Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1909-11-08
MOST OF THEM SILENT
Navy Chiefs Take No Part in
Polar Controversy.
MAY BE HEARD FROM LATER
Admiral Chester the Exception, Ind
He Sides With Peary.
PUBLICLY DEN0UNCES COOK
Statement Issued Yesterday Which
Supplements His Address Before
the University Club.
PUBLICLY DENouNCEs COOK

Admiral Chester'S attack, delivered at
the university Club Saturday evening.
and renewed in an interview given out
Yesterday, is generally regarded as the
most severe onslaught on DIR. Cook since
commander Peary. while still in the
northern waters. hurled the epithet of
liar from the decks Of the Roosevelt
MANY of the naval officers in Washing
ton have pretty strong opinions. repre-
sentative of each side in the controversy,
and. have given forcefuI expressions of
. them in private conversations; but as yet
none of them. except Admirals chester
and Melville, has come forth in lecture
or in print.
II is thought, however. TO be only
matter of time before some of the pro-
. Cook naval officers will explode few
shells in the vicinity of Peary, Melville
and Chester, although. II Is said, they
may wait for the signal to fire, TO ne
ca bled from Copenhagen. There are some
big guns loaded, and for that reason the
position of the higher naval officers is
regarded as one of armed neutrality.
Two Admirals Decline to Talk.
Admiral Schley was the first officer ap-
preached for reply to Admiral Chester.
as he is known to be friendly TO DIR.
- Cook: but perhaps recalling the great
controversy in which he himself figured
SHORTLY after the Spanish American war,
Admiral Schley declared: You will have
to excuse me. I don't want to engage
in any controversy.
Remembering that Admiral BroWnson
is a great champion of the prerogativeS
Of the line officers of the navy, and that
Commander Peary, an engineer, does
not come strictly within that class. some
. newspaper men made effort to draw
him out in reply to Admiral Chester
hut Admiral .Brownson remained neutral.
3 MY speech last night. Admiral Ches-
ter says. was informal and extempora-
had abOut
a week, and was called up on the tele-
phone and asked il ] would speak upon
the polar question before the club.
agreed, and arrived in Washington from
. New York only a few hours before /
made the speech.
II used as the basis of my research the
da-a used by DIR. Cook in his copyrighted
stories of his polar expedition printed in
New York newspaper. and carefully
studied these observations.
Basis of Argument.
Il base my argument that DR.. Cook
did Rot reach the north pole on the dis
agreement between his observations and
the known declLation of the sun, as
shown by the Nautical Almanac. on the
dates referred to in his narrative. Where
DIR. Cook states that April q he first saw
the midnight sun at Sc degrees % min
utes, a distance of 225 miles from the
pole, In reality that date, according
to the Nautical Almanac, the midnight
sun would have been visible as far south
as :: degrees. a distance of IA miles from
the pole. In his narrative, DR.. Cook.
after assuming that April Z lie was as
far north 81 degrees % minutes. based
his claim of reaching the pole on an av-
erage daily journey of fourteen miles a
day for fourteen days. As a matter Of
fact. he would have had to travel forty
miles a day In order to cover the distance
from his real location. according TO the
Nautical Almanac. to the pole.
''FOllOw1nE DIR. Cooks first statement
concerning his journey, Prof. J. n. Stock
well OF Cleveland showed that if his sup
posed latitude were correct. DR.. Cook
ought to have seen the midnight sun
above the horizon April /. DIR. Cook 8
own account fixed this date at April Z.
N trying TO account for this discrepancy
Or. Cook stated that he did not say that
the sun was on the horizon at the time
specified and that there were many DAYS
IN which the sun was obscured by cloud
The inference drawn from the denial was
that on any Of the preceding seven DAYS
the midnight sun might have been seen
above the horizon il the weather had
been clear.
Refers to Specific Statement.
But in his later and fuller narrative
DR.. Cook specifically stated that on
April 3 the barometer remained steady
and the Thermometer sank: the weather
became settled and clear: at noon, now.
there was dazzling light. while the sun
At midnight sank but for a few moments
leaving the frosted blue bathed in noon
day splendor.' OF the weather between
these two dates, he wrote, there was at
no time perfectly clear horizon but
the weather was good enough to make
frequent nautical observations IL fire.
uuent nautical observations could be made
between April :; and April ., 1t is pretty
certain that the sun was not altogether
obscured In the middle of all the nights
and II Is certain that il was slowly rising
total OhScuraffOn no .rI, riato
TO clear daylight April -
Not only did Admiral Chester main
tain that on April 3 Dr. Cook was TAR
south Of the position he gives himself I'm
his narratives. but that on the four subse-
quent days. and presumably on all SUBJ
sequent days DIR. Cook was headed south
away from the pole which. according to
d his own accounts, was at least 22J miles
away. Admiral Chester based this de-
duction. he said. en- Cooks statement that
on April : the sun sank just below the
horizon, and that four days later. On
april 4, the sun showed a short distance
above the horizon. According to Admit
raj Chester. If DIR. Cook had been travel
ing northward during these four DAYS
his change In location combined with the
steadily increasing declination of the sun
would In four DAYS have caused a far
greater change in the suns position
relative 10 the horizon than that reported
nv Or. Cook.
Cook Was Astray.
Il, il really took az DIR. Cook said. four
days for the sun 10 change it's midnight
position from just below the horizon to
Just above IT," Admiral Chester continued.
the only explanation possible is that DR.
cooks movements were taking him away
from the midnight sun: in other words. to
The south. The point l wish TO make is
that the sun during these four DAYS was
getting above the horizon at an apprecia-
Die rate each day. IL DIR. Cook were 60
ing TO the north this rate would have
been increased still further. But such
increase would require far less than four
DAYS for the change mentioned
therefore state" Admiral Chester
said In conclusion. that DIR. Cook never
got beyond ~ degrees. just beyond Cape
Thomas Hubbard. and that he then start
ed back south. Ny conclusion is that Dr.
Cook never got closer than J64 miles to
the north pole"
Admiral Chester will give ont a signed