236 NATURAL SCIENCE. October, 



In regard to the Trans-Polar Current, it seems very doubtful 

 whether Dr. Nansen's theory be true. At first sight, when we com- 

 pare the projected and actual routes of the " Fram," and allow for 

 the fact that the vessel was frozen in further west than was intended, 

 their agreement seems clear proof of Nansen's theory. When we 

 enquire more closely, however, the results of Nansen's voyage appear 

 as fatal to the existence of the supposed current as they are to the 

 explanation offered by some English geographers of the facts from 

 which Nansen argued. The idea that a steady current flows across 

 the Pole from north-western Siberia receives little support : the 

 " Fram " drifted in accordance with the prevailing winds ; when the 

 wind reversed its direction the " Fram " floated backward. It was 

 the winds and not an ocean current that carried it on its course. 



It is, no doubt, true, that ocean currents are due to the wind, 

 and that, if the prevailing winds blow from the New Siberia Islands 

 to the Pole, and thence southward into the North Atlantic, there 

 will be a drift of water in the same direction. But this in an open 

 ocean such as the Arctic, would simply mean a superficial, variable 

 drift, and not a true ocean current. 



It is important to notice that the " Fram " floated northward in 

 the winter and spring, and southward in the summer : this is exactly 

 the opposite of what many of Dr. Nansen's critics predicted. They 

 explained the northward drift of the ice off the Siberian coast as due 

 to its being forced back by the discharge of the great rivers ; in that 

 case the northward movement ought to have been at its greatest in 

 the early summer, and to have stopped in the winter. 



In spite of the poverty of the Arctic sea, and Nansen's short 

 journey on land, naturalists will await with impatience the detailed 

 account of the results of his expedition. These will, no doubt, be 

 found to repay the magnificent patience and courage of Dr. Nansen 

 and his colleagues. His march with Johansen must certainly be 

 reckoned as one of the most daring feats in the annals of Arctic travel ; 

 but its courage was far exceeded by the reckless hardihood with which, 

 instead of returning to the " Fram " (as the explorers could, no doubt, 

 have done, had they arranged to do so), they set off for Spitzbergen, a 

 journey of ten times the length. Such a feat was only possible to men 

 skilful with kayak and ski, who knew how to live on the feeble 

 resources of an Arctic island. For daring and neatness of execution, 

 the Nansen Expedition is probably unrivalled in Arctic history, while, 

 to find a parallel for the extent of new area traversed and richness in 

 results, we have to go back to the days of Franklin and Parry. 



While the voyage of the " Fram " has been collecting the 

 materials for a final solution of the •' Trans-Polar Current " question, 

 great doubt has been thrown on the most striking piece of evidence 

 which suggested it. The resemblances between the fauna of the 

 Greenland and Spitzbergen seas do not count for much, as the whole 

 circum-polar fauna is remarkably uniform. The argument from the 



