i6 A V O Y A G E T O
Dumber Aly inftructions directing me to examine it, with a view
t— v-— < to difcover a good harbour, I proceeded in the fearch; and
on
The Captain, on his return homeward, in March 17755 heard, a fecond time,
fomething about this French difcovery at the Cape, where he met with Monfieur Crozet,
who very obligingly communicated to him a Chart of the Southern Hemifphere,
wherein were delineated not only his own difcoveries, but alfo that o f Captain Kerguelen {a).
But what little information that Chart could convey, was ftill neceflarily confined to
the operations of the firft voyage j the Chart here referred to, having been publilhed
in France in 1773 ; that is, before any intelligence could poffibly be conveyed from
.the Southern Hemifphere of the refult of Kerguelen’s fecond vifit to this new* land 1
which, we now know, happened towards the clofe of the fame year.
O f thefe latter operations, the only account (if that can be called an account, which
conveys no particular information) received b y Captain Cook from Monfieur Crozet,
-was, that a later Voyage had been undertaken by the French, ■under the command o f Captain
Kerguelen, which had ended much to the difgrace o f that commander (b) .
What Crozet had not communicated to our Author,, and what we are fure, from a
:variety of circUmftances, he had never heard of from any. other quarter, he miffed an
opportunity of learning at Teneriffe. He exprefles his being forry, as we havejuft
read, that he did not know fooner that there was ort board the frigate an officer who had
'been with Kerguelen, as he might have obtained from him more interejling information about
this land, than its filiation. And, indeed, if he had cbnverfed with that officer, he
might have obtained information .more intereftng than, he was aware of j he might have
•learnt that Kerguelen had adtually vifited this Southern -land a fecond time, and that
the little ifle o f which he then received the name and pofition from the Chevalier de
Borda, was a difcoveiy o f this later voyage.’ But the account conveyed-to him being,
as the Reader will obferve, unaccompanied with any date, or other diftinguiihing cir-
cumftance, he left Teneriffe, and arrived on the coafts of Kerguelen’ s Land, under .a
full perfuafion that it had been vifited only once before. And even, with regard-to the
operations of that firft voyage, -he had nothing to guide him, but the very fcanty materials
afforded to him by Baron Plettenberg and Monfieur Crozet.
T he truth is, the French feem, for fome reafon or other, not furely founded on the
importance of Kerguelen’s difcovery, to have been ¡very ihy of publishing a full and
diftin& account .of it. No fuch account had been publilhed while Captain Cook
-lived. Nay, even after the return of his ihips in 1780, the Gentleman who obligingly
-lent, his.affiftance to give a view o f the prior obfervations of the French, and to .con-
-nedhthem on the fame Chart with thofe o f our Author, though his affiduity in procuring
geographical information can be equalled only by his readinefe in communicating
if, had not, it ihould feem, been able to procure any materials for that purpofe, but
[a) See Cook’s Voyage, Vol. ii. p. 266, ( ¿ ) I b id . p . 268.
jfuch
■on the 16th, being then in the latitude of 48° 45', and in the 1776.
longitude of 52’ Eaft, we faw penguins and divers, and
rock-weed floating in the fea. We continued to meet with Monday ,6'
more or lefs of thefe every day, as we proceeded to the Eaft-
ward; and on thp 21ft, in the latitude of 48° 27' South, and Saturday 2,.
in the longitude of 65° Eaft, a very large feal was feen.
We had now much foggy weather, and, as we expected to
fall in with the land every hour, our navigation became
both tedious and dangerous.
At length, on the 24th, at fix o’clock in the morning, as Tuefday 24.
we were fleering to the Eaft ward, the fog clearing away a
little, we faw iand *, bearing South South Eaft, which,
upon
futh as mark the operations o f the firft French voyage j and even for thefe, he was
indebted to a MS. drawing.
But this veil o f unneceflary fecrecy is at length drawn afide. Kerguelen himfelf
has, very lately, publilhed the Journal o f his proceedings in two fucceffive voyages,
m the years 177a and 1 7 7 3 ; and has annexed to his Narrative a Ghart of the coafts
o f this land, as far as he had explored them in both voyages. Monfieur de Pages,
alfo, much about the fame time, favoured us with another account of the fecond
voyage, in fome refpefts fuller than Kerguelen’s own, onboard whofe Ihip.he was-
then an officer. ®
-From thefe fources of authentic information* we are enabled to draw every ne-
cefiary material to correfl what is erroneous, and to illuftrate what, otherwife, would
have remained obfcure, in this part of Captain Cook’s Journal. - W e lhail take occa-
fion to do this in feparate Notes .on the paffages as they occur, and conclude, this
tedious, but, it is hoped, not unneceflary, detail o f fails, with one general remark,
fully expreffiv.e o f the difadvantages our Author laboured under. He never faw that
part of the coaft upon which the ’French had .been in 1772 ; and he never knew that
they had bten upon another part of it in 1773, which was the yery fcene of .his own.
operations: ' Confequeutly, what he knew o f the former voyage, as delineated upop
Crozet’s Chart, only ferved to perplex and miflead his judgment; and his total ignorance
of the latter, put it out-of his power to compare his own obfervations with thofe
then made by Kerguelen ; though we, who are better inftruited, can do this, by.tra- -
cing the plaineft marks of coincidence and agreement.
* Captain Cook was not the original difcoverer of thefe fmall ¡Hands which he
now fell in with. It is certain that they had been feen and named by Kerguelen, on
his fecond voyage, in December 1773. Their pofition, relatively to each other, and
V o l . I. ' I j pp