investigation of the relative merits of the Polar Attainment and the
unjust propaganda of distrust which followed. Such an investigation
would do no harm if the original work and the later criticism has been
done in good faith. Why has it been refused? To take the ground that it
is a private matter and that the Government has taken no official part
in the Polar race is to assume a false position. The injustice of this
evasive policy is brought out in my telegram to former President
Taft--and again in my letter to President Wilson. To compel such an
investigation and to appoint Arctic explorers as National experts has
been my main mission on the platform. Much against my will I have been
forced to adopt the usual political tactics of getting to the voters to
force action by Congress and the official circles of Washington.
When in 1911 the bill was introduced in Congress to retire Peary as a
Rear Admiral with a pension, I supposed that this would automatically
bring about a thorough scientific examination of the merits of the rival
Polar claims. And such an investigation I then believed would surely
bring about the only reward I have ever claimed--The appreciation of my
fellow countrymen. It was however, as I learned later, a bold Pro-Peary
movement fostered by lobbyists whose conscience was eased by drippings
from the Hubbard-Bridgeman Arctic Trust, but I still believed that the
dictates of National prestige were such that the usual white-washing and
rail-roading process could not be adopted in a question of such
International importance. I did not begrudge Mr. Peary a pension if
honest methods were pursued to adjust the bitterly fought contention in
the eyes of the world. My friends made no protest in Congress. As
matters progressed, however, I saw that such men as Prof. Willis Moore
and others of his kind--men I had previously trusted as honest, really
proved themselves, double-faced, political back-scratchers. Then I
changed my tactics. When one's honor is bartered by thieves under the
guise of friends--and when these thieves are part of a government from
which justice is expected--Then one is bound to uncover the leprous
spots of one's accusers. I am glad to note that Prof. Moore, the
President of the National Geographic Society, has since been exposed as
being too crooked to fit into a berth of the present administration.
There are others whose long fingers have been in the Polar-pie who will
also meet their fate as time exposes their flat-heads.
To call a halt on this National Humbug where only official chair-warmers
and political crooks served as experts, I sent the following telegram to
former President Taft:
COPY OF TELEGRAM SENT TO FORMER PRESIDENT TAFT
Omaha, Neb., March 4, 1911
The President--The White House,
Washington, D. C.
When you sign the Peary bill you are honoring a man with sin-soiled
hands who has taken money from our innocent school children. A part of
this money I believe was used to make Arctic concubines comfortable. I
am ready to produce others of the same opinion. Thus for twenty years
while in the pay of the navy, supplied with luxuries from the public
purse, Peary has enjoyed, apparently with National consent, the
privilege denied the Mormons.
There are at least two children now in the cheerless north crying for
bread and milk and a father. These are growing witnesses of Peary's
leprous character. Will you endorse it?
By endorsing Peary you are upholding the cowardly verdict of Chester,
Tittman and Gannett, who bartered their souls to Peary's interests by
suppressing the worthlessness of the material upon which they passed.
These men on the Government pay-roll have stooped to a dishonor that
should make all fair-minded people blush with shame. This underhanded
performance calls for an investigation. Will you close these dark
chamber doings to the light of justice?
In this bill you are honoring one, who in seeking funds for legitimate
exploration, has passed the hat along the line of easy money for
twenty years. Much of this money was in my judgment used to promote a
lucrative fur and ivory trade, while the real effort of getting to the
pole was delayed seemingly for commercial gain. Thus engaged in a
propaganda of hypocrisy he stooped to immerality and dishonor and
ultimately when his game of fleecing the public was threatened, he
tried to kill a brother explorer. The stain of at least two other
lives is on this man. This bill covers a page in history against
which the spirits of murdered men cry for redress.
Peary is covered with the scabs of unmentionable indecency, and for
him your hand is about to put the seal of clean approval upon the
dirtiest campaign of bribery, conspiracy and black-dishonor that the
world has ever known.
If you can close your eyes to this, sign the Peary bill.
(Signed) FREDERICK A. COOK
The telegram was received but not acknowledged--the Peary bill was
signed. But the false assumption of Peary's "Discovery of the Pole" was
eliminated from the bill. There is therefore no National endorsement of
Peary; though he was given an evasive Old Age Pension which the
newspapers quoted incorrectly as an official recognition of Peary's
claim to polar priority.
I now appeal to President Wilson and the present administration to make
some official endeavor to clear our National emblem of the stain of the
envious Polar contention. To that end I have written the following
letter:
AN APPEAL TO PRESIDENT WILSON
(COPY OF A LETTER)
Chicago, May 1, 1913
Honored Sir:
I appeal to you to forward a movement which will adjust in the eyes
of the world the contention regarding the rival Polar claims. The
American Eagle has spread its wings of glory over the world's top. It
would seem to be a National duty to determine officially whether there
is room for one or two under those wings.
The graves of our worthy ancestors are marks in the ascent of the
ladder of latitudes. Hundreds of lives, millions of dollars, have been
sacrificed in the quest of the Pole. The success at last attained has
lifted the United States to the first ranks as a Nation of Scientific
Pioneers. Every true American has quivered with an extra thrill of
pride with the knowledge that the unknown boreal center has been
pierced and that the stars and stripes have been put to the virgin
breezes of the North Pole. The unjustified and ungracious controversy
which followed has wounded our National honor; it has left a stain
upon our flag. Is it not, therefore, our duty as a Nation to dispel
the cloud of contention resting over the glory of Polar attainment?
I have given twenty years to the life-sapping task of Polar
exploration--all without pay--all for the benefit of future man.
Returning--asking for nothing, expecting only brotherly appreciation
of my fellow countrymen, I am compelled to face an unjust battle of
political intrigues by men in the pay of the Government. My effort now
is not for money nor for a pension, but to defend my honor and that of
my family. The future of my children demands an exposition of the
unfair methods of the arm-chair geographers in Washington. However,
I do not ask the administration to defend me or my posterity, but do
ask that the men who draw a salary from the National treasury be made
answerable for a propaganda of character assassination, among these
is Prof. Willis Moore and others of the so-called National Geographic
Society.
The National Geographic Society with Prof. Moore as President is
responsible for the false interpretation of the rival Polar claims.
This society is a private organization used mostly for political
purposes; for two dollars per year a college professor or a
street-sweeper becomes with equal facility a "national geographer."
It is, therefore, not "national" nor "geographic," and when this
society poses as a scientific body, it is an imposition upon American
intelligence, and yet it is this society, with the well-known
political trickery of Prof. Moore, which has attempted to decide for
the world the merits of Polar attainment. An investigation of the
wrong doings of this society will quickly bring to light the
injustice of the Polar controversy.
A commission of Polar explorers appointed by National authority will
end for all times the problem of the rival Polar claims. There is an
abundance of material on both sides by which such a commission could
come to a reasonable conclusion. The general impression that the Polar
contention has been scientifically determined is not true. There has
been no real investigation into either claim. Such an investigation
could only be made by Arctic explorers, and to bring about this end I
would suggest the appointment of an International Commission of such
men as General A. W. Greely, U. S. A., Captain Otto Sverdrup of Norway
and Professor Georges Lecointe of Belgium. Their decision would be
accepted everywhere. Greely and Sverdrup have each spent four years in
the very region under discussion, and Lecointe is the Secretary of the
International Bureau for Polar Research and also director of the Royal
Observatory of Belgium. Such men will render a decision free from
personal bias, free from National prejudice and their verdict will be
accepted by the Nations of the world.
Though I am an interested party I insist that my appeal is not
altogether a personal one. In the interest of that deep-seated
American sense of fair play, in the interest of National honor, in
the interest of the glory of our flag, it would seem to be a National
duty to have the distrust of the Polar attainment cleared by an
International commission.
Respectfully submitted,
(Signed) FREDERICK A. COOK
To the President,
The White House,
Washington, D. C.
Thousands of requests similar to those reproduced below have gone to
various officials in Washington. Such appeals demand action.
Chicago, May 7, 1913
Mr. Josephus Daniels, Secretary of the Navy,
Washington, D. C.
Dear Sir:
Rear Admiral Peary wears the stripes of the Navy, he is drawing
a pension of $6,000.00 per year from the tax-payers--The National
dictates of honor compel such a man to be clean morally--honest
and upright officially. Dr. Cook has publicly made charges against
Peary which relegate this Naval Officer to the rank of a common
thief and degenerate. In his book, "My Attainment of the Pole,"
(Mitchell-Kennedy, N. Y.) there are specific charges made which call
for an investigation. These charges have remained unanswered for
three years--Why?
In the Polar controversy the flag has been dragged through muck, and
this dishonor seems to rest upon a man for whose actions you are
responsible.
The American people have a right to demand an investigation into the
intrigue of the Peary Polar Propaganda, and as one believing in
justice at the bar of public opinion, I ask that you take steps to
clear this cloud in the eyes of the world.
Respectfully,
FRED HIGH
Editor of _The Platform_,
The Lyceum and Chautauqua Magazine,
Steinway Hall, Chicago.
Chicago, May 22, 1913.
To Congressman James R. Mann,
Washington, D. C.
Dear Sir:
The conquest of the North Pole has lifted the United States to a first
position as a Nation of scientific pioneers. The controversy which
followed is a blot on our flag and it is a slur at our National honor.
From the Government purse and from private resources we have spent
millions to reach the top of the earth; it would appear therefore to
be our duty as a Nation to adjust the Polar contention in the eyes of
the world.
If Dr. Cook has reached the Pole, a year earlier than Peary, as most
Arctic explorers believe, then the seeming endorsement and the pension
of the Naval officer is an injustice to Dr. Cook and an imposition on
the public; if both have reached the Pole then there should be a
suitable recognition and reward extended to each. As one of thousands
of American citizens, I beg of you to forward a movement which will
bring about a National investigation into this problem, with a
suitable provision for a proper recognition.
Respectfully,
CHARLES W. FERGUSON,
Pres.,
The Chautauqua Managers Association,
Orchestra Bldg., Chicago.
CAN THE GOVERNMENT ESCAPE THE RESPONSIBILITY?
BY FRED HIGH
While the Danes were royally entertaining Dr. Cook on September 4th,
1909, telegrams were being showered upon him by all the world. The King
of Sweden sent this message:
"A BRILLIANT DEED, OF WHICH THE AMERICAN PEOPLE MAY RIGHTLY BE PROUD."
The American minister to Denmark made Dr. Cook's visit state business
and joined in the effort to share Cook's honors. Dr. Cook paused in the
midst of all this splendor to cable the following message to our
President:
Copenhagen, Sept. 4, 1909.
President,
The White House, Washington.
I have the honor to report to the chief magistrate of the United
States that I have returned, having reached the North Pole."
To which President Taft cabled the following reply:
Beverly, Mass., Sept. 4, 1909.
Frederick A. Cook,
Copenhagen, Denmark.
Your dispatch received. Your report that you have reached the North
Pole calls for my heartiest congratulations, and stirs the pride of
all Americans that this feat which has so long baffled the world has
been accomplished by the intelligent energy and wonderful endurance
of a fellow countryman."
WILLIAM H. TAFT.
Was President Taft speaking for the American people when he called Dr.
Cook's achievement the pride of all Americans? Were we ready to share
Cook's joys? Share his honors? If so, then in all fairness, should we
not share in his trials and tribulations? Are we like the crazy base
ball fan who cheers a pitching hero when he wins and insults him with
all kinds of vile epithets when he loses?
For one I shared in that thrill of pride and was glad to know that I
had had dealings with Dr. Cook before he went in search of the Pole,
consequently, I felt in honor bound to withhold any hasty criticisms
that I might feel tempted to hurl at Dr. Cook. All who joined in his
praises should insist upon it that he be given a chance to disprove
every charge that has been brought against him, that he be given a
chance to explain his every act before we join in the cry to crucify
him. "Crucify him, or give us the most contemptible coward, moral leper
and political crook that has lived in our time," if Dr. Cook's charges
are true.
Believing that this is a matter that ought to be fairly settled by
competent and orderly methods, I have written to several congressmen and
senators, and the following correspondence speaks for itself:
Chicago, Illinois, May 7, 1913.
Hon. Wooda N. Carr,
Washington, D. C.
Dear Sir:
I wish to ask a personal favor of you, one that I think the public is
interested in and one that I think the world ought to know more about.
It is the Cook-Peary controversy. I have given this considerable
thought and study. I have heard Dr. Cook lecture a number of times and
have talked to him personally and tried to find out from every angle
the facts as to whether or not his story is true. So far I have been
unable to find a flaw in any of his statements, and Mr. Peary by his
actions has given every evidence that Dr. Cook is telling the truth.
Therefore, as a citizen who is interested in the larger affairs of
this country, and as the editor of The Platform, which is devoted to
the Lyceum and Chautauqua movement, I am asking whether or not it
would be compatible with fair play and our sense of justice and real
national dignity to take this controversy out of the hands of
individuals and settle it by an official tribunal, or by a commission
of arctic explorers.
I shall be very glad, indeed, if you will inform me of what steps
could best be taken to bring about the settlement of this controversy.
If there are any authoritative facts developed along this line, I will
be glad to know where to locate them as my sole object is to learn the
truth.
Under separate cover I am sending you copy of The Platform which
contains Doctor Cook's letter to President Wilson, which I hope you
will read.
Yours very truly,
(Signed) FRED HIGH.
House of Representatives, U. S.
Washington, D. C., May 13, 1913.
Mr. Fred High,
602 Steinway Hall,
Chicago, Ill.
Dear Sir:
Your letter of the 7th inst., regarding the Cook-Peary controversy,
received. I do not think it would be possible to get Congress to
interfere in this matter. It is a question of little concern to many
who discovered the Pole, or whether it was discovered at all. It seems
to be a personal matter, the settlement of which should be determined
by the persons interested.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) WOODA N. CARR.
Is it a matter of no concern whether or not the North Pole has been
discovered? Is it a matter of no concern whether a man can fake a story
about having discovered the North Pole, receive the homage of the world,
fleece the American public out of thousands of dollars for fees to hear
his lecture and go unpunished? If Dr. Cook has hoaxed the world as so
many have charged him with having done, this is more than a private
matter.
If Dr. Cook has discovered the North Pole, are we acting the part of
fellow countrymen by shirking our duty? Shall Congress say that the
clique at Washington either make good its charges against Dr. Cook, or
be made to retract and stand disgraced in the eyes of the world? We
shared Cook's honors. Will we shirk when he calls upon his countrymen
for a square deal?
The following letter was received from Senator Miles Poindexter and
should be carefully studied:
United States Senate, Committee on Expenditures in the War Department.
Washington, D. C. May 9, 1913.
Mr. Fred High, Editor,
The Platform, 602 Steinway Hall,
64 E. Van Buren St.,
Chicago, Illinois.
My dear Mr. High:
I have yours of 7th inst., and was very much pleased to know that you
are interested in securing a fair examination, officially if possible,
into Dr. Cook's claims of discovery.
Ever since the Cook-Peary controversy began, I have paid more or less
close attention to the questions involved therein. I have talked with
a number of residents around the neighborhood of Mt. McKinley, Alaska,
some of whom are friendly and some unfriendly to Dr. Cook; have read
with great care Dr. Cook's book describing his polar expedition; and
have followed through the newspapers and otherwise the various phases
of the controversy and happenings in connection therewith. As a
lawyer, I have always been especially interested in the study of the
credibility of witnesses, the weight of evidence; and in deducing
logical conclusions therefrom. From the careful consideration of the
comparative character of the witnesses for and against Dr. Cook, their
motives, and the attitude and hearing throughout the controversy of
Cook and Peary themselves, I have a very fixed and firm conviction
that Dr. Cook's story is true. I believe the majority of the people of
the country who are interested in the subject are of the same opinion.
From my observation of the miserable petty cliques and factional
squabbles in official circles of the Government, such for instance
as the Sampson-Schley controversy and innumerable smaller disputes,
I have long ago ceased to accept, as necessarily correct, official
evidence merely because it is official.
I have not yet seen a copy of The Platform containing Dr. Cook's
letter to President Wilson which you say you are forwarding me under
separate cover, and when received will read it with much interest.
Not having read it, I do not know just what plan Dr. Cook proposes for
an official investigation. I will be glad however, to learn the basis
upon which it is proposed to make the test an official investigation.
It occurs to me that it is entirely a private matter and that the
Government officially has nothing to do with it. Every man has as much
right as any other man to form a conclusion in the case; public
opinion, if the facts can be presented to the public, is the best
judgment. I would be apprehensive of submitting the absolute
determination of the question to an official tribunal for the reasons,
among others, which I have mentioned above. However, will be glad to
learn further as stated of the proposal.
With kind regards.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) MILES POINDEXTER.
Senator Poindexter's letter is a stricture on official Washington that
ought to cause every true patriot to blush with shame. Are we at the
point where even an impartial investigation can not be had into the
controversy as to who discovered the North Pole?
There are thousands who believe this is a question that touches our
national honor and therefore is a rightful subject for a Congressional
Investigation. Those who believe this, ought to write to their
representatives at Washington and urge such action as will lay the
facts before the world.
* * * * *
The following letter from Hon. Champ Clark is worthy of much
consideration as it reveals the real status of this controversy as it
exists in official circles.
Dr. Cook is a private citizen with no Cook Arctic club to back him and
share his gains. No National Geographical Society helped to finance his
venture with the hope of managing his lectures as a sort of bureau
graft. He is a private citizen.
Speaker Clark's letter furnishes us with the reason for asking Congress
to take a hand in this affair for it shows how ready our statesmen are
to give ear when the people speak:
THE SPEAKER'S ROOM
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
WASHINGTON, D. C.
May 10, 1913.
Mr. Fred High,
Editor of The Platform,
Chicago, Illinois.
My dear Mr. High:
I have your letter touching the Cook-Peary controversy. I note what
you say. I do not see clearly what it is that you are suggesting. That
is, whether you want Congress to formulate some plan to determine the
matter by appointing a commission of Arctic explorers, or exactly what
it is that you do want.
Of course, I do not know very much about Arctic explorations and do
not set a very high store on them as I never could understand what
sort of good would come of locating the North Pole. I am a good deal
of a utilitarian, and am a disciple of the Baconian philosophy rather
than of the philosophy of Aristotle and the Greek school. To tell the
truth, I have always had a hazy sort of an idea that both Cook and
Peary discovered the North Pole. I have not valued my opinion highly
enough to undertake to exploit it or to induce anybody else to believe
it as I have enough other matters on hand to employ the time and
attention of one man.
Wishing you success, I am
Your friend,
(Signed) CHAMP CLARK
The following opinion of the men on the Chautauqua platform is
attributed to our good friend from Missouri:
"The Chautauqua has been a powerful force in directing the political
thought of the country, which is largely sociological in these
latter days. I approve the Chautauqua lecturers, with whom I have
been associated, because they constitute as fine a group of men and
women as can be found among the splendid citizenship of America. I
have a deep and abiding interest in them, and bid them a hearty
godspeed in their work."
Dr. Cook is perhaps the leading Chautauqua lecturer of the present
season. He is now booked to appear at seventy Chautauquas this Summer
and it is certain that even the genial Speaker of the House wouldn't
want to associate with a man who would hoax the world for gain.
Certainly he wouldn't want "The greatest liar of the Century" to be one
of the powerful forces directing the political thoughts of the Century.
If Dr. Cook discovered the North Pole he should be given the credit for
that great achievement.
We certainly have a right to see to it that neither Dr. Cook nor Mr.
Peary are treated as though they were the scum of the earth. Dr. Cook
has brought charges against Mr. Peary as a Naval officer. He still
brings these charges, and he should be made to prove them. Peary, an
officer of the Navy, has brought charges against Cook and he should be
made to prove them.
Mr. Peary is an officer of our navy, drawing an old age pension. His
position is such that he cannot ignore Dr. Cook's open charges. He is
honor bound to protect the good name of this great country by asking an
investigation of these charges. To remain silent, is to stand to be
branded as the arch-degenerate of our day. Don't forget it was he who
opened up the mud batteries and caused this undignified controversy.
No honorable man can allow such open charges of gross immorality as Dr.
Cook preferred against Mr. Peary in his telegram to President Taft.
These have been printed in magazines and newspapers as well as appearing
in Dr. Cook's books, now in the sixtieth thousand edition.