Fergus County Democrat., 1909-09-14
Notice to Subscribers.
THE POLE CONTROVERSY.

and announced that he had succeeded
in reaching the north pole. there was
rejoicing everywhere that after CEN
turies OF effort the long quest had
proved successful. DR.. Cooks pre-
liminary statement was brief one.
but was considered by the scientific
world, and especially men familiar
with arctic exploration. as salts
factory. The first disappointment
came with his more extended state
ment, which was also brief, outlining
the incidents Of the final dash for the
pole. There was regret that the ac-
count was not more extended one,
but the doctor explained that he pro-
posed little later to submit a COM
plete report, giving all the data Of the
trip. Meantime DR.. Cook has been
the guest Of royalty and Of the scien-
tifc associations of the Scandinavian
peninsula and has received the highest
honors from the hing of Denmark.
The most striking fact in connection
with DR.. Cooks claim is that he was
for hours at time questioned by the
most famous arctic explorers of the
peninsula, men who have devoted
most Of their lives to exploration in
the far north. and who, as body,
know more about conditions as they
actually exist within the arctic circle
than any other group in the world,
and as result of all this. they unani
mously and unhesitatingly announce
that Dr.. Cook certainly did reach the
pole.
It has been urged against him
that his claim that he had made
fifteen miles a day for several sue
cessive marches on his final dash
could not be true-these suggestions
The Paris Temps admirably sums
ers and savants-yet in his account.
Peary states that he himself made
even faster time in exactly the same
region Again, it was cited as very
strong circum mstance against Cook that
he was accompanied at the pole by
only two Eskimos. Yet when Peary's
account appeared Sunday, it was
found that his only companions at
the pole were two Eskimos. Then
the statement Of Cook that there was
no land at the pole-only field Of
ice, and that he had no means Of
ascertaining the depth of the water
under it was derided by some. Yet
Peary states that he found exactly
the same conditions, and that owing
to the thickness of the ice he was
unable to ascertain the depth of the
water Some miles from the pole,
Peary found point where he was
able to cut through the ice and under
take soundings, with the result that
his wire was not long enough to de-
termine it and that the ice broke.
As matter of fact, the strongest
point urged against Cook, at least
the one most generally urged by his
detractors, was that his report as to
the final dash and the actual condi-
tions at and around the pole were sc
hazy as to suggest that it had beer
manufactured without visit to tht
pole itself. Yet Commander Peary'!
widely advertised, copyrighted, higl
priced special account of his fna
dash is open to just the same criticism
Paris newspapers. which can have nj
interest in the controversy as between
the supporters of the two men, poin
out that Peary's account is really
favorable to Cook, inasmuch as it fully
confirms and corroborates all tina
Cook set out with regard to thes
conditions.
There is yet another circum stanc
that merits attention from the impair
tial. Cook was informed while at
banquet in his honor that Peary ha
returned and flashed the news to tn
world that he had found the pol,
Cook Immediately said "Hurrah fo
Peary," or words to the same effec
and uttered no word of doubt, BIZ
only expressed his congratulations Z
the success of the commanders e.
forts. When Peary was informed thu
Cook was ahead of him, he immedi:
tely denounced his rival as fakir an
fraud and said he had never been t
the pole, although up to this time h
has submitted absolutely nothing
support of that position further tina
to say that some Eskimos told hi.
or some one else that Cook has nevs
been out of sight of land.
The Paris Temps admirably sum