May 



1901] 



NA TURE 



85 



ing, and that the amendments were sprung upon them. The 

 meeting was accordingly adjourned until February 12, the very 

 day before Prof. Gregory sailed. During the prolonged dis- 

 cussion which took place the authorities on magnetism were 

 unanimous in affirming that a station on land was essential in 

 order to obtain the full value of the observations made on the 

 ship. , 



Sir Clements Markham threatened that the Council of the 

 R.G.S. would not accept the amended instructions, whereupon 

 Sir Michael Foster drew attention to the letter which Sir 

 Clements had written at the time when the Joint Committee 

 was proposed. 



The amendments were finally approved by 16 votes to 6, and 

 Sir Archibald Geikie and I were deputed to explain to Prof. 

 Gregory, who was in attendance, that he was to be landed in 

 control of a small party, if a safe and suitable place could be 

 found, and to ask if he would accept these conditions. We 

 reported his consent to the meeting, which was then adjourned 

 for the consideration of other details. 



Two of the Representatives of the R.G. S., Sir Anthony 

 Hoskins and Sir Vesey Hamilton, resigned shortly afterwards, 

 explaining that they could not agree with the action of the 

 Committee. The R.G.S. had however the right, which it 

 subsequently exercised, of appointing new members. 



At the adjourned meeting, on February 19, the question of 

 the ship wintering was discussed at length. Those who had 

 practical experience of the Antarctic urged us strongly not to 

 take the responsibility of permitting the ship to winter in the 

 ice. Sir Joseph Hooker's statement of the danger was especially 

 impressive, and the meeting decided in accordance with his 

 opinion. 



At the same meeting Major L. Darwin proposed to modify 

 the conditions accepted by Prof. Gregory, by adding to them the 

 additional consideration that he should only be landed if the time 

 of the ship should not be too greatly diverted from geographical 

 exploration. I protested strongly against any modification at 

 this stage. Sir Michael Foster opposed me, and, after the close 

 of the meeting, there was a somewhat sharp though friendly ex- 

 pression of conflicting opinions, he maintaining that there should 

 Ije " give and take," I that we were already pledged to Prof. 

 Gregory, that the arrangement was as it stood a compromise — 

 the minimum Prof. Gregory would accept — by no means the one 

 which scientific men, not belonging to the Navy, would have 

 preferred. 



At that meeting Major Darwin did not succeed, but his sug- 

 gestion in somewhat different words was again brought forward 

 at the next meeting on March 5. Just before the meeting Sir 

 Archibald Geikie told me that he intended to support the pro- 

 posed changes " in the interests of peace," and that Mr. Teall, 

 and Mr. George Murray, I^rof. Gregory's representative, also 

 approved them. Resistance was hopeless ; I could only protest 

 against any alteration of the conditions offered and accepted, 

 requesting that my name and the names of those who agreed 

 with me (Mr. J. Y. Buchanan and Captain Tizard) should be 

 recorded. 



I wrote to Prof. Gregory a full account of what had happened, 

 carefully explaining that his representative and many of his 

 friends supported the changes, that I had confidence that the 

 proposal was made to enable the Geographical Society to accept 

 the instructions and that it was not intended to prevent and I 

 believed would not prevent his being landed. 



In spite of the incorporation of Major Darwin's changes the 

 R.G.S. Council refused to accept the instructions, but addressed 

 a letter signed by their President, dated March iS, to the 

 members of the Joint Committee stating that they were com- 

 pelled, "as trustees for the money subscribed through their 

 Society and for the funds voted by their Society, to regard the 

 above scientific objects [viz. those to be carried out by a landing 

 party] as subsidiary to the two primary objects of the Expedi- 

 tion — namely, exploration and magnetic observations." In 

 view of the unanimous witness of all experts that the landing 

 party was essential for full success in the magnetic work this 

 statement is sufficiently remarkable. 



The letter went on to inform us that the President, Sir 

 Leopold McClintock, and Sir George Goldie had interviewed 

 the officers of the Royal Society and had reported to the R.G.S. 

 Council which now suggested that the Joint Committee should 

 recommend a small Committee of six, three to be appointed by 

 each Council, to deal finally with the Instructions. 'The Council 

 of the R.G.S. agreed to accept the decision of this Committee 



NO. 1647, VOL. 64] 



provided the Council of the Royal Society agreed to do the 

 same. 



It has been stated in various directions that the Geographical 

 Society produced new evidence (based upon the experience of 

 Borchgrevink and the intentions of the German leader) which 

 had not been laid before the Joint Committee, and thus induced 

 the officers of the Royal Society to agree to a new Committee. 

 To this it may be replied that these sources of information had 

 been open to the Joint Committe, and that, if anything new had 

 arisen, it was reasonable to refer it to the old Committee rather 

 than to a new one appointed ad hoc. Furthermore, the letter 

 of the Royal Geographical Society referred to above clearly in- 

 dicated that the real intention was to escape from the conditions 

 proposed to and accepted by the scientific leader. 



The Joint Committee met on April 26, and was addressed in 

 favour of the course proposed by the R.G.S. Council by Sir 

 George Goldie. Nothing was said which could diminish the 

 conviction that the R.G.S. Council and that of the R.S. in 

 weakly consenting to nominate a fresh Committee had struck a 

 disastrous blow at all future cooperation between scientific 

 bodies in this country. 



What reply could the Officers make if they were asked to 

 advise the Council of the Royal Society to cooperate with that 

 of the Royal Geographical Society on any future occasion ? 



I felt justified in asking what guarantee was there that the 

 Council of the Royal Geographical Society would accept the 

 finding of the Committee of six, when it had refused to accept 

 that of a Committee which included all the officers and almost 

 every expert in Arctic and Antarctic Exploration from both 

 Societies. In reply Sir Michael Foster, in spite of the promise 

 of firmness held out by his attitude on February 12, when Sir 

 Clements Markham threatened that his Council would repudiate 

 the finding of the Joint Committee, maintained that they had 

 only acted within their rights, and that the Royal Society 

 Council claimed the right to do the same if it had not agreed 

 with the decision. 



At this point it will be convenient to give a list of the 

 Representatives of the Royal Society on the Joint .Antarctic 

 Committee, the Representatives of the Royal Geographical 

 .Society being equally significant in relation to the Council of 

 their own Society. They are the President, the Treasurer, the 

 Senior Secretary, the Junior Secretary, Mr. A. Buchan, Mr. 

 J. V. Buchanan, Captain Creak, Sir J. Evans, Sir A. Geikie, 

 Prof. Herdman, Sir J. D. Hooker, Prof. Poulton, Mr. P. L. 

 Sclater, Mr. J. J. H.' Teall, Captain Tizard, and Admiral Sir 

 W. J. L. Wharton. 



It the reports of Joint Committees of such magnitude and 

 weight are to be thrown over with the approval of the Councils 

 of both Societies because a majority of one Council does not 

 agree with the conclusions, men will rightly hesitate before 

 consenting to devote an immense amount of time and trouble to 

 the work of the Society, and the efficiency of the Royal Society 

 will be greatly diminished. 



The considerations set forth above indicate the future injuries 

 which are likely to be inflicted on our Society by this surrender. 

 At the meeting on April 26 I was more concerned with the 

 immediate and pressing injury, and therefore urged that the 

 Royal Society was a trustee for the interests of science and that 

 we had pledged ourselves to secure certain powers to the 

 Scientific Director, that it was better the Expedition should 

 not start (a contingency contemplated as possible by Sir George 

 Goldie, but not a serious danger, I believe, even though the 

 Royal Society had stood firm and appealed to the Government, 

 not on the subject-n:atter in dispute, but on the refusal of the 

 Royal Geographical Society to work with the recognised 

 methods of cooperation) than that the Royal Society should 

 betray its trust, that the Fellows of the Society would not 

 support the Officers in thus yielding to the Royal Geographical 

 Society, and that I should feel bound to explain my position to 

 the Society. Sir Archibald Geikie and Mr. J. Y. Buchanan " 

 also strongly objected to the surrender, which was then con- 

 firmed by a large majority of those present. 



We were told by Sir George Goldie that the three Represen- 

 tatives of the Royal Geographical Society on the new Committee 

 would be Sir Leopold McClintock, Mr. Mackenzie, and Sir 

 George himself; by Sir Michael Foster that the Royal Society 

 Council would appoint three non-experts, viz. Lord Lister, 

 Lord Lindley and the Treasurer, who could pronounce without 

 bias upon the whole of the evidence. My colleague, Captain 

 Tizard, with whom I had worked with the most complete 



