stefansson-wrangel-09-27-054

- 29 - 92

that I had an ordinary trading venture "somewhere up North." The news aspect
was changed when it became known that I was doing something that for the time
being at least I was very reluctant to advertise. It was great luck for me that
I had a friend on the New York Times and that in consequence the first big
"story" about Wrangell Island that appeared was printed in their Issue for
March 20,1922, substantially as I had given it out.

With the expedition of two or three ships the Times story about Wrangell Island was such as anyone might
condense from a frank and full book telling our ideas, doings and hopes. Although
I had been avoiding publicity, I felt after seeing the Times article that no harm
had been done and possibly some good. But I felt entirely different after I had
seen the "re-writes" of the story by the more sensational papers and especially
by the Anglophobe section of the press. These papers used such real facts as suited
them from the original story, added such others alleged facts as brought cut the meaning they
wanted and worded them both in the news form and in the editorial comment so as to raise
the question as to whether Americans should tolerate having a British subject
resident in the United States organizing expeditions to deprive the United
States of an island which belonged to them by the combined logic of history and
geographical position. Of course, they begged three questions, first, whether
the United States had any adequate legal claim to the island, second, whether the United
States wished to press such claims if they had them, and third, whether it might
not possibly suit the United States better to have the island in British possession
rather than in the possession of Russia or Japan.

But more disturbing than the doings of the Anglophobe American
press was the response in the press of Great Britain and Canada. The general
trend of the Canadian editorials was to the effect that no one, unless he were
crazy, would imagine that so remote an island had any value. This was usually
followed by saying that Canada had any amount of undeveloped territory, and that
all her energies must be concentrated on developing the lands nearer home before