TO THE EDITORS OF THE ANTHOLOGY.

NATURAL HISTORY.

BOSTON, JANUARY 9, 1809.

GENTLEMEN,

I PRESUME that among the other branches of science, which your valuable miscellany was intended to encourage, that of the natural history of our own country will claim a place.

I not only do not make any professions of attainment in this valuable department of knowledge, but I most expressly disclaim any such pretensions.

I have, however, remarked, that industry and zeal sometimes compensate for defect of profoundness and solidity; and perhaps society owes as much to the well meant and active exertions of enthusiastick individuals, as to the researches of more penetrating minds whose sedentary habits frequently paralyze their exertions.

My curiosity was excited by the advertisement of a whale to be exhibited at Charlestown. I considered this animal as one of the noblest of creation inferiour to man. I knew that the opportunities for examining individuals of this class by men whose habits fit them for accurate observation were rare; and it will appear in the course of this communication, that the most celebrated naturalists of Europe, have cited but two cases in which this particular species has been examined on shore.

In all other instances they must have relied wholly upon the relation of individuals, not at all calculated either by their education or habits to give accurate descriptions of this extraordinary and singular race of animals.

Before I proceed to give the description of the individual lately exhibited, I may save some trouble, and afford some amusement to your readers, by giving the Linnaean account and divisions of the several genera and species of the cetaceous order.

Linnaeus's first genus is called Monodon. But as this genus has two teeth in the upper jaw, and as the fish now exhibited has none, we may lay this genus out of the case.

His second genus is called Balaena, and includes the following species;

1st. Mysticetus. This species having no fin upon the back, can not be the one now exhibited.

2d. Species. Physalus. Spiracles double in the middle of the head, at the extremity of the back a soft fin; English name Fin Fish; inhabits the American and European seas, equalling in length the common whale, but much more slender, and less fat; mouth longer, whalebone shorter, blue, ejects water from his spiracles with great force, body brown, shining, beneath white, dorsal fin straight, acute, 3 to 4 feet long.

3d. Species. Boops. Spiracle double, a horny protuberance at the extremity of the back; inhabits the south and northern oceans; 46 feet long; very smooth skin; black; belly white, longitudinally

wrinkled; head oblong; snout sharpish; tongue 5 feet long; eyes placed near the angles of the mouth. English name, Pikeheaded. 4th. Gibbosa. This animal has no dorsal fin, and is of course out of the question.

5th. Musculus. Spiracles double; under jaw very broad; inhabits the coast of Scotland; 78 feet long; body above, black, beneath, white; lower jaw semicircular, upper sharp; mouth very large; horny laminae, or whalebone, black, very short; spiracle double, pyramidal, divided by a partition; belly wrinkled; dorsal fin fat.

6th. Rostrata. Is too small, and does not agree in any respect with the individual now exhibited.

Third genus. Physeter. This genus differs in every respect from the one now exhibited.

Mr. Pennant in his Zoology gives the description of many species, but as his description of the Balaena Musculus agrees most accurately with the one in question, we shall insert only that.

"Balaena tripinnis maxillam inferiorem rotundam et superiore multo latiorem habens.”

He adds, "The character of this species, is to have the lower lip broader than the upper, and of a semicircular form."

"That taken in 1692, near Abercorn castle, was 78 feet long, circumference 35 feet; gape, or rictus, very wide; the tongue 15 feet and an half long; the mouth furnished with whalebone about 3 feet in length; on the forehead two spout holes of a pyramidal form; the eyes placed 13 feet from the end of the nose; the pectoral fins 10 feet long; the back fin about 3 feet high, near the tail, which was 18 feet broad; the belly full of folds; is said to feed on herrings.

To the above description of Mr. Pennant, I add the account of the same species by Mons. Lacepede in his supplement to Buffon. It is in his second genus, and second subgenus. Name, Balaenoptera Rorqual. Synonime, Balaena Musculus. Linnaeus

Specifick character.

"Under jaw round, much more advanced than the upper; the head short in proportion to the tail."

"It inhabits the temperate parts of the ocean from the 60th degree of north latitude, to the 35th of the same; feeds upon herrings; black on the back; very white on the belly; whalebone does not exceed 4 feet, diminishing to 5 inches, terminated by long hairs; eyes situated near the angle formed by the lips; its fat seldom exceeds one foot in thickness, and frequently is not more than 4 inches; all the under part of the belly presents longitudinal folds, or furrows from 2 inches to 2 inches and an half in width, and the spaces between the folds are about equal."

"Dalechamp, a learned physician of Lyons, who died in 1588, in a note upon Pliny, states, that he saw one of this species which was cast ashore at Montpelier; he describes it thus ;

"Balaenarum plana et levis cutis est, orcarum canaliculatim striata qualem vidimus in littus ejectam prope Monspesulum."

We shall add the description of the whale now exhibited, from actual mensuration, and let naturalists decide whether the assignment of him to the species of the Balaena Musculus be, or be not correct. This whale was found floating on the surface, not far from Salem in Massachusetts, in about the 43d degree of north latitude.

His back is of a very dark brown colour, approaching to black; his belly perfectly white, longitudinally furrowed, or wrinkled; the folds about 2 inches wide; his form broad over the head and shoulders, exceedingly taper and slender towards the tail. His general shape precisely corresponds to the figure of the Balaenoptera Rorqual, or Balaena Musculus, as given in a plate by Lacepede. Length from the nose to the end of the tail, in a straight line, 60 feet; circumference near the pectoral fins, 35 feet. Under jaw 12 feet long, 3 feet longer than the upper, and much broader; the eyes placed near the angle of the lips, and 13 feet from the tip of the nose, about 2 feet above the angle or plane of the mouth; the visible part of the eye small, and the transparent cornea white. Lateral fins situated in the largest part of the body, 18 feet from the nose, about 6 feet long. Tail horizontal, 3 feet broad, and 14 feet from point to point; spiracles double; dorsal fin fat, and about 2 feet long, and 12 from the tail.

This individual was a male.

It will be perceived that this fish agrees, in his proportion, and his essential characters, with the Balaena Musculus of Linnaeus. He is somewhat smaller than the only one of which naturalists give us a precise description, to wit, the one found near Abercorn Castle; but perhaps the mensuration in that case was made over the surface of his body, which would make a variation of 10 or 12 feet; this one was measured on the ground, as he laid upon the beach, in a perfectly strait line.

On the whole, we have the pleasure to find in this instance, that the descriptions of approved and justly celebrated naturalists have a degree of accuracy which one would scarcely have expected to find of an astonishing and stupendous animal, which Providence in its wisdom has made so rare, that we have seldom the opportunity to examine him in such a situation as to be able to ascertain his precise dimensions and characteristicks.

If, gentlemen, this dry and tedious description, shall, in the smallest degree, contribute to promote the objects of your useful work, I shall be amply rewarded.

A SUBSCRIBER.

ACCOUNT OF MR. PELHAM'S SYSTEM OF

NOTATION.

[In presenting the publick the following account of a late ingenious work, we are sensible that we do not consult the taste of those, who read only for amusement. But we have been sorry to find, that no one, as far as we know, has yet taken notice of its merits, or called to it the attention of the publick. As far as we have examined

it, we have been first pleased with the accuracy, and we may say sobriety of the pronunciation; equally removed from the extremes of foppery and vulgarity. It is true, we were at first rather alarmed at the bristled appearance of the page, but a very little attention satis fied us, that the apparent complexity soon vanished, and we found a system of marks expressing all the sounds of the English language with great simplicity and neatness. Mr. Pelham's System of Notation contains, in our opinion, the most complete and accurate analysis, which has yet appeared, of all the sounds in the English language. We are especially pleased to find, that the letters now in use can express, with so little alteration, all the sounds of the English tongue; that the vowel sounds may also be noted, so as to shew by the marks their mutual dependence. Indeed we venture to say the vowel sounds have never before been analyzed with so much accuracy. We do not indulge the foolish hope, that the English language will ever be printed in this way; for, as orthoepists and philosophers never made a language, so they will never regenerate one. Mr. Pelham may expect considerable encouragement from foreigners. Of this we are sure, that a book in French, printed in this way, would be sought for with avidity by any man, who was studying that language. Those of us, who have any doubt of the accuracy of our English pronunciation, will rather seek information by looking in a pronouncing dictionary; but this by no means diminishes the merit of this work, which, to a foreigner, must be far more valuable, than any pronouncing dictionary of the English language, with which we are acquainted. The account, given in this number, of the previous attempts of this kind, by many celebrated men, we think will be interesting, even to those, who are not disposed to examine and understand the present system. If they should, however, they will not fail to discern its superiority to any one that has preceded it. The next time we read Rasselas, we shall certainly read it in Mr. Pelham's edition. ED.]

IT has frequently been repeated, and is now universally acknowledged, that the imperfection of our alphabet is the chief obstacle to a perfect understanding of English pronunciation. As language consists of sounds, and sounds are represented by written characters, it seems essential, that each letter should regularly denote a single, invariable sound, and readily combine with the others, to produce the infinite variety of compound sounds. If the Roman alphabet was adapted to the sounds of the Roman language, it by no means follows, that the same alphabet must be sufficient to express the words of other languages. When the Roman alphabet, therefore, was introduced into Britain, such changes should have been made in it, as were suitable to the genius of the new language, it was to represent. Whatever may have been the cause or manner of its introduction, the Roman alphabet was received without improvement, and has, in its present imperfect state, become the established medium of communicating the sounds of the English language. That it can be only partially applied to this purpose is sufficiently apparent in the practice of our most eminent orthoepists, who find themselves compelled to change the orthography of English words, in order to convey an idea of their pronunciation.

To supply the defect of uniformity in the powers of the alphabetical characters, various other expedients have been suggested, all, however, requiring a detail of general rules, with numerous excep tions; so that the student soon becomes involved in a labyrinth of perplexities, and abandons the study in disgust. The next resource was found in expunging all letters not essential to the sounds of the words, and thus presenting the pronunciation in a false orthography. But this remedy may be said to be worse than the disease, for, though an attentive study of the principles of the language is the most fatiguing means of acquiring a knowledge of its pronunciation, it is also the most effectual: whereas, when a person has been taught by false spelling, he has to unlearn this, before he can venture to write a word from memory. As a surer means of instruction, the varying sounds of the vowels have been sometimes noted by characters placed above them, but the characters used for this purpose have generally been numeral figures, and even these have become almost as uninteliigible as the vowels themselves, by the same figures being applied to vowels having different sounds. The division of words into the syllables of which they are formed, is a rational and useful mode of instruction, but this implies that the letters have a uniform sound, which is certainly not the case in the Roman alphabet, as applied to the English language. For instance, the letter c has four distinct sounds in can, cell, special, and suffice, while its figure remains the same. A like irregularity exists in the letters in sign, resign, vision, and version. The letter g in gill, (of a fish) has a sound totally different from that of the same letter in gill, (a measure) though the words are exactly the same in appearance. These remarks might be extended to ch, in chaise and chain; to x, in wax and exert; to t, in late and satiate, &c. It is true, that the Italick character is often employed to distinguish the different sounds of some of the consonants. But it is equally true, that its alternation with the Roman letter is insufficient to mark more than two sounds.

Though the want of regularity in the sounds of the consonants is thus perplexing, the difficulties increase when we approach the vowels. The intermixture of their sounds, resulting from the varying powers of each letter, is a perfect chaos, that can be reduced to order by no other means, than a patient, and diligent study of the principles of combination. Few, however, will undertake this, and fewer still will persevere till they have accomplished the Herculean task. In the words wall, lard, mare, and mane, the vowel a has four long sounds, essentially distinct from each other, and their correspondent short tones are found in wallet, cellar, marry, and many. Thus it appears that a single character is the representative of no less than eight sounds, including the short with the long ones. lettero likewise represents four long sounds in born, worm, pole, move, and four correspondent short tones in bonnet, won, whole, and wolf, besides a dipthongal sound in one, and the vowel sound of i in women. But it is not in the combination of consonants with the single vowels, that the student of English finds the greatest difficulty. The diphthongs, or double vowels, present impediments at every step. The combination ea has five different sounds in bear, fear,great, bread,beut. In the words vein, seize, heir, heifer, sleight, the combination ei has

The