stefansson-wrangel-09-31-081r

OverviewTranscribeVersionsHelp

Facsimile

Transcription

Status: Needs Review

THE DIFFICULTIES OF 1922 123

“story” about Wrangel Island that appeared was printed
in its issue for , substantially as I
gave it out.

With the exception of two or three slips, the Times
story about Wrangel Island account was such as anyone might
condense from a frank and full book telling our ideas,
doings and hopes. Although I had been avoiding pub-
licity, 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 alleged facts as brought out the meaning they
wanted, and worded both the news and the editorial
comment so as to raise the question as to whether Amer-
icans 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 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 Anglo-
phobe American press was the response in the press of
Great Britain and Canada. [With conspicuous exceptions] 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

Notes and Questions

Nobody has written a note for this page yet

Please sign in to write a note for this page