New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1910-03-27

Goes. WHAT became ~ him after he parted
from his comrades and with his Esqui-
ma-s, went nOrthWarde Dad he 20 a few
miles and build q snow house and stay
There for months II 50, A. Is strange that
his presence Was not a matter Of note.
And what object could he have had in
STAYING there? To keep going northWard.
supplied as he was with provisions. warm
clothing. dogs. sleds and helpers. etc. vas
such q procedure as would seem natural.
Hiding an a snow house for months was
an improbable occurrence. And how. sep
arated by long distances. could he read
Peary's mind and anticipate him by
writing Pearys story before Pea-y himself
wrote IT.
And what bearing has the story about
the ascent OF Mount Mckinlev on this
story about the journey % the North Polee
or course. Mr. Peary and his partisans
viii say that II the frst be proven 10 be-
false, we are justified IN holding the Sec
0nd 20 bc false. But this Is t-cading upon
dangerous ground. FOR the Two witnesses
who charge that the Mount Mckinley story
was false volunteered the statement that
their nrst story about their participation
IN the ascent was false. Therefore they
have az the very outset destroyed the value
0f their own testimony
Thinks Psary's Attack Boomerang.
But THE real peril 70 Peary is that IN
order 10 destroy the value ~ Cooks story
~ the Journey 10 the pole De- must destroy
the value 81 his own like story With the
same sword with which he strikes down
Cook be must co-ordinately commit hari-
F kari. for the Two stories being the same.
the killing % one destroys she other. In
other words. the Two stories. like the
Siamese tVins. must live together or die
together. Peary can a. reasonably assert
thar ~ the above famous twins Chang
vas Chinsman and Eng was an English
man as he can assert trat Cook story -
false ana his own is true As tire case
stands he, in effect asks us 20 believe
That and when added by cook make o.
bur when added by him make ..
4 Therefore. even - Cook were 70 admit
that his story o. his journey 10 the pole
vas false. We could not accept IL as being
false unless Pear should admit thar his
Ike story was "a So. az unless ~ other
testimony Cooks story b. proven false. IN
watch event. as I have conrended. Peary-s
story instantly falls with Cooks. T. Cooks
story Is a gold brick. Pea-y's is a paste
diamond. Observe. ] say n.
The Copenhasen Verdict
But Cook submitted mis- data ta tie
Copenhagen professors, and they declared
. thar the proofs were insufic-eut 70 sustain
his claim. They did not assert that Cook s
story was untrue. Elt merely rendered a
verdict ~ not proven AS they had not
. been into than region. their verdict can ~
accepted as vClcing Their knowledge % the
matter
Yet when Commander Pearv heard -
4 the Dop-rk4E-u decision he smiled and.
presto h.- Identical story is proven trle
and he is acclaimed as she di-cove-er and
poor Cook branded as faker Medals are
. voted 10 Pea~v. resolutions Of congratlIa-
ton for him passed and be- Is elected mem-
her OF societies. while Cooks name IS
erased from the rolls u mem DerslID. And.
. tC cap the max, an attempt Is made ln
. the Congress OF tle United States 20 make
AR. Peary a rear admiral 81 The navy in
. recognition Of his discovery Of the North
f Pole, A more groJesque Official monstrosi-y
+ Has never -n the history Of THIS government
. been attempted.
. 'Representat.Ne Macon deserves the
. thanks Of the American people for MS ex-
/ pose ~ Pearys Improbable nor. in fact.
imDossibie-story 81 ms Journey 90 and from
q
F.. comrades. Till read ny Mscon's remarks
/ ] had believed thar both Cook and Peary
4 had reached the pole. but ] confess that
ar. Macon has shaken my faith in Pearv.
f especially when 7 consider THE fact that he
could read the synopsis OF Cook s story and
. shape has own accordingly.
Cock . Gentleman.
yet 7 prefer even now % believe that
/ each ~ these explorers made the trip DO
/ declares he did. But coupled with :his
/ preference for belief IS the conviction that
Cook, besides being The real discoverer. has
. ur0vel himself q gentleman 81 generous
! cha-n~ tc-istics, while Peary has proved rhat
10 is lacking iu some ~ THE qualities which
appeal 20 GUY higher nature.
cooks flight indicates an a~uteIy sensi-
tive nature. one watch shriuks from caustic
criticism whether n be just or unjust. in-
stead % Eamelv facing and conquering IT..
Pcary, on the contrary. displays a repulsiv-
coarsencss. Frenzied hy the tid.nEs that
his rival had reached before 10 did the
coveted goal - his LIES ambition. ~ ffne-