courfe of this voyage, which was carried on, with fingular
perfeverance, between three and four years, have been already
Rated to the reader. But the general fearch now
made, throughout the whole Southern hemifphere, as being
the principal objedt in view, hath been referved for this fe-
parate article. Here, indeed, we are not to take notice of
lands that have been difcovered, but of feas failed through,
where lands had been fuppofed to exift. In tracing the.
route of the Refolution and Adventure, throughout the
South Atlantic, the South Indian, and the South Pacific
Oceans that environ the globe, and combining it with the
route of the Endeavour, we receive what may be called ocular
demonftration, that Captain Cook, in his perfevering re-
fearches, failed over many an extenfive continent, which,
though fuppofed to have been feen by former navigators, at
the approach of his Ihips, funk into the bofom of the ocean,
and, like the bafelefs fabric of a vifion, left not a rack behind*.
It
* It muft be obferved, however, that Monfieur le Monier, in the Memoirs of the
French Academy of Sciences for 1776, pleads for the exiftence oF Cape C.rcumc-
fion feen by Bouvet in 1738. B M EngUfc nav,gator fought for in vain, and
fuppofes to havebeen only an iiland of ice. Mr. Wales, m a paper read before the
Royal Society, very forcibly replied to M. le Monier’s objeAions; and the attack
having been repeated, Tie has drawn up a more extended defence of this part o f Captain
Cook’s Journal, which he hath very obligingly communicated, and is here inferted.
a - M tending to prove that Captain Cooi fought for Cape Circumdfm under the proper
Meridian; and that the Objections which have been made to hit ConduB, in
refpeft, are not well founded.
±
I N T II O D U C T I O N. xx
It has been urged, that the exiftence of a Southern continent
is necellary to preferve an equilibrium between the
twomeridian
o f Greenwich : and confequently that this land may exift, notwithftanding:
all that has yet been done*to find it. M . Le Monier has alfo two additional{Memoirs
on the fame fubjecf, in the volarne for 177.9, occafioned, as lt aPPears> by fome objections
which have been made to his former Memoir before the Academy. For fome
reafon or other, the Academy has not thought proper to print the objections which,
have been made to M . Le Monier’s hypothefis ;. nor has he been particular enough in-
his two Memoirs, which reply to them, to enable me to fay of what importance the
objections are. I can only gather, that they contain fome exceptions to the quantity
by which M . Le Monier afferts the variation alters in io° of longitude, under the-
parallel of 540 South j and which, I conceive, has little to do in the difpute.
Whether the land,, ufually called Cape Circumcifion, exifts or not,, is a point o f
fmall importance to geography ;. as the moft ftrenuous aflerters of its exiftence mull
allow it to be a very inconfiderable ifland,. and o f no ufe. This, therefore, is not,,
ill itfelf, a matter worthy of difpute : but, in aflerting this, M . Le Monier has, and I
am forry to obferve it, with fome afperity too, particularly in his fécond Memoir,
endeavoured to cenfure the judgment and conduct of Captain Cook, whofe memory I
have every reafon to revere, as well as the judgment of thofe who were with him j
and on this account, I cannot help feeling rnyfelf called on to explain the motives'
which induced Captain Cook to place no dépendance on the arguments, now adduced
by M . Le Monier, in fupport of his fuppofition ; and which, M . Le Monier muft
know, were not unattended to, at that time, from what the Captain has Jaid, p. 236:
Vol. II. of his Account of the Voyage. And it may be proper to obferve here, that
what fell from Captain Cook, on this fubject, was to {hew that this circumftance was
then attended to, and not to. throw blame on M . Bouvet,, for whofe memory and
abilities Captain^Cook entertained great refpect : nor is it incompatible with the utmoft
refpect, for a man to have a favourable opinion of his own- labours ; or to endeavour
to ihew why he thinks the difagreement between them and thofe of another perfon,.
when there is one, does not arife from an èrror committed by himfelf. There could,
therefore, be no occafion for M . Le Monier to exprefs himfelf 'as he has . done in
feveral parts of his fécond Memoir.
The fubftance o f M. Le Monier’ s argument is this. In 1739, when M l Bouvet’ s
difcovery is fuppofed to have been made, the methods for determining the longitude
of a {hip at fea were very defe&ive ; and, of courfe, the longitude of any land which
happened accidentally to be feen by one, was equally uncertain. On a preemption
that this was the cafe with refpeft to Cape Circumcifion, M . Le Monier enquires into
the quantity of the variation of the magnetic needle, obferved by M . Bouvet at that place,
and alfo into obfervations of the fame kind, made at other places in the neighbourhood*
of it, about the fame time, as well as both before and fince. And by comparing
thefe obfervations together, he concludes, that at the time when Captain Cook was
in