stefansson-wrangel-09-28-007

110

- 47 -

Office doubtless wanted to sound out the various powers as to their attitude. The
legal technical advisers of the Forgign Office seemed to be clear as to the superiority of
British rights in the case. The Russians did not seem to have any legal claims,
but they were making a great deal of fuss - wireless despatches from Moscow, notes
to the Foreign Office, and threats from Vladivostok. The United States had
undeniably been the owners of Wrangell Island for a period following their taking
possession in 1881 and here was at least a reasonable ground for discussion.
American newspapers, doubtless basing their editorials on inaccurate encyclopaedias
and other books of reference, were asserting that the question was whether the
United States should surrender territory which belonged to them to the British
Empire. Amusingly, the papers in Canada were at the same time discussing the
question of whether the British Empire should take Russian territory away from
Russia, and both parties were talking about Wrangell Island. Most of the Canadian
editors evidently based their idea of Russian ownership on the Moscow declarations
to that the effect, but a few apparently took it from the Mercator's charts on their
walls. To one as ignorant unlearned in of west-European history as these men were in of the
history of Russia, it might seem reasonable to glance at the map and conclude that
England belonged to France.

X When you are trying to lead a nation to a change of policy nothing
is more important than the attitude of the press. Through my fortunate and most
valuable friendship with Sir Michael Sadler I got in touch with the London Times
and the Manchester Guardian. For years I had been a great admirer and constant
reader of the Guardian and I had in part, therefore, the necessary background for
the delightful day I spent with its owner and editor, C. P. Scott, whose
personality intensified the impression which the Guardian had made. Since this
paper is mainly concerned with social and political movements and with the cause
of truth and progress along those lines, it is probable that my visit to Manchester
was really important in turning the attention of Mr. Scott and his editors to the