East Oregonian : E.O. (Pendleton, OR) 1888-current, 1909-09-18


iteth 1t a man to discover the north
pole when he can neither own it, nor
sell it, nor give it away?
And yet that is precisely the sit
uation, no matter what may be de-
termined in the present deplorable
controversy--wheth Cook or Peary
saw it first.
One of the interesting questions
which have arisen out of efforts on
these explorers is as to the jurisdic-
tion which may now extend to the
pole by right of discovery. Have
they extended the possessions of the
United States, or have they merely
added to the holdings of some other
nation?
Already two countries have put in
their claims to whatever may have
been. found at the top of the world.
Denmark insists that it belongs TO
her as a part of Greenland Canada
claims it as part of her northerly
possessions And American citizens
found it! Under these circumstances
did Peary have a right to offer the
pole to President Taft as though 1t
were something he owned and could
give to the American nation? 1t is
question which has puzzled many
eminent geographers and statesmen
Light upon the subject is shed by
q high official of the atete depart
ment, according to whose argument
no one nation can claim special jur-
isdiction there, but the finding of the
pole is a gift to the whole world.
There are three ways by which
this question Of rights of discovery
are settled One, which has been
recognized for many years applies to
such matters as the finding of an
isolated islet in the Pacific, for in
stance. In such case the discover
er, by planting the flag of his coun-
try, and making formal declaration,
annexes the new land.
Another way applies more particu-
larly to Arctic exploration. If new
lands are discovered and they prove |
to be a continuation of, and part of, |
land already known, those new lands
belong to the same sovereignty that |
owns the old land. Thus, if Cook |
and Peary's discoveries should have |
developed to be merely combinations
of Greenland Denmark's claim would |
be preeminent
But this is utterly disproved because
1t has been demonstrated that Green
land is an island. Amundsen, in his
explorations, proved this by circum-
navigating it. Thus the Danish
claim falls to the ground.
The third way, which applies to
the Canadian contention, is the claim
of nations to the "hinterland" which
stretches far back from their ack-
nowledged possessions. There are
several familiar instances of this in
Africa. The "hinterland" extends
until it meets the acknowledged jur-
isdiction of another power.
But, in the case of the north pole,
It is situated at point where all the
meridians converge and where all
the "hinterlands' of all the northern
nations meet. For that reason no one
of them can set up a claim to the
pole without meeting the counter
claims of others. Therefore, it is the
worlds possession and not that of
any one country.
AS for the possession of any is
lands or lands which may have been
discovered by either Cook or Peary
above the S7th parallel in their
dashes to the pole, this same state de-
partment authority is of the opinion
that they would be in the same cate
CORY as Spitzenbergen which although
discovered over 200 years ago, has
never been claimed by any civilized .