?]0 SUR'VBY OF THE INTERTROPICAL '? deprived them of ?eir ?t, but ? ?eir A? a? ? ve? f?i?ble ?ubs. ?is m? have b?n a .very serious 1? ? su? s?p? ?v?, but one th? they ?c?y de?. ? was n?rly new, it m?ur? ?gh?en f?t in leah, ?d two in b?adth, ? wo?d ?s?y ? eight per.ns; the sid? were sup? by two .?1? f?n? ? ?e ?nwh?e by of a climbing ?t, (?gdla? in?,) that ?ws a?fly her?uts, ?d ? whi? ? ?e en? of ?e ? were n?fiy, ?d ev? ms?ly j&?; ?e ?1? were &er on eider side by rope ?ns?' of of bark. ? ?n? was m?e of one sheet of b?k, but in ?e bottom, wi?in it, sho?-pi?s were pl? cross-?ys, in order shape, ?d ?cr?se its sffen?h. ?e. ?s?p- tion of a can? seen by Ca?n Flindem Blue. Mud Bay, ? ?e G? of C?nmria, dff- fe? ve? ?ffie kom ?e above *. ?il? we were b?nging away the ? ?e native, who h? foHow? us ?o? ?e shore, were ? cMse by ?ong ? trees, lousy vo- ?emti?, in whi? ?e wo? ?-nS-? w? t?ught ? ? fr?u?fly us?. ' ?. ?e next mo? we s?ed out of Kn?er's
- F?sosas' Te? ?ustrah?, vol. II. p. 198,
�
