1803.
January.
ship's head N.E. by N., gave variation 2° 57′, or 4° 4′ east, corrected to the meridian.
Tuesday 11.We had the wind at N.W. in the morning, and steered close to it on the larbord tack, until noon; when the hill on the outer north-east island, bore S. 89½° W., nine or ten miles. The latitude of the hill is 13° 38¼′, and from six sets of distances of stars east and west of the moon, its longitude would be 136° 36′; but from the survey and more numerous observations, it is 137° 0½′ east.[1] After a calm the sea breeze came in, and our course was directed for the north-east point of Groote Eylandt; at sunset we approached a rocky islet three or four miles from the point, and anchored under it in 6½ fathoms, sandy ground, with the point bearing S. 5° E., and the furthest visible part, very low and sandy, S. 63° W. five or six miles. On the other side, the north-east islands extended from N. 32° E. to 39° W., with many small rocks scattered along them; the nearest of which, a split rock, was distant a short mile.
Wednes. 12.In the morning we steered close to a N.N.W. wind, for the low sandy point, where the shore was found to trend southward; and five or six miles to the west there was other land, moderately high and in some places cliffy, which took nearly a parallel direction; and the bight between them ran so far up towards the north-east bluff of the woody hills, that a junction with the small opening seen on the outside appeared to be probable. A shelving spit extended out from the low point, and on opening the bight our soundings decreased from 6 to 2½ fathoms, which made it necessary to tack; and the wind being adverse to passing within the north-east islands, if indeed there be water enough for a ship, which seemed doubtful, we steered out by the way we had come in.
Having little wind, the isles were not passed till late in the- ↑ The apparent error of 24½′ in the first longitude, is greater than should exist in the mean result of six sets of distances. There is an interval of three days in the observations of the moon at Greenwich with which these distances were compared; and it seems probable that a great part of the error might arise from that cause.
