Mawson, commenting upon the question of claims and I 
am sure he would not mind if I quoted a paragraph from 
Inisiletten: 
“I am still sorry that America has not laid territorial 
claim to the big unclaimed central Pacific sector. There 
would be no difficulty with New Zealand, I am sure, having 
it extended into the Ross Ice Shelf. No doubt also terri- 
torial adjustments could be made elsewhere. What seems 
to me important in such a move is that the Antarctica ice 
continent if tied up to a limited number of sovereignties 
of good repute and mutual regard could then be admin- 
istered on good lines conjointly for the benefit of all and 
especially of the inhabitants (penguins, birds, seals, etc.). 
If every nation had a hand in it, some of the life there may 
soon become extinct.” 
Hindsight is inevitably clearer than any other kind of 
sight. ‘The United States, at the time of Hughes’ historic 
policy, could probably have claimed without much, if any, 
protest more than half the continent, on the basis of the 
discoveries of Palmer and Burdick, and more especially on 
what has only recently been recognized as the brilliant 
achievements of Wilkes in 1839-1840. Such a claim now 
would certainly produce “comment,” to say the least. 
‘The Soviet Union has made it clear that she will not 
recognize any realignment of claims to which she is not a 
party, though she has made no Antarctic claims herself. 
Whether the Russians would accept any of the approaches 
suggested above is an open question. It might, indeed, 
stimulate them to make claims based on von Bellings- 
hausen’s supposed discoveries. 
Nehru of India proposed that the whole matter of Ant- 
arctic claims be discussed by the United Nations General 
32 
