The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1909-10-02
COOKS STORY
CANNOT BE SHAKEN
Continued From rage one.l

Continued From rage One.)
this out. I did it because l wished to
be sure of announcing my own discov-
cry
Still Friendly to Commander.
The further questioning with their
answers follow:
Odd you look upon Commander
Peary as friend or as an enemy2
Al must say L do not know. I
have treated Peary as friend Until
| know more about the situation l shall
continue to do the same.
Q.-Did You ever say anything in
Etah that indicated that you feared
for your life if he got there9
A.-No.
Q.-Would you be willing to meet
Peary in debate when he gets here ?
A.-As far as | am concerned, the
Peary incident is closed. Peary is not
the dictator OF my affairs, and | do not
care to say anything further about
him.
Q.-What caused you to have such
confidence in Whitney that you intrust
ed your instruments to him?
Al knew him by name Circum-
stances that arose while l was with
him justified my confidence. | gave
him the instruments TO bring back be-
cause | thought they would be less
liable to injury on board his vessel than
If L took them across glaciers and rough
ice-covered country.
Q.-What is you opinion of the
story told by the negro Henson of the
information he obtained from your two
hsklmosF @@
A.-Well, the Eskimos were bound
by me not to tell anyone where they
had been. Henson s testimony is en-
tirely founded on heresay.
Q.-Was your determination of the
pole solely by an observation of the
sun S altitude, or did you take observa-
tions of the pole star twelve hours
apart and by the determination of the
celestial pole mid-between the two po-
sitions prove the accuracy Of your po-
sition on the terrestrial pole?
Allow are you going to take an
observation of the polar star when you
have continuous sum- There is no
night; you cannot have any stars.
There is no darkness.
Won't Tell His Figures.
OWN you describe in detail any
single observation taken by you at the
North Pole, the exact figures of the
results and the corrections applied
A.-Not at this present moment. We
will describe every one of them in de-
tail when they go to the University of
Copenhagen within two months. After
that they will go to everybody that
wants to examine them.
On your original narrative, as
published, you said: ''The night of
April was made notable by the swing
ing of the sun at midnight over the
northern ice. Our observation on April
6 placed the camp in latitude 1886,
longitude GA The astronomers say
that in the latitude you mention the
midnight sun would have been visible
on April 1 and that if you really saw
it for the first time on April you
must have been $50 miles from the
pole, instead of 234, as you supposed.
Therefore, to have reached the pole on
April q you would have had to travel
thirtynine miles daily. What is your
explanation of the apparent discrep-
ancy?
An the first place, that indicates
the point I have taken-that nobody
car pronounce judgment on a matter
of this kind until they get a complete
record. The northern horizon at mid
night had been so obscure that we
could not tell whether the sun was
below the horizon or above it. We
were not making observations at mid
night. Therefore, this statement is
based on the fact that we have said
that it was possible to see the sun at
midnight of that day My impression
is that we were absolutely unable to
see the sun the midnight before that.
The horizon was obscured.
, Q.-What was the temperature at
the point nearest the pole?
A.-Eighty-thre degrees Fahrenheit.
| found that we suffered less cold when
the thermometer was at its lowest point
than we did when it was not as cold,
but had heavy wind to contend with.
.A.n.--