Addendum to footnote by Syma Ebbin: The Linnaean Society report included the deposition of Gorham Norwood who recounted his observations of the 27th of September when, working with a Mr. Colbey and his son, along the shores of Loblolly Cove, they encountered a snake that “did not move like other snakes, and did not move fast.” The snake was killed and taken to the village of Sandy Bay. Mr Norwood noted that, “Upon examining the Snake, it struck us as being different from any we had ever seen … Many of the persons who saw the Snake, suggested that it might be the progeny of the Sea Serpent, which had been so much talked of, and which was said to have been seen near the cove, where this snake was killed.” The designation of the new Scoliophis Atlanticus species was based on the “minute” examination of the creature.  The Report concludes, “The appearance at nearly the same time and place of two creatures, agreeing with each other in certain important and conspicuous particulars, disagreeing in the most remarkable of these particulars with other animals in their class; and between whom no difference, but that of size, has been discovered, must naturally lead to a conjecture that they are of the same species … the Society will  probably feel  justified in considering them individuals of the same species, and entitled to the same name…”   Unfortunately, it was later determined that they were mistaken in their attribution of the sea serpent’s juvenile phase to what was later found to be a deformed black snake. It’s likely that the sea serpent depicted by Elihu Vedder in his 1899 painting, which has been reproduced on the cover of this newsletter, is based on the description of the animal found at Loblolly Cove by Mr. Norwood.