The sun., 1909-11-29
StYSCOOK DIDN'T REACH POLE
WALTER WELLMAN INTIMATES
THAI HE'S AN IMPOSTOR.
lae Says That what Cook Claims to Have
DOne with Ills slight Equipment and
Y Organization was Physically IInpOs-
slbie and Beyond Human Power.

ttWtO AAAAh bUywhhu
WASHINGTON. Nov. 2s.--Walter Well
man. who planned to reach the north
pole by a fiighs in an airship. declared
to-day in a prepared statement that DIR.
Frederick A. Cook did not attain the
frozen goal.
sTo an honest winner I could offer my
congratulations" said Mr.. Wellman. ~but
not to one who had cheated in the game.
Though arctic men have long feared
some impostor might hide himself for n
time in the north and then emerge with an
Imaginary tale OF journey to the pole.
for one have never believed the man
existed who could thus put a stain upon
the bright pages OF arctic effort and incur
the detestation OF the world by an at
tempt to convert the heroic into humbug
and to obtain money and honor by false
pretenses.
1T Is naturally true" says Mr.. Well
man, that one who has had experience
In equipping and leading expeditions
In dog shedding in rough ice and great
: cold. keeping diaries OF such travel and
records OF astronomical observations.
forms a standard OF judgment all his
own. From this viewpoint we studied
the narratives OF Cook and Peary with an
impartial desire to reach the truth through
analysis in the light Of experience. The
only purpose in making this analysis
public is to do ones duty by contributing
what he can. be it ever so little, toward
the truth and justice. II Is needless to
eay this is done without personal bias
OF interest. with nothing to gain and
perhaps much criticism to endure on
account OF Il.
There are three ways to test the good
faith OF one who claims to have been to
ths pole-first by his character. second
by his narrative. third by his astronomical
observations. The first and second are
much more important than the third.
II both character and narrative are above
suspicion. as in the cases Of Nansen.
Atruxzi. Shackleton and others. the as
economical observations are mere mat
ters OF course. important from the sci
sntifo view but negligible as proof. be-
patise no proof Is required. On the other
hand, IL character and narrative be inn
peached a travellers alleged astronom-
ioal observations are OF no value, for
the simple reason that. having concocted
q story. such a man would not hesitate
90 conooct astronomical observations
20 match it-something very easily done"
Mr.. Wellman gives his views at length
upon Arctic sledging. which he declares
lis nothing new. No miracles are to be
expected; one may perfect and improve
and do little better but he cannot revo-
lutiopize. cannot perform prodigies.
Every pretended sledgine feat must be
tested by it's inherent probability. its
approximate conformity to the standard"
Then Mr.. Wellman lays down certain
standards for measuring the accuracy
of claims OF sledging exploit in the Arc
ito regions. and from these he makes the
following comparisons of results:
-No sane man would set out on thou
sand mile journey over rough ice with only
two sledges and would surely come to
grief If he did Analysing the ns rrattves
of Cook and Peary in the light OF these
principles we find that Peary's method
0onformed to the standard in every par
tcular. He had a far northern base.
with his ship 400 miles from the pole.
He advanced supplies the previous au-
t.lmn and in the early spring to a point
AZ miles nearer the pole. When he started
early on the return OF the light iC was
With so or 10 men, 14O dogs and 2l sledges.
-Four supporting parties went out on
the sea ice, returning one after the other.
His last support left him only Is5 miles
from the pole. and by this time his W ei ghts
were so small that rapid travel was wholly
practicable. All the way from the land
TO this point his weights per man. per
dog and per sledge had been cut to the
minimum because of the use of these sup
porting parties.
-Pesry's narrative was found consist
ent in every particular - in equipment,
organisation, loads. power. time, in
cidents made. Everything within the
limits OF practice. nothing miraculous
or even surprising nothing that had
not been foreshsdowed by the expert
snce of others. His achievement was
the natural evolution of sledging art
the perfection of it through long expert
ence- Every statement he made concern
ing it was precise. workmanike, cred
1bie: and IL was no surprise to learn
that his astronomical observations. when
examined by competent authorities. were
found in keeping with the published
when Cook left Annotok, on February
10, he had before him q journey Of SO
miles to the pole. When Peary's advance
party left the Roosevelt on February Is.
n had before IL "A journey of 500 miles TO
the pole. When Cook Left the land az
Cape Hubbard on March Is TO set out over
the sea ice he had before him "a journey
TO the pole and back of $50 miles When
Peary's advance left Columbia and sta rted
over the sea ice on February %, the jour
Jney to the pole and back was $40 miles
Cook q journey from the land out and ba ok
was "a per cent. longer in distance than
Peary's and so per cent. more difficult
when the greater weight and the neces-
sary slower rate OF travel arc taken into
account. Cooks men and dogs had lust
finished $50 miles Of travel, Peary's men
and dogs started fresh.
Cook had no support save for the first
three days. Peary had ample support
to a point $50 miles north OF the place
whore Cooks support left him. Cook
had three mon, 20 dogs, sledges: Peary.
20 men, 133 dogs. 10 sledges. Every ex-
pertenced Arctic man will at once conclude
from these facts that Peary could travel
TO the pole about twice as fast as Cook
could travel, that Peary could averag ge
perhaps ten to twelve miles per day on
the upward trip and Cook five or six miles
or about what others have done with
similar equipment and organization
That which he claims to have done with
his equipment and organization was
physically impossible. 1t is beyond
human power"
Discussing DIR. Cooks alleged astrono-
mioal observations" Explorer Wellman
says:
mo competent traveller with a low
sun, low temperature. great refraction
/. and using sextant instead Of theodolite
would think OF recording such an obser-
walton as $3.50 40. And then we advanced