FOOTNOTES:
[75] Note 57.
[76] Note 58.
[77] Note 59.
[78] Note 60.
[79] Bancroft, History of Alaska, p. 79, presents the same view: "The identity of Kayak is established by comparing Bering's with Cook's observations, which would be enough even if the chart appended to Khitroff's journal had not been preserved. At first both Cook and Vancouver thought it Yakutat Bay, which they named after Bering, but both changed their minds. As late as 1787 the Russian Admiralty college declared that the island Chukli (Montague of Vancouver) was the point of Bering's discovery, but Admiral Sarycheff, who examined the journals of the expedition, pointed at once to Kayak Island as the only point to which the description of Bering and Steller could apply. Sarycheff made one mistake in applying the name of Cape St. Elias to the nearest point of the mainland called Cape Suckling by Cook."—Tr.
[80] Note 61.
[CHAPTER XVII.]
EXPLORATIONS ALONG THE AMERICAN COAST.—STELLER'S CENSURE OF BERING FOR UNDUE HASTE.—BERING DEFENDED.—DALL, THE AMERICAN WRITER, REPRIMANDED.—THE RETURN VOYAGE.
It is by no means an easy matter to form an unbiased opinion of Bering's stay off Kayak Island. Steller is about our only authority, but just at the point where it is most difficult to supplement his account, he gives vent to most violent accusations against the management of the expedition from a scientific standpoint. On the 16th of July, when land was first seen, he says: "One can easily imagine how happy all were to see land. No one failed to congratulate Bering, as chief of the expedition, to whom above all others the honor of discovery belonged. Bering, however, heard all this, not only with great indifference, but, looking toward land, he even shrugged his shoulders in the presence of all on board." Steller adds that on account of this conduct charges might have been preferred against him in St. Petersburg, had he lived.