The Washington herald., 1909-11-08

Scientists i'm this city yesterday were
discussing the speech made Saturday
night by Rear Admiral Colby NJ. Ches-
ter. l.. s ~. retired, at the University
Club. in which he characterized Or. Fred
ericz A. Cook as a "faker.' and declared
DR.. Cook not only did not reach the north
pole. but did not approach nearer than
distance Of about 56i miles from the
pole
The Importance of Admiral Chester
accusation lies not only in the fact that
he is an eminent astronomical authority
and was formerly superintendent Of the
United States Naval Observatory, but in
that he was one Of the special subcom-
mittce Of three appointed by the Ma
tional Geographic Society to examine the
records of CommanIar Peary and report
on his claim 10 polar discovery. The
subcommittee declared Peary had reach
ed the pole.
Others Declined 10 Talk.
Prof. Willis L. Moore. president and
o. p. Austin. secretary Of the society.
declined 10 discuss Admiral Chester's
speech They took the ground that 1t
would be improper for them 10 talk about
II. because both Commander Peary and
Dr Cook were members of the society.
MY speech last night" Admiral Ches-
ter said, was informal and eXtempora-
neous had been In New York for about
a week and was called up on the long
distance telephone and asked If / would
speak upon the polar question before the
club. I agreed. and arrived in Washing
ton from New York only few hours
before I made the speech.
1T is true L referred TO DIT Cook as a
faker / used as the basis Of my re-
search the data used by Dr. Cook in his
copyrighted stories Of his polar expedi-
ton printed in n New York newspaper
and carefully studied these observations.
'I base my argument that Dr. Cook
did not reach the north pole on the dis
agreement between his observations and
the known deClinatiOn OF the sun, as
shown by the Nautical Almanac, on the
dates referred 20 IN his narrative Where
Dr. Cook states that on April he FIRST
saw the midnight sun at Sc degrees 2
minutes q distance OF 2l5 miles from the
pole. i'm reality on that date, according
to the Nautical Almanac the midnight
sun would have been visible as far south
as 81 degrees, a distance of 56i miles from
the pole.
Based False Claim.
IN his narrative, Dr. Cook. after as
Stunning that on April ne was as fai
north as SIS degrees p minutes. based
his claim of reaching the pole on an
a day for fourteen days. AS a matter o.
fact. he would have had TO travel fort,
miles a day IN order 10 cover the dis
tauce from his real location, according Z,
the Nautical Almanac. to the pole.
Following Dr. Cooks first Statement
concerning his journey. Prof. j. y. Stock
well. OF Cleveland, showed that If hi
supposed latitude were correct. Dr. Cool
ought 90 have seen the midnight sun
above the horizon on April 7. DIT. Cook
own account fixed this date ar April Z
il trying 90 account for this discrcpanC-
DR. Cook stated he did not say that III
sun was on the horizon NJ the time speCi
fled, and there were many days In whiC
the sun was obscured by cloud The IN
ference drawn from the denial was tina
on any Of the preceding seven days IN
midnight sun might have been seen abov
the horizon il the weather had bee
clear.
But IN his later and fuller narrativ
DR.. Cook specifically stated that 'on Apr
the barometer remained steady and IN
thermometer sank. the weather beCam
settled and clear; az noon now there wa
a dazzling light, while the sun az mid
night sank but Tor "a few moments, leay
q q
splendor. OF the weather between thes
TWO dates. he wrote, there was at no tim
q perfectly clear horizon, but the weathe
was good enough 20 make frequer
nautical observations II frequent naut
cal observations could be made betwee
April and April Z, IL is pretty certai
that the sun was not altogether obscure
I'M the middle of all the nights. and it
certain that it was slowly rising froi
total observation on the early date
clear daylight on April T.
Not only did Admiral Chester maintal
that on April Or. Cook was far sout
Of the position he gives himself i'm h
narrative. but that on the four subs,
quent days and presumably on all sui
sequent days, DR.. Cook was headed sout
away from the pole, which. according
his own accounts was at least 2g5 mil,
away. Admiral Chester based this dedu,
ton, he said, on DR.. Cooks statemer
that on April the sun sank just belo
the horizon and that four days later q
April q. the sun showed a short distan,
above the horizon.
Did Not Travel North.
According to Admiral Chester If D
Cook mad been travelling northward du
ing those four days his change in Loo
ton. combined with the steadily increa
ing declination of the sun. would in fol
days have caused a far greater chan.
in tho suns position relative to the hor
zon than that reported by DR.. Cook.
IF IL really took. as Or. Cook sal
four days for the sun TO change its mil
al