In the proofs adduced, outside of the letter addressed to the king, no direct evidence appears in regard to the discovery. There is no testimony to be found of any one who took part in the setting forth or equipment of the expedition, or in the prosecution of the voyage, or who was personally cognizant of the return of the Dauphiny. No chart or private letter, no declaration or statement of the navigator, in regard to the extraordinary discovery achieved by him, is produced or mentioned, although he belonged to a family of some note in Tuscany, which still existed in the present century. In this respect, Italy, the birth place and home of Verrazzano, is as blank and barren as France. All that is really shown of any pertinency is the single circumstance, that possibly the claim to the discovery was advanced in Italy, and in that country alone, at the time of the construction of the globe of Ulpius in 1542, but not anterior to the year 1529, or until five years after the event, when, according to the Verrazano map, if that he accepted as genuine in its present form, and the most favorable construction be upon its ambiguous legend, of which that inscription is capable, the claim was for the first time announced. And thus there is nothing showing that the letter or its pretensions were known before the last named year. In view this important fact, and the absence of any evidence whatsoever corroborative of the letter or its contents, it is not unreasonable to believe that the letter was an attempt to appropriate to the Florentine the glory which belonged to Estevan Gomez, a Portuguese pilot, who actually discovered and explored this coast, in 1525, in the service of the emperor, Charles V, and whose voyage and exploration were immediately thereupon made known, both, in Spain and Italy. That such, indeed, was the source from which the Verrazzano letter was derived is susceptible of demonstration; and for that purpose some account of the voyage and discoveries of Gomez and their publication becomes necessary.