Baudin, Then, Knew Nothing About Port Phillip When He Met Flinders On
April 8.
But if somebody else saw it from the masthead on March 30, why
was not the fact reported to the commander?
Why was he not asked the
question whether so large a bay should be explored? Again, if Le
Geographe did sight Port Phillip, why did she not enter it? Here was a
magnificent chance for discoverers. They were necessarily unaware of
Murray's good fortune in January. As far as their knowledge could have
gone, the port was absolutely new to geography. If we believe Peron and
Freycinet, surely these were the most negligent explorers who ever sailed
the seas.* (* It is true that Cook did not enter Port Jackson when he
discovered and named it on May 6, 1770. But exploration, it must always
be remembered, was not the primary object of the voyage of the Endeavour,
as it was of Le Geographe. Cook, when he achieved the greatest extent of
maritime discovery made at one time by any navigator in history, was
simply on his way homeward from a visit to Tahiti, the primary purpose of
which was to enable astronomers to observe the transit of Venus. Cook,
too, made a record of the latitude and longitude of Port Jackson. No such
entry was made by the French relative to Port Phillip, as will presently
be shown.) But if we believe that Baudin spoke the truth to Flinders - and
the absence of all reference to the port in his letter to Jussieu is
alone sufficient to show that he did - what shall we say of the statements
of Peron and Freycinet, written after Baudin's death, after they had
learnt of Murray's discovery, and when they had set themselves the task
of making the work of the expedition appear as important as possible?
Enter page number
PreviousNext
Page 61 of 299
Words from 16975 to 17282
of 83218