JUNE 7, 1901.] 
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 expression 
of conflicting opinions, he maintaining that 
there should be ‘give and take,’ I that we 
were already pledged to Professor Gregory, 
that the arrangement was as it stood a com- 
promise—the minimum Professor 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 suggestion in somewhat 
different words was again brought forward 
at the next meeting on March 5th. Just 
before the meeting Sir Archibald Geikie 
told me that he intended to support the 
proposed changes ‘in the interests of peace,’ 
and that Mr. Teall, and Mr. George Mur- 
ray, Professor Gregory’s representative, 
also approved them. Resistance was hope- 
less ; I could only protest against any altera- 
tion of the conditions offered and accepted, 
requesting that my name and the names of 
those who agreed with me (Mr. J. Y. Buch- 
anan and Captain Tizard) should be re- 
corded. 
I wrote to Professor Gregory a full ac- 
count of what had happened, carefully ex- 
plaining 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 in- 
tended to prevent, and, I believed, would not 
prevent, his being landed. 
In spite of the incorporation of Major Dar- 
win’s changes the R. G. 8. Council refused 
to accept the instructions, but addressed 
a letter signed by their President, dated 
March 18th, to the members of the Joint 
Committee stating that they were compelled, 
“as trustees for the money subscribed 
through their Society and for the funds 
SCIENCE. 
895 
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 Expedition— 
namely, exploration and magnetic observa- — 
tions.” 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 remark- 
able. 
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 recom- 
mend 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 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 in- 
duced the officers of the Royal Society to 
agree toanew committee. To this it may be 
replied that these sources of information had 
been open to the Joint Committee, and that, 
if anything new had arisen, it was reason- 
able to refer it to the old committee rather 
than to a new one appointed ad hoc. 
Furthermore, the letter of the Royal Geo- 
graphical Society, referred to above, clearly 
indicated that the real intention was to 
escape from the conditions proposed to and 
accepted by the Scientific Leader. 
The Joint Committee met on April 26th, 
and was addressed in favor 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. 
§. Council and that of the R.S. in weakly 
