Captain Rich vs. the embarrassment, 1818
Hard on the heels of the news that the Great Sea Serpent had been captured by Captain Richard Rich, galloped the news that the creature actually captured by Captain Rich was a fine albacore tuna, and that the Sea Serpent was still apparently frisking off the shores of Massachusetts. Newspaper editors were (mostly) sympathetic instead of condemnatory, possibly enjoying the entertaining little story with which they could fill inches. Or maybe just hedging their bets, should the Great Sea Serpent actually turn out to exist.
The Great Mackerel Capture was accomplished on Thursday, September 3; the Great Sea Serpent was identified as a Great Tuna on September 4; by September 5 editors were explaining how a sea serpent turned into a tuna or a tuna turned into a sea serpent, and how the voracious Sea Serpent could still lurk in the deeps.
By September 14, it was Captain Rich’s turn. He had been obliged to dodge bad press fairly quickly, opening an exhibit of the captured creature to a less-than-enchanted public. Days later he defended himself, his crew, and his actions.
The captured fish was exhibited almost immediately, while the sea serpent apparently headed south. A Boston correspondent for a New York newspaper included a multitude of details, as Richard Rich opened his exhibit to a paying—and quickly unimpressed—crowd. The letter was addressed to Lang, Turner & Co., who published the New-York Gazette.
Letter from Boston. New-York Gazette [New York, New York] 12 September 1818 [Saturday]; p. 2.
Our Boston correspondent, under date of the 9th inst. says, “No news here to-day—no arrivals. We had a tremendous shower of rain last night and this morning, and it blew strong from the N. E. It is still very thick and stormy.”
—
Capt. Tatem, arrived at Savannah from Philadelphia, says he saw a huge sea-monster, with his head ten feet above the water. See Savannah ship news.
—
The gentlemen from whom we yesterday received a very polite note, will, no doubt, be much gratified by the perusal of the following extract of a letter from Boston:
Boston, Sept. 9, 1818.
Messrs. Lang, Turner & Co.—Observing in your paper of the 7th inst. that you have given the story of the capture of the “strange fish” brought in here, as evidence of the non-existence of the Sea Serpent, the following statement of the circumstances is presented you, relative to the capture of that fish, which I think will satisfy you, that although the public have been grossly imposed upon, it does not in the least invalidate the evidence of the many hundreds, and it may be said thousands of persons, of respectable standing in society, who have testified to the fact of the existence of the Sea Serpent.
On Thursday evening, of the 5th [sic] instant, a man by the name of Dresser, arrived in town from Squam, (a few miles from Gloucester) on horseback, express, to communicate intelligence of the capture of the Sea Serpent, by the expedition commanded by Capt. Richard Rich. He stated, that he saw the Serpent in tow of the boat, which had her colors flying; that two of the persons engaged in the enterprize, one by the name of Hopkins, informed him, it was 120 feet in length, and that they should probably be in Boston by 12 o’clock that night. The town was immediately thrown into a great commotion, and a great crowd of people soon pressed round Mr. Dresser to learn the particulars of the great achievement, which he repeated over and over again, the account was soon circulated, and the majority of our citizens were satisfied of the fact, that the great leviathan of the deep had been conquered.—But few persons, comparatively speaking, doubted the truth of the story, and those made bets to a considerable amount, individually, that it was untrue; yet the public in general believed it to be a fact. In consequence of this intelligence, two or three boats were despatched down the harbor, with orders to Capt. Richard Rich, not to come up to town, but proceed to Commercial Point (Dorchester), with his prize. Invitations, it was understood, were sent to several surgeons and naturalists, to attend the dessection [sic] of this great monster on the morning following, preparatory to his hide being taken off, stuffed and exhibited to the public, so completely satisfied were the persons concerned in the expedition, of the fact. One of our news-collectors provided himself with a cod line, for the purpose of going down the harbor early in the morning, to take the length, breadth and depth of the Serpent, to give to the public. Until ten o’clock in the evening nothing was heard or talked of but the Sea Serpent. Opinions of people had made him worth from $200,000 to 1,000,000, to the owners of the expedition—various stories were in circulation, such as A. B. had been offered $10,000 for his eighth in the concern; and C. D. $20,000 for his quarter, &c. On the morning following, people were up early, and all was enquiry if the Sea Serpent had arrived. About 8 o’clock, Capt. Rich arrived up to town, and the keeper of one of our news rooms called on him, and obtained an account similar to the one published in the Mercantile Advertiser and your Gazette of the 7th inst. which was recorded on the news book. The public was not a little disappointed on learning that this monster of 120 feet in length had shrunk up to only about 10 feet, but still the singularity of the animal, as described,kept up the curiosity of the public to see it, whether it was a Sea Serpent or not.—About nine o’clock the boat arrived up to town, and proceeded to Russia wharf, where a room had been provided to exhibit this “strange fish,” and much parade with sails to cover the passages from the boat to the store was made. A thousand stories were soon in circulation, that he had contracted, or in other words, had drawn himself up like a turtle into his shell, and would soon extend himself again; that it was not the “Sea Serpent,” but a “strange fish,” which had been brought up here to be exposed to the public to take off their attention, while the real Sea Serpent was on one of the islands below, and persons were engaged in preparing him for exhibition, &c. Soon after this strange fish had been stored, Capt. Rich appeared at the door, and opened the show at 50 cents each person, which was shortly reduced to 25 cents. People were admitted, when, wonderful to relate, the Sea Serpent had suddenly metamorphosed himself, like one of Mr. Maffey’s puppets, into a Horse Mackarel, Albacore, or Thunny, or which of the three you may please to have it; and instead of 120 feet, measured only 8½ feet in length; his hard shell, or scales, had disappeared, and instead of a harpoon not being able to penetrate through his back, a small penknife was thrust up to the handle in every part of him. The imposition now appeared manifest to every one—the more so, as Capt. R. Rich through the day exhibited him, and reported over and over again, that the fish he had taken was what he called the “Sea Serpent;” that it was the only “Sea Serpent,” ever seen off Cape Ann; that it was the animal which every person had taken to be the “Sea Serpent,” and how he could make himself appear in the water 100 or 120 feet in length, was unaccountable to him, and every one else who had seen him. This story was seconded by his officers and crew, which appeared to every one ridiculous and foolish in the extreme. The mortification of the public at being so completely gulled, or hoaxed, was manifest enough by their countenances, and some very severe remarks were made against those employed in the expedition. It has been stated, that a number of persons went from Gloucester to Squam, to see the fish Capt. R. Rich had taken; but he was very careful to keep him from their view by covering him up with sails, and at dark took him on board under deck. Persons engaged in the expedition were ashore at that place, and made no hesitation in asserting they had taken the “Sea Serpent,” when they knew it to be false. Thus it will appear form the circumstance, that a hoax was intended from that very moment to be played off upon the citizens of this town and vicinity, and a greater hoax (it is allowed by all classes) was never imposed upon the town. The owners of the expedition, it is believed, had no hand in it, but were as much deceived as the public; they ought, therefore, to be exonerated from the blame. Owing to this circumstance, persons who before believed the existence of the Sea Serpent on our coast have now changed their opinion; but as observed before, this hoax, on a great scale, does not invalidate the evidence given by so many respectable persons as to the existence of such a monster, which is still believed by thousands.
Shipping news. New-York Gazette [New York, New York] 12 September 1818 [Saturday]; p. 2.
Savannah, Sept. 1.—Arr’d, sch’rs Young Spartan, Chamberlain, Havana, 7 days; W. Gray, Gray, Balt.; Eagle, Conway, do; Caroline, Connello, do.
Sloop Howard & James, Tatem, Philadelphia, 6. 24th ult. off Cape Henry, saw a huge sea-monster, which we supposed to be the wonderment called the Sea Serpent; when first seen, was steering S. W. but afterwards shifted his course to N E.; his head was about 10 feet out of water—we were within 100 yards of him.
How delightful to learn that the Great Sea Serpent was safely on its annual migration south! And how very deceptive Captain Rich appears, as he hides the harpooned tuna from observers until he can get it to a paying audience in Boston and cannot seem to explain how the fish could be mistaken for the serpent.
Now it was Captain Rich’s turn. He was careful to note that he had never seen the sea serpent before undertaking its pursuit, and that he relied on his crew to recognize it. He explored the labor involved in pursuing the volatile sea serpent. He clarified why his apparently deceptive actions were anything but. And he described how a tuna could be mistaken for an enormous sea serpent. First, the editor of the Boston Daily Advertiser reviewed the descriptions of the sea serpent given in depositions by dependable citizens, italicizing sections in which the Great Serpent was observed resting quietly in the water; the importance of those sections would be essential to the theory that what Captain Richard had caught wasn’t the true sea serpent.
“The Sea Serpent.” Boston Daily Advertiser [Boston, Massachusetts] 14 September 1818 [Monday]; p. 2.
We conceive it to be a duty we owe to Capt. Rich as well as our readers, to publish the following communication. Capt. Rich with a very laudable spirit undertook the arduous, and apparently hazardous enterprise of drawing the monster from his hiding place, and of solving, if possible, an important problem in natural history. If the public have been disappointed by the result of his enterprise, it is not his fault. On the contrary he ought to have the credit of the best intentions, as well as of skillful and bold exertions. He has done more than any other person to discover whether there be such an animal as the sea serpent. His doubts therefore are not to be classed with the stupid incredulity of those who have not deigned to examine the evidence which has been offered of his existence, and which by an ill-timed ridicule endeavour to discourage all inquiry. But while due attention is paid to his statement, the mass of evidence published last year ought not to be overlooked. The appearances described by most of the observers who have given their testimony under oath, differ materially from those by which Capt. Rich was deluded. We have made inquiry of the opinions of the gentlemen in Gloucester, and we learn that gentlemen whose names have been mentioned to us, who had the best opportunities of observing in the summer of 1817, and several of those whose statements are published in the collection of the Linnæan Society, are still confident that they could not have been mistaken. We copy a few passages, from the great number of similar statements under oath in the publication alluded to.
Amos Story, in his deposition given Aug. 23, 1817, says, “It was between the hour of 12 and 1 o’clock when I first saw him, and he continued in sight for an hour and a half. I was sitting on the shore, and was about 20 rods from him when he was the nearest to me. His head appeared shaped much like the head of a sea turtle, and he carried his head from ten to twelve inches above the surface of the water. His head at that distance appeared larger than the head of any dog I ever saw.” He saw him again some days afterwards. “He then lay perfectly still, extended on the water, and I should judge I saw fifty feet at least. I should judge I was forty rods from him this day. I had a good spy-glass both days when I saw him. I continued looking at him about half an hour, and he remained still, and in the same position until I was called away.”
Solomon Allen, 3d. in his deposition given Aug. 21, 1817, says, “His head is formed something like the head of a rattlesnake, but nearly as large as the head of a horse.” “When I looked at him from the shore with a glass, at about 200 yards distance, his mouth appeared to be open about ten inches.”
William H. Foster says, in his deposition taken Aug. 27, 1817. “When I first discovered him his head was above the surface of the water, perhaps ten inches and he made but little progress through the water.”
The Hon. Lonson Nash, in his letter dated Sept. 9, 1817, says, “With a glass I could not take in, at one view, the two extremes of the animal, that were visible. I have looked at a vessel at about the same distance, and could distinctly see forty-five feet.”
Matthew Gaffney in his deposition given Aug. 28, 1817, says, “His head appeared full as large as a four gallon keg; his body as large as a barrel, and the part that I saw, I should judge forty feet at least. The top of his head was of a dark colour, and the under part of his head appeared nearly white. I fired at him when he was the nearest to me. I had a good gun, and took good aim. I aimed at his head, and think I must have hit him. He turned towards us, immediately after I had fired, and I thought he was coming at us; but he sunk down and went directly under our boat, and made his appearance at about one hundred yards from where he sunk.”
We leave it to our readers to conclude whether the above testimony made deliberately on oath by men of respectability, is utterly false and groundless. If so we should be glad to know on what grounds human testimony is to be credited. We have no doubt that Capt. Rich has taken an animal which he and others bel[ie]ved to be the Sea Serpent; but whether he has taken the animal described by the above deponents, we entreat our readers to judge for themselves.
In regard to opinions formed respecting this Serpent by naturalists abroad, they are undoubtedly various. The report of the Linnæan Society has been republished in England. The only scientific and literary journals in which we have seen a notice of the subject, consider the existence of a Sea Serpent as proved; and among them are the Quarterly Journal of the Royal Institution, and the Literary Panorama. The French naturalist Cuvier has expressed his opinion to the same effect. The opinion of Sir Joseph Banks (which has been repeatedly inquired for here) appears to be not very different. We understand that in a reply to the letters of Gen. Humphries last summer, he expressed some doubts on the subject. His more mature conclusions formed since receiving the report of the Linnæan Society and other information, may be gathered from the following extract of a letter written by him to a gentleman of this town June 24, 1818. After commenting on some of the newspaper accounts published this season, he says, “I conclude that the last year’s serpent is inclined to lay its eggs again this year and I hope that the brave Americans who were unable last year to find the monster in their cruise for the purpose of harpooning him, will be more successful in the present summer.” These opinions show that a belief in the existence of this animal, on the testimony furnished is not so very absurd as the wiser heads in this country, [vide New York Gazette and Franklin Gazette] have imagined.
“Sufficient time having elapsed for the public mind to cease fermenting, I now offer my statement of facts, without comment, leaving it for others to judge of the good or ill, that it may produce.
Having been fully satisfied in the belief of the existence of a Sea Serpent, (although I must acknowledge, I at first doubted) and feeling confident that means were within the power of man, if rightly used, to overthrow this monster—I determined on a trial—I proceeded to Gloucester and completed my expedition—presuming I had a formidable foe to contend with, I was well prepared for an attack—In selecting my crew, I took none but men of respectability and integrity—and among the whole number (eleven) eight had seen the supposed Serpent, a part of those had made oath to the account already published, of his existence, appearance and character.—I selected such men, in order that I might not be deceived, should he make his appearance, having never seen him myself. When all was in readiness, information was brought us that the Serpent was off Squam Bar. We immediately proceeded thither—there, on our arrival, we were assured he had been seen, and that we might expect his appearance whenever it should be perfectly calm, and the water smooth, for at no other time had he been seen—the next day brought with it a dead calm, and smooth water, with the much wished for appearance of the Serpent—my crew all agreed to a man that what we then saw was the supposed Serpent, which had been seen both at that place and at Gloucester Harbour—I was perfectly satisfied, so precisely did it answer the description that had been given of him—and had I never approached nearer, I could, with satisfaction to my own mind, have given testimony upon oath, that I had seen a Serpent not less than one hundred feet in lengt[h]—We did not keep at a distance and wonder at what we saw, our object was to take it if possible—we accordingly gave chase; each day brought with it, this wonderful appearance, and it was sometime before we could discover the deception—but by following it up closely we have ascertained that the supposed Serpent is no other than the wake of such a Fish as we have taken. I have endeavored to gain the best information possible, and find that what I first saw, answers well the description given—By all the information I can obtain, he has never been seen, except in calm weather, when the surface of the water appears white & smooth, he then making his appearance moving with uncommon velocity, heaving up little waves of the true colour of the ocean, that appear at a little distance like what has already been described—it has been his mode of swimming on the surface, till from twenty to thirty of these waves could be distinctly counted, and then to sink deeper under the water, for a short time and then reappear as before. At other times he would make a circle, producing on the water the same appearance as before. After many unsuccessful attempts, we at length fastened to him, he being under water about seven feet. I was in doubt what to call it. We soon discovered that he possessed great strength and velocity, but soon found ourselves loosed from it—Still anxious to know what it was, that had produced so much astonishment, and had been the cause of so much speculation (for we never doubted this was the cause) we continued our pursuit until the time for which I engaged my crew had expired. I then returned to Gloucester and discharged them.—Being unwilling to relinquish the undertaking, and in the fullest conviction, that I had seen what was called the Serpent, and finding a part of my crew willing to continue the cruise, we again returned to Squam, with a determination to capture if possible, whatever had produced this singular appearance. The third day he reappeared and on the fifth we succeeded in taking him—believing it to be an uncommon fish for this climate, (having never seen the like) and feeling convinced that we had taken out of the water, that which had caused so much wonder, and had excited so many speculative opinions, I thought proper to bring it to Boston, not doubting that those who were interested, would be satisfied with what I had done. As I went upon a private expedition, I left this town privately; but few people knew of the undertaking, till I had gone. During my cruise I had never given my opinion, not even to those who were with me. After I had obtained the object of my pursuit, it was my intention to have returned to Boston, as quietly as I had left it. I did not go on shore, nor did I allow any one to come to me, except those of my crew—when I sent the boat for my baggage, I requested the crew to answer no questions that might be put to them.
The Express that came to this town, came without my knowledge and certainly against my wish—had I have know it in time, I should have prevented it. I publicly defy the man on earth, to say I sent him express, or had any knowledge of it—and now let me ask what I could have done more to please, or said less to offend any person. It was not possible for me to make a Serpent, to answer their speculations, but all that has been pointed out to me as the Serpent, I [have] taken, but not without some difficulty and labour. Many persons from Gloucester have been witnesses to the object of our pursuit while we were in chase, and all with whom I have conversed, agree in the opinion I have here given, which is, that this fish has caused many of the opinions that have been given of the supposed Serpent—of this, my Boat’s Crew are well convinced, and its existence on this coast has been in part founded on the testimony they have given.
If I am asked, how it is possible for a Fish like the one taken to produce such a wonderful appearance, by his motion in the water (with thousands of questions besides) I can but answer.—“His peculiar movement added to his velocity, has produced to my eyes a greater deception than I ever witnessed before, and finally I repeat, that what I saw answered the description so minutely—and the describing his body, as being like kegs fastened together, struck me so forcibly, that had I not followed it up and discovered the deception, I should have added my testimony on oath, to the long list already given, of the existence of a Sea Serpent on our Coast.
I now take my leave of the public, but am ready to answer verbally any questions that may be put to me, hoping they will do me the justice to say that I have used no deception.
RICHARD RICH.”
So the Great Sea Serpent was instead a Great Optical Illusion! Still, New Englanders—or at least New England newspaper editors—wanted to believe. Sightings of sea serpents are sprinkled through newspapers during the next few decades, but never one was captured—a rather satisfying conclusion for such a marvelous monster.
previous: The sea serpent vs. reality | next: The sea serpent vs. the comedians
To “Nineteenth-Century American Children & What They Read”
Some of the children | Some of their books | Some of their magazines
Some works for adults, 1800-1872