Note 16 — Chapter XVI

I ascertained, upon studying carefully the accounts of the Congo Expedition of 1816, that Professor Smith’s account in many respects is much more reliable than Captain Tuckey’s. Professor Smith gives the river above Isangila a general width of about one English mile, which is quite correct, and at a place which the officers reached on the 8th September, 1816, he estimates the width to be about half a Danish mile, which Captain Tuckey has unaccountably extended to about four or five English miles, that is to say, from 6640 to 8800 yards! Captain Tuckey, according to Stanford’s Library Map of 1874, places the second Sangalla by dead reckoning in east longitude 14° 36′, south latitude 4° 59′, which is very far from being its position. On July 28, 1877, I obtained south latitude 5° 19′ by observation. Captain Tuckey is, however, more reliable in his orthography than the botanist of his Expedition. Both gentlemen have unaccountably passed the largest fall, viz., Nsongo Yellala, with but a mere word of mention.