2i6 NATURAL SCIENCE. March, 1897. 



name it, and the latter proved by calling it after my absent friend, the leader of the 

 one Arctic expedition still at work in the field. 



Finally, I must record my protest against these ignoble imputations, these gross 

 inaccuracies, this arm-chair view of Polar work, and this " stabbing in the dark " of 

 a man who is now wintering for the third time in Franz Josef Land, in the cause of 

 geographical science. 



Arthur Montefiore Brice. 

 157 Strand, W.C, 

 February 12, 1897. 



P.S. — In studying the new map of Franz Josef Land {Geoqraphical Journal, 

 December, 1896) it should be remembered that the discoveries of Payer and Smith 

 occasionally overlap with those of Jackson. The latter is only responsible for areas 

 enclosed in heavy lines and names printed in heavy type. A. M. B. 



[With Mr. Brice's epithets we deal elsewhere. The geographical questions 

 raised by him are : (3) the relations of C. Mary Harmsworth and C. Lofley ; (4) the 

 use of the name Markham Sound ; (6) the discoverer of land seen by Nansen to the 

 westward of his winter hut ; (7) the name of the island on which Nansen wintered. 

 The late date at which we receive this letter prevents us reproducing any maps, 

 reference to which would easily show geographers the correctness of our previous 

 remarks. These we will attempt to elucidate for Mr. Brice's benefit, as follows : — 



(3.) C. Mary Harmsworth is identical with C. Lofley. Leigh Smith saw the 

 coast from a position whence he must have seen the cape called C. Mary Harms- 

 worth by Jackson, and whence (as any geographer but an armchair one will under- 

 stand) he could not have distinguished the point so obvious to Jackson's party 

 working along the coast. Anyone who will plot Leigh Smith's map on to Jackson's 

 so that C. Ludlow corresponds, will find that C. Lofley of Smith coincides with 

 C. Mary Harmsworth of Jackson. 



(4,) As for Markham Sound, we wrote with Payer's map lying before us. This 

 shows that he gave the name to a sound running along the S.E. coast of Zichy Land, 

 which he saw and did not guess at. Those who have not Payer's map may refer to 

 the map distributed in illustration of Mr. Brice's own paper at the Geographical 

 Society on November 11, 1895, i'l which map Markham Sound is represented as 

 separating Zichy Ld. from the islands there grouped under the name Hooker Id. 

 That is the exact position now usurped by Jackson's " British Channel." Further, 

 Payer's Markham Sound runs N.E. and S.W.,but Jackson's runs N.W. and S.E. 



(6.) We are most wilUng to admit Jackson's claim to be the discoverer of " the 

 land marked 21, Island 10, and Island 11." But these three small patches are not 

 quite the same as "the land to the westward" of Nansen's winter hut, for this 

 obviously included Zichy Land. 



(7.) Nansen wintered on Payer's Karl Alexander Land. Comparison of the 

 maps by Payer, Jackson, and Nansen shows that Hooker Id. and the three islands 

 to the north, were regarded by Payer as the western end of his McClintock Id. 

 North of this is the island with the high ground or mountain which Payer named 

 after Richthofen. Then, crossing Payer's Todesco Fjord, we come to another 

 island, to the N.W. point of which Jackson applied the name of McClintock. It is 

 the next land to the north on which Nansen wmtered, and this is the S.W. end of 

 Payer's Kai:l Alexander Land. This, however, appears from Nansen's map to be 

 three islands, of which the northernmost is a westerly continuation of Payer's Andree 

 Id., and should bear that name. 



Mr. Brice's laborious explanation of the map illustrating his last paper was 

 quite unnecessary ; he has forgotten that it was given quite plainly on the map 

 itself. The " obvious discrepancies " between the maps of Payer and Jackson are 

 mostly due to the fact that parts of Payer's map were laid down from observations 

 made at a distance, and are therefore not so correct as those on his actual line of 

 march. Mr. Brice should beware of laying stress on this, or people will infer, most 

 unjustly of course, that he is trying to minimise the results of the Austrian explorer 

 as well as those of the Norwegian. — Editor Natural Science.] 



