422 HUDSON HONORED IN NEW YORK 



of the genuineness of Dr. Cook's mountain ascent had arisen "in the public 

 mind," and that these questions bore upon the standing of the club of which 

 he is a member. It then directed the acting president to appoint a committee 

 to investigate the charges and make a report to the club. 



An interesting development of the discussion was that Professor Herschel 

 C. Parker, of Columbia, who headed the expedition with which Dr. Cook 

 approached Mount McKinley, and who twice issued voluntary statements to 

 newspapers calling attention to the doubtfulness of Dr. Cook's claim to the 

 ascent, was one of the three directors who voted against the resolution. The 

 eight members of the board who were present at the meeting were Professor 

 Marshall H. Saville, acting president; Henry C. Walsh, secretary; Professor 

 Herschel C. Parker, Caspar Whitney, W. G. Clark, Herbert L, Bridgman, 

 Frederick Ober and F. S. Dellenbaugh. 



WAS COOK "UNETHICAL"? 



The stand of the club on the point raised by Commander Peary, as to 

 whether an explorer commits an unethical act in using preparations made by 

 another explorer, was first stated for publication by Professor Saville. Com- 

 mander Peary requested the club to make a definite statement on this point 

 after the departure of Dr. Cook for the north, and included in his communi- 

 cation a doctrine that, by prior exploration and by taking precautions look- 

 ing to further work, an explorer "preempts" the field to the exclusion of other 

 men. The Explorers' Club, Professor Saville said, officially recognized Com- 

 mander Peary's position in the matter soon after he made his request, that 

 is, while Dr. Cook was still absent on his attempt to reach the pole. 



An interesting aspect of the question was touched on by the magazine, 

 "The Bench and Bar," which published an editorial on the legal proof of the 

 discovery of the North Pole. The editorial lamented the fact that neither 

 Dr. Cook or Commander Peary was willing to share his discovery of the 

 pole with white comrades, for in order to establish a claim at law corrobor- 

 ative evidence must be introduced in the shape of credible witnesses who will 

 testify to the truth of a story or the telling of a story with such a degree of 

 circumstantiality that scientists will be convinced of the truthfulness of it. 



The two corroborating Eskimo witnesses of Cook and the negro witness 

 of Peary could be disbelieved by a jury, said the editor, first because they are 

 ignorant and would know whether they had been at the pole only as told so 

 by an intelligent man, and secondly, they occupied the position of employes. 



