rst undertook the work, it was debated, whether it should be
written in the first or third person; it was readily acknowledged on all
hands, that a narrative in the first person would, by bringing the
adventurer and the reader nearer together, without the intervention of a
stranger, more strongly excite an interest, and consequently afford more
entertainment; but it was objected, that if it was written in the name
of the several commanders, I could exhibit only a naked narrative,
without any opinion or sentiment of my own, however fair the occasion,
and without noting the similitude or dissimilitude between the
opinions, customs, or manners of the people now first discovered, and
those of nations that have been long known, or remarking on any other
incident or particular that might occur. In answer to this objection,
however, it was said, that as the manuscript would be submitted to the
gentlemen in whose names it would be written, supposing the narrative to
be in the first person, and nothing published without their approbation,
it would signify little who conceived the sentiments that should be
expressed, and therefore I might still be at liberty to express my own.
In this opinion all parties acquiesced, and it was determined that the
narrative should be written in the first person, and that I might,
notwithstanding, intersperse such sentiments and observations as my
subject should suggest: they are not indeed numerous, and when they
occur, are always cursory and short; for nothing would have been more
absurd than to interrupt an interesting narrative, or new descriptions,
by hypothesis and dissertation.[5] They will, however, be found most
frequent in the account of the voyage of the Endeavour; and the
principal reason is, that although it stands last in the series, great
part of it was printed before the others were written, so that several
remarks, which would naturally have been suggested by the incidents and
descriptions that would have occurred in the preceding voyages, were
anticipated by similar incidents and descriptions which occurred in
this.

[Footnote 5: It is highly questionable if this substitution of writer
for adventurer have the efficiency ascribed to it, when the reader knows
before hand, and cannot but remember, that it is artificial, and
avowedly intended for effect. This is so obvious, that one cannot help
wondering how the parties concerned in the publication of these Voyages
should have acquies