diff options
Diffstat (limited to '78944-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | 78944-0.txt | 613 |
1 files changed, 613 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/78944-0.txt b/78944-0.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..437a4f0 --- /dev/null +++ b/78944-0.txt @@ -0,0 +1,613 @@ +*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 78944 *** + + + + + THE CANADIAN VIEW OF THE ALASKAN BOUNDARY DISPUTE + + AS STATED BY + + HON. DAVID MILLS MINISTER OF JUSTICE + + _In an interview with the correspondent of the Chicago Tribune on the + 14th August, 1899_ + + OTTAWA GOVERNMENT PRINTING BUREAU 1899 + + + + + THE CANADIAN VIEW + + OF THE + + ALASKAN BOUNDARY DISPUTE + + AS STATED BY + + HON. DAVID MILLS, MINISTER OF JUSTICE + + _In an interview with the correspondent of the Chicago Tribune on the + 14th August, 1899_. + + +You ask me to state to you the Canadian view of the Alaskan boundary +dispute. I shall not in endeavouring to meet your wishes, claim to do +more than express my own view upon the subject. + +I may say to you that already correspondents connected with two New +York journals made a similar request a short time ago, but it was +during the midst of the session when I had but a few moments at my +disposal, and in my conversation with them, I could do no more than +outline my opinion upon the subject and point out in what respect, we, +on this side of the border, dissented from the contention of the United +States. I notice that the brief statement of my opinions were not very +favourably received, or very carefully considered by some of your +citizens. In discussing the speech made in the House of Commons by the +leader of the Conservative party (Sir Charles Tupper), it was stated +by some Washington correspondents of the New York and Philadelphia +press, that it was very hard to explain his misinformation, and that I +seemed to be still more ignorant than Sir Charles Tupper. The natural +inference from this kind of criticism is that every opinion at variance +with the contentions which have been put forward in your country, and +which for the most part meets with favour in your press, is quite +undeserving of serious consideration. The impression made upon my mind +is that vehement assertions and frequent repetitions, are to supersede +careful investigation of the facts and the legitimate conclusions to be +drawn from them. + +This Alaskan Boundary Dispute was discussed by the Joint Commission +of the two countries. No conclusion, it seems, was reached. The +proceedings were secret. It was stated that the Commissioners had +referred the question to their respective governments. This was all +that, for some time, was disclosed to the public; but no sooner was +the statement bruited abroad that the matter was being discussed by +Lord Salisbury and Mr. Choate, than telegraphic despatches were sent +from Washington to the New York journals, and thence to the London +newspapers, in which the Canadian members of the Commission, and the +Canadian Government, were described as men who were ill-informed, +obstinate, greedy, refusing to agree to an arbitration in respect of +the disputed boundary without first obtaining from the United States +Commissioners or Government, a cession of territory, to which they +could, in reason, make no claim, and which undoubtedly belonged to +your country. Every one who has read the protocol on this part of +the negotiations, which I understand was published to prevent the +persistent repetition of these misrepresentations, now knows how +unfounded they were. The attempt was made to prejudice the case of +this country, by mis-stating its position. It was announced by the +New York and Washington correspondents of London newspapers, that the +Commissioners of the United States desired arbitration, and that the +Canadian members of the Commission stood in the way. This mis-statement +was, for a time, daily repeated. It was published in the English and +Canadian newspapers, as well as in those of the United States. The +attitude of the respective parties was carefully concealed, and the +impression sought to be made, and for a time not without success, that +the demands of the Canadian Commissioners were most unreasonable. +It was not until the protocols upon the subject were published in +England, and in this country, that the public became aware of the gross +injustice that was being done us. When the publication was made, it was +seen that we were willing either to arbitrate or to compromise. Our +representatives had offered to accept a compromise which would permit +us to retain so much of the disputed country as would afford us a means +of access to our own possession in the interior. Our geographical +position is such, that the disputed territory is of immensely greater +consequence to us, than to you. + +It is well to bear in mind that two controversies have arisen between +you and us in respect to the possessions which you acquired from Russia +upon our northwestern border. In one, you claimed that that part of the +Pacific Ocean known in recent years as Bering Sea, and which borders +upon the Aleutian Islands which Russia ceded to you, along with her +possessions upon this continent, was a part of your acquisition, and so +the fur-bearing seals found in its waters were your exclusive property. +Sometimes you contended that it was a _mare clausum_; sometimes you +said this was not your contention, but you claimed to exercise upon +the high seas, in time of peace, rights which belong to a state only +in time of war, and you contended that people, in the pursuit of a +legitimate vocation upon the high seas, were guilty of a crime only +a little less atrocious than piracy; and so the killing of seals in +the Pacific Ocean, by Canadian seal hunters, was claimed to be the +destruction of wild animals that were the property of the United States. + +We find it difficult to understand how any public man could have +persuaded himself that there was any merit in this contention. The +Municipal Law of the United States can have no force outside of the +territories of the Republic, except upon board a ship sailing under +the United States flag. The courts of the United States have held +that a man standing on board a United States ship, and shooting a man +in a boat at the Society Islands, was not amenable to the laws of +the United States, as the murder which he committed was beyond the +jurisdiction of the Republic. I dare say that this was, in strict law, +a proper decision; but how, then, could a Canadian on board a Canadian +vessel, under the British flag, upon the high seas, be amenable to +the Municipal Law of the United States? Your government assumed that +they were. It authorized the seizure of Canadian vessels upon the +high seas, under the authority of your Municipal Law, to which they +owed no subjection, and where International Law alone prevails. These +vessels were confiscated. The men on board were imprisoned, and when +they were discharged, it was far away from home, and without the means +necessary to enable them to return. We felt that the action of your +Government was a violent encroachment upon the municipal rights of +Canadians, that were wrongfully subjected to your authority. It was a +violation of these settled principles of International Law for which, +on many occasions, the United States had conspicuously contended. It +was also at variance with the contention of the United States, in +her controversy with Russia, between 1821 and 1824, in respect to an +exclusive sovereignty, over the same waters. The contention of your +Government, we thought wholly untenable. We thought the principles +of Public Law applicable to the case, were too clear to admit of +controversy. I do not know of any foreign jurist who took your side. +Yet unreasonable as were thought your pretensions, they went to +arbitration. Erroneous as we thought the doctrine set up by Mr. Blaine +and others to be, we did not refuse to arbitrate. The question went +to an International Tribunal that was certainly not biased in our +favour, and our contention, in that matter, was upheld. Why, then, +should the Government of the United States, in this second branch of +the controversy, hesitate to refer the question, since we cannot agree +to compromise, to a tribunal of like character? + +It may be that the Government of the United States has persuaded itself +that our position is untenable; that the boundary line ought not to +be placed where we say, that under the Convention of St. Petersburg, +it should be drawn. But the United States, like ourselves, is an +interested party, and its Government ought not, either wholly, or in +part, undertake to decide the question in dispute, before the reference +is made, nor refuse to have the contention put forward by us and by +them, submitted to a competent and impartial tribunal, for adjudication. + +If, in the opinion of your Government, your contention is well +founded, and if they believe it best comports with the terms of the +Convention of 1825, it will be enabled to establish that fact before +an International Tribunal, and if such a tribunal agrees with your +contention, we must bow to its decision; but should it be found that +our contention is well founded, the Government of the United States +ought to be equally ready to acquiesce. There is neither reason nor +justice, in suggesting a reference of a matter, upon which we cannot +agree to a tribunal, that is not permitted to consider the whole +question, and to locate the boundary in conformity with the terms of +the Convention of 1825. + +As I understand the protocols upon this subject, they show that we +contend that the boundary line, as set out in the convention, crosses +the Lynn Inlet not far from the ocean, being drawn from the crest +of the mountains on one side, to the crest of the mountains on the +opposite side. The Government of the United States dissents from this +view and maintains the boundary passes round the head of the inlet. Now +what efforts do the protocols show, were made to reach a solution? We +were of opinion that there were two ways in which this difference might +be amicably adjusted--by a compromise, or by reference to a properly +constituted tribunal. We offered to compromise. We contended that Dyea +and Skagway are built in Canadian territory. They are the natural +seaports from which sea access, at the present time, can be had into +our Yukon country, where we have a mining population of 30,000. The +possession of the inlet is of great consequence to us. It is of little +importance to you. As a compromise we offered to leave Dyea and Skagway +in your possession, if you assented to our retaining Pyramid Harbour, +which would afford to us a highway into the interior, through our own +country. This compromise would have left you the greater portion of +the territory, at this point, in dispute. It would have made the Lynn +Inlet a common water. This proposal your representatives declined. The +proposal was then made to you, to refer the question to arbitration, in +order to ascertain the boundary fixed by the convention, and this also +you have declined. Why? There would seem to be but one answer--because +you are in possession of territory that is rightfully ours. If under +the Convention of St. Petersburg you think you can rightfully claim +Lynn Inlet, why should not the matter have gone to arbitration? + +It is said that this disputed boundary should be dealt with on +principles recognized by diplomatists, and not on those which govern +the actions of Attorneys. I admit it. We did so proceed, when we +offered to compromise this dispute, and leave Dyea and Skagway in +your possession. We did so, when we offered to ascertain the legal +boundary, by a properly constituted independent tribunal. We did so, +when we offered to qualify our extreme right, by the rule adopted, in +the Venezuela arbitration. This statement of facts is our answer to the +charge of obstinacy. Our obstinacy consists in this, that we object to +the surrender of everything that is in controversy between us. Since +you have been good enough to ask me my opinion upon the subject, let +me ask your readers to carefully compare these offered concessions +on our part with the concessions which your Government is willing to +make. What was it? Nothing beyond this, that they would grant to us +the liberty to build a highway in a territory behind the coast range +of mountains, beyond which under the convention you have no right to +go, upon condition, that we admitted, that the harbour from which we +started, and the country through which our road ran, was under the +sovereignty of the United States. I ask your people to compare the two +concessions, and let them candidly say, which of us is most open to the +charge of being unreasonably obstinate. We are most desirous of a fair +settlement. The people of the United States are our neighbours, and we +are theirs. It is to the advantage of both countries that a feeling of +friendship and mutual good-will should prevail amongst the people of +each towards the other, but this most desirable object is not promoted +by one country appropriating to itself the territory which rightfully +belongs to the other. + +I have referred to the question of boundary at the Lynn Inlet, which +is the place most prominently brought forward in the controversy, +but in order to understand the treaty, and the proper location of +the limitary line, separating the American territory acquired from +Russia from this country, it is necessary to give some attention to +the historical circumstances out of which that treaty grew. Before the +treaty was negotiated between Great Britain and Russia, disputes had +arisen between the Government of the United Kingdom and the Emperor of +Russia in regard to the extent of their respective possessions upon +the northwest coast of this continent. The Russians had visited the +country. They had explored the coast at least as far south as the 54th +degree of north latitude. They had established fishing and trading +stations upon the coast. The Canadian traders who had been organized +into a Fur Trading Company, known as the Northwest Trading Company, +had also explored the country. Their explorations began as early as +1762, and continued until 1820. There were the two Frobishers, the +two Henrys, Sir Alexander Mackenzie, Fraser, McLeod and others. Their +exploration extended from the Arctic Ocean to the Gulf of California. +They had established numerous trading posts within the Pacific slope. +At the beginning of this century, they had beyond the mountains, at +least 700 agents in their employ. It was upon their explorations and +discoveries, that the British Government relied for the maintenance of +its title to the country. It is a well recognized rule of English law, +that a British subject carries with him, into a derelict country, both +the laws of his country, and the sovereignty of his King. + +When the question of boundary came to be discussed between the +representatives of the Emperor of Russia and the King of England, +there was not much difficulty in arriving at an agreement, because +the Russians had visited the coast for the purpose of fishing and of +trading with the Indians found there. They had no desire to undertake +the extension of their dominions into the interior. They had at the +time no resources in the country for the purpose. The English by the +treaty were left in possession of nearly the whole country. Russia was +confined to a narrow fringe upon the shore. + +Before this treaty was made, the United States had acquired north of +the 42nd degree of latitude, whatever rights Spain possessed upon the +coast. Between the United States and Great Britain a convention had +been entered into which established a _modus vivendi_ between them, +by which each bound itself not to interfere with the settlements of +the other; but the question as to their territorial rights, under the +convention, was left untouched. + +In 1824, the United States made a treaty with Russia, which is modelled +on the plan of the one which had previously been entered into by the +United Kingdom and the United States. This convention, between the +United States and Russia did not undertake to define any territorial +limits as an assertion of territorial sovereignty. By Article I., the +citizens and subjects of the high contracting parties agreed that +neither will disturb or restrain the other in navigating or fishing in +these waters, or in the liberty of resorting to the coast to trade with +the natives. But where any part of the coast is in actual occupation of +the one, resort shall not be had to it by the other, for the purpose of +trading with the natives. + +By Article II. non-intercourse by the one, with the settlements of +the other, is mutually agreed upon, except by the permission of the +Governor or Commandant of the place. The United States agreed that +they will form no settlement north of 54 degrees 40 minutes of north +latitude. And Russia agrees to form no settlement south of that +parallel. They further agreed, that for a period of ten years, the +ships of both powers, and the ships which belong to the citizens and +subjects of each, may without hindrance, frequent the interior seas, +gulfs, harbours and creeks upon the coast mentioned in the preceding +article. Here there was no division of territory between the parties. +There was a _modus vivendi_ provided by which the United States agreed +not to exclude Russian vessels from the interior seas, gulfs, &c., +south of 54 degrees and 40 minutes, and Russia agreed not to exclude +the United States vessels from like waters north of that parallel. The +United States Government knew at the time this convention was made, +that the Government of Great Britain was claiming sovereignty upon the +same coast; and so that the United States could not well recognize any +rights of Russia to the sovereignty of the country. + +In the correspondence which took place between the Governments of +the United States and Russia, the United States did not concede the +pretensions which Russia set up. Mr. Adams, in a despatch to the +American Minister, Mr. Middleton, in July, 1883, says:-- + +“From the tenor of the ukase of the 14th September, 1821, the +pretensions of the Imperial Government extend to an exclusive +territorial jurisdiction from 45 degrees of north latitude on the +Asiatic coast to 51 degrees north latitude on the western coast of +the American continent; and they assume the right of interdicting +the navigation and fishing of all other nations to the extent of one +hundred miles from the whole of that coast. The United States can admit +no part of those claims. Their right of navigation and of fishing is +perfect, and has been in constant exercise from the earliest times +after the peace of 1783 throughout the whole extent of the southern +ocean, subject only, to the ordinary exceptions and exclusions of the +territorial jurisdiction which so far as Russian rights are concerned, +are confined to certain islands north of the 35th degree of latitude +and have no existence on the continent of America.” + +There is nothing in the treaty of 1824 inconsistent with the contention +which Mr. Adams put forward in this communication, and so we find +Mr. Adams, in his letter of instructions to Mr. Middleton, takes the +ground that the exclusive right of Spain to any portion of the American +continent, had been terminated by the successful revolution of her +colonists, and by her treaty stipulations with the United States. Mr. +Adams practically maintained that the entire continent of America was +closed against any European power, that North America consisted of +the colonial possessions of the United Kingdom, and of independent +republics, and so there was no further room for acquisition, and he +argues that the necessary consequence of this state of things, is +that the American continents henceforth will no longer be open to +colonization. + +A few months later, the celebrated message of President Monroe, set +out two propositions, the one against the attempt of the Holy Alliance +to interfere with the independence of the Spanish American States, +and the other declaring that no part of the American continent is to +be considered as subject to future acquisition for colonization by +any European power. It is clear, that this second proposition was +intended as a denial of the rights of Russia to acquire territory on +the continent of North America. Mr. Adams conceded that Russia had +possession of certain islands, but he denied altogether that she had +any right to territory upon the continent--upon the main land. Mr. +Adams was conversant with the explorations of Mackenzie and others +associated with the North-west Company, and his position was, that the +territories which did not belong to the United States by virtue of +her treaty with Spain, and by the explorations of Lewis and Clarke, +were under the jurisdiction of Great Britain, and so the treaty of +1824 with Russia was not one for the mutual recognition of territorial +sovereignty on the part of either party. + +These facts are important to bear in mind in the interpretation of +the Treaty which was subsequently negotiated and ratified between His +Britannic Majesty, and the Emperor of Russia. There is this marked +difference between the convention entered into between Great Britain +and Russia in February 1825, and the convention of the previous year +between the United States and the Emperor of Russia; the convention +between His Britannic Majesty and the Emperor, was a convention +settling a boundary between territories admittedly belonging to Great +Britain and territories to which it was conceded that Russia had +valid claim; that is, the part of the continent north of 54 degrees +40 minutes of north latitude. The territories south of 54 degrees 40 +minutes north latitude were territories that were still in controversy +between Great Britain and the United States. + +The first Article of this convention declares, wholly contrary to +the action and contention of the government of the United States in +reference to the Bering Sea, that the subjects of the High Contracting +parties shall not be troubled or molested in any part of the ocean, +commonly called the Pacific Ocean, either in navigating the same, +in fishing therein, or in landing on the coast in parts not already +occupied, to trade with the natives. + +Article II provides that in order to prevent the _right_ of navigating +and fishing exercised upon the ocean by the subjects of the High +Contracting parties from becoming a pretext for illicit commerce, +they mutually agree that subjects of His Britannic Majesty shall not +land at any place where there is a Russian establishment, without the +permission of the Governor or Commandant, and that Russian subjects +shall not land without permission at any British establishment on the +north-west coast. + +Under these articles, the freedom of navigation is recognized. Article +III and IV provide for the demarcation of the boundary which is to +separate the territories of the one, from the territories of the other. +Let me read to you those articles in precise terms:-- + +“Article III.--The line of demarcation between the possessions of the +High Contracting parties, upon the coast of the continent, and the +islands of America to the north-west shall be drawn in the manner +following:--Commencing from the southernmost point of the island called +the Prince of Wales Island, which point lies in the parallel of 50 +degrees 40 minutes north latitude, and between the 131st and the 133rd +degree of west longitude (Meridian of Greenwich) the said line shall +ascend to the north along the channel called Portland Channel as far +as the point of the continent where it strikes 56th degree of north +latitude; from this last mentioned point, the line of demarcation shall +follow the summit of the mountains situated parallel to the coast as +far as the point of intersection of the 141st degree of west longitude +of the said meridian; and finally from the said point of intersection, +the said meridian line of the 141st degree, in its prolongation as +far as the Frozen Ocean, shall form the limit between the Russian and +British possessions on the continent of America on the north-west. + +“Article IV.--With reference to the line of demarcation laid down in +the preceding article it is understood: + +“1st. That the island called Prince of Wales Island shall belong wholly +to Russia. + +“2nd. That whenever the summit of the mountains which extend in a +direction parallel to the coast from the 56th degree of north latitude +to the point of intersection of the 141st degree of west longitude +shall prove to be at the distance of more than ten marine leagues from +the ocean, the limit between the British possessions and the line of +coast which is to belong to Russia, as above mentioned, shall be formed +by a line parallel to the windings of the coast and which shall never +exceed the distance of ten marine leagues therefrom.” + +It will be seen that the starting point is the southernmost point of +the Island called Prince of Wales Island, which lies in 54 degrees +40 minutes north latitude and that this line is to ascend north. +From whence? Why from the starting point--the southernmost point of +Prince of Wales Island. It is perfectly true that the boundary is to +ascend north along the channel called Portland Channel, but it cannot +ascend north along the channel called Portland Channel by commencing +at the southernmost point of Prince of Wales Island, the place of +beginning, a line more than one hundred miles in length running due +east, must be drawn from the southern end of Prince of Wales Island +before Portland Channel can be reached. The first question then to +be considered is, whether the description of the direction of the +latitude and longitude of the line is to yield to the use of the +words “Portland Channel,” or whether the name “Portland Channel” must +be subordinated to the direction and description contained in these +articles. If Clarence Channel, which lies immediately east of Prince of +Wales Island is taken, there is an exact conformity to the description. +You may ascend north from the southernmost point of Prince of Wales +Island along Clarence Channel, but you cannot ascend north from the +southernmost point of Prince of Wales Island along Portland Channel. +You can ascend to a point on Clarence Channel as far as the point on +the continent where it strikes the 56th degree of latitude. You cannot +ascend Portland Channel to a point on the continent where it strikes +the 56th degree of north latitude, because Portland Channel does not +reach that far north. The difference between drawing the boundary from +Portland Channel and from Clarence Channel is this--the boundary upon +the mainland commences where the 56th degree of north latitude cuts the +shore in the one instance, and in the other it commences at a point at +the head of Portland Channel which falls short of the place designated +as the place of beginning. + +By Article IV, the line is to be drawn so as to leave the whole of +Prince of Wales Island to Russia. If a due east line is to be drawn +from the southernmost point of the island to the entrance at Portland +Channel, these words “leaving the whole of Prince of Wales Island to +Russia” are surplusage, because a due east line would not only leave +the whole of the Prince of Wales Island to Russia, but would leave +several other large islands, of which no mention is made, lying between +this island and the mainland. If Clarence Channel is taken, there is +an obvious reason for providing in the treaty, the words, that the +whole of the Prince of Wales Island shall be left to Russia, because a +line ascending from the southern most point north, would cut off the +southeastern portion of the island, but these words have no proper +place in the treaty if the line starting from the southernmost point +of Prince of Wales Island is to be extended eastward to the entrance +of Portland Channel, as it would not be a line “ascending north” from +the southernmost point of Prince of Wales Island. It will be observed +that this qualification found in Article IV of the description given of +the limitary line in Article III is unaccountable, if a line is first +to be drawn eastward from the Prince of Wales Island to the entrance +to Portland Channel. Why should this portion of the description have +been omitted altogether? It is, I think, clear from the wording of the +treaty, that the use of the words “Portland Channel” cannot refer to +the body of water commonly so designated, and the whole of this part of +the description of the boundary is inapplicable. + +Let any intelligent reader with a map before him, undertake to draw +the line from the description which the treaty furnishes. If he begins +at the southernmost point of Prince of Wales Island, which lies in +54 degrees, 40 minutes of north latitude, he cannot from that point +ascend to the north along Portland Channel. The name of the channel +through which the line is drawn are words subordinate to the direction, +description and relation of the line so drawn to the starting point, +which determines, in my opinion, through what waters the line is to +so ascend that the whole of the Prince of Wales Island is to remain +in Russia. It is assumed in the words of description, found in the +treaty, that the line that ascends to the north along the channel, can +do so as far as to the point of the continent where it strikes the +56th degree of north latitude. This is a point, upon the shore, in +which the boundary upon the mainland is to begin, and so the words are +wholly inapplicable to Portland Channel, as it falls short, by several +miles, of extending to that degree of latitude. The channel which +lies immediately east of Prince of Wales Island, and through which +the descriptive words of the treaty requires the boundary to be drawn +does so extend, so that the geographical conditions fit in with the +description in the one case, and do not in the other. + +By the third article the line of demarcation is to follow the summit +of the mountains, situated parallel to the coast as far as the +intersection of the 141st degree of west longitude; and the fourth +article provides that whenever the summit of the mountains, which +extend in a direction parallel to the coast from the 56th degree +of north latitude, shall prove to be at the distance of more than +ten marine leagues from the coast, the limit between the British +possessions and the line of coast which is to belong to Russia shall be +formed by a line parallel to the windings of the coast, and which shall +never exceed the distance of ten marine leagues therefrom. + +It is too clear to require argument that the limitary line was to +follow the coast range and the summit of that coast range, whether high +or low was to be the boundary, when it was not more than ten leagues +from the coast. In many places inlets extend through canyons through +the mountains, and so much of each of those inlets as would be cut off, +by a line drawn from the summit of the mountain upon the one side, to +the summit of the mountain upon the other, is Canadian territory. The +line cannot be removed further inland, because there may be a gap in +the mountains into which an arm of the sea extends. The coast range +approaches these inlets on each side, in most cases, near the waters +of the ocean. When you pass the Lynn Inlet, it will be found that the +coast range embraces peaks from 10,000 to 18,000 feet high, and it does +seem to me preposterous to contend that the provisions of the treaty +can be applied by drawing a line in the rear of those mountains, as +certainly would be done, if the boundary passed around the head of Lynn +Inlet. + +It is, I think, manifest that the framers of the treaty assumed, +that harbours, inlets, and arms of the sea, would be found, when the +boundary was drawn, within British territory, and certain provisions of +the treaty were entered into upon this assumption. + +Article VI provides that the subjects of Her Britannic Majesty from +whatever quarter they may arrive, whether from the ocean, or from +the interior of the continent, shall, for ever enjoy the right of +navigation freely, and without any hindrance whatever, all the rivers +and streams, which in their course towards the Pacific Ocean, may +cross the line of demarcation on the line of the coast. As some of +those rivers flow into Bering Sea, it is perfectly obvious, that the +contracting parties assumed that the navigation of that sea was open to +British vessels. + +By Article VII for a period of ten years, the vessels of the two +powers, and of their subjects respectively shall mutually be at liberty +to frequent all the inland seas, the gulfs, havens and creeks on the +coast mentioned in Article III. The coast mentioned in Article III +is not the entire coast of the continent, but the coast north of 54 +degrees 40 minutes. + +By Article X every British or Russian vessel navigating the Pacific +Ocean, which may be compelled by storms or by accident to take shelter +in the ports of the respective parties shall be at liberty to refit +therein, to provide itself with all necessary stores and to put to sea +again without paying any other than port and lighthouse dues, which +shall be the same as those paid by national vessels. + +This is not a temporary arrangement but a permanent one which each +party has within the ports of the other. + +It has been contended by some of the United States press, that the +waters belonging to Great Britain herein referred to, are those that +lie south of the 54th degree 40 minutes of north latitude, but this +is not so. Those territories were in dispute between Great Britain +and the United States, and with reference to them no compact was +entered into in the treaty between Russia and Great Britain. What is +entered into is the establishment of a boundary north of 54 degrees +40 minutes, and it is with reference to this boundary, separating +the territories of Russia from the territories of His Britannic +Majesty, that all the provisions of the treaty referred,--Russia made +no claim, in this treaty, to any territories further south. She set +up no pretensions to any privileges further south; what was being +settled was the dispute between Great Britain and Russia in respect +to sovereign rights north of 54 degrees 40 minutes north latitude. +The subjects of Great Britain were without any hindrance whatever to +have liberty of navigating freely all the rivers and streams which in +their course towards the Pacific Ocean may cross the boundary line, +the line of demarcation, as set out in Article III of the convention. +These rivers and navigable routes were not rivers south of 54 degrees +40 minutes north latitude, but rivers north of that latitude--rivers +that flowed from British territory through the Russian territory upon +the coast. All the provisions of the treaty relating to fishing and +to navigation have reference to the territories and waters which were +the subject of the treaty, and so it is wholly beside the question +to refer to the convention between the United States and Russia of +the previous year. It is as plain as anything can well be, that the +contracting parties assumed that when the separating line came to be +drawn, under the treaty, that there would be, in some places, harbours +and inlets remaining on the British side of this boundary line, and +Russia stipulated for the right of Russian navigators to use them, +and for her ships to take refuge in them, as she had conceded a like +right to the subjects of His Britannic Majesty. These would, indeed, be +strange treaty stipulations, if upon the whole length of this boundary, +from the 56th degree of latitude to Mount St. Elias, it never crossed +an inlet, and at no point touched the sea. This is, in my opinion, +a conclusion which no one who will candidly examine the treaty, can +reach, and I ask a fair consideration of our side of the dispute by the +people of the United States, to whom justice is far more important than +success. + + + + + TRANSCRIBER’S NOTES + + Italic text is denoted by _underscores_. + + Inconsistent punctuation has been retained as it appears in the + original publication. + + Perceived typographical errors have been silently corrected. + + Changed “Behring Sea” to “Bering Sea” (as it is named after Vitus + Bering). + + +*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 78944 *** |