17 
Ordinary Meeting, October 31st, 1870. 
Kev. William Gaskell, M.A., in the Chair. 
Professor Eeynolds said that he thought the manner in 
which some of the Manchester papers had heralded the re- 
turn of the Arctic Expedition very unfortunate. Failure 
of the Arctic Expedition. Collapse of the Arctic Expedi- 
tion appeared in large capitals. And although these might 
be explained as referring to the failure to reach the Pole, 
this was not the impression tliey conveyed to the public 
mind. Many readers of the newspapers never get beyond 
the large type, and of those who do, a very large proportion 
accept the decision of the paper as expressed in the heading 
without question. In this case the result, appeared to have 
been to create a very general impression that the expedition 
had failed in. its object; whereas, in truth, it had been one 
of the finest achievements ever accomplished. Looked at 
boldly it comes to this. Since Hudson’s time, more than 
200 years, Arctic Navigators had succeeded in penetrating 
about 60 or 70 miles of the 540 to be passed before the Pole 
could be reached. Whereas Captain Nares has, in one year, 
carried the British Flag some 60 miles nearer, so that nearly 
one half, and this by far the most difficult half, of the entire 
result of all expeditions since Hudson’s time, has been ac- 
complished by the last. And this is not all. Captain Nares 
seems to have pursued the journey to its end, at least by 
that route; and in coming back can say that he did not 
leave a single uncertainty behind him. So far, therefore, 
from having been a failure, this has been the most suc- 
cessful expedition ever sent out. 
Peoceidings- Lit, & Phil. Soc.— Tol. XVI.— No. 3— Session 1S76-7« 
