossible à franchir avec des
  canots aussi chetifs et aussi fragiles que le sont, au rapport
  d’Ysbrand Ides, les chaloupes des Tunguses,” &c. &c. t. i. p. 156. Had
  this writer known that the two continents are not above _thirteen_
  leagues (instead of _eight hundred_) distant from each other, and
  that, even in that narrow space of sea, there are intervening islands,
  he would not have ventured to urge this argument in opposition to Mr.
  Bell’s notion of the quarter from which North America received its
  original inhabitants.

Footnote 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.

Footnote 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.

Footnote 76:

  The late Sir Joseph.

Footnote 77:

  See the instructions in the Introduction.

Footnote 78:

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

Footnote 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.

Footnote 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.

Footnote 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.

Footnote 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.

Footnote 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.

Footnote 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.

Footnote 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.

Footnote 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.

Footnote 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.

Footnote 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.

Footnote 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.

Footnote 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.

Footnote 91:

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

Footnote 92:

  Dampier’s Voyages, vol. iii. p. 10.

Footnote 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._

Footnote 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.

Footnote 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.

Footnote 96:

  See vol. IV. p. 252.

Footnote 97:

  P. 11.

Footnote 98:

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

Footnote 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.

Footnote 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.

Footnote 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.

Footnote 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.

Footnote 103:

  Vol. III. p. 35.

Footnote 104:

  Nichelson.

Footnote 105:

  Mr. Dun.

Footnote 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.

Footnote 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.

Footnote 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.

Footnote 109:

  See the Instructions in the Introduction.

Footnote 110:

  See Vol. III. p. 36.

Footnote 111:

  Vol. IV. p. 243.

Footnote 112:

  Vol. IV. p. 244.

Footnote 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.

Footnote 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_.

Footnote 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.

Footnote 116:

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

Footnote 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.

Footnote 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_.”

Footnote 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_.

Footnote 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.

Footnote 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.

Footnote 122:

  Kerguelen’s Isle de Clugny.

Footnote 123:

  Cape François, as already observed.

Footnote 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.

Footnote 125:

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

Footnote 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.

Footnote 127:

  Cap François, for reasons already assigned.

Footnote 128:

  If there could be the least doubt remaining of the identity of the
  Baie de l’Oiseau, and Christmas Harbour, the circumstance of the
  perforated rock, which divides it from another bay to the south, would
  amount to a strict demonstration. For Monsieur de Pagés had observed
  this discriminating mark before Captain Cook. His words are as follow:
  “L’on vit que la côte de l’est, voisine du Cap François, avoit deux
  baies; elles étoient separées par une pointe très-reconnoissable par
  sa forme, _qui representoit une porte cochère, au travers de laquelle
  l’on voyoit le jour_.” _Voyages du M. de Pagés_, vol. ii. p. 67. Every
  one knows how exactly the form of a _porte cochère_, or arched
  gateway, corresponds with that of the arch of a bridge. It is very
  satisfactory to find the two navigators, neither of whom knew any
  thing of the other’s description, adopting the same idea; which both
  proves that they had the same uncommon object before their eyes, and
  that they made an accurate report.

Footnote 129:

  In the last note, we saw how remarkably Monsieur de Pagés and Captain
  Cook agree about the appearance of the south point of the harbour; I
  shall here subjoin another quotation from the former, containing his
  account of the harbour itself, in which the reader may trace the same
  distinguishing features observed by Captain Cook in the foregoing
  paragraph.

  “Le 6, l’on mit à terre dans la première baie à l’est du Cap François,
  et l’on prit possession de ces contrées. Ce mouillage consiste en une
  petite rade, qui a environs quatres encablures, ou quatre cents toises
  de profondeur, sur un tiers en sus de largeur. En dedans de cette rade
  est un petit port, dont l’entrée, de quatres encablures de largeur,
  presente au sud-est. La sonde de la petite rade est depuis
  quarante-cinq jusqu’à trente brasses; et celle du port depuis seize
  jusqu’à huit. Le fond des deux est de sable noir et vaseux. La côte
  des deux bords est haute, et par une pente très-rude; elle est
  couverte de verdure, et il y a une quantité prodigieuse d’outardes. Le
  fond du port est occupé par un monticule qui laisse entre lui, et la
  mer une plage de sable. Une petite rivière, de très-bonne eau, coule à
  la mer dans cet endroit; et elle est fournie par un lac qui est un peu
  au loin, au-dessus du monticule. Il y avoit sur la plage beaucoup de
  pinguoins et de lions marins. Ces deux espèces d’animaux ne fuyoient
  pas, et l’on augura que le pays n’étoit point habité; la terre
  rapportoit de l’herbe large, noire, et bien nourrie, qui n’avoit
  cependant que cinque pouces ou plus de hauteur. L’on ne vit aucun
  arbre, ni signe d’habitation.” _Voyage du Monsieur du Pagés_, tom. ii.
  p. 69, 70.

Footnote 130:

  Cap François.

Footnote 131:

  Cap François.

Footnote 132:

  Though Kerguelen’s ships, in 1773, did not venture to explore this
  part of the coast, Monsieur de Pagés’ account of it answers well to
  Captain Cook’s. “Du 17 au 23, l’on ne prit d’autre connoissance que
  celle de la figure de la côte, qui, courant d’abord au S. E., et
  revenant ensuite au N. E., formoit un grand golfe. Il étoit occupé par
  des brisans et des rochers; il avoit aussi une isle basse, et assez
  étendue, et l’on usa d’une bien soigneuse precaution, pour ne pas
  s’affaler dans ce golfe.” _Voyage du M. de Pagés_, tom. ii. p. 67.

Footnote 133:

  Cap François.

Footnote 134:

  Cap François.

Footnote 135:

  This part of the coast seems to be what the French saw on the 5th of
  January, 1774. Monsieur de Pagés speaks of it thus: “Nous reconnumes
  une nouvelle côte etendue de toute vue dans l’est, et dans le ouest.
  Les terres de cette côte étoient moins elevées que celles que nous
  avions vues jusques ici; elles étoient aussi d’un aspect moins rude.”
  _De Pagés_, tom. ii. p. 68.

Footnote 136:

  See Hawkesworth’s Collection of Voyages, Vol. ii. p. 42.

Footnote 137:

  If the French observations, as marked upon Captain Cook’s chart, and
  still more authentically upon that published by their own discoverers,
  may be depended upon, this land doth not reach so far to the west as
  the meridian of 68°; Cape Louis, which is represented as its most
  westerly point, being laid down by them to the east of that meridian.

Footnote 138:

  The idea of Cape Louis being this projecting point of a southern
  continent, must have soon vanished, as Cape François, within a year
  after, was found, by the same discoverer, to lie above one third of a
  degree farther north upon the same land. But if Kerguelen entertained
  any such imagination at first, we are sure that, at present, he thinks
  very differently. This appears from the following explicit declaration
  of his sentiments, which deserves to be transcribed from his late
  publication, as it does equal honour to his candour, and to Captain
  Cook’s abilities. “La terre que j’ai découverte est certainement _une
  isle_; puisque le célèbre Capitaine Cook a passé au sud, lors de son
  premier voyage, sans rien rencontrer. Je juge même, que cette isle
  _n’est pas bien grande_. Il y a aussi apparence, d’après le Voyage de
  Monsieur Cook, que toute cette étendue de mers meridionales, est semée
  d’isles ou de rochers; mais qu’il n’y a _ni continent ni grande
  terre_.” Kerguelen, p. 92.

Footnote 139:

  Kerguelen, as we see in the last note, concurs with Captain Cook as to
  this. However, he tells us, that he has reason to believe that it is
  about two hundred leagues in circuit; and that he was acquainted with
  about fourscore leagues of its coast. “J’en connois environs
  quatre-vingt lieues des côtes; et j’ai lieu de croire, qu’elle a
  environ deux cents lieues de circuit.” _Kerguelen_, ibid.

Footnote 140:

  Some of Monsieur de Kerguelen’s own countrymen seem more desirous than
  we are, to rob him of this honour. It is very remarkable that Monsieur
  de Pagés never once mentions the name of his commander. And, though he
  takes occasion to enumerate the several French explorers of the
  southern hemisphere, from Gonneville down to Crozet, he affects to
  preserve an entire silence about Kerguelen, whose first voyage, in
  which the discovery of this considerable tract of land was made, is
  kept as much out of sight, as if it never had taken place. Nay, not
  satisfied with refusing to acknowledge the right of another, he almost
  assumes it to himself. For, upon a Map of the World annexed to his