Dr. Hawkesworth meant to prepare as interesting a narrative as he could, and tried to please home parties as flatteringly as circumstances permitted. Thus, men of science would be gratified by the selection of the place as Botany Bay, an Admiralty officer would be glad of the adoption of his name in Port Jackson, while the Dutch appellation of New Holland gave place to the more British one of New South Wales. Even Torres Strait, that honoured the navigators of Spain and Portugal, surrendered to the English name of Endeavour Strait.
The value of Cook's second voyage in the Resolution, which was brought out by the Dean of Windsor, had the advantage of good logs, with the presence of Captain Cook at its revision, and was, consequently, never questioned as that of the Endeavour had been under the editorship of Dr. Hawkesworth, which had a far more novel and romantic story to tell.
In a remarkable letter to Sir Joseph Banks by John Frederick Schiller, German translator of Hawkesworth's voyage, and dated November 14, 1773, the writer expresses the deep concern of a German bookseller at the wrong done to the sale of this translation by some published remarks in England, impugning the correctness of the official Admiralty narrative. He therefore seeks "some lines" from Sir Joseph, as Cook's fellow voyager, in refutation of those injurious assertions. The German scholar adds: "Mr. Ferber, an eminent mineralogist, says he has of late made a literary tour through Europe, and after his return from England asserted at Berlin that
"Not only the respective Commanders, Messrs. Biron, Wallis, Carteret, &c., had publicly protested against Dr. Hawkesworth's account of their voyages, as containing misrepresented facts, but also that especially Messrs. Banks and Solander had publicly declared that they had never delivered any Papers of theirs into that Editor's hands, and that the Public was to wait for their own narrative, which was to be published within 3 or 4 years."
Mr. Schiller goes on to say: "In order to support these assertions, Mr. Ferber is said to have produced a letter which he affirmed to have received from Mr. Banks, and in which all these assertions are plainly expressed and corroborated."
If, then, suspicions were excited immediately after the publication of our authorised and popular version of Cook's voyage, it is not surprising that further investigation, as now made, should develop renewed scepticism. The recent record of the London Press that the Corner's Log had been pronounced by the Admiralty experts to be genuine, and in Cook's own handwriting, might well puzzle outsiders.
Had Sir Joseph Banks publicly answered the appeal of Mr. Schiller in 1773, and satisfied the world as to the authenticity of Dr. Hawkesworth's story, the necessity of any subsequent controversy might have been avoided. In that appeal to Banks and Solander "in the cause of Truth, of Justice, of Honour and Humanity," we read that the two naturalists "intend to publish in five or six years hence, in sixteen or eighteen folios and two thousand copper plates, and totally unconnected with Dr. Hawkesworth's narrative." Such a great work did not appear. Why not? History does not tell.
There has been sufficient reason for the present writer's long silence upon this inquiry, and particularly since he had reported on Cook's logs some six years ago.
Now, however, as the acting archivist is just entering his eighty-fifth year, Colonial friends here deemed it a proper time for the printing of this pamphlet in the cause of Truth, Justice, and Honour, it being his last contribution to Colonial history, the series of which began in 1845 by the publication of his Geography for Australian Youth, which was the first production, by the Australian Press, of any Geography of Australia.
JAMES BONWICK.