Qass £An — - Book OKKIC!IAI- UONAXION. ALASKAN BOUNDARY TUIBUNAL. THE COUNTER QSE OF THE UNITED STATES BEFORE THE TKIBUXAL CONVENED AT LONDON UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE TREATY BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND GREAT BRITAIN CONCLUDED JANUARY lH. 1003. WASHINGTON: GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. 10(»3. FEB 13 1904 D.ofD, ■J cr CONTENTS OF THE COUNTER CASE. Page. Introductory !?tatement 1 The British negotiations of 1828-1825 2 I'ortland Canal and 54° 40' north latitude 11 The boundary from Portland Canal to the 56th parallel of north latitude 28 The lisih-e and its eastern boundary line 31 The lease of the lisiere by the Hudson's Bay Company 42 Russian occupation 53 The proposed boundary survey of 1872-1874 55 The boundary on the Stikine 61 The correspondence of 1886 66 The Dall-Dawson discussion 68 The Reciprocity Conference of 1892 69 The alleged British protests 71 American occupation 76 The boundaries proposed by (ireat Britain 82 Statement in conclusion 90 III THE COUNTER C.VSE OF THE UNITED STATES. INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT. The United States, pursuant to the provisions of Article II of the treatA' of January 24, 1903, herewith submits to the Tribunal created thereunder, its printed Counter Case and additional documents, cor- respondence and evidence, in reply to the printed Case, documents, correspondence and evidence presented to the Tribunal on behalf of Great Britain. The United States, considerinu' that the scope of the printed Cases was to set forth the positions of the respective governments as to the matters in controvers}' without reference to the attitude heretofore taken bv the other, did not in its printed Case anticipate the claim which it was presumed would be advanced by the British Government^ or adduce evidence to controvert the same. Furthermore, had such a course, in the opinion of the United States, been in accord with the intent of the treat}' of January 24, 10(>3, that oovernnient would have been embarrassed in pursuing it by reason of the varied and contlicting claims, which have i)een from time to time in recent years advanced by pul)lic men and writers in Canada, as to the delineation of the boundary line now under consideration. As a further reason for avoidance of such a course by the United States, the Government of Great Britain had never ofhciallv indicated which, if any, of the sevei-al lines heretofore proposed by Canadian statesmen, writers and cartographers would receive its official approval and support. Under these circumstances the United States deems that it would have been inappropriate on its ixirt to have followed a method of treatment based solely upon coiijcctur*^ as to the attitude wliich would l)e assumed by His Majesty's Govonment. Moreover, since the atti- tude of Great Britain was uncertain, the concessions which might be made on her part were <>(|ually so. It was, therefore, a matter of 1 2 corNTER casp: of the ignited states. speculation how ri'lcvaiit iind how niuteiiul, if ut all, would be evidenee establishing- British and Canadian acquiescence in. and agTecniont with, the interpretation placed upon the treaty of 1825 l)y the United States, until the British Government had distinctly defined its position in the Case, which it has submitted to this Tribunal. The United States, therefore, in this Counter Case presents to the Tribunal the evidence of such accjuiescence by British authorities and subjects in the boundary line set forth in the Case of the United States, together with such other evidence as substantiates the reply of the Ignited States to the claim of (ireat Britain or such as is in rebuttal of the evidence adduced in the British Case. THE BRITISH NEGOTIATIONS OF 1823-1825. The United States has no further evidence to present as to the course of the negotiations which took place between Great Britain and Russia during- the years 1828, 1824 and 1825; but since there have been sub- mitted to the Tril)unal in the British Case certain documents bearing upon this subject it becomes necessary to consider them in connection with the statement already made in the Case of the United States. It is, however, contended that this additional evidence in no way alters any material allegation made in the Case, but on the contrary contirms and strengthens the position therein set forth. The first document submitted by Great Britain and not included in the Appendix to the case of the United States is a memorandum enclosed in the letter of Mr. J. H. l\dly, the deputy governor of the Hudson's Bay Company, to Mr. Canning, dated September 25, 1822." It contains conimcnts upon the grounds ad\anced l)y ]M. de Poletica in his correspondence with Secretary of State Adams. ^ in support of Russia's claim to the Northwest Coast as far south as 51" north lati- tude. The memoi-andum, while it forms ])art of the correspondence, does not bear ui)on an}' question at issue before this Tril>unal. other than to show that the officers of tlie Hudson's Bay Company exam- ined the narratives of Cook, Vancouver, Meares, and Portlock for the purpose of traversing the ai'gument of iSI. de Poletica, which it was natural to suppose would be reiterated in the approaching nego- tiations between (irc^at Britain and Hussia. The second document demanding attention is a letter of July 25, " Britisli Case, App., p. L'o. ''U. S. Case, App., pp. 32-38. THE HKITISH NEGOTIATIONS OF 182:{-182.j. 3 1823, from Mr. C'anninu- to Sir Charles Bao-ot" modifying n minor point in tho instructions given the latter on July 12, 1823/ It in no way att'ects any statement made in the Case of the United States. The third document is the text of the full power of the United States minister at St, Petersburg/ It establishes no new fact, only em- phasizing the object sought l)y the United States in its negotiations with Russia, as set forth in the Case. The fourth document is an unsigned memorandum dated January 13, 182-1, and addressed to Mr. Canning.'' In this memorandum there appears to have been enclosed "a Russian Chart (copied from Van- couver's survey)" for the purpose of proving that Sitka was located upon an island. From the suggestion as to a boundary line through Chatham Strait and L3'nn Canal being similar to the one proposed by Mr. Pelly, fhinuary 8, 1821,'' it would ap]iear that this memorandum, like others utilized by the British Govei-nment, originated Avith the Hudson's Bay Compan}^ the real party in interest. The chart men- tioned is not produced, but it establishes the important fact, that there were Russian copies of Vancouver's charts, which, it may be presumed were consulted by the Russian representatives during the negotiations, and from which by retranslation were derived the names used in the correspondence and treaty drafts. The fifth document is also a memorandum from the Hudson's Bay Company, dated January 16, 1821.-^" It appears in the British Case as an enclosure to Sir Charles Bagot's instructions, though the latter are datt^d January 15, 1824.^/ one day previous to the date of the memo- randum. It is to be presumed, however, that if the document was not enclosed in that letter, it was forwarded in the letter of January 20, 1824,^' from Mr. Canning to the British minister at St. Peters- burg, which "enclosed certain information and suggestions" respect- ing the negotiation, which Mr. Canning stated he had I'oceived since his "-despatch on that subject was prepared". In this memorandum the writer. Mr. Pelly. said that, "as in the conversation he had with ^Iv. Canning. h(>|Mr. Canning] seemed to consider Mr. Faden's map as the most antliciitic (an opinion which in so important a (|uestion as that of settling a national boundaiy. it may, perhaps, be dangerous hastily to admit) Mr. Pelly has had the posts "British Case, App., p. 48. 'Ibid., p. (>4. 'j U. S. Case, App., p. 128. ./'Ibid , p. (i."?. '■British Case, App., p. 48. f/H)id., p. 59. '/ Ibid., p. r,9. /' Ibid.. )). 65. 4 COUNTER CASP: of the INITED STATES. of the Huclsoirs Bay Conipaiiv, in that pait of the territory under consideration, marked on it: lie has likewise had coloured the proposed line from Lynn Canal, the northern extremity of Chatham Strait, as well as the less objectionable one from Mount Elias."' The map, which was thus endorsed l)y ]\Ir. Canninu- and wliich he, on account of his opinion as to its authenticity, doubtless forwarded to Sir Charles Bagot, would appear to have been the one published by James Wyld, the successor of W. Faden, London, June 1, 1823.'^' The other so-called Faden map'' Mas not published until June 1, 1824, at which time the boundary line had been substantially agreed upon up to 5t)' north latitude. Tlie tirst of these maps, therefore, was undoul^tedly consulted both at London and at St. Petersburg as to the entire boundary, while the second could onW have been used in determining the line northward from the 56th parallel. These two maps will l)e considered more in detail in the discussion of the line of demarcation drawn by the treaty. The sixth document is the letter of Mr. Canning to Sir Charles Bagot of January 20, 1S24.'" to which reference has just been made. The enclosures, which are not produced, appear to have been addi- tional memoranda, containing information and suggestions, which, because of the extravagance of the views expressed, Mr. Canning was unwilling to endorse, as he was also unwilling to modify, in accord- ance therewith, his instructions of January 15, 1824. The nature of these suggestions can only be conjectured from the colors placed upon the Faden map, which made Cross Sound and Lynn Canal the southeastern boundary of the Russian possessions. The seventh document is a letter from the Hudson's Bay Companv to Mr. Canning under date of April U), 1824.'' Mr. Felly had received from Mr. Canning a few days previously the despatch and papers sent to the Foreign Office on March 20.' These he laid before the Committee of the Hudson's Bay Company, and he stated to ]Mr. Canning in this letter, that, if the British Government consid- ered it advisal)le to accede to the last proposition made by llussia, his committee could see no reason to ol)ject to it. He suggested, hoAve\er, that, on account of the lack of accurate geographical informa- tion, there should be inserted in the article of the treaty, "providing "British Case, Atlas, No. 10. ('Ibid., p. 78. '>Ibid., No. 11. 'Ibid., p. 66. 'British Case, App., p. 65. THE EKITISH XEGoTIATIONS (>F 1S2.3-1S2:.. 5 for the homularv on the maiiilaiul the noarcst ehiiiii of iiiountuins. not exccMMlinii" a few l('a' northwai'd to Blount Elias." The ninth document is a letter of Lord F. Conyngham to Mr. Felly, dated October l'.>, 1824,'' transmitting copies of paptu's received by the Foreign Othce from Count Lieven, the Russian minister at London, with a request for Mr. Felly's observations upon them. The papers enclosed were undoubtedly Count Nesselrode's inqjortant despatch of August 31, 1824,'' to Count Lieven, which the latter was authorized to com- municate to Mr. Canning.'' together with the enclosures which it contained. •' The tenth document is Mr. Felly's reply to the letter of Lord Conyngham. dated October 20, 1824,^' containing his conniients upon the Russian papers. In it he stated that the counter draft of Russsia^' " Britis^h Case, App., p. 80. f Ibid., p. 204. ''U. S. Case, App., p. ISO. /British Ca,«e, Apj)., pp. 100, 107, 108. t- British Case, App., p. 110. '.i Iliid, p. 110. 'T. S. Case, App., p. 200. /'ll»i to state with certainty until the production of the documents, — that is, that every proposal advanced l)y a British nego- tiator upon the subject of the boundary originated at the Hudson's Bay House in London: that the historical and geographical facts employe<•) p. 115: {thvcc), p. 117; {cme) p. 118; and {one') p. 133. '']))i.l., ]). 115. f U. S. Cas^e, pp. 64-6(3. THE BRITISH NKGOTIATIONS OF 1S23-1S25. 7 As shown in llu' (use of the Uniti'd Stutes, the territorial (lue^lioii was. so far as tlie British Government was concerned, subsidiary to that of niaritiuic jurisdiction." and this newly produced cNidcnce ])rovos the assertion that '"it was not the British Government, hut the Hudson's Bay Company which had given it such prominence"'' in the neootiations. The importance of this fact, now conclusively established, is that the Foreign Otfice and the British minister at 8t. Petersburg" relied for their information, outside of the maps which they examined, upon the data furnished them by the Hudson's Bay Company. The reference of despatches and papers to Mr. Felly and his committee by Mr. Canning, before being acted upon by the British Government, shows that it was dependent upon that company for the facts relative to the region in dispute. The Faden map of 1823 was furnished to the Foreign Office b\- Mr. Felly at the time the letter of instructions of January 15, 1824, was prepared and sent to Sir Charles Bagot.' It eml)odied geographical information in accord W'ith the memoranda of the Hudson's Bay Com- pany enclosed to the British minister, and also showed the boundary desired l)y the Company. It undouljtedly played an important part in the negotiations of February and ]\Iarch, 1S24, as well as in the subsequent conferences which took place and in the preparation of draft conventions at London and at St. Petersburg. There can be no doubt that this map was before the negotiators. In the memorandum of the Russian plenipotentiaries upon the amended proposal of Sir Charles Bagot appears the following statement: '•According to the most recent and best maps published in England the establishments of the Hudson Bay Company approach the coast only along the hfty-third and lifty-fourth degrees, and it can not be l)rov('d that they reach the Great Ocean at any i)()int"."' No other map. pul)lished at that time, shows the posts of the Hudson's Bay C()mi)any west of the Kocky Mountains, which had been placed on the Faden map under the direction of ]\Ir. Felly.' This assertion of the Russian representatives could, therefore, have been made only after an examination of this map. Besides the Faden map there w^ere before the negotiators the map of "U. S. Case., pp. oiMiO. 'T. S. Case, Ajip., p. KU. ''Ibid., p. ()0. ' British Case, A]>p. p. »i.i. f British Case, App., \k (io. 8 COUNTER CAST-: oK THE UNITED STAl ES. 180'2. j)ul)lisli(Hl hy tlu' Kiissiuii ((U:irt('niiast('i--_oeiu'nirs tlo}):irtni('iit/' pr()l>;il)ly \';inc()uvcr's charts (either ti Kus^ian. Kiio-jisli. or French edition),'' one or more maps by Arrowsinith. and ])()ssil)ly the Langs- dorff map of 1803-1805.'^ Other than these publications there is no evidence that an}' were consulted or examined during- the negotiations. Nevertheless the following- statement is made in the British Case: The answer [to what was Vancouver's Portland Canal] must depend on tlie evi- dence to be found in Vancouver's book and charts, knon-n to hare been before tlte negotiators, and the sole, or, at any rate, the main and best sources of information on this lieacb <" Xo citation is given to substantiate the assertion that Vancouver's Ijook was '"'"JiJirnm to have been before the negotiators" or that it and the charts were probal)ly the '' so/c^' sources of information as to Port- land Canal. The fact and the presumption as well are unsupported by any evidence as yet produced ))y either the United States or Great Britain. An assertion of such importance in the present controNcrs}- demands atlirmative and conclusive proof. Upon the establishment of the fact that Vancouver's narrative was read and relied upon l)y the Russian negotiators rests the entire materiality of the extracts from that work which appear in the Appendix to the British Case.-^ The United States denies that evidence of any nature whatsoever, from which this assertion can be deduced, has been presented to the Tribunal. On the contrary there is proof that Sir Charles Bagot. the British minister at St. Petersburg, was not familiar with the \'an- couver narrative. The expedition under the command of Captain (ieorge Vancouver was sent out to accpiire accurate information as to the existence of " any water-connnunication" between the Northwest Coast and the British territory on the opposite side of the continent ''by means of any considerable inlets of the sea, or even of large rivers. "'i' He was instructed especially to survey "the direction and extent of all such considerabh^ inlets, whether made bvarms f)f the sea or by the mouths of large rivers." And he was informed that "• the discovery of a near conununication between any such inlet or strait and any river ruiuiing into, or from the lake of the woods, would l)e particidarly useful.'"''' «U. S. Case, App., p. 127; British - British Case, p. 50. Case, Atlas, No. 5. .'pp. i:;9-14i>. ^V. y. Case, Atlas, Xos. 4 and 5. ;/ U. S. Counter Case App., \\ 2."V1. clbid., Xos. 8 and 10. -'' Ibid., p. 251. '^British Case, Atlas, Xo. 7. THE KKITISII NEGOTIATIONS oF iNl'M-l^lio. 9 ^^'itll lidclity and persoveraiicc \"anc()uv('r accoiiiijlisliod tlie task set ht't'orc him: and in tlu» dedication of !iis ])ul)lisl)('(l nai'rati\-e it is announced that, within the liniits of Ids researches, there was no •'naviyahh' coinnmnication " Avith the Athmtic seaboard." There had' existed for many years j^rior to his voyaoe the tale of a great ii\-er of Northwestern America u)) which De Fonta was said to have saihnl »>(> h>atriies after ])assing for 2H(i lea_i>ut>s throuo-h the tortu- ous channels of a vast archipehigo. This river, known as ""Kio de los Kevins." was phiced by English geographers in latitude 53^ north. For it \'ancouver sought. At the close of his narrative he commented u])on this traditional river. He stated that the archipelago did exist l)etween 47"^ and 57^ of north latitude, '"vet the evidence of a navigable river flowing- into it, is still wanting to prove its identity: and * * the scrupulous exactness with which our survey of the continental shores has ])een made within these limits precludes the possibility of such a v'nQv having been passed unnoticed by us, as that described to be Kio de los Reyes."*'' Turning now to the amended proposal of 8ir Charles Bagot it is found that lie opposed the granting of the continental shore below the r.tlth ])arallel to Russia, because it would deprive Great Britain of the bays and inlets between that parallel and 54- 45' "' whereof several (r/st t/irre f'-s (venj rraietleve. the mouth of some ri\er flowing through the midst of the country occui)ied by the Hudson Bay Com- pany, and it is, consequently, of great importance to (xrinit Britain to possess the sovereignty of the two shores thereof."'' Both of these statements show an ignorance of A'ancouver's nar- rative, of the purpose of the expedition, and of the careful execution of its ()bj(Ht. Hut as further jiroof that tiie Hritisji negotiator was unfamiliar with the text of Vancou\er, when he made the above statement in regard to Portland Canal, attention is called to the fact that the explorer in his description of his reconnaissance of that inlet «U. S. Counter Case. A pp.. p. 2ri0. cU. S. Case, App., p. 159. '' ll)i.l., ].. 2."iL'. '' ll.id., p. ](«. 10 COUNTER CASE OF THE UNITED STATES. speciticully stated that *'//" iranfiniixl t<> trnit/jnifi- in hnr nKirxInj Jand^ ill latitude 55- 45', longitude 230^ (i'/'" Furthermore, it should he noted that throughout the correspondence between the neo-otiators and in the trcnity th(^ astronomical locations are given in longitude w.st" of (irreeinvich, while in the narrati\e of \'ancou\'er the longitude given is cast. On all tlie English maps referred to in the negotiations the longitude appears as vast of Greenwich, In addition to this evidence that the Vancouver narrative was not a source of information to the plenipotentiaries of Great Britain and Russia, much less one of "the main and best sources," the following pertinent questions may be asked: \A^ould not the negotiators, if drawing the southern boundar}' with Vancouver's technical descrip- tion before them, have stated accurately the astronomical locations? Would they not have traced the line from the place of beginning to the head of Portland Canal by landmarks, especially as the field notes of Vancouver did not a])pear to correspond with any one of the maps before them? Would not some reference to the Vancouver text have been made during the negotiations? In the light of the evidence produced and in view of the silence of the correspondence upon the subject, the United States asserts that the text of Vancouver's narrative becomes irrelevant and immaterial in interpreting Articles III and IV of the treaty of 1825; and that, unless it can be shown that the representatives of Ixttli powers had the narrative as a guide in fixing names and places, allegations and argu- ments which rest upon Vancouver's text are valueless in deterniiniiig the intention of the negotiators or the meaning of the treaty. The chief omissions of Great Britain in the Case presented to tlie Trihunal arc the documents (the majority of which had been made public) which relate to the treaty of April 5 17, 1824, between the United States and Russia. The negotiations which resulted in this treaty were conducted by the same Russian plenipotentiaries who con- ferred with Sir Charles Bagot and w(M'(» carried on at the same time as the negotiations with (Jreat Britain, namely during February and March, 1824. While the American negotiation dii-ectly afiected the trading privileges secured for a term of ten years by Great Britain, it is principally important in detennining what the Russian negotiators, "British Case, App., p. 143. PORTLAND CANAL AND rA° 4U' NORTH LATITUDE. 11 in their correspondent^ with Sir ( "hiirles Bu^^ot, intended us the south- ern line of demarcation on the continent. A consideration of this factor in the negotiations between Great Britain and Russia will he more appro}3riate when that portion of the boundary is discussed. As to the point of commencement of the line of demarcation, the I'nited States understands that (xreat Britain concedes that it was the intention of the negotiators and it is the meaning of the treaty of 1825 that such point was Cape Muzon." It, therefore, deems further dis- cussion of that subject unnecessary. Nevertheless, to the reasoning- liy which (rreat Britain reached this conclusion in the Case sul)mitted, and to the deduced intei'pretation of certain clauses of Article III which appear in the discussion, the United States cannot assent. The southern ])oundary was intended b\' the negotiators to be the parallel 5-1- -i(>', and the clause of Article IV, which states that "the island called Priiicr of W(ile>i Island shall belong wholly to Russia,"* was inserted for two oljvious reasons — that in case an}- portion of the island la}' below the boundary parallel named it should still form part of the Russian possession, and further that in the event of the eastern point l)eing the most southern, then, even if both headlands extended below 54- -10', the one lying to th(> westward should nevertheless be Russian territory. PORTLAND CANAL AND 54° 40' NORTH LATITUDE. The subject of this southern l)oundarv is directly connected with the location of Portland Canal, for if the parallel governs then the line of demarcation enters the passage sometimes called Portland Inlet. Conversely, if the boundary was intended to pass through that inlet then it would seem to ))e conclusive that the negotiators intended to draw the line along the parallel 54 4i»'. In a consideration of the identification of that portion of Portland Canal lying south and southwest of the eastern end of the chamiel now known as Pearse Canal, the United States does not deem that it is material to make "in(|uiry as to what was Vancoiir, r's Portland Canal".'' The United States makes no contention as to " llnicomur's Portland CanaP' or to the (question '•^^'hat was ]'(f/ico>/>'c/-\s Observa- tory Inlet T''' On the contrary it deems the consideration of these "British Case, p. 4(i. 'British Case, p. 50. &U. S. Case, App., p. 15. •' \\>u\ , i)p. 50, 51. 12 CorXTER CASE OF THE UNITED STATES. (luostioiis without i)r()tit in tlu^ present controversy. It conceives t!iat t\\o real (juestion at issue is. AVluit was the /irr/(jt/af <>/■■■<' rorthuul Canal ( In answerinu' this cjuestion it Ijeconies iniporttmt to deterniini^ what geographical material was before Count Nesselrode. M. de Poletica. and Sir Charles Bagot when the negotiations took place, and what was shown therein as to the location of Portland Canal. In addition to this, the expressions used in negotiation or hy the goveriunents prior or subsequent to the treaty of 1825. and the understanding by geographers, publicists and officials of either Great Britain or Russia, as to the southern boundary established by the treaty, ai'e niati'rial in locating the Portland Canal of the negotiators. It should be borne in mind that all negotiations eoncerning that portion of the line of demarcation from the point of commence- ment to oti-^ north latitude ceased with the suspension of negotia- tions at St. Petersl)urg hy Sir Charles Bagot. March 17 2!t. 1S2-1-," on which day the Russian plenipotentiaries delivered to him their tinal decision.^' From that time forward Great Britain ottered no objection to the boundary proposed by Russia, except to that portion north of tlu^ ."MUh })arallel as far as mount St. Elias.'' The first mention of Portland Canal was in the counter draft of Russia deli\ ered to the British minister February 24. 1824."' Thus the negotiations on that subject occu})ied about six Aveeks. On the part of Great I^ritain Sir Charles Bagot was the oidy one who discussed I'ortland Canal with the Russians. He does not ap])ear to have conmiunicated with his government during this period; and not having done so he received no specific information in regard to that arm of the sea from the Foreign Office. The negotiations conducted by Mr. Middleton. the American minister at St. Petersburg, conmienced on February !• iM and continued until April 5 17, 1824.' On February 2(» March 4 Count Nesselrode proposed 54^^40' as the soutliern line of the Russian possessions on the Northwest Coast, fixing on that pai-allel. as he said, so that the lower portion of Prince of "\\'al(>> Island would belong to Russia.' On the 7th Mr. Mid- dleton accepted the proposal.-'' A week before this the Russian plenipo- «U. S. Case App.. p. 153. ' Ibid., pp. 71, 69. &Ibid., p. IfU. .'Ibid., p. 83. ("Ibid., p. IS I. !/ Ihi.l., ]). S4. 'Hind., p. 15 S. PORTLAND CANAL AND rA° 40' MORTH LATITUDE. 13 tentitiries hud proposed to Sir Churlo.s Btigot to draw the tjouiuUuy so Jis to make the southern extremity of Prince of Wales Island Rus- sian torritor}'/' From tiiis significant circumstance, from the fact that the subject of each negotiation was the same, namely, the >sorth- west Coast, from the fact that Russia recogMiized that the United States had as valid claims to the coast south of the Russian possessions as Great Britaui had,* and from the statement of Count Nesselrode that in his negotiations with the British minister he "proposed to carry the southern frontier of our domains to latitude 54^ -iO'"^, it is manifest that it was the intention of the Russian plenij^otentiaries to make the line of their southern boundar\- in the negotiation with Great Britain coincident with that agreed upon with the United States. The geographical data which, according to the evidence, were before the negotiators, were the maps alreadj- mentioned. It is true that Sir Charles had been furnished by the Foreign Office with memo- randa prepared by Mr. Pelly, the deputy governor of the Hudson's Bay Company;^ but when the memoranda were prepared Portland Canal had not become a factor in the negotiations, and, when the Hudson's Bay Company was again consulted b}' the British Govern- ment, it had ceased to be a subject of controversy. There is. there- fore, in none of Mr. Pelly's correspondence any discussion of that channel. The Russian map pul)lished in lSi)'2 by the quartermaster-generars department shows a broad inlet, in which are several islands and from which two branches penetrate inland.'^ Neither the inlet nor the branches are named, and it was not, therefore, from this map that the description of the line from Prince of Wales Island to the head of Portland Canal was derived, although it is probable that it was used to test the accuracy of others. Incidentalh^ the purpose of Great Britian in reproducing a section of this map with a colored outline,' is not understood, the color show- ing merely native tribal divisions, as is demonstrated l)v an exam- ination of the large map, on which the dotted line running inland from Behm Canal, and which in the section reproduced is colored, is the supposed southern limit of the Kolosh tribes on the coast. The Langsdorff map,-^ if it were ever at St. Petersburg, could hardly " U. 8. Case, App., p. 158. '^British Case, Atlap, Xo. 5. ''Ibid., p. 174. ''Ibul., No. (i. clbid., p. 173. /Ibid., Xo. 7. 2G626 2 14 COUNTER CASE OF THE UNITED STATES. have been consulted l>v the negotiators. t)ecause it was so rudely drawn. What Arrowsniith maps were examined during- the negotiations it is ditheult to determine. Four have been otiered in evidence; two on behalf of the United States, one of 1818/' the other of 1822 with addi- tions to 1833;* and two on behalf of Great liritain. one listed as "up to 1822,"' but showing on its face that it was corrected to 1821;' the other, ''up to 1824,""' Of these maps, the one of 1818 is on a small scale, l)ut shows substantially the same details as the larger maps. In all these it is noticealjle that the channel westward of Pearse Island is almost closed and the main course of Portland Canal runs between Point Ramsden and Pearse Island. The name "Portland Canal'* extends along- the shore of the channel "'Ijeyond the head of Pearse Island," as stated in the British Case. ' One of two views must have been taken by the negotiators after examining the region al»out 04 - 40' as shown on the maps. Either that the whole estuary bounded by the mainland on either side and comprising both Portland Inlet and Pearse Canal, was to be consid- ered as Portland Canal,'^ in which lay Pearse, Wales, and other islands; or that the estuary as far inland as Point Ramsden was an unnamed arm of the sea, from which diverged two liranches, Portland Canal and Observatory Inlet. The Arrowsniith maps, relied upon at St. Petersburg, would have conveyed the idea that the entire estuar}^ was named '"Portland Canal". No method of reasoning would have applied the name "Observatory Inlet", wdiich extends at right angles to that branch from a point far above Ramsden Point, to any portion of the waters ))elow that headland. On the other hand the Vancouver chart of this region'' appears to name each l)rancli without giving a name to the main inlet below their junction. But in any event an examination of this latter chart would never sugg'est that the name ""Observatory Inlet", which appears in small lettei-s on the western side of that channel and above Point « U. S. Case, Atlas, No. 8. &Ibid., No. 10. (• British Case, Atlas, No. 8. if-^'" Count Nesselrode in his letter of August 31, 18:^4, to the Russian minister at London, stated that the coast which then was the subject of discussion extended from "'oO- of north latitude to blf- ^^'"* In the same letter the following expressions appear: "We have, conse- quenth", confined them [Russia's rights of sovereignt}'] to the 54° ^6?';"*^ •'it must be well understood that this concession [of hunting and trad- ing] will only comprise the space inclosed between latitude 59^ and the southern houndarij of our territory to wit, latitude olf- Jfi'-,''''' "our counter draft carries our houndary from the tifty-tirst degree of north latitude to J^-^ 4^'."^ It is to be noted that the subject under discus- sion is the coast, not the islands, and that the boundary referred to is that upon the coast, which is repeatedly stated to be 54^ 40'. Count Lieven was directed to read this letter to Secretary Canning and to furnish him with a copy,-' and the latter undoubtedly gave a copy to Mr. Pelly.^ A copy was also furnished to Mr. Stratford Canning upon depart- ing on his mission to St. Petersburg.^' Thus the British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, the officer of the Hudson's Bay Company who had been directing the boundary negotiations, and the British plenipotentiary who negotiated the treat}^, examined these statements, which so clearly set forth the intention of Russia as to the southern line. Yet there was no protest against and no conniient upon the subject by any of them. The treaty was signed and ratilied with the understanding upon V)oth sides that the southern boundary of the Russian possessions reached Portland Canal at 54^ 40'. During the correspondence which took place at the time of the lease of the lisiere to the Hudson's Ba}' Company in 1839. which will l)e considered later, the subject of the southern limits of the Russian territory is several times mentioned. It should be borne in mind that «U. S. Case, App., p. 78. ^Iliid., p. 204. 6 Ibid., p. 201. /Ibid., p. 204. clbid.,^p. 202. r/ British Case, App., p. 110. ''Ibid., p. 203. /'U. S. Ca^^e App., p. 208. 18 COl^NTER CASE OF THE UNITED STATES. none of the islands was includod in tho lease. Count Xesselrode. one of the negotiators of the treat^y of 1825, reported to the Emperor that tiie Russian American Company believed that "it would be advisable to cede to the Hudson's Bay Company the exclusive right of trade on the nhore of the continent between latitude 54-^ 4-0' and the Cross Strait"/' The territory covered by the lease is described in the Russian version of the lease as "the coa-^t (the islands excluded) and the interior portion of the land * * ^ situated between Cape Spencer * * * and latitude 54-- 40'.'^'' In his narrative of a journey around the world, published in IS-tT, Sir George Simpson, the governor of the Hudson's Bay Company, who signed the lease on behalf of that company, stated: •'"Russia, as the reader is of course aware, possesses o// the inaiidand, between lat. BlfF' 40' and lat. 60^, only a strip, never exceeding thirty miles in depth".'' When testifying before a select committee of the House of Commons in 1S57, Governor Simpson said: "There is a margin of coast marked yellow in the map [U. S. Counter Case, Atlas, No. 35] from o4P 40' up to Cross Sound, which we have rented from the Rus- sian American Company for a term of years".'' Mr. R. M. Martin, in his defense of the Hudson's Bay Company, pu))lished in 1849, states that the territory of the Russian American Company "includes all the Pacitic coast and islands north of 54^ -^^'".* Again he writes that the lease provided that "the Hudson's Ba}' Com pan}^ should enjo}' for ten years the exclusive use of the continent assigned to Russia by Mr. Canning in 1825, and extending from 54-^ 4-0' north, to Cape Spencer".-^' In the application, made in 1859 b}' the Russian American Com- pan}' to the Russian Government, for the privilege to renew the lease, the territory is stated to l)e "a part of our i)ossessions on th(> North West coast of America, a strij) of land extending in a North W(>sterly direction from J,f" 40' north ".-^ In 1867 an American company attempted to enter into a lease with the Russian American Conipan}", (' U. S. Counter Case, App. p. ?>. ''Ibid., p. (5; see also report upon lea^^e, Il)i(l,, p. 7. <-"U. S. Case, App. p. Sm. '^ U. S. Counter Case, App. p. 38. f Ibid., p. 46. /Ibid., p. 47. '/Ibid., p. 21. PORTLAND CAXAL AND 54° 4()' NORTH LATITUDP:. U^ ;is the term of tlie tiurcemoiit with the Hudsoirs Bay Company was about to ('xpii'o. The Kussian (•oni])any reported the circuinstances to its oovoriinieiit and >tated that the area desired hy the Americans was enclosed by the t'oHowino' limits: •• Beginning at the point on the Pacitic Ocean where -5.^-' 4^' nortlt h(tltii(h> intersects 134- 8<>' of west longitude,'' thence up Chatham Strait to the head of Lynn Canal, thence north to the l)Oundary, thence southward along that boundary to '^ latitude oly^ Ifi' and thence west to the point of beginning-'/' The report further stated "that the said territory — excluding the islands — is exactl}' that which is now leased to the Hudson's Ba^- Company". It is manifest from this statement that the parallel 54^ 4'. would enter this inlet. The location of this portion of the boundary seems to have remained substantially unquestioned until the meeting of the Joint High Com- mission in 181>8. It is true that theories and claims of an extravagant character had from time to time been advanced by Canadian writers in support of changing the acci^pted l)oundary and causing it to run up Clarence Strait and Behm Canal, up Clarence Strait and Ernest " r. S. Counter Case. App. p. :^4; .w nlxo Il)iS could, under their instructions, have conunitted their government to any claim advanced by them in regard to Portland Canal. There is no intimation in their instruc- tions'' that the line from the i)oint of beginning to the head of Port- land Canal was in question. On the contrary they are informed that ''\fr(nu Portland Channel to (ilacier Ba}^ '" there arc difficulties in tracing the line: and '"that steps should be taken as early as possible for arriving at an agreement as to the intention of the parties to the Treaty of 1S25 as to how the boundary line along the strip yi'Y>?/i Port- land Canal to Mount St. Elias should be drawn.'' ^ Four years after the meeting of the Joint High Commission, the ]Marquis of Lansdowne at the instance of the Canadian Privy Council directed the British ambassador at Washington to make inquiry of the United States Government '"as to the nature of these storehouses, and the reason for their erection in this territory the title to which was, and still is, the subject of diplomatic negotiations ])etween Great Britain and the United States".'' (The language of the Report of the Privv Council and of Lord Pauncefote's despatch is the same.) To the in(|uiry of the British amiiassador Secretary Hay replied, February 28, 1902,^ stating that he was not aware that the British Government had "ever advanced any claim to this territory before the signature of the Protocol of May 3<», 1898, preliminary to the appoint- ment of the Joint High Commission"*. On September 6, 1902, the British charge d'affaires addressed a note to the acting Secretary of State'" calling his attention to a note of the British minister, dated June 5, 1891, and stating that it raised an issue as to the boundary in the region where the storehouses had ))een erected. An examination of the note referred to'' shows it to consist of a ([notation from a « British Case, App. p. 300; U. S. Counter Case, Ai>p. p. 240. ''British Case, App., pp. 297-298. ' NORTH LATITUDE. 23 nized. It further repeats its eoiiteiition that A'aiu-ouver's narrative was not before tlie nesi'otlators. and that all reference to it is, there fore, irrelevant to the question at present under discussion. The ([notation from the amended proposal of Sir Charles Bagot in his neo-otiations at St. Petersburg in February and March. 1824. does not end. as quoted in the British Case, with a pcM-iod." The remainder of the sentence is most mat(M-ial in determining the application. He stated that the line proposed by the Russian plenipotentiaries through Portland Canal '* would deprive His Britannic Majesty of sovereignty over all the inlets and small bays lying between latitudes 56^ and 54- 45'. [thus far the quotation from the British Case] whereof several ((^v there is evert/ reason to helieve) coininunimte directly with the estah- lishments of the ITudson''s Bay Company and are consequently of essen- tial importance to its commerce; while on the other hand^ the Russian- American Comjxtny j}()x>«6,s'(?", ''^ canaT' or ''• channel", the United States may confidently assert that such usage in the negotiations is strongly in favor of the l)road and natural channel south of Wales Island. ]n this connection the following statement appearing in Z' Univers (Paris, 1819) is material. The ])Oundary is said to Ijegin at the most southern point of Prince of Wales Island and "'to proceed eastward ne through the territorial waters of that power. According to the rule announced by the British commissioners during the negotiation of the treaty of Washington in 1871, the navigation of inland waters by the citizens of another nation could not be claimed as a right.' Thus to draw the boundary linc^ through Tongass Nar- rows and Pearse Canal would sul>stantially debar the United States from all communication with its territory lying along the western shores of Portland Canal above 55^^ north latitude. That such was the intention of the negotiators of the treaty, it is « U. 8. Counter Case, App., p. 239. f' U. S. Counter Case, Atlas, No. 30. cU. S. Counter Case, App., pp. 239,242; British Case, App., p. 14:4. tained the title to them for which Sir Charles Bagot unsuccessfully contended. To demark the southern lioundary as claimed in the British Case would, therefore, be contrary to the intention of the negotiators of the treaty of 1825 and against the meaning- of its provisions. The statement made in the British Case, that the admission of the Ignited States to the sovereignty of Pearse and "Wales islands and to the navigation of the channel southeast of them " would give [that government] domination of the continental coast opposite, and the important point of Port Simpson, to the great prejudice of Great Bi-itain.'*'' is substantially a declaration that in case both shores of that inlet come under British sovereignty the United States will beexcluded from navigating those waters. As to the argument advanced that these islands are valuable to Great Britain for defense, it seems needless to point out that the}^ are of fai' greater importance to the United States. Excluded from its possessions along Portland Canal, with the possil)le establishment of a British military post at the southern entrance to its inland waters, the territory of the United States would be menaced far more than the British possessions would ho by a nuitual right ot^ navigating the broad arm of the sea extending inland from Dixon Entrance. The British Case presents to the Tribunal several other ways of running the boundary line from Cape ]\Iuzon to the 56th parallel, if its definition of Portland Canal is rejected.'' They are Imsed upon the theories and specidations of Canadian writers, to which reference has already l)een made. As they are manifestly the very proposi- tions, in substance, which Sir Charles Bagot made in his negotiations and which were rejected by Russia, and as the}' are chiefly based in «U. S. Case, App., p. 163. 'Ilml., pp. 61-63. " British Case, p. 58. 28 COUNTER CASE OF THE UNITED STATES. the British Case upon a hypothetical mountain Ijoundarv approaching tlie shore of the niainUmd near the northern end of Revilla Gigedo Island, the United States deems it iinnecessarv to consider them in detail or to traverse the logic upon which they rest. THE BOUNDARY FROM PORTLAND CANAL TO THE 56TH PARALLEL OF NORTH LATITUDE. The United States in its printed Uasechiinied that the line of demar- cation from the head of Portland Canal should follow the same course, on which the line touched the mainland, until it intersected the 56th parallel of north latitude. " This claim, in case the Tribuiial shall find that there is no mountain range, such as was contemplated in the treaty of 1825, within ten marine leagues of the shore, the United States understands that Great Britain substantialh' concedes *. The boundary at this place, as drawn in the British Case (Map No. 26 in the Atlas accompanying this Counter Case) depends upon a mountain boimdary intersecting the 56th parallel within ten marine leagues of the western shore of the continent. In case such range is more than ten marine leagues from the shore, or in case it should not intersect the 56th parallel, then the line proposed l)y Great Britain would fail. Though this portion of the line seems hardly of sufficient importance to warrant an extensive discussion, the peculiar interpretation placed upon the language of the treaty and the resulting line now claimed by Great Britain are so nuu-h at variance with the general acceptance and understanding of the boundary for three quarters of a century, that they demand at least a passing notice. It is asserted in the British Case that the line should be drawn to the place where a mountain range extending along the coast touches the 56th parallel, or in the case of there 1)eing no such mountain range, then to the point where a line drawn ten marine leagues from, and parallel to,^the western continental shore would cross that degree of latitude. This interpretation of the language of the treaty the United States conceives to be contrary- to the intent of the article and at variance with the usual method of tracing a boundary. It is established by the Kussian text of this portion of the treaty^ that the "it"' of the English version and the 'S/A'' of the French refer to the line, not to the canal. This also appears from the lan- « U. S. Case, p. 104. cU. S. Case, App., p. 7. f^ British Case, p. 70. HorXDARV FROM PORTLAND CANAL TO .",()'! H I'ARALLKL. 29 guao'e of tlio treaty itself, as any other interpretation would \ iolato the grammatical rules of the French lano'uag'e. The terms of the treaty. If changed to correspond Avith this interpretation, would read, the said line shall ascend to the north along the channel called Port- land Channel as far as the point of the continent where f/ir ///le >^tvikQt> the tifty-sixth degree of north latitude. There is no suggestion here tiiat the line should tuin al)rupth' to the east or the west: on the con- trary" it is to continue "to ascend to the north''. It is apparent that hy a natural reading of this description, without distorting it to meet some preconceived theory as to the rest of the boundary, the line would pursue the same course, which it was then following, until it intersected the 56"^ of north latitude. Besides being the natural and not the forced interpretation of the treaty, such delineation is favored by the physical conditions existing at the head of Portland Canal. Beyond the "'low marsiiy land" described b}' Vancouver, there extends a clearly defined valley for several miles inland from the termination of the tiord. wdiich coincides with its general trend, thus forming a natural boundary as far as the 56th parallel. « In contrast to this convenient line of demarcation. Great Britain claims that on reaching the head of Portland Canal the boundary should turn abrupth" toward the west at right angles to the course of the channel, mounting the precipitous side of the tiord, and should follow this course for a distance of almost sixty miles before reaching the 50th parallel, instead of live miles if drawn through the open valley of the Bear River. It seems that, in attempting to reach a suital)le starting point for a theoretical moimtain boundary near tlu^ continental shore. Great Britain has failed to observe that this portion of the proposed line actujiUy intersects the northern part of Behm Canal, in fact cutting in two Bell Island, thus giving to Great Britain an outlet to the sea below the 5f)th parallel. Sir Charles Bagot had opposed the boundary. whi«"h was finally agreed u})<)n in the treaty, on the verv ground that Great Britain would be deprived of "sovereignty over (/// the inlets and small bays lying between latitudes 5tF and 04-4-5'.'"' Great Brit- ain now proposes to secure some of these very inlets and small bays, w hich the Bi'itish ministei' in l.si>-l: failed to obtain and on account of which he suspended the negotiations at St. Petersburg. «U. 8. Counter Ca^e, Ai>p.. p. 241. ^ U. S. Case, Apji.. p. 1.39. 26(320 3 30 COUNTER CASE OF THE UNITED STATES. Tlie iiroii (soiitli of ;")() north latitiulc). between tiie line proposed in the British Case and the one which tlie United States requests the Tri- bunal to find, forms a narrow wedi>o-sliaped strip of territory not exceeding 150 square miles, bounded on the north by the ofith parallel and on the east Iw the valley of the Bear River. The area in dispute seems insigniricant, ])ut the deterniiniition of the line in accordance with the contention of Great Britain forms an important factor in the theory of the boundary presented in the British Case. If the line reaches 56-" north along the course contended for ])y the United States, it is not to l)e supposed that the negotiators, without mentioning a change of direction, intended that it should turn on that parallel due west for sixty miles. The mountain chain which the_y stated that it was to follow must have been, in their minds, approximately near the point where the line reached the parallel, though not necessarily inter- secting it. It is obvious that the hypothetical coast nuige of the British Case, if a series of isolated peaks can be so callcMl. does not meet this condition. In connection with this portion of the ])oundary the Tribunal is recjuested to examine the maps submitted in evidence by .both the United States and Great Britain, which show that the universal under- standing of the treaty by cartogra})hers and b}' governments for seventy live years was the same as that now claimed b}'' the United States. Particular attention is directed to the Admiralty chart of 186S of Portland Canal." It will be observed that the mountains lying to the eastward of the channel were named b}' Stati' Commander Pender (the officer in charge of the survey) in honor of distinguished British sub- jects, while those along the western shore were named after citizens of the United States, l)y this means indicating to which nation the territory belonged. The Bear River valley is shown as far as the ."iOth parallel; to the ioe)it of this valley and nortJi of Portland Canal appear Mount Johnson and the Reverdy Mountains. The\^ lie directly in the area now claimed by (Jreat Britain. From the text of the treaty, from the evidence before the Tiibunal, and from the long acquiescence of Great Britain as to the meaning of the treaty, the United States submits that the line between the head of Portland Canal and 5(5- of north latitude should be drawn " British Case, Atlas, No. 23. TIIK LISIEKK AND ITS EASTERN HOUNDARV LINE. 31 liii'cctly to that parallel aJDiiL;' the axi-^ of the \alley. which forms a contimiatioii of Portland Canal, and not diverted to a point sixty miles to the westward in order to meet a chain of mountains, the existence of which is denied by the United States, and the absence of which is a tlirnia lively estal)lishe(l. THE LISli:RE AND ITS EASTERN BOUNDARY LINE. The Tnited States, in considerino- that portion of the line of demar- cation, described in Articles III and IV of the treaty of lS:>r), between the odth parallel of north latitude and the 141st meridian of west longitude, contends that the claims made in the British Case and the l)oundary drawn therein (Map No. 2(i of the Atlas accompanying- this Counter Case) are based upon false premises, which are in direct conflict with the e\'idence adduced and contrary to the intcMitiou of the high contracting- parties and the meaning of the treaty. The claim of Great Britain and the authorit}' to draw tiie line of frontier as is done in the British Case rest upon the assumption of a •'datum line"" })ased upon an erroneous meaning given to the words "co^e!" and " ockin ;^^ upon the assumption that "Ja crete des inontagnes^'' means the "summits" instead of the "cresf" of the moun- tains;'' upon a further assumption that distinct peaks can be said to parallel a coast line; upon ignoring the value of the word '' .slnuos lies'''* in the negotiations and treaty:'' and. above all, u})on a misconstruction or a failure to construe the plain intent of the negotiators as evidenced in the correspondence. The word eofe or coast may l)e employed in three distinct ways; (1) geographically, to designate the phux'tcal coast^ the line where water ends and land begins; (2) legally, to designate the jxiUtlcal endsf^ the line adopted in international law as the basis for the extension of nninicipal jurisdiction over portions of the high seas contiguous to the territory of a nation; and (3) descriptively, as the /KUiie of a particular region. (1) The physical coast line of the mainland under discussion, of Avhich rlvage and .^horc are synonyms, follows the limits of salt-water along all the meanderings of the continental margin, without refer- ence to the adjacent islands. (2) The political coast line (since all arms of the sea not exceeding "British Case, p. 73. 'Ibid., pp. 1(3, 73. ''Ibid., pp. 27, 81. 32 COUNTER CASE OF THE CNITED STATES. six luilcs, ;iii(l ill soiiio c'iises more, in width, and all islands arc piac- tically treated as portions of the mainland) extends outside the islands and waters between them. In the present instanee the jjolitical or legal coast line drawn southward from Ca])e Spencer would citjss to the northwestern shore of Chichag'of Island and follow down the west- ern side of that island and of Baranof Island to Cape ()nniianey: at this point it would turn northward for a short distance and then cross Chatham Strait to the western shore of Kuiu Island: thence again turning soutlnvard along that shore and along the outlying islets west of Prince of Wales Island, the line would round Cape Muzon and proceed eastward to Cape Chacon; thence following northward along the eastern shore of Prince of Wales Island to Clarence Strait it would cross the latter at its entrance and proceed southeastward to the parallel of 5-i" 40' at the point where it enters Portland Canal. Thus the political coast line of Southeastern Alaska does not touch the mainland between Cape Spencer and 55^ of north latitude. It should also be noted that there are no "inland waters" composed of salt water within the physical coast line. })ut within the political coast line there are a great number of straits, sounds and inlets, formed by the contour of the continent and the proximity of the islands to it and to one another. (3) The coast used in a descriptive way is found in the nanu^s the "Northwest Coast", ""the coast of Northwest America", and ''the Coast"" when used as a proper name or as the synonym of such name. It may or may not in this sense include the islands adjacent to the territory so named. The word ocenn^ of which mcr and ,svv/ are synonyms, is similarly used in three ways; {\) p/ii/s!c«ilh/, to designate the entire body of salt water which surrounds all the continents and islands on the globe; (2) poUt/adly^ as the waters ))eyond the legal coast line: and (3) dencr'iptivdy^ as a proper name of a particular expanse of the high seas. The United States contends that the words "cr5^e" and '''' oa'an " in Articles III and W of the treaty of 1825 are used in their physical and descriptive senses onl}^, and that to draw their limits artiticially as is done in the case of a political coast is inconsistent with their meaning and with the intention of the parties to the convention. It would api)ear that a similar use of the word "coast" is to be found THK LISIEKE AND ITS KASTEKN HOl'NUAKY LINK, 33 in tlu' pi'ochiinatioii and statutos of Groat Britain, which granted to the Province of Nowfoundhmd jurisdiction over the adjacent coast of Lat)rad()r." and w hich is interpreted in the niai) of tlic Dominion of Canada issued in 1902 by the Canadian Department of the Interior.* As an example of the use of the word '"coast" in the negotiations, attention is directed to the folk)wing, which appears in ]\Ir, Canninjr's draft convention of July 12, iS24, "the line of frontier * " * shall ascend northerly alonu' the t-hannid calhul Portland Channel, till it strikes the tYA/.s-f of the continent/'*^ The same expression is ag-ain used in the draft accompanying the instructions to Mr. Stratford Canning, December 8, lS'2i:.'^ It is evident that the "coast" referred to at the head of Portland Canal was the physical coast of the conti- nent. Sir Charles Bagot, in a paper which he delivered to the Russian plenipotentiaries at St. Petersburg, used in the same sentence the expressions, "distant de la .cote de 10 Heaths marines^'' and "aladis tance delO Ueues marines da riiytge. ''"''' Sir Charles thus used the words "f6'^(^"" and '"'' rivage'''' synonymously. The latter word could never be construed so as to refer to a political coast line. Jt is invariably applied to the physical coast. The same use of the word is found at the present time, the v,ord "coast" being applied to the margin of inlets far be^^ond the artificial coast of the British Case. Dr. (xeorge ]\I. Dawson, whq was familiar with the Canadian contention in its early stages, and informally dis- cussed the ([uestion with Dr. W . H. Dall in February, 1888, stated, in a narrative of his (exploration in the Yukon region, made in 1887: " We l)egan the ascent of the Lewes, and from its head-waters we crossed the mountains by the Chilcoot Pass and reached the voadat tJce ],,-(td of Lynn Can. > U. S. Case, App., p. 15i». f'lbid., p. 2.=>0, No. \?fy. /U. S. Counter Case, App.. y. "258. . IK). 34 CUUNTEK CASE OF THP: LWITEJ) STATES. the natural and customary meaning- of the word "coast," in the same Avay tliat it was used ])v the negotiators of the treaty of 1825. 'Vhv liritisli Case asserts that "it is ch'ar that 'cote' and "Ocean' refer to the same thing.""" If this statement is correct, then if the latter -word is applied to the waters at the ht>a(l of L^Min ('anal it con- tirms the meaning of "coast" contended foi- by the United States. In 1898 Sir Wilfrid Laurier, during a debate in the Dominion House of (\)innious. said: " But if we had adopted the route Ijy the Lynn Canal, that is to say, had chosen to build a railway from Dyea by the Chilkat Pass up to the waters of the Yukon, we would have to place the ocean terminus of the railway upon what is now American territory.''^ A little later in the same debate he spoke of "that strip of territory />/t the Sea ii'lih-lt ]i(is Dyea as it^ /mrhoiu';'^ iv\\([ rei)eated the expression "ocean terminus.''''' It is clear that the Canadian Prime Minister used "sea "' as a syn- onym of "ocean," and that he considered them applical)le to th(» salt w^ater in the neighl)orhood of Dyea, that is, at the head of Lynn Canal. In connection with the meaning of "r«0/--" adopted in the British Case, much importance is given, and considerable space is devoted to the instructions issued in lfP93 b}^ Dr. T. C. Mendenhall. superin- tendent of the United States Coast and (ieodetic Survey, to his su))or- dinates who were to take part in the joint survey to be undei'taken under the convention of July 22, 1892; in which he directed them to carry their operations inland "thirty nautical mil(\s from the coast of the majidand in a direction at right angles to its general trend.*"'' Whih' the United States appreciates (he fact that this official used an expression which might be construed into an admission on his part that he coincichnl with the Canadian view, it emphatically denies that such was his intention. In an article subsecjuently published he clearly delined iiis attitude upon the construction of tli<^ treaty.' which he. as an official, had no authority to do under the instiuctions issued to him prior to the joint survey.' His position in regard to the boundary, as shown 1)}^ this article, was directly opposed to the construction which has been placed upon his woixls by Great Britain. « British Case, p. 72. . 17,1. ' U. S. Counter Case, App.. pp. 2(i9-:^76. t'lbi.l., p. 172. .'Ilnd., p. 2(iS. THE LTSIERE AND ITS EASTERN HorNDAKV LINE. 35 FurtlitTinorc. Pr. Mendoiiluill was suj^erintciulciit in lM»4aiKl issued instiuctions to the United States surveviiii;- i)arties. which were in the tield that year. Several of the surveyors were assigned to the region about the heads of Chilkat and Taiya Iidets. In their instructions the following- appear: ''"As the trigonometrical survey of the Chilkat and Taiya Iidets to tlw 10 marine Jt-ague limit is of the greatest importance, tJic t(>j)i>(/rfiij [of ihr hiii'i r jxirtioiix at haxf) heing secondary, you will first assist in the triangulation."" "On receipt of these instruc- tions you will please arrange to proceed to Alaska and make a topo- graphical reconnoissance of the country to the 7)(//'f/nrfn'd and eadvard oi '\1'A\\\\\\\\(^X v^\\dK\\Q\'i, L'29. '/Il)i(l., pp. 185, 18S. 'Ibid., p. 211; British Case, Apj). pp. 110, IIH. fV. 8. Case, App., pp. 7, S. r/Iljid., pp. 529-o3S: V. S. ('omitrr Case, pp. 2.i7, 202-265. ''' p. 45. 40 COUNTER CASE OF THE UXITED STATES. Hudsoirs Bay C'oinpain' from sccuriiio- a foothold on the seashore, from which their trappers and ti'ach'rs eould successfully compete with the Kussian American Company and their Indian hunters along the maiidand and among the islands. An examination of the frontier of the Hsu-re, now proposed by Great Britain (Map No. 26 in the Atlas accompanying- this Counter Case), shows that every important inlet and hay would, by such demarcation, have belonged to Great Britain, and only the peninsulas and promontories would have been Russian territory. Great Britain shows that the force of this fact, so evident in the negotiations, is appreciated; and to meet it declares that '"the truth is that the only ditticulty is that caused by reading into the Treaty a controlling principle that r>ritish territory shall nowhere touch salt water, and by rejecting every application of the Treaty w^hich does not produce a result in conformity with that assumption. It is submitted that no vestige of any such principle is to be found in the Treat}'.''" The United States asserts that the intention of the parties to the treaty is vital to its true interpretation; that such intention between nations is the very essence of the agreement; and that any material variance from the intention must give place to an interpretation in accordance with it. Besides the facts which have been set forth in the Case of the United States, a statement in the British Case shows that substantially the same opinion as that held by the United States concerning the purpose of the b'siere has been reached by Great Britain. It reads as follows: ''In the third place, the extent and the function assigned to the Uslt-re which Russia desired to possess, are worthy of note. It w as to be a mere fringe, as a protection and a 'point d'appui.' It will be found that this conception of the Jhure was not departed from "'.''' How the '"mere fiingc,"' which Great liritain now claims to have been the extent of Russia's continental possessions below mount St. Elias, was to form ""a protection and a 'point d'appui' '' is not explained. The United States agrees that the lisicre "svas to ])rotect and support the interests of Russia in the archipelago and iidand waters along the maiidand shore, but it denies that the Uxterc of the British Case would have performed those services. Incidental to a consideration of the inland boundary of the lis/ere, « British Case, p. 75. ' b ibid, p. 19. THE LISIERE AND ITS EASTEHX HolNDAKV LINE, 41 t'orwliich (iroat IJritaiti is now coiitciulinL;. the assiiiiiptioii tliat nioiiiit St. P]lias is within British tcrritorv" is. it is suhniittcd. cntirrly unwarranted. Thi'ouoliout the noth mei'idian of west longitude, 'which had ))een sul)stantially agreed upon l)_v the negotiators, was changed to the 141st in order that its lofty peak might mark the termination of the llstere^ since the latter meridian more nearly ai)proached the mountain.'' Mount St. P21ias lies within ten marine leagues of the ocean and overtops all other mountains intervening between it and the coast. The United States submits that to draw the line of demarcation along the southern spurs of the great mountain would be in conflict with the evidence and with the manifest intention of the parties to the treaty of 18i{5. The extent of the llisiere, as interpreted by both of the treaty powers and by other nations for substantially seventy-five years is directly opposed to the present contention of Great Britain.'' The particular attention of the Tribunal is directed to the following British. Canadian, and British Columl)ian Maps: the Arrowsmith map of 1833:' the Bouchette map of 1S.53:'" the Cauchon map of 1857; f^ the British Ad- miralty chart of 1861, corrected to 1S06:'' the Hudson's Bay Com- pany's map of 1850;' the Arrowsmith map of ISOS;' the official map of British Columbia, 1884;^ the map of the Canadian Geological Sur- vey of 1884;' Sir George Simpson's map of 1847:'" map of Select Com- mittee of House of Conmions. 1857;" official map of British Columbia, ''British Case, p. 6. ^U. S. Case, App., pp. 168, 178, 180, 181; S;'' and the ollicial ( antidian map of ISSP). '• Oil examination of these maps, touether with the othcis ollered in evideiu-e, althouo'h they may differ in minor details, it will he found that they all auree in the fundamental ])rinciple of drawinu" the boundary line about the heads of all inlets from Portland Canal to the 141st meridian of long'itude. Upon this point there i.s no disagree- ment. It was universally uiulerstood that such was the meanino- of the treaty, and the same method of demarkinLj- tlu> line was |)ursaed b}^ both the British and Canadian (TO\efiiments in their otlicial publi- cations. Great Britain thus openly and unreservedly proclaimed to the world the intention of the parties to the treaty of 1825 and the meanino- of its terms. Besides the maps and charts, w hicii were officially issued by the Imperial and Dominion Governments, every act of those oovernments up to a comparatively recent period was in accord with the meaning of the treaty as interpreted in their maps and charts. THE LEASE OF THE LISIERE BY THE HUDSON'S BAY COMPANY. The controversy known as "the affair of the Dryad'" has been dis- cussed in the Case of the United States,'' and its result, the leasing- of the limeve to the Hudson's Bay Company noted. The claim of the Hudson's Bay Companj^ for £22,150 had been presented and pressed with much earnestness by the British Government through its minister at St. Petersburg.' The Russian Govei-nment finally, in the latter part of the year 1838, directed the Russian American Company, us there seemed no further pretext for a\-oi(ling payment of the claim, to ''enter into friendly negotiations with the Hudson's Bay Company*' looking to\vards a settlement.'^' The Russian company at once took steps to compl}' with the directions of its government. Preliminary to official negotiations Baron Wrangell communicated privately with (lovernor Simpson of the Hudson's Bay Company suggesting a lease of the Uslere for a term of years to the British company in consideration of a tixed annual rental and the abandon- ment of the claim for damages in the affair of the Dryad.'-' To this « U. S. Counter Case, Atlas, No. 36. ^U. S. Case, App., pp. 285-307. ^Ibid., No. 39. /Ibid., p. 308. <-Ibid., No. 43. f/Ibid., p. 311; U. S. CoimterCase, Api-., p. 4. f^pp. 77-80. LEASE OF LTSIERE BY HIDSon's HAY (OMPANY. 43 pi'oposal ii favonihic reply was received from Mr. (afterwards Sir Georov) Simpson ami a meeting" ])etween the governors of the com- panies was arranued to complete the ao-recment/' The meetino- took ])lac(> at Ilarn'ouro' al)()ut l-'chriiarv 1, 188!);'' and. on February •>, the lease was .vJLined hy the representatives of the c()ini)anies.' By the terms of this instrument '"the whoh^ mainlantl coast and Interior country belonging to Russia'' situated between Cape Spencer and latitude 54- 40' was leased for the term of ten years to the Hud- son's l>ay Company-, ''together with the free navigation and trade of the Waters of that Coast, and Interior Country situated to the South- ward and Eastward of a supposed line to l)e drawn from the said Cape Spencin- to Mount Fair Weather", The Russian American Company also included in the lease Fort Dionysius (termed Point Hightield in the instrument) situated on ^^'rang■ell Island, and further agreed not to trade in '"'any of the Bays, Inlets, Estuaries, rivers or lakes in that line of the Coast and in that Interior Coiintr}"". For this lease the Hudson's Bay Company was to pa}- 2000 seasoned land otter skins aniuialiy and to reliiKpiish the Di'yad claim."' The agreement con- tained certain other provisions, b}- which the British company was to furnish the Russian colonies with supplies at fixed charges. The chief reason for the Russian American Company entering into this arrangement was the pressure brought to bear upon it by the Imperial Government in demanding a settlement of the Dryad claim, which the British representatives at St. Petersburg had been urg-ing \igorousl3' upon Count Nessclrode.' That it secured certain com- mercial benefits was incidental. Th(> Hudson's Ba}' Compan}' apparently had two reasons for desir- ing the lease; (1) it secured thereby the rivers of the lislere in which it could trap and hunt the river beaver, which were found only in fresh water; •^" and {'!) it also obtained control of the entrances to the inland territory of (ireat Britain east of tlie line of demarcation. (1) The skins of the river beaver had in 1832 become the principal article of the fur trade in the southern part of the Russian possessions, and formed the unit of barter. In this particular trade the Americans in their vessels, and the l)ritish. operating from their recently estab- aU. S, Case, App., p. 311; U. S. Counter ^Ibid., pp. 150, 152. Case, App., p. 4. *'U. S. Counter Case, App., p. 35. f-U. y. Counter Case, p. 5. /Ibid., p. 48. (^^ British Case, App., p. 150. 44 COUNTER CASE OF THE UNITED STATES. lishcd [)()st at Xaas. \vore the chief (•oin})etitors." In tlu' dcsiro to set'uiv these skins Mr. Oo-den in chari^c of tlie iSaas station atteni])ted to make an arrangement to sujij)ly tlie Kussians with "merchandise to be paid for with river Ijeavers.""'' It would appear to have been this particuhir tiade wiiich induced the Hudson's Bay Company to attempt the erection of a post on the Stikine River, which attempt l)rought about the atlair of the Dryad, for Baron Wrangell reported, before that event, that he particularly feared the nayigation of the rivers b}' tlie Hudson's Bay traders and hunters," for it is the region neighbor- ing upon the rivers which furnishes us with Ijeavers and not the coast.'''' A year later he reported that ''without doul)t Mr. Ogden's onl}" aim is to occupy the region where the natives living on the coast obtain river beavers, and then with their Canadians to hunt for these furs. It is in this manner that the Hudson's Bay Co. obtains the greater part of their furs wherever they have settlements, since they have almost no need whatever to trade with the natives,"'' The Russian governor proceeded to show how the Canadian trappers carried on their operations in taking the beaver, and asked ""Does not this mode of hunting resemble the ro))t)ery of a band of brigands who trample on the rights and property of the aborigines? If the Hudson's Ba}' Co, are allowed to trap river beavers in all the locali- ties where the coast Kolosh of our possessions obtained their furs for trade, then the Kolosh will be ])rought to the deepest misery."'^' To secure the right to hunt and trap in the rivers of the //.svVw was earnestly sought l)y the Hudson's Bay Company. (2) The Stikine Indians, liesides hunting in their river and streams, carried on with the tril)es further inland an extensive traflic in land furs, which they in turn sold to the white traders, and the same aiethods were employed by the Chilkats and other coast Indians,'' The mutual trading privileges granted by the treaties of 1824 and 1825 had expired, and in spite of the etiorts of the United States minister at St. Petersburg they had not been renewed.'' Thus the Russians had sub- stantially monopolized this ])rancli of the trade in these regions since February, 1835, when the British right of navigation and trathc within the Russian possessions ceased, ^'U. S. Counter Ca?e, App., p. 1; U. S. Case, ''Ibid., p. 277. App., p. 2(j5. /Ibid., pp. 27o, 366. '^ U. 8. Counter Case, App., p. 2. fV. S. Case, pi>. ()!l-72. <^ U. S. Case, App. , p. 267. LEASE OF LISIERE BY HUDSon's KAY COMPANY. 45 To obtain control of thi^s trade in land fur.s was, therefore, desii-ed by the Hudson's BaN' Company's factor at Naas, for he was thorouohl\' familiar with its profitable character. The lease of the mainland of the Russian possessions between Cape Spencer and 54- -to', was negotiated by Governor Simpson for these two reasons. That they were deemed of \'alue to the company is evident from the fact that in order to obtain them the Hudson's Bay Company was willinu- to withdraw a claim of i"22,150 and to pay annually for the monopoly of the trade 200<» land otter skins, equiva- lent to over -t'^oou." The valuable character of the rights secured is furthei- evidenced by the efforts of an American company, through the minister of the United States at St. Petersburg, to ol)tain a lease (that of the Hudson's Bay Company being about to expire) for which the Americans offered to pay tive per cent of their gross receipts from the trade.'' The United States asserts that these fact.-, conclusively establish that the Hudson's Ba}' Company considered all the inlets and estuaries of the mainland between Cape Spencer and 54^ 40' to be under Russian dominion, together with a consideral)le extent of the rivers emptying into the sea in that region. If Great Britain secured by the treaty of 1825 the heads of all the principal inlets and the rivers, except the estuary of the Stikine, as now claimed in the British Case, the Hudson's Bay Company would have had no object in leasing the llsiere^ much less in a))andoning a large claim and i)aying a considerable rental for the privilege. British subjects had the perpetual right to navigate the rivers crossing the Russian mainland; the}' could, therefore, enter these for the purpose of hunt- ing tlu^ I'iver beaver, since the habitat of the animal was fresh water streams and ponds, and all the fresh water of the coast was, according to the present British contention, within British territory. If Great Britain owned the heads of the main inlets along the coast, nothing was to be gained by leasing from Russia the promontoi-ies and pi-ecipitous outer shores of the mainland. The routes from the intcrioi-. by which the Coast Indians carried on their trade in furs with the tribes inland, connected with the heads of the larger inlets, the best example being at the extremity of the Lynn Canal where trails led across the mountains from the Chilkat and Chilkoot Inlets. "Britwh Case, App., p. 151. '- 1'. s. Counter Case. App.. p. .S4. 2t)(;20 4 46 COUNTER casp: (»f thp: united statp:8. The Hiidsoirs Buy Compaii}^, if the lino of demarcation contended for in the British Case was the correct one, would have gained no advantage by the lease that it did not alread}' possess. The reciprocal trade privilege had expired and it could have retained a monopoly of the trade in river l)eaver and land furs, without i)aying large sums for the exclusive right. That the company did not possess such monopol}^ except by title from Russia through the lease is apparent. It is asserted in the British Case" that the lease of the //.s/V/y- to the Hudson's Bay Company '"cannot be put forward as atfecting the boundary", that the "lease sets up no boundary", and that it is "impossible to detect the recognition of any sovereignty on the part of Russia, except over the portion of the territory given her by the Treaty ". To the last proposition the United States agrees, but from the others it dissents. It has already been shown that a boundary was set up in the lease, the southern boundary of 54^ 40' north latitude. It is submitted that the lease, interpreted by the acts and utterances of the parties, directly bears upon other portions of the line in controversy. Two years after Governor Simpson signed the lease at Hamburg- he visited the ceded territory. A narrative of his journey was pub- lished in 1S47, in which he mentioned the lease, and added: "Rus- sia, as the reader is, of course, aware possesses on the mainland, between lat. 54" 40' and lat. 60^, only a strip, never exceeding thirty miles in depth; and t/tiii strij), in the absence of such an arrange- m£7it as hax jasf heen mentioned^ renders the interior coantrtj coni- ixiratircly useless to England^\'' If Great Britain had i)ossessed the heads of the inlets. Governor Simpson would never have written the last clause of the foregoing sentence. The summer before the lease was executed the Russians made surveys of the mouth of the Chilkat River and of Taku Inlet.'' This region came within the leased territory and, therefore, the Russian American Company was prohibited from trading with the natives of that region. The chief factor of the Hudson's Bay Company in 1S40 complained to the Russian governor that he had been informed that the Indians in the neighborhood of Cross Sound had been selling their peltry to a Russian trading vessel, and that, if it was true, it was sufficient reason for the lessee to withhold its rental. This charge Governor Etholine «p. So. ''U. S. Case, App., p. 318. cU. S. Case, pp. SO, 81. LEASE OF LISIERE BY HUDSOn's BAY COMPANY. 47 denied, l)ut stuted thut, tlirouo-h sonic of the tribes livino- on tiie islands, furs had been purchased which came orioinally from Chilkat, and that tiiese would l)c kept for the Hudson's Bay Company/' Later in the 3'ear, he wrote: "After June 1, there came only one canoe here from Chilcat, from which we boug-ht IS river beavers (sent to you with the hist steamer).'"' This action of the Russian governor was in compliance with the pro- visions of the lease, that the Russian American Company ''shall not have any conununication for the purposes of trade with any of the tribes of Indians occupying or inhabiting that Coast or Interior Country [described as between Cape Spencer and 54^ 40'J. And shall not receive in trade, barter or otherwise any of the Furs, Peltries or produce what- soever of the Mainland Coast or Interior Country' alread}^ described."^ If Chilkat was not within the leased " mainland coast and Interior country belonging to Russia," then the Russian American Company was not violating its covenants l)y trading through other Indians for the furs secured there; and, if Chief Factor Douglass had not. like- wise, understood the head of Lynn Canal to l)e within the Russian possessions, he would not have entered his complaint against the Rus- sian traders. Both parties to the lease thus recognized that it embraced that inlet and its branches. The agreement was renewed in 1S49, the Russian American Com- pany having secured imperial sanction for its continuance"' and was subsequentl}' extended by several renewals until the territory was transferred to the United States. In the year 1857 a select committee of the House of Commons con- ducted an investigation of the affairs of the Hudson's Bay Company. '^ During the sessions of the conunittee a map was produced, which was later pul)lished as part of the report of the committee (Map No. 35 in the Atlas accompanying this Counter Case). The territories occupiinl l)y the company were an essential part of the investigation, and this map was referred to and relied upon constantly. It distinctly shows the extent of the lislere leased from Russia, the boundary line l)eing drawn about all the inlets and approximately ten marine leagues from their heads. " U. S. Counter Cage, App., p. 10. '' V . S. Counter Case, Ai^j)., pp. 12-14. '^Ibicl., p. 12. ' Il)i(l., p. 3(i. <• British Case, App. p. 150. 48 COUNTER CASE OF THE UNITED STATES. The lease and the leased territory were investigated l)y the com- mittee and the evidence in regard to them was published as part of the report made to the House of Commons. John Rae, Esq., one of the witnesses ))efore the committee, stated that the ''strip of land" leased was shown on the charts "running aU)ng the shore."" Sir George Simpson was asked: ''Besides your own territory, 1 think 3'ou administer a portion of the territory which belongs to Russia, under some arrangement with the Russian company?". To wiiich question he replied: "There is a margin of coast marked yellow in the map from 54^ 40' up to Cross Sound, which we have rented from the Russian American Company for a term of years.'"' In response to another question he replied: "The British territory runs along- inland from the coast about 30 miles; the Russian territory runs along the coast; we have the right of navigation through the rivers to hunt the interior country."' It is apparent that Sir George Simpson, who had visited the region and was thoroughly familiar with its topography, believed that the only way to reach the British territory lying behiiid the Jislert'^ was by the rivers. The lease, which had been extended from time to time, was to expire May 31, 18(57.'' In ^Nlarch the Russian American Company made a report upon the subject to its government.' By this report it appears that the minister of the United States at St. Petersburg, acting on l)ehalf of a Californian company, had proposed to obtain the grant of exclusive tishing, hunting and trading within certain limits. This area included Lynn Canal and the region iwrth of it "to the boundary l)etween Russian and English possessions." '' The territory desired ])y the American company, the report stated, was, with the exception of the islands, "exactly that which is now leased to the Hudson's Ba}- Company." '' It is apparent, and there is no evidence to the contrary, that all parties to the lease fully understood that the Iwundary line of the lislere extended around all the inlets and indentations of the coast, and that for over twenty-tive years tii(\v acted in accord with that understanding. But there is even stronger proof that the Hudson's Bay Company considered all the inlets within Russian domain. Every year during " U. S. Counter Uase, App., p. 87. '' Ibid., p. 34. Mbid., p. ;«. flbid., p. 8:?. British Cnse, p. ST. 50 COUNTER CASE OF THE I'NITED STATES. the treaty of 1^'2-i between the United IStutes and Russia." It has been shown'' that Mr. Canning was inditt'erent to the deHniitation of the boimdarv. and that it was the Hudson's Bay Company which was the active force in urging British intei'ests in this particuUir. In all the vast area, lying westward of Hudson's Bay and extending from the Columbia Kiver to the Arctic Ocean, the Hudson's Bay Com- pany was the only representative of British sovereignty. Lieutenant Colonel Scott in 1807 in reporting on the Indian policv of the com- pany declared: '•'There is not a regular soldier in all British Columbia (excepting marines on shipboard and at Esquimalt ).'''' Throughout the entire region the government was in the hands of the governor of the company and a council composed of its chief factors'' who.made ordinances and directed the. territorial atfairs.'^ Justice was adminisj tered in accordance with the laws of England by the factors, whose commission as such was " undeistood to answer the purpose of a com- mission as magistrates.''''^ Over the Indians of those territories the company exercised absolute authority, arresting and punishing offenders. f' These facts were brought out in the investigation con- ducted by the select committee in 1857. And, knowing that the com- pan}' had been the onh^ representative of British sovereignty in "those extensive regions, whether in Rupert's Land or in the Indian Territory,'' the committee declared it to ])e its opinion that the privileges of the Hudson's Bay Company should l)e continued, the primary consideration lieing, "the great importance to the more peopled ]iortions of British North America t//. o7, 40. ^Ibid., p. 41. ./"Il)i(l., i>p. 88, 42, 45. f/lliid., p. 38; U. S. Case, App., p. 850. ''V. S. Counter Case, App., p. 'M\ > Britisli Case, Atlas, No. 10. .? U. S. Counter Case, App., p. 18. LEASE OF LISIEKE liY HUDSON's HAY COMl'ANV. 51 Jlaviny t'i)r a lono- period had no otlior oliieials in its liuiian terri- tories than the factors of the Hudson's Ba}' Company, having- main- tained British rule over the aborigines through that company, and having-, in fact, delegated to it sovereign rights or at least permitted their exercise in the preservation of "law and order", the British Government cannot now, it is su])mitted, declare that the compan\' was in no sense its representative. Having secured the henetits of such relationship, it is too late to repudiate the company's aets and to deny its public character. At the time when the lease was in contemplation the British Gov- irmnent was earnestly pressing- for the payment of the Dryad claim, and must have been in constant communication with the representa- tives of the Hudson's Bay Company in London. The correspondence between the Foreign Othce and Governor Pell}', which is produced in the British Case, appears to end in February, 1S36," although the matter was a subject of discussion at St. Petersburg- throughout the two succeeding years. ^ It cannot be doubted that the British Gov- eriuuent was fully cognizant of the proposed lease, and gave its assent to its execution by the Hudson's Bay Company. The company', dependent for its privileges upon the will of the British Government, would not have entered into an agreement to obtain control of the territory of another power without ol)taining the detinite assent of Her Majesty's Government to such a course, espe- cially when such action might involve the political relations of the two powers. Nor would it have entered into such an agreement, which was clearly ultra vires, without tirst securing governmeutal sanction. The lease, furthermore, involved the settlement of a claim in the hands of the minister of Great Britafn at St. Petersburg, and the For- eign OtKce nuist have been notitied of the proposed method of its settlement. The governors of the two companies also arranged to meet by reporting to their res])ective eml)assies in Berlin.' The United States submits that the presumption that the l>ritish Government gave its assent to the lease, is too strong to l)e dismissed by the statement made in the P)ritish Case that "there is no evidenre that Great Britain either approved or disai)proved the lease."'' In confirmation of the conclusion, whicli nuist be reached from the "British Case, App., p. 158. 'U. S. Counter Case, Ajip.. p. ."i. '>U. 8. Case, App., pp. 2H2-307. '' Britisli Case, p. 87. 52 COUNTER CASE OF THE UNITED STATES. known relations oxistino- Ix'twtMMi the British Government and the Hudson's Ba}' Conipan}-. Mr. K. M. .Martin states that, ''after nego- tiations between the two goverinnents, and the two chartered Com- panies, it was agreed in 1839 that from 1st June, 1840, the Hudson's Bay Compan}' should enjoy for ten years the exclusive use of the continent as>igned to Russia by Mr. Canning in 1825,"" ]Mr. Martin, in his book, was defending the Hudson's Bay Com])an3^ from the numerous attacks which were in 1848 being made upon it. He undoubtedly had ever}" facility offered him to confirm his state- ments. On this account, his assertion carries the added weight of being to all intents endorsed by the company" itself. In any e\'cnt, the subsequent course of the British Govermiient in ofJering no o])jection to the lease, and in recognizing the mutual interests of the two companies by agreeing with Russia in 1854 to preserve neutrality on the Northwest Coast* constituted a substantial confirmation of the lease, which described the Russian possessions as extending south as far as 54- 40' and comprising not only the mainland coast but the "Interior countr}' " as w^ell. Moreover, as has been stated, a map showing the Russian territor}^ was before the select conunittee of the House of Coumions, and that territor}' was pointed out by witnesses. The mtip was published with the report. In attendance upon that investigation was Honorable William H. Draper, Chief Justice of the Court of Conmion Pleas of Upper Canada.' He had been sent to London l\v the Canadian Gov- ernment to watch the investigation. Thus Itoth Great Britain and Canada were fully notified of the interpretation placed upon the treaty by the Hudson's Bay Company. Yet the following year'' the company was permitted to renew the lease without protest or objection by cither the British or the Canadian (jovernment as to the extent of the Russian territory and the cours(> of the Ijoundary around the inlets. The United States, therefore, contends that the Hudson's Bay Compan}', being from the first the party in interest in the fixation of the boundary and the best informed as to the region, was the most competent British authority to interpret the meaning of the treaty; that the admissions made by that company in the lease and in its interpretation were made by the only representative of the Brit- «U. S. Counter Case, App., p. 47. 'Ibid., p. 45. Hbid., p. 18. ''British Case, p. 87. RUSSIAN OCCUPATION. 53 ish Government on the Pacific Coast; that the contents of the h^ase were known to that ooyernnient at the time of its inception: that the interpretation of it b}- the conti'actin*i' parties in regard to the territory h^ased was brouoht to the knowledge of both tlie British and Canadian Governments b}- the map and evidence published by the House of Commons; and that Great Britain, having failed to reject such interpretation at the time and having permitted it to be made public without reservation, must ))e deemed to have conceded its correctness. RUSSIAN OCCUPATION. The positive and strong proofs of the occujxition and sovereignty exercised b}' Russia between 1825 and 1807 over the lisien., submitted in the Case of the United States, would seem to make it unnecessary to add thereto further evidence, but for the doubt sought to ])e thrown upon such occupation and sovereign acts in the British Case." It is suggested that no more conclusive proof could be produced to establish the dominion of Russia over the lis lere than the lease which was accepted by the Hudson's Ba^^ Company. It lias already been shown that the limits of the llslere were definitely established befoi-e the British parliamentary committee in 1857, and that the operation* of the Hudson's Bay Company under the lease extended to the inlets of the maiidand and especialh' to the head of Lymi Canal. A furth(n- proof of this latter fact is to 1)e found in the report of the Ogilvie Canadian surveying party of 1887 and the depositions of J. J. Healy, United States Deputy Collector, and others.* From these it appears that Ogilvie found it difficult to induce the Chilkat Indians to trans- port his party across the mountain passes, because of the ill-feeling agiiinst the British on account of the killing of some of the tri])e hy the Hudson's Bay Company during the time of their trading opera- tions in that vicinity. Reference was made in the'Case of the United States to the practice of Russia in conferring upon the native chiefs who signalized their loyalty to that government silver ])adges or medals, with such inscrip- tions as ■'Allies of Russia."'* Three of these medals which were pre- sented by the Russian Government to tlu^ head chief of the Chilkat tribe, and which have descended through his family and are now the ^'British Case, p. 85. best wiiy to protect the Russian territory was to renew the lease to the Hudson's Bay Company, a question then pending; and this was accordingly done.' These facts, in rel)uttal of the assertions in the British Case, show that Russia exercised control over the native tribes on the mainland, that it exercised and was accorded jurisdiction by the British over the leased territory, and that it knew the extent of that territory and was prepared to enforce its authority therein. Taken in connection with the evidence sul)mitted in the Case of tht> United States, it is conclu- sively established that for fort3'-two years after the treat}^ of 1825 « U. S. Counter Case, Apji., faciiijr p. 214. • Iliiil., App.. pp. 27-31. '> Ibid., pp. 35-36. PROPOSED SURVEY (»K 1ST2-1S74. 55 Kussia, iiiulcr its intorpivtatioii of that treaty, lu'lcl uiKli.si)uted sovcr- oioiity on the mainland which it had publicly' deniai'ked upon its official maps, and wliicii it transt'envd witli an unim})aired title to th(> United States in 1867. THE PROPOSED BOUNDARY SURVEY OF 1872-1874. The British Case devotes considerable attention to the correspond- ence which took place ])etween 1872 and 1878 respecting a suggested siirve}' of the lioundary from the head of Portland Canal to mount St. Elias and thence to the Arctic Ocean. The object had in view in dis- cussing this cori'espondence seems to have been to show ''the unwill- ingness" or '* failure of the United States Congress to provide for [the] Survey."" It is suggested, however, that facts much more pertinent to the issues before the Tribunal are estal)lished by this correspondence. It conclusively discloses the fact that, during the period named, there was no controversy between the two (irovernments as to the interpre- tation of the treaty of 18:^5, nor as to the general course which the boundary line should follow. The Legislative Assembh' of British Columbia of 1872, w^hich initiated the suggestion, asked the Dominion Government "to have the Iwundary line properly laid down."'' The action of the succeeding Legislative Assembly of 1874 (which is omitted from the correspondence in the British Case) is more specific as to the line that it desired to have demarked, which it descril)ed as ■•the boundary of the ;]<> mile V)elt of American territory running along a part of the seaboard." It again urged upon the Dominion Government the necessity of having "the said boundary estal)lished and detined." '■ The Privy Council of the Dominion of Canadti and the Governor General approved of the action of the Legislative Assembly, and askcnl the British (iovernnient "to take the neccssai'V steps to have the l)oundarv determined and mai'ked :" and the British minister in Washington was instructed to bring the matter to the attention of the (loveriunent of the United States.'' Accordingly he in()uired of the Secretary of State if his Govcrnincnt would be willing to agree to tlu^ ap])()intint'nt of a Connnission "for the purpose of detining the boundarj' line between Alaska and British " Britii^li Cas^e, p. 2it. '• V. S. Counter Case, j). 50. 'j Britii^li Case, Api).. p. I(i2. '' Briti.-^li Case, App.. j). 1(54. 5() COrNTKK CASE OF THE UNITED STATES. Columljiu.*' The Secrctiirv "was perfectly satistied of tlie expediency of such a measure," but expressed some doubt, for reasons o-iven, as to whether Cong-ress would make the necessary appr()i)riati(»ii. But on a second call the minister learned that the President was so impressed with the advantag-e "of having- the boundary line laid down at once,'^ that he would reconunend favorable action on the part of Congress/' In his next annual message President (irant referred to the happy result of the arbitration which adjusted the water ])<)undary from the 40th parallel, and said "'the award leaves us, for the first time in the histor}' of the United States as a nation, without a question of disputed boundary between our territory and the possessions of Great Britain on this Continent." He then referred to the difficulties attending '"the determination of our admitted line of boundary" after occupation and settlement, and in view of the sparsely occupied condition of Alaska, he reconunended Congress to provide for a joint Conmiission to deter- mine the line between that territory and British Columbia.'' In no part of the correspondence is there any indication of the existence of a controversy over the terms of the treaty, l)ut on both sides it was agreed that it was desirable to have the line laid down and marked by a joint survey and this fact seems to be recognized in the British Case. There was, however, a further fact established by the correspondence of special significance in the determination of the questions submitted to the Tribunal — to wit, certain points were approximately indicated through w^hich the boundary line should be drawn l)etween the head of Portland Canal and mount St. Elias. After the President's message had been sent to Congress and a bill introduced to carry out his recommendation, the British Minister called upon the Secretary of State and was informed by him that the subject of the joint survey had been under investigation by the engi- neer department, and it had been found that for the United States alone it would cost one million and a half of dollars, and would require ten years of labor; and he feared that Congress would not authorize such an expenditure. Under the circumstances it was believed that it would be (juite sufficient ''to decid(> upon some particular points to be marked," and these it was suggested "should be the head of the Port- land Canal, the points where the boundary line crosses the rivers Skoot, Stickeen, Taku, Islecat [Chilkoot] and Chilkaht, Mount a British Case, App., pp. 104-5. ' &TJ. S. Counter Case, p. 145. PHOI'OSED SUKVEY OF 1ST2-18T4. 57 St. Elias. iind * '• " the rivors Yukon iind Porcupinp.''' The doterniiiKition of these points alone it was estimated would occupy four 3ears of time and cost the United States a lialf a million of dollars." These suoo-estions were accepted M' the British ^Minister without dissent, forwarded by him to London and thence communicated to the Dominion Government, with instructions to report upon the cost of the last proposed survey. The Privy Council took it under considera- tion and referred it for an estimate to Captain D. R. Cameron, the commissioner eno-aoed in the survey of the boundary along the 4-!>th parallel, transmitting to him the American proposition, including the points to be tixc^l and a list of the rivers named.'' The subject also engaged the attention of the Dominion Surveyor Genei'al. J. S. Den- nis, who, in a report to the Minister of the Interior, emunerated the rivers which were to be crossed b}^ the l)oundary, giving the list which the British Minister had furnished.' Later the Se(,'retar3^ of State sent to the British minister a written report on the subject, prepared by Gen. Humphreys. Chief of Engineers, in which were enumerated the "'Staken, Taku, Chilkat, the Alsekh rivers," on which were to be fixed ""'the points of intersection with boundary line;" and this latter was also sent to Cai)tain Cameron.'' as well as to the Foreign Otiice in London.' In making his report in 1875, Captain Cameron included this list of rivers on which the l)oundarv was to be marked. The next year the Prime Minister of Canada in a report to the Privy Council mentioned the rivers named b}' the Secretary of State as the particular })<)ints whereon the boundary line should be marked;' and a year later, 1877. the Privy Council, in a Minute, repeated the list.-^ Neither the British representative at Washington, the Foreign nor Colonial Otiice in London, the Prime Minister of Canada, its Privy Council, nor the Surveyor (Jeneral entered any dissent from the proposition that the boundary line when laid down was to cross the rivers named. The British C:ise (piotes a sentence from Captain Cameron's report in which he stated that the Government of Canada "expect the terms of the Treaty to be fully and strictly carried out. '"•' « British Case, App., p .168. ''Ibid., p. 189. ''Il)id., p. 17.3. /British Cast-, App., p. 2;«. ' Il>i. 178. r/ British Ca.-^e. p. .'30. '' r. S. Counter Case, App., pp. 50-51. 58 COUNTER CASK OF THE UNITED STATES. It is not clear, from the context, to what he refers. He was called upon for an estimate of the cost and time required for the surve}', not to construe the treaty, and whatever may have been his meaning, he did not dissent from the enumeration of the rivers, but inchidt'd them in his report. Other ofhcial declarations are found in the correspondence under review, which show that the rivers upon which the boundary was to be mai'ked. were streams whicli liad their orig-in in British territory and which reached the ocean in American territor3\ In a despatch of the British minister at Washington to the Secretary of Foreign Atlairs in London, he reported an interview with the Secrc^tary of State in which he recalled the proposition made by the latter that if the whole surve}^ could not be made, "the points where the territories met could be fixed on the rlver-s rohlch run tJirom/h hoth of tJniii.^^" This propo- sition received the approval of the British minister,'' and had the con- currence of the Canadian Prime Minister and Priv}^ Council.' In considering the subject, the Survej'or General of Canada referred "to the mouths of the rivers in question as points from which the necessary triangulation surveys should commence, in order to determine the ten marine leagues back."'' This correspondence furnishes further evidence of the interpreta- tion i)laced ui)<)n the treaty b}' the British and Canadian authorities respecting the boundary line from Portland Canal to mount St. Elias. The discussion which arose over the case of Peter Martin, an Ameri- can who was being conveyed as a prisoner from British territory, caused an examination to be made 1)y the British Government of the question whether Article VI of the treaty of 1825 was still in force. By the terms of that article British subjects had forever "the right of navigating * * ''■ all the rivers and streams, which, in their course towards the Pacific Ocean, may cross the line of demarcation upon the coast described in article three of the presiMit convention." By the last clause of Article VI of the treaty of cession of 1867, Russia sought to dis-annul Article VI of the Anglo-Kussian treaty of 1825. Article XXVI of the British-American treaty of 1871 gave to the citizens of the United States the free navigation of the St. Law- rence, and declared the Yukon, Porcupine and Stikine free and open, "British Case, App., p. 183. ^British Case, App., pp. 188, 190. ''U. y. Counter Case, App., p. 67. <^Ibid., p. 178. rK()I'()SP:u SUKVEY of 1,^T2-1S74. 59 for the purposos of coimnerce, to the citizens aiul su))jeots of both nations. Tlie hiw otHeers of the British Crown hokl that the Stikine was open for the purposes of comnierce only, and that in accepting- Article XXVI of the treat}'^ of 1871, Great Britain had lost for her siihjects the rioht, secured by Article VI of the treaty of 1825, of ""the free and unrestricted navioation of the rivers flowing throuo'h that territory [Alaska] to the sea"". It is to be noted that the crown lawyers assumed that these rivers flowed through American territory." This opinion was bitterly attacked by Canadian statesmen and jurists as surrendering valuable rights. Honorable Edward Blake, then Minister of Justice, in a report to the Canadian Privy Council in ISTT, stated that the "so-called concession by the United States was in fact a concession by Great Britain to the former country, which gave nothing and got ever3'thing" ; and hv added that he had never been able to form a plausible conjecture as to the I'eason for the action of the British Commissioners", who negotiated the treaty of 1871." His successor as Minister of Justice, in a further report on -the same subject, after quoting the opinion of the British law ofhcers, stated that it was "the painful conclusion that our rights existing at the time of the treaty of Washington [1871J have been lost through that treaty."'^ In 1879 the opinion of the law officers was made the subject of an animated debate in the Canadian Parliament. The member from Victoria. British Colum})ia, referred to the loss of British rights in Alaska hy the treaty of 1871, and pointed out that " under the con- vention of 1825 with Russia, we had the I'ight to navigate all the /v'/v/'.v that ran out of our territory and tJt rough Ahcsh/, but by the act of Russia in 1807, in transferring the territory of Alaska to the Ignited States, we lost the right of navigating the rivers. This was because the negotiators of the tri'aty of 1871 neglected their duty." Honor- able David Mills, late Minister of Justice in the cabinet of Sir Wilfrid Laurier. pointed out the effect of the treaty of 1825, "which gave to Russia a narrow strip of territory upon the coast south of Mt. St. Elias, extending as far south as Portland Canal, u])oii tiie cxiucss con- dition that all the rl i'crs ji owing throng Ji this Iiu.s.sian trrritorij should be open to navigation by Great Britain, for all purposes whatsoiner"; and, citing the opinion of the law officers of the crown, he said that, "British Case, App., p. 211. '>Ihid., p. 233. 60 COl'NTER CASE OF THE UNITED STATES. *' it' the people on the western coa^t were now in u worse position than they were before, it was due to the negotiations whieh took phice at Washino-ton *'. Sir .John A. Maedonald, the Prime ^linister. while concedino- that there existed two opinions on the subject, stated that the best international lawyers in Enohind, Mr. Montague Bernard and Lord Tenterden, " were united in the opinion that, l)y the transfer of Alaska, the effect of the treaty of 182.5 was gone"." It is submitted that the correspondence of the two governments between 1873 and 1878, estal)lishes, 1st, that there was no controversy as to the interpretation of the treaty of 1825, and that all that was contemplated at that period was a survey to tix and mark the boundary line; 2nd, that it was conceded that this line should cross the rivers Iskoot, Stikine, Taku, Chilkoot, Chilkat and Alsekh; 8rd, that the rivers and streams which had their origin in British territory between Portland Canal and mount 8t. Elias and emptied into the ocean passed througli American territory before reaching the sea; and, 1th, that, when it was decided that the right to navigate these rivers and • streams had been lost to British subjects, it was regarded as a serious injury to British interests. It is hardly necessary to point out how inconsistent are these facts with the contention in the British Case, that all these rivers and streams, except the Stikine, flow entirely through British territory, and empty into the sea within British waters. Mr. Alexander Begg, the British Columbian historian, who is recognized by Canadians as a careful student of the boundary (juestion and who has written much upon it,'' states that he has no doul)t that, if the Iwundary had been surveyed at the time under consideration, the line would have been drawn on the rivers named, in accordance with the proposition of the United States. Mr. Gos- nell, author of the British Colum])ia Year Book, after (juoting the proposition of the United States (iovernment in 1873 as to marking the line upon the rivers named, adds, "the Canadian Govermnent was quite willing to accept the proposition." ' The reason why the Congress of the United States failed at th(^ time to make the apjjropriation necessary for the survey is fully set forth in the correspondence, and it seems to have been properly under- stood in Canada. Honorable Richard W. Scott, at that time Commis- sioner of Crown Lands and now Secretary of State in the Canadian 'I U. S. Counter Case, App., pp. 164-166. 'Ibid., p. 201. ''Il)id., p. 210. THE BOUNDARY ON THE STIKINE. 61 Cabinet, stutod in tlio Senate in 1892 that ''the only reason why it [the line] was not setthnl twenty years ago was that the expense was too heavy. The United States at one time ])roi)osed a vote for the purpose and it was then said that it would cost al)Out two million dollars. The population was small, and thev did not feel warranted at the time in making that particular survey." " It will be shown later that remissness as to a joint survey cannot l)e charged against the United States alone. THE BOUNDARY ON THE STIKINE. The Stikine River is the only stream crossing the //'siv/-r which is navigable for any considerable distance b}^ steam vessels, and since the cession it has been the chief water communication with the British possessions beyond the boundary. AVhile the correspondence l)etween the two governments initiated in 1872, respecting the joint survey, was in progress, various questions arose regarding the navigation of this river. These are treated at some length in the British Case, but not in such a wa}' as to greatly aid the Tribunal in determining the l)oundary in that region. A\'ith the latter object in view, it has been thought necessary to publish some of the documents found in the Canadian Sessional Paper No. 125 of 1870. and others pertinent to the subject.'^ It has been seen that in the proposed surve}' one of the points of the boundary to be marked was to be on the Stikine River. An examination of the papers produced in the British Case and those to be found in the Appendix to this Counter Case, will enable the Tri- t)unal to ascertain the views of the two governments, and of the ^■arious authorities representing them, as to the point on the Stikine River at which it should be crossed by the international boundary. It is believed that the facts so established will materially assist the Tril)unal in tixing the course of the internatioiuil line between the head of Portland Canal and mount St. P^lias. RefereiKH' has been made to the questions which arose as to th(> navigation of the Stikine after the cession to the United States and up to the year 1874. - The local customs authorities of the United States at first held that the lower portion of th(> river was not o])en to British subjects, and a few years later the British customs officials sought to « U. S. Counter Case, App., p. I(i7. ^ Thirl., jip. ,\3-8fi. 26626 o 62 COUISITER CASE OF THE UNITED STATES. exclude Anierieaii vessels from the navio-ution of the upper part of the river, but when the questions reached the higher authorities, both governments promptly decided that the river was free throughout its whole extent to their citizens and subjects for commercial purposes/' That discussion is only useful at the present time to show that, in the minds of the officials of the two governments, the river flowed for a considerable distance through the territory of l)oth countries. The Stikine is navigable for river steamers for upwards of one hundred miles, and for light draught vessels and at a certain period of the year for a considerable distance further.'' From an early period its navigability and topograph}' became known. In 1833 Peter Ogden, the Hudson's Bay Company's agent, made a journey up the river for a considerable distance above the point Hxed by him as ten marine leagues from the ocean coast.'" In 1S3T the Russian Govern- ment made a surve}' of the river and published a map of it.'' In 1867 a Hudson's Bay post existed presumably at the place selected by the company in 1833.'' In 1802 gold was discovered on the river above the boundary as marked by the Russian survey. In 1803 the Russian (xovernment dispatched a government vessel to investigate the facts as to the gold deposits, and a full survey of the river was made. This expedition was accompanied by Professor Blake of Yale University and his report and map were published bj' the United States in 1868.' From 1802 onward the locality was continuously visited by man}- hundreds of miners. '^ In 1872 extensive gold deposits were found in the Cassiar district, reached from the headwaters of the Stikine, and for successive 3'ears it was a popular mining resort. Sevei'al steamers were kept employed, carrying from two to three thousand passengers annually. In 1875 and 1S76 the jneld of gold exceeded $1,000,000 per year. The British authorities caused the river to be accurately surveyed at different dates. In 1808 a survey was made l)y Professor Leach for the Hudson's Ba}' Com- pan}' to ascertain the boundary.'' In 1875 the entire river' including « U. S. Counter Case, App., pp. 53-t)l, 182. '' Iljid., p. 85; British Case, App., p. 228. * <'U. S. Case, Apj)., i)].. 272, 2S;5, :-!18. ''Ibid, p. 514. ' ll)i(l., p. ;Wi>. .'' See map in Atlas accompanj'ing this Counter Case, ^Map sheet No. 29. f/U. S. Connter Case, App., p. 28. /'Ibid., pp. 7o, 79. THE KOUNDAKY ON THE STIKINE. 63 the Cussiai- District was surveyed for the British Cohiniljiun (io\ cni- iiuMit by (Tiistiivus A. Wrioht, a civil engineer, employed in the Cassiar mines, and a map of it was published at San Francisco b}^ the British consul." American and British officers likewise made jour- neys up the river and submitted reports upon its topography and geographical features. '' Notwithstanding the great traffic which had been carried on for several years on the river and the fre(|uent surveys and reports which had been made, the point where the international boundar}' crossed it had not as yet been marked by the joint action of the two govern- ments. Ogden, the agent of the Hudson's Ba}' Company, had fixed it for the purposes of his companj^; the Russian Government had marked it; in 18()8 a surve}' had been made and the line located by the Hudson's Bay Companj';^ and the local customs authorities of the two governments had from time to time sought to observe a conven- tional line.'' But as there was no uniformit}' in their attempts to mark the boundary, confusion and disputes arose. In 1875 the subject was brought to the attention of the two govern- ments through a report of the United States collector of customs of Alaska to the Treasury Department " that citizens of British Columbia had surve3'ed and laid out a town live or six miles below Boundary post,'' where the British Customs House was established on the Stikine River." The Secretary of State, in an interview with the British minister in Washington, informed him of the contents of the col- lector's report, and stated that American officers on the spot asserted that both the town site and the British custom house were within the territory of the United States, ''that is, within the ten marine leagues from the coast at w'hich the boundar}' should be," and ho sug- gested that the settlers should be called upon to suspend operations until the ((uestion of territory could be decided. Through th(; Foreign Office in London the matter was laid before the Canadian Government, and it became the subject of deliberation by the Privy Council of the Dominion. The result of its delilx'ra- tions was embodied in a report and made puldic. After referring to the terms of the treaty which required the line to follow the sununit (' U. S. Counter Case, App., pp. 76, 77, 78, 265. '' British Case, App., pp. 176, 185, 192; U. S. Counter Case, App., pp. 7(), 7S. 7!». 1(54. <■ U. S. Counter Case, App., pp. 7.3, 77. '' British Case, .\.pp., pp. 185, 192, 197; U. 8. Counter C&ae, .\pp., pp. 66, 70, 79. <" U. S. Counter Case, App., p. 66. 04 rol'NTER CASE OF THE UNITED STATES. of tlic iiiouiituiiis. tho report said: "'The Stikine River inlcrsoots the Intcriiiitioiial Itoimdar}' in the vieiiiity of tiie 'uth deg-ree of north latitude:"" and it reconiniended that the true line should be accurately determined on the Stikine \vithout further delay, in view of the possi- ble increase in settlements along its banks. It therefore recom- mended that the United States Goveriuneiit be invited to join with, the British Government in tixing- the boundary at the single point indicated/' The following year a new case arose. One Choquette had estab- lished a trading post in the vicinity, and the United States collector gave him notice that he must pay duties on his goods or move his post beyond the American side of the boundary. He refused and appealed to the Canadian authorities for protection.'' The same year the case of Peter Martin occurred. While encamped on the banks of the Stikine, he pssaulted the guard in an attempt to escape, was overpowered, taken to Victoria, tried for the oli'ense, con- victed and imprisoned. Upon being informed of the facts, the Gov- ernment of the United States made a demand for his release.' These occurrences pressed upon the governments the advisability of at least agreeing upon a boundary on the Stikine. When the de- mand for the release of Martin was made, a surveyor, Joseph Hunter, was dispatched to the Stikine by the Canadian Government, was furnished with a copy of the treaty of 1825 and certain charts, and was instructed "to ascertain, with approximate accuracy, the l)ound- ary on the said river betAveen the Dominion ami the territory of Alaska.'"' When the British minister presented at \\'ashington the suggestion of the Privy Council for a survey of the Stikine, he was met Iw the offer to send an iMigineer on each side, who should agree to the best of theii- ability to a provisional boundary on the Stikine. On receipt of this i)roposal, the Privy Council reported that Hunter had already u)ade his surve}^ and asked that it n)ight I)e provisionallv accepted as to the boundary. ' A comparison of Hunter's map with the ma]) })ul)lislied by the Brit- ish Government in ISTO, known as Wright's Map'' (see Atlas accom- «U. S. Counter Case, App., i)p. 66-69. '' Ihiil., p. 224. ^Ibid., App., pp. 69-71. ' ll)i-l., pp. 2.'!9-241. cBritit^li Case, Aj.p., pji. 198. .'U. S. Counter Case, App., pp. 76, 77, 78. THK HOnNDARV OX THK STIKIXE. 65 puiiyino- this Counter C':is(\ Slioot No. 2!l) will .show that the point fixed l)y Iluntci" as the Woundai'v was some (listaiu-(> nearer the mouth than an\' point previously indicated hy any other authority, and likewise below the localities which had hitherto been in dispute. Major Wood, of the I'nited States Army, after a journey up the river, reported to the War Dejiartment that the Russian momuiient was at a point on the river !;>.") niilt^s from its mouth." Hunter's map shows the old Iludsoji's Bay post was more than sixty utiles above the mouth. His survey also shows that the point stated by the Canadian Privy Council in 1875 as the boundary line near the 57' was almost in conformity with a straig-ht line of ten marine leagues from the coast. Notwithstanding these facts, and with a full knowledg-e that the line tixed by Hunter was much below that indicated by the Privy Council of Canada and by other British authorities, the Government of the United States, with the spirit of conciliation which later marked its conduct in aoreeing to the provisional line at the head of Lynn Canal, con- sented to regard the point fixed i)v him as the temporary- t)oundary on the Stikine for customs and jurisdictional purposes, with the under- standing that it was not to be construed as atiecting the rights under the treaty.'^ This was done with the full knowledge on the part of the United States that its own officers, who had visited and were acquainted Avith the river topography, difl'ered from Hunter, and also that the Canadian Privy Council and Survevor General had indicated a line moi'e favorable to the United States. Mr. Hunter claimed to have found the point where the mountain range described in the treaty as "'parallel to the coast" touched the Stikine, This he fixed at a distance of 24.74 miles from tlie mouth or Kothsay Point, and fi'om the coast in a direct line 11>.18 miles.'' In this action he was in direct conflict with the United States Army officers who had \isited the riAcr'' and of the meml)ei's of the I'nited States Coast Survey who have examined and reported upon its topo- graphy. '^ Nevertheless, the fact reported l)y Hunter as to the moun- tain range has up to a very recent date l)een accepted by the Canadian authorities and wi'iters. For instance, the Executive Council of British Columbia, in 18S5, in the course of an exhaustive review of "U. S. Counter Case, App., p. 79. '' ('. 8. Counter Case, App., pp. 79, 80. '' U. S. Foreifrn Relatiouis, 1S7S, ]>. 34f). ' Ihid., p. 2ii.S; V. S. Ca.y Mr. Phel])s to Lord Salis- bury and received by him without dissent.'' It is true that some " U. S. Counter Case, App., jip. 181, 188. '■ Ibid., 25.3; U. S. Counter Case, App., 91. '> British Case, App., 249. TPK CORRESPONDENCE (»F I^k 67 months later Lord Iddeslcioh, in sciulini;- to Mr, Phelps u Ciuuidiun otticial map which he had requested, called his attention to the boiind- arv line as marked on the Stikine River, which was hioher ii]) tiian that tixed by Hunter in 1ST7 and accepted as the provisional line, and entered a disavowal of the recognition of its correctness; but his note had no reference to the previous correspondence and did not in any way ({ualifv or dissent from it." The Iddleslejuh map is No. 32 in the Atlas of the British Case and is also shown in the comparative collec- tion of the Stikine River in the Atlas of this Counter Case. (Sheet No, '29). It was discussed in the correspondence between Lord Salis- bui-y and Mr. Choate, to which reference is here made.* The British Case concludes its review of this subject as follows: ""No survey was made as sug-o-ested by Mr. Phelps.''' This assertion calls for some tiualitication. Between the notes of Mr. Phelps and Lord Iddlesleigh some corre- spondence occurred which is printed in the Appendix to this Counter Case, and from which it is learned that the Canadian Government, while unwnlling- to agree to the appointment of a joint commission, was "prepared to take part in a preliminary investigation" or survey. The President thereupon recommended to Congress that an appro- priation be made for the purpose.'" On October, 1888, Congress voted the necessary funds to begin the survey, which was to be conducted under the general direction or approval of the Secretary of State. There is printed in the British Case a letter from the Superintendent of the United States Coast Survey addressed to the Canadian Minister of the Interior, in which the latter is informed of the action of Con- gress and of the plans being made by the superintendent for carrying out the proposed survey. He further stated that the object of the preliminary work was to collect such data as would enable the two govermiients to agree upon a treat}" establishing a Ijoundary, He then invited the Minister of tho Interior, to whom he had been referred as the proper official, to ariange the detail of the Canadian parties who would join oi' cooperate with those of the Coast Survey, All the correspondence which passed upon this subject between the two officers named has been obtained from the offic(> of the I'nited States Coast Survey and will be found in the Appendix to this Coun- ter Case. It will there be seen'' that the Minister of the Interior fi British Case, App., 255. clbid., 91-93. '' U. S. Counter Case, App., i:!4. 145t. '/Il.i.l.. 174-177. 68 COUNTER CASE OF THE UNITED STATES. lU'kiiow It'dii'cd the receipt of the siiperinteiuh'iit's U'tter. stated tliat tht' mutter had l)een sul)niitted to his ooveriinieiit and was then iiiuU'i- consideration. With this letter the coriespondence ended, and the Canadian (jovernnient took no part in the survey, wliicii \\as eon- ducted by the United States alone. THE DALL-DAWSON DISCUSSION. What is termed the ""Dall-Dawson Conferences" has been given such importance in the British Case that it has been deemed proper to complete the correspondence which is there only partially produced. " The meeting- of these two scientists was brought about at the time of the sessions of the Atlantic Fisheries Connnission. The object has been so fully discussed by Ambasador Choate and the British Secre- taries for Foreign Affairs that a reference to that corres])onden('e* need only to be supplemented by two remarks. In Lord Lansdowne's despatch of August 18, 1902, reference is made to what a}){)eai's in the "Protocols of the Commission" during the Fisheries negotiations of 1888. His Lordship must have intended to refer to the minutes kept by the British members of that Commis- sion, as the officially signed Protocols of the Joint High Commission were communicated in full to the Senate of the United States at the time the Fisheries Convention was submitted to that body, and printed as an Executive Document (see S. Ex. Doc. 113, .5(»th Cong. pp. 117- 120). An examination of these will show that no mention is made of the ''Dall-Dawson Conferences" or of the Alaskan boundary ques- tion. This fact confirms the position taken l)v the United States that the Fisheries Commission professed no authority to consider that ques- tion, and whatever was done by its members was purely- extra-official and was not intended to commit either government. It will l)e seen from the following extract that Dr. Dall fully under- stood the character and effect of his meeting with Dr. Dawson: "It was announced and agreed that the meeting was entirely informal; that neither party had any delegated powers whatever, and that its o))iect was sinq)ly the arrival at a consensus of opinion as to some rea- sonable and business-like way of settling upon a iini^ satisfactory to both countries, and the most practicable means of demarkating the line if one was accepted." It cannot seriously be claimed that what « C. S. Counter Case, App. pp. 94-113. '' Ibid., pp. 135, 150, 159. KECiPKociTY C()NFerp:ncp: of lW):i. 6D was said at such a iiuH'tint;- could bo rooardod as otlicial. or that any i^-oveninient would ado[)t such a method of niakiiiu' its position known upon so inii)oitant a question as a i)ouiuhiiv line, if it was held to l)e in dispute. THE RECIPROCITY CONFERENCE OF 1892. A brief reference is made in the liritish Case" to the reciprocity conference which was held in Washington in February 1892, but in view of the importance attached to it b\' the British Foreign Ofiice in the discussion with Mr. Choate. the subject seems to call for an explicit statement on the part of the Tnited States. The correspondence respecting- that conference will be found in the Appendix to this Counter Case/' It is asserted by Great Britain that a distinct statement of the Brit- ish (daims to the boundar^^ substantially as now presented, was made b}' the Canadian delegates at that conference. The correspondence shows that the main object had in view by the Dominion Government in holding the conference was to discuss commercial reciprocity, and that all other questions mentioned were of slight importance compared with that matter. The subject of the Alaskan boundary was presented, but from the same point of view as in 1872-8 and in 1886-S, to the effect that a marking of the line was desira])le; and out of the confer- ence grew the convention of July 22, 1892, providing for a prelimi- nary survey "'with a view to the ascertainment of the facts and data necessary to the permanent delimitation of said boundary line"; a survey similar to the one which had been considered in 1888, but in which Canada, though invited, failed to participate. From the Amer- ican reports of the conference it is manifest that there was no discus- sion of divergent views, and that •' no assertion was hinted at of a British claim to the heads of inlets or of any rights on Lynn Canal." But there is other evidence to establish this fact. The correspond- ence between Lord Salisbury and ]\Ir. Choate shows that when the sub- ject of the Alaskan ])oundary was under discussion in the .Joint High Commission at Qu(d)ec in 1898. a map was introduced by the British commissioners with the boundary drawn upon it, giving the Portland Canal peninsula and the heads of all the inlets to Canada: and that an American menil)ei' of tlie commission, who had also [participated in "p. 38. ^United States Counter Case, Ap pp. 114-123; 135, 151, 161. 70 COUNTER CASE OF THE UNITED STATES. the oonfciviR'C of 1892. stated that tlie view then advanced "was the first distinct statement of the British chiini." 'I'he oidy (lualitioation made by the British commissioners upon this statement was that the claim Avas put foi'th in the insti'uctions to the British connnissioners. copies of which had been sent to the Secretary of State of the United States on August 1, 1898.* A further })roof from British sources that no divei'gence of views respecting the interpretation of the treaty of 1825 was developed in the reciprocity conference of February 1892, is to be found in the Debates in the Canadian Parliament, Upon the return of the dele- gates to Ottawa, the speech from the throne of February 25, 1892, announced the results of the conference and among other things said, "•an amicable understanding was arrived at respecting the steps to be taken for the esta))lishment of the ])oundary of Alaska.'' During the debate in the Senate on the speech from the throne Honorable Rich- ard W. Scott, the leader of the Liberal party of the Dominion, who had acted as Commissioner of Crown Lands when the proposition for a survey was under discussion between the two governments in 1873, and therefore well informed on the subject, spoke as follows: It is quite true that an amicable understanding was arrived at resj^ecting the steps to be taken for the establishment of the boundary of Alaska. It was not necessary to go to Washington to discuss that. The question has been discussed in despatches for twenty years. There was no dispute as to the boundary of Alaska. * * * it was settled in the treaty of 1825. The line was defined but not marked out. There is no dispute as to where it goes. It commences at Portland Channel and extends along the summit of the mountains, where these mountains do not extend more than 10 marine leagues inwards, and if they are more than 10 marine leagues, then 10 leagues are the limit to a certain meridian, and from that point it is a straight line to the Frozen Ocean. * * * No doubt it is a very expensive boundary. The expensive part of it is, of course, the fringe of land that runs along the coast up to a pai'ticular part where the meridian runs, because it is entirely a matter of cost; 1 have never heard of any dispute as to the interpretation to be given to the treaty, because the treaty is i)lain and sjieaks for itself. ^ This view of the state of the boundary cjuestion in 1892 and of the interpretation of the treaty should commend itself to the considera- tion of the Tribunal, from the fact that the distinguished statesman who advanced it in Parliament is now a inenil)ei' of the Canadian Cabinet. « U. S. Counter Case, Apji., pp. 154-5. ''Ibid.. ]>. 154. Ibid., pp. l()7-8. THE ALLE(iET) BKITISH PROTESTS. 71 THE ALLEGED BRITISH PROTESTS. An effort is made in the British Case to show that protests have been made to the Government of tlie United States at various times against its real or supposed claim to the boundary line. Noticing them in the order of time, the hrst advanced is the representation made respecting the report of Lieutenant Schwatka of a reconnaissance in 1883 conducted by him in Alaska and adjoining British territory. The report was published in full with maps in 1885. From this it appears that he was sent by the general commanding one of the military departments on the Paciiic coast, to examine into the condition of the Indians of the Territory of Alaska, and to report upon the resources of the country in view of possible military oj)erations against the tribes." His instructions contemplated no survey of the boundary and his report does not develop any intention or attempt to do so. Two years after the report appeared the British minister in \A'ash- ington enclosed a memorandum in a note to the Secretar}' of State, without making any comment upon it, and added that " he (Schwatka) traversed British territory for a considerable distance without any intimation having been given the British authorities of his intention to do so;" but he stated that "no doubt had their acquiescence been asked it would not have been refused."'' The chief allegation of the memorandum was that in his report he had indicated Perrier Pass ""as defining the international boundary." The statement which gave rise to this assertion was, "'the country be^'ond Perrier Pass, in the Kotusk mountains, lies in British territory." '' The context shows that there was no intention to define the boundary, and this was so appar- ent that the minister did not feel called upon to make any comment. His note was regarded as of so little importance that it did not evoke a reply from the Secretary of State, and nothing further was heard of the incident until after the adjournment of the Joint High Commission in 1899, when the subject of the boundary bccaine a matter of discus- sion l)etween Lord Salisbury and Mr. Ciioate. This is styled "Can- ada's Protest" in the British Case.' In 1888 the British Minister brought to the notice of the Secretary of State -"a rumour " * * that a charter is about to be granted by the authorities of Alaska for certain privileges in a part of that coun- « U. S. Counter Case, App., p. 89. locality. Secretary liayaid iiatinally responded that "the rumour * * * is. as stated by yon, cci-t;iinly vaonc and iudetiuite;" that his department had no notice of it; hut that lie would make incfuiry of his colleag'ue, the Secretary of the Intcn'ior. In a few days he informed the minister that the ollicial named had no information on the subject, and there the correspondtMice closed." 'Phis is termed "a further protest of Her Majesty's Government."'' Jn fJune, 1891, the British minister in Washington addressed the Secretary of State a note in which he inserted an extract from the hist report of the Superintendent of the United States Coast and Geodetic Survey, stating that, in accordance with recent enactments of Congress, a preliminary survey of the Alaska ])oundary had been made, and described the line very much as it had been drawn in the Coast Survey map published by the Secretary of State at the time of the cession in 1S()7, and as it had been marked on every map issued ])v the Govern- ment of the United States sin e that date. The minister followed the extract with the following statement: '"The Dominion Government have expressed a desire that the (jovernment of the United States may be reminded that the question of the Ixjundary at this point is, at the present time, the subject of some difference of opinion and of consid- erable correspondence, and that the actual l)oundary line can oidy be properly determined by an International Commission."' As the extract described the line from the southern extremity of Prince of Wales Island to the Arctic Ocean, a distance of 1.4oo miles, it was difficult to determine the locality referred to as " at this point.'' The survey was the one which grew out of the correspondence initi- ated by Secretary Bayard in 1885, and in which the Canadian Govern- ment had been invited but had failed to ])articii)ate. Th(^ note in 1888 was so vague and indeiinite that no reply seems to have been made to it, and neither government again alluded to it until eleven years after- wards, when it was cited b}' the British charge in 11)02 as evidence of dissent from the claim of the United States to the watei' boundary along the Poi-tland Canal.'' This is styled '^The British Protest of June, 1891."^ « British Case, App., pp. 265-67. ''Ibid., p. 295. f' British Case, p. 94. <■ British Case, p. 9S. <• British Case, App., p. 268. THE ALLEGED BRITISH PROTESTS. 73 Had it l)een the serious intention of the British Govcnunent to enter u i)rotest lioainst the chiini of the United States to the l)Oun(hirv as indicated in the Coast Survey maps, an appropriate time would have oeeurred when the latter government issued the map of 18(37, while the treatv of cession was pending- and before the transfer of Alaska was made. Another suitable occasion presented itself when, at the recpiest of Earl Granville, on November 17, 1883, the annual reports of the United States Coast and Geodetic Surve,y for the year 1874, 1875, 1870, 1877. 1878, and 1871*. were delivered to the British legation in Wash- ington for the information and use of its government." These reports contained maps marking the boundary in the same maimer as in the report which was made the subject of the legation note of June 5, 18U1. Again the British Case asserts that " the Canadian Government, in the early part of the year 1898, formally protested to the Imperial Government that the United States had established a sub-port of cus- toms at Dyea, in territory which they claimed w-as rightfully British,''* l)ut it is not alleged that this protest ever reached the Government of the United States. The British ambassador, on February 23, 1898, wrote the Secretary of State, that "the great traffic which is now attracted to the valley of the Yukon in the Northwest Territory by the recent discovery of gold in that region finds its way there from the coast, principally through cei'tain passes at the head of the Lynn Canal, and it has become more important than ever for jurisdictional pur- poses that the boundary, especially /// that particular locality, should be ascertained and defined."'' Out of that note grew the modas virend! of 1898-9 respecting White and Chilkoot Passes and the Ivlchini River; hut there is no indication in it of a protest even at that late date against the occupancy of Dyea by the United States authorities. The foregoing constitute a review of all the allegations in the liritish Case that the attention of the L'nited States has been called to the fact that the Government of His Britannic Majesty entertained views as to the interpretation of the treaty of 1825 opposed to those of the Ujiited States, and that His Majesty's Government has made protest against the claims of the United States and against the occu- ])ancy of the teri'itory now in controN'ersy. « U. S. Counter Case, Api)., p. Ss. • r.ritish Case. \\^\\, p. -I'.n. i> British Ca*e, p. 96. 74 COUNTER CASE OF THE UNITED STATES. The United States submits that the ucts stated and the so-called protests fall far short of the requirements of international law and the practice of nations, in cases of such importance and gravity as those involving large areas of territory and rights of navigation and commerce of the highest value. When matters of such moment are involved it is not the custom of governments to make known their views by means of an informal meeting of two citizens or subjects, clothed with no authority either to speak or act for them. Neither is it usual when an unwarranted assumption of territorial sovereignt}' is charged to present protests in lang-uage so vague and indefinite as to fail to make them understood by the otiending government. The contention of the United States is that up to August 1, 18'J8, it had no distinct and official announcement that the British Govern- ment entertained view respecting the interpretation of the treaty of 1825 materially at variance with those uniforml}^ put forth and main- tained by the United States from the date of the acquisition of Alaska, It admits that there has existed some uncertaint}' as to the exact point where the line should l)e drawn on the rivers and streams which flow from British through American territory into the sea; but not until a copy of the instructions of the British members of the Joint High Conmiission were sent to the Secretary of State on August 1, 1898, was any special assertion of a claim to the heads of the inlets made by the British Government; and not until the British Case was delivered on May 2, 1903, was there a distinct and formal averment made by that government that it contested the water boundarj^ as laid dow'n upon all of the official maps of the United States since 1867. On the other hand the United States sul)mitted to the Tribunal in its Case a mass of evidence to show that Kussia and the United States have since the treaty of 1825 been and remained in uncontested possession of the limcre as claimed by them; and it herewith submits further evidence to show not oidy the accjuiescence of (ireat I^ritain in this peaceful possession, but the recognition of this jjossession by various of its authorities and their declarations that no ))rotests have I)een made against the American occupation. In addition to other acts, cited in this Coimter Case, of acciuiescence by the liritish authorities in th(^ ot'cupation of tli(^ United States, attention is I'alled to the declaration of Lord Lansdowne, the present THE ALLKGKI) BRITISH PROTESTS. 75 hctul of the British Foreig-n Office. Tn his reply to Mr. Choate he says: "The nuiin question in this controversy is that which iiiv(jlves the ownership of the heads of inlets in i;eneral, and of the Lynn Canal in particukr."" In the Case of the United States and else- where in this Counter Case the facts of the American occupation of that portion of Ahiska are fully discussed. It is now desired to sub- mit to the Tribunal the testimony of the hig-hest British authorities as to what has been the character of the protests, if any, which have been made to the American occupation of the inlets at the head of Lynn Canal. During- the debate in the Canadian House of Commons on the Yukon railway bill, February 11, 1898, the Minister of the Interior, Hon- orat)le Clitt'ord Sifton, was questioned as to the ownership of the territory in th^ vicinity of the passes about the head of Lynn Canal, and he replied as follows: Diffic-ulties also arose in the White Pass, behind the village of Skagway, and at Chilkat Pass behind Dyea. I believe onr contention is that Skagway and Dyea are really in Canadian territory, but as the United States have had undisputed possession of these for some time past, we are precluded from attempting to take possession of that territory. Sir Charles Hibbert Tipper. May I be excused for saying that I do not think the Honourable Minister meant to say "undisputed possession". Tiie ^IiNisTEu OF THE INTERIOR. There have been no protests made. It must he taken as undisputed when there has been no protest made against the occupation of that territory by the United States. Sir Chari.es Hihbekt Tipper. A claim, I suppose, was made and adhered to? The Minister op' the Interior. There is nothing in the records to show that any protest has been made — an unfortunate thing for us,, but it is a fact. I do not know that tliat particularly affects the discussion, because there has been no real discussion aljout that particular point. * * * '' Five days later the Prime Minister, Sir Wilfred Laurier, was asked ))y the ineml>er from Victoria. British Colunibi:i. respecting a report that the United States was about to send tr()()})s to Pyea and Skagway. The Prime Minister stated that he was not informed as to the inten- tions of the (xovernment of the United States and added: My luniourable friend is aware that, although this is di.si)Uted territory, it has been in the possession of the United States ever since they acquired this country from the Russian Government in 1867, and, so far as my information goes, 1 am not aware "U. S. Counter Case, .\pp., p. 158. ''Ibid., p. Iti'i. 76 COUNTER CASE OF THE UNITED STATES. that any protest lias ever been raised by any Goverinnent ajzainst the iiccupatiim of Dyea and iSkagway by the United States. It is only in recent years that the atten- tion of the pul)lic has been drawn to it." Tlie t'ofcgoiiio- are tlu> doclunitions of the Minister to who.se dcpart- iiient the .subject of the ))Oundiii'v speciality pertained, and of the head of the Dominion (Jovernment — the two officials best qualified and most fully authorized to make a public statement of the facts involved. It is not to be presumed that they spoke unadvisedly or without a proper investigation of the official records. But the pul)lished '"'■ Debates" show that in the month following, after ample time had elapsed for examination, the subject was before the House of Commons again, upon a motion by the leader of the opposition, Sir Charles Tupper. In his reply, the Prime Minister, Sir Wilfred Laurier, said: Now I will not recriminate here; this is not the time nor the occaieion for doing so; but so far as I am aware no jirotest has ever been entered against the occupation of Dyea ))y the American authorities; and when the American authorities are in pos- session of that strip of territory on the sea which has Dyea as its harbour, succeeding the possession of the Russians from time immemorial, it l)ecomes manifest to every- body that at this moment we can not dispute their possession, and that before their possession can be disputed, the question must be determined by a settlement of the question involved in the treaty.'' ^\'hen it i^ remembered that all the acts which are cited as ''])ro- tests"" in the British Case, with one exception, had a presumed relation to the territory about the passes at the head of Lynn Canal, the Tri- bunal ma^" determine, in the light of the public declarations of the Prime Mini.ster and the Minister of the Interior of the Dominion of Canada, I'elating to what Lord Landsdowne terms "the main question in this controversy," what weight 'should be attached to the averments now made on behalf of Great Britain. AMERICAN OCCUPATION. The Cnited States sii))mitted in its Case an overwhelming array of evidence to establish its complete, continuous and uncontested occupa- tion and control over the territor}' which it I'eceived from Russia, and u})on that evidence it would be ([uite content to leave to the Tribunal the decision of the question, how far that occupation and conti'ol, in connection with the acts of the litigant parties respecting it, atiect the true interpretation and meaning of the treaty. " U. S. Counter Case, App., p. 170. 6 Ibid., p. 172. AMKRICAX OCCUPATION. i I Hut the British Case, in treatini:- upon this subj(H-t, couttiin.s some strang-e assertions of fact and conclusions, whirh it is deeiuecl proper should receive attention. It contends that, up to a recent day, there has been a marked absence of control by the United States throuohout the lislert'-J' it is able to cite but two cases between Istilt and isiMj "to show the very slight nature of the control occasionally exercised l)v the United States over the inhal)itants of Alaska"''; it states that the isolated acts of possession of citizens of the United States at the head of Lynn Canal bear no importance in the present case and that they were in violation of hiw: that the primitive condition of the country remained unchanged until about 1S!M), which date is tixed as the begin- ning" of the mining exploitation; and that the assumed claim of the. United States, that the possession about Dyea and Skagway should influence the Tribunal in its decision, 'Ms wholl}' disputed."'' Bv reference to the Case of the United States it will be seen that for several years after the cession of Alaska it was held, so far as the Ustei'e was concerned^ mainly as an Indian territory and that the laws of the United States, except so far as was necessary for the preserva- tion of order and the protection of commerce and the revenue were concerned, were not extended over it. This naturally had a restrain- ing influence upon immigration and white settlement. But it was shown by indubitable official evidence that during that period the authority of the United States was continuously exercised by the army, the na\y and the revenue service throughout the whole of the //n/V'/v. and especially along the Stikine River and up to the heads of all the inlets: that peace and order was enforced among the Indians in those regions, and the}' were made to recognize the unquestioned authority of the United States: and that the customs regulations were in operation throughout the territory. It also was shown that during the same period survevs of all the coasts of the Ilxieiw including the inlets and the rivers emptying into them, were made. It was not until 1SS4 that the Congress of the United States decided to give the territory a civil government, but a considerable white set- tlement had existed at Wrangell at the mouth of the Stikine from the date of the cession: in ISso the town of Juneau on the mainland was founded, and about the same time a mission school was established at Haines at the head of Lvnn Canal and white settlers began to enter (I British Case, p. 89. '> Il»i there were three canneries in operation at and in the vicinity of Pyramid Harbor; that by 1888 their annujil output amounted to 55,0<>0 cans; and that they were among the first and most important in Alaska.' It appears in the Case that immediately after the civil government was estal)lished in 188-1 the Pres])yterian mission at Haines was surveyed and the sur- vey filed in the land office at Sitka. Depositions now submitted show that surveys were made of the early trading posts and notice of their location filed with the United States collector at Sitka, and that various official surveys wei'e made by the United States deputy sur\eyor fi-om 1889 to 1891, and a map of the surveys in Pyramid Harbor in 1891 will be found in the Atlas accompanying this Counter Case, Map No. 32.'^ In 1887 a Canadian exploring survey party to the Yukon, under the direction of William Ogilvie, arrived at Haines. This party was «U. S. Counter Case, App., pp. 212-214, 288. ''Ibid., pp. 220, 230, 231. f^ Ibid., pp. 220, 230, 233. '' Ibid., pp. 220, 229, 231, 235. AMERICAN OCCUPATION. 79 oporutiiio' with another Dominion party undor Dr. (xoorge M. Dawson, which had entered upon its work through the Stikine route. The boats of the party were towed up from Juneau to Taiya Inlet b}-^ the Fnited States naval vessel "Pinta," Conuuander Newell. "While waitino- there for supplies Ogilvie made some surveys at the head of the inlets; Commander Newell reported, "having previously asked authority from me to begin these, which request I cheerfully granted.''^' Mr. Ogilvie had much difficulty in inducing the Chilkoot Indians to transport his supplies and instruments over the mountain passes on his way to the interior on account of their anger at the British because the Hudson's Bay people had killed some of the tribe, It appears there was a party of Stick Indians from the interior of British territory trading at Haines, who were ready to do the packing over the trail, but the}' Avero not permitted bv the Chilkoots who held them to be foreigners. Mr. Ogilvie had to appeal to Commander Newell, who. Ogilvie in his othcial report says, '"kindh' aided me in making arrangements with the Indians. ^' * * Com- mander Newell told him [the Chilkoot chief] I had a permit from the Great Father at Washington to pass through his country safeh% that he would see that 1 did so, and if the Indians interfered with me they would be punished for doing so. * * * I am strongh' of the opin- ion that these Indians woidd have l)een much more difficult to deal with if they had not known that Commander Newell remained in the inlet to see that I got through without accident."* Mr, Ogilvie on his return from the Yukon again passed through Haines where he was joined b}' Dr. Dawson. United States Deputy Marshall Ilealy deposes: "" I had considerable talk with them during their visit. Thev made no protest against the occupation at the head of Lynn Canal by Americans, and made no claim to the region as belonging to Canada."'' In view of the voluminous official reports of the surveys made b^- .Messrs. Ogilvie and Dawson, and of thinr visit to the head of Lynn Canal in lss7. it can not be seriously maintained that " until 1S1>6 the (Tovernments of Oreat Britain or Canada knew litth' or nothing"*'' of that region, or that they were ignorant of the exercise of sovereignty by the United States over that district. » U. S. Case, App. p. 391. '11)1(1., p. 235. ''U. S. Counter Case, App., pp. i.'lo-217, 234, '_>:;.'>. '/ British Case, p. 92. 80 COUNTER CASE OF THE UNITED STATES. In the year issT Francis II. Poindexter was appointed ju.stice of the peace for the district in and a))out Pyramid Harbor, and acted in that capacity until he left Alaska in 1S'.>1. In the discharo-e of his duties he took coo'uizance of both civil and criminal cases arising- on the shores of Chilkat Inlet and in the country adjacent thereto. Poindexter after leaving- Alaska resided in California until his death in October, 1898." About the year 188U dohn -I. Healy was appointed Ignited States deputy marshal, and in lSt)U he was also connuissioned as deputy col- lector of customs, and exercised the functions of these offices over the country about the head of Lynn Canal, including- Chilkat. Chilkoot, and_D3'ea Inlets.^' Other officials in the. enforcement of the revenue laws about the same time seized and confiscated liquors in the vicinitv of the summit of Chilkoot Pass.' In 1s'ainst his acts; that in the month of September 1897, under instructions from his government, he visited Lake Lind(M-iuan to investig-ate an alleged cutting of timber on American territory, and that he assumed at that place jurisdiction of of an otiense there, in the presence of the Canadian official in charge in that vicinity and without his protest; and that in October 1897, he was visited in Dyea bv one Bevan, who represented himself to be, and he believes him to have been, an inspector of Canadian police, who agreed with him that the limit of exercise of jurisdiction over the trails named should be at a point between Lakes Bennett and Linder- man fixed upon between them and so indicated on a sketch, which is reproduced in his deposition.^' It also appears from the deposition of the United States officials cited, the superintendent of the canneries, the owners of the trading- posts, and other residents that from the first location of white settlers at the head of Lynn Canal in ISSO up to the year 189S. all persons regarded and accepted all the localities in that vicinity as the territor}^ of the United States, that all locations entry and record of titles were made under the laws of the United States, that jurisdiction and authority was in all cases exercised by United States officials; and that no British or Canadian official or subject during the period named ever made any claim of territory or filed or uttered any protest against the exercise of authority by the United States. It is contended on the part of the Ignited States that the facts herein set forth, and in its Case, establish beyond controversy that the United States has been in complete and peaceful occupation and control of the territory a])out the head of Lynn Canal from 18^)7; that this occu- pation and control were well known to the Canadian (iovernment and its officials; and that no claim was advanced by them to this territory or any protest made against the American occuinition previous to 1898. In the presence of these facts and of th(^ public declarations of the present Prime Minister of Canada and of the ^Minister of the Interior that Kus.sia had b(^en in possession of the territory in question from time innnemorial. and thtit in l^t)7 it pass(>d into the hands of U. S. Counter Case, App., pp. 222-227. 82 COUNTER CASE OF THE UNITED STATES. the Aineiiciins. l)y whom it whs held in undisputed possession up to 1898, it is suooosted that the contention in the British Case is not well founded that these faets should have no influence upon the Trihunal. THE BOUNDARIES PROPOSED BY GREAT BRITAIN. A serious euibarrassnient which has in the past presented itself to the United States in the consideration of the informal or unofhcial claims of Great Britain and Canada respecting- the houndar}- has l)een the variable and confiicting- character of those claims advanced from time to time. The British Case presents for the first time in the history of the controversy a distinct, complete, and formal announcement of its claim respecting- the boundary of the //.svV/v. And this claim ditiers from every other claim which has l)een set forth l)y British or Cana- dian officials or subjects. A brief review of the various phases which the question has underi>-one at the hands of those officials and subjects, when they attempted to depart from the long-accepted interpretation of the treaty, may be useful in a consideration of the claim of Great Britain now l)efore the Tribunal. For about twenty years after the United States took possession of Alaska and pul)lished its official map of 1867, there was a general acceptance by British and Canadian officials, cartooTa]jhers and Avriters of the line marlvcd out b}- Kussia and so explicitly and i)ublicly laid down b}' the United States. It has been seen that when a move- ment was initiated in 1872 for a survey and delimitation, there was no dissent in the pulilic offices either at London or Ottawa from the proposition that the line was to be drawn, under the treaty, across all the rivers and streams wliicli empty into the inlets and straits of the sea. When gold was discovered near the headwaters of the Stikine in paying quantities a few years later, and an efiort was made to push down the line which had heretofore l)cen ol)served l)v the Hudson\s Bay Company and detei'niined by the Canadian Privy Council, no sug- gestion was made that the line crossing the rivers should beaI)andoned. As Lord Iddesleigh, directing the foreign affairs of the British Gov- ernment in 1886, expressed it, in referring to the boundary marked as laid down by the Cnited States, it was admitted that the boundary was '"somewhere in that region". The first indication of a change in the views of Canadians on the subject was manifested in British Columbia. A report of the Execu- BOUNDARIES PROPOSED BY GKEAT BRITAIN. 83 tive Council of tlu' Provincial Government published in 1885" shows thiit a very full and detailed discussion of the l)oundarv took place in the Council, with a copy of the treat}' of 1825 published in ^IcCul lach's Connnercial Dictionary before it. This text of the treat}" did not contain in Article III the words '"'' called Portland VlKininiy Upon this text the Council reached the following conclusion: **The Government of British Columbia contends that any recognition of the words ' Portland Channer as beino- in the Treaty, was a grave mistake, and most injurious to the interests of British Columbia." The official map makers of the Province were accordingly directed to prepare a map to conform •* to the interests of British Columbia," and it appeared with the Ijoundary drawn from Cape Chacon up Clarence Strait, thus giving the Portland Peninsula and the Revillagigedo Archipelago to Canada. On this new map, however, the line crossed the Stikine at the point fixed by Hunter, and passed about 10 leagues around the heads of the inlets. It is a curious fact that the genesis of the Cana- dian claims had its origin in a false text of the treaty of 1825. In 1888 Dr. Dawson, who was in Washington seeking to impress upon Dr. Dall the views of General Cameron, produced a new map. also originating in British Columbia. The hallucination seemed still to exist that "Portland Channel" did not exist in the treaty, but a step further had been taken to protect "the interests of British Co- lumbia." Hunters range of mountains disappeared, all the rivers were pushed back into Canada by the pencil of the draughtsman, and the line was drawn across the heads of all the inlets. A still further advance was made in British Columbia, in the contention that the political coast line outside the Alaskan archipelago was the line from which the treaty limit of ten leagues from the coast was to l)e drawn, a contention which ett'aced the lisiere from the mainland. This latter claim was probably of the class referred to in the semi-ofticial Ottawa article in the Edinburgh Review, as '' the extravagant claims put forward l)y over-z(>alous British Columbians." although it is repro- duced and insisted upon in the British Colunil)ia Year Book for 11K>1.^ From about 1888 the Canadian official maps ceased to appear, as formerly, with the boundary marked in accordance with the official maps of the United States, although it was asserted in the Dominion House of Commons on May 6, 1901, that the large official map of the si()n at the last Paris Exposition had the boundaiy marked as cdaimed l»y the Ignited States. " On the other liand. it will be seen l)v an examination of the Appendix to this Counter Case'' that the British map pul)lishei's eon- tinued almost uniformly e\en up to a very late date, to mark the boundary as it appears on the ofiieial maps of the United States. This is especially noticeable in the British Admiralty cluirts. The British Colonial Otfice List, although not an ofBcial issue, is understood to be the only publication of the kind, and to be circulated by the Colonial Office: and it is professedly " com])iled from othcial records," etc. In 1869 this publication contained a oeneral map of the British Domin- ions showino- the Alaskan lixiri'e substantially as claimed l)y the United States. Simihir maps appeared in its annual issues up to and includ- ing- Vd'(Yl. In the issue of 1903 the map was omitted. '' Th^re has been as much varianc-e and moditication of views on the boundary (juestion ))y the public men and writers of Canada, as in the map publications. Extracts from some of the recent published arti- cles are given. ^^ Hon. David Mills, in 1879, in the Dominion Parlia- ment, com))atted tlie opinion of the British law officers that the right had been lost to navigate the rivers and streams which flowed through Kussian territory to the sea,^ but in an article printed in 1899'' he claimed that the true boundary line should be drawn across the iidets, thus placing all the rivers except the Stikine in British territory. In the same article he contended that the ten 3-ears' privilege of trade granted b}- Article VII of the treaty of 18^25 was confined to the //s/t'/'t^, and yet the British Government in the Fur Seal Arbitration at Paris in 1893 maintained that it applied to the whole of the Northwest Coast of America.^' He asserted in 1899 that the true interpretation of the treaty recpiired that the boundary line should pass up Clarence Strait, while the government of which he was a minister has now asserted that the true interpretation of the treat}' requires it to pass up Pearse and Portland Canals. It has T)een seen that Hon, K. Vs . Scott, Minister of State in the present Canadian Cabinet, declared in the Dominion Senate in 1892 " U. S. Counter Case, App., ji. 178. ' Il)ii«l., p. 204. <'II)i(l., p. 245. ;/ Ibid., ])p. inO-194. ''Ibid., pp. 200-211. boundarip:s proposkd by gk?:at hritain. 85 that there was no dispute as to tlie l)ouii(laiv. and he deserihed the line, aceordinu' to the treaty, as follows: "It eoniuienees at Portland Channel and extends alono- the summit of the mountains, where those mountains do not extend more than 10 mariiu> lea^-ues inwards, and if the}' are more than !<• marine leag'ues, then 10 leagues is the limit to a certain meridian, and from that point it is a straight line to the frozen ocean."" IIow rtulically that line diilers from the one his own government has now sul)mitted to the Tribunal ma}' be seen by ref- erence to Map No. 37 of the Atlas accompanying the British Case. ^ Attention has been called to the parliamentary declarations of the Prime ^Minister and the Minister of the Interior of Canada that there has been undisputed American possession about the head of Lynn Canal, and that it has been held from time immemorial by Russia and the United States; nevertheless the British Case has occupied con- siderable space in the attempt to show repeated protests bv Great Britain against this occupation, and a line is insisted upon which places the larger portion of that arm of the sea in British territory. Without dwelling further upon the inconsistencies and conflict of views of the statesmen of Canada, attention is called to extracts from various recent articles published by prominent Canadians,^ showing similar inconsistencies and as marked conflict with the position in the British Case as those already cited. In order to illustrate more graphically these inconsistent claims, a comparative reproduction on a reduced scale is presented, in the Atlas accompanjing this Counter Case, of five British Columbian maps and of three British maps to which official authenticity has l)een given at difl'erent times. (See Sheet No. 28.) An examination of them will show the appropriateness of the follow'ing colloqu}' which took place in the Dominion Parliament. February 11, 1898: Sir Charles Hibbert Tcpper. * * * I do not know how far the government would be warranted in marking wliat is disputed territory, nevertheless I think it would not confound any proper conception to mark the points they [the United States] have already occupied in the territory with customs officers. The Minister of Marine and Fisheries (Sir Louis Davies). It might he as hard to find the disputed boundary as the real boundary. Sir Charles Hibbert TrppER. I do not press for any impropriety being com- mitted, but I think this can be done * * * d «U. S. Counter Case, App., p. 167. 'T'. S. Counter Case, App., pp. 200-l'11. ''U. S. Counter Case, Atlas, No. 2t). F THE UNITED STATES. The ocuUir coinpai'utiv(» studv of the iiiap.s reprodiu-cd on Sheet No. 28 of the Athis may be aided l)y a comparison of figures. The first map on the Sheet (mari^ed n in the table of contents), issued by the Government of British Columbia has the line drawn approxi- mately as it appeared on all British and Canadian maps up to the date of its })ubliration in lS,S-f. This line is in substantial agreement with the interpretation placed upon the treaty ))v the Ignited States. It will be found that the second British Columbia map of 1S84 (marked Z>), which may not have been issued until 1885, has given to the United States as its Udh'e approximately ir».64o square miles. Dr. Dawson's Map of 1887 (marked c) Avhicli was used by him at A^'ashington in 1888 and which Lord Lansdowne has stated repre- sented the views of the British Government," draws a "line approxi- mately following summits of mountains parallel to the coast " and gives to the United States as its Jidere approximately 8,930 square miles. The Joint High Commission Map of 1898 (marked g) was a map with the boundary traced upon it in red ink, which was submitted to that conuuission by the British mem))ers at Quebec on August 30, 1898. It is presumed to represent the \ iews and wishes of the British Gov- ernment at that time. It is somewhat similar to the map (marked/') just above it on the sheet, except that the boundary- line on the latter crosses over to Douglas Island and takes in the Treadwell gold mine. The British Commissioners' map gives to the United States as its lislere approximatelj' 3,340 square miles. The Map No. 37 in the Atlas to the British Case (marked Ji). which is the ultimate and most formal presentation of the British claim," gives to the United States as its Usiere approximately 7,900 square miles. Contrasted with these varying claims of the British authorities is the uniform lislere^ as shown on the official maps of the United States since 1867, which contains approximately 32.000 square miles. An examination of ]\Iap No. 37 in the Atlas accompanying the British Case, and which is reproduced in the Atlas accompanying this Counter Case as No. 20 and on a reduced scale in No. 28, will show: (1) That it is inconsistent with the positions heretofore occupied by the British and Canadian GoA(u-nments. its officials, historians, carto- graphers and writers. These inconsistencies appear in what has « U. S. Counter Case, A pp., p. 159. BOUNDARIES 1'R()1M)SKD BY GREAT BRITAIN. 87 already l)een stated in this Couiitoi' Case, and need not here be repeated. Attention, however, is called to the fact that practically all the rivers which were supposed to cross the ll)Il)i(l., p. 494. BOUNDARIES I'KoPoSKI) HV CiKKAT BKITAIX. 89 (6) Fiiiiilly. l>y the aid of the Canadian scientists and (■art()o-rai)li('rs, the United States is given a Uf( sttuefS pavdUelement a la cote'''* referred to in Article III of thi^ trt'aty of 1825. {<1) That the words " cdte^^ and *' octan'' used in Articles III and IV of the treat}' in describing the lUiere were so used in their physical and not in their political sense; and that such was the intention of the hiuh contracting parties and the meaning of the treaty. (e) That the interpretation of Articles 111, IV and V of the treaty of 1825 by the United States since the cession of the territory in l.sOT. and by Russia prior thereto, has been uniformly and consist- ently maintained to the })resent time, and is the same interpretation set forth in the Case of the United States. i^f) That, until a comparatively recent period, the British and Canadian Governments, by their official acts, declarations, and publi- cations, interpreted the meaning of Article's 111, IV, and V of the treat}' of 1825 in accordance with the interpretation placed upon such articles by the United States and Russia. {th parallel of north latitude to the Hist meridian of west longitude, l)oundingthe shoi-es of uU inlets and l)ays, and that the line of demarcation, when actually locatcnl upon the ground, was to be so drawn as to include within the territory of Russia all of the waters of such iidets and l»ays and of the shores boundino- them. 92 COUNTER CASE OF THE UNITED STATES. (/) That His Hritiumic ^Majesty's GovermiUMit has never, until its Case was submitted to this Tribunal, ofheiaily declared a claim as to the manner in which the boundar}- line should be drawn lietween the Territory of Alaska and the Province of British Columbia, contrar}' to the interpretation placed upon the treaty of 1825 by the United States and Russia. (J) That the boundary line claimed in the British Case is at variance with and contradictory of the various interpretations of Articles 111, IV and V of the treaty of 1S25, which have been, from time to time, advanced by Canadian statesmen and writers, and which have formed the bases of various boundary lines appeai'ing upon certain maps pub- lished in Canada since 1885 and upon others pul)lished in Great Britain since 1898: (k) That the boundary line claimed in the British Case is in direct conflict with the evidence submitted to this Tribunal and is contrary to the manifest intention of the hig-h contracting- parties to the treaty of 1825 and to the meaning of such treat}'. The United States upon the facts established by the evidence sub- mitted in its Case and contirmed by the evidence adduced herein and in the British Case, and upon the further facts established as above set forth, reasserts its claims as to the answers and decisions which should be made by this Tril)unal to the questions propounded in Article IV of the treaty of January 21:, 1903, and repeats the specilic requests therefor, as set forth in the Case of the United States. ALASKAN BOUNDARY TRIBUNAL. riPPEXDIX TO THE mmW QSE OF THE [MTED STATES BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL CONVENED AT LONDON UNDER THE PROVISIOXS OF THE TREATY BETAVEEN THE UXrJ'EI) STATES OF AMERICA AND GREAT BRTl AIN CONCLUDED JANUARY 24, P»U3. WASHINGTON: GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. 19 8. CONTEXTS OF THE APPENDIX. Page. Papers relating to the lease of the //.sfV'/v to the Hudson's Bay Company 1 Proposition in 1874 for survey of boundary 49 Papers relating to the boundary on and navigation of the Stikine River 53 The case of Peter Martin 87 The Coast Survey reports sent to the British Government in 1883 88 Report of a military reconnaissance in Alaska, made in 1883 by Lieutenant Schwatka 89 Diplomatic correspondence of 1886 91 The Dall-Dawson discussion 94 Correspondence relative to the Reciprocity Conference of 1892 114 Diplomatic correspondence subsequent to the adjournment of the Joint High Commission 124 Extracts from debates in the Canadian Parliament 164 Correspondence between U. S. Coast Survey and the Canadian minister of the Interior, 1888 174 Extracts from British and Canadian publications 178 Papers relating to occupation on Lynn Canal 212 (ieograpliical and topographical information relative to southeastern Alaska: Portland and Pearso canals 237 Maps and charts 243 Miscellaneous 250 ^liscellaneous documents, etc 268 III PAPERS RELATING TO THE LEASE OF THE LISIERE TO THE HUDSON'S BAY COMPANY. Rtjxrrt of Gorenioi' to Board of Directors of the RuMian American Company^ May 6", 1832^ No. 181. [Translation.! Schooner "Cadboro" of the Hudsoirs Bay Company arrived here on April 2*> with Mr. Ogden, a shareholder of this company, who estab- lished a new settlement at Naas (Observatory Inlet) and is the chief manager of the company's establishments to the north of the Columbia River. The true purpose of his visit was to have an interview with me and to persuade me that there was nothing- in the information diffused by the Americans that the Hudson's Bay Company trades lio.uor, guns and powder for furs and intends to establish a settlement within our boundary at Stachin. ]SIr. Ogden declared to me that with regard to a settlement at Stachin he had been telling on purpose to the Ameri- cans about this intention, and that as to trading in articles prohibited by the Convention he, Ogden, assured me that neither guns nor pow- der had been furnished to the Kolosh. As to liquors he had begun to sell some this year and reported this to his chiefs, not seeing any other means of crowding the Americans out of the straits. For it is the second year that he pays the Kolosh for furs twice and three times as much as the Americans (two and three blaidcets per river beaver), thus losing consideral)le sums, but sees that allowing the Americans to })ay in licpiors and tii"e ai'ms, it is not })ossible to ht)pe to crowd them out of this competition, and he therefore resolved in spite of the prohibition of the Convention, to pay in licpiors, however al)staining so far from selling the natives firearms. I have the honor to n^port this circumstance to the Board of Direct- ors and leave for it to decide if it is possible for us alone to keep to the strict fulfilment of the Convention when the British and Americans break it without any limitations and thus i-eap benefits of which we are depri\'cd. Mr. Ogden injured tiie AnuM-jcans (piite considerably this year in thivstniifs in the following way. IIa\ing always on hand at the new settlement of Naas and on the Columl)ia river a large* supply of wmh-- ch'AWiWsQ iov one year in advance {\hQ yearly expenditure of blankets is calculated at Naas at 8,000 and on the Columbia river Ho, 000) he sends three vessels to the straits to such localities where the Americans are putting in and begins to pay twice and three times as much as the 2 LEASE OF THE LISIERE Anun'iciins who nevor hold out voiv loiie protected from all direct or indirect rivalry in trading in the leased territory. As to the Stakine affair we do not claim payment for any damage; we require nothing more than a just compensation for the material losses suffered, which I assure you, in all justice, were severe. You will believe me when I tell you that in 1833 a ship was kept busy in making the preliminary arrangements necessary for the estal)lishment of a settlement near our frontiers on the Stakine River and since 1834 two ships with a crew of 80 men have been occupied in the same way. This crew was collected from various places a year ago and as the enterprise* failed, they were unemployed and a charge upon us, their keep and salaries etc., amounting to a considerable sum. As to the detention of our ship in the estuar}- of Stakine, it is proven by your declaration and other documents. Upon this point our respective Governments are already agreed and therefore it would be useless to argue further. In other respects too it seems that the Boards of our Companies are entirely of accord. It would be very unpleasant therefore if this one disputed ([uestion should prevent a further agreement and troul>le our respective friendly relations, profitable alike for both parties and which would, if relapsing into rivalry, be injurious to both. A definite conclusion on all these points can. 1 am sure, never ))e satisfactorily reached by correspondence. On the other hand, I think that several hours of personal conversation between you and me would deeidt* the affair. For this reason it is proposed that I leave for Berlin in time to arrive there on the last day of this month (new style), entrusted with a full power of attorney from the (iovernor and the Committee of the Hudson's Bay Company to draw up a contract with the Russian American Coni])any. I shall therefore hope to meet you there with similar powers on your part. No other consideration would induce me to leave P^ngland and make such a journey at such a time of the year, when every hour before starting for an eight month's sojourn in America is of value to us. This may prove how willing the Hudson's Ba}' Company is to make friends with the Russian American Company. Not knowing at what hotel I shall stay, I shall present myself to the English Andxissador TO THE HUDSON S BAY COMPANY whoi'O you c:in iiuiuirc' toi" in(\ I hcii you also to inform ^ our Amhas- srtdor of your arrival. Seeing- that 1 cannot stay in Berlin more than two (lays. 1 hope you will l)e al)le and will do your utmost to meet me there on Thursday January :U.st n. s. G. Simpson. Bdi'oii Wi'diKJrll to J[r. Siiiipxon. [Translation.] Hambi:r(;, J(iii>((ir>j 251 .Fehrndrij OtJi, 1SS9. To Mr. CxEOiKiE Simpson. Sir: Supplementing- the agreement we entered into in the name of the Russian American Company and the Hudson's Bay Company, I hereby agree that for the term of ten years beginning on fJune 1st, 18-in, the Russian American Company shall not encourage foreigners to visit the northwest coast of America through the buying from them of diti'erent goods, excerpting those of which the Russian Colonies may be in urgent need, and those taken in payment for different works and buildings on the northwest coast of America, or unless it should be found necessary to buy a ship or a vessel for the service of the Rus- sian American Company. It is understood, that in ca-se a foreign ship should land in Russian dominions, on the north-west coast, for shelter from bad weather or for purposes of illicit trade and if in such case the Russian American Company had neither means, nor right of com- pelling this ship to cease the traffic and to depart, — this should not be made a pretext for the Hudson's Bay Company to withhold from the Russian American Companv' the rental agreed upon in exchange for the right ceded to the Company of trading on a certain portion of the continent. I am, Sir, yours trulj', Baron Wrangell. Mr. Sliiijmm to Baron Wrangdl. [Translation.] Hamburg, January 25 FJrraanj (J. IS.JO. To Baron \Vran(;ell. I beg to inform you that I have received your letter of the above date, about the agreement concluded between us. the Hudson's Bay Company and the Russian American Company. February (ith. 183J^ and I beg to reply that I am i)eifectly satistied with your assurance, that during the existence of this agreement the Russian American Company will not encourage any foreigners to visit the northwest coast for purposes of trading, and further: that the Hudson's Bay Company will not keep back or avoid paying the rent due to the Rus- sian American Company by agreement under the circumstance^^ men- tioned in your letter. 1 am. Sir, Yours trulv, Simpson. 6 lp:ase of thk lisikke Traiii^Jat'niii from fin linssidn of a Porhdii of Ariuli- I ives up to the Hudson's Bay Company for ten years, beginning- with June 1, 1840, for connnercial establishments the coast (the ishmds exchided) and the interior portion of the land, belonging to His Majesty the Emperor of Russia, situated l)etween Cape Spencer, which forms the northwestern cape at tiie entrance of Cross Sound, and latiude 54 40', i. e. the whole of the coast of the continent and the interior part of the land, situated to the southeast of the line, traced from the above mentioned Cape Spencer to Fair Weather mountain, as well as exclu- sive trade in those places. And that the Russian American Compan}' will evacuate all posts or redoul)ts occupied by it at the present time on that coast and in the interior of the country above mentioned, and will not establish new redoul)ts and posts for a duration of ten years, nor send its officers, otticials, ships and A(\ssels for trading to the bays, inlets, mouth of rivers or lakes on the abo\e mentioned line of coast and interior country. And will have no relations whatever for trad- ing- with the Indians, living on that coast and in the interior of the country. And will not receive either in trade or in any other wa}' furs, skins of animals and other products of the above described con- tinental coast and interior of the countrv. lite Diredoi-x to the Ch'uf MdiuKjer (f tlie Russian Americcm Colonies, ^ Captain Ivan AntonorirJi Kupi-e[ian()f\ April 17. 1S39. JVo. 230. [Transliitioii.] You are cognizant through the dispatches of the Board of Directors, of the correspondence which arose on account of the claim of the Eng- lish Hudson's Bay Company, which demanded for the non-admission of one of her vessels into the Stickin River, compensation for damages to the amount of t':^2,ir)(» from the Russian American Company. The Board of Directors set up all possible evidence for the dismissal of the claim, but finally on account of a new^ demand from the English Minister, Mr. Milbank, an instruction was received on Oct. 15, 183S, from the Minister of Finances, the purport of which was that the Rus- sian American Company should come to an amicable understanding with the Hudson's Bay Company. The Board of Dii-ectors reported to tlx^ MinistiM-of Finance on Dec. 20, that it was ready to come to an amicable understanding with the Hudson's Bay Com})any. on the basis stated in the above report, and that desiring- to enter into relation with it. in order to conciliate nuitual interests and prevent disagreeable encounters in the future, Rear- Admiral Baron Wrangell, member'of the Council of the Company, entered into correspondence with the Director of the Hudson's Bay (^ompany, for the pur])ose of facilitating ollicial negotiations 1)V pre- liminary private explanations. «The full text of the lease as produced by Great Britain will be found in the Brit- ish Case, Appendix, Vol. 1, page 153. TO THE HUDS()I«J S BAY COMPANY. 7 riiis corrcspoiulciu-c disclosed that the Hudsoirs Bay C()in}>any. would ugToe to Icaso for a certain iiiiinltcr of years, foi' an aiimial ])ayiii('Mt in furs, a certain area of coutiuuous Kussiaii possessions in America, north and south of the Stickine, and at the same time it expressed its readi- ness to forward to oui' colonies for a moderate percentai4'e, full yearly supplies of merchandise and provisions; for better association and ao'reement with regard to this matter and for the amicable arrange- ment of the Stickine atlair, the Directors of the Hudson's Hay Company, proposed to send, at the l)eoinnino- of January of the current year, one of its members to Bei'lin or Hamburg, for the purpose of meeting a plenipotentiary of the Russian American Company, for a iinal agree- ment on new treaties. ^ 'V\\v P)oai'(l of Directors, thinking that the de])atable (juestion might be satisfactorily settled for both sides, asked authorization to begin official transactions and conclude a contract on the basis proposed by this Board stating that Kear-Admiral Baron Wrangell agreed to take this mission upon himself. On .January Stli. the ^Minister of Finances informed the I^oard of Directors that, according to the report of the VJce-Chancellor. His Imperial ^Majesty express(Ml his approval of the proposition of this Board to enter upon an agreement with the Hudson's Bay Company, with regard to its indenmitication for the Stickine atl'air, as well as with regard to its leasing to it for a certain number of years, a certain area of our possessions contiguous to the British frontier to the north and south of the River Stickine, also to the sending of Baron Wrangell abroad for the tinal negotiations with a plenipotentiary of the Hudson's Bay Company. In compliance with this august will, Rear-Admiral Baron Wrangell, l)eing furnished with a power-of-attorney for putting of the above mentioned })roposition into execution, left St. Petersburg on January yth to go abroad, and having concluded at Hamburg an agreement with the plenipotentiary of the Hudson's Bay Company, Mr, Simpson, on January 25th, (February (Jth) forwarded this Act to the P)oai-d of Directors, and as an appendix to it, a copy of a letter of His Excellency to Mr. Simpson and the answer of the latter. Rear-Admiral Baron Wrangell executed with decided success the august will, lulling induced the plenipotentiary of the Hudson's Bay Company. Mr. Sim})s()n. to drop entirely the claim against th(> Russian American Company, with regard to the Stickine atfair. and in general concluding with Mr. Simpson, an agreement promising for the Russian American Company useful results, on account of combinations fully detailed in the copy ai)pended hereto, of the report of the Board of Directors to the ^linister of Finances of March 8d. No. 40. Informing you with regard to this, the Board of Directors has the honoi- to forward herewith a copy of the agreement concluded, in the English language, with the Hudson's Bay Company, with a translation into the Russian language, and copies of the sup})lementary letter of Rear-Admiral Baron ^\'l•an.^ell to Mr. Simpson and the hitter's answer to the same, for your guidance^ and exact and strict obseivance. laying special stress upon: 7'V/.v/'. Leased to the Hudson's Bay Company for 1<> years, to ))egin on June 1, 1840, the coast (with the exception of the islands) and the inner portion of the territory belonging to Russia, situated l)etween Cape Spencer, forming the northwestern cape of the enti-ance to 8 LEA8K OK THE LISIERK Cross Sound, iiiid huiliule .^-t 4(>'. i. o. the wliolc coast of the coiiti- iient anc'i interior part of the territory, as well as free iiavioation and trade in the waters of this eoast and interior portion of the territory, situated to the southeast of the line made from the above mentioned Cape Spencer to Fair Weather Mountain, as well as exclusive ti'ade in those localities, — order to be delivered to the Hudson's Bay Company by June 1, 1840, and l)y this time abolish all ])osts and redoubts occu- pied by us at present on that coast and in the interior of the above mentioned territory, takino- upon yourself the obljoation to see that all further contents of Article 1st of the aj^reement concluded with the Hudson's Hay Com})any ])e observed on the part of our colonial author- ities, institutions and otlicials subordinate to them, in the strict and full sense, not only for the sake of appearance, but in the very essence of the matter. The Board of Directors requests you, on the surrender of St. D3'onisius redoubt, (from whence you will take the arms, materials and merchandise as moval)le property which is not liable to surrender to the EnoUsh). to connuunicate in writing- to the Chief appointed by the Hudson's Bay Company, your o})inion as to the num- bers of the garrison necessary to be maintained at the redou))t for the purpose of keepino- the natives in due awe, in oi'der that the English, relying on too weak a force, should not tempt the savages to hostile attempts, the consequences of which may be injurious to them and to us. Endeavor to explain to the Kolosh, that we are friends with the English, in order that, knowing this, they should not attempt any evil designs against these latter. Executing in such a manner in all strictness and with due foresight Article 1 of the contract, you may nevertheless use (according to your opinion, and without losing sight of the advantages of the Russian American Comi)any) your right to carry on trade in, and maintain rela- tions with the islands and straits, according to Art. 2. By the terms of the latter, the English have not the right to trade sea-otters from hunters in the waters of our possessions, nor otters nor river- beaver caught within our frontiers. The Russian American Company must not purchase the furs of animals caught on the territory ceded to the English. /Second. The Hudson's Bav Company, for the above mentioned part of our possessions leased to it, ol»ligated itself every year to pay or deliver to the Russian American Company as payment for the lease :20()i) seasoned land otter skins, (not including cub or damagiKl skins) caught on the western side of the Rocky Mountains, the first delivery of the 2000 otters to be made on June 1st or before this date in 1841;^ in addition to this, it consented to sell to the Russian American Com- pany during 10 years: — (a) all the seasoned land otter skins that may be colU^-tt^d on the western side of the Rocky ^lountains. not to exceed 2000 skins at the rate of 28 shillings stei'ling, and, (b) 8000 s(\ison(Ml land otter skins caught on the eastern side of the Rocky Mountains, at the rate of ;)2 shillings per skin, with delivery of the 2000 otter skins sold to the agent of the Russian American Com- pany on the N. \V. coast. The first delivery of the skins that are to be sold shall also be made on June 1st or earlier in 1841 and further deliv- eries on June 1st or earlier of the next years. You Avill not fail to take the necessary and appropriate steps with regard to the acceptance TO TH^ Hudson's bay company. 9 oil this account of those otters I'roni the Iliulsoirs Buy C'c^inpany and their transportiition to Okhotsk, with other furs. Third. Take the necessary steps for the reception from the Iludsoir.s Bay Company, of whetit and other provisions, in the quantity and at the prices mentioned in Art. 4, of the ag-reeinent; l)ut if. on account of some unforeseen circumstance, the Hudson's Bay Company should not l)e able to fulfil this part of the contract, you may send one of our folonial vessels to the southern coasts for the purchase of these sup- plies through the intermediary of an agent of the Hudson's Bay Com- pany; all the extra expenses that may he incurred by such a circum- stance, (for the sending of our vessel and commands, their maintenance and the purchase of the supi)lies). shall l)e paid by the Hudson's Bay Com])any. with the exception of such case when there may tie lack of (butter) (Maslo) with regard to which the i^oard of Directors will issue special instructions. Fourth. Payment for the otters, as per Art. 8: payuKMit for the wheat, as per Art. 4; payment for the freighting of the merchandise, as per Art. 5, of the agreement concluded with the Hudson's Bay Com- pany; and payment for vai'ious purchases that may be made from time to time, shall be made to that Comj^any as the al)ove mentioned otters, wheat and other pi'ovisions. merchandise, freight, and other articles shall have been delivered to our agent at Ft. Simpson, at Sitka, or at such other locality of the northwestern coast to the north of Ft. Simp- son, bv means of a tri})licate note from our colonial authorities in the name of the Directors of the Russian American Company in St. Petei's- burg, in favor of the (xovernor, Vice-Governor and Committee of the Hudson's Bav Company, the payment to be made sixt}' days after presentation. Pointing out the princii)al articles of the agreement concluded with the Hudson's Bay Company, the Board of Directors hopes that these as well as the other articles of this agreement will be observed and main- tained according to the full meaning of its present contents, for the avoidance of any complaints which miglit give a pretext for unjileasant consecjuences. If, through ignorance, misunderstanding.or as is wholly uidikely, with intention on the part of the English, the agreement concluded should be broken in anj^ way, endeavor, without taking- recourse to violent measures, to remove the misunderstanding- by means of correspondence or personal interviews with the authorities, infoi-ming the Board of Directors of all such negotiations or incidents, g-iving full details, and forwarding the necessary proofs and documents. N. PlJOKOl'VKKF. A. Sevkkix. PJr'rfnrs. Till- (rdiuriior iif fhi Hiiss/iiii AiU( ricitii (\il Mr.-h>hn />(>iii/I,is. [Tninsliition.l NoHTII-WKSTKKN COAST OF AMERICA. I'orf Xr>r-Arrh(ij>^E OF THE LISIERE duty to inform you tluit I find your instructions o-iveii to your g-ontle- nien iit Stuchin and Taku in entire cont'orniity with the ag-reements which were conchided between us during your stay here; it remains now to hope that these agreements may be kept sacredly for our mutual advantage. — You may rest entirely assured, dear Sir, that on the part of the Russian American Company and its Agents nothing is being done that can in any case infringe upon the rights which it con- ceded to you by contract for which I, as tiie guardian of its operations appointed l)y Imperial order, do vouch. — I am at the same time fuil}^ convinced that the Hudson's Bay Company will not wish to appropri- ate rights which do not belong to it, — and I therefore deeui it my duty to dwell somewhat in my answer on that part of your letter where you mention your unsuccessful trading visit to Cross- Sound. You say: "The Kolosh (Indians) declared that they had sold all their sea-beavers and land furs to your steamer, and should this be confirmed this single case is sufficient for withholding payment of the lease.'' 1 avow that 1 did not expect any such suuunary sentence from you. especially as you are not quite sure that the Indians you met with belong to some continental tribe, which fact (if they really l)el()nged to inhabitants living in the vicinity of Cross Sound, which, among others, you have not explained in your letter) allow me to doubt, for, as far as I know l>v my long residence (28 years) in this country, there are no other inhal)itants in the vicinity of Cross Sound except those who ha\'e their permanent abode on the northern coast of the island of Sitka. Not entering fui'ther into the examination of our mutual rights, — I have the honor to inform you of the following facts: our steamer during her trading trip this summer through the straits did not have any conununications with any of the continental tribes l)elonging to you; — the oidy point where she traded is the small harbor of Aya near Cape Bingham on the northwestern coast of the island of Sitka with a ti-il)e calling itself Kkhu-tsetl-khwan. This people hunts along the coast of Ltuya (Port Fran^ais) and farther to the north up to Yakutat (Bering Bay). The sea otters, forming their greatest trade, as well as a small ([uantity of otters, they obtain themselves, as already said, in our waters; land animal furs which may be had from them in small quantities at times, they ol^tain by purchase, trading them for sea otters, partly fi'om the Yakutat people who go every year for tradt^ to the I'galakhnuite ti'ibe which iidial)its the very l)a('kwoods of our pos- sessions near the Chugat Bay (Prince* William's Sound), and partly in the same way from the Chilcat, Hootznoo and other Kolosh; it is undis- putable that from among these furs those coming from Chilcat ])elong to you: 1 understood the matter so and these furs have always and will always be kept for you. — In the vicinity of Cross Sound proper, on the southern as well as on the noi'thern coasts, there are no animals constituting the trade with the Indians and consequently there is no hunt whatever luM'e, oidy occasionally may some stray otter t)e met with. I mentioned al)ove that near Cross Sound along the continental coast from Cape Spencer to Lynn Canal- there are no tribes or ])ermanent settlements (with the exception of 4 or .5 huts (wigwams) situated on a small island near this coast, or some iiomud'tc Indians who oidy tempo- rarily put in at this coast on their journey); if tin* Indians told 3'ou TO THE Hudson's bay company. 11 otherwise, 1 will say rinnly that it is a downriulit untruth, as is in gen- eral the g"roater part of information nn-eived from the Kolosli who are. on account of their iiuiate (lu})licity, always ready to tell you one thing and another to us, if not for the ])urpose of gaining some advantage, then from their unsurmountaMe propensity for lying.— ^ As you refer in your lettei- to the settlement of Kaknau, 1 ha\e the honor to ex])lain to you that this settlement did realh' exist some 15 years ago, ))ut it has been abandoned since then; part of the inhabitants migrated to Chilcat. the river Okoi (between Ltuya and the Bering Bay) and other places; the hereditary elder went with part of his jjeople to the island of Sitka near the New-Archangel yjort, but the greatest part of all has been killed in the war with the Stachin people. There remains at present only the name of this settlement and you may see there every 8 years for sev(M-al days the remaining population which asseml)les there from various localities of their present abodes for the commemo- ration of their d(»ad relatives according to the Kolosh custom. Such is the information I possess on Cross Sound and 1 could never imagine that any one should dispute our rights to trade with the natives. I agreed with you at your visit here, when Tongas was in ciuestion, and I hope that you will agree with me when you will be convinced of what 1 said to you a])Out Cross Sound; even in the case of some conti- nental tribe being here. I do not see why we should not ha\'e the same right here as you have in Tongas the circumstances being the same. To Cross Sound flow all the furs from the Russian possessions and to Tongas from the English. The principal foundation of the Treat v between the two companies explains all the remainder: the continental coast (of our possessions) from Cape Spencer and farther to the South- east, as well as the interior of that part of the Continent with all its tribes and exclusive trade with them ])elong to you while the islands remain ours as heretofore. During your short sta}' at New-Archangel, it was not possible to foresee and expound all the conditions of the Kolosh trade, this is why I deem it indispensable to ask you. dear Sir, (hearing that you intend to come to the straits) if you do not foresee the possibility to honor me by a second visit for a personal interview and ru^gotiations. I am fullv convinced that after this explanation no misunderstandings will arise any more between us with regard to the trade with the Kolosh. Should circumstances hinder you from coming to New-Archangel. 1 am ready to come for a personal interview with you to any point in our straits which you nu'ght find convenient. I can give to it some time between SeptemlxM- 1. and April 1, therefore I beg of you to inform me now of your intention. 1 entrusted Captain Lindenberg, who is so well ac delivered to you ^/// //ir /ri/ir/ f>//:s wh'ivh lic traded last sununcu" in Cross Sound which will remain in your hands until further agreement on the subject. For your guidance I am forwarding to you our rates on all furs in general, bought last summer by Mr. Lindenberg in the Straits, as well 12 LEASE OF THE LISIERE as of the furs puichased in Sitkti beginning with June 1. until October 1. of the current yeav. You may ascertain from these lists the insig-- niticance of our ti'ade with the Kolosh. whicli at the present time, does not form even 1 1<) of our former trade, — in one word, the aboNc men- tioned furs constitute the whole protit of the Russian-American Com- pany on the northwestern coast of America! During- the whole of last summer not one Kolosh came here from the English possessions and even not one canoe of the Keku or Henegau Kolosh who foi-merly alwaj's visited New-Archangel for trade; — there were also not more than two or three canoes from the Hootznoo Kolosh. I see from your Kolosh rates, transmitted to me l\v Mr. Kennedy, that you pay them more for furs than we do and if we are not going to keep to the same rates we will be forced to lose even the small numl)er of furs which we collect at present! After June 1, tlu'i'e came oidy one canoe here from Chilcat, from which we bought 18 river l)eavers (sent to you with the last stt'amer). It is clear that it is more protitable for the Kolosh to trade with the English on account of the prices paid by them. I close this letter with the information that the last news received b}^ me from St. Petersburg through Okhotsk date as far back as April 15. Perfect peace reigns in Europe and the important atiairs in the East which occupied the Cabinets of the tirst class Powers are coming to the wished for end of order and concord. I beg of you to forward to ^Ir. John McLaughlin my letter to him herewith enclosed. In expectation of having the pleasure to receive a communication from 3"ou, I have the honor, to l)e with perfect esteem, dear Sir, Your humble servant, (s'g'd) A. Etholine, ('t<((ii of the Iniperial Fleet, Knight and Governor of the Russian Colonies in America. To Mr. John Doucjlas, Agent er 17th, 18^8. Xo 1519. Concerning the renewal of the agreement with the Hudson's Bay Company, with plan attached. To His Excellency T'he Minister of Finance, Private Councillor and Knight. Feodor Paa lovitch Vrontchenko. Hy His Ahijesty's order, which was announced to the Board of Direct- ors on January 8th, 1839, (No. 7-1) by Your Excellency's predecessor, the Russian American Company and the Hudson's Bay Com})any, which claimed damages for the loss ai"ising out of the non-admission of a vessel, belonging to the latter Company, to the Stakine river, con- cluded an agreement for lease, for a fixed term, of a part of our possessions contiguous to the English frontier northwards and south- wards from the Stakine river. This agreement, concluded i)y Rear Admiral Baron \\'rangel and TO THE Hudson's bay comi'anv. 13 Sir Simpson as representatives of the two Companies, on .laniiaiv 25 F('l)i'uarv (i, is;*)!*, for t(Mi years, beg-innino- from .lunc 1st, 1S4(), was iipprovod l)v His Majestv, as announced l)v vour predecessor to the Board of Directors on May ISth, 18:^9. (No. 2523). The results of this agreement were that our Company was relieved of the o})lio-iition to pay a ver}' considerable sum to the Hudson's Bay Company and that all the causes of disagreement between the com- panies' agents were removed. Reciprocal feelings of hostility which are so dangerous in these remote countries, were changed into a feel- ing' of friendship and it was understood that services should be ren- dered and civility be shown by each Company to the other. Moreover, as the State Chancellor of th'e Foreign Office had surmised would be the case, the United States ceased their constant solicitations for the renewal of the 4th Article of the Convention of 1824, granting to American ships the right of free navigation in the seas and straits of our possessions. The agreement expires on May 31, 1850, but in the current year the Directors of the Hudson's Bay Company entered into correspondence with the Board of Directors regarding the renewal of the agreement for a term of nine years, until May 31, 1859; ui)on which date the franchise of the Hudson's Bay Company expires. In the opinion of both Companies it was thought wise to renew the agreement on the previous conditions with certain changes, made absolutely necessary by altered circumstances and mutually beneficial to both Companies. The principal reason of the Board for desiring the renewal of the agreement is the wish to maintain friendly relations between the Com- panies. This seems to be particularly necessary at the pi'esent time. It seems certain too that unless such friendly relations be maintained it will ])v impossible to avoid such hostilities and conflicts, as would not only have a bad influence on the afi'airs of the American Com])any, but might also lead to unpleasant correspondence between our (lov- ermnent and that of England. Belying upon all these considerations, the Board of Directors, hav- ing first obtained the assent of the (xeneral Meeting of the Sharehold- ers, has the honor of asking Your Excellency to use your good offices in order that the Company may o])tain permission for the renewal of the agreement with the Hudson's Bay Company for mno years, until Ma}' 31, 1859, according to the plan hereto annexed which is in the same form as that approved of l)y the Ceneral Meeting of the Share- holders and adopted l)y the Dii'ectors of the Hudson's Bay Company. For the President: V. POLITKOVSKY. Jj/'rrcfor Zacirlrjskf/ to l)ti'('ct<)r>< of Ruman Ametncan Compmn/. [Translation] January 29. 184!t No. <;(»4. To the Board of Directors of the Russian American Company. On December ITth. 1848. (1519), the Board of Directors of the Company applied to the ]Minister of Finance to obtain the permission for the renewal, for nine 3'ears, of the agreement ])etween the Hussian 20626— AP 2 14 lp:asp: of try, lisiere AnKMiciin and the English Hudsoirs B'd\ Companies, for the lease of a part of our possessions in America. The Minister of Finance communicated this application to the State Chancellor, who ])resently informed him that, acting- on his report, dated rianuarv tlu> '2'2n(.\. llis Majesty was pleased to sanction the said proposal of the Jioard of Directors of the Russian American Company'. The Department of Trade and ^Manufactures has the honor of informing- the Board of Directors in order that the necessary arrange- ments may be made. For the Director: Zacielejsky. Memorinl of Coimt Ncxi(le, Jan wiry 23^ ISoIf.. [Translation.] The Board of Directors of the Russian American Company made a report concerning the necessit}' of adopting measures for protecting the Company's possessions from the danger they would be exposed to in case of a rupture between Russia and Great Britain. On the North-Western coast of America and on the Island of Sitka, wdiere a great part of the Company's property is concentrated, the Company has not at its disposal means of defense suthcient to sustain the attack of a I^ritish squadron. The Board of Directors therefore thought it advisable to enter into direct communication with the Hud- son's Bay Compan3% whose settlement is close to our own; and invite that Company to o])tain from the British Government a grant of neutrality for the ships of both Companies and their possessions on the North-West coast of America. Judging from the statements of the agents of the Hudson's Bay Company made when the lease to that Company of a strip of land, a part of our possessions, was negotiated, there is reason to believe that they will use their utmost endeavors to obtain the proposed grant of neutrality, especially since the condition of that Com})any is inferior to ours. Finding that it would be advantageous in the present political situ- ation to carry th(> proposal of the Russian American Company into effect, 1 take the libert}' of asking wdiether Your Imperial Majesty is willing to allow such a proceeding, upon the condition that, when both companies shall have come to a nmtual understanding upon the mat- ter it shall be presented by them for the approval of their respective Governments. Cou^T Nesselkode. Note. — His Majesty ordered this to be done. St. Petersburg, January £i, ISo.'^. Senator Senlanio^ to Major- (rene rat J'ot Itlorsli/. Chan-irian of Board (f Dtrectors (f liuxKiati Aiacrtcan Coinjxiny. [Translation.] March 31, 1851. No. 1072. The Imperial Ministry has had the honor of laying before His Impe- rial Majesty the letter you addressed to Mr. Colville. Director of the TO THE Hudson's bay company. 15 Britisli Iludsoirs Buy C()iiH);uiv. as wt'll as the orioiiial copy of the lot- liu- dated March the 2i!nd," in whicli ]\lr. Addiiiiitoii has iiit'ornicd the Com})aiiy, by order of the Chief Secretary of State of Her Britannic Majesty, that Her Majesty-s Government bound itself on condition of reciprocity, to respect (hiring- the continuance of the war, the posses- sions of the Russian An)erican Company, but that this territorial neu- trality should not extend to ships of the Company on the hiiih seas and that lli'r Majesty's Cruisers should have the rioht of s(Mzin<;- them and their car'^oes and of blockadino- their })orts and shores Considering- the peculiar position of the Russian Coh)nies in Amer- ica, His lmi)erial Majesty graciously charged mc; to inform you. that the lm[)erial CTOvernment, likewise, acknowledges this neutrality of the territorial possessions of the Hudson's Bay Compan}- in America and it agrees not to attack them during- the continuance of this war, but it also reseryes the right for its Cruisers of seizing the ships and cargoes of the afore-mentioned Coiupany on the high sea. as well of l)locka(ling their shores and ports. Will you please inform the Board of Directors of the Hudson's Bay Company, that due orders will l)e given without delay to all Imperial Authorities to carry out and to cause others to carry out this order of His Imperial Majesty, which renders operative the tentative ol)lig-a- tions taken by the British Government concerning the territorial pos- sessions of the Russian American Company. JIhiisfrr of Finance to Adin'n'nl <>f FU-tt. [Translation.] Ministry of Finance, Department of Trade and Commerce, Ajyril 8th, 18oJ^. No. 1759. To His Imperial Highness Lord High Admiral of the Fleet. In January last, the Minister for Foreign AHairs wrote to me to the ert'ect: 1st: That the Board of Directors of the Russian American Company had set forth the necessity of taking proper steps for the protection of its territories from attack, should hostilities with England threaten its dominions, and at the same time pointed out the fact, that the North Western coast of America and the island of Sitka, — where the Company's chief p()ss(\ssions are, — were insutKciently protected to witlistaiid an attack from the English squadron. The Board there- fore thought it wise to apply to the adjacent English Hudson's Bay Com])any. begging it to secure from its own govin'iuncnt a d(>claration of nmitrality for the possessions and ships of both Companies. Judg*- ing by the expressions of the ag'cnts of the Hudson's Bay Company at the time of the lease of the strip of land \\\ our possession, we may rely u])on their utmost endeavours to secure the gi'ant of neutrality — its position being much weaker than our own. 2nd. That the Chancellor of State, provided he ap)iroved. and more- over found the Russian American Company's proposals wise in the ])resent state of political aH'airs.^ should ha\e the honor of re))ortino- the same to His Imperial Majesty and when His Majesty should have " See i>fM page 18. 10) LEASE OF THE LISIERE ^•niciously sunctioned those proposals, the State Chancellor was to inforiii the Russian American Company that with the approval of the Hudson's Bay Company, that Company should also solicit its Govern- ment to accept the proposals. The Russian American Company was informed of the fact. At present the ^Minister for Foreion Affairs has informed me (1st) that the Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Russian American Company has received from the Directors of the Hudson's Bay Com- pany an answer," written ])y the Secretary of State for Foreion Atiairs, Mr." Addinoton, by order of the Chief Secretary of State, to the fol- lowing eti'ect — that the Eng-lish Govermnent willinoly sanctioned the neutrality of the possessions of both Companies on the American coast, adding thereto, that the said neutrality does not extend to the ships of the Russian xVmerican Company on the high seas and that eventually the harl)ors and shores of the Company may be su])jected to a blocade; {'2nd) that His Imperial Majesty, in accordance Avith this report has graciously permitted our Government to consent to the neutrality of the possessions of the Hudson's Bay Company l)ut on the same conditions, these facts have been duly presented to the Com- pany for propel' consideration. The Privy Councillor Seniavine has forwarded to me. with His Majesty's sanction, a copy of the document for the Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Russian American Company, with data for carrying out this resolution. Having informed the Governor-Cieneral of Eastern Siberia of all the al)ove-mentioned facts 1 have the honor of laying them before Your Imperial Highness, enclosing a c()i)y of the document and th(^ report of tlu' Minister for Foreign ^Vtfairs. Secretarv of State. P. Brock. Board of Diri^ciorx of Rn^)ctors, on its part, intends to send to the Colonies, for your us(> in this year's na\igation. a screw steamer belonging to the Coni])any, but furnished with llanil)urg papers and flag, to be used in the Company's business. «Seepos< page 18. TO THK HIDSON's BAY COMPANY. 17 111 iuldition to this, tlu' Hoard of Directors, for the pur[)ose of su})- })lvino- its ves.seLs with neutral tlai>s, has sold (accord inelong. With regard to your relations with the Hudson's Bay Company, the Board of Directors reciuests you to remember that those relations must remain friendly, as heretofore, and that, as the Hudson's Bay Companv co-operated ethciently with us in the attainment of the neu- trality of our possessions, it is proper for the Colonial Government to be particularly obliging in its intercourse with the agents of the Hudson's Bay Companv, and to show them all possible courtesy in all matters. In conclusion, the Board of Directors hopes that, during the con- tinuance of the war with England, when the external activity of the Companv must necessarily l)e greatly diminished. Your Excellency will ])ay special attention to the development in the colonies of the ice. luml)er and stone industries, as those articles can always be exported from the colonies in foreign vessels. V. Kasiiirin, C/ialrman. A. Etholine. F. Wkaxgel. [Enclosure.] SSt. Petersbi'kc;, Murdi Jl, ]i>54- Sik: The IiuiH'rial Minister lias had tlie honor to bring to the knowledge of His .Ahijesty the Knipemr the letter addressed to yon by Mr. CVdville, Director of the Knglisli Ihidson's P>ay C'oini)any, ami the certified copy of that dated .^hll•(•h '12 last, in which .Mr. Addington informed him, in the name of the Princiiial Secretary of State of Her Jiritannic ^hijesty, that the (.iovernment of the Qneen, on condition of reciprocity, nndertonk to canse the possessions? of the Russian American Company to be respected during the whole continuance of the war; l)ut that that territorial neu- trality woulil not l)e extended to the Company's vessels which might be met on the high "seas by Her P.ritannic ^htjesty's cruisers, 'which would be authorized to capture them with their cargoes, and which would have the right to blockade its coasts and ports. His Imperial Majesty, taking into consideration the peculiar situation of the Rus- sian colonies in America, has deigned to authorize me to inform you. Sir, that, as a matter fjf reciprocity, the Imperial (Jovernment permits the neutrality of the terri- torial possessions of the Hudson's Bay Company in America, and engages not to cause them to be attacked during the whole continuance of the war, but that he like- wise reserves to his cruisers the right to seize .such vessels of the said Company, as 18 LKASE OF THE LISIERE they may meet on tlic lii^'li seas, ami to caiitiiie them and theii cargoes, as well as to l)loekaany, will be liable to cai)ture by Her Majesty's shij^s, and that the coasts and jxjrts of those possessions will be liable to naval t)lockade. I am. Sir, your most obedient lunnble servant, H. U. Addixgton. (Not Addressed). A true copy with the Governor of the Hudson's Bay Company. Depufi/ (rovcrtun' of /fudson^s Bay Company to the Directors of the- liiix'^kui American Company. Hudson's Bay House. London. May IGth. ISoJ^. To the DiKECTOHS of the Kussiax American Company, 8t. Petershm/. Gentlemen: I have the honor to aeknowkHlge the receipt of your letter of the 5 iTth ultimo trtinsiiiittiuo' u copy of a coinniuiiicatiou from Mr. Leon Seniavine the A.ssisttuit Minister for P\)reio-n A Hairs to the President of the Russian American Com])any, containiiio- the concurrence of His imperial ^Majesty to the pnjposed neutrality on t he North-West coast of America upon the same conditions as those assented to by Her ^lajesty's Government. The Hudson's Bay Company lost no time in comnumicatino- this information to the Foreign Office in order that the necessary instruc- tions mioht ])c oivon to carry out this arranoement and I be"' to assure TO THE Hudson's bay company, 19 vou, that it is ulwuvs our wish to rocii)ro(';ito those ft'clinos of aiiiity and good imdcrstandiiiu- so ossentiiil to the interests of the two Com- panies. I ha\(' the honor etc., John SiiKrHEKO, Df'jjiitij (rormmr. Ripoi't of Boil I'd of D'n'i'C'toi'H of Iiiis.si((ii Aiio'i'teaii Coinjximj^ Ortohcl' 21^ ISoo. [Transhition.] To His Imperial Majesty. REPORT OF THE l$OARl) OF DIRECTORS OF THE RUSSIAN AMERICAN COMPANY, UNDER YOUR IMPERIAL MA.JESTy's PATRONAGE. Lieutenant-Captain Kashevarov, Commander of the harltor of Aiaii. suppUMiientino- liis former r(>])orts in regard to the stay of the enemy's shi{)s in the port entrusted to his care, informs us, under date of August .5th. that on July 3(>th. a French frigate "La Constantine'\ joined the English ships in the bay. She was commanded by Captain Tardy de ]\loiitravel, Chief of the squadron in the Lido-Chinese seas. When the Captain and the officers of the frigate came on shore, they w^ere exemplary in their demeanour; they did not search the port or its neighborhood or the store-houses of the Company. They said, that althougii they were perfectly aware that cannon were ])uried under- ground, the}- would ))e i-eadyio take them from the batteri(>s but con- sidered it beneath their dignity to dig them up. They took oidy tim- ber, water and a small ({uantity of tish. which the sailors caught near the coast. In general, the English, as well as the French officers, were always civil to the Company's Agent. Commodore Eliot invited him to dine with him on board the frigate and although Mr. FreibcM'g at first refused this invitation under difierent pretexts, he finally accepted it to avoid giving oii'ence. He was kindly greeted both l)y the Connno- dore and his officers. On this occasion Mr. Freiberg had an interview with the Russian officers who were prisoners taken fi'om tlu^ frigate '•Diana", namely: Prince Urousoff. Kovalevsky and Michaelotf. They stated that they had been treated politely and with great consid- eration by the English. In confirmation of Conuuodore Charles Frederick's proclamation issued at Aian during the first stay of the English ships. Connnodore Eliot gave the Com])any"s Agent a letter for Captain 'Pardy de Mont- ravel to be presented to him in the event of his arriving at Aian after the depai'tuie of the English, begging the lattei" not to conunit any hostih' acts against Aian. Acting upon this lettei' Captain Tardy de ]Montravel gave the Agent a written document to be presented to the Conuuandei's of the French ships, arriving at Aiaiu and entailing the security of the. port and property of the Company. On August 1st, the English ship put to sea and on the -Jrd. the French frigate followed. This siiuadron is supposed to have sailed towards Okhotsk; no hostile ships remained in the \)o\'i of Aian. LicMitenant-Captain Kaslu^varov adds that according to what the officers of the aforesaid ships had said, the French squadron sailed 20 LEASE OF THE LISIERE to Sitka with tho iiittMition of not obsi>rviiio- the neutrality of the Coloniet?. Thi« .statement, however, in thii opinion of tlie Board of Directors deserves no notice, in view of the fact that the allied squad- rons had already been in Sitka durino- the month of June and the allied Admirals had declared that the neutralit}" would not be violated. It is even probable that this circumstance was as 3'et unknown to the crews of the ships then lyino- at Aian. The Board of Directors of the Russian Anjerican Company has the honor of informino- Your Impei'ial Majesty concerning- these matters. President: Major-G eneral Politkovsk y. October 21, 1855. Report of tlu' Board of Directors of tin; RaHift the frigate wiiich instantly put out to sea. She was soon t)iit of sight as well as all the other ships which had been visil)le on the horizon. The Board of Directors has the honor of informing Your Imperial Majesty of these matters. President Major-General: POLITKOVSKY. 10 November 1855. The Director.^ of the Jiif-sskin Ainericaoi Coirqxiny to tlic Minuter of Foreign Affairs. [Translation.] Board of Direction of the Russian American Co^ipany. Jar, uary 26, 1859. A7>. ///. To the Minister of Foreign Affairs. In the year 1S39 the representatives of the Russian American Com- pany and the Hudson's Bay Company, with the High assent of His Majesty, concluded an agreement between the two said Companies providing for the lease by the former to the latter, for a term of ten years, from June 1, 18-10, of a part of our possessions on the North West coast of America, a strip of land extending in a North Westerh' direction from latitude 51-^ 10' north, along a line drawn between Cape Spencer, in the Cross bay, and ]\lount Fair Weather. The reasons which induced the Russian American Company to enter into the said agreement, were as follows: (1) The strip of mainland so leased is ten marine leagues in breadth and is sea-coast land, rather improductive of fur bearing animals, ))ut with a certain importance in a conmiercial sense, because since the establishnient there of our fort St. Dionysius a certain portion of the hunting product of the natives living within the limits of the British possessions ctime into our hands. But the benefits which our Company' thus derived from the situation were seriously reduced by the opera- tions of the Hudson's Bay Company which availed itself of the right granted for ever to British subjects by the Convention of 1825, to navigate freely on all streams running* across our territory from the British possessions into the Ocean. It took measures to occupy (and did })artl3' occupy) all the most important points on the border of our possessions. The rivalry and conflicts between the agents of both Companies, which must inevita))ly arise under such circumstances would certainly have resulted in loss to both Companies. (2) We desired also to adjust amicably the claim for 18.").0<)0 Roubles which the Hudson's Bay Company made as an indenmity for our hav- ng prevented a ship of the Hudson's Bay Company from entering the river Stakine. Tlie Hudson's Bay Company declai'ed that act to l)e a breach of the stipulations of the aforesaid Convention of 182."), We resisted that claim under the stipulations of the said Convention, but it became evi- dent from the long correspondence which took })lace in this connection 00 lp:ase of the list ere betwcM-'ii our Govcnunciit mid that of (ii'cat Britain, that the Kiissian AiiHM'ican Conijiaiiy woiiM Ix' t'orccd ultiinately to satisfy the said claim. The a}4re(Mii(Mit entered into between tlie two C'oni]ianies contained amono- other stipuhitions one which ])oundthe Hudson's Bay Company to furnish to the Russian American Company, as a yearl}^ rental, 2000 sea-otter [sic] skins and to withdraAv the aforesaid claim for damag-es. When the term of the said lease expired, it was agreed ))y the assent of both Companies to renew the same for a further term of nine years from June the 1st, 1S5<), ou the former conditions, ))ut with certain modifications wliicli were rendered necessary })y the circumstances of the time and were demand(>d ])y the mutual inter(\sts of the Companies. The renewal of the said lease, in the form of which an original copy is herewith enclosed, took place under the High Imperial assent, given on January the 22nd, IS-iH, upon a report submitted to His Majesty b}" the State-Controller. The chief cause upon the part of the Russian American Compan}^ for renewing this lease, viz. its desire to maintain friendly intercourse between the Companies made necessary ])v the local conditions of close neighborhood, was fully justified during the last war. and proved to be as im})ortant as the Board of Direction had anticipated. For it was undoubtedly this friendly understanding which assisted the Companies to obtain (in 1854) the neutrality that each Company asked for and obtained from its own Government and which protected their property by exempting each Company's possessions respectively from the hostile attacks of the enemy. As the termination of the last prolongation of the said lease is now approaching, the Board of Direction of the Russian American Com- pany deemed it just to inform the Hudson's Bay Company that. l)v a contract concluded with a syndicate of trading firms of San Fran- cisco, the Russian American Company had bound itself to trade exclusively with the said syndicate in the sale of certain colonial prod- ucts, to Avit: ice, coal, timber and salt fish; and consequently that upon the expiration of the lease to the Hudson's Bav Company, the Russian American Company could no longer grant to the Hudson's Bay Company the export trade in the said articles: but, with the permission of the Russian Crovernment, it could renew" the other stip- ulations of the said lease, for the remaining term of the Company's concessions, viz. till January 1, 1862. The F)oai(l of Direction of the Hudson's Bay Comi)any re])lied in a letter dated Decend)er 28, 1858, that, notwithstanding so considerable a limitation of the Company's trading right the Company was quite willing to renew the lease for another period on the former conditions, because the Company was desirous to continue the same friendly relations which had subsisted for so long a time between the Companies. The (|uestion was then submitted to the Russian American Com- pany's Committee for political affairs, and by mutual agreement ])etween the Connnittee and the Chief Board of Direction, it Avas decided to rc^port the case to Your Excellency, with the retpiest that the High ai)])roval of His Majesty to a renewal of the said lease to January 1, 1862, be ol)tained on the same conditions, excluding the right of exporting the aforementioned colonial products. The Chief Board of Direction of the Russian American Company TO THK Hudson's bay company. 23 rtiinouiu-es to Your Exci^llciuy the said decision and has the honor to re(|iiest an answer, with the return of the enck)sed original aureenient. I)on(> in London on the '2i')th April S May . 1S41>. W. PoLiTKOvSKY, President. [Sio'iKHl by four nieniJxu's whose sionatures are illegible.] A. '^IMlvO^■SKY, Chitf of Chancery. ^fhiJxfer of Fori^'ign Aifa/rs to Minhter of Finance- [Translation.] No. 582.] Fkbkuaky 26, 1859. The Board of Directors of the Russian American Coniininy requests that His Majesty may grant his permission to the extension until Janu- ary l>th, 18H2. of the agreement concluded between that Company and the Hudson's Bay Company in the year 1839 and renewed in 18^9, by which a part of our possessions on the North- Western coast of America were leased to the Hudson's Bay Company. The Board of Directors is of the opinion that it is not advisable to grant to the said company the right of foreign trade in ice. coal, tim- ber, and salt tish. In view of the facts that the leases of 1839 and 1819 were confirmed by our Government, that the proposed lease contains no new^ stipula- tions, but on the contrai'v curtails the right of the Hudson's Ba}" Company; and that its term is to be less than three years — I, for m}' part, see no objection to asking His Majest3'"s approval to the exten- sion of the Agreement. I have the honor to lay the matter before Your Excellency, annex- ing the original rec[uest of the Board of Directors. (No. Ill) and a copy of the contract of 1819. I beg you to inform me whether the Ministry of Finance finds any ol)jection to granting the permission asked for by the Russian American Company. Minister of Foreign Affairs. Director of Department. JSHnistt-r if Finance to Minit^ter of Fordr/n Affairs. [Translation.] Ministry of Finance. Department of Foreign Trade, March -i, 1859. ^^o. 3J,52. To the Minister of Foreign Affairs. In answer to the report No. 582 dated February 26. last, returning- the enclosures. I have the honor to inform Your Grace that the Min- istry of Financt> sees no reason for refusing the request of th(^ Russian American Company, re(iuesting tlu^ High permission of His Majesty for the renewal, in its new form, of the agreement concluded l)y the said Company with the Hudson's Bay Company. Minister of Finance: A. Knia.ievitch. For the Chief of the Department: (signed) General-Lieutenant Pashkow. 24 LEASE OF THE LISTKRK Rep()rt of Minister of Foreign A^f\urH^ 2l<(r<-/i /.^, 1S50. [TranslatidU.] KEl'ORT TO HIS MAJESTY FROM THE MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS. The Board of Directors of the Russian American Company most respectfully requests Your Majesty to grant Your Hioh permission to the extension, until January 1, 1862, heino- the remainder of the term of the Company's fi-anchise. of the contract concluded with the Hud- son's Ba}' Company in the year lS8i^ and renewed in 184'.>, hy which a part of our possessions on the North- Western coast of America is leased to the said Company. The Board of Directors, however, believes it would be advisable not to grant to the said Company the right of export trade in ice, coal, timber and salt fish. After having asked the opinion of the Minister of Finance in regard to the matter, I see no objection to granting to the Hussian American Company permission to renew the contract, especially in view of the fact that the leases of 183H and 1849 were confirmed l)y our Govern- ment. The proposed lease, also, contains no new stipulations l)ut, on the contrary, curtails the rights of the Hudson's Bay Company, and its term is to l)e less than three years. I have therefore no hesitation in requesting for it Your Majesty's sanction. The original bears the annotation in His Majesty's own handwrit- ing: "Let it be done."" St. Petersburg, March 1J{,^ lSo9. Directors of Russian American Conipany to Minister of Finance. ■ [Translation.] March 26, 1859. No. 386. To the Minister of Finance: On account of the expiration on June 1st, 1859 of the agreement sanctioned b}^ His Imperial Majesty and concluded between the Russian American and the English Hudson's Bay Companies, for the lease of a part of our possessions on the northwest coast of America, the Board of Directors of the Russian American Company deemed it advisa))le to announce to the management of the Hudson's Bay Company, that, according to the conti'act entered into with the Tradesman's Society at San Francisco wc had agreed to trade exclusively with that society in such colonial products as ice, coal. timt)i'r and salt iish and that, there- fore, we could not, after the expiration of the term mentioned, allow the Hudson\s Bay Company to retain the right of foreign trade in these products. Nevertheless we have no objection, provided the sanction of the Government be obtained, to the renewal of the other clauses of the agreement until the expiration of the term of our franchise, that is, until January 1st, 1862. The Directors of the Hudson's Bay Company on December 28th 1858 replied that, notwithstanding such a material limitation of its right to trade in the aforesaid colonial products, it would consent to TO THE Hudson's bay company. 25 the roiiowal of the contract tor the term recently nieiitioiied. and on the previous terms, as far as the rest of the conditions werc^ concerned, wishino- particuhirly to maintain the same friendly feelino- which has so long- existed between the C'om])anie.s. This question was pres(>nted for tlu^ consideration of the Committee on political ati'airs. established according to articles of the Company and, by the mutual ag-retMuent of that Committee and the Board of Directors, it solicited the good ofHces of the Minister for Foreign Affairs in order to obtain His Imperial Majesty's sanction to the pro- longation of all the articles of the agreement until .January 1st, 1862, except the one concerning the right of carrying on the foreign trade in the above-mentioned local products. At present, the Minister for Foreign Ati'airs has informed the Board, in his report diited March ITth, (No. STO) that His Imperial Majesty was pleased to sanction the renewal of this agreement for the term and on the conditions proposed b}' the Company. Informing you. Sir, of all these matters, the Board of Directors begs to add. that due measures for the carrying out of the said resolu- tion have been adopted. President: V. Pootkovsky. Report of Minister of Foreic/n Aifalrs. LTranshition.] REPORT OF THE MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS TO HIS MAJESTY CON- CERNING THE CONTRACT CONCLUDED BETWEEN THE RUSSIAN AMERICAN COMPANY AND THE HUDSON'S BAY COMPANY, Vour Imperial Majest3% acting upon my most respectful ri^port of March 1-1, LSoS>, has granted to the Russian American Company ])ermis- sion to extend the contract l)etween that Company and the Hudson's Ba}' Company, leasing a part of our possessions on the North-Western coast of America until Jaiuiary 1, 18«)2, on which date the franchise of the said company expires. Now, conforming to the opinion of the Council of State dated May 2^> last approved by Youi- Majesty, which permitted the Kussian Ameri- can Company to continue its business on the former terms until the ({uestion of the Company's franchise should l)e tinally decidtnl: namely, until June 15. 1863, the Board of Directors of the Russian American Company, finding it impossible in so short a period of time to make any moditications in the agreement, proposed to the Hudson's Ba\^ Company an extension until rlune 1st, 1863, of the present agreement upon its former terms, and has received the consent of the Hudson's Bay Company to that proposal. Accordingly the Boaid of Directors requests Vour Majesty's High permission to an extension of the said agreement ui)on the fornier con- ditions until June 1, I8»i3. Having been informed by the Minister of Finance that there are no objections to granting the request of the Russian American Company. I take the lil)erty of asking for it Your Alajesty's High approval. The original bears the annotation in His ^Jajesty's own iiandwriting: '' Let it be done.'' Tzarskoe-Selo, Octohr 19. ISO I. 26 LEASE OF THE LISIERE Minister of Foirign Affnirs to Board of Dir<;ctors of Russian American ( 'owj)ar)y. [Tninslatioii.] MiXISTRY OF FOKEKJiV AfFAIRS, Octoher ^i, 1861. No. 3162. To the Board of Direction of the Klssian American Comrany. His Imperial ^Majesty, havino- taken into consideration my report of the request of the Board of Directors of the Company, dated Septem- ber 11, No. 870, has oranted his iiigh permission to the extension, until fTune 1, 1863, and in its former terms, of the ao-reement conchided l)y the Russian American Company with the Hudson's Bay Company. 1 deem it my duty, in repl}' to the said request, to inform the lioard of Directors of the Couipany of this Imperial order. Minister of Foreign Affairs. Board of Directors of Busslan Arnerican Conqxniij to Jli/u'.ste/' of Finance. [Translation.] NOVEMHER HtH, 1801. No. 1»»02. To the Minister of Finance: In the report dated March SOth, 1859, No. 380, the Board of Direct- ors had the honor of informing- you. Sir, that the term of the agree- ment of lease with the Hudson's Bay Company has been prolonged, with the sanction of His Imperial Majesty, until the expiration of the term of the American Company's franchise, that is to sav until Jaiui- ary 1st, 1862. At present according to the permission given to the Company by the Council of State and confirmed by His Imperial Majesty on May 2yth last to prolong its operations on the previous basis until the question concerning the Company's franchise be definitely settled, that is to say until June loth, 180)3, the Board, finding it inconvenient in so short a time to eli'ect any alteration of the contract, pi'oposed to the latter Company that the lease be extended on the present ))asis until June 1st, old style, 18()3. To this the Board of Directors have given their consent. Tlu^refore the Board of Directors ha\e again solicited His Imperial Majesty's sanction to the prolongation of the above-mentioned agreement and the Minister for Foreign Ati'airs informed the Board, on Octoljer the 21st (sub No. 3102,) that in con- sequence of his report. His Imperial Majesty was pleased to grant the permission, for the i)rolongation on the ])r'evious terms, until June 1st, old style, 1803, of the contract concluded between the Com})anies. The Board of Dinn-tors is bound to inform you. Sir thereof and to add that ai'rangements to that elfect have Ixmmi made by the Company. Fresident: V. Folitkovsky. TO THK Hudson's bay company. 27 TJu- Bod I'd of D! recto !'><<>/ the B Kssian Amei'lcan Coutpany to Min/ster of Finance. [Triinsliition.] January 9tli, Lmj;^. No. 37. To the ^Iinistp:h or Finance: Hefoiv the expinitioii on Jiuiujirv 1st, 1862. of the term of the iioree- lueiit with the Hudson's B;iv Company for the lease of a part of our jiossessions on tht> North-Eastei-n coast of America, the Company's Board of Directors — bearinji- in mind the permission of the Council of State, sanctioned \>\ His Imperial Majesty on May 29th, 1861, to pro- lon<)- the operations of the Company on the previous conditions until the (juestion of its franchise should be settled, that is to say till June l.Mh, 1868. — ai)plied to the Minister of Foreion Atfairs askino- him to secure His Impi-ria! Majesty's permission for the renewal of that agree- ment, with the consent of the Hudson's Bay Company, on the previous <-onditions. until June 1st. old style, 1863. In his report to the Board of Directors, dated October 21st. 1861, (No. 3162), the Minister for Foreign Atfairs stated, that His Imperial Majesty had graciously sanctioned the renewal of this agreement and the Board had the honor of informing the ex-Minister of Finance of this fact in his report dated Noveml)er 6th, (No. 1062). In ,]\\\\ last the management of the Hudson's Bay Company informed th(> Board of Directors that theCovernor and Council of that Company's dominions, intended to put an end to the agreement which had so long- existed between the two Companies. Their intention being due to the. unfavorable conditions of trade during these two last years which seemed to show little prospect of improvement. Notice was therefore given us that upon the expiration of the term of the agreement its renewal would not be accepted. The Board of Directors, attributing this refusal not so much to the conditions of trade, which upon investigation showed no material change, but to local ditliculties. arising out of the discovery of gold deposits in the Stakine river, did not hurry to inform its Govei'nment of this connuunication and instructed its agents to carefully investigate the matter, believing that with time and further developments the ideas of the Hudson's Bay Company might still l>e changed. This view of th(^ matter was very soon justified and towards the end of the year, information came from the Board of Directors of the Hudson's Bay Company, that, in view of the present unsettled condi- tion of th(> country, it was too soon to expect trade to be carried on without encouragement. The Directors were therefore willing to rcMicw the agreement for two years longer, on the previous conditions luitil -lune 1st. old style. 18«;5. Therefore relying ujjon the actual general state of atl'airsand on the report of our Ambassador in London, who consith'rs the further renewal of our agreement with the Hudson's Bay Com])any of gr(\it im])ortance towards preventing any com])lications in the Stakine rixcr (luestion, — which, in the opinion of the Board, will no longer re(|uire such close attention and watchfulness on our part. — the Board of Directors, after having submitted the question to the consideration of the Connnittee for political atl'airs. has the honor of asking for your good oUices in obtaining His Imperial Majesty's sanction to the renewal 28 LEASE OF THE LTSIERE of the aforesaid contract with the Hudson's Bay Compan}^ on the former terms until June 1st. old style, 1865. In conclusion, the Jioard of Directors considers it its duty to add, that in 1859. on the renewal of the ao-reement until January 1st, 1802, it was ao-reed that the Hudson's liay Company should not have the right to trade in local ])roducts such as: coal, ice, timber, and salt-tish, and that the same condition is now to be observed. Therefore, in the present instance, should g'old deposits be discovered in the leased strip of land, the right to work them should belong- to our Company or be made the subject of a special agreement. Chairman: V. Politkovsky. Report of Minister of Finance^ Jdiiuary £5, 1863. [Translation.] Ministry of Finance, Department of Trade and Manufacture. The Boai'd of Directors of the Russian American Company, in com- pliance with the oHer made by the management of the British Hud- son's Bay Company, asks permission to renew for two years more, till June 1st, 1865, the agreement with that Company for the lease of a part of our possessions in America. In this wa}^ it is thought that cer- tain difficulties, arising out of the discovery of the new gold tields on the Stakine River be3'ond the borders of our possessions, can be averted, — in view of the fact that these gold tields attract a great num- ber of new comers of different nationalities which necessitates constant care and watchfulness on our part. 1. In 1889 permission was granted to the Russian American Com- pany to make an agreement with the Hudson's Bay Company, for the period of ten years, commencing in June 1840, for the lease, at a fixed annual rental, of a part of the Russian possessions in America adja- cent to the English frontier and north and south of the Stakine river. Upon the expiration of this term, the agreement was renewed, with His Imperial Majesty's sanction, tirst for a term of nine years, until flune 1st, 1859, afterwards until Januarv 1st, 1862 and finalh" till June 1st, 1868. 2. The privilege granted to the Russian American Company expired on January 1st. 1862 and l)v permission of the Council of State sanc- tiontnl by His Imperial Majesty on Ma}' 29, 1861, the Company was allowed to prolong its operations upon the previous conditions, until the question as to tlu^ fui'ther administration of the Russian American Colonies should be detinitely settled. 3. The gold tields on the Stakine River were discovei-ed at the beginning of 1862 and parties of diggers began coming there in ISIarch of the same year. From information obtained on the spot by the Colonial Boai'd. the riclu\st deposits lie not less than 165 Italian miles from the mouth of Stakine, far beyond the Russian possessions which extend only 8(» miles (52^ versts) from the shore. The mines nearest our frontiers are the poorest, the nuggets l)eing very small and in the best districts it is impossible to make more than five dollars a day profit. The (Company's paj'ty, sent there under the command of the T(» 'I'HK iu'dson's hav company. 29 tcrhniral cn^iiu'cr Andrci'V, siicceecled in four days in o-cttini;- only about five zolotnik.s. which were sent to the Chief Director of the Colonies. The news of this discovery, however, made a oreat impres- sion on the colonists of Vancouver Island. Several articles appeared in certiiin pajx'rs edited in the harbor of Victoria daiminii' for (ireat Britain the mouth of the Stakine. upon the o-round that if it belono-ed to liussia it would l)e inconvenient for the ookl miners. All this alarmiHl the Colonial Manasi-enuMit and the Board of Directors of the Kussian American Company solicited the (iovermnent to take steps toward iiuardin^i' the mouth of the Stakine River against the expected arbitrary proceedings of foi-eign traders and pointed out the necessity of sending there a war ship of the Pacific Fleet. Accordingly, the Minister of Finance communicated with the Vice- Chancellor and the Minister of Marine (Lord High Admiral). Adju- tant ( Jeneral Krabl)e informed him that, on account of a great reduction of the na\al appropriation, the SijUiidron in the Pacific Ocean was then verv small and would later f)e limited to but three vessels. Prince (iortchakov. Hnding it inconvenient to weaken this scjuadron by send- ing one of its ships to the Colony, wrote to the Kussian Aml)assador in London in reference to the (piestion of the protection of our domin- ions on the Stakine River against arbitrar}- actions by the miners. The Ambassador informed him that, in his opinion, the best settle- ment of the matter would be a friendh' agreement. He said that the agreement existing l)etween the Hudson's Bay Company and our own had already averted UMinv misund(M'standings. and that the renewal of the agreement on the basis of the Convention of 1S:^5, would no doubt be sutlicient for the future. At this time Privy Councilor I>aron Hi-unn()\' was sent out and a reference to the matter was received l)y th(^ Ministry of Marine from Rear-Admiral Popov, one of His Maj- esty's suite, and Commander of the Pacific Scpiadron, who on his way from Petropavlovsk (Port of Avatchka) in August last, came into Novo-Archangel and held a conference with the Chief Director for the Colonies about the Stakine River Mines. Rear Admiral Po})ov observed that the mouth of the St-akine was too shallow for the entry of our war ships. l»ut that such shi})s might be sent there not as i)olice shi])s but to display our flag for a short time. Taking into consideratit)n all these facts, the Minister of Finance is of the same opinion as Baron Brunnov. that, owing to the great num- ber of new comers of difierent nationalities, the ({uestion of guarding the Russian dominions at the mouth of the Stakine can be best settled by means of a friendly agreement and therefore he finds the request of the Russian American Company for the renewal, for two years moie. of th«' agi'eement with the Hudson's Bay Company to be worthy of consideration. Moreover, the expiration of the term of the fi'an- chis(» of the former Company should be no obstacle to the renewal, inasnmch as by His Im])erial Majesty's sanction, the Company has the right to act on tlie present basis till th(> ((uestion as to the renewal of its ])rlvileges is definitely settled and since the agreement ])eing con- tracted in the name of and with the sanction of the (to\ crnment. binds the latter for the short term of two years. Moreover, in view of the fact that to introduce a consideration of this matter into th(^ Council of State would be inadmissiible on account of its involving a too opiMi discussion of our foreign i)olicy. the Min- ister of Finance, in conformity with the opinion of the \'ice-Chancellor. 2r.O:26— AP 3 30 LEASE OF THE LISIERE l)elioves it necessaiT that preliininiirv conversations upon the suhjoct shiould ho had with Prince (lortchakov and the Lord Iliiih Admiral and tiien that the dctinitivc sanction of Your Inipci'ial Majesty shoujd be asked for. This (|uesti()n lie has the honor of sul)niittinu' to Your InipiM'ial Majesty's decision. On the orjuinal. writtcMi witli the hand of the Minister of Finance: "By Ini])eiial connnantl to l)e carried into eti'ect."' St. Petershuro-, January 2oth, 18t;;5. Secretary of State: Reutekx. ^fhtist't' of F! nance to T7cv' CJi((ncclIor. [Translation.] Ministry of Finance, Department of Trade and Manufacture, January 31, 1863. No. 71^9. ^y Imperial Order. In reoard to the renewal of the lease between the Russian American Company and the Hudson's Bay Company. To the Vice Chancellor, I ha\e received Your Excellency's connnunication dated January l(')th. No. 163, in reoard to the proposal of the Board of Direction of the Russian American Company to extend for two yeai's. to wit, until the 1st of June 1865, the term of the contract with the Hudson's Bay Company for the lease to that Company of a part of the Ivussian pos- sessions in America ah)ng- tlie British frontier, northward and south- ward of the river Stalvhin. 1 am of the same opinion as our Ambas- sador in London, namely, that the best way to settle the question of protecting- our possessions near the mouth of the Stakhin against the tide now flowing into that district of all classes of immigrants attracted thither by the newdy discovered g-old deposits is to come to an amica- ble agreement. 1 am in favor of granting the request of the Com- pany aforementioned. But remend)ering that if this subject should in the usual course of affairs l)e ])rought u]) for discussion Ix^fore the Council of State, inconveniences might arise because of certain })olit- ical ([uestions which ought not to be too freely discussed in public, I had the honor to report the case to His Majesty and His Majesty issued on January the 25th an Imperial order that the said proposal of the Russian American Company should be conHdentially discussed befondiand by Your Excellency, the Minist(>r of th(» Marine, and myself: and that after such discussion the final decision of His Majesty in regard to this matter be takeiL Ha\ ing informed the (icneral Aide-de-camp Krabbe of this Impe- rial order, I have the honor to communicite tlu» sanu> to Your Excel- lency herewith. Minister of Finance. Secretary of State, Reutern. TO THE Hudson's hav comi'anv. 31 nnrf (if M/iiisfrr of FiiKiiicc, Fihrcdrij .l.i^ /W-A [Tnuisliitiiiii.] MlNISTKV OF FlNANCi:. I)ki>artmknt oy Industry and Tradk. On the orioiiml is written by His Imperial Mjijestv: ""To be exe- eiited": and by the Minister of Finance, "'St. Petersburo- Fel)ruary In aeeordance with ^'our Imperial Majesty's order of .lannary lioth last the Minister of Finance, touether with the Lord lliyii Admiral and the Director of the Asiatic Department, Adjutant (leneral Jgna- tiev, acting for the Vice-Chancellor, met to discuss the question raised by the Board of Directors of the Russian American Company; to wit, the renewal for two years longer, until June 1st. 1865, of tli€ ag"ree- ment with the Hudson's Bay Comptmy for the lease at a stipulated yearl}' rental, of a j^art of the Russian dominions adjacent to the Eno-lish border in America, north and South from the riv(M' Stakine. Fpon consideration, the Minister of Finance and the Adjutant (ren- erals lvrabl)e and Itiiiatiev came to the conclusion, that the lease of this strip of land. l)elonoino- to Russia, but iidiabited by independent natives, to the Hudson's Bay Company, might avoid di[)lomatic ditK- culties between Russia and other (ioveriuiients which might arise out of hostile demonstrations of the natives against foreign subjects. Such demonstrations are greatly to b(> fearetl on account of the great influx of gold prospectors of ditferent nationalities. Th(M'efor(\ in accord with the opinion expressed in the rei)ort of the Minister of Finance it is agreed that the (i,u(\stion of guaiding the Russian posses- sions on the Stakine Ri\'ei' against the lawlessn(>ss of the various for- eigners attracted there b}' the gold deposits, can best be settled by a friendly agreement, renewing the aforesaid contract for two years more. This contract should in no way prevent the consummation of those changes in the administration of the Russian American Colonies and of the Russian American Company's articles, which are to be introduced at the expiration of th(> tiM'm of their franchise. — inasnuich as thos(^ changes are not vet settled by legislative order and because to act upon them at once would take too much time. They cannot therefore be made etl'ecti\"e l)efore two years. The Miiuster of Finance therefore finds it wise to allow the Board of Directors of the Russian American Company to renew until June 1st. ISO;"), the agreement with the Hudson's Bay Company, for the lease of the said part of our dominions in America. The Minister of Finance has the honor of sul)initting these facts for Youi' ImixM'ial Majesty's decision. Secretary of State: REUTEltN. M(ni>(tfr of F'nuinct^ to th- Yice Chinirrllnr. [Translatidii.] Ministry of Financk. DnrARTMENT OF ^MANUFACTURES AND TraDE. Khruai'ii 23, JSO-L X». 1J09. To the Vice Ciianceelor, by His Majesty's order: In regard to the renewal of the contract between the Russian AnuM'it-au Coinja-'y and the Hudson's I)ay Com|)any. 32 LEASK OK TIIK LISIKHK After hiviiii' rei'C^ivol tin' r.'i) )rt which was rosppctfully suhmittc I to him l)v mv on the 22iid ot" F(>l)i-u;irv, 1 1 is M:ij(\stv directod that tiuthority should ho oiven to the Kiissian Anicriciiii C()ni})any to renew for a further tei'm of two years, to wit. until the l.st of flune. iSGo. the eontraet concluded for a certain tixed consideration, with the Hudson's Bay Compan}' providino- for the lease to the saidi Company of a portion of the Russian territory situate ah)ni*- the Eno-lish l)oun(i- ary line in America. Northward and Southward frou) the rivei- Stakhiii. As I have already comnumicated this Im})erial order to the Direc- tion of the Russian American Com[)any 1 n.ow have the honor to inform Your Excellency of it also, in connection with the interviews whicii have l)een held heretofore upon this subject. The Minister of Finance. Secretary of State: Rkutehn. Director of Department: A. BUTOVSKY. Minlsfci' of FiiuiiiCr to f/it- Ijoiird of D! r('rfoi:'< of thordei- in America north and south from the ri\er Stakine. Havin*'' informed the Vice-Chancellor and the Lord Hioh Admiral of this Imperial order, I likewise, in answer to the repoitof the Board, dated January 9th last (No. 37), inform it thereof, in order that proper directions may lie g'iven and proper action taken by the Company. Secretary of State Reutekn. T/k' 2[iinst(r of y'l iiancc to tJn- Vice ('hdiicellor. [Translation.] Private.] To His Excellency Prince A. M. Gortchakov. Sir: By the enclosed Memorandum, sent to me by the President of the Board of Direction of the l^ussian American Company, Your Excellency will observe that in view of the approaching- termination of the lease of the sti'ip of land on the American continent which belongs to the Russian Amei'i("an Company the Hudson's Bay Com- pany has proposed to it to ren(MV the said lease on the same conditions for a furth(M- ])erio(l of three years. On the other hand, tlu^ Minister of the United Sttites of North America has offered to the Board on ])ehalf of some persons in California to psiy a o-reater sum for the land now leased to the Hudson's Bay Com])any, than the said com]iany TO THE IU'DSOn's HAY COMl'ANV. 88 pjiA's, or to noo-otiate for the lea.so of tho islar.d.s lyin^' near the coast and not leased by the said coiiipanv. The Director of the Russian AnuM'ican C'onipany states that Mr. Chiv offered further to enter into neuotiations with a view of accjuirino- these hinds l)y purchase. Since the acceptance of either the one or the othei' of these said otfers may have important political results and may oldige the Im])e- rial (io\erruncnt to opiMi negotiations with the (Jovernment of (Jreat Britain or that of the United States, I consider it my duty to forward to Your Excellency the said Memorandum in order that you may give the subject a closer examination. In my opinion it w'ould be well to connuunicate to our ^linister at Washinoton for his information all the details i-elatino- to the subject, in view of the neootiations now ))ein<;- carried on in regard to the cession of our Amei'ican Colonies to the I'nitcd States; and also to instruct the Board of Dii'ci-tion of the Russian American Company to refrain from taking any decisive meas- ures in the matter, until the decision of the (lovernment shall ha\'e been made known to the said Board. Awaiting instructions from Your Excellency as to further proceed- ings, I beg Your Excellency to accept the assurance of my perfect devotion and respect. M. Reutekx. March lOth, 1807. [Enclcsure.] Memorniidum. Amongst otlier stipulations contained in the agreements entered into l)y our (gov- ernment with tlie United States in 1824 and witii Great Britain in 1S2.^, by which the frontiers of our colonies were exactly defined, the right was granted to the citi- zens of lioth nations to navigate freely on all seas, bays and inlets within the hmits of the Russian possessions in America, for the purposes of fishing and trading with the natives, during a period of ten years. It was also provided tiiat British ships should enjoy the perpetual right of free navigation on all rivers and streams, which cross the boundary line of the territory on the coast lielonging to Russia and flow into the Racitic Ocean. About tlie time when the said Agreement with the United States was to terminate, in April is;54._the Chief (iovernor of our colonies in America, in order to execute the I'rovisions thereof I'oirujianded a shii) belonging to the Russian American Com- pany to be stationed in the Coioshen straits, near the mouth of the river Stakhin, where the Company has a fort. In .June of the same year there arrived at that jioint from London a brig, belonging to the Hudson's Bay Com])any, called "Dryad," with the purpose of ascendijig the river Stakhin and founding a settlement within the line of the British possessions. The captain of the Russian American Company's ship prevented the execution of this plan and the Jirig "Dryad" was obliged to sail away without having fullilied her errand. In conse(iuence (jf this, the Hudson's Bay Company claimed from the Russian .Vmcricau Comjiany the sum of i;22.150 for damages caused to the Company by the said refusal to allow the brig " Dryad " to enter the river Stakhin. A correspond- ence ensueil thereupon between the two Comi)anies, which resulted in an Imperial order to the Russian American Company directing it to end this dispute by .•^ome amicable arrangement. Meanwhile the Board of Direction of the Russian Amciican Company received an intimation from one of the mi'iubers of the Hudson's Bay Company's Conuuittee that this claim could be satisfied by means of a lease to the Hudson's Bay Company of a part of the Russian territory aany and the Hudson's Bay Comi)any, according to which the former granted to the latter by lease, for a term of ten years, for the purjx.se of carrying on an exclusive trade with the natives, that part of the mainland belonging to Russia which lies between Cape Si)encer in 54° 40' northern latitude and Mount Fair Weather, in 59° 20' north latitude [.s'c]. The Hudson's Bay Company on its part waived its claim for damages and undertook in consideration for the land leased, to furnish 2000 otter skins [sic] yearly. The term of that lease expired on ]\Iay lU, 1850; but l)efore that date the Hudson's Bay Company offered to renew the agreement for nine years more, on the ground that, if the lease were extinguished it would be impossible, in s]>ite of the sincere desire of the directors of both ('(jmpanies to continue their former mutual good rela- tions, to prevent conflicts and disputes between the agents of both jiarties. This is especially the case because the trade on the border territory would inevitably assume the character of an unfriendly competition and would be likely through the conduct of the natives to become injurious to both Companies. Having the same apprehensions and being equally desirous to continue the existing friendly intercourse the Russian American Company agreeay Comininy made this offer, the ^Minister of the I'nited States made the following ])roposition to the Board of Direction of the Russian American Company on behalf of certain merchants in California, to wit: (1) To grant to them the exclusive right of fishing, hunting and trading with the natives within the following limits: Beginningat the jioint on the Pacillc Ocean where the 54° 40' north latitude intersects 134° 80' west longitude, along the Christian Sound and Chatham strait, to the 59° of north latitude on the chief jiromontory of Chilcate i)eninsula, shown on the charts under the name of Lynn Channel; thence northward t(j the boundary between Russian and English possessions; thence south- ward along the above-mentioned boundary to latitude 54° 40' and thence west to the point of begiiming; including all islands, headlands, rivers etc., within thesaiay Company. The orifiinal lease of the said territory was forced upon the Russian American Company hy the necessity of quieting the Hudson's ]?ay Company's claim for imlem- nity. Althouirh it offered no pecuniary advantage to the Russian American Com- pany it served as a means to prevent conflict and disiHite between the agents of both Companies. Under it the former disagreements were unknown and the intercourse between the companies was entirely harmonious and satisfactory, it was owing indei'd to these mutually good relations that the two com])anies ol)tained from their resjiective (Governments, l)efore the last war, the decrees which made their jiroperty neutral ground and exempt(^d it from hostile attack, it having been considereil as proi)erty of private connnercial companies. But similar conditions are not likely to recur, because, since the appointment of a (Tovernor by Im])erial decree, the colonies will no longer retain their essentially connnercial character which rendered such an agreement possible. Therefore the Kussian American Comi)any has no desire to contiruie the said contract with the Hudson's 15ay Comjiany in tlie future if a more advantageous arrangement offers itself. The importance of the ]>rop()sal made by Mr. Clay will become evident upon a closer examination of the subject. As the term of the aforesaid lease has now expired, and as the Riissian American Company has replied to both offers made, the Company has a full right to choose the contract which presents the greater benefit. But as this transaction relates to so remote a territory and may have a political as well as a connnercial imi>ortance, it becomes necessary, in order to deal wisely with both parties, to decide beforehand: (1 ) Which of these offers is more acceptable to the (Government, from a political standpoint: and I 2) Would it be in conformity with the policy of the Government to enter into agreements with both parties: with the one for the lease of the mamland, and with the other for that of the islands'? Krtracf frotii Xdrratirc of a Journey Mound the WorJd. dx\, % Sir George Simji-^on^ London^ J 8/^7. (Vol. Il.'pag'e.s 180-183.) Finclino- that the vosscl. in whi^-h I was to pnx'i^od to Ochotsk, would not sail till two or three weeks later than I had heen led to '^xpect, 1 was anxious to employ the intermedi- ate month as usefully as possible; and as (xovernor Ktholine kindly afforded me the use of the Kus.sian steamer to tow to Cowlitz, on lier way to the Columbia, throuj»h the more intricate and dang-erous por- tion of the inland navioation, I deternnned to eml)race the opportunity', which this arrano-ement gave nie, of visiting- our estal)lisinnent of Tako and Stikine. Leaving New Archangt'l on the day after that of the hishoj/s arri- val. W(^ passed through Peril Straits into Chatham Sound, and. with- out having halted in the night, anchored at Tako next evening ahout seven. After ship])ing furs and getting a supj)ly of fuel, we again started at noon of the following day. Hy dayljreak on Monday the 25th of April, we were in ^Vrang■el^s Straits; and towards evening, as we approached Stikine, my apprehensions were awaketied 1)V observ- ing the two national flags, the Russian and the English, hoisted half- mast high, while, on landing about seven men. my worst fears were reali/ed l)y hearing of tiic tragical end of Mr. flohn McLoughlin. Jun., the gentleman r(M-ently in charge. On the night of the iJOth. a dispute had arisen in the fort, while some of the meri. as I was grieved to hear, w<'re in a state of intoxi- cation; and several shots were fii'ed. by one of which Mr. McLoughiin fell. My arrival with two vessels at this critical juncture was most 30 LEASE OF THE LISIKKE opportune, for otlici'wisc the fort mioht |)r()lial)ly have fallen a sacri- fice to the sava«ies. who were as>einl)le(l i-ouiul it to the luiniher of al)oiit two thousand, justly thini\ino- that the place could make l)ut a feeble resistance. depri\'cd, as it was, of its head antl i^arrisoned l)V men in a state of complete insubordination: and. if the fort had fallen, not only would the whites, twenty-two in number, have been destroyed, but the stock of ammunition and stores would lia\e made the captors clangorous to the other establishments on the coast. In fact, it was to the treacherous ferocity of the neighbouring tribes, that the recent catastrophe was indirectly to be imputed, inasmuch as the disposition in question rendered necessary- such a strictness of discipline as would, in a great measure, account for Mr. McLoughlin's j)i'emature death. From the depositions of the men, I ascertained beyond a doul)t that a Canadian of the iiame of Urbain Heroux had discharged the fatal shot. How to bring th(> fellow to justice was the question. In my opinion, the jurisdiction of Canada, as established by -io Geo. 3. ch. 138, and 1 and !^ Geo. 4, ch. ♦)(!, did not extend to Russian America; and. on the other hand, 1 knew that the Russians had no court of crim- inal jurisdiction in America; Avhile, at the same time, 1 was by no means certain that, even if they had such a tribunal, they would take any cognizance of a crime that did not concern them. Lender these circumstances, I determined to take Heroux W'ith me to Sitka, a step which, ])esides being, at all (M'ents. a lesser evil than letting him go free, appeared to offer the only ch'.mce of making the man atone in some degree for his oii'ence. Having so far settled this matter, I demanded from four of the neigh])oring chiefs, with whom I had. an interview, some explanation with respect to their designs on the establishment: and they, while repudiating any imputation of the kind for themselves, admitted that an attack on the fort had been recommended by some rash youths, l)ut had been opposed by the wiser and older heads. I congratulated them on not having connnitted any overt act of hostility, assuring them that, in that case, they would have been most sever(dy punished both by the Russians and by ourselves. The chiefs replied that, in future, they w^ould so (K)nduct themselves, as to merit our entire appro- bation, and would be security against any attacks on the part of any of the neighbouring tribes. I farther took this opportunity of pre- paring the natives for a measure which the Hudson's Bay rom]iany was most anxious to introduce in this quai'ter, and which it had already introduced elsewhere with the happiest results, namely, the discontin- uance of the use of spirituous licpior in the tracU'. I K.rf lUicfK ffoin TujXirt from Select ('oiiniutf( c on tlir lIudstDi's Ihnj ('oiiipariy. cCv. Reports from ('omm!ttii\ House of ('oik moiis^ lSo7^ Sess. 2, ^VoL XV. (Page I\'.) 11. As to those extensive regions, whether in Ru])ert"s Land or in the Indian Territory, in which, for the present at least, there can be no [)rospect of permanent settlement, to any extent, l)y the European race for the purposes of colonization, the opinion at which Your Committee have arrived is mainly founded on the follow- ing considerations: I". The great im])ortance to the more peophnl portions of l)ritish North America that law and order should, as far as TO THE Hudson's bay comi'anv. 37 possible, 1)(> niiiint:iiiu'(l in tlicsc territories: 2". The fatal ett'ects which they l)«'lieve would iiifallihly result to the Iiufiaii poinilation from a system of open eompetition in the fur trade, and the consequent intro- duction of spirits in a far greatei* det>"ree than is the case at present; and 3". The prol)al)ility of the indiscriminate destruction of the more valuable fur-bearing animals in the course of a few years. 1:^. For th(>se reasons Your Committee aiv of opinion that whatever may l)e the validity or otherwise of the rights clainied l)y the Hudson's Bay C'ompiinv. under the Charter, it is desirable that they should con- tinue to enjoy the privilege of exclusive trade, which they now possess, exce[)t so far as those privileges are limited by the foregoing recom- mendations. Ji'stfUHi/i 11 of Jo/ni R. Are you aware of any arrangement which the Kus- sian Compan}' have made with the Hudson's Bay Company, b}^ which the most valual)le portion of their fur-trading territory is leased to the Hudson's Bay Con)pany on certain conditions {! — There was an arrangement of that sort some years ago; I cannot say whether it is still in force: it was a lease not of the whoh\ but of the strip of land which you will see in the charts running along the shore. Test nil oinj of Sir Gt'orge S> iiipxon. (Pages 44— t.j.) 7<>2. Chairman.] I believe you hold an im[)ortant situation in the administration of the territories of the Hudson's Bay Company '. — I do. 703. What is it '. — I have been Governor of their territories for many years. 704. How long have you held that situation? — Thirty-seven years I have been their principal representati\e. 70."). Mr. Edwaki) Ellice.J As governor the whole time? — Yes; I have ludd the situation of go\ern()i' the whole tim«\ 7or). Chairman.] "\\'hat is the nature of your authority in that capac- \i\ '. — The supervision of the Company's atiairs; the presiding at their councils in the country, and the principal direction of the whole inte- rior management. 7o7. A\'here do you generally reside?— I have resided for several years at the Red River Settlement; I have resided in Oregon; I have resided in Athabasca, and latterly I have I'csided in Canada. 7o,S. Is there any fixed seat of government within the territories of the Hudson's Bay Company ?— There is no fixed seat of government, but there is a seat of council for the northern and the southern dei)art- ments: one at Norwayhouse. at the northern end of Lake Winnipeg, and the other at Michipicoton. or Moose Factory, for the southern department. 7ott. Y'our authority extentls, I imagine, as w(dl oven* Rupert's Land as over the territory which the Company holds by license? — Over the whole of the Company's atiairs in North America. 710. What is the nature^ of the council which you have mentioned? — The ])riiicipal ollicers of the Com])any. the chief factors, are meml)ers of council. If there is not a sutHcient number of chief factors the numl)er is made up by chief traders, who are the second class of part- ners, and all matters connected with the trade are discussed and deter- mined at this council. 38 LEASE OK THE LISIERE 711. ^\'hat if> the nahirc of the authoritv of the council as ilistin- o-uished from A-our own; arc thcv merely advisers ( — They are advi.sers, and tliey uiye theii- opinions and vote u})on any qu(\stion that may he under discussion. 7\'2. Does the ultimate authority and decision reside in you solely, or is it with you in conjunction with the council!' — With me in con- junction with the council. 713. Do you mean that they could outvote you and prevent your doino- anything- which you thought ])roperf — They could outvote me, l)ut it has never l)een so; in the absence of the council my authority is sui)i'eme; in ti'avelling through the country, or gi\ing any dii'cction connected with the managcMiKMit of the business, my authority must l)e acted upon until it be amudled or disallowed b}^ the council or the Company. * -K- * * * ■» * (Page 5!t.) 1018. In what way is justice administered in that country which is under yonr controls — As nearly as possible according to the laws of England; we have a very competent legal otticer. who tills the office of recorder at Red River Settlement. 1011:). Supposing an, outrage takes place in a distant part of the country, what happens!' — The case would be tried prol)ably at Red River or at Norway House. 1020. How can that be done; when a murder, for instance, takes place in a very distant part of the countr}-, what is then done^ — In one case three parties wdio Avere concerned in a murder, were remoAed to Canada for trial, all the way from Mackenzie's River, at great difficulty and great expense. 1021. I suppose in very distant parts of the country you administer justice as l)est you may ^ — In many instances we have brought cases to Red River, where the parties have been regularly tried by jury. 1022. For minor ott'ences what proceedings do you adopt practi- calh" ^ — The Indian is reprinianded and held in disfavour for some time. 1023. Mr. Edward Ellice.] Will you illustrate that answin- by gi\ing a case which occurred at Norway House recently!' — Some Indian lads broke into one of our stores and they were regularly tried, and two of them were ti'ansported from their own district 3<>() miles oH' to another district; that was the entire })unishment; it was, in fact, no punishment; they were also severely re])i'imanded. 102-1. CiiAiKiMAN.] ^Vhat system do you ado})t in the way of pre- serving discipline and proper subordination among your own officers, scattered over this vast extent of country, at the clifi'erent posts? — I do not know^ that there is any particular discipline; we g-enerally con- tri^e to have respectal)le men; our officers are always highly respect- able men, and we generally keep oi'deily servants; our servants are orderly and well conducted. 102.5. Do you take care to keep a pr(>tty strict supei'vision over them, and does their advancement dep(>nd altogether upon their con- ducts —There is a very strict supervision. 1026. Besides your own territory, I think you administer a portion of the territory which l)elongs to Russia, under some arrangement with the Russian Company ( — There is a margin of coast marked yel- low in the map from T)-!^ 40' up to Cross Sound, which we have rimted from the Russian American Company for a term of years. ' TO THK Hudson's hay company. 39 U)'!!. Is tliiit tlie wliolc of that st^^]1^-Tllo strip ooos on to Mount Saint Klias. 102S. Where does it hegin ^ — Near Fort Simpson, in hititude 54^; it runs up to Mount St. Elias. which is further north. 1021>. Is it the whole of that strip which is inchided between the British t(M'i'itorv and the sea^ — We have only r(Mito(l tlie ])art between Fort Simpson and Cross Sound. lo;)0. Wliat is the date of that arrangement^— That arranocnicnt. I think, was entcM'cd into a])out ls;>l). 1081. W'liat are the terms u})on which it was made; do you pay a rent for that huuW — The British territory runs along inland from the coast about 80 miles; the Russian teri'itory runs along- the coast; we have the right of navigation through the I'ivers to hunt the interior country. A misunderstanding existed upon that point in the fir.st instance; we were about to establish a post upon one of the rivers, which led to very serious ditliculties l)etween the Russian American Company and ourselves; we had a long correspondence, and. to guard against the recurrence of these difficulties, it was agreed that we should lease this margin of coast, and pay them a rent; the rent was, in the first instance, in otters; 1 think we gave 2.000 otters a year; it is now converted into money; we give, I think, £'l,o(»0 a year! 1032. :Mr. Charles Fitzwilliam.] What otter is that"^— The land otter from the east side of the mountains; we now pay £1,500 a j^ear for the use of this margin of coast. 1033. Chaikmax.] Is it a lease for a term of years ^ — I tiiink the term was originally lii years. 1034. Mr. KiNXAiHi).] Have you the whole care of it, or are there Russian officeis in the territory^ — V\ o ha\e the entiie care of it. 1035. Mr. Fdwahd Ellice.J That was maintained through the last Avar, was it not. in order that there should l)e no disturl)ance among the Indians?— Yes. 1086. Chairman.] Was any inconvenience sustained before this arrangement was made with regard to the management of the Indians, inasmuch as it was found that s})irits wei'e introduced among them bj' parties com])eting with one another for tlu^ fui' ti'ade ^ — Yes. there was a great abuse of spirituous li(|uors. 1037. Was that the main inducement to you and to the Russian Company to make this arrangements — It was not the principal induce- ment, but it was one of the inducements. A year or two afterwards 1 entered into an arrangement at Sitka with the (lovernor of Sitka that the use of spirituous liquors should be entirely prohibited. A murderous scene took ])lace under our own eyes at Sitka, arising from a del)auch among the Indians, and we came to an agreement then that litpior should no longer be introduced into the country. 1038. Mr. KiNNAiRi). I Has that agreement been rigidly kept on their i)artS — It h;is been rigidly k'ept. I believe, by them as well as l)y us. I08t>. Mr. (ioROON.j With regard to the administration of justice, is it not the case that under the Acts by which the Company exercise jurisdiction, viz. the 43 Geo. 3. and the 1 tSc 2 (tco. 4, the Company are bound, under a penalty of i'o.ooo. to transmit cases of felony for trial to Canada? — The ex-recorder of Rupert's Land will be here in the ccnirse of a day or two. and I should rather pri^ftM" that he should 40 LEASE OF THE LISIEHE answci' the i|iiestioiu and ('X})laiii all iiiattcrs coimocted with tlie adiniiiistratioii of the law. i<)40. I suppose you would also wish to defer till the recorder is here, the answei- to the next (luestion which I should put, viz. how often that had Ixhmi done^ — There have only been two cases transmitted to Canada in my time; one is the case of those Indians in Mackenzie's Kiver. a few years ag'o, of whom I spoke. 1041. How long has there been a recorder estahlished at the Red Kiver ^ — In 18oi> t\w tirst recorder was ap})ointed there. 1042. Mr. Grocax.J What was the name of the recorder in 183*J^ — Adam Thom. 1(>43, Mr. Grooax.] How was justice administered previously to a recorder being- api)ointed^ — There was never a criminal case w'ithin my recollection previously to 1S89, except the case to which I am alluding, in Mackenzie's Kiver. 1044. With regard to the introduction of spirits into the territory; are spirits allowed to those who are in the employment of the Com- pany ( — I may say that the whole importation of spirits, from the year lb47 to the year TS.^iT). a\(M'aged under .^.(tOO gallons into the whole country. (Page (54.) 1112. Mr. Roebuck.] What do you mean by possessory rights; do you mean rights under the charter^ — Rights as British sub- jects previously to the treaty. lli;>. Had N'ou possession of land^ — W^e had possession of land. 1114. How did you acquire it^ — Under the license to trade. 1115. But that is not possession of land? — Yes, under the license to trade we had various ]K)ssessions in the country. . 1116. Do you luiderstand that a license to trade gives you posses- sion of the land^ — We understood so. HIT. What is the interpretation which you give to the words "a right to trade", that it gives you a right to the land!' — We conceive so. 1118. In fee-simple? — I do not say under what tenure, l)ut we con- sider that it gives us a right to tlu^ land. sfr * * * -/- -X- * (Pages 05-()T.) 1142. I think you said that the (lovernment of the country was vested in a council? — Yes. 114l->. Are the transactions secret? — Not at all. 1144. Are minutes kept? — Yes. 1145. And is it open to the public; may anylxxly have access? — All criminal and other legal cases are tried at: Red River, and are open to the public. There was a trial by jury last year at Norway House which was open to the pul)lic; but our own deliberations with refer- ence to the management of th(> ti'ad(^ of the country are not open to the public. * •:;- ->:- -Jr ■;;- -x- * 1150. Mr. LowK. I In whom does the executive^ power reside; in the Governor exclusiv(dy? — The (xovernor and his council. 1151. The Council of Factors? — Y'es. 1152. Consisting of 16? — Y"es; and where there is not a suflicient number of chief factors, the nnml)er is made u\) by chief traders; that is as regards the Company's ati'airs. the business of the country. 1158. As n^oards the oo\ernment (»f the territorv. how is it gov- TO THE HTDSON's hay (^»MFAXV. 41 enu'cl: I am now speaking" not ttf tr:uli'. hut of the uciu'nil o()\('riiiii(.'iit of the t(M-i'itorv ^ — In the Red Kivor Sottloment. in the district of Assinihoiji, the present recorder is the governor of the disti'ict. 1 ir)4. He has the executive power as well a-^ the judicial ( Yes, 1 155. What extent of territory is that over ^ —The district of Assini- l)()ia takes 50 miU's by th(> compass round the Ked River Seltleinent. 115*>. Has he any assistance in that, or does he do it entirely him- self^ — Tlie fact is there is very little to be done in that respect. 1157. What there is to l)e donc> he does^ — Yes; oui' oaols arc almost always empty: they scarcely ever have an inmate. 1158. As to the rest of tiie territory, how is that o-overned^ — By mys(df and the council. 1151>. Have you any legislative^ powei'^ — Xo. 1100. You cannot make laws in the teri-itory? — We can make laws as far as regards the management of our own aft'airs. which is the oidy case in which we have occasion to make laws. 1101. As to the t(Muire of land, how is it regulaled: what law is in force in the territory:? — Thi^ law of England. 1 imagine. 1U^'2. Up to what periods — Up to the present time. 1103. Y'ou spoke of a lease of t»yt> years: wdiy is the land not given in free-hold^ — Our counsel in this country recommended that lease. 1164. Do you know why? — No. 11»)5. Who grants the h^ase ? — The Company: geniM-ally the governor of the disti'ict. 1100. Tiider the seal of the Company? — Under the seal of the Com- pany. 1107. Have you a seal of the Company out there ( — Y es, as Governoi- in-Chief. 1108. Has the Comi)any in London any legislative power: can it make laws for the ti'rritory ? — It gives instructions with regard to the mode of conducting the business. 110i>. There is no power of making laws. then, at all. as I under- stand, for the territory? — On the subject of the laws. I would beg to refer to the recorder. 1170. Mr. F^DWARi) Ellu'E.] Is it not the case that the directors in London have supervision of the acts of the council ( — Y'es. 1171. Mr. Lowe.] The (Jovernor is the Executive? — Yes. 117:i. All over the territory? — Y'es. 1173. There is no legislative power'at all. as I understand: there is no power to make laws in anybody ? — AVe make such laws as are nec- essary. 1174. You do not make Statutes at all ?- — No. 1175. Do you make Ordinances^ — No. we have never had occasion to make Ordinances: we have passed certain Resolutions of Council. 1170. Are they considered l)in(ling in the nature of laws on the inhabitants of th(> territory? — They are principally in reference to our own trade: tlu^ laws are administered as nearly as j)ossibl(> in accord- ance with the laws of England by the recorder of the country, and the late recorder is now on his wa}' to London, and will be forthcoming in the course of a day or two. 1177. Where do these 10 factors, who form the council. live?--All over the country. 1178. Are they summoned every year to meet? — A sullicient num- ber assemble for the pur])ose of holding a council every year. 42 LKASK OF TIIK LISIKKK 1179. Where do they nicety — At Norwuy IIousi^. llSd. At \vh:it timeV— (Jenenilly al)out"the loth, or 15th. or -unh of fliiiie. llsl. Mr. Bell. I ^^'hat mmiher is considered sulHeient^ — 1 think seven factors with the (loveriior. 1182. Mr. Lowe.] Does the public ever attend the discussions of this council; — No, never; the public would be our own serxants. 1183. Mr. KixNAiRi). I There is a council at Red Kiver^ — Yes, at Assiniboia, where the recorder resides, and where the white population is assembled. 1184. Mr. Lowe. J Has the recorder and councils — Yes. 1185. ^Vllat does that consist of ^ — Certain inhabitants of the colony. I think there are 10 or 12; the clergy, the Koman Catiiolic and Prot- estant Bishops, the principal inhabitants of the settlement. 1186. By whom are they selected^ — By the Company, on the recom- mendation of the governor of the country, or the application of any of the parties. 118T. Mr. Adderley.] Does the Governor-in-Chief sit with the council himself; is he a meml)erof the councils — Yes; hejs the presi- dent of the council, and the recorder is the law oflicer. 1188. The members of the council are nominated by him^~-He sug- gests tliem. 1189. Mr. Bell.] Ls there a recorder. inde]iendent of the Gov- ernor? — Y"es. 1190. At the Red River and at Norway House also? — No; the recor- der of Red River goes to Norway House. 1191. Mr. Lowe.] Have you any magistrates, justices of the peace i — We consider all our factors as magistrates. 1192. Do they hold any conunission from the Crown, or from the Governor?- -Their connnission as factors is undi>rstood to answer the purpose of a commission as magistrates, 1193. Have they power to imprison, and to decide any matter? — We have never had an}^ case of imprisonment. 1194. Mr. Grogan.] Does the charter specialh' confer on the Com- pany a power of government, such as we are now speaking of, namely, of imprisoning parties, or is it only a license to trade?—! must l)eg to n>fer you to the charter. (Pages 74-75) 1378. The Governor and Company in England appoint the Governor in Hudson's Bay ?^— They do. 1379, According to their will and |)Ieasure, and his ap]X)intment is revoked at their will and Y)leasure? — It is so. 1380, So that, in fact, th(> Governoi- out there is tiie d(j\vnright servant of the Gox'ernoi- and Company here? — He is positively their servant, 1381, And wliat they desire him to do he is bound (o do? — He is, 1382, ^^4ler(> does he live usually when he gets to that country?^! have been the (irovernor for the last 37 years, and I have lived nearl}'' all over North Ani(>rica, I have lived inOr(\gon, I havi> lived in Hud- son's Bay, in Red Ri\-er, at York Factory, and in Athabasca. I have travelled the whole country over, 1383, There are no headcjuarters of the Government, then, and the talk about the Governor and council is a mere idle statement? — No, Th(^ (rovcrnor of Assiniboia is resident uyion the spot. TO THK HI'DSOn's may COMl'ANY. 43 18S4. 1 ivinark that you alwiiys iilliide to your Red River Govern- iiiont at Assiiiiboiii: did you not ju.st now say that tliat sini])ly occupiiHl a circuit of .')(! miles by tlu^ c()Uii)ass^ — Yes. 1385. And tiio wliolc country, you have told us. and the niaj) tells as, also, is as lai'ue as Europe^ — Yes. 1386. So that when you talk of that sui;dl territory, it is like talk- ing- of San Marino, in Europe^ — Criminals would ho sent down to Assinihoia. 1387. If a murder were committed on the shores of the Arctic Sea, would the man l)e sent down to Assinihoia^ — Yes, in the first instance. 138S. Have you ever known an instance of a murder on the shores of the Arctic 8ea^— Not on the shores of the Arctic Sea, hut within the Arctic circle. 138i>. Can" you state that case tome; — I cannot o"ive all thedetails from memory. 131H). j\Ir. Edward Emjce.] Was that the case which you spoke of before to-day^ — Yes: Creole Le Graisse was one; there were three. 131U. Mr. Roebuck. J So that in your long life there of 30 odd 3-ears you have known three eases ^--That was one particular case; those three persons were accomplices; they were sent to Canada for trial. 1392. Are those the only cases which 3"ou recollects — The only cases in the Arctic regions, t!iat I recollect. 1393. How many criminals do you suppose are aniuially tried at Assiniboia!' — I think the whole of the criminal cases within my recol- lection, are but 19 in the 37 years. 1394. And that you call administering justice in that country ( — Yes. 1395. ^^'e may take that as a specimen of the administration of jus- tice in those countries under the rule of the Hudson's Bay Company? — Of the absence of crime, I should hope; we claim to ourselves great credit. 139(!. Do you mean to say that in your temire of oHicc^ there for 37 years there has been only in fact 19 criminals in that country ^— I think so. 13i>7. Mr. Edward Ellick. | Are those serious cases or minor of- fences { — Serious cases. 1398. Mr. RoEHUCK.] Take murders: do you mean to say that in all your term of office of upwards of 30 \'ears, there have been only 19 murders committed in the Avhole of the Hudson's Bay territory S — There were 11 peoi)le killed in this particular case which I am referring to. 1399. Do you mean to say that in the 37 years of your go\'ernnient of that country, there have been only lt» murders connnittcHlS — li> cases; I said there were 11 nmrders in that first case which I spoke of. l-fDO. I want to ascertain what has l)een the administration of jus- tice in that country; I want to know how many persons have been brought to justice; you tell me 19 S — Since 1821 there have been 19 cases of homicide in which the Hudson's Ray Company's people were concerned; in 11 punishment was inflicted; one ]:>risoner was tried and acquitted; one was a case of justifiable honucide: three accused parties died l)efore being captun^d, and in three* cases there was no evidence to proceed against them; those are the 19 cases. 1401. Do you say tliat that fairly represents the state of crime in that countrvS — I do. 1402. Do vou mean to sav that since Ls^I, the date tliat \'ou have 44 LEASE (»F THE LISIERE (luoted, tliorc havt' Ihhmi only those 19 oases of murder in that coiin- trv^ — In wliieh tlie Coiiijxiny's people were coneerned: in the wars that take place in the plains auiono- the Hlaekt'eet there are cases in which we can not intertere. (Page 1)1.) 1732. (Chaii-nian.) I thiidv you made an arranjj-(Miient with the Russian Company by wliicli you hold under lease a portion of their territory ? — Yes. 1733. I believe that arranuenient is that you hold that strip of country which intervenes l)etween your territory and the s(nu and that 3'ou i;-ive them t'l,.")O0 a year for it^ — Yes. 1734. \Vh:it wei'e your objects in making- that arrangement? — To prevent diliiculties existing l)et\veen the Russians and ourselves; as a peace oli'ering. 1735. What was the nature of those dithculties? — We were desirous of passing- through their territory, which is inland from the coast about 30 miles. There is a margin of 30 miles of coast belonging to the Russians, ^^'e had the right of navigating the rivers falling into the ocean, and of settling the interior country. Ditliculties arose between us in regard to the trade of the country, and to remoAe all those ditii- cultjes we agreed to give them an annual allowance. 1 think, in the first instance. 2.001) otter skins, and afterwards of A'L.jOO a yeai'. 1736. Before that arrangement was made did you find that spirits got introduced, owing to a sort of competition between your traders and those of the Russian Company? — Yes; large quantities of spirits wei'e used previously to that. 1737. And you found that very injurious? — Yes. 1738. During the late war which existed ])etween Russia and Eng- land, 1 believe that some arrangem(»nt was made between you and the Russians by which von agreed not to molest one another? — Yes, such an arrangement was made. 1730. By the two companies? — Yes; and th(^ go\'i'rnment confirmed the arrangement. 1740. You agi'eed that on neither side should there be any molesta- tion or interference with the ti'ade of the different parties? — Yes. 1741. And I believe that that was strictly observed during the whole war? — Yes. 1742. Mr. Bkli>. ] ^^'hi('h (lovernment contirmed the arrangement, the Russian or the Eni;iish. or both? — Both (lovcM'iniients, (Pages 190-191.) 3.")72. What is your opinion of the soil and climate f Vancouver's Island, and of its capabilities f( Text / 111(1/1 1/ (if Ml', ■hnilcx i'oojX'l' 3.")72. A\'hat is your opinion of of Vancouver's Island, and of its capabilities for a settlement on a large scale? — Its climate, in every sense of the word, is superior to that of Great Britain, and its capabilities of agriculture are of a con- siderable extent. The land is partially wooded and jiartially open with prairie. There is plenty of room there for a large population. 3573. In point of fact the j)opulation has increased \ei"v slowly, I believe'?— It has decreased since 1 ha\e ])een there. 3574. To Avhat causes do you attribute that? — The maladministra- tion of the government of the Hudson's Bay C/Ompany. 3575. To what particulars do you especially refer? — There is no encouragement for immigration into the country. Many i^eople have come to \'ancouver's Island, and have left it; they ha\-e approved of TO THE Hudson's bay company. 45 the soil, of the climate, and of the capahilities of the ooiuitr}'; but they have objected to being- subject to the Hudson's Bay Conlpan3^ If the British Government were established there, that would be the oidy necessary step for the British Government to take. There are thousands of peoi)le in the neighborhood of San Francisco and Cali- fornia who would gladly go to a British colony, provided it was under a new administration. 857t). You moan if X'ancouver's Island was administered directly as a British colony, and not indirectly under the control of the Hudson's Bay Company i — Directh'. 3577. Do 3-ou believe that to be the general feeling of the inhabi- tants i — I am sure of it. 3578. Will 3'ou point out to the Committee in Avhat manner the administration of the Hudson's Bay Company operates to check colon- ization i — In the tirst place, with respect to their courts of justice, the people have not contidence in them; there are only a small number, but nevertheless they are unanimous in their opinion, they have no contidence in the courts of justice; our supreme judge has not been educated to the bar; I believe all the knowledge that he gains is from Ijooks; for instance, before he can decide upon a case, he has to refer to his books even in the most common case. (Pages 210-211) The Honourable William Hexey Draper, C. B., called in; and Examined. 4038. Chairman.] What situation do 3"0U hold in Canada ;f — I am Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas of Upper Canada. 4039. How long have you held that situation? — I have held the office of Chief Justice a little more than a 3'ear, but I have been upon the Bench of Upper Canada for nearh' 10 3'ears. 404<». 'What other public situations have vou held in Canada? — I was appointed to the Executive Council of Upper Canada in the vear 1836. I was appointed Solicitor-general of Upper Canada in 1837. I was a])pointed Attorne3'-general of Upper Canada in 1840. I held that office until some time in the latter part of 1842; I was re-appointed in 1844; and I continued to be Attorney-general from that time until I was appointed to the Bench. 4041. How long have j-ou been resident in Canada? — I landed in Quebec on the 16th or 17th of May 1820; I have been a continual resi- dent in Canada since that period. 4042. Under what circumstances are 3^ou now visiting this coun- tr3'? — I was requested 1)3' the Government of Canada, through the medium of two of its membei's, to undertake the duty of t-oming to Eng-land for the purpose of watching the investigation which, it had been comnumicated to them, was to take place before a Commit- tee of the House of Commons, with a view of pressing whenever I deemed it necessar3^ for the interests of the province, certain views which the Government of the province adopted in reference to their rights and interests in this (question. I had written insti'uctions from the Government of Canada to that eli'ect, which I can hu' ])cfore the Committee, if thev desire it. The3' were comnumicated to me through the provincial secretary, and emanating from the Government, giving me general directions what I was to do. 4043. Sir John Pakington.] As before this Committee? — Incom- ing to England: generally pressing upon Her Majest3'\s Government 26626— AF 4 46 LEASE OF THE LISTERE the views of the Government of Canada, as well as attending- before the Committee from time to time to wtitch the nature of the proceed- ings ;ind what is goino- on. Testimony of Big Jit Jlononihlt E. EUict\ M. 1\ (Page 328.) 5825. Do you conceive the rights of self-government to have ])een given by the charter!' — Certainty: and the country has ])een governed, so far as the Hudson's liay Company's territories are con- cerned, under those rights; there has never l)een any other authority for .the government of the country or for the administration of justice; it being always understood that the Crown took the power, if it should see right, in the Act enabling it to grant the license, to constitute an independent magisterial power, which it has never exercised. -■<•*****« (Page 330.) 5836. Do you mean by that, that you think that it would be advantageous for the company to withdraw as it were to the more northern part of their territory, and to leave for gradual settle- ment the southern portion of their country ^ — I am of opinion that the existence and maintenance of the Hudson's Bay Company, for the pur- pose of temporarily governing this country, until you can form settle- ments in it, is much more essential to Canada and to England than it is to the company of adventurers trading to Hudson's Bay. ******* (Page 332.) 5848. Do you consider that the country which the com- pan}" hold under license is very valuable as a fur-trading country ? — Some part of it on the other side of the Rocky Mountains, especially on the rivers which flow up to these mountains, I believe to be very productive of good furs. I do not think that it is the most profitable part of their trade; the most profitable part of the trade is their old territory, and the licensed territory to the east of the Rocky Mountains. Extracts from the IIudika and British Colum- bia, was forwarded by His Honor the Lieutenant Governor to His Excellency the (iovernor General. That the Provincial Government has been informed that the matter is now under the consideration of Her Majesty's Government. That by a unanimous resolution of the House of Asseinlily, passed on the 7tli instant, an Address was presented to His Honor the Lieu tenant Governor, requesting His Honor to urge the speedy settlement 49 50 PROPOSITION IN 1874 of the (luostioii. That it i.s of the greatest consequence that Her Maj- esty's Cxovernnient should be impressed with the necessity and impor- tance of hastening- such settlement, as an alk^ged conflict of authority between the United States authorities at Wrangel and British Colum- 1)ia miners and traders has already arisen and as a not im])r()bable repetition thereof may lead to serious complications. Tlie Honorable Attorney General reconmiends that should this I'cport be ai)proved, His Honor the Lieutenant-Governor be respect- fully retiuested to cause a copy thereof to be forwarded to His Excel- lencT the Governor-General for his consideration and action thereon. The Committee advise that the recommendation l)e approved. Certified. W. J. Armstkong, Clerl\ Executive ComwU. [Enclosure. To His Honor the Honorable Joseph Wm. Trutch, Lieutenant (lorernor of the Province of BrUish Cohunhijt. May it please Your Honor: We, Her Majesty's dutiful and loyal subjects, the Legislative Assemljly of British Columbia, in Parliament assembled, beg leave to approach your Honor Avith our respectful request, that your Honor will be pleased to take into consideration the fol- lowing Resolution of the House: That, whereas, the recent discovery of rich and extensive gold mines in the North- ern portion of the Province has greatly increased the imi)ortance and urgency of having the lioundary between British Columbia and Alaska properly established and defined; and, whereas, the boundary of the 30 mile belt of American territory run- ning along a part of the seaboard, seriously affects vital questions bearing upon navi- gation and commerce, be it therefore resolved; That a respectful Address he presented to His Honor the Lieutenant Governor, recommending him to urge upon the Fed- eral Government the necessity of taking immediate steps for having the said boundary established and defined. J. RoLAXD Hett, Clerk of the Afwenifili/. 8th January, 1874. Sir Edmard Thoridon to Captain Caiaeron. Washington, Fehrvary 18th ^ 187 Jf.. Sir: I have the honor to enclose two despatches, under flying seal, addressed to you by Earl Granville with regard to the Alaska Boundary, and a copy of a letter from General Humphreys of the United States Engineer Department, containing an estimate of the amount considered necessary for the survey of that Boundary. The latter document has ])een furnished me by ]\lr. Eish, l)ut he did not send me a copy of Cai)tain Kaymond's report to which General Humphreys refers. I presume that it was either too long to be easily copied, or that it contained passag"es which he does not wish me to see. The maps accompaiu'ing Lord Granville's despatch No. 1, are sent separately but also b}" post. I am, &c., Edward Thornton. Captain Cameron, R. X., &c., &e., &c. FOR SURVEY OF HOUNDARY. 51 [Enclosure.] Foreign Office, Jdiiiinrii 29t1i, 1874- Sir: I have received from the Colonial Office a copy of a (lesi)atch from the Gov- ernor General of Canada, which refers to certain documents reijuired hy you, to assist you in dra\vin>j: up a report which you have l)een requested by the Canadian Ciovern- meiit to furnish in regard to tlie Alaska llouiidary, and I send you herewith the fol- lowing documents which it is thought will l)e of use to you: 1. The Convention iK'tween Russia and the I'nited States, of April, 1824. 2. The Convention l)etween Great Britain and the United States, of Fel)ruary, 1825. 8. The Treaty between Russia and the United States, of March, 1867. 4. Maps of the territory. No map was attached to the Convention of 1825, and it is not known what maj) was used l)y the negotiators, but those now sent have been furnished by the 15oard of Admiralty. Sir E. Thornton will l)e instructed to ask the United States Government if they have any ol>jection to furnish, for your use, a copy of a report drawn up by the American Engineer Department, and if he can procure one to forward it to you. I am, &c., Texteruex. Captain Camerox, R. A., &c., &.('., &c. J//'. Fish to Sir Edward Thornton. Depart^ient of State, . Washington, 17 Feh 1874- The Right Honorable Sir Edward Thornton, K. C. B. Etc. , etc. , etc. Sir: Refernno- to 3'our verbal request to Mr. Davis yesterdav, I have now the honor to transmit a copy of General Humphrey's letter of January :^l>th, 1873, to the Secretary of War, containing an estimate of the appi'opriation necessary to be made to carry into effect the President's reconnuendation in regard to the boundary line between Alaska and the British possessions. I have the honor to be with the highest consideration, Sir, Your obedient servant. Hamilton Fish. [Enclosure:] General Humph rfijs to the Secretary of War. Office of the Chief of Exgineers, Washhigton, D. C, Jamiarn 29th, 1873. Sir: In reply to the communication of the 11th ultimo, from the Department of State, asking for an estimate of appropriation necessary to carry into effect the Presi- dent's recommendation in regard to the boundary line between Alaska and the British Possessions, I beg leave to state that owing to the rugged character of the country along the line between the head of the Portland Channel and Mount St. Elias and thence north to the Arctic Ocean, winch renders it imitossiliie or nearly so, it will l)e absolutely impracticable to run the line I'ontinuously in the ordinary way, and the plan that jiromises the greatest degree of accuracy attainal)le under the circumstances IS that of ('ajjtain C. W. Raymoml, Corps of Engineers, whose duties upon the recon- naisance of tiie Yukon River in ISfit), rendered him familiar with many of the obsta- cles to be met with in that country in the prosecution of similar surveys. He was, therefore, directed to prei)are an estimate of the time anlst and biSrd degree of longitude west from (Greenwich, thence ascends to the north along the Portland channel until it strikes the 56th degree of north latitude, thence follows thesunnnitof the mountains parallel to the coast until it intersects the 141st degree of west longitude, and thence along said meridian of longitude north to the Frozen Ocean. 52 PROPOSITION IN 1874 FOR SURVEY OF BOUNDARY. Whenever the summit of the mountains, parallel to the coast, i)rove to be at a greater distance from the ocean than ten marine leagues, the l)oun(lary line shall l)e parallel to the winding of the coast and not more than ten marine leagues from it. Cai)tain Raymonds estimates the time necessary to fix the line in the V>est manner practicable, to be nine years in the field and one in the office to complete the mapping of the line and preparation of report. This estimate of cost is, for the first year, i;213,609; for the second year $205,227; for each of the third, fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh years, $173,767; for the eighth and ninth vears, $97,009 each; and for the tenth vear, §50,000; making a total of §1,531,689. ■ In view of the great cost of marking the line to the extent practica))le, it might be found sufficient, for present requirements, to establish only those jioints on it neces- sary to determine the limits of territory upon the lands accessible to settlers and upon the navigable waters and rivers. This will materially reduce the time and expense. The points which appear to be necessary to fix are as follows, — viz: — 1st. After the establishment of an observatory at Sitka, to fix the southernmost point of Prince of Wales Island, ascend the Portland channel, and fix the point on the 56th parallel, at which the line leaves this channel. 2nd. To ascend the Staken, Takee, Chilcat the Alsekh rivers, and fix the points of intersection with boundary line. 3rd. To ascend the Yukon River, and to fix the intersection of that river and the Porcupine ■with 141st meridian of W. L. which here forms the boundary line. 4th. To com- plete the office work, mapping the results, &c. For the completion of the above work two if not three years' field work will be required, with one year's office work in addition. The estimate for two years' field work will be as follows, being the same as for the first, second and tenth years of Captain Raymond's estimate: — 1st year §213, 609 2nd vear 205, 227 3rd year 50, 000 Total §468, 836 Very respectfully, A. A. Hl'MPHREYS, Brig. Gen. and Chief of Engineers. The Honorable W. W. Belkxap, Secretary of War. Extract from t]u_Jvur)ie with the highest consideration. Sir Your o])edient servant Edwd. Thornton. To the Honorable Hamilton Fish, Etc., etc., etc. [Enclosure.— Extract.] WAHHiyoTOi^, 7(h November 1S68. Foreign vessels have not the rijrlit tinder tlie law and should not be i>ermitted to proceed via the Stikine River thronsh American territory to foreign ports l)eyond the ))onndary of the T'nited States^. Snch vessels should lie requireil to enter and unload at your Port and must not unless previously authorized by the Dei)artment be allowed to pass further inland. J. McCvLLOCH, Secrelarji of the Treasur;/. THE NAVIGATION OF THE STIKINP] RIVKR. 57 [Enclosure. — Extract.] The principal officer at Sitka to the CoUertor at Wrangel dated 21 August 1873. No atlvice ha^? been reeeivetl that foreign bottom.^ are a.s yet permitted to navitrate the Stikine River, and until instructions are received to the contrary tlie prohilntion still existsi. (teo. K. ^Ic Kxkjht. J/)'. FikJi to Sir Edward Thornton. Department of State, Wa-^hington, IS Dec. 1873. The Kight Honorable Sir Edward Thornton K. C. B., Etc. , etc. , etc. Sir: Referrino- to your note of the Ist in.stiint, in relation to the alleged interference with the rig-ht of navigation of the Stickine I'iver, .-secured by Article XXVI of the Treaty of Washington, 1 have now the honor to enclose herewith for your inforaiation, a copy of a letter of the 10th instant upon the sul)ject, from the Secretaiy of the Treasury. I have the honor to be with the highest consideration, Sir, Your obedient servant, Hamilton Fish. [Enclosure.] Tlie Sea-elary of the Treasury to the Secretary of State. Treasury Department, Washington, D. C, December 10th, 1873. Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge receipt of your letter of the 8rd instant, referring to a communication from the Department of State of the 3rd August last, covering a copy of a note of the British Minister relative to the navigation of the Stikine River. You now enclose a copy of another note from the British ^Minister of the 1st instant, u])on the same sul)ject, and invite my attention to the alleged interference with the right of navigation of that river secured by Article 26 of the Treaty of Wash- ington, and you express the desire to know if any further information has been received l)y this Department since the date of my letter of the 12th September last, aildressed to the Department of State, which covered a copy of my letter of the 8th of that month to the Collector of Customs at Sitka, asking him to report the facts without delay for communication to the British Minister. I regret to inform you that no report from the Collector at Sika has been received. But on the ^>th instant, the Collector was advised that, under the circumstances of the case, and in compliance with the suggestions of the British Minister of the expe- diency of sending instructions, the Department was willing to give effect to Article 26 of "the Treaty which, for the purposes of commerce, opens the navigation of the Yukon, Porcupine, and Stikine Rivers to British subjects under such laws and regu- lations as would govern in such cases. The Department desires that every facility should be given to British vessels engaged in this commerce. With this view the Collector was instructed to carry out, for the present, Article 1, jiage 10 of the Regulations the Department will shortly issue, governing the transportation of merchandise to, from, and through the Domin- ion of Canada, imder the Acts of June 29th, 1864, and July 28th, 1866, the Treaty of "Wasliington, and the Act of March 1st, 187o, for which purpose a copy was sent him. And the Collector was directed, with the further view of giving more specific instructions, to report the number and tonnage of British ves.sels employed upon the Stikine and other rivers mentioned; the cargoes they carry; and the final destina- tion of the goods; and to forward a copy of the regulations issued l)y the British authorities in regard to American vessels on the same rivers. 68 THE BOUNDARY ON, AND And I may aild that the D(;'))artinent (•ontiMiiplates the issue of regulations, on the opening of navigation in Alaska, whi(;h will protect the interests of the Revenue, ■while the stipulations of the Treaty will be duly observed. , 1 have, &.C., Wm. a. Richardson, St'crctari/. The Honoural)le Mamiltox Fish, ikc, &c., &c. j\Ii\ Fish to Sir Edimird Tliovnton. Department of State, ^VasJli/i(Jto)}^ 3 'hmUj 187 Jf.. The Right Honoi-able Sir Edward Thornton, K. C. B. P^tc, etc., etc. Sir: Referring to previous correspondence upon the subject of the navigation bv British vessels, of the Stikine River, in the Territory of Alaska, 1 have the honor to inform you that it is stated in a letter of the '28d ultimo, from the Secretary of the Treasury that the Collector at Sitka, and the Deputy Collector at Wrangel Island have been instructed to act in accordance with the provisions of the Treat}' of Washington. I have the honor to be with the highest consideration, Sir, Your obedient servant, • Hamilton Fish. Tht Earl of Duffer In to the Earl of Khnherley. Ottawa, Fehruary ISth, 187)4,. My Lord: I have the honor to forward an approved report of a Committee of the Privy Council in respect to the navigation of the Stikine River in British Columbia, and containing the opinion of my Ministers in regard to the interpretation of the 2nd section of Article 26 of the Treaty of Washington, as a question of principle is introduced in the interpretation of this clause. I have decided not to communicate with the Lieutenant Governor of British Columbia until 1 should learn from Your Lordsiiip whether the opinion of my Ministers in regard to the clause meets with yoxxx approval. I have &c., Dufferin. The Right Honoralile The Earl of Kimberley, &c., &c., &c. [Enclosure.] CoT[)y of a Report of a Committee of the Honorahle tlie Privy Council, approved by His Excellency the Governor General in Council on the 11th February, 1874- On a Report dated 6th of February, 1S74, from the Honorable the ^Minister of Justice, stating that in the month of I\Iay, LS73, certain correspondence took place between the I.iieutenant Governor of British Columl)ia and the Secretary of State at Washington, in resjiect to the navigation of the Stikine River, in the Fnited States Territory, having been forbidden to British sul)jects, notwithstanding the 26th Article of the Treaty of Washington, and instructions appear to have been given by the Ignited States authorities tending to obviate the course which had been com- plained of. THE NAVIGATION OF THE STIKINE RIVEK. 59 That furtlier application is now made by the despatcli of the Lieutenant Governor, No. 98, of the ISth Decenilier, IST'A, in whk-h he states that a (juestion lias arisen as to the proper interpretation of the2n(l clause of Article 26 of the Treaty of Washin^rton. That the point is really whether the ])rovision in question of the Treaty will be held to patch of the 13th of February, enclosing a report of a Committee of the Dominion Privy Council in regard to the interpretation to be attached to the .second .•section of the twentv-sixth article of the Treaty of "Washington, relating to the navigation of the Stikine, Yukon and Porcupine Rivers. In reply. I have to inform 3'ou that Her Majesty's (Tovernment concur in the interpretation phiced upon the article by your Govern- ment, namely: — "That the navigation of the River Stikine in its entire length is free and open for the purposes of commerce as well to citi- zens of the United States as to the subjects of Her Britannic Majestj', subject, as to the portion thereof within the territory of either coun- try, to such laws and regulations as are not inconsistent with the privilege of free navigation". 1 have, &c., Carnarvon. Governor General, The Right Hon. The Earl of JDufferin, K. P., K. C B., cScc, &c.. cScc 2fr. Ftsli to Sir Edward Thornton. Department of State, Woshin(/ton, 2[ay 2nd., 187 Jf.. Sir: 1 have the honor to transmit herewith for your con.sideration, and that of the Government of the Dominion of Canada, a copy of a letter of the i^.Jth idtimo. from the Acting Secretary of the Treasur}^ 60 THE BOUNDARY ON, AND and of its accompanying- report of the Collector of Customs at Sitka, Alaska, relating to the transit of foreign merchandise through the ter- ritory of Alaska cia Stikine River to British Columbia. I have, &c. , Hamilton Fish. The Right Honorable Sir Edward Thornton, K. C. B. &c., &c.., &c. [Enclosure.] Tlie Acting Sccrektrij of t}i.e Treasury to the Secretary of State. Treasury Department, Washington, April 25th, 1874- Sir: I have the honor to transmit herewith copy of a Report from the Collector of Customs at Sitka, Alaska, dated the 2nd instant, with its enclosures, relative to the transit of foreign merchandize through the territory of Alaska via the Stikine River to British Columbia. It will be observed that the Collector of Customs at Victoria, B. C, has given notice to the effect that all foreign goods destined for the rivers at Dease Lake, B. C, via the Stikine River, must be entered with payment of duties, at some port in Brit- ish Columbia, the ports of Victoria and Esquimalt Ijeing particularly mentioned. The effect of such regulation will be to require goods shipped from ports of the United States to British Columbia, by the route proposed, to be turned aside from their usual route, and carried to some Canadian port in the south-western portion of British Columbia for payment of duties to the Canadian Government as preliminary to their shipment through the territory of the United States by way of the Stikine River, to their places of destination in British Columbia, on said river. It thus appears, that by this regulation certain onerous requirements are imposed upon the trade between the United States and British Columbia, via the Stikine River, from which the trade between British ports by the same route is exempt. Unless there may be some law or regulation affecting the domestic commerce between different places in the British possessions, re(|uiring British vessels to turn aside from their course to repoi't at Victoria or Esquimalt, or some other port in the A-icinity before making the passage of the Stikine River. Upon this latter point this Department has no information. In the absence of any such corresponding requirements affecting British commerce, the question may be raised whether the order issued by the Canadian Collector at Victoria, which, so far as it applies, established a condition precedent to the free navigation of said river for the purjioses of commerce, does not work a discrimina- ti(m against American commerce in contravention of the provisions of the Treaty of Wasliiugton thereby in practical effect depriving the United States of all the benetits supposed to have been acquired under the Treaty of Washington, as regards the free navigation of said river, for the purposes of commerce. It furtlier ajjpears, however, that the occasion for this order is, that no port on the Stikine River, or on the north coast of British Columbia, in connection with the Stikine River has yet been declared a port of entry by the Government at Ottawa. In view of the premises, I will thank you to communicate with the British Minis- ter relative to the subject-matter of this comnumication, inviting an expression of the views of the Government of the Dominion of Canada in relation thereto. I have the honor, &c., F. A. Sawyer, Acting Secretary. Hon. Hamilton Fisn, &c., &c., &c. [Enclosiirt'.] CrsTOM IIorsE, Sitka, Alaska, Collector's Office, April 2d, 1874. Sir: I have the honor to transmit herewith enclosed printed notice of the Col- lector of Customs at Victoria, B. C, and copies of letters from the Honorable U._ S. Consul at Victoria, B. C, relating to the navigation of the Stikine River by British vessels, and the collection of duties, for your information. THE NAVIGATION OF THE STIKINE KIVER. 61 The merchants (loininion. You would oblige me very much V)}' informing me, by return mail, what are the laws or regulations in force which govern such cases at the present time, ami wliether our Government has adojjted any new regulations under which the subjects of (jreat Britain have the free use of said river for j)arp(>ses of conmierce and free navigation. As to late regulations adopted by the Custom House authorities here, and having reference to the importation of foreign merchandize intended for the mines at Dease Lake, I have to refer you to my letter of the IHth instant, and to the notice of the Collector at Victoria. I am, &c., ■ D. Eckstein, United StafcH Consul. W. Chapman, Esq., Collector, Sitka, Alaska. The Earl of Dtcffcrhi to Her Majesty s Charge (V Aff a! ris. No. 30.] Ottawa, 20th July, 187 1^. Sir: With reference to Sir E. Thornton's despatch, No. 15, of the 5th of May last, I have the honor to enclose, for the information of the Secretary of the Treasury of the United States, copy of a Report of Council, and a Report from the Customs Department on the subject of the collection of duties on goods entering British Cohnn))ia rla the Stikine River. I have, &c., Dufferin, R. G. Watson, Esq., Charge cV Affaires, WasJihigton. [Enclosure.] Copy of a Report of a Committee of the Honorable the Privy Council, approved by His Excellency the Governor General in Council on the 18th July, 1874- The C'ommittee of the Privy Council have had under consideration the despatch dated 5th ]May, 1874, and accompanying correspondence from Her 3Iajesty's Minister at Washington, having reference to a notice issued by the Collector of Customs at Victoria, B. C, whereby goods destined for Dease's Lake, via the Stikine River, are required to pay duties at Victoria or Esquimalt, and to the inconvenience to which American vessels would be thereby subjected. They have also laid before them the annexed Rei)ort, dateil 4th June, 1874, from the Hon. the Minister of Customs, to whom the above desjiatch and correspondence were referred, and they respectfully submit their concurrence in the said Report, and advise that it be communicated by Your Excellency to Sir Edward Thornton. Certified. W. A. HiMSWOKTH, Clerk, I'riry ('uuiic'd. [Enclosure.] Customs Department, Otiaua, 4fh .huie, 1874- The undersigned ^linister of Customs has the honor to submit for the considera- tion of His Excellency the (Tovernor tieneral in Council, the following memoranda on the subject of the accompanying corresi)ondence resjiecting navigation of the Stikine River, and the collection of the revenue in the adjacent territory, referred by His Lordship to the Hon. the Privy Council, and by that l)ody referred to the undersigned, and as the despatch of the Acting-Secretary of the Treasury, of 25th THE NAVIGATION OF THE STIKINE KIVEK. 63 April Ia8t, addre^j^ed to the Hdii. Ilaniilton Fish, foiitaiiis a clear stateiiu'iit of the eubsitanee of the whole eorres^poiidenee, he bejijs leave to remark thereupon: — The Aeting-Seeretary of the Treasury say;?: "It will be observed that the Collector of Customs at Victoria, B. C, has given notice to the effect that all forei^jn goods destineil for the mines at Dease Lake, B. C, ria the Stikine River, must be entered for payiiii-nt of duties at some port in British C()luml)ia, the jinrts of Victoria and Ksi|uimalt being )>articularly mentioned," and remarks thereupon "that, the effect of such regulation will be to re([uire goods shipped from jMUts in the Cnitetl States to British Columbia, by the route jn-oposed, to l)e turned aside fiom their usual route and carried to some Canadian port in the south-western portion of British Cohnnl)ia, for payment of duties to the Canadian Covernment as preliminary to their shipment through the territory of the United States by way of the Stikine River, Stikine River, I am reciuested l)y the (lovernor General of Canada to com- municate these reports to the (iox'einmont of the United States. I have the honour to l)e, with the highest consideration. Sir, Your obedient servant. R. G. Watson. Hon. Hamilton Fisii. Etc., etc., etc. 64 THE BOUNDARY ON, AND M)-. J'^isJi in _Mr. ir«:/As-o//. C'Jiai'C/c. Department of State, Was:/ihi(/fo)i, ISf/i Avfpist^ 187 Jf. Sir: KofcM-rino- to your coinimiiiicatioii of the 30tli ultimo, in rela- tion to the coniplaiiit which reached this Department through the Sec- retar}" of the Treasurer, and which formed the subject of my note of the 2nd May last, 1 have the honor to transmit a copy of a letter of the 12th instant from the Secretary of the Treasury, and of the peti- tion which accompanied it. from which it appears that the impediment to American .trade with British C'ohnuhia, l)y wayof theStikiiie River has not I)e(Mi removed by the location of a British customs officer at the ])oundary line ])etween the two countries on that river; as he requires that all uoods intended to Ite introduced within the British jurisdiction there shall first l)e cleared at Victoria. This Dc^partment was encouraged by the statements contained in the Report of the Customs Department, and approved in the Report of the Council of Canada, copy of which accompanied your note of the 30th ultimo, to believe that this state of things would end with the location of a British customs officer on the Stikine, who would be authorized to collect the duties on the spot without the inconvenient and ))urdensome conditions complained of: and it is hoped that steps may be taken which will secure that result at the earliest practical period. I have, &c. , Hamilton Fish. R. G. Watson, Esq., &c., &c., &c. [Enclosure.] The Trea>ove named stream, and is the i)oint that all goods destined for the upper Stickine River are transshipped, and wliere the United States Government (to facilitate trade and accomodate persons of all nations, who might wish to navigate or do l)usiness on said river, eighty miles of which is in the Territory of Alaska,) have established a Custom House under the charge of a Deputy Collector, and have at all proper times cleared vessels and goods belonging to citizens of Canada and others. - On the other hand, the Dominion or Canadian Government has ]ilaced an Inspec- tor of Customs at the boundary line on said river, and actually refuse to i^ass any THE NAVIGATION OF THK STIKINE RIVKH. 65 ^(ioiIk unless they are first cU'art'il at the INirt of Victoria (a dit^tance of 700 iiiileH from tills point), and have seized and now keep in tlieir jtossession valnal)Ie and per- isliahle piods l)i'lonirin.<.' to merchants of this ])laee. tlie most valuable of wliicii were purchased prior to May 1st, 1S74, and before any order on tlie .subject of tiie Cus- toms were promuitiateii at the Port of Victoria. Tliese LM-ii'vauces liave been borne by us heretofore with f^reat patience, as we have l)een told from time to time that tliey would soon l)e remedied as soon as orders could come from the Canadian Ciovernment at Ottawa, Ac. The time has now arrived when we can no lon>rer keep<|uiet; ju.stice to our country and to our.-elves compel us to speak and respectfully ask of you, whom we conceive to be the proper person, to lay the matter bt'fore our (Jovernment. Kes])i'ctfully, William Kisr, 1,[-:.\k, Miffhitnt. Bex. Coles, Mirduuit. B. Bernstein, Merclie to yoti herewith copy of tlii.s report. I have the honour to be, with the highest consideration. Sir. your obedient servant. K. G. Watson. The Honorable John L. C'adwaeadek. etc.. etc.. etc. [Enclosure.] Cuy/// ((/■ (f Hi pod uf r ent, ]V(isli!rujt(»i. ]). 6'., Stpt<:nih( r lo, 187 o. Hon. IIamii.ton Fish, Sccrdarn <>f Sfntr. Sir: I htive the honor to transmit herewith, for your information, a copy of eacii of two letters, dated the !^lst ultimo, received at this Department from the Collector of Customs at Sitlia. Alaska, in which that officer reports the surveying- l)y British authorities, of a site for a town })elieved to be located on territory belongino- to this country. I have the honor to be, Sir, your obedient servant, H. H. Bristow, Secretary. [Enclosure. Custom Hocse, Sitka, Alaska, Collector's Office, August 21, 1875. Hon. B. H. Bristow, Secretar}! of till' Treamry, WasJting'on, J>. C. Sir: It becomes my duty to inform you that citizens of Biitish Columbia have sur- veyed and laiil a town fiVe or six utiles down Ijelow Boundai-y post, at the place known as "Big Bend" — where the English Custom House is, on the Stickine River. They have applied to the board of Land and Works of British Columl)ia for a Charter and assignment of the land. The general belief is th:d the town is estal)- lished on American territory. The unexjiected and sudden development of the unexcelleig Bend on the River was in American territory. Met a Cho- quette, trader, known as /.'»r/,-, of Ihirkx Bar, — stated that he was with Engineer Leach when he estal)lished the line for the Russian and Hudson Bay Comjiany: — that the thirty miles was at or near the Hot Springs, opposite the great Glacier— that the English (-ustom House was in Alaska. Had an interview with Judge Sullivan — the Cold Commissioner for Cassiar, who, providetl I understood him — had been called to view and declare the town site eligi- ble, or not. Tolther your Goverinnent are pre- pared to take this course, Ihave, &c,, Carnarvon. Governor General the Right Honorable The Earl of Dlfferin. K. P.. K. C. B.. &c.. &c., cVcc, 68 THE BOUNDARY ON, AND [KiK'losure.] Sir E. T/ianitoii lu tlw Karl <>f Drrhif. Washington, ^^JOi Septemhrr, 1875. My Lord, — Duriny: an interview witli ]Mr. Fish, on the 2or(l instant, he read me a couple of letters which liajji'oi\'d hy Ills Krcellency the Governor General in. Coundl ok the 2Srd Nortel nhrr^ lS7o. The Committee of Council have had under eon^ideratioii the despatch of the Rioht Hononil)le the Earl of Cariuirvoii to Ilis Excellency the (lovernor ( i(Mieral, transmittino-a cop}' of a despatch from Her Majesty's ]\lini.ster at \\'ashiiioton on the suhject of a settlement lately mad(> by British subjects '"at a point near the Stikine Hiver. alleged l»y Amer- ican othcers to be within I'nited States t(U'ritory and below the British (Justom House, which is also stated to be within the Tnited States boiuulary/' In the disfu.ssion of this subject between Sir Edward Thornton and Mr. Fish, the latter sugo-ested, that as the weight of the evidence seemed at present to be in favor of the point in question being in United States territory, the settlers shoidd be called upon to suspend opera- tions for the present and until the question of territory could l)e decided. THE NAVIGATION OF THE STIKINE RIVP:R. 69 In vi(Mv of the circiim.stances represented l»y Mr. Fish. Her Majesty's (iovernnuMit doeined it desirahlt^ that an orticcr shoidd he sent i)v the GovornnuMit of Canada or of liritish Columbia to asc(M'taiii whether the settU'inent alluded to. and the Hi'itish Custom House, are within British territory. From the terms of the Trt'aty detiniiii»- the International boundary between Alaska and the British ])ossessions, that portion of it extend- ing" from the o«;th deg-ree of north latitude to the point where it inter- sects the 141st degree of west longitude, follows the summits of the mountains whieh extend in a direction parallel to the coast, and, should these summits prove to be more than ten marine leagues from the ocean, the line shall then l)c parallel to the windings of the coast, and shall never exceed a distance of ten (1<>) marine leagues therefrom. The Stikine Kiver intt>rsects the inteiMiatioiial boundai'v. in tiie vicin- ity of the .■)Tth degree of north latitude, with so intrie;ite a l)asis for determining tlie true line, it appears to tlie Conunittee that a satisfac- tory solution of the ciuestion can only be arrived at by accurately defining the point where the boundary intersects the Stikine Kiver, and as sc^ttlements ar(> likely to increase along the banks of that river, it seems to he obviously in the intcnu^sts of both countries that the true line should be defined at this point without further delay. The necessity for marking the l:)oundarv in other localities is not immediately pressing, but it is undoul)tedly in the interests of both nations to encourage the settlement and developement of the country in the vicinity of the Stikine, and the cost «f ascertaining th(> point where the boundary intersects that river cannot be .so serious as to warrant its postpone ment to an indefinite period. The Conunittee would therefore recommend that the Cnited States Governnient Ijc invited to join with the British (government in fixing the l)oundarv at the single i)oint indicated, and that a copy of this minute, if api)roved by Your Excellency, be transmitted to the Right Honorable the Farl of Carnarvon, with the recjuest that should the suggestion herein contained meet with the approbation of Her Majesty's (Tovernment, the sut)ject may be again brought undtM-tht^ notice of the Cnited States Clov(M-iunent, with the hope that it may be faxourably entertained. Certified. W. A. Himsworth. C'/t/'/t\ Pi'n']l rniiiicil. TJk' Scrr<:t/ (if th< Ti\ thu CoUectoi' at Sithi. Treaslrv Department, W<(sIu„(/toh, D. 6'., Juhj U, 187 6. Sir: Your letter of the 15th instant " is received, in which you inform the departnuMit tliat one A. Choijuette. hIhis Buck, has established a trading-post within the limits of the Alaska purchase, and there fur- nishes goods to the Indians of Alaska, and is supposed, also, to sell them liciuors. This j)ost was first set up some two miles above the customs othce of the Canadian authorities; but you state that these authorities have removed their flag and office up the Stikine Kiver to a place known as (ilenora Landing, whieh is sui)posed to be Co miles above the boundary-line, and 'JO miles above their post of last year. " For letter .«ee jkM page 75. 70 THE BOUNDARY ON, AND The position of Cluxiiu'ttc's tnidiiio-post. thereforo. tVills within the rocoiiiiizod limits of the Territory of Aiuskii, and you inquire wliether you shall notify Choquette of his ol)liuation to pay duties on his goods, if he remain where he is. or direct him to leave within a certain time, and make seizure of his goods if the removal is not etiected. You are advised to notify the trader to })ay duties on his goods, or to remove them within a detinite time without tlie Territory. As, according to your report, all his goods are a foreign importation, if the duties on them are not paid, or if the goods are not removed from the Territory within a reasonable time, it wnll be incumltent upon you to make seizure. Very respectfully. Lot M. Morrill, Secretary of the Tveanury. M. P. Berry, Esq.. Collector of Cu-stom.^^ Sitka. Ala-^l'a. The Collector at Sitka to Mr. A. Choquette. Custom House, Sitka, Alaska, Collector's Ojfice^ 19th Septemher., 1S76. Sir: In accordance with instructions received at this office from the Honorable Secretary of the Treasury of the United States, under date of July 14th, ISTO, it becomes my duty to notify you to remove all of the foreign goods, wares and merchandise in your possession and kept for sale and trade l)y you within the jurisdiction of the United States, beyond the limits of Alaska territory, or pay the legal duty on the same. I am further instructed bv DejDartment letter of date above referred to, that should you decline to remove such foreign goods, wares, and merchandise in your possession on receipt of this notice of removal, that 1 tix a time for such removal to Ije consummated, and that after the expiration of the time so tixed and s])ecitied, that 1 proceed to search foi- and make seizure of any and all such goods, wares and merchandise found in your possession, and remaining within the limits of the territory of Alaska, upon which the duties due the United States has not been paid. In consideration of the dithculties to be expected from the early closing of the navigation of the River Stikine, I shall tix the time for your removal to be completely made at two (2) weeks after the opening of the river, for canoe oi" steamboat naviga- tion in the spring of the year, A. D., 18TT; provided you decline to, and have not paid the duties as above referred to. M. P. Berry, Collector of Cudoiiis, District cf Ala -ska. Mr. A. Choquette, Mercland., Stikine River., Alaska Territory. j\L: A. Cho'juitte to JJr. Brodie. 29th September, 1876. Sir: Herewith I enclose you a notice that has been sent to me, the other day, which I wish you to present to the (^olonial Secretary, and THE NAVKJATION OF THE STIKINE RIVKK. 71 ulso iiiforii) him that I am paying" mylicciist^ and duties to the Govern- iiUMit, and that I look to tlieni for pnttectioii. as I am x'erv sm-e that I am at least ten (l(»)mih^s (>ast of the houndai'v, that is east of the hreak of the coast ranoH' whieii, according' to tlie old Treaty, makes me a h)no- way in British Columbia. It is not oidy my judouient nor my opinion, ))ut it is the opinion of every one man that has good judt;-ment ahout such. Mr. JNIcKay, i\Ieml)er of the Hudson l^ay Company, also Judge Sul- livan that got lost last sunuuer on the J\i(ific^ laid out a small town site, but it has remained that vcay ever since. It is ten (10) miles below me wlit>re he had laid out the town site, which i)i'oves that I am in British Colum))ia. Another thing that you will have to inform them of. is. that there never has ])een any survey done by either Government. Another thing you nnist also state to them, is, that in June, 1875, it was pub- licly made known to all, that when the Canadian Custom House was located, that it should be thel)oundary until l)otli Governments should have a general survey. Mr. McKay spoke to Judge Gray, and he said that he would see to it, but in case that he neglects, you must be sure and see that they do something about it, for if you do not, it will ruin my business, and probably be the loss of all my goods too; but. Sir. it is my belief — me and Mr. McKay — that they are trying to scare us otf. and if our Gov- ernment do not help, or have anything to say about it. that they may go ahead and try their hand anyway. Our Government can very easily have it put in the newspapers that anyone doing business on the Stikine River above the new boundary settled l)y the Customs in June, 1S75, that the said party or parties are not to l)e interfered Avith until the general survey is made, that will be satisfactory. It will put a stop to these little ofhcials of Alaska, for it is only them that has anything to say. Hoi)ing that you will do your best for me, and 1 leave it all for you to do, as I cannot go down to see about it now, and as 1 am not very well known with the officers at Victoria my intluence would not go far anyway, 1 am. dear Sir, Yours very truly, A. Choquette, T/ir Colh'ctor (it Sitka to the Seo'etary of the Treaxv.nj. Custom House. Sitka, Alaska, O'Urctnr.s ({-ific, March 29, 1S77. Hon. Lot M, Moukiul, Secretary of tht^ Treasvry, Wa-shtiu/ton, I). C. Sir: I have the honor to report, that, having received official infor- mation from the American Consul, at Victoria. B, C, of date March 24, IsTT to the etlect that the Canadian Govermnent has ordered a survey of the Stikine Kivei-. with tlu^ obj(»ct of d(>tei'mining the l)ound- ary line, with the i'e([uest that I should suspend enforcement of Depart- ment instructions, in r(>gard to the removal of or collection of duties from A. Choquette, until such time as it may be necessary to complete 72 THE HOUNDARY ON, AND said survey In compliance therewith, I have notified the parties interested of the suspension of my orders, until the 1st day of August, 1877, which will eing selected for this important work, as also are the puljlic upon this evidence of a desire on the part of the Dominion iJovernment to guard the interests and facilitate the operations of our miners and traders in that direction. The present step may be presumed to be only the preliminary of a complete adjustment and iiermanent establishment of the boundary line in question. The Stcrctary of the Trcosciy to tJo Collector at S'ltlui. Treasury Detartmext, Office of the Secretary, WmJihirvant. 1). II. BuisTOw. Secrrtary. [Enclosure.] Cl'stom HoisE, Sitka, Alaska. Colleetor's Ojjic^', March .'OOi, 1876. Hon. B. H. Bristow, Secretary of llie Treamr;/, WasJiington, D. C Sir: I have the honor to herewith, transmit foi- the information of the proper authoritiei?. statement of Georire Collins and eontirmatory statement of A. J. Whit- ford, regardintr the finish of Leach's survey of the Stickine river on "the ten marine league inland". It becomes my duty, in connection therewith, to state that the Canadian Custom House Authorities will again move their Flag down the River. According to Collins their station la.st year, — following the meanders of the Kiver, could not have been less than twenty-eight miles below the finishing point of the Leach survey, at the time that the information was furnished me that it was the intention to move their Collection Station further down the River, — the Office said "that the move was only one of convenience," that it had no political significance, or intent, or done to bring "their line to the coast"; all of which would be well enough if we <, Aiiierican Citizen. Have been an occasional resident of the Stickeen river since 1862. About the time of the Alaska purcha,se, say 1S68, Professor Leach, formerly of the English Sap- pers i^ Miners, was employed l)y the Hudson Bay Company to survey thirty (30) miles inland, from the Coast on a salt water line — ^that the company nnght be able to build their trading jiost in British Columbia. I was with the surveyor — before going with him I had built for the H. B. Co. a house at the Big Ice Mountain — after the survey the sai\ at Barry's bar on the river^was buried near by, the Profe.'^sor located the line — the point of ending directly on the grave, stating, that " one half the corpse was in P^nglish, the other half in Russian American territory." Choquette, alias Buck, was. also with the survey, and he knows he justifies facts, when he says, the thirty miles (30), only reached to Warm Springs Creek or there- abouts. GEORCiE Collins. Sitka, Alaska, Mare], .3il, 1S76. A. J. ]\'liilt'r>ril, Aiiieriran eillzen. The fact rehearsed l>y (Jeorge Collins about the miner dying at Barry's bar, on the Stickeen river, 1S(>2, is well known to ine. as I was on the bar at the time and I have often heard it stateil, that Professor Leach linished his survey, directly on the to)) of the grave, and that nearly the whole of Barry's bar was in the Alaska purchase. A. J. WlIITFORD. Sitka, Alaska, .Wirch -id, 1S7G. 74 THE BOUNDARY ON, AND The Secretary of State to the Aethuj Secretary of thi^ Treasury. I)p:i'art:mext of State, Washlinjto,,^ Jntu 2Ji. 1876. The Hononit)le Charles F. Coxant, Acting Secretary ain move their tiag- down the river. An examination of the letter of the Collector, and of the accom- panying- papers, fails to assure me of the precise intent of the British Custom House authorities, in this matter, at least so far as to convey any distinct statement, either that the British Custom House authori- ties are now^ occupying- a position within the Treaty limits, of Alaska, or that the position, which it is alleged that they are about to occupy, is within such limits. 1 will thank you if you can furnish any definite information as to the precise location, with reference to the boundary line, between the United States Territory of Alaska, and the British Possessions in North America, of the occupation, either present or apprehended, of the British Custom House, or of their flag. I have the honor to be, Sir, your obedient servant, Hamiltox Fish. TJte Acting Secretary (f the Treasury to the Secretary (f State. Treasury Department, June ^7, 1876. Hon. Hamilton Fish, Secretary of State. Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 24th inst. relative to the finish of a survey of the Stikeen River, and a report on the alleged intention of the Canadian Custom House authorities to move again their flag down the river. And you ask to be furnished with deHnite information as to the precise location, with reference to the l)oundarv line between the LTnited States Territory of Alaska and the British Possessions in North America, of the occupa- tion, either present or apprehended, of the British Custom House or of their flag. A copy of 3^our letter will be sent to the Collector of Customs at Sitka, with instructions to obtain all information practicable on the subject and make report to the Dt^partment, on receipt of which a copy will ))e transmitted to the Department of State without delay. I have the honor to be, Sir, your obedient servant, C. F. CONAXT, Acting Secretary. THE NAVIGATION OF THE STIKINE RIVER. 75 The Secretary oftlic Trcdsuri/ to the Stcntdry of SStnte. Treasury Department. Jiihj2oth^ 1876. Hon. Hamilton Fish, Secrdary of State. Sir: As connected, with the suljject of a coimnunication from this Department of the i^Tth ulto.. rehitive to a survey of the Stikine River in Alaska and the proper boundarv of the territory, 1 have the honor to transmit herewith, a copy of a letter to the Department by the Collector of Customs at Sitka, under date of the 15th ulto.. invit- ing your attention to that portion of the lett«M- which announces the location of the ottit-e of the Canaditui Customs authorities at Glenora Landino-. I liave the honor to he, Sir, your obedient servant, Lot ]\1. Morrill, Secretary. [Enclosure.] Custom Hocse, Sitka, Alaska, Collector's Office, June loth, 1876. Hon. B. H. Bristow, Secretary of the Treasury, Washington, I). C. Sir: I have the honor to inform you that the Canadian Customs Authorities have removed their Flag and office up the Stickine River — to a place known as (xlenora hmding the same being above the supposed boundary line some sixty miles and al)out ninety miles from and aVjove the post of last year. One A. Choquette, alias Buck, last year, settled and built a trading post, some two miles above the Customs post, — which is — undoubtedly in the Alaska purchase. The person referred to is believed to sell liciuor to Indians and is the source from which the Alaska Indians derive large supplies of foreign goods. He pays his Revenue to the Canadian Authorities. 1st. Shall I notify Choquette that if he remains where he is located that he must pay rluties on his foreign invoices and be subject to the restrictions that other mer- chants in Alaska are subject to? 2nd. Or shall I seize him without preliminaries? 3rd. Or notify him, and give him a fixed time to remove his merchandise further inland, — then seize him at the expiration of the date? Having had conversation with him, I am under the impression, that nothing will be effected unless J am ordered to act decisively; — therefore would request that my orders on the subject be clear and positive. I am. Sir, very respectfullv, vour obt. servt., M. P. Berrv, Collector. The Secretary (f State to tJie Secretary of the Treai, 1876, requirinij: other and further information in reference to the boundary line between the rnited States, Territory of Alaska and the British pos.sessions, I have the honor to submit Wright's map of the Stikene river with such notes and ex[ilanations appended thereto as I am i-ognizant of. There are no white settlers that I know of at present between the Hudson Bay post marked B., and the mouth of the river, exceiitingthe trader Chotpiette. Never- theless, jtost r is considered the line of the territory, because it is not known that the < Government of the I'niteil States proposes to secure the actual ten leagues, either by proclamation, declaration or pos.session. > I am, Sir, very &c., etc., oinl of the continent vhere it .strikes the 56th degree of North Uititade; from this last mentioned point, the line of deniarkation shall folloir tJie .summit of the nionntain.'< .vtuated parallel to the Coaxt as far as the point of intersection of the 14M degree of West longitude, (of the same merid- ian ) * * * and, 2nd, That Avhenever the summit of the mountains which extend in a direction parallel to the Coast from the 56th degree of North latitude to tlie point of intersection of the 141st degree of West longitude shall jn-ove to lie at the distance of more than ten marine leagues from the ocean, the limit between tlie British posses- sions and the line of coast which is to belong to Russia as above mentioned (that is to say, tlie limit to the possessions ceded by this convention) shall be formed by a THE NAVIGATION OF THE STIKINK RIVER. 79 line parallel to the icindhiff of the coast, and wliich xJiall never exceed tlu' dixtmice of ten marine leagues tlierefroni." A? a niattt-r of fact, tht're is no well defined range of mountains extending in direc- tion parallel to the coast. A rugged, l)roken region extends bai-k from salt water a considerable distance; the mountain peaks visible seeming to stand in groups or clusters; a confused mass of hills of varying altitudes "from three thousand to six thousand feet, the highest being, perhaps, in the vicinity of the point marked (Jrand t'anon, in latitude about 57° 20' N." It would appear that the Russian Government had caused a monument to be set uji, on the Stickeen, marking a point ten marine leagues from the coast, and that this monument was, or is located someone lumdred and tliirty live (135) miles from the mouth of the river, in the vicinity of a point called Shakerville. I would suggest that the United iStates send an officer of Engineers to be joined if po.ssible, by some projier ofiicial on the part of Great Britain, early the coming .«eason to proceed from here North in .Tune, to define and i)ermanently mark a line ten marine leagues from salt water. I am, sir; very respectfully, your oljedient servant. H. Cl.vy ^VooD, Assislant Adjutant General. [Printed slip.] BRITISH COLr.MBI.\ — THE ALASK.VX LIXE. Victoria, Marcli 24- Josei)h Hunter, C. E., has been appointed by the Canadian Government to define the boundary line between British Columbia and Alaska. He will leave with his party on Tuesday. P. S. — Gexeral: The rough of the foregoing letter was prepared at its date. In view of the action taken by the Canadian Government, as indicated by the attached slip, the jiresent seems a favorable moment to submit it for your consideration. Very respectfully, H. Clay Wood, Assistant Adjxdant General. Headquarters, Fort Wraxc.el, Alaska. Octi>her M 1876. The Assi.xtaxt Ad.ittaxt Gexeral Depart.mext of the Columbia, Portland, Oregon. Sir: I have the honor to recommend that the attention of Congress, at its apitroaching session, l)e urgently invited to the necessity of instituting proper meas- ures for the early (letermination of the lioundary line between the United States Territory of Alaska and the Province of British Columbia. The recent development of important gold-bearing placer mines in northwestern British Columliia, which are only to l)e reached by way of the Stickeen Kiver, makes a knowledge of the boundary point on that river a question of no small sig- nificance, in the interests of commerce and trade. Gold is found on the Stickeen River at and al)ove Glenora, and on Dease, Thibert, ^IcDames, Trout and Quartz Creeks. Although the mines this far discovered are clearly without Ignited States territory the entire business of the mining region centers at Fort Wrangel. The severity of the winter in the interior brings the whole population to tlie coast with the close of the mining season in November, and sucli as do not remain at Fort Wrangel until spring pass through here en ronlf to (tther jioints. Not less than two thousand persons left Ft. Wrangel for the interior during the present season, all to return here with the ai)i)roach of winter. Four (three British and one Amerii-an) light draught river steamlxiats are employed in transporting freight and ))assengers from Wrangel t<.) Telegraph Creek, while five ocean steamers have, in 1.S7(), engaged in the trade with Fort Wrangel from Victoria and Portland. There is reasonable assurance for the belief that the mining interests of this section will develope a large and |)ermanent industry. The gold yield of Cassiar district for 1S75 exceeded one million dollars and for 187() it is estimated at s;i,.")00,00(). Silver bearing Galena ore has been discovered in 80 THE BOUNDARY ON, AND the ilistrict of a (]uality and in such quantity as, it is beheved, will warrant its l^eing mined and broufjiit to Wranu:el, thence Vj l)e forwarded for reduction in England. Thus it is seen that the Slickeen River has l^ecome a thoroughfare for an extensive goods and passenger commerce, passing, in its course for sixty miles, through terri- tory liable to be claimed by l)oth nations, and over which the authority and i>rotec- tion of law are now definitely extendecl by neither. Jllegitiniate trade naturally spring" up in this doubtful lielt, embarassing lawful enterprise ami capital in each direction, and greatly hindering a j)roj)er execution of the customs and Indian intercourse laws of the United States. Attention is resjiectfuUy invited to the map herewith enclosed, and to the provi- sions of the treaty between the United States and Russia proclaimed June 20, 18t)7. A line ten leagues from the ocean, running i)arallel to the windings of the coast, would cross the Stickeen River nearly at the point indicated. I have persojially examined the country near the river from its mouth to the head of steam navigation, and was im]iressed with the ditticulty that would arise in determining a continuous summit of the Coast mountains. There is no range or chain, but rather for the entire distance of over one hundred miles, and to the right and left as far as the eye can reach, a confused mass of mountain peaks with elevations from three thousand to six thousand feet, the highest being perhaps in vicinity of the point marked "Grand Canon" in latitude about 57° 2lK. I am. Sir, Your ol)edient servant S. P. JOCELYN, Capt. ild I)\f. t'oiiirnandliKj. [First endor.sument.] Headquarters op the Colu-mbia, I'ortlcnid, Oregon, March 29, 1877. Respectfully forwarded to the Assistant Adjutant General, Mil. Div. of the Pacific. I notice l)y the enclosed slip that the British Government has sent an Officer to examine this boundary line, and I call attention to the written report and recom- mendation. Would it not be well for our Government to look into this subject at this time. I invite attention to the accompanving papers, Letters from the Collector of Cus- toms, Sitka, Alaska, L5S4 DC 1875, 461 D. C. 1876, Extract from report of Captain Robert N. Scott, ;!rd Artillery, of Septend)er, 1867, and letter from the Commanding Officer, Fort Wrangel, with enclosures, dated October 1, 1876. 1830 DC 1876. I reconnnend that a competent Officer of the Army, P^ngineer Officer if practicable be detailed to survey the line, and permanently mark it according to existing treaty stipulations. If deemed practicable the British and American Officers might be associated in the work. Attention is particulaily invited to the enclosed tracing (1830 —— 1876). . DC O. O. Howard. Brigadier GeneraJ. Commanding. [Second enildi-si'inent.] Headqrs. IMil. Div. Pacific and Department of Cal'a., San Francisco, April 9, 1877. Respectfully forwarded to the Headquarters of the Army. I do not think the Department Commander overestimates tlie need of speedy action on the jiart of the United States in the matter of determining its boundary line between Alaska and British Xortli America. I ask the special attention of the General of the Army and War Department to this subject. These papers also show good cause for not al)andoiiing Fort Wrangel as a military post. Irwix McDowell Major (u'lieral, V. S. A. Commanding Dir. & Dept. [Third endorsenient.] Headijuarters of the Army, Washington, April 26, 1877. Respectfully submitted to the Hon. Secretary of War. It is usual for Congress to provide for the survey and demarkation of International boundaries bv a Connnission and survevors. THK NAVIGATION OK THE STIKINE RIVER, 81 To survey the lK)un(larv between Alaska and British Columbia will be a diliirult and costly work, of too lar-re an extent to be performed by a single olHcer, out of the ordinary Army appropriation. W. T. SiiER.MAX, General. Offieial Copy. E. D. TowxsExn, Adjutant General. A. G. Offick, M(t)/ 3rd, 1S77. Pdliion of Amerieanclthtns to U. S. Treamry agent. (ti.knora, Stickeex River, July 6, 1S78. Sir: Inclosed please tind copy of instructions latelN^ received b}' ]Mr. R. Hunter, de])iity collector of customs at Glenora, Stikine River, British Columbia, which, as you will see, places certain restrictions on Ignited States steamers ravig-ating- the Stikine River, which, up to the receipt of the enclosed instructions, have been alike free to ])oth nations. The steamer Beaver, an American steamer, although reall}' owned by British subjects, exercised all the rights of free navigation for the past two years. In addition to the instructions of which you have inclosed a copy. jNIr. Hunter, the deputy collector above named, has notitied us that we will not even be allowed to land freig-ht and again ))ring it forward from any point above a certain post about twenty miles from the mouth of the river, which they claim as th(> ))oundaiy line, but which is clearl}'^ 10 or more miles below the real boiuidary line. An American steamer is thus fort)id by a Canadian ofticial, under penalty of seizure as soon as she arrives at the Canadian Custom-House, for landing freight on American soil and again bringing it forward to the Canadian port of entrv. In regard to the last named restrictions, the dej)uty collector, iVIr. Hunter, declined furnishing a cop}' of his instructions, but gave notice verbally in the presence of witnesses. The steamer Nellie, of Port Townsend, came to Wrangle in June last for the purpose of plying, for freight and passengers, between Fort Wrangle and Teleg'raph Creek, her owmers believing, and still believing, that they have the same rights as Canadian vessels. The restrictions placed on her by the Dominion authorities will virtuall}' drive her, as well as every other American vessel, from the Stikine River. In navigating the Stikine River vessels clear from Fort Wrangle for Glenora, where the Dominion custom-house is stationed, and where all duties on foreign goods are collected. Twelve miles abf)ve this point, at Telegraph Creek, is the head of navigation, where nearly all the goods that come up the Stikine River are landed and forwarded thence to theCassier ^Nlines by pack-trains. The river is ditlicult of naviga- tion from (ilenora up to Tch^gia])!! Creek, and again (|uite easy. When navigation was ditlicult, it has heretofore been customary to store freight at Glenora and forward by small lioats, or take it up by steamer when the river was more favoral)le, or to land part of the cargo so as to lighten the vessel, and after proceeding to a higher point and landing the cargo, returning to Glenora and reloading the freight that had l)een i)reviously landed, and again proceeding to the higher point. The Stikine is a river of strong current and somewhat difficult navigation, and unless all the ad\antages pertaini g to the navigation of such waters, siu-h as carrying heavy loads up the lower jiai't of the 82 THE HOUNDARY ON, AND river, and whon the diffieiilt waters are reaehed unloadiiio- part and pro- ceedinu- with the remainder, repeatino- this liohtenino- in some eases for three or more trips, and then bringino- forward what had been so left, the right to navigate is of no value. The whole distance from Fort Wrangle to Glenora is about one hundred and fifty miles. You will please lay our grievance before our government at once, meantime taking such steps as you may deem proper to protect us in the enjoyment of our rights as citizens of the United States. Your obedient servants, -loHx C. Callbkeath, Ben. J. Stretch, Chas. H. Low, blaster, Owners of the steamer Well! e^ of Port Tov:risend^ Wash. Terr. Maj. W. G. Morris, United St at ex Revenue Dept. Port Toimsend, WasJi. Ttr. P. S. — No charge is made of an attempt to evade revenue or port regulations, or that the Dominion Government is wronged in any way. It is simply a move to drive American vessels from the river. J. C. C. [Enclosure.] Mr. Jnlimon to Mr. Hunter. Ottawa, Maij 18, 1878. Sir: In reply to your letter of the 25th in.stant, I beg to inform you that it is con- trary to the coasting regulations for the United States steamers or vessels to unload part of their cargo at the first Canadian custom station on the Stickine River, and after going higher up and landing the remainder to return again and reload what has been unladen and return therewith to the higher jioint. This course is not allowed to Canadian vessels in any similar circumstance in the United States. The steamer might properly take freight for the two points, and be allowed to land the (juantity consigned to each; but no foreign vessel has the right to reload freight once landed in Canadian territory for delivery anywhere else in the Dominion, and if that practice has really been allowed by the custom officials, it must l)e discontinued at once. The genera! question to the right to navigation by both nations is not open to question, but tliat right nmst always be exercised with due regaiil to customs laws and regulations. I have the honor to be, yours, etc., J. Johnson, Comiiiixsloner of i'u.^totii.''. Mr. Callhreath to [I. S. Treasury A(jent. Fort Wrangle, -/"/// lU 1S78. Dear Sir: I will take it as a personal favor if you will bring this n)atter to the notice of our government as .soon as possible, and if possible to get instructions so as to send by the next California. Of course this can only be done by using the telegraph. As soon as the water falls, the restrictions imposed upon us will drive everything but Canadian vcs.sels from this river. Of course this is the object of the Dominion authorities. I think our government might at least demand a suspension of the restrictions until the matter can be discussed, as THE NAVIGATK^N OV THE STIKINE RIVEK. 83 the full and iinrcstrioted ri^ht hus been heretoforo enjoyed^ })y Ameri- can ves.sels coequal with Canadian. By attending to this you will place me under renewed obliiiations. Yours, truly, John C. Callbkeath. Major W. G, Mokris. If. S. TrtKisnry Agent to Amerlcun Petitioners. Office Special Agent of the Treasury, Portland, Oreg., Jxdy 2S, 1878. Sir: 1 am in receipt of your conmiunication, signed also b}- Benj. Stretch and Capt. Chas, H. Low, dated Glenora, July (!. I fully appreciate all the ditticulties under which you labor and the obstacles which are being- placed in your way by Canadian Customs officials in the prosecution of your business. I can see, however, no way to relieve you. The rule laid down by ]Mr. Johnston, the Cana- dian Connnissioner of customs is the law. The treaty of Washington guarantees to the subjects of Hev Britannic Majesty and to the citizens of the United States the free navigation of the Stikine River, "sub- ject to any laws and regulations of either country within its own terri- toiy not incoussistent with such privilege of free navigation." The Dominion Government has its own laws governing its coasting trade, and we cannot directly or indirectly violate them. ]Mr. John- ston is correct when he says the privilege you seek would not be accorded Canadian vessels b}' the United States. Our Customs regulations relating to the coasting trade are very rigid, and under no circumstances would a foreign bottom be permitted to engage in the trade you desire. The only wa\' out of the difficulty is for you to transfer the title of your boat to a British subject. This, however, should be done with caution, for should the Stikine trade die out, 3'ou would not be able to again procure Aiuerican papers for your boat without special act of Congress. The verbal instructions of Mr. Hunter in regard to the point on the river where freight must l)e laiuled involve quite a ditlerent propo- sition. The boundary line l)etween Alaska and British Columbia is the same as laid down in the convention of 1825 between Russian America and British North America. It is vague and undetermined, and will always remain in dispute until the respective governments settle the question by joint commission and survey. 1 have devoted no little time and attention to this matter, and shall devote a large portion of my forthcoming report upon Alaska to its discussion, and endeavor to impress upon Congress the nei'essity of immediat*^ action. I presinne the point settled upon l)y Mr. Hunter is tiiat locatinl by ]Mr. Hunter, the railway engineer, in his recent survey. The report of the latter has not yet reached me, but I learn casually he has run the line nuich farther down the river than has heretofore been sup- posed to be the boundary line. 84 THE BOUNDARY ON, AND When the Dominion l*:ii'liaiuent was prorogued on the lOth of lSh\\ last, Lord Dutferin used the following lanouage: I am happy to be a1)le to ptate that, jieiidiufr the final settlement of the queptiou of boundary, a conventional line has been adopted l)y my "rove'-nment and the Gov- ernment of the United States between Alaska and British Columbia on the .Stikine River. Whether this is in accordance w^ith the Hunter survey I am unable to inform you, but will write to Washington for information, and when reply is received will duly notify you. As 3'ou have s])ecially asked me to lay your grievances before our government, I shall this day send your <-orrespondence and a cop\' of my reply direct to the Secretary of the Treasury. 1 have given you my view of the case, and in the meantime would advise you to let matters remain in .^fati/ tjxo, until the department can be heard from. Your suggestion about using the telegraph is impracticable; the department would not act unless the whole case was properly presented, and this can only be done 1)V transmitting all the papers. I am, respectfully, your obedient servant, Wm. Gouverneur Morris, Spt'cial Arjfiit. John C. Callbreath, Esq., Wran(/el^ Alasl'a. Governor of the Colonies A. E. Etliol'int to Coiitmandtf of Sttai/wt' Nieolai /, Yohmteer Pilot Lindenherg . [Translation.] July 23, 1840. No. 75. 1 recommend you to sail from here on the steamer entrusted to you through Peril Strait to Icy Strait for trading purposes with the Kolosh, where you will cast anchor in a safe and con\enient place or at the point indicated to you by the Kolosh Ya-Khu-gan of the Icy Strait going back to his home with you and who volunteered to pilot you and to show you the place where u]:)on receiving information as to the arrival of the steamer all the lev Strait Kolosh will assemble for the purpose of trading with us. As far as I could imderstand from the words of that Kolosh the most convenient place is Port Frederic or Saviour Bay; at all events I wish \'ou to keep in view to trade with the Kolosh on the southern coast of Icj' Strait and not on the northern, which at present according to the agreement. l)elongs to the English and not to us. I ha\"e been informed that the Kolosh there have over (iO skins of sea otter which they want to sell to us and I instruct you tluM-efore to em})loy 7-S days for trading with them during which time I suppose it will l)e [)ossible to l)uy all their furs; should you not succeed in this I authorize 3X)u to sacrilic(> -J-H more days to this mat- ter in order to endeavor to purchase from them not only sea otter, but other remarkable furs that they may have. Upon having finished trading in the Icy Strait the steamer must sail along around the northern point of Admiralty Island (or Khuznoo Island) to the English settlement near the mouth of the river Taku (this settlement according to ^Ir. Duncan, C'ii[)tain of the Hudson's THE NAVIGATION OF THP: STIKINE RrVKR. 85 Bay Coiiiptuiy'.s vessel Vaiieouver. is situated in latitude .^s 0'); l)ut as this route between the above mentioned Admiralty Island and the continent is very nai'row and ))ut little known, I reconnneiid you to find a convenient anchorini»- place in Barlowe Cove, which is at the extreme northern point of Hoolznoo Island and there sound the nar- rows of the channel as far as Stephen Strait, and then only shall you sail with your steamer to that strait. At Taku you will deliver to Mr. Douii'las. Chief of the En<>lish settlement the herewith enclosed letter from me to him, the ma]) of our survey of the Stikine Kiver mouth, and order to have delivered to him oU pairs of boots sent him from here on the steamer (which accoi'diiio- to accounts we are to pay them for lilankets brought on the Brig Chichagoii) as well as the 54 boards left here from Vancouver for delivery and which are loaded on board the steamer. Deliver also to Mr. Douglas the furs sent on with you from the Novo Archangelsk office, bought by us from the Chilkat Kolosh who were recently here, in exchange of which take from the English as many skins of river beavers or otters and in general all the furs they have had time to trade fi'om the Kolosh inhaljiting the islands situated within our possessions during their stay at Stikine and Taku. For greater convenience and clearness in the accounts, I found it necessary to propose to Mr. Douglas to proceed with the trade between the English and us by the piece, i. e. fur for fur of equal quality, the remaining quantity to be put down on the accounts between us, which I communicate to you for your guidance as well as that, according to an agreement luade by Mr. Douglas and myself, all skins of sea otters witliout exception, bought l)y the P^nglish from the Kolosh of these regions, will be didivered to us for the price they were purchased. Rt'port of Expedition to Camar District. [From •■Journals A; Sessional Tapt-rs. British Colinnbia, 1,S73-1".] TotJie Ilonorahle the Chief Coniinissioner (f Lanch (Did V^'orls^ British Cohiiuhia. Sir: From Fort ^\'rangle to the mouth of the Stickeen river the distance is about live miles; from the mouth of the river to the Big- Bend, distance al)out eighteen miles: and the average course east. From the Big Bend to the Great (ilacier seven miles— average course north by east. From the (ireat (ilacier to the Hudson's Bay Company's post, distance about thirty-eight miles; average course north by east; portion of this part of the river is a great deal cut l)y sloughs, snaggy and shallow in the fall of the year. From the Hudson's Bay Com- pany's post to Salmon Creek, six miles; average course west; also a portion of this part of the river is cut by sloughs, snaggy and shallow. From Salmon Creek to the Little Cafion, about sevent(^en miles; aver- age course north. From the Little Cafion to Klutchman's Canon to Clearwater Biver. about fourteen miles; average course north-east by north. From Clearwater River to Collins' Bar. eight miles; average course north bv east. From Collins' Bar to Shakesvillc, al)out seven 8H BOUNDARY ON, AND NAVIGATION OF STIKINE RIVER. niilos; tlic averao-o course north-east by north. From Shakesville to Miller's Bar, about nine miles; average course north-east by north. Three and a half miles above Shakesville there is one riffle, not navi- gable for steamboats at low water; with hig-h Avater it is good; and with middling stage can go through the slough, leaving the riffle to your right. From Miller's Bar to Tidegraph Creek, foot of the Great Cailon, distance nine miles; average course north east. The ice leaves the river from the 24th April to the 5th or y his excellency the Manjuis of Lansdowne to state that he has connuunicated to Her ^Majesty's Goverimient the agreement of 91 92 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE OF 1886. the Governinont of Cuiiiidii in pi-iiiciple to a preliminary survey of the Alaska bomulary bv a eoniniissioii. 1 have the honor to be with the highest consideration, sir. your obe- dient servant, H. O. Helyak. Si/' L'loittJ Wc>th of January, which inclosed the purport of a dispatch from Mr. Bayard, were conununicated to the foreign office on the 31st ultimo. Sir L. West has, in consequence, been instructed to inform the Gov- ernment of the United States that Her Majest3'"S Government are pre- pared to take part in a preliininarn investigation of the boundary question. This would not connnit the two Governments to a joint connnission such as that suggested in your note of the 19th of January. Meanwhile, we do not propose to move further in the matter until we know what action is taken by the United States Government in regard to applj'ing to Congress for an appropriation. Believe me, sincerely, ROSEBERY. DII'LOMATIC COKRESFONDENCE OF ]88<). 93 J/"/'. Bded right to navitjate the navile rivei- and which is now the most imi)ortaiit inland route. Dr. Dawson seemed to feel that any plan not invohing the i)ossession of teri-itory through to the sea by Great Britain would be unacceptable; while I "The views of General Cameron are to be found in the accompanying copy of a letter to Sir Charles Tapper (printed above as Document Xo. 2), most courteously furnished me liy Dr. Dawson, in order that these views should lie dearly put on record. D ALL- DAWSON DISCUSSION. 97 felt (Miuiilly contidciit tluit such ii cession is undesinihle for tiic I'nited States and would not be likely to be considered seriously by them. We both ajireed that the sooner the matter is settled and decided the l)etter for both coiuitries. The development and population of the region is prole. 1 am. sir. \'erv respectfully, your olx'dient servant. Wm. II. Dall. J//' Dall to Mr. Bayard. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, Dcctinhi-r 19, 1S88. Dear Sir: I have the honor to submit herewith, as previoush' sug- gested, two documents relating- to the Alaska boundary question. The tirst is a memorandum, in which I have endeavored to trace without partisanship the historical i)rocess l)y which the Anglo- Russian treaty of 1S2.") came into being, and to explain the circumstances which may be su})])osed to have suggested the language used in the delimitory clauses, as well as the meaning that language was intended to convey. As the subject is full of ditticulties for any one who has not had the opportunity for special investigation into the circumstances, I lia\e felt that perhaps such a discussion might be of use to all parties concerned. With this document are sul)mitted the following maps, moi'c or less necessary for a cleai" uiulerstanding of the discussion: (1) Two tracings l)y the Coast Surve3\ showing' the features of the reg'ion on the north shore of Portland Inlet near its mouth. {•!) British Admiralty Chart. Xo. 2431. showing the latest British survey of Portland Iidet. If these papers an> to be printed it is very desirable that in the same collection should appear an othcially revised copy of the American- Russian treat}' or con\'ention concluded in 3824. A similar copy of the Anglo-Russian treaty of 1825; A similar copy, with both the English and French versions, of the Amei'ican-Russian treaty of 18ti7. by Avhich Alaska was i-eded to the I'nited States: A reproduction, from the atlas of the French edition of \'ancouvcr of 17i»!>. of so nuich of chart :-5 as covers the region north of {\\v tifty- fourth })arallel and that j)art of chart 7 which lies between the paral- lels of 'A and .37 degrees north latitude. If there are an}' additional geographical data forthcoming from the Coast Survey, during the last year or two, it would be desiratde to have them represented on a chart by themselves. The second document sul)mitted is a criticism in the light of the pre- vious memorandum of the singular hyi)othesis regarding the l)oun(larv line which ha\'e l)een emitted by ( iimeral Cameron of Canada, and which are foiinulated by Dr. Dawson in the accompanying lettei' to Sii- Charles Tupi)er. of which a copy was courteously furnished by him at the time of our informal conference, already reported on. 98 DALL-DAWSON DISCUSSION. This i,s lu'compaiiicd by a copy of un oliiciul Canadian \uii\) on wliich General Cameron's hj'pothetical boundary line is depicted, which it would be Avell to reproduce as far as it relates to the Alaskan region. I liave the honor to be, very respectfully, yours, Wm. H. Dall. Memorandum on the AIafle delimitation in harmony with the physical features of the coast, an ai)i)r()ximation to it was adojited l»y which advantage was taken of a natural ()])ening in the arciiipehigo which fringes this coast. Tiiis opening, known as Dixon's Entrance, sepaiates the Queen Char- lotte Islands from the group noAV known as the Alexander Archipelago, by a broad strait almost free from impediments, the eastern end of which is prolonged into tiie most extensiye ijdet which penetrates the Ameri- can mainland in any part of the disputed region. If a person entirelj^ DALL-DAWSOX DISCUSSION. 99 ioii()r:iMt of tlic discussion had hocii sIioavm \ ancouver's cliart of this ve- g'um and dirot-ted to select a line which should separate it into two por- tions in the niaiHier most in harmony with tlu^ physical characters of the land and water, he would unipuvstionahly ha\'e drawn a line which, do- partino- from the central channel of Portland Inlet, at its mouth, should be extended westward throu^'h Dixon's Entrance to the Pacific. If at the same time it was intended to g'ive to Russia only as much territory as would l)ring' her to the natural boundary, and no more, this line would be identical (on Vancouver's chart) with the parallel of Si de- grees and 4(» minutes Jiorth latitude, which grazes the southern head- lands of Prince of AVales Island and enters Portland Inlet practically in mid-channel. In this connection it nmst be borne in mind that Vancouver's charts were at that time, and remained practically uj) to 188»l. the only charts worthy of consideration, all others ])eing based upon them with but trifling- changes, and these not always for the better. It is certain as anything can be of which we have not documentary evidence that the maps used by the agents of the contracting parties were those of the French translation of the ofKcial edition of Vancouver's report and atlas. This translation was issued in the same form as the original, at Paris, in 179!*. There are others, but of later date and more or less al)i'idged or modified in the translation. French Ijeing the diplomatic language, the French rather than the original edition would have been used. 3. It is also necessary to remember that at that period, and for many 3'ears later, the region in question was regarded by all the civilized world as a horrid wilderness, peopled by l)lood thirsty savages, in itself value- less, and of importance only through its relation to the ainour jyi'oprc of the nations concerned and the daring voyages of a few adventurous fur traders. Considered as territory, a few miles more or less, in one direc- tion or the other, would have been regarded as of al)s()lutely no impor- tance by either nation. Such a view persisted long afterward in rela- tion to the far more attractive Oregon Territory, and is still widely prevalent in regard to southeastern Alaska. 4. The convention of 182-1: acknowledged no rights of sovereignty. The Russians agreed not to attempt settlements south of the natural boun:lai'v above descril)ed (lat. 54- 40' N.), and the Americans agreed to make none north of that line. That the trading posts of either should not l)e visited by the trading vessels of the other except with the con- sent of the officer in couunand of the post, but that thc^ trade away from the ti-a«ling posts should be free to all (the sale of arms, amuumition, and li(|uor being prohibited) for ten years, after which the Russians might exclude the Americans from the waters north of the parallel mentioned. The convention was practically a moihis virimd/\ with delimitation of the areas in which sovereignty might accrue or even- tually be admitted, but without any definite admission of such sover- eignty iti set terms. 5. The Anglo-Russian treaty of the following year started fi'om this basis and took a step in advance. In it the possessions of Russia were admitted to extend southward to the j)arall(d of 54 4(»', and her sov- ereignty over them was (>rtectively recognized. In territorial matters this was the oidy positive feature of the treaty. The difl'erenct's be- tween (rreat Britain and the Fnited States in regard to the territory south of 54 40' were not referred to, and the rights of (xreat Britain 100 DALL-DAWS^ON Dlf^CUSSION. on that part of tlie coast were ivco^-iiized only inferontially, it at all; that is to say, while it was admitted that she had rights (a fact which indeed was g-eneralh' conceded), there was no attempt to state or define the territorial limits of those rights, except that they did not extend north of 54^ 40'. Thus Russia gained distinct recognition, hut Great Britain onl\' a ///odi/s vivcrtdi. 6. The convention^ ahove referi'ed to wei'e negotiated wiiile George Canning was in charge of the British de])artmentof foreign affairs. We have th(> usual olHcial correspondence between the Russian and Amer- ican diplomats, and the explanatory dispatches of the latter, printed in the papers already alluded to, and in British and Foreign State papers (Vol. XIII, pp. 498-520), as well as the volumes of archives which have appeared under the auspices of the United States State Depart- ment. The unavoidable conclusion from a reading of these documents is, that the parties were, (1) chiefly concerned about a matter of princi- ple or national pride rather than the ac(iuisition of a little more or less of a territory regarded by all as practically worthless except for its fur trade: and (2) that in the delimitation of territory it was from the first and to the last a question of a parallel of latitude rather than of such a group of islands and such an area of the continent. Russia kne\v better than any one else the value of the fur trade on that coast, in the preservation of which the imperial family and many of the court were directly interested through the ownei'sliip of stock in the Russian American Company. She desired to exclude all foreigners from approaching the coast and attempted to ))ring this a))Out by the ukase of 1S21. The pretensions to control of the North Pacific assumed in this ukase were inadmissiV)le in international law and were the subject of inmiediate pi'otest by the maritime powers. Great Britain and the United States. As the citi- zens of the United States were the first to explore and to establish trade in many parts of the region, and a naval officer of Great Britain was the first to adequately chart the greater part of it, as both had traded with little molestation on the coast for more than thirty years, it was intolerable that such a question should be treated ])v ukase and settled by the edict of but one of the parties concerned. 7. In the end Russia was ol)liged to recede wholly from the false position into which she had advanced, and the fur trade was for ten years thrown open in the Alexander Archipelago to all parties, and during that period practically destroyed, so far as sea-otters were con- cernecl. The only compensation which Russia received for this morti- fication was a recognition of her sovereign rights over the coast southward to 54^ 40'. This was really a great gain and probably worth more to her in the end than that ])art of the fur tnule which she lost. But in the state })apers which ha\e l>een pul)lished there is little or nothing ex[ilanatory of the minor details relating to the territorial delimitation, as finally agreed upon. It is certain that the form used was essentially the work of the Russian negotiators and expressed as closely as they thought necessary the boundaries necessary to secure to Russia the control of the trade and fisheries on the islands and shores of southeastern Alaska. The ^' line of 54- 40'" was then, as for many years, the central idea, and later l)ecame a campaign slogan in the United States when the northwest boundary was in question. The Russians wanted every inch of the coast to avoid the planting of DALL-I)AWS(>>J DISCUSSION. 101 (.'oinpctitiNc tnuliiii:' posts in their midst. Hut tlicv were obliii-cd to yield to the British dciiiaud for free uas ioutioii of tiie ri\ers l>y which the traders of the Britisii intei'ior coimtrv could hriug their furs to the sea and carry their ooods to the interior. This privilege, how- ever, was never used. The settlement of a number of minor disputes later, by leasing" to the Hudson's Bay Compan}' the trading privileges of the Alexander Archipelago, put an end to a good many matters of controversy; and the practical extinction in this region, somewhat later, of the sea-otter, the object of aU this c()ntro\('isy, left no par- ticular occasion for further discussion. JS. There is. fortunately, one source of light on the St. Peterslnirg negotiations which helps us matei'ially to understand the motives and interests at work. This is the "" Political life of the Right Honorable George ('anning. from his acceptance of the seals of the Foreign Department in September, 1S2'2, to the period of his death in 18^7. By his private secretary, Augustus Granville Stapleton" (second edition. 3 vols. 8vo. London, Longmans & Co.. 1881). Both the writer and the subject of the memoir were in and of tlie things of which it ti'eats, and, apart from an official goxernmental record, no testimony could be more reliable and authentic. The part I'elating to these negotiations will be found in \o\. iii. pp. 11-1-120. The quotations which follow are r. After stating that the teri-itorial claims of the United States, and a supposed "' secret partiality for the Russian side of the question,'' rendered it undesirable for Great Britain to join with the United States in negotiations about this subject, and that Sir Charles Bagot, am- bassador to Russia, was instructed by Mr. Canning, then foreign secre- tary, to treat alone with the Imperial Government, the negotiations are thus described: The principal object of the negotiatimi was to obtain a recorded dit^avowal from Ku.ssia of the maritime pretensions advanced in the Uivaze [of Septeml)er, 1821]. And then (l)ut tliis was a secondary consideration) to settle some line of demarcation between the respective territories of the two countries, the settlement of which would furnish the Russian Government with a fitting opportunity for making the disavowal in (piestion. On the first point the Russian Ministers professed to entertain no difliculty; all therefore that it was necessary to do was to decide upon the mode of dividing the territory. For tiiis end it was agreed as the basis upon which the negotiations should be conducted, that the claims of strict right should be provisi(mally waived by both Parties, and that the adjustment should be made upon the sole principle of their mutual t-onvenience. That of Great Britain, on the one hand, required the posts on the Continent belonging to the Hudson's Bay Company, the embouchures of such rivers as afforded an outlet for the British trade into the Pacifick, and the two banks of the ^lackenzie River; on the other that of Russia induced Her to wish to secure to Herself Her Fisheries upon the islands and shores of the North West Coast and the posts which she might have alreadv established on them. ( O^^ifs convention of A])ril 5-17, IS-J-i:. (See Treaties and Conven- tions l)etween the Tnited States and other powers, pp. 73;^>-7o4: or British and Foreion State Pai)ers, Vol. xii. pp. 595-599.) This convention essentially limited settlements by the citizens of either nation respectively to the north or to the south of the natural boundary line of 54 deju-rees 40 minutes north hititude, which we have alr(>ady described, and left the coast, apart from tradino- posts already established, open to navigation and trade with the natives for the period of ten years after the signing of the convention. 11. Mr. Stapleton then continues: The boundaries desired ))y Husnia ))eyond what Sir Charles had been authorized to agree to, did not in any way materially affect the interests of this Country [(ireat Britain]. He was, therefore, instructed to consent, with some trifling niO(bficationsto the line of demarcation for which Russia contended. But in return for this concession on the part of Great Britain, certain points as to the navigation of Behring's Straits, and as to jirivileges of trading were to be stipulated for which had not been contem- l)lated in former discussions, but nevertheless were not considered to be of a nature at all unfavorable to Russian interests. Upon these points, however, the nego- tiation was broken off. AN'hether tlie comj)laints of the Russian Com])any against the convention with America may this Convention (ireat Bi'itain secured for Ih-rself as far as Kussia was concerned all that was important for Her (commercial interests. (OjjKSciL, pp. 120-125.) The explanatory words in .brackets have been added by the writer to secure eh'arness. 12. It t'ornis an interestino- conlirniation of the little weii;ht Itiid In- Great Britain on the matter of Icrritorial limitation in its nunor details to find, in the Life of the Kioht Hon. Stratford Canning by Col. Lane- Poole (London; Ijononmns, Creen & Co., 188.S, 2 vols., 8vo.), a work which, besides embalming greater things, fairly teems with the trifles of petty di})lomacy, only the following paragraph in regard to the nego- tiations alluded to: The ol)jeot of this instrument [the treaty of 1825] was a good deal more than a mere (juestion of boundary, thoufjjh the latter was made to cover and mask the larger desid construction of the Avording of the treaty, made in 1S41 a voyag(^ aroiuid the world, it is believed with diplomatic as well as other purposes in view. He visited southeastern Alaska, of which the fur trade was then under lease to the Hudson's Bay Company, and the coast of British Columbia, etc. He pul)lished in 1847 an account of his travels in two volumes. In the second volume (p. 209) we find the following observations: Russia, as the reader is of course aware, i>ossesses on the mainland between lati- tude 54° 40'' and latitude 00 degrees only a strip, never exceeding 'M miles in depth; and this strip, in the absence of such an arrangement as has just been mentioned [the aforesaid lease], renders the interior comparatively useless to England. 104 DALL-DAWSON DISCUSSION. 15. It does not, in the writer's opinion, require further arg-unient to enforee the conelusion that whatever construction Ije phiced on the wordino- of the treaty to conform to the historic evidence and prac- tical international usage of the U\o parties most interested, that construction nuist assume: (1) That the parallel of Al- 40' noi'th latitude was the dominating- factor. (2) That the coast and islands north of that parallel and excepting- the right of river navigation were wholly and entirely conceded to the sovereign tv of Russia. (3) That the geographical l)asis upon which iiotii parties rested their delimitating description was based on the charts of Vancouver, of which the edition used was prol)al)ly the French translation of 171>!>. 16. We may now proceed, using the otlicially-revised copy of the treaty, to discuss the wording in those points in which it concerns the boundary. According to Vancouver's chart, as already herein stated, the south- ern headlands of the body of land called V)y him Prince of Wales Island were supposed to graze the parallel of 5-4^ 40'. Their position has not yet been officially determined within the limit of accuracy now possible to geodetic surveyors with the best instruments. As Van- couver's latitudes depended on the use of the sextant of those early days, there was an evident possibility that the position of the head- lands might finally prove to )ie a mile or two north or south of the accepted parallel. To avoid a wording by which Hussia (in the event of the headlands being shown to project south of that parallel) should be deprived of sovereignty over the few acres concerned, the proviso was made that the island called Prince of Whales Island should belong- wholly to Kussia. This conclusion seems quite self-evident, and is in harmony with the rest of the treaty. We have seen no other expla- nation worthy of consideration so much as suggested. IT. It having been decided after years of controversy that the paral- lel of 54 and 40' should constitute the essential part of the ])oun(larv line, it pro))ably did not occur to any of the parties concerned that before stating where the boundary line should diverg(> from it, they had omitted to state that the said boundary line should follow the parallel to the point of divergence from the point on that parallel where the}- specified the boundary line should begin. Nevertheless, as we have already shown, there is no other conclusion in harmony with the prog- ress of the negotiations, and it has been tacitly accepted for half a cen- tury by all concerned. We therefore hold that the intent of Article III of the Convention of 1825 is to be taken as if the interpolated words in brackets formed part of it: Commencing from the southernmost point of tlie island called I'rinee of Wales' Island, which point lies in the parallel of 54 degrees 40 minutes north latitude, and between the KJlst and i;3:]rd degrees of west longitude (nn'ridian of Greenwich) the said line [proceeding along the said parallel of 54° 40'] shall ascend to the north along the channel called Portland Channel, (etc.) Is. At this point we come across another difficulty, or, rather, one has been suggested very recentl3\ By a careful study of Vancouver's text it is evident that there is on this point a certain discrepancy betw(>en his charts and his text. In reading over his whole account of the survey of this iidet and its branches (Vancouver, ofiicial English edition. Vol. II, pp. 32J», 830, 331, 334-340. and 371), he seems to have dall-daws(ix DiscrssioN. 105 ViiriiMl a little in his notions, ])ut his tinal treatment of Observatory Inlet extends it to Points \\'ales and Maskelyne. while in anothei- j)lace lie seems to regard it as l)euinnini>- at Point Kamsden (cf. <>p. vlt. II, p. 375). On the other hand, he treats Portland Inlet as continuing to the sea behind ^^'ales and Pearsc Islands. So that, if the treaty is to be tried by Vancouver's text, it will result in giving to Great Britain the above-mentioned islands and some other small ones. But on Vancouver's charts 'the names of Portland Canal and Observ- atory inlet are not extended southward to the main l)ody of the iidet south of Point Kamsden. They are attached to the two bifurcations extending northward of wdiich Portland Canal is the longer and most important. This is especially marked on chart 7, where there is abun- dance of room for extending the names southward if that had been desired by the cartographer. On the other chart, that of the north- west coast in general (No. 8, French edition), which is on a very nuich smaller scale, the names, especially '"Entree de I'Observatoire," do extend some distance south of Point Kamsden; but when compared with the larger and nuich more detailed chart 7, wdiere this is not the case, the inference by a non-critical observer would be merely that there is not room for the name on chart 3 alongside the inlet north- ward from Point Kamsden, and that the extension was luerely acci- dental. At all events, the larger and moi-e detailed chart would be likely to produce the sti'ongest impression on the minds of those exam- ining l)oth, and we may be quite certain, in view of the education at that time in vogue, that none of these gentlemen were geographers or qualified geographical critics. There Avill therefore be little improbability in the assumption that the longer northern part and the broader southern part were I'egarded as one inlet, under the name of Portland Chamiel or Canal, to which Observatory Inlet became tril)utary at Point Kamsden. This on the same i)rinciple, l)v which of a ncnvly-mapped river the largest and most important ramitication is selected to bear the river name from its source to the sea, while others are regarded as tributaries. This is the natural view to take, as nobody would mouse out the minutije of Vancouver''s text when the}' had, as thev might justly infer, the resultant of it in the graphic form of his detailed chart. This view I believe to have been taken by the negotiators, as it certainly has since been taken by the British Admiralty olhce, on its charts (LS.j3).and by everybody else until the pi'esont revival of controversy. 19. It will hardly be denied that, in the construction of the meaning of the ti'eaty, we are to be guided ))v what the negotititors had ])efore them, and the ideas they held, rather than by what was unknown and unconsidered by thcMu. It can not be assumed that these gentliMuen. after the manner of anticpiaries or philologists, made searching investi- gations into Vancouver's nomenclature or microscopic comparisons of his charts one with another. The most reasonal)le. indeed, we may fairly say. in \iiMv of all the <>vidence. the only reasonabh* conclusion is that they took as a l)asis for their discussion, without research or special comparison in details, the two charts (Nos. 3 and 7, French edition) in \'ancouver*s atlas which relatecl to the region concerned; that they assumed their essential cor- rectness for the pur])ose and were well aware that no other charts existed to wdiich a hio-her o"rad(^ of accuracv could b(> assii»*ned. 106 DALL-DAWSON DISCUSSION. I may add that there are to be found in Vaneouver''s text, when care- fully eonipared with hi.s charts, several instances of such discrepancies. No one can he surprised at this wiien aware of the niehmcholy circum- stances under which his life was terminated just as his rejjort was issu- ing- from the press. I may add that, as is the oeneral rule in such cases, subsequent" g'eographers have followed the charts rather than the text in their use of the work. 2U. We conclude, then, that an unpartisan survey of the circum- stances would lead to the acceptance, in this instance, of the usage which has obtained among- geograpliers in general, and those of the British Admiralty in particular, since the negotiation was conclud(Hl, and against which no single objection lias l)een raised until the pi'esent time. Besides the fact that it has been adopted, the line drawn through Portland Inlet has the o])vious advantage of being the natural as well as the conventional wa}' northward of the boundary departing* from the parallel of 54^ 40'; and that this was the reason it was selected by the Kussian negotiators I have not personally a particle of doubt. The passage l)ehind Pearse and Wales Islands is very narrow and obstructed by rocks. It also has several entrances at its southw^estern extreme, which would lead to new dithculties of selection. Pearse and Wales Islands, though not small, are very narrow, high, rocky, bold islands, valueless for any purposes as far as now known. The general features of this vicinity are indicated on the CJ. S. Coast Survey recon- naissance charts reproduced herewith. 21. As we are confronted by a hiatus in the wording- of the treaty, which jumps from Cape ^luzon ("the southernmost point of Prince of Wales Island") to Portland Canal or Channel, so, as we proceed in order, at the head of the inlet we are met with another hiatus in the wording: 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 the 56th degree of north latitude. Now by Vancouver's observations Portland Canal does not reach the fifty-sixth degree of north latitude. By the most recent British survey, even including the estuary of a small stream at the head, the inlet falls short of that latitude about 8 miles, but on Vancouver's chart about five times as much. Vancouver is probal)ly wrong in the latitude, l)ut this is of no help to us. Furthermore: From the last mentioned point the line of demarcation shall follow the sinnmit of the mountains situated parallel to the coast (etc.). Now, if the channel did reach the latitude of of) degrees north, there would necessai'ily be a hiatus between it and the ""sunnnitof the moun- tains"' for which no provision is made. The rational rendering of the clause is not difficult to conceive. The negotiators merely intended that, following the channel as long as it was available, the line should be projected in the same direction until it reached the said parallel, along which it was to extend to the summit of the mountains which are rej^resented on Vancouver's chart 7, as existing in this vicinity in about latitud(^ 55"^ 50' to 55^ 55' north, and on his general cliart in latitude 5(i to 5t)' 15'. The mean latitude for the summit would l)e about latitude 50 degrees. That this is the correct explanation is confirmed b}' Stapleton, who says: The line * * * was * * * to ascend to the north along Portland Chan- nel as far as the point of the continent where it vould itrike the 56th degree of north latitude, etc. D ALL-DA WSON DTSCFSSION. 107 This is obviousl}' the intorpi-etution whicli coiiiiiion sense would sucr- gest ill the absence of sucli historical t-onlii-niation. 22. As the •* summit of the mountains" and the waters of the chatuiel can not be conceived to physically coincide it is obvious that their inter- section was not intended. It was perfectly ajiparent that the channel and the tifty -sixth dej>ree of north latitude were separated on Vancouv- er's chart by some 15 g-eographical miles, consequently an intersection of these two could not have been intended. But the only remaining construction which can be put upon the wording is that the line of demarkation and the tifty-sixth parallel should intersect, which is in accordance with conuuon sense and the historic record, as well as the sul)se(iuent usage of the parties interested, and nuist therefore be adopt(Ml. 28. We now come to the ""crest of the mountnins situated parallel to the coast." What could have suggested this expression t We turn to Vancouver's charts for a reply. There we find the area behind the sea-level on the mainland covered with the conventional signs, which, in the cartography of those days, signitied mountainous or broken country. The area so treated varies in width on ditlerent parts of the coast and is bounded on the interior by a much higher and, for the most part, continuous range of mountains, indicated in the conventional manner. This range is separated from the sea by a distiince which, in some places, does not much exceed 5 miles, while in other places, meas- ured at right angles to the axis of the range, it is over 40 miles. We have already shown that a mean position for the crest, taking- charts 3 and 7 into consideration, is very close to oG degrees north lat- itude, at the intersection of the produced " line of demarkation " north of Portland Channel. In logic as well as trigonometry, one intersection of two projected lines gives probability to the correctness of its location, ])ut a third coinciding with the tirst amounts to proof po-iitive of the correctness of the joint intersection. We may fairly claim, then, to have established in this mauner the following tirst principles: (1) That it was the '" line of demarkation" which was to intersect with the tifty-sixth parallel. (2) That the '•summit of the mountxins" was the crest of the range represented on the chart as coinciding practically with the above inter- section. 2-1:. Furthermore, though there are numerous spurs and short ranges of less importance indicated more or less scattered over the conven- tional mountainous area, the above range is the only one which pre- serves, together with a general parallelism to the coast, a fairly con- tinuous domination over all other mountains represented on the chart l)etween Portland Canal and the meridian of 141 degrees west of Greenwich. It was (assuming its existence, as the negotiators must have done) the obvious and onlj' natural line of demarcation possible under the circumstances. There are, however, a few l)reaks in this natural ramfoart as iudi- cated by Vancouver; the most marked on the general chart is at the head of the Taku Inlet or estuary. For the bridging of these some pro- vision was necessary; so in the following article it was provided that when the crest (crete) of these mountains shall ])rove to be at more than ten marine leagues from the ocean the limit or boundary shall be formed — by a line parallel to the sinuosities of the coast and which ^liall nevor exceed the distance often marine leajsues therefrom. 108 DALL-DAWSON DISCUSSION. 25. Had tho t()i)()sea. It is therefore to tlu' summits of these mountains immediately bordering the coast tliat the words of the convention must be understood to refer. Only in the case of the al)sence of mountains is the 10 marine league limit admissi- ble, and then under certain conditions, for general parallelism with the coast is also essential. It was no doubt in conseiiuence of the distinctly conventional mode of representa- tion of the mountains on Vancouver's charts, and the necessary inference that they did not accurately represent the facts, that the limiting clause was inserted in the convention. 3. I have already shown in my memorandum that (1) there is no rea- son to believe that Vancouver's charts and text were subjected to any critical comparison whatever. If there had been any one competent to critically compare them concerned in the matter, it is highly improbable DALL-DAWSON DISCUSSION. 109 tluit so slipshod :i definition of tiie boundary line would ever have been adopted. (2) There is not in \'ancouver's Atlas any continuous line of moun- tains represented as cver^'where arising- innnediateU' from the coast and which borders upon the sea. The sea-shore forms the edge of an area conventionally indicated as mountainous, which is a ditierent thing-. Moreover, the true line of mountains has, I l)elieve, been positively identified in the memorandum. (3) I have already stated what seem to me to l)c the obvious reasons for the insertion of the limiting clause. -t. General Cameron's views may i)e taken up seriatim. As quoted by Dr. Dawson the\' begin: In the second clause of the fourth article provision is made for the case of the mountains being found at more than 10 marine leagues inland, and it is there laid down that the measurements shall be made not from inlets, but from the ocean. It will be observed here that the insertion of the words "not from inlets, but" gives what is really a very false impi"ession, though doubt- less not so intended. It assumes the whole point of contention, and can not be admitted as it stands. The general continues: The convention stipulates, "Que partout ou la crete des montagnes, qui s'^tendent dans une direction parallele a la cote * * * se trouverait ;i la distance de plus de dix lienes marines de I'ocean * * * la limite * * * sera formce par une ligne parallele a la cute, et qui ne pourra jamais en etre eloignee que de dix lieues marines." The word ocean is wholly inapplicable to inlets. This last sentence, it will be observed, is pure assumption, unsup- ported by reason, history, or fact, but a very convenient way of deciding the question in advance and saving the troul)le of making an argument. The decision naturally follows with military promptitude — consequently the line, whether marked by mountains or only by a survey line, has to be drawn without reference to inlets. Had it not been so clearly provided against by express stipulation in the second clause of the fourth article of the convention — Unfortunatel}' there does not appear to be an}- "clear provision'" or "express stipulation" in the second clause of the fourth article which bears upon the general line of announcement (for w^e can not call it argument) which the general is giving us; but in the next clause we come at last upon something tangible, as follows: and by the accepted principles of international law, it might, in the case of the absence of mountains, be agreed that the ])rean of the article in question reads: "A partir du point le phis meridional de File dite Prince of Wales * * * la dite limine reniontera an nord le loiij: de la passe dite Portlitud C7((U)//(^/ jusqu'au point de la terre ferme ou elle atteint le 56nie degre de latitude nord," etc. Now, to reach the entrance of Portland Channel from the point first defined the line must run about 50 miles east of north, and, inoreover, bj- ascending Portland Channel it can not strike the main-land in latitude 5(5 degrees north, as the channel terminates before reaching this latitude, and was known so to terminate at the time of Vancouver's survey. If, however, the name only of Portland Channel be omitted, and the directions given be precisely followed, the line will ascend Clarence Strait and reach the main- land at the stated latitude and by the stated course. The several directions with respect to the line of boundary may, it is argued, be considered as more authoritative than the single mention of Portland Channel. The inner meaning of this heroic argument i.s that its originator has discovered that between the termination of Portland Canal and latitude 66 degrees north thei'e is a hiatus, and he thereupon goes about to find a wa}" to dispense with that hiatus. He is so much eno-rossed bj^ the fact that he has found a way to reach the parallel of i)Q degrees b^^ water that he has omitted to observe that by this process he has created a new hiatus. It is not conceivable that he regards the "crest of the mountains" as situated in the channel of Burroughs Bay, where he ter- minates his water line. But his new line provides no way for getting to the "crest of the mountains" from the water, so his argument, all other points being waived tempo rarilv, is as " palpal)ly erroneous," and for the same reason, as the construction it was intended to overthrow. Of course the historical argument, as detailed in my "memorandum," renders any further attention to the present hypothesis unnecessary; but it may not ])e undesiral)le to point out that the treaty contemplated that the "line of demarcation" should pass through one channel, pas- sage, or named l)ody of water. The new hypothesis carries it through three, which wei'e named by Vancouver; /. e., Clarence Strait. Behm Canal, and Burroughs Bay. There is no reason why this should ha\e been done, as the line of 56 degrees north latitude can be reached through Clarence Strait with less divergence from a northerly course than l)y the route suggested, and, though the hiatus is bigger there, in principle it does not differ from a smaller one. Besides this, a little more territory would have been added to the hypothetical Canada by the direct northerly line. There are other routes which present advan- tages, and in fact if one has courage to repudiate explicit statements in the treaty there is hardly anything impossil)le to be luade out of it. 10. The general's argument then proceeds to its third point, that is to say, the construction to be placed on the name Portland Channel. Here his argument, provided one admits that the treaty is to be con- strued by the text of Vancouver, is sound. He says: Apart from the above contention of the British Columbian Government, it is at least certain that if the line of boundary was intended to follow Portland Channel, it was the channel so named by Vancouver, the lower part of which channel passes to the north of Wales and Pearse Islands of recent charts. The line has been erro- neously shown on many maps as running to the south of tliese islands, along ])art of Observatory Inlet of Vancouver, in conse to trouble you with a matter a])out which I am being pressed by the Canadian Govt, in case you should ha able to give me an answer to their question at once. 1 remain, 3'onrs ver}^ truly, Julian Pauncefote. THE RECIPROCITY CONFERENCE OF 1^92. 117 The Srcrth of March ultimo, 'I regret that for many reasons I have been unable to make an earlier response. For convenience of reference 1 here quote the substantial part of your note: In a note dated 27 January last, I had the pleasure to inform you confidentially, that the Canadian Government, in deference to your jn-eference for an unotiicial conference on the question of reciprocity, were disposed to meet your wishes in that respect. It was understood that you would be ready after the 4th of March to discuss the sub- ject unofficially with me and one or more agents from Canada. I have now received de.spatches from the Governor General of Canada in which he reipiests me to ascer- tain from you whether the present time is convenient to you for that purpose, in which case the Representatives appointed by the Canadian Government will proceed at once to Washington to confer in the manner proposed on all or any of the sub- jects indicated in the bases of negotiation, of which I had the honor to place a copy in your hands on the 22d. of December last. A copy of the bases of negotiation which you placed in my hands on the 22d. of December last is appended hereto. You told me. if \\\\ memor}' is not in error, that you were instritcted by Lord Salisbur}^ to propose the topics to the United States for discussion and if pos- sible for agreement. I answered you that I felt sure that the Presi- dent would l)e unwilling to appoint a commission to consider the propositions as they were stated and furthermore that I should be unwilling to suljmit them to the President. After some further consideration, in which you repeated that the propositions were merely the bases upon which a discussion might be instituted, 1 replied that in any event I had not a moment to give to the subject until after the adjournment of Congress in March, but that after that date I would be willing, in response to your re(]uest "to have a full but private conference with the British Minister and one or more agents from Canada, and go over every point of difference and consider every sul)ject upon which a mutual interest could be founded. If an agreement is reached, all well; if not, no otticial mention is to be made of the effort. Above all things it is important to avoid pu))lic reference to the matter." While no notes were exchanged between us, I cai'efuliy minuted my modification of the paper you left with me containing Lord Salisburj^'s propositions and did so immediately after you left the Department. You will ol)serve the private character which I wish to impart to the conference is recognized by you a month later in your note of Januaiy 27, when you called the correspondence '•confidential." In view of the fact that you had come to the State Department with the proposals and that the subject was thus for the tirst time mentioned between us, and in view of the further fact that I agreed to '"a pri- vate conference" as explained in my minute. 1 confess that it was a surprise to me when several weeks later, during the Canadian canvass, Sir John McDonald aiul Sir Charles Tupper both stated before public assemblages that an informal discussion of a Reciprocity treaty would 118 CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO take place at Washington after the 4th of March, " by the initiation of the Secreturv of State." I detail these facts because I deem it important, since the matter has been for some weeks open to public "remark, to have it settled that the conference was not "initiated'' by me, but, on the contrary, that the jjrivate arrangement of which I spoke was but a modilication of your proposal and in no sense an orio-inal sug-o-estion from the Goverment of the United States. With this explanation, it only remains for me to say that gentlemen representing the Dominion of Canada and proposing to discuss the commercial relations of the two countries, may be assured of a cour- teous and cordial i-eception in Washington by the Government of the United States. I have the honor, cVcc. James G. Blaine. The Brit'ixh Min hter to the Secretary of State. 4 April 1891, 9.30 P. M. Dear Mr. Blaine, I have just received the enclosed Telegram from Sir Charles Tupper — from which 1 fear that he and his Colleagues must have started before he received my Telegram to him advising him of the contents of your letter to him which arrived here after his departure for Ottawa. The}" are evidently now on their Avay to Wash- ington as the enclosed Telegram is dated from "Rouses Point Depot N. y." I hope this will not cause 3^ou any inconvenience, as I gather from your letter to Sir Charles Tapper that you did not propose to defer the date of our meeting l)e3"ond a few days. Believe me, truly yours, Julian Pauncefote. Hon. J. G. Blaine, &c., &c., &c. The Br'dhlt Minister to the Seevctary of State. British Legation, Washwyton, D. C, April 8, 1891. Dear Mr. Blaixe: I beg to thank you for your note of the 6th in which you propose the 12th of October as the date for opening the adjourned conference on reciprocal trade relations between the United States and Canada. 1 have transmitted a copy of your note to the Governor General and shall have the honor to address you again as soon as I receive His Excellency's reply. 1 I'cmain, dear Mr. Blaine, very sincerel}^ yours, Julian Pauncefote. THE RECIPROCITY CONFERENCE OF 1892. 119 The British Minister to tJie Secretary of State. British Legation, Washington, D. (7., ApvillS, 1891. Dear ]Mk. Bi.aixe, Inimodiately upon receipt of 3^our letter of the 6th instant sugo•e^^tino• the 12th of 0('tol)er next as the date agreeal)le to the United States Government for openino- the Conference at Wash- ington regarding the United States and Canada, I comnuinicated a cop3' of it to the Governor General of Canada, and I now have the honor to enclose a copy of the answer which I have received from His Excellenc.v in reply to my connnunicatioii. I am, 3'ours sincerely, Julian Pauncefote. Hon. James G. Beaine, &.c.. &c., &c, [Enclosure.] Tlie Governor General of Canada to the British Minister. (tovernmext House, Ottaira, Canada, 14th April, 1891. Sik: I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your despatch No. 15 of the 5th instant enclosing a note from Mr. Blaine in which he suggests the 12th of C)cto- ber next as the date agreealile to the United States Government for oi)ening the Con- ference at Washington regarding reciprocal trade relations between the two co\intries. In reply I shall be ol)liged if Your Excellency will be good enough to inform Mr. Blaine that the Rei)resentatives of the Canadian Government will readily hold them- selves at dis])osal for the purpose mentioned in your despatch now under acknowl- edgment and at the date named by the United States Government. I have, etc., Stanley of Preston. Sir Julian P.vuncei-'ote, G. C. M. G., etc., etc., etc. Meworandmn hft at Dcpartinent of State hij the BritisJi Minister. British Legation, \Va.'<}iin(/ton, J). O. Her MaiestY's Go\ ernment have not felt able to pro- Convention. ceed With the proposcfl Convention, unless par* passu with the proposed Canadian negotiations and they con- tinue to hope that it may be found possible to arrive at a satisfactory conclusion upon both subjects. May 21, ISOI. The BritisJi Minister to the Actln 20th ultimo, you informed me that the Secretary of State would not return to the Capital until the end of this month, and you suggested that the visit of the Canadian Kepre- sentativcs to ^Vashington to discuss reciprocal trade arrangements, 120 CORRESPONDPmCE RELATIVE TO which Wiis Hxod for the 1:2th instant should l)e postponod. in order to enable Mr. Bltiine to be present. 1 at once connnunicated with the Governor-General of Canada on the subject, and his reply is to the efl'ect that the Government of Canada will willinoly meet the conven- ience of the Government of the United States as to the date of the meetino-, but that they would prefer that it should 1)6 held before the Christmas holidays, as the Dominion Parliament will probably assem- ble aoain soon after that time. I am, Very truly yours, Julian Pauncefote. Hon. William F. Wharton, &c., &c., &c. The Bv'dhh 2T!ii!stti' to tJtr Secretdry of State. Bkitish Legation, 11^ Januartj 1802. Dear Mr. Blaine: I informed Lord Stanley of your readiness to receive the delegation from Canada and of your desire ""that it may not become a public atiair as it did before.'' Lord v^tanle}" has replied that owing- to bye-elections now going on, the Dominion Ministers will be occupied in the Provinces until al)out the second week of next month. But they could be in Washington on the 10th of February if that date would suit your convenience. His Excellency adds that the Dominion Government, while giving all possible eti'ect to your wish for privacy, cannot prevent the move- ments of Ministers being known, or avoid answering questions which may subsequently be asked in Parliament respecting the general results of the discussion. Will you kindly inform me whether it will be agreeable to 3^ou to receive the delegation on the 10th of Februar}^ i I am, dear Mr. Blaine, yours very truly, Julian Pouncefote. Hon. James G. Blaine, etc., etc., etc. The British J/i/ii.ste/' to the !Secreianj of Stafr. Personal.] British IjEGAtion, January 27, 1802. Dear Mr. Blaine: I should be extremel}- ol^liged if you would favour me with an answer to the inquiry contained in 1113^ private Note of the l-tth Instant, whether it would be agreeable to 3^ou to receive the Delegation from Canada on the 10th of Februarv next, as I am pi'esscd for an answer by Lord Stanley. Will 3^ou l)e kind enough to inform me at the same time whether Monday the 1st proximo will be a convenient date on which to open the Behring Sea Joint Conuuission. Sir G. Baden Powell and Doctor Dawson propose to be here on Saturday next and will be ready to meet the United States Conunissioners on the following Mondav. I am anxious to send a r(q)ly h\ telegraph to Canada on both points toda3\ I am, dear Mr. Blaine, yours very trulv. Julian Pauncefote. Hon. James G. Blaine, &c., &c., &c. THE RECIPROCITY CONFERENCE OF 18!i2. 121 TJie Secretary of State to the Britixh Minister. Dei'ahtmknt of State, Washington, February i, 1892. Sir Julian Pauxcefote, G. C. M. G., K. C. B., &c., y Secretary Blaine as wholly of an informal character, no record of its sessions exists in this Department. I shall thank you, therefore, to give me such a statement as 3'ou may be able to make respecting what took place at the conference, espe- cially on the subject of the Alaskan l)oundarv. I have the honor to be, Sir, your obedient servant John Hay. (Enclosure as above.) 122 CORRESPONDENCE RELATIVE TO J//'. Fofitcr to the Scci'etanj of State. Washington, Novernher 7, 1S99. Hon. John Hay, Seet'etary of State. Sir: I have the lionor to acknowledg-e the receipt of youi- letter of the -tth instant, with which you enclose a copy of a despatch of Lord Salisbury to Mr. Tower, British Charg-e in Washington, of the 14th ultiuio, and you ask me to give you a statement of what occurred regai-ding the (piestion especially of the Alaskan Boundary at the Con- ference held in Washington in Fe])ruaiy 1892. The Conference to which Lord Salisbury's despatch refers met for its first session in the Diplomatic Room of the Department of State on February 10, 1S92, and three additional sessions were held, a tinal adjournment taking- place February loth. The Conference w^as the result of a coi'respondence Avhich had extended over eighteen months. After some preliminary inquiries, the British Minister handed to Sec- retarv Blaine, on December 22, 1890, a memorandum proposing a joint commission to prepare a treat}^ respecting- the subjects named. The first provided for a reciprocity treaty between the United States and Canada. The next five subjects related to the Atlantic fisheries and various trade and maritime matters. The last was as follows: "7. Ar- rangements for delimitation of boundary between Alaska and Canada." Mr. Blaine's answer to the proposition was that it would be useless "to attempt to secure the appointment of a formal commission for reciprocal trade between the United States and the Dominion;"' but that the United States was ready to have a "private conference with the British Minister and one or more agents from Canada" upon any point of ditference between them. On January 27, 1891, Sir Julian Pauncefote addressed Mr. Blaine a "private and confidential" note, stating- that "the Canadian Government in deference to your prefer- ence for an unofiicial conference to discuss the question of reciprocity, are now disposed to agree to your proposal." On April 1, 1891, Mr. Blaine informed the British Minister that the Canadian gentlemen were assured of a cordial reception "to discuss the commercial relations of the two countries." Various other notes passed between the Department of State and the British Minister, in all of which the object of the Conference is referred to as of a com- mercial character, and in no instance is the subject of the Alaskan boundary mentioned. February 1, 1892, Mr. Blaine in a personal note to Sir Julian Pauncefote, wrote: I have to advise you that, in accordance with your request we will receive the gentlemen from Canada who wish to discusts reciprocity between the two coimtries, on the 10th of February; it must be kept con.^^tantly in mind that the meeting is to be altogether an informal one. In view of the conditions under which the conference had been assented to by Secretary Blaine, it was conducted in the most informal manner, and no joint protocols or minutes were signed. At the com- mencement of the Conference Sir .Julian Pauncefote referred to the subjects mentioned in his momorandmn of December 22, 1890. Mr. Blaine, evidently absorl)ed by the reciprocity question, asked that these subjects be restated, and this was done by one of the Canadian Cabinet Ministers. The matter of the Alaskan boundary was men- tioned, along- with the other subjects, but 1 am quite sure it did not THE RECIPEOCITY CONFERENCE OF ]8i)2. 123 evoke any di.scussioii and it was infoiinally passed over a\ itli the other subordinate topics, and the question of commercial reciprocit}' Avas taken up, and it consumed the time of the tirst two sessions to the exclusion of all other subjects. At the opening- of the Conference on the third day the Canadian delegates sul)niitted written proposals on the Alaskan boundary, the protection of the tisheries, wreckino- and towing-, and for the revival of the unratified tisheries treaty of 1888. The proposal as to the Alaskan boundary was for reference of the delimitation to some impartial authority. Objection was made on the part of the United States that the existing dilierence of views w^as not of such a character as to call for more than a joint survey and report, which Avould enal)le the two Governments to agree upon the fixation of the boundary. The discussion was of ver}" brief duration and related mainly to the questions which had arisen as to the point where the line crossed the Stikine River and the inconvenience occasioned by this existing uncertainty. No assertion was hinted at of a British claim to the heads of the inlets or of tiny rights on Lynn Canal. When the Con- ference convened the next day, I submitted a substitute for the British proposal, which was in all respects embodied in the treaty of July 22, 1892, and this substitute was accepted without o])jection. The consideration of the boundary was of the briefest duration, was treated on both sides as of slight importance, and an agreement was reached without difficulty. Although Mr. Blaine made a full report of the Conference to the President and a later one was submitted by me, the merest reference was made to the boundary, Mr. Blaine speak- ing of it as one of the *' other questions * * * informally discussed by the Conference," and the President, in his message comnmnicating the results of the Conference to Congress, did not even allude to it, (See S. Ex. Doc. Ill, 52nd Cong. 1st Sess. Feb. 21, 1892). As a further indication that the more recent claim of Great Britain to a boundary line which would cut across the inlets penetrating the mainland and place the heads of the inlets within British territory was not advanced at that Conference, I refer you to the correspondence on tile in the Department of State between Senator Fairbanks and Lord Hersehell, the chairmen of the respective delegations of the Joint High Commission of 1898. When the British ^Members of that Com- mission on the 30th of August 1898 introduced a map of Southeastern Alaska with the boundary line traced across the inlets as above described, 1 stated that it was the tirst distinct statement of the British claim. The only correction of that assertion was that the claim was advanced in the instructions given to the British Commissioners on the 1st of August 1898. The map referred to as introduced by the British Conuuissioners will be found in the Department of State. Very respectfully. John W. Foster. DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE SUBSEQUENT TO THE ADJOURNMENT OF THE JOINT HIGH COMMISSION. Mr. ViUiers to Mr. Choate. Foreign Office, May 13, 1899. Your Excellency: At the interview which I had the honour to hold with YOU on the 3rd instant, Your Excellency stated, on the assumption that for the present at least the ditlerence of view between our two Governments concerning- the Alaska lioundary was final and could not be adjusted bv direct negotiation, that you were desirous to impress on me that there were ten other matters before the Joint High Commission upon which agreement did not seem to be out of the question, but that the way was absoluteh' blocked by the irrecon- cilable divergence of view, which had shown itself in regard to the boundary dispute. If an arbitration could be arranged it would be an issue very satisfactory to the President, but the views of the Commis- sioners as to the conditions on which an arbitration could be set up were almost as divergent as their views with respect to the matter itself in dispute; and while you would be very glad to see a proposi- tion which might have the efiect of referring this controversy to arbi- tration you looked with more hope to some arrangement by which the Alaska controversy should be separated from the rest and the negotia- tions be allowed to go on if possible to agreement on the other ten matters leaving the boundary (juestion for subsequent discussion. 1 replied that generally of course Her Majest3"'s Government were very anxious that these diti'erences of opinion l^etween the two coun- tries should l)e adjusted, and that the}' would be very glad if any means of accelerating- that result could be devised. I thought it pos- sible that the Canadian Government would look upon the questioBS referred to the Conuiiission as practically indivisible, and would shrink from leaving- the Alaska dillicultv, which was the most impor- tant and urgent diliiculty, unsettled, while an agreement was come to a))out the rest. For it was obvious that if an agreement had appeared probal)le in an}' of these negotiations it might have been to a great extent because of the hope that by concession on these points the great boundary controversy could be brought to a close. I promised to ascertain the views of the Colonial Office and of the Canadian Government, and the substance of your Plxcellency's com- munication Avas accordingly telegraphed to the Governor General of Canada, who has replied that his Ministers can sec no reason why the Alaska boundary ([uestion should not be referred to arbitration at once on the lines of the Treaty for settlement of the dispute with Venezuela, and that they are ready to proceed with the other matters at issue as soon as an agreement for arbitration has been arrived at. Although Her Majesty's Government have been disposed to believe 124 CORRESl'ONDKNCK AFTKR ADJOURNMENT. 125 tlmt the Al:isk;i lioimdiiiT coiil*! hos{ he (Iciilt with in coiiiu'ctioii with ii comprohensive iuljiistiiKMit of oiitstiuuliMo- (|iu\stiTee either to an e(|uital)le adjustnient of the matter or to its reference to arbitration ueiH'rally on the lines proposed by the liritish Commissioners and accepted by both Governments in the case of the (lis[)ute as to the boundary of British Guiana. I have the honor to be, &{-. (For the Manpiess of Salisbury) F. H. ViLLIERS. His Excellencv The Honoural)le Joseph 11. Ghoate, c^c, cNcc. tScc. Lord Sill ls}}tii'i/ to Jf/\ ( 'jKKitr-. Immediate.] F\)kei(;x Oefice. Minj 17, 1S99. Mv d?:ar Ambassador, Sir, Julian Pauncefote duly reported to me the conmmnication which })assed between your Excellency and himself respecting- the reference to arl)itration of the Alaska boundary question. The result of 3'our negotiations w'as a proposal that, besides the rules in the draft treiity drawn up by the British Conmiissioners at Wash- i no-ton, provision should be made that in the event of the Tri})unal of Arl)iti-ation tindino- that the settlementsof Dyeaand Skagway are situ- ated within territory l)eloii.iiing- of riuht to Great Britain, those settle- ments shall come within tlu> operation of Rule C, and be and remain in the occupation, and within the territory and under th(> jurisdiction of the I'nited States. 1 have the honour to inform your Excellency that Her Majesty's Government, after consultation w'ith the Canadian Government, and careful consideration, feel unal)le to accept this arrangement. They would however be prepared to accept, as a fair and reasonable compi'omise. that the addition to the rules should run as follows: — •• If Dyea and Skagway are found as the result of the award of the Arl)itrators to be within the territory of (ireat Britain. ])oth places will be and remain in the occupation and within the territory of the rnited States. If Pyramid Harbour is found to be within the terri- tory of the United States, it will be and remain within the territory, and under the jnrisdiction of Great Britain." Mr. Tower, Her Majesty's Ghai-ge (rAtiaires at Washington, has been instructed, by telegraph, to mak(> an oHicial connnunication in this sense to Mr. Hay. 1 remain, my dear Ambas-^ador. yours \ cry truly. Sa LIS HURT. Mr. Choah' to Lord Snl islmri/. American Embassy. London, Moij LSt/i, ISDO. ]Mv EoRD, I hiive the honour to acknowledge the receipt, on the 15th instant, of your Lordship's letter of the IHth. in regard to a dis- position of the Alaskan boundary (juestion in sonn^ way which sjiould :>66"2e— Ai- X26 CORRESP(»N[)KX. The two })rinci[)al grounds of objection were as to the UK^thod of constituting the i)roposed Arbitral Tribunal, and the provision as to the eti'ect of actual settlement upon the rights t>f the parties, 'ilie American Conuuissioners were of the o])inion that an Ai'bitral Tribunal, consisting of an e(]ual numloer of jurists a])pointed by each side, and whoshoukUlecide i)V a majority vote, somewhat similar to the Arbitral Tribunal provided for in the Gen- eral Arbitration Treaty of .January 11, 181>7, between the two Govern- ments would l)e a most competent Tribunal to dispose of such a ques- tion as is here involved, and would be far more satisfactory than such a oiu> as that constituted by the A'enezuela Treaty; and that the United States should not he called upon to submit to any arbitration, its right to hold the territory u]:)on which under its authoi'ity cities and towns have b(>en built and valual)le interests and in(histi'i(>s estab- lished without protest ()i'ol)jection from eithei" Her Majesty's (tovern- ment or the Canadian authorities. On these two points the views of the British and American Commis- sioners appear to have been irreconcilable, and the hope that by nuitual concessions we may be able to agrin^ upon terms of arbitration nuitually satisfactory will be most gratifying to the President. OF JOINT llKiH (OM.MlssloX. 127 Tlic altenuitive suogostioM in your letter of an "(Mjiiitiible adjust- ment of tlie matter/' meaning I assume, of the boundary itself, has not yet 1)een the suhjeet of instructions to me. hut you may rest assured that it will not t)e overlooked hy the Secretary of State. On hearing from him I shall t;d-;e tlic liherty of asking for -i further inter\ie\v. I ha\'e the honour to he. cVic., JosKiMi II. C'hoate. The Most Honourable The ]\Iarqii^ of Satjsbi'ky. K. (i.. ilCic.. c^c. v.<;c. J//'. ( 'h(>((tr to Lord ^(il islniri/. Amfkican Embassy, London. Mmaj I'j, 16V0. My I) far Lord Salisbury: After my reply of yesterday to your Lordship's note of the loth, received on the l.")th, had been prepared; 1 received 3'our Lordship's letter of the ITth which caused mp much disappointment and regret: because it sets at naught the whole nego- tiation had between Sir Julian Pauncefote and myself with the full approval, as I had supposed, of your Lordship, and puts' an entirely new aspect upon the situation. Let me say in passing that the result of those negotiations was not understood between Sir .Julian and myself to be a proposal on either side, l)ut rather a suggestion or what we could fairly recommend to our respective (Tovernments. and which, if I should find acceptal)le to my Government, would eventuate in a proposal from that of Her Majesty. Your Lordship's letter does not disclose the grounds or reasons upon which the new proposition is based — that if Pyramid Har})or is found to l)e within the territory of the I'nited States, it should be aiul remain within the territory and under the jurisdiction of (ireat Britain. The proposition that l)ye;i and Skagway are found, as the result of the award of the arliitrators. to be within territory belonging of right to (ireat Britain, they should come within the operation of Kule C, and be and remain in the occupation and within the territory and under the jurisdiction of the I'nited States, was based upon the obvious and impregnable ground that those settlements had l)een tiuilt and established under the authority and within the jurisdiction of the United States, and valuable interests created there without a word of protest or objection from either the British or Canadian (Jovei'nment, and to territory to which no adverse claim had bet'u presented l)v either of them to the I'nited States. ])rior at least to th(> signature of the Protocol of May, IMIS. by which the High Joint C'ounnission was created. 1 am not. however, aware that at Pyramid Harbor any town has ))een built or settlement established by either British oi- Canadian subjects, or any interests or industries created, the protection of which would atiord any reason, in justice or eciuity why that place, if found to be within the' territory of the Tnited States, should be set over to (treat Britain. I am thei'eforc^ unable to see any correlation or i'eci])rocity in these two ])ropositions. and at a loss to understand tin* r(>asons for the new proposition contained in your letter — l)ut ha\-e transmitted its exact 128 CORKKSPONDP^NCE AFTKH ADJOURNMENT terms by cable to my (iovonimcnt and shall await its instructions with groat int(M'(>st and somi^ solicitude. With the fullest confidence in your Lordship's desire for an amicable and nmtually-satisfactory adjustment of this ditHcult cjuestion, 1 shall hope, after further instructions, which 1 await, to resume the consid- eration of it with you personally. Yours very truly, frosEi'ii H. C'iioatk. The Most Honourable The Marquis of Salisbury, K. G., Sa-., t<:c., <&v. LiOiuJ Sdl/shiiri/ to Jfi\ Cliodte. FoREioN Office, Lonchnu 'f'l^y 1^^ -, ISOO. Your Excellency, The correspondence which has passed between the United States Governmeut and that of Her Majesty, as well as the negotiations and other diplomatic intercourse which have taken place both here and at Washington, have left on the minds of Her Majesty's Ministers a strong impression that no eft'ective progress will be made in coming to an agreement upon the subjects which divide the two countries without the assistance of arbitration. This appears to be especially the case with respect to the Alaska boundary. The diti'er- ent signitication which the two Governments attach to the language of the Treaty of 18:^5 is not of a character which appears likely to be adjusted l)y the method of explanation or argument on the two sides. Some of the ablest men belonging to both nations have now for several months devoted the utmost erudition and acumen to this discussion, but the attainnuMit of an agreement seems to be no nearer than when the comnumications began. Her Majesty's Govermuent feel that no sat- isfactory agreenuMit l)etween the two countries ean be arrived at until the difference with respect to the Alaska Ijoundarv has been adjusted, and that this adjustment can only be attained by the process of arbitration. Much of course will depend upon the manner in which the subject of controversy is presented to the tritninal selected for arbitration, and upon the conditions by which the arbitrators' decisions are shaped and limited. Upon this mattersome])reliminarv discussion hasalri^ady taken ]ilace l)etween the two Governments: but no formal ex])r(\ssion of opinion on either side in this respect, has as yet been arrived at. In order to ascertain whether any formal ditference exists between them in this respect, and to pave the way if ])ossible for an ultimate agree- ment, I have, on behalf of Her Majesty, to })ropose to Your Excel- lency that the Treaty of Arbitration adopted between this country and Venezuela, with the assent and largely at the instance of the United States, shall be applied to the determination of the Alaska boundaiy which is now undei' discussion. That treaty is now receiving its appli- cation at Paris, and cUiring the thi'ee years which have elapscnl since its conclusion, no Loi'il S(il /shiirij. AMf:KicAN Emiussy, .l'/y"-s/ .9?'//. ]S99. Mv I)p:ar Lord Salisbury, To aid your Lordshi]) in the considera- tion whieli you may aty betweiMi Kussia and (Jreat Britain in 1825 — and the settlements on the inlets. es]n'cially those al)out the head of the Lynn Canal, have been made with the authority and under the jurisdiction of the CnitiHl States, without any protest or claim of territorial ownership on the part of (Jreat Britain — whereas, in the Venezuela case, the British occupation and settlements involved were upon the teiritory clainied by \'en(vuela. and against the constant protest of \'enezuela: thus constituting, as A'enezuela alleges, a series of advancing encroachments upon w hat that country claimed to ])e her territory. In support of the proposition that, from the Treaty of iS'i."). to the cession to the Cniteil States, in is^u. the Hu>siiin (lOViM'nmcnt steadily maintiiincd its claim to a strip of territory, thiity milo in w idth. on 180 CORRESPONDENCK AFTER ADJOURNMENT the uuiiiihiiul of the C'oiitiiuMit. bc^'iniiiii^- ut .■")4 4<»' and t'xtoii(liiis, Ik'itish subjects and vessels were excluded from these iut(n'ior waters; and the British Government acquiesced in this with- out a protest. In the same connection. I called attention to the case of the ••Dryad"" — where the British (xovernment presented and pressed upon the Russian Government a claim of the Hudson's Bay Couipany. for damages sustained l)y the detention of the vessel, destined for some point on the Stikine River, which resulted in the Hudson's Bay Com- pany taking, in 18;3i), a lease from the Russian American Company (these two companies representing their respective GovernnuMits in the control of the country along the north-west coast) of the strip of territory, or L'lxh'i'c of the Treaty for ten years, in consideration of the annual rent and the extinction of the claim. This lease was made with the authority and approval of the two Governments. The Hud- son's Bay Company entered and occupied under it for the term of the lease, and for an extension of another term; and then surrendered possession, without objection or protest from any one. I also called your Lordship's attention to the special Parliamentary emjuiry into this transaction, in 1857, and to the map submitted to the Conuuittee. and to the testimony of the (Tovernor of the Hudson's Bay Company, showing the strip jeasi^d to hav(» been thirty miles in width and to extend around the lunid of all the inlets, including the Lyiui CVmal. in tlie opinion of the President, the action of the two Governments during Russia's occupation of the strip of territory now^ in controversy, makes a wholly different condition of affairs from that between Great Britain and Venezuela— and the diti'erence has been maintained and made more distinct since the cession l)y Russia to the United States. In supj)ort of this I called your Loixlship's attention to the map pre- pared and published by the United States in 18t)7, which delimited the boundary — and which traced the limits of the strip on the mainland, in accordance with tiie uniform chiim which Russia iiad made. Not oidy was no protest made against this m-ap l)y the British (iovern- ment, but the British map publishers and the Canadian Government adopted the same boundary line in their publications. And, in accord- ance with this delimitation, the United States have exercised, as I stated to your Lordship, acts of sovereignty — such as control of Indian trib(>s. estal)lishiny the United Stat(\s under the cession fi'om Russia, and only very lat(dy brought in ([uestion. In tliis cas(> the int(M'))retation is to be made in the light of ])rior and subseciuent historical facts of occuj)ation. administration and recognition, and of the acts and omis- sions of the parties concerned. Hei'e while the question of actutil settlements and administration is collateral to the main subject of arbitration — and. being of great importance, is rightly to be guarded by the distinct understandinii- suggested by the President — it is not. as the \'enezula case, the essentiid ])oitit directly at is.»ut>. In the oth<>r case, the controvei'sy rested, not ui)on the interpretation of any such 132 COKKIOSl'UNDENCK AFTER ADJOURNMENT treaty detiiiitioii of the bouiularv lino, l)iit cssoiitially upon the his- torical facets of occupancy and possession, out of which the Arl)itrators were to determine tlic })oun(lary line in confonnity to the rules pre- scribed to tluMU. Your Loi-dship's proposal for an arbitration will be entertained by the President with that earnest consideration which its iiu])()rtance, and the hi_oarded on either side as a matter of pressino- importance, special attention should have l)een devoted b}' Her Majesty's Government to that ]iarticular reoion. It is necessary to bear this in mind In considering- the various reasons put forward by the I'liitinl States Government, on account of which they claim to distinguish the pr(\sent dispute from that reecMitly dis- cussed liefore the Ti'ibunal of Arbiti-ation at Paris. The general etieet of thc^ Cnited States contention is that the claim put forward by Her Majesty's GovernuuMit that the boundary line should cross the L^Min Canal in the neighborhood of Berner's Hay, following the general line of the coast range of mountains indicated by the treaty as the position of the l)oundary, is a new one first put for ward after the Joint High Commission had been created, and that before then Her Majesty's Government bad made no claim to the head waters of the canal, or any i)rotest against ^■ari()us acts on the part of Kussia and th(^ United States inconsistent with tiiat claim, and that the United States (JovenuntMit ai'c therefore justified in refusing to allow the (juestion of the i)ossession of these waters to be adjudicated u})on by an independent tribunal. I wish to point out in the first place that there has been but little discussion of the boundary question between the two Governments, but whenever it has been referred to it has been on the admitted basis that the whole line was undetermined, and that the interpretation of the l)oundary articles of the treaty was entirely an open question as to which each (iovernment was free to urge its own views. This was the view acce])ted l)y President (irant in his annual mes- sage to Congress of the 2d DeciMuln'r. 1^72. and l)y the late Secretary Bayard in his despatch to Mr. Phelps of the 2(ith November. 1SS8. and, as w^as pointed out in that despatch, no question concerning- the true location of the line stipulated in the treaty bad ever arisen between Great Britain and Kussia ])rior to the cession of Alaska to the Ignited States. The only value of th(> region during that i)eriod lay in the fur trade, and dui'ing the tirst ten years after IS^;") that trade was thrown opiMi on (M(ual tei-ms to the subjiM-ts and citizens of (Jri^at Bi'it- ain. Russia, and the Ignited States l)y Articl(> \U of the treaty between Great Britain and Kussia of [s-2:>. and Article IV of the treaty of l.s-_'4 between the I'nited States and Kussia, and lud'ore the expiry of the ten years the negotiations between the Hudson's Bay Comi)any and the Kussian AnuM'ican Company which resulted in the lease to the former of the trade of the whole of the //.svV/v southward and eastward of a line joining Cape Spencer and Mount Fairweather had l)een initi- ated. By that lease tlu^ exclusive i-ight of trade and commtM'ce in the //s/r/v outside th(^ line mentioned, covering practically the whole territory the l)oundarv of which is in dispute. Ix'came vested in the com})any which enjoyed a simiiai" mono})oly in the territoiw on the 18-1 CORRESPONDENC?: AITKR ADJOURNMENT British side of the frontier, wiicrcxcr it iiiiiilit l)c. and. as it was a niattcr of iiKliHoronco to it wiii-thcr it (l('i'i\'('(l its rights from its Brit- ish charter or its Kussian h'Hse. no (picstion as to the true hx-ation of the line eould arise. The l(>ase, thougli originally for ten years only, was renewed from time to time and terminated only on the date when Alaska was ceded to the I'nited States. When. subse(}uently to that cession, the gold disco\ eiies in the Cas- siar district of British Columbia, to which the most convenient access lay through the Stikine Kiver trav(>rsing the llsiere. rendered it desir- al)le to locate the boundary in that region, the discussion l)etween the two Cxovernments was entiridy eontined to the (juestion of a joint sur- vey, an indispensable preliminary to any attempt to Hx the boundary, and never touched on the inter[)retation of the treaty. Indetnl, in the complete alVscMice of top()grai)hical information as to the country, it was ol)viously impossible to discuss that question, and it was tacitly avoided by both sides. Even when later Mr. Secretary Fish threw^ out the suggestion referred to by Mr. Choate that the points where the boundtiry crosses certain rivers might be surveyed with a view to a partial delimitation, lie declared that it was doubtful whether Con- gress would vote the money necessary for the purpose, doubts wdiich were speedily verified by the action of that body, and it can sciircely be a matter of surprise that a suggestion mad(^ in such circumstances failed to receive ci'itical examination at the' hands of the British or nominion (Tovernuients, and that no attempt was made to initiate a discussion as to the interpretation of the treaty which, in the absence of a survey, must have been of a purely academic nature. The case of Peter Martin in 1877, to which Mr. Choate also refers, does not appear to have any bearing on the matter, as it turned on the (juestion of his unauthorized conveyance as a prisoner through United States territory, and Her Majesty's Ciovernment have never questioninl the right of the United States (TO\ernment to territory at th(^ mouth of the Stikine Kivei-, though the ([uestion how far iidand that territory extends remains in dispute. Mr. Choate made no reference to the correspondence initiated by the late Mr. Bayard in his note to Mr. Phelps of the 20th November, iSSo, which has already been mentioned. That note made no claim that the interpretation of the treaty as r(\gards any i)articular part of the boundary line was no longer ojxmi. and the Earl of Iddesleigh, in his note to Mr. IMielps of the jJ7th August, lSS(i, inclosing copy of the map of the Dominion of Canada, geologically colored, for which Mr. Phelps had asked, and on which a line was shown sepai'ating the //.svVw- from Canadian teri-itory, stated clearly the attitude of Iler Maj- esty's (Jovernment in regai'd to the position of tli<' disputed boundary in the following words: — In forwarding to you a copy of tlie map in que.^^tion, J iiavc the honor to invite your attention to the faet that the Alaska boundary line s^hown thereon is merely an indication of tlie otrnrrcnee of such a dividing'' lini' somewhere in tiiat region. It will, of course, Ite readily uuderstood that no weijiht could attach to the nia]i loca- ti(jn of the line now noticed, inasmuch as the convention between Great Britain and l\ussia of the 28th Fel)ruary, 1825, whii-h defines the line, makes its location depend on alternative circumstances, the occurrence or the nonoccurrence, of mountains, and, as is well known to all concerned, the country has never been topographically surveyed, l.'er .Majesty's (Tovernment therefore feel that they are bound distinctly to disavow the recognition of the correctness of the line shown, on the edition of the map in (|uestion forwarded herewith, as the boundary line between the Province of British Columbia and Alaska. (»F JOINT IIICH COMMISSION. 185 The riiitcd States ( JoNcniiuciit took no ('Xf('|)ti()ii to this (Icclaratioii. which was t'oUowcd latci- by the statt'iiUMit in the iiHMiioiaiicUiiii oivcn to Ml-, liayard l)y Sir L. SackvilK- West on the 1.4th Scptcinlicr, 1SS7, as to tht> actit)!! of Lieut(Miant Schwatka (hiring- his ri'connaissunce of 18S8 in i)iir|«)rtinu- to tix Perrier's Pass at thc^ head of the Lynn Canal as a point on the l>oun(hirv. It was there stated that — Altlinui;li Her Majesty's (iuvermiieiit liave atrreeil in i>riii(ij)le tn take jtart in a pivliniiiiary investigation (if the Alaska lidundary (lUcstiun, they are nut ]irei>are(l to ai!d Jidy, 18!»2. That article provided for a coinciilent or joint survt\v '" with a view to the ascer- tainment of the facts and data necessary to the permanent delimitation of said lioundarv line in accordance with the si)irit and intent of the existing treaties in regard to it between Great Britain and Russia and ])etween the United States and Ru.ssia," and further, that *' the high contracting parties agree that, as soon as practicable after the report or reports of the connnissions shall have l)een received, they will proceed to consider and estal>lish the boundary line in question." It is clear from this that the whole question of the interpretation and application of the treaty was. by common consent, left over for discussion, after the couqiletion of the survey in the light of the facts which it disclosed, and it might fairlV^ be argued from the express terms of the convention that l)oth (ioveriunents had estop])ed them- selves from contending that the boundary shoidd be run otherwise than in accordance with the " spirit and intent" of the existing" treaties 18() ('()KKKS1>()XDEN(^K AFTKK ADJOURNMENT in ret>ard to it ln'twoen (irc;it liiituiii uiul Russia and between the United States and Uiissia. It is evident in any case that, at any rate', in 1S!)2. neither (iovern- nient ehiinied to have an}' rights in tiie disputed ten'itory arisino- out of ])()ssession. occupation, or ])()litical control. Nor does it appear tiiat any sucii claims were preferred on the part of tiie Tnited States until the ine(»tinos of the rloint lliyh Comniission. The elal»orate series of nia})s on which the results of the joint sur- vey were embodied were not received by Her Majesty's (lovernment until ]\Iarch IbDS, but in the meantime Her Majesty's Government, realizinii' the improbability of a settlement being- reached by diplo- matic discussion, as contemplated by the convention of I8O1J, and the need of an early settlemiMit, owing to the new conditions created by the Yukon gold discoveries, had instructed Sir fJ. Pauncefote to pi'o- pose to the Tnited States (Tovernment a reference of the (juestion to three jurists of high standing, one nominated l)v each of the two l\)wers, and the third by an independent power, and that this com- mission should })roceed at once to delimit the l)oundai'v at the heads of the inlets through which the traffic for the Yukon entered, principally at the head of the Lynn Canal. The proposal was made by Sir J. Pauncefote to Mr. Sherman on the 23d February, 1898, and in making it he specitically alluded to the divergence of views revealed by the informal discussion which took place in 188,s. On the '2d ]\larch he reported to me that the United States (xovernment were anxious for a provisional boundary, the rights of both parties being reserved pending a final settlement, but were unwilling to proceed with a new convention providing for ar])i- tration until diplomatic discussion had failed to secure a settlement. A proposal for a provisional boundary was made b}- Sir J. Paunce- fote on the ISth April in a memorandum in which he stated that — In view of the wide divergence of views existing on the subject of the Aiaska- Canadian boundary, tlie Dominion (Tovernnient fear that the suggestion to proceed with tile demarcation under the convention of 1892 would lead to no result. They are, however, prepared to agree that a provisional line should be tixed without preju- dice to the claims of cither party at the watershed of thetirst sunuuit north of Dyea. 8ucli a provisional boiuidary would be at a distance of considerably more than 10 leagues from the coast. In answering this memorandum, on the i)th May, Mr. Day stated: In consenting to the tem])orary marking of the boundary line in the method just indicated, this (Government desires it to be distinctly understood, on the part of ])oth (iovernments, that this arrangement is not to be construed as affecting in any manner rights under existing treaties for the ultiinatc consideration and cstal)lish- ment of the boundary line in question. AA'hen, th(M'efore, the Joint High Uonunission nu^t in Ai;gust 18!»8 to discuss the question, it was clearly understood on both sides that the line was to be determined "in accordance with the spirit and intent" of the treaty, without restriction, the rights of )K)th ])arties having been fully and distinctly reserved whenever any (luestion of the interpretation or a])plication of th{^ treaty was discusstnl. and the fact of such reservation expressly recognized on ])oth sides. It has already l)een fully explained why no ([uestion as to the inter- pretation of the treaty was raised by either party tuitil I88r), and that on the first occasion when the discussion of the matter was approached, Her Majesty's Ciovermnent gave distinct notice that they entirely dis- OF JOINT IlKJII COMMISSION. 187 avowed the convctne.s.s of the line shown on the nuips to which the United States (loveriuneiit appealech In view of these facts. Her Majestv's Gov cnnncnt are fairly cntith'd to ehiini tliat as a s(>ttUMU(Mit of the (luestion (an not he reached dii)h3- niatically. the interpretation of the treaty and its application to the facts ascertained hy the survey siioidd he submitted unreservedly to an impartial tril»unal. without any such i-estrictions as were contained in the \'enezuelan treaty, anil in proposino- to allow, as provided by that instrument, continuous adverse possession for tifty years, if such can be proved, to override treaty lioht. they have made a distinct conces!>;ion to the United States. They do not, of course, admit that there has })cen any such adverse poss(\ssion. hy way either of exercise of jurisdiction or of political control, and if the United States citizens have settled recently at the head of the Lynn Uanal. they have done so in the full knowledge, as oiven in the (h)cum(Mits inclosed in President Cleveland's messanntted to an arbitration tril»unal under the rules laid down in the Venezuelan treaty, and unless there are other facts and circumstances upon which the United States Gov- ernment rely, but which might be excluded from the consideration of the tribunal bv these rules, Mr. Choate has not, so far as can l)e seen, advanced any reason to warrant Her Majesty's (iovernment in depart- ing from tiie view expressed in my note of the 1st July, that there is nothing in the terms of the Venezuelan treaty '"wiiich is inapplicable or which would be inconsistent with an e(|uital)le solution of tht^ Alaskan controvei'sy." The (juestion inunediately under discussion is whether or not th-e dispute as to the bounchuy should be referred to arbitration, and it is difttcult to understand why the length of time during which the rival claims to disputed teri'itory have been matters of controversy should form an eli'ment to be taken into consideration in that connection. If it be desirable, on other grounds, to employ the assistance of an impartial tribunal as the best means of terminating the dispute, the length of the pei'iod of })revious controversy a|)i)(>ars to l)e iunnaterial. The exercis(> of the rights of sovereignty witiiin the anni in disjnite by control of the Indian tril)es and estai)lishment of administrative machinei-y therein was. as the United States Ciovernment are aware, one of the principal grounds ])ut forw'ard by Great Britain in suppoit of her right to the territory claimed by Venezuela, and such grounds, if put forward by the United States Govermnent with refer(>nce to the Alaska l)oundarv would, no doubt, be fully considered l)va tril)unal of arbitration, and if found to be established foi" the period prescribed in the treaty, might s(>ttle the controversy in their favor. But it is not admitted tiiat such control was exercised I)v the United 138 corrksi>()NDEN(;k aktkk aiuoihn.mknt States until Ncrv iccciilly and at't(»i- due notice of the t-laini of Ilei- Majesty's Government, and in tliese cireunistaiK-«!s. t!ie faet of its exercise appears to l)e a reason in favor of . rather tluin an obstacle to. arbitration. The fact that the starting- point in the present controversy is a ti'eaty. and that, in tiie dispute with Venezuela, the claims on either side were l)ased on discovery and occupation, can not, in the opinion of Her Majesty's Goveriunent. constitute any essential ditrerument of e\"erv ground uj)on which an e(iuitablc claim to disputed territoi'v may be based. As has already been pointed out, it is the Government of the United States who have imported into the j)resent di.scussion other considerations than riiat of strict treaty right, and I trust that on fidl consideration they will not continue to object to these con.siderations being- t(»sted l)y rules which, with their apj)roval and with the consent of Her Majesty \s Government, have l)een applied to a similar case. If, however, the I'nited States Go\'ernnient still consider that the terms of the Venezuelan treaty are in any respect inade(iuate to ])ro- vide for an equitable settlement of the present controversy, such suggestions as they have to otter will receive attentive considciation from Her Majesty's (iovermnent. You are authorized to read this despatch to AJr. Hay, and to leave a copy of it with him if he should so desire. 1 am. etc.. Salisbury. R. Tower, Esq., cfc.^ etc., etc. Mr. i'liodtc io Lord S,(l islm r;/. A M E KTC A N Em bass V . London, S. U:. .Jomiorn 22. 1900. My Lord: Your Loi-dship's despatch to ]\Ir. Tower, No. 218. of October 14, lS9i>. has been jjlaced in my hands, with instructions to resj)ond to Your Lordship's courteous reipiest to make further sug- gestions in reply ])eai'ing upon the question luider discussion. The Lnited States (Jovernment is not to be undei'stood as refusing to submit to the adjudication of an indejXMuient tribunal the real ([ues- tion at issue betwcMMi us in respect to the Alaska boundai'v. On the contrary, as I understand it, the present discussion contemphites the probability of such a submission. As I stated in my note of August t), to which Your Lordship's note to Mr. Tower is an indirect reply, the Pi'esident was yirevented by the considerations there stated from assenting to the pro])osal that tlie Venezuela treaty, as it stands, should be api)lie<])(H'ti\o claims out of the facts of discoxcry. occupat ion. and other historical circiimstauc(>s in wliich thcii- dispute as to the l»ouM(hirv had been involved for uioi'e than a century, durinu' which the <|uestion had l)een always open. But in the present instance thcM'e is an express a^ifreement of the parties detining the Ijoundai'v — in the treaty of 1825 — which has sul)sistod ever since, practically without dispute as to its inter]M-(>tation on the principal ])oint. .V <-lear and distinct inter- pretation on this ])oint was j)ut ui)on it l»y l>otir])arties in the written neiiotiations which resulted in the nieetino- of their minds u|)on it. This inter|)retation was i-euurded by both parties as vital and vei-y inil)ortant to their rt^spective intcM'ests. It was ])ublicly declared and acted u})()n l)y Russia from the date of the treaty until she conveyed to the I'nited States in lsi>7. and all that time at any rate it was acipii- esced in by Great Britain. The I'nited States continued ]3ublicly to mainttiin and act upon the same interpretation with the acquiescence of Great Britain confessedlv until 1SS5. and as we claim until 1S!»8, when a new- and wholly different interpretation on this main point was put forward by (Treat Britain. The two interpretations thus presented are aV)sohitely distinct and are not involved in any confused or doul)t- ful historical explorations. One or the other is right and can and should be ascertaiiu'd and determined so to be, to the exclusion of the other, and ncMther party wishes to ac(|uire an inch of the territory lightly belonging to the other. Surely the tril)unal which is to pa.ss ui)on such a question should not be enabled to compi-onnse it, but should be required siiuply to decide it. If the difference thus raised is to be compromised, it should be compromised by the parties them- selves, so that they can know exactly what they ai'e doing. I have spoken of the interpi'etation of "he treaty u))on tlu' ])rincij)al point. By this 1 mean the question whether the strip of coast (la lisiere de cote) which by the treaty is to belong to Russia runs around the shores of the inlets or across their mouths — the former construction necessarily excluding (xreat Britain from the salt water at all points to a distance measured by the crests of the mountains pirallel to the coast, if there are such, or by ten leagues in the absence of such moun- tains, while the latter construction as necessarily gives to Great Britain so much of each iidet as extends above a point crossed by a line drawn from the crest of the mountains nearest to the coast. This is a question of construction })etween the two parties, to l)e determined in the usual way by the language of the treaty intei'pi'eted in the light of the acts of the parties l)efore and after, and including any claim of either that the other is estopped to dispute the const miction which it asserts. It is eminently a question for jurists to determine judicially, and it W'lis with this view that the United States, through its commis- sioners in the Joint High Commission, offered to sulmiit it to a per- fectly independent tril)unal. to be composed of six learned jurists, three to I)e named by each party, and a majority of them to decide. It is not easy to see how any judicial tril)unal could compromise it. unless expressly comniissione(l to do so, as in t!ie \'ene/,iuda case. They luust decide it one way oi" the otluM-. This is the question which we maintain was ne\-er raised by Her Majesty's Government until ISDS. Russia and the Tnitc^d States claimed the former inter])i-etation from first to last; (ireat Britain realized its intrinsic importance from the l)eginnning, but never dis- ])utedour intei-j)retation. which was open, public, '.md uniform. These 140 rORRK-^roXDENCE AFTER ADJolRNMENT features of the case now presiMited ditiereutiate it liuliciilly from the Venezuehi case. Your Loixlshi}) state> that '"no (|U('stioii as to the iiit('rj)r('tatioii of the treaty was raised hy either party up.til lss5." It would he more in harmony with my view of the situation to say that Russia and the United States uniforudy and publicly a-serted an intt'rjjrctation of the treaty whieh (Jreat liritain did not dispute. But assuming tiiis fundamental and very iiuportant question to be decided either by an independent tribunal or by agreement of the par- ties, another question remains still to be determined — one of crreat importance and which has always been open — namely, the exact loca- tion of the boundary line accordino- to the spirit and meaning- of the treat}' and its precise distance at e\'erv point from the coast. This is a (piestion of no small difficulty, orowing out of the alternative pro- visions of the third and fourth articles of the treaty, by the former of which the width of the strip or the distance of the British possessions from the coast is to be measured to the civsts of the paralhd moun- tains, but by the latter, if no such mountains are found within ten leagues, then l)y that distance or by a distance never exceeding that. This minor or secondary (Question might, of course, also be referred to an arbitration; but it is obviously not, like the tirst, a question for jurists. Tt would properly l)e disposed of l)y a joint surrey. And it is a question of such minor imi)ortance, after the tirst ({uestion has been oncv determined, that neither party would })robably d(>sire to go to the great expense and trouble of an arbiti'ation about it. but they would either run the line 1)V agreement or leave it to l)e run l)y a joint sur- vey, as was once agreed Ijetween them. For if the tirst question were once determined in accordance with the present contention of Her Majesty's Govenmient, (Treat Britain or Canada W'Ould have in her own possession such a wide and ample stretch of seacoast, being the entirety of all inU^ts beyond a point crossed ))y a line drawn from the crests of the motuitains nearest the coasts, that a few miles, or even leagues, more or Uvss. would make no sut)stantial ditlerent-e. while, on the other han'd, if that question were once determined in accoi-dance with the uniform contention of Russia and the TnitiHl States since 1X2."), Great Britain or Canada having no possible foothold on the seacoast through the whole length of the strip or lisiere, a few niih's. oi' even leagues, more or less, in its width at any point, would make no \ery important ditierence to either party. The difficulty of locating the exact boundary line according to an}- interpr(^tation of the treaty was in great measure removed by the report and maps of the joint survey created by agreement of Great Britain and the United Slates in iS'.i-i. Before taking u^) Your Lordship's review of the facts and incidents since the date of the treaty between Great Britain and Kussiii. which are cited asconhrming the view that the question of the interpretation of the treaty has been always open, 1 venture, with deference, to ask whether in that review the distinction which I have drawn betwiH'u the question of the interpretation of the treaty and the question of the actual d(Mnarkation of the boundary line has not been lost sight of. for it appears very clearly to me that nearly all of them recognize as jin open question the actual demarkation of the line, which nuist remain open until il is actually acconq)lished. and that they do not suggest OF JOINT HIGH COMMISSION. 141 oi" assume that tlio (luostion of the intorprotation of the treaty now raised and insisted upon by (ireat Britain was open. It would he stranu-c indeed if Her !\hi]esty's Go\ernnient. at the time of the exehanije of the treaty with Russia — or the Russian Gov- onnnent of that day — could have reoarded the question now raised by Great Britain iis left open, or that any (juestion under the treaty was left doul)tful or open for future determination, except the actual demarkation of the boundary line so as to carry out the spirit and intent of the treaty as well known to them both and freshh' in their minds from the protracted and very earn(\st struo-gle which they had had over its terms. One persistent etfort of Her ^Majesty's representatives in that neg'o- tiation was to ^et to the sea, in the interest of the Hudson's Bay Com- pany'. The eiiually persistent etfort of the representatives of Russia was to set up a bari-ier in a strip of hind which should keep (ireat Britain away from the sea at all points from the southern end of Prince of Wales Island to Mount St. Elias, so that the Russian estal)lishments on the islands and the coast belonging- to the Russian American Com- pany coulcl by no possibility be interfered with, a point which the iieo'otiators on behalf of Great Britain expressh' and tinally yielded. I may not properly here enter upon an analysis of the protracted negotiations which culminated in the treaty of ]S25. They are now very familiar, and as Ave claim the whole course of the negotiation shows that the ]^ritish plenipotentiaries, and Mr. Secretary Canning as well, had a perfectly clear conception of the lisiere upon which Russia insisted so strenuously — that it was to be Russia's impenetrable barrier to an}" alien access to or from the inner region of the mainland, a strip of teri'itory running parallel to the sinuosities of the coast, and necessarily around the inlets and not across their mouths, extending at all points from the water's edge to the interior possessions of Great Britain, beginning at the point of the continent where the line ascend- ing to the north along Portland Channel strikes the tifty-sixth degree of north latitude and extending to the intersection of the one hundred and forty-tirst meridian. It constituted a definite expanse of territorv over which and over the tide water along it, as well as over the islands outside of it, Russia possessed an exclusive jurisdiction — the same which she afterwards conveyed in its entirety to the United States. It could bo pierced in favor of Great Britain only by rivers having their origin in British dominions and tiowing through the Russian territorial strip to tide water; and as to these, no lodgment on the Russian shore, but only access to the interior, was granted to Great Britain. The provisions as to this strip of land in the fifth and sixth articles of the original treaty, where it is referred to as '"la lisiere de terre ferme" and "lisiere de la cote," must have been understood by the negotiators on l)oth sides in the same sense. And the fact that ))y the seventh article of the treaty Russia gave, and Great Britain took, a license for British vessels for ten years from the date of the treaty to frequent "toutes les mors interieures, les Colfes, Havres et Cri(|ues sur la Cote'" proves that the negotiators on both sides nuist have understood that all these interior waters, etc., were in Russian territory. In view of this, we claim and insist that when the tn^aty was signed the question now raised and pressed by Her Majesty's (lovernment whether the lisiere ran around the inlets or sinuosities of the coast or 26626— Ai' 10 142 CORRESPONDENCE AFTER ADJOURNMENT across tlu'lr nioutlis was not left open or uiuhMstood by the iieu'otia- tors on either side or by either (Tovernnient for which they acted as an open question, and if not then left open it certaiidy was never attempted to be opened until ISSo — and as we chiini not until 181»8. Of course, the actual demarkation of the line with whatever difficulties pertained to it according to the spirit and meanino- of the treaty was necessarily left open, and could only l)e determined after the country was explored In' competent survey. Comino- n()w to the references to the boundary ((uestion in sul)se- (juent correspondence between the (Tovernments wiiich Your Lordship reo'ards as havino- l)een always upon the admitted l)asis that the whole line was undetermined, and that tiie interpretation of the boundary articles of the treaty was entirely an open question, 1 submit that in each instance, especiall}' in view of what had preceded tluring Russia's ownership, these references indicated or assumed no more than that the whole line was undetermined in the sense of not having- been sur- veved and marked, but not that the interpretation of the treatvon the main point now under consideration was in any sense open. Inunediately after the making of the treaty, the Russian Govern- ment proceeded with the preparation of a map showing the respective possessions of Russia and Great Britain as tixed by the treaty. This map was published in St. Peterslnirg in 1827 l\v order of His Imperial ^Majesty. It runs the l)oundary line from the head of Portland Chan- nel at a distance of ten marine leagues from tide water around the head of all the inlets to the one hundred and forty-first meridian. And along this line upon the map is inscribed the words ''Limites des pos- sessions Russes et Anglaises d'apres le Traite do 1825." There could have been no more direct and peremptory challenge to Great Britain, if its Government at that time regarded the interpretation of the treaty as having been left an open (juestion at the time of its signature, or as being then an open question as to which each Govermnont was free to urge its own views. The great importance of this location of the boundary as between the two nations, as represented respectively by the Hudson's Bay Company and the Russian American Company, must have been still very fresh and vivid upon the minds of Her Majesty's ministers who had negotiated and concluded the treaty, Russia thus proclaiming to them and to the world a clear and emphatic interpretation of the tr(^aty which conformed to that which the nego- tiators on both sides had put upon it. Was not that tlie time and the last time for (ireat Britain to speaks Could her Government lie l)y without a protest, and at any time afterwards claim a different interpi-e- tation which would nullify the whole object of Russia in making tlie treaty^ But Great Britain did not merely lie by without a protest; she and Canada also expressly adopted this location of the boundary exactly as Russia had defined It. In 18;>1 the map prepared by Bouchette, deputy surveyoi'-general of the Province of Lower Canada, "published as the act directs by James Wild, geograpiier to the King, London. ]\Iay 2nd, 1831," traces tii(^ Russian l)<)undary on the continent exactly according to the Rus- sian imjjerial map of 1827. And in 1882 the map of Arrowsinith. the most authoi'itative cartographer of London, whose earlier map liad been used by the negotiators of the treat3\ does exactly the same thing, stating upon its face that it contains the latest information which the documents of the Hudson's Bay Company furnish. And it will hardly OF JOINT hi(;h commission. 143 bo questioned thtit :it tlnit time tlie IIuclsoii's Bay Coinpany })ossesse(I all the powers of ooveninient in the British territory in that region and was in faet the only British authoi'ity there. Can it be elainied that at the time of the pul)lieation of that map, apparently by the authority of the Hudson's Bay Company and of the British Govern- ment— at any rate without a protest from either — they then regarded the interpretation of the treat}' on this cardinal point as an open ([uestion^ And o!i Canadian authority maps were sul)se(iuently pul)lished defin- ing the boundary in the same way, excluding (Ireat Britain from all access to tide water along the whole extent of the line — notably, Devine's map, published "by order of the Hon. Joseph Cauciion. Coiumissioner of Crown Lands, Crown l)e})artment. Toronto. March, 1857. ■' All the map makers of the world followed suit, and a careful search has failed to discover any map published anywhere prior to 1884 in which this boundar}' line did not conform to the original Russian imperial map of 1827. Your Lordship suggests that the only value of that region during the period from IS^f) to 1S07 lay in the fur trade; that by the terms of the treaty that tradcMvas thrown open on ecpial terms for ten years to the citizens of Great Britain, Russia, and the Ignited States; that ])efore the ten years expired the negotiations between the Hudson's Bay Com]:)any and the Russian American Company, which resulted in the lease l)y the latter to the former of the lisiere, had been initiated; and that as that lease, though made at first for ten j'ears, by renewals terminated only on the date when Alaska was ceded to the United States, it was a matter of indifi'erence to that company whether it derived its rights from its British charter or from the Russian lease. But to me it is hardly conceival)le that the Hudson's Bay Coinpany. l)acked by the whole power and prestige of the British CTO\'ernment, would, with its approval', have accepted that lease if either the com- pany or the Government had had the least idea that nnder the treaty of 1825 they were entitled as of right to what they took by lease and to what Canada now claims; and so I insist with renewed earnestness that the taking of that lease and the renewals w^ere declarations to the world that neither regarded as open the contention now made on behalf of Canada. The information conveyed in Your Lordship's note, that before the expiration of the ten 3'ears' license provided in the seventh article of the treaty, negotiations had been initiated between the Hudson's Bay Company and the Russian American Company for the lease of the lisiere, which appears to have been signed at Haml)urg February 0. 1839. and that by renewals it was terminated only on the date when Alaska was ceded to the United States, is the first to that etlect that my Government has received. All the data in its possession, includ- ing the Alaskan archives now in the State Department, had indicated that the negotiations for the lease had been brought al)out in the lat- ter part of the year 1S38. three years after the expiration of the ten years, by a note from the British Ambassador in St. Petersl)urg, revising the claim of the Driie in the Hous(> of Commons ''to coiisid(M" the state of thosi^ British possessions in North America which are under the administra- tion of the Hudson's Bay Conipan}', or over which the}' possess a license to trade," is extremely signilicant to show that no one concerned on the part of the company or the committee had any doubt about the interpretation of the treaty on the point now l)eing discussed. Among the members of the conunittee Avere Lord John Kussell, Lord Stanlev, Mr, Roebuck, Mr. Gladstone, and Mr. Ellice, who was a native of Canada, and a director of the Hudson's Bay Com})any. Chief Justice Draper, of Canada, attended its session as the represent- ative of the Government of Canada; Sir George Simpson, governor of the territory and president of the company, was a principal wit- ness. In connection with his testimony he produced a map of the ter- ritory leased, sa^'ing, '"There is a margin of coast marked yellow on the map from 54^ 4<»' up to Cross Sound which we have rented from the North American Company for a term of years," and the boundary as laid down on that map conforms to the present claim of the United States, being carried around all the iidets and interior waters. The map was printed l)y order of Parliament, and no objection to the validity of the lease or to the correctness of the map was suggested by anybody. The lease itself was not only made with the approval of both Governments represented by the two companies, but shortly before this Parliamentary inquiry it had been ratified anew by both Governments. During the Crimean war, at the request of the two companies, the territory covered by the lease was l)y the order of both Governments exemi)ted from the operations of the war. I have thus carefully reviewed all the cii'cinnstances that intervened from the negotiations of the treaty in 1S25 till the cession to the I'nited States in ISGT, a period during which, 1 think, we may reasonably claim that this main ([uestion was not regarded as open by either Russia or Great Britain. l)ut that the acts of both solidly confirmed the interpre- tation put upon the treaty at the beginning by Russiii and ever since by her and by the United States, not only because of their conclusive effect, but because it is necessary to bear this prior history in mind in considering the subse(|uent facts relied upon hy Your Lordshij) as indi- cating that both parties sul>se(|uently regarded this (luestit)n as o])en, and also to keep clearly in mind the distinction l)etween this funda- mental question and the actual demarkation in accoi-dance with the spirit and intent of the treaty as thus uniforndy int(M-i)reted by l>oth parties, which was always open and never could be accomplished until after a complete surve}' of the rc^gion through which the line ran. Bearing these things in mind, I submit to Your Lordship that it is impossible to sustain the suggestion that President Grant, in his animal message to Congress in December, 1S72, accejited the view that '"the inter})retation of the ))oundary articles of the treaty was entirely an open (juestion as to which each Gt)vernment was free to urge its own views." On the contrarv, no such idea can be read even ))etween the OF JOINT HIGH COMMIS-^ION. 145 lines of his iiiossiiiio. Indeed, he asserts the houndarv to })e an "admitted honndarv,"" and only alludes to the line as heinj^' undeter- mined in the sense of its never having- been surveyed and marked down; and the message furnishes a very strong- argument in su})})()rt of our present eontention tiiat the main (juestion was not open. It w'ill be remembered that the award of the Emperor of (xermany in tiie San ,Iuan ease had just then )>een made. The questions involved were in some respects singularly like those involved here: first, whether the water boundary d(>senl)ed in the treaty ran through Riosario Chan- nel or through Ilaro Channel, and, second, whichever channel was decided to l)e the one, to survey and mark it out accoi-ding to the spirit and intent of the treaty. The British commissioners had proixjsed that the art)itrator should have the right to draw the boundary through an internuxliate channel. The Amei'ican conunissioners declined this proposal, stating that they desired a decision, and not a compromise; and the sulimission to the Emperor was to determine whether it ran through one channel or the other, and his award had been that it was most in accoi'dance with the true interpretation of the treaty that the ])oundary line should l)e run through the Ilaro Chamiel; but this left still undetermined the tracing out and marking of the line in conform- ity with the award. President Grant, having in his message stated the history of the ease and his satisfaction with the award and with the pi'ompt and spontaneous action of Iler ^lajesty's Government giving etfect to it, and having already said, "The award leaves us, for the first time in the history of the United States as a nation, without a qutHtion of dispKted houndciTy heticeen our territory and the possessions of Great Britain on this continent^''' proceeds: It now becomes necessary to complete the survey and determination of tliat portion of the boundary Hne (through the Haro Channel) upon which the commission which determined the remaining part of the line were unable to agree. I reitom- luend the appointment of a commission to act jointly with one which may be named ))y Her Majesty for that purpose. Kxperieiice of the dirticuities attending tlie di^termiiiation of our admitted line of Ijoundary, after the occu{)ation of the territory and its settlement bv tliose owing allegiance to tiie respective Governments, i)oints to the importance of establishing, l)y natural objects or other monuments, the actual line between the territory ac<|uired by j)urchase from Russia and the adjoining jiossessions of Her Britannic Majesty. The region is now so sparsely occupied that no conflicting interests of indivitluals or of jurisdiction are likely to interfere to the delay or embarrassment of the actual location of the line. If deferred until population shall enter and occupy the territory, some trivial contest of ni'igh])ors may again airay the two Govern- ments in antagonism. I tlierefore recommend the appointment of a commission, to act jointly with one that may be ap]>ointed on the i)art of Great I'ritain, to deter- mine the line between our territorv of Alaska and the conterminous {possessions of (Treat Britain. (For. Hel., U. S., 1872.) Is it not absolutely c(U'tain that no idea of there being any open ques- tion a))out the interpretation of the treaty had ever entered the Presi- dent's mind^ He declares it to be '"an admitted line of boimdarv." and reconunends. exactly as in the San Juan case upon the footing of the award, "a joint conmiission to determine the line." President (irant's recommendation was occasioned by piM'sona! con- ference between the liritish Minister, Sir Edward Thornton, and the Secretary of State, Mr. Fish, in the preceding month, in which the former, under instructions from the Foreign OtHce, proposed the appointment of a joint conunission for the pur])Ose of defining the boundary })etween Alaska and British Columbia, and he reported 146 CORRESPONDENCE AFTER ADJOURNMENT uiulor fUite of Novemliev 25 that ]\Ir. Fish statod that the President had dctennined to reeomiiiend in liis annual message tliat a joint com- mission l)e appointed '''for the purpose of hiyinodown the l)oundarv." On the 23d of December of the same year Sir Edward Thornton, referring to his ])re\'ious conference with Secretary Fish, transmitted to the Foreign Office a copy of the hill introduced in Congress ''autliorizing the survey and marking of the boundary"' (see Canadian Session Tapers. 1S78. No. 125. j^p. O. 7, 8). In no pai't of this corre- spond(Mice is there any intimation that the interpretation of the treaty was in dispute. It was merely a movement to have the boundai-y fixed by the treaty surveyed and nrarked. When gold was discovered in the Cassiar region, which was reached through the Stikine. and the passage of miners u]^ that river ensued, it was deemed wise to have the eastern boundary of the lisiere where it crosses that river more accurately defined, which lead to the move- ment in 1873-74 on the part of the two (xoveriunents for a joint sur- A'ey. The cost of a survey of the entire boundary being objected to, it was suggested, in a conference between Sir Pklward Thornton and Secretary Fish, that it would be sufficient to fix the Ijoundary at cer- tain named points, viz. the head of the Portland Canal, '"the points where the boundary line crosses the rivers Skoot, Stikine, Taku, Isle- cat, and Chilkat. ]Mount St. Elias. etc." The legislative assembly of British ColumI)ia, in petitioning the Canadian Government for a sur- vey, refers to it as "the boundary of the thirty-mile-l)elt of American territory."" Dennis, Surveyor-General of Canada, to whom the matter was referred, restated the points to be determined and named the rivers, viz. Skoot. Stikine. Taku. Islecat, and Chilkat. 4'he Skoot was at no point nearer than 25 miles to tide water, and the points of crossing of the rivers were far above the heads of itdets into which they emptied. The survey was agreed upon, but failed because Con- gress made no appropriation; but it is clear that the British and Canadian authorities understood that the eastern boundary of the strip crossed the rivers named at some point above their mouths, which are at the head of inlets, including Lynn Canal, and that the boundary could not therefore cross any of those inlets, which is quite inconsistent with the theory that the (juestion was then regarded as o})en whether the lisiere ran around the inlets or crossed their mouths. In the years 1874 to 1876. questions aros(> as to the proper location of custom-houses of the two Governments on the Stikine Kiver, and the point in dispute centered around the crossing of the river by the boundary line 30 miles in a direct line from the coast. The British Minister, reciting the complaint, stated that the British custom-house was "supposed to be within the I'nited States territory — that is. within th(» ten mai'ine leagues from the coast."" The Pri\v Council of the Dominion of Canada, in moving the Governor-CTCMiei-al to bring the subject of the sui'vey again to the attention of the Fnited Sttites. I'ccites that ''the Stikine River intersects the international boundary in the vicinity of the fifty-seventh degree of noi'tii latitude"" that is, 30 nau- tical miles from the coast in a direct lint\ It is admitted by Your Lordship that in 1873 the discussion between the two G()\ei"nm(mts was entirely confined to the (piestion of a joint survey, an indispensable preliminary to any attempt to fix the bound- ai'V and '"ntMcr touched n\Hm the iiiter|)retation of tlie treaty." But OF .JOINT HKJH COMMISSION. 147 my (lovonmient can not ayrec to the i)roi)<)siti()n that "in th(> coni- pK'te ahseiice of toj>()iiraj)hical information as to tlie countrv. it was obviously impossil)K' to discuss that question and that it was tacitly avoided by both sides." What could the al)sence or presence of topographical information as to the country have to do with the question whether the lisiere, by the true inter})retati()n of the treaty, ran around the inlets or across their mouths^ whether it was intend(>d to be a contiiuious border of solid land, which should serve as an eti'ectual barrier against the access of the Canadians to salt water, or should be no strip at all. but a broken series of ])ortions of the coast, admittinu' Canada to full possession :ind enjoyment of the interior waters in many })laces^ And how coidd the suyoestion of Secretary Fish as to the points where the boundary descri])ed in the treat}- crossed the rivers, all of Avhich were points of consideral)le distance above the inlets, fail to command the attention of Her Majesty's Government if it had all this time been of opinion that the upper part of these inlets was in each case in British territory ( If. as Your Lordship concedes, the sul)ject of the interpretation of the treaty was in that correspondence tacitly avoided on the side of (ireat Britain, may we not fairly claim that the reason for silence on the part of the Tnited States was because the positive interpretation which had been publicly and uniformly asserted by Russia and themselves for nearly tifty years had never been questioned; in other words, because there was no question? Certainly, the United States never avoided it. tacith' or otherwise. My (irovernment does not reoard what took place between the two (ioviM-nments in 1S76-77 in the case of Peter Martin as havino- any conclusi\(' bearino-. My reference to it in my note of August '• was quite casual, as to one of the very few instances in which there had ])een any correspondence on the subject of the boundary; but there are certain features in that ease which are relevant. No one can read the note of Secretary Fish to Sir Edward Thornton of January K), 1877, and imi)ute to him any suspicion that the interprc^tation of the treaty definition of the boundary on the point now under consideration was open, or that anything- was left undetermined except the exact location of the admitted boundary line. He says: The al)Sfnce of a line defined and marked on the surface of the earth as that of the limit or })onnilary Ijetween the two countries can not confer upon either a juris- diction beyond the point where such line should in fact be — that is, the boundary which the treaty makes the boundary. Surveys make it certain ami patent, l)ut do not alter rights or chantje riglitful jurisdiction. It is (pute true that the Minister of Justice reconunended that the release of Martin l)e i)ut upon the ground of the conveyance of the pi'isoner through American territory. But the British Charge, in his note to Mr. Fish, did not state the ground u})on which the ivlease was ordered; and the proceedings seemed to inxolve ti tacit concession on the part of (ireat Britain that the place of the assault Mas in Amer- ican territory. The demand foi- his release was upon tliat groiuid. and the British Minister so understood it. In examining the Canadian documents in relation to the case, it appears that the surveyor, who was sent l>y the Canadian Surveyor-Ceneral to visit the locality, reported four months before the release of Martin that the assault for which Martin was tried was committed in the territory of the I'nited States 13 miles from the mouth of the Stikine Kiver; and the Ministtn- 148 CORRESPONDENCE AFTER ADJOURNMENT of Justice, to w lioiii the case was referred for imcstij^-iition, reported to the Privv Council that the assault was upon American territory, and no suogestion to the contrary was made hy anyone on the part of (Jreat Bi'itain. In my note of Au*>ust 0, 1 made no reference to Mr. liayard's note to Mr. Phelps of Novemher 20, LSS."). jind to the correspondence which that note initiated. This omission was not from overlook! n^- that note and correspondence. l)ut because a carefid readino- of it had satistied me: and now that Your Lordship has brought it up, 1 submit to your candid judonient that Mr, Bayard did not there take the view that the interpi'etation of the l)Oundary articles of the treaty was an open ques- tion, but only that the demarkation of the line was undetermined and was full of difficulties in the then state of topoo-raphical knowledtic. Of course, Mr. Bayard in that note made no claim that the interpre- tation of the treaty as regards any particular part of the boundary line was no longer open, for nobody, so far as we can discover, had up to that date claimed that it was open. Certainly no one on the part of Her Majesty's Government had done so. Undoubtedly, Mr. Bayard did point out in that note that '' no cpiestion concerning- the true location of the line stipulated in the treaty had ever arisen betAveen Great Britain and Russia prior to the cession of Alaska to the United States.'' But in the same pai)er and in the same connection, he had already said, "It is certnin that no question has arisen .sv'/?cv^ 1S()7 l)etween the Governments of the United States and Great Britain in regard to this boundary," thus covering- the whole period from 1825 to 1885. In view of these emphatic declarations, my Government is at a loss to understantl how he can be held to have sustained the view that at the latter date the interpretation of the treaty as to the bouiid- ar}^ was an open question between the two Governments. All the statements of Mr. Bayard and Mr. Phelps in the correspond- ence that followed must be read in the light of these declarations and in view of the ol)ject at which they were aiming, viz, to obttun. not an arbi- tration to interpret the treaty, but a joint coumiission, which should make a survey of the line stipulated by the treaty, or, as Mr. Bayard afterwards limited it (in his subsequent instruction of March 19. l8S(j, to Mr. Phelps), to "'an agreement for a })reliminary survey of the Alaska boundary with a view to the discovery of such natural outlines and objects as may be made the basis for a future formal convention for the survey of the boundary line." He was deeply impressed with the extreme difficulty and enormous expense of a survey of the bound- ary line — ditficultics and expense whu-h we think have been very greatly reduced 1)V the rei)ort of the joint coumiission appointed in 185>"i and the ma|)s pre])ared by that conuuission — but all that Mr. Bayard and Mr. Phelps said may be read in vain for an}" indications of a doubt in the mind of either, whether the lisiere was a continuous and solid strip of land running around the inlets, and excluding- Great Britain from access to the sea in every part of its length, or a conge- ries of broken strips interrupted at the mouth of every inlet and admit- ting her to exclusive possession of all parts of every inlet above a* l)oint crossed by a line drawn from the crests of the mountains nearest to the coast. The difficulties of which ^Ir. Bayard treated at great length were the same which Mr. Fish and tlie (>xperts of both (to\ ern- ments then consulted had encountered in 1872, but neither then nor in OF JOINT HKiH COMMISSION. 149 ISS,") (lid thev «uo-o-est a (li\"('ri»('nce ot" views as to the iiiterj)retation of the treaty. When the Karl of Iddeslei^jli sent the Canadian inai) to Mr. Phelps with his note of August 27, ISSH. and felt called upon to disavow the correctness of the line of houndarv as marked on it. he raised no ([ues- tion about the interi)retation of the treaty of 1825 — certainly none as to whether the lisierc ran around the inlets, so as to keep Canada at all points 30 marine miles from salt water — hut pointed directly and exclusively to the doubt which had always existed as to the exact loca- tion of the ))oundary line, the eastern edge of the lisiere, occasioned by the alternatixe clauses of the treaty defining" it by parallel moun- tain sunnnits. or in their absence by the ten h'agues. He says that the l)oundary line shown on the map *' is merely an indication of the occurrence of a dividing line sonKur/n^rc In that ftijiitn;"' and he goes on to explain what he means by that and why no weight could be attached to it. inasmuch as the treaty *' irJilch drfine-s the line makes its location depend on alternative circumstances — the occurrence or non- occurrence of mountains, and, as is well known to all concerned, the country has never been topographicallv surveyed." Surely, consid- ering that at that time, more than sixty years since the treaty, the question now raised had never been suggested, nor any question about the meaning of "'the coast"" or "the sinuosities of the coast," the phrases employed in the treaty, he could not have intended covertly to raise it for the tirst time l)v the language used, nor could he have believed that our Government would so understand that language, which by the ordinary rules applicable to diplomatic correspondence, or to any correspondence, must be limited to its obvious meaning; for after sixty years of silent acquiescence and occasional active concur- rence in the interpretation publicly asserted by Russia and the United States, if he intended to raise such a radical question to the contrary, h(^ should have done it in unmistakable terms. The Earl of Iddes- U'lgh's hmguage is in exact conformity with the inscription upon the maj) itself, which he enclosed, and which doubtless suggested to him the caution which he gave. The boundary between British Cohnnbia and Alairika as shown upon this map is taken from a map of British Colnml)ia pul)lished in 1S71, under the direction of * * * Hurveyor-deneral for the Province of British C'ohuuliia; Init no steps have yet been taken by the Canadian (iovermnent to verify what decree of accuracy may be attached to the boundary thus laiil down. The same observations apply in full force to the language ciuoted by Your Lordship from the memorandum given to Mr. Secretary Bayard by Sir L. S. Sackville West in Se})temt)er. 1887. There was no more reason why the United States (TO\(M'iunent should take exception to this declaration than to that of Lord Iddesleigh. already discussed. In April. l8St), Sir L. W<\st had been instrui-ted by Lord Kosebevy to inform the (iovermnent of the United States th;it Her Majesty's (lov- ernment are prepared to take i)art in a preliminary investigation of the boundary (juestion. And Lord Rosebery had notified Mr. Phelps that he did not propose to move fui'ther in the matter until he knew what action was taken towards an appropriation ])y Congress. In the meantime. Lieutenant Schwatka, ha\ing l)een sent to Alaska, not by the I'nited States (iovernment, but l)y (Jeneral Miles. tluMi connuanding the DepartmtMit of the Columltia. and not to make any survey, but to gather information foi' militai'y purposes, had made 150 CORRESPONDENCE AFTER ADJOURNMENT his report, aiul iR'ither the rc'ix^rt nor the maps which accompany it delineating his route disclose any boundary survey on his part or the fixing- of any points for the boundary. His report, howe\er. casually stated that ""the country beyond Terrier Pass" (which by his map appears to l)c more than 20 leagues l)eyond the head of Lynn Canal), ''lying in British territory, lessens the interest of this trail beyond the pass to the military authorities of our (Jovernnient." This remark, which from the context is shown to l)e merely incidental to the nar- rative of his journey, has no further signilicance than an assertion on his part that the Kotush ^lountains are situated in British territory. And Sir L. West, in his memorandum, so far from raising an}- ques- tion about the interpretation of the treatv, or claiming that the ques- tion now presented was open, expressly declined to raise any discussion even in regard to the position of the boundary, ])ut merely called attention to Lieutenant Schwatka's statement, so that no prejudice might come from silence about it. There is no indication that either he or Lord Kosebery had any idea th;it anv question of interpretation existed. ' I venture to suggest that Your Lordship ma}" have inadvertently and without full consideration of the circumstances laid too much stress upon Dr. Dawson's letter of February, 1888, which comes next in order of time. Your Lordship draws the conclusion that '" Dr. Dawson, dur- ing the sittings of the Joint High Commission of 1888, made it dis- tinctly clear that // the Commission. l)ut in this " informal meetin<;^-" where '* neither party had any d(dei;ated powers whatever." It ai)]iears by Dr. Dawson's UHter. upon wliicli Your Lordship relies, that he did not put forward this idea as oriuinally his own. or one for w iiich he was responsible, or as a claim in any sense of Her ^Majesty's Government, but as the view of a Canadian land survevor, General Cameron, which he says in his letter to Sir Charles Tupper "may be substantially adopted," and he courteously furnishes Professor Dall with a copy of the letter as stating clearly General Cameron's views. It was wholly inuiiaterial whether Dr. Dawson adopted General Cameron's views or not: but Sir (,'harles Tuj)})er. who was then in ^^'ashino•ton. and wjis keenly alive to the importance of everything bearing on the Alaska boundary, was in no mood to adopt them. He a])pears purposely to have refrained from doing so: for in communi- cating to the Secretary of State a copy of this letter of Dr. Dawson, he refers to it as explanatory, not of the views of himself, or of the Canadian or the Imperial Government, but of Dr. Dawson's own views. I annex a copy of Sir Charles Tupper's letter. Professor Dall describes them as "'some very surprising claims" and as "the singular hypothe- ses regarding the l)oundarv line which have been emitted by General Cameron, of Canada, and which are formulated in the accompanying letter to Sir Charles Tupper," And Mr. Bayard refers to them as "certain views of Gen. D. K. Cameron, as sul>mitted in the letter of Dr. Dawson." Certainly, therefore. Her Majesty's Government made no such claim. And if there was any purpose on the part of the Canadian Government of making it, such purpose was very studiously and successfully disguised. I think it will appear that neither the Canadian nor the Imperial Government adopted or put forwai'd this claim until after the protocol of May 30. 1SH8. If the views of Her Majesty's Government as to the boundary were fully stated at the conference held in Washington in February. 181>2, with members of the Canadian Cal)inet and the British Minister, and a suggestion was submitted for a reference of the qui'stion to arbitra- tion, it does not appear of record in the Depai'tment of State, and no information of such a proposition is in its possession. No protocol of the conferences was made, as it was understood in advance that they were to be of an informal and private character; but Secretary Blaine submitted to the President a report of some length in regard to the PVbruary conference, as did Mr. Foster with respect to the second conference in June — l)oth of which were transmitted to Congress and ])ublished (Senate Ex. Doc. 114, 5'2d Congress, tirst session, pp. 3-13). These conferences were brought al)out because of the protests of the Canadian Government against a recii)rocity treaty with Newfoundhnul: and in the preliminary arrangements for the meeting, while a number of subjects were suggested for consideration, the Alaska boundary was not mentioned. Almost the entire time was taken up with com- mercial (juestions, of which Mr. Blaine makes full report and very l)rietly refers to other (piestions, among them ""a connnission totix the boundary separating Alaska from British territ(n'y." l)ut there is no intimation of so serious a pr()|)osition as an arbitration of that (piestion. I am not al)le to i^erceive. theref()i'(», that a proposition on the ])art of the British rein"(\sentatives. a>suming it to ha\ e been niad(> at such 152 CORRESPONDEXCE AFTER ADJOURNMENT iui iiifonnal coiitoroiu'c in tlio t(n'in.s quoted hy Your Lordshij). l)ut whic'li the .Vnioricau represeutativos refused to eonsidei-, can he ret>'arded as raisin<>" or ()peiiin»4' tlie question of the interpretation of the treaty now under consichM-ation. Undoubtedly, if that sug-gestion had l)een adopted and carried into an executed agi'eenient, it might have ])een possible under it to raise l)efore the tribunal any cpiestion whatever; but as a rejected proposition in tht^ form stated it opened nothing. c(M"tainly not the ([uestion of interpretation of the treaty raised b}- Canada's present chiim. It is suggested l)y Your Lordsliip tliat the treaty whicli was soon afterwards signed by the Secretary of State, Mr. Foster, and the British Charge, ^Ir. Herbert, was, and was expressed to be, "with a view to the ascertainment of the facts and data necessary to the per- manent delimitation of said boundary line in accordance with the spirit and intent of the existing treaties;" and that it was "agreed that as soon as practica])le after the report of the commission shall have l)een received, the}' will proceed to consider and establish the boundaiy line in question," These facts and data were to be the result of the sur- veys of scientific experts, and no inference can be drawn from this convention that there existed any divergence of views as to the inter- pretation of the treaty of 1825, especially as to the point now under consideration. It l)rought no such claim to the attention of the Amer- ican Government. What was postponed to be taken up after the reports of the commission should come in, and upon the facts and data derived from such reports, was the consideration and establishment of the boundary line. And it is now believed that with the light thrown u})on the topography of the country by the elaljorate series of maps on which the results of the joint survey were eml)odied. if the question now raised whether the lisiere runs around the inh^ts or across their mouth were decided, the actual location of the t)()undary in either view could be easily made by agreement or by tlu' present Joint High Commission. So far as the records of the State Department disclose, the first proposition submitted by the British Government for an arbitration of the Alaska boundary was contained in the note of the British Ambas-^ador, Sir Julian Fauncefot(\ to Secretary Sherman, wdiich it now appears by Your Lordship's despatch he was directed to write l)efore Her Majesty's (Tovernment had received the maps referred to. It is true that in this note he refers to "'the wide divergence of views existing," but when he comes to explain this by particularizing the line respecting which his Government is most concerned, he says: The great traffic whirh is now attracted to the valley of the Yukon, in the North- west Territory, by the recent discovery of gold in that region, timls its way there from the coast principally throngh certain i)asses at the head of Lynn Canal, and it becomes more innxirtant than ever for jurisdictional purposes that the lioundary, especially in that particular locality, should be ascertained and defined. This was the last statement of the views of th(^ British Goveriunent before the creation of the Joint High Commission, tuid it developed the fact that up to that time the divergence now so much (Mn})hasi/ed was more ai)parent than real, as it recognized that the line in dispute al)out the head of Lynn Canal was in the neighborhood of the passes. And this is the case in every instance cited in Your Lordship's despatch where the British Government has made any declaration of its views. 1 have alreadv commented on the Earl of Iddesleigh's letter to Mr. OF ,I(»Ix\T HIGH COMMISSION. 153 Plu'lps ill iSiSti. In ISST-SS, wIkmi the Hi'itisli aiul Aiiicriciin custoiiis officials cauio into conHict on the Stikinc Hi\ cr. and Sir Edward Tliorn- ton sul)Miitted :i i)r()j)()siti()n for a settlcnuMit. the question was whether tlie line in accordanee with the treaty should be drawn across the river where the Canadian surveyor had placed it 20 miles from tide water, or 30 miles. In 1872. when the ett'ort was made for the creation of a commission to mark tiie boundary, it has been shown that there was a concurriMice of opinion between the two Governments that the line should l)e di'awn across the rivers named, amono" which was the Skoot, which at no i)oint was less than 25 miles from tide water. It is clear that in every instance when up to the creation of the .Joint Hioh Com- mission the British (xovernment has made any reprt^sentation to the Government of the United States respectinjj;- tlu> t)oundai'v. it has related to the eastern or interior line of contact with Canadian terri- tory, either on the rivers or in the mountain passes, and that whatever uncertainty or difference of views was manifested arose from the want of precise knowledge as to the topography of the country, and did not concern the interpretation of the treaty. It is also clear that at no time previous to August 8. 1898. has the British Government intimated to the Government of the United States a claim to the waters of the inlets extending into the strip of mainland set otf to Russia by the treaty of 182.). Certainh', until such claim was made, and the rights of the United States under the treaty in the territory now disputed were challenged, there was no occasion for them to refer to the subject of possession, occupation, or political control in any correspondence with Great Britain; but we maintain that possession, occupation, and political control of the territory now disputed w^ere exercised continuously from 1825 to the present time by Russia and the United States in suc- cession, and such exercise is in its nature claim of title. I have refrained in this comuumication from importing any extrane- ous considerations and arguments in support of an interpretation of the treaty of 1825. but have limited it to what seems to me to be cogent And conclusive grounds for the assertion that its interpretation on the point presented has not been open in the long period from 1825 to ISHS. It is true that these views would be entitled to e(|ual consider- ation before atril)unal appointed to interpret the treaty and settle the boundary, but the uniform acquiescence and occasional concurrence of one ])arty in an interpretation opeidy })roclainu^d and acted on by the other seems to ))e a complete answer to the claim that that inter- pretation continues open. If the British or Canatlian (Jovermnent had at any time desired to enter a ])rotest against the claim of the United States, abundant otHcial data existed upon which such a protest might have been l)ased. In 1807, immediately after the sig-ning- t)f the treaty of cession, the Depart- ment of Stat(> issued an official map of the Territory of Alaska, on which the international boundary was traced, carrying it well beyond the sources of the streams emptying into Lynn Canal, and this line has been accepted in all the cartographic publications of our (iovern- nient since that date. In iss;] the Secretary of State sent to the British ^Iinist(M' in Washington at his recpiest co})ies of the amnial reports of the United States Coast and Geodetic Sur\-ev for 1874 and for other succeeding ^-ears. containing- boundary limits of a similar character. 154 CORRESPONDENCE AFTER ADJoCRNMENT The census i)u))licati()ns of isso and IS'.to not only contained a simi- lar map. but also an enumeration of the Indian tribes of the Territory,^ including those inhabiting- the country al)out the head of the Lynn Canal. Many other publications of a similar charactei' miiiht becitinl. Her Majesty's Government, however, held its peace durino- the time of these publications, and entered no claim to any part of the Lymi Canal until after the protocol had been siened in 18US. providing for a Joint High Connuission to adjust unsettled Canadian (piestions. The first presentation by Her Majesty's Government of the present claim of Canada was made in the instructions issued b}' the. Foreign Ottice to the British members of that commission, bearing date July ]9, 181)8. which was received by the Secretary of State on the 8d of August in that year. During the conferences of that conmiission, the American dcdegates asserted that no such claim had ever been put for- ward by the Bi'itish (iovernment previous to the creation of the com- mission, and the assertion was not called in ([uestion. Chairman Fair- banks, in his letter to Lord Herschell of February 11, lsi>i», referring to this claim, used this language: C)ur first advices on this subject were received at your hands since our sessions began at Quebec. * * * if the views you now present have l)een urged upon the attention of the United States at any time prior to the original jirotocol (May .'!0, 1898), we shall esteem it a favor if you will l)e good enough to direct us to the fact and date; further, we shall be pleased if you will advise us at what time since LS25 the British Government made claim on either Russia or the United States to any territorial rights round the upper part of Lynn Canal. To this Lord Herschell, in his letter of February 15, 1899, replied: The statement that the views of the British Government had not been made known till that time (the assembling at Quebec August 23, 1898) is erroneous. The instruc- tions given us by the British (iovernment made it perfectly clear that the upi>er ])art of the Lynn Canal was claimed as British territory. * * * A copy oi tliese instructions was sent on August 1, 1898, to the United States Secretary of State. To this letter Chairman F'airbanks, under date of February 1P>, 1899, responded as follows: It is quite true as stated in your letter of yesterday that the instructions of your Government were sent to our Government a few days before the Quebec meeting, but they did not in fact come to the attention of the connuission ers until they assem- bled at Quebec. You will no doul^t recall the observation made by (Tcneral Foster, during your presentation of the British case upon the boundary, tliat the view then advanced by you respecting the head of the Lynn Canal was the lirst distinct state- ment of the British claim. I do not recall that you seriously disjjuted it. Thus the exact punctum temporis of the first assertion of this claim of Canada by Her Majesty's Government is fixed. Your Lordship says that "the question immediately under discussion is whether or not the dispute as to the boundary should be referred to arbitration, and it is difficult to understand why the length of time during which the rival claims to disputed tei'ritory have been matters of controversy should form an element to be taken into consideration in that connec- tion." P)ut 1 may be pardoned, at the expense i)erhaps of painfid repetition, for saying that the precise question luider iimnediate dis- cussion is not whether there should be an arbitration, but. assuming both sides to be so disposed, whether the terms and scope of the Venezuelan arl)itration, where the arbitrators were left free to wander over the whole breadth of territory which had been the subject of con- stant and open dispute for more than a centur}-, and to make the boundary which they could not find, should be applied to this case, OF JOINT HKiH COMMISSION, 155 wIhm'c a line ti.xcd l)v a treaty in IM!'). a ])laiii iiit('i-i)n'ruti()ii of wliicli has 1)0011 unifonnly aiul publicly assorted l)y ono party witliout (jues- tioii or prot(^st l>v tho other for seventy-throe years, is at the end of that time assaiU'd and a new lino elainied — and whore the one claim or the otiun* must l)e riulit — leaving- no middle oround on which to create a boundary in the place of the one tixcMl by the treaty. 1 am sure that these views, oti'ored at Your Lordship's sutii>estion, will receive consideration at the hands of Her Majesty's Government. I beg to assure Your Lordship that the Government of the Cnited States is under no misappj'ohension as to the nature and s(;ope of the ])roposal for arbitration submitted ])y Her Majest3'''s Government. If 1 dwelt almost exclusively in my note of August 9, as I have done in this connnunication, "upon tho boundary in tho neighborhood of the Lynn Canal."' it was IxM-ause 1 took that as the most striking example of all tho inlets and because I regarded the question whether the boundary of the treaty runs around them or across their mouths as the most important and as the one which keeps us so far apart. For,- if this question were once solved, neither the question of the Avater boundary described in the treaty as "ascending to the north along the channel called Portland Channel"' nor the actual demarkation of the land liiu^ by mountain crests or by the ten-league measure Avould. T think, bo difhcult to settle either by convention or l)y tho aid of the Joint High Commission. While the claim of Her Alajesty's Government is not stated with absolute distinctness in your letter of Instruction of July V.K ISltS, it was to be inferred from its perusal that tho British connnissionors would maintain that under the treaty Great Britain should at least be entitled to a portion of Lynn Canal. And in the conferences of the commission a map was submitted by them (doubtless the one referred to by Y^our Lordship) with a boundary line traced upon it setting forth the British claim, which developed a divergence of views as to the line, not only in the region of the Fort- land Canal, but along the entire mainland of the lisiere. It is there- fore distinctly understood that the British proposal of arbitration relates not only to the entire line of the strip of territory from Portland Canal to ^Nlount St. Klias on the mainland, l)ut that it oml)races in the submission tho British claim to a portion of all the inlets extending into the mainland and to the greater part of L3'nn Canal. 1 need not repeat what I said in my note of August 9 as to the necessity of excepting from the perils of any arbitration settlements made l>v American citizens in good faith under tho authority and actual jurisdiction of tho (iovoi'nment of the United States before the claim now made on the part of Canada was qvov presented by Her Majesty's (Tovornment. Such necessity and the injustice of involving them in an arbitration are too ol)vious. 1 ha\"o tho honor to t)e, with the highest consideration. My Lord. Your most obedient humble servant, Joseph H. Choate. The Most Honoral)lo The Marquis of Salisbury, K. G., £tc.. t'te., etc. 156 CORRESPONDENCE AFTER ADJOURNMENT [EiK'lo.sure.] The BuiTii^ii Legation, The Arlington, \V(i.00, and remarked that, so far as he was aware, no reply had ever been made to it. As the absence of a rejoinder miglit l)e considered to imply inability to meet the arguments advanced it is desirable that I should i)lace on record the following ol)servations: — His Majesty's Government learned wdth satisfaction from his Excel- lency's note that the Govenunent of the United States Avere not averse to a reference of the main ditference between Gi'eat Britain and the United States to the adjudication of an inde])endent Tribunal, but rather contemplated the probability of such a mode of settlement of this long-pending controversy. They agree that what the Aml)assador •describes as the paramount issue, namely, whether the line should be OF JOINT HIGH COMMISSION. 157 drtnvii lUToss inlets ov round their liesids. can l)est be decided by tiiis means, l)ut they are unable to share the view that the particular course Avhich the line is to take when the above question has been settled can be satisfactorily determined by a joint .survey. A joint survey has alread}' been made, and if the dificrenees between the two Govern- ments could not be settled bj- the aid of the xevy complete maps thereby atiorded, it is scarcely to be anticipated that a fresh survey would achieve a more definite result. It seems rather that the '"minor or secondary'' thouoh '• hiy-hly important*' questions, namely, the exact location of the l)oundary line and its precise distance from the coast, are analogous to those involved in the main issue, and can only be determined by a similiar process. For instance, assuming- that the (|uestion of inh^ts had been decided, and a joint survej' dispatched to lay down the boundary in conformity with the provisions of the Treaty of 1825, which prescribes that the line shall follow the sunnuit of the mountains situated parallel to the coast, the British surveyors wouM naturally interpret this to mean the summit of the mountains nearest the coast, while it is possible that the Ignited States' surve^'ors might contend for the highest range. How could this point be decided^ Yet upon the decision would depend the possession of part of the town of Skagway, even suppos- ing the ownership of the heads of inlets was decided adversely to the British contention. Again, if there should be a break in the moun- tain range which it is decided to follow, should the line across the l)reak be drawn parallel to the coast-line between the same degrees of latitude as the tei'iuinals of the break or parallel to the general trend of the coast-line. Controversies over these points, and others of a similar character, the least of which might turn out to be of far-reach- ing inqiortanc(\ would, it is to )»e feared, arise, and it is scarcely to be expected that surveyors in the held could reach an agreement upon them, nor, indeed, would it be expedient to allow them such latitude. AVith regard to the question relative to the heads of inlets. Mr. ( "lioate observed that of the two absolutely distinct interpretations which have been presented by Great Britain and the United States, '"one or the other is right, and can and should be ascertained and determined so to ])e to the exclusion of the other." The same argument is equally applicable to many occasions of difi'erence which surveyors sent to lay down the l)oundary would encounter. For these reasons His Majest3''s Government are of opinion that all questions which depend for their solution upon the interpretation of the Treaty should be simultane- ously referr(Hl to arbitration, to determine the true meaning of that instrument, and this, not merely with regard to the Lynn Ganal or any other particular point, but in respect of the whole line, through- out its entire length, from the southernmost point of Prince of Wales Island to Mount St. Elias. What is desired by l)oth Governments is the termination of the dispute, and this appears to be the only way in which it can be satisfactorily and ]iermanently settled. The objection recorded by Mr. Choate to the application of the \'ene- zuela Tivaty to the adjustment of the pr(\sent controversy se(Mus to be directed against the provision for compromise which that arrange- ment affords, and the latitude giviMi to the Tribunal constituted under it: but. for the reasons which have been already adduced in Loixl Salislniry's despatch of the 14th Octobei-, 18iH«, His Majesty's Govern- ment still consider that the circumstances of the Alaska boundary 26020— Ai' 11 158 cokrespondencp: after adjournment controversy arc such as to warrant an unqualified submission to an inii)artial 'rril)unal. and it was solely with the desire to meet the ol)jcctions of the rnited States" Kepresentatives that the British mem- bers of the fJoint Iliiih Commission of lSiKS-l)y proposed to allow that continued adverse j)ossession should be recognized and full regard had to the equities of the case. With this object in view, it appeared to them that the Venezuela Treaty oti'ei-cd a convenient and suitable pre- cedent. Accordingly, they proposed arbitration on those lines; but His JNIajesty's (lovernment arc not wedded to a particular formula, and are prepared to consider any reasonable modifications to the rules suggested (not inconsistent with finality of decision) which the United States may consider the special circumstances of the case to call for. Towards such questions as the composition of the Tribunal and its organization, as well as the terms of reference. His Majesty's Go com- ment have, with the qualifications above mentioned, adopted no fixed attitude, nor have they declined to reconsider the original proposal of the British side of the Joint High Commission, which, at the same time, they conceive to be eminently fair to the United States. But while they are thus prepared to acquiesce in every reasonable concession, it would be difficult to include in that category without some reciprocal concession or compensation the stipulation contained in the last paragraph of the Ambassador's note, to the effect that all settlements made l)y American citizens in the disyjuted territory under the authority of their Government up to a very recent period shall remain the property of the United States, The main question in this controversy is that which involves the ownership of the heads of inlets in general, and of the Lynn Canal in particular. That Canal derives its present importance from the fact of its forming the natural approach to the gold-bearing regions of the Canadian interior, which are accessil)le by sea in those latitudes through the ports of Dyea. Skagway, and Pyramid Harbour. The valleys i)i the rear of these ports are the only known avenues of apj^roach to the interior which come down to the Lynn Canal, and ai'c consequently the measure of its value. Their ownership must therefore constitute, in the view of the United States" Government, the chief object of the arl)itration. There cannot be a doubt that the proposal of the United States' Pleni- potentiaries at the meeting of the eloint High Conuuission, renewed by Mr. Choate, to except from the ''perils of any arbitration all towns or settlements on tide- water settled under the authority of the United States and under the jurisdiction of the United States at the date of this Treaty"'' was put foi'ward with the object of securing Dyea, Skagway, and Pyramid Harbour, for th(\v are the only settle- ments on tide-water that can possibly be embraced by the dehnition. The suggested reser\'ation therefore seems equi\alent to a declaration on the part of the United States' Government that they will accept arbitration only on condition that the principal objects of the refer- ence shall be theirs in any event, and that Great Britain will so cove- nant l)efore the parties go into Court. The proposal seems ])ased on the assum])tion that the setthMuents at the head of the Lyiui Canal were established undei- the authority of the United States })rior to the announcement of any claim to the terri- tory in ([uestion on the part of Great Britain. So confidently is the soundness of this contention assumed, that several times in his Excel- lency's note it is emphasized by the express inclusion of Canada, as OF JOINT HIOH COMMISSION. 159 di.stiiu't from the mother-countrv. in the charoe of lia\ iiio- said oi- done iiothino- prior to 181>S to indicate her ehiini. 1 will not recapitulate the arg'unuMits to the contrary which ha\'e been previously advanced. Thei'e is one point, however, witii which I nuist deal in some detail. Mr. Choate su>•■o■(^^ted that too nuu-h wei^i'ht has been oiven to Mi'. Dawson's letter of the 7tli Februar}'. 1888. laid before the Fisheries Connnission of that year, and argues that the meetinos between that gvutleman and Professor Dall were wholly informal; that neither possessed any deleg-ated authority what- ever, and that their o})iiHons could not be held to commit anyl)0(ly but themselves. While it is true that the conferences between ^Messrs. Dawson and Dall were informal, these gentlemen were experts spe- cially selected by their respective Governments, and their views must therefore be held to be those of the (Jovernments which they repiV- sented. That this was so understood at the time is evident from the map (No. 1(3) which accompanies the Reports of both experts sul>mitted to Congress by President Cleveland on the 2nd ^larch, 1889. That map is a reproduction of one prepared in Ottawa for the pur- poses of the Conference of 1887-88. As originally published it show'ed no boundary-lines, but upon a few copies lines were drawn in ink by Dr. Dawson, showing (1) a boundary-line as given on the Uinted States' Coast Survey Map of Alaska, 1884; (2) a boundary-line approximately following the summits of mountains parallel to the coast, in presumed conformity with the text of the Convention of 1825, as understood l)y the Canadian Government; (3) one of the conven- tional lines discussed during the conferences, and referred to in the l^rinted correspondence betw'een Dr. Dawson and Sir C. Tupper, which the latter laid before the Commission. It was not possible to draw the second conventional line, as this depended upon geographical details not determined at the time. A note upon the face of the map states that the line from the United States' Coast Survey ]\Iap "dis- regards both the Treaty reference to mountains and that to the ocean coast." A copy of the lithographed map. with the lines and notes above referred to, was sui)plied to Professor Dall. and is reproduced in fdc-x'niiih' as Map No. itJ above referred to. That the line following the mountains parallel to the coast, crossing all the larger inlets, must at the time have been accepted as endiodying the Canadian view of the meaning of the Treaty of 182.5 is shown by the addition ])v the Ignited States' authorities to the fac-^hnih' (at the to}i and outside the border of the map) of the words •' Dawson's Canadian ^lap. 1887, showing conventional Ww^^ p}'op<>tlished i)y the Cnited States' (Tovernment and subnntted to Congress. The statement by Mr. Choat(= that the meetings between Messrs. Dawson and Dall were not held during the sittings of the Joint High Connnission of 1888 seems to have been made under a misapprehen- sion. An examination of the Protocols of the Conmiission discloses that on the Uth flanuarv, 1888, Mr. Chamberlain suggested that Di". Dawson and Profc^ssor Dall should meet and endinwor to agree uj)on some detiiute suggestions for the consideration of the Conference. On the 23rd January. Mr. Bayard concurred in this suggestion, and on the 8iith it was arranged that Dr. Dawson shoidd be sununoned liy telegraph. On the 2nd Fel)ruarv, Mr. Chamberlain announced that 160 CORRESPONDENCE AFTER ADJOURNMENT Dr. Hawson had arrivcMl at Washington, and Mr. Bayard informed the Conforeiico that the neccs-sarv arrang-onicnts would l)e made at onee for him to meet Professor Dall. On the 7th Fehniarv, Mr. Chamher- hiin i-eported to the Commission that Dr. Dawson and Professor Dall had not made any prog-ress on the question of the Alaska })oundary. The Connnission sat on the 2nd, 3rd, 6tli, and 7th Februar}'. The Conference between ^Messrs. Dall and Dawson were therefore held during- the sittings of the Joint High Commission. The inference that Sir C. Tupper dissociated himself from Dr. Dawson, because in the former's note of transmission he referred to the hitter's views as "his'' — /. c/., Dr. Dawson's — '"own," appears to be based upon a mis- conception of Sir C. Tupper's meaning. Bearing- in mind that on the same day on which Dr. Dawson's letter was written ^Ir. Chamberlain reported to the Conference that the two experts had failed to come to any agreement, it is not surprising that Sir C. Tupper should allude to Dr. Dawson's views as "his own." Jiieaning thereby his own, not as distinct from those of the -Govern- ment which he was there to represent, but from those of his fellow- expert with whom he could not reach any agreement. They were his iiidividual'views in the sense that they were not shared by Professor Dall. These view\s were known to the Government of which Sir C. Tupper was a men)bei- before Dr. Dawson was sunnnoned to AVash- ington. If the Canadian Government were not in accord with them it is scarcely likely that he would have been selected to confer with the American expert, nor is it probable that Sir C. Tupper would have placed them before Mr. Ba3"ard without, at any rate, some dis- tinct and explicit disavowal of responsibility for them. Moreover, as His Majesty's Government can confidently state, it is not the case, as suggested that Sir C. Tupper was in no mood to adopt General Cam- eron's o})inions on the subject of the Alaska l)oundarv, for it was at the instance of Sir C. Tupper, at the time High Commissioner for Canada, that General Cameron was selected by the Secretary of State for the Colonies to investigate and report upon this question of the Alaska boundary. Sir C. Tupper, in the year 188S, attached great weight to General Cameron's views on the subject of the Alaska boundary, and, in a letter addressed to the Secretary of State for the Colonies on the 1st August, 18S8, he entirely concurred in protesting- against any attempt on the part of the United States to disregard Canada's claim to the heads of inlets. He fortitied the protest of the Canadian (lovernment by a Minnorandum from (uMieral Cameron's pen, of which a co]iy is herewith inclosed. Attention nuist also be given to the Message of the President of the United States, transmitting these Reports and jSIaps of Dr. Dawson to Congress, and to the Memorandum of his S(H-retarv of State, which accompanied them, in which Mr. Bayard expresses the opinion that these documents are "of value as bearing upon a subject of .great international importance, and should be put in shape for public information." It appears to His Majesty's Government that the President thus l)ul)licly ac(|uainted the people of the I'^nited States of Canada's claim to the heads of the inlets more than eight years ))ef()re anything in the nature of settlement was begun at the head of the Lynn Canal, for beyond a few trilling acts of occupation on the part of private indi- viduals, at periods separated by considerable intervals of time, no set- OP JOINT iihtH commission. 1()1 tli'iuoiit was iittem|)tod in those localities until tlic niiiiiiit:' ru>li to the Klondike in the >2 the Canadian Ministers proposed, as recorded in Lord SalisburVs despatch of the Uth October, 18119, -'that a reference to some impartial authority ))0 made 1)V Great Britain and the United States for the purpose of ascertainino- and decidino- finally the true boundary, regard l)einLi- had to the Treaties relating- to the subject, and likewise to the case which may l)e presented ])y either Govern- ment, and to the testimony which may be adduced as to the physical features and conditions of that country.'' The accurac}" of this record is confirmed by the ]\Iinutes of the pro- ceedings of this Conference, signed by the Canadian Delegates and concurred in by Her ^Majesty's Minister at Washington. These ^lin- utes, which were published by order of the Canadian Parliament in the Sessions of 18!»2 and 18!K3. also record that on the iL'th February. 1892. ''the various contentions relating to the ))oundary were then explained." thereby indictiting that the existence of a divergence between the views of the respective Governments as to the true mean- ing of the Treaty was recognized at that date, and that each Govern- ment was acquainted with the claim of the other. The main facts in support of the British claim have alreadj^ been fully set forth in previous communications, and it seems unnecessary, as Ihave before said, to repeat them; but His Majesty's Government desire to place on record the foregoing supplementary observations in further elucidation of some points of their contention, and in disproof of the suggestion that neither the Imperial nor the Canadian (xovern- ment adopted or put forward the British claim to the heads of the inlets " until after the Protocol of the 3le water connected witii the Pelly River and the Yukon River. Lieutenant Schwatka noted Perrier portage as the point at which the boundary lietween Lnited States' and British territory passed, tiie I'nited States' territory lying seaward, the British territory inland. Lieutenant Schwatka had been employe(\ to make a recon- naissance in Alaska; l)ut finding that country most accessible through Lynn Canal, continued his exploration down the Pelly River in British territory until it passed the meridian of 141° west longitude iiito I'nited States' territory. Lieutenant Schwatka's Report was pnl)lished as a Congressional Paper. 162 CORRESPONDENCE AFTER ADJOURNMENT It is not known tliat tlu-rc has ln'cn any other otlicial claini to I'mier Pass as the point at which tlie international l)onn(lary rnns. Fnjni the ocean entrance to l^ynn Canal, the head of l)oat navi<,fation up the Chil- koot is about 80 miles; from this point to Perrier Pass is somewhat in excess of oO miles, or 10 marine leagues. Lynn Canal has water-ways of less than 6 miles in hreaittli at no great distance from its entrance. It is contended on the Cana. No. 1081.] December 18, 1902. Henry White, Esquire, etc., etc.. etc., London. Sir: I have to reqitcst you to procure at 3'our earh' comenience and forward to the Department t\YO copies of the Report described as follows: [North American, No. 119.J Report on the location of the British Alaskan Boundarv under the Anglo-Russian Convention of 1825 by Col. D. R. Cameron, R. A. C. M. (t. Coloni.vIj Office, September, 1886. I am, sir, your obedient servant. John Hay. Mr. WJdte to Mr. Ihnj. No. 1037.] American Embassy, London ., J<(nuary '23rd, 1903. SiK, Referring- to your Instruction No. 1081 of the 18th idtimo I have th(> honour to enclose herewith the copy of a Note from the For- eio-n Odice statino- that Colonel Cameron's Report on the Alaska I>()undary was printed contidcntially for Hi.s Majesty's Government and that they are unal)le to connntuiicate it to us. I have the honour to b«>, Sir, your obedient Servant, Henry White. The Hon. John Hay, cScc. l^c, t^c, Secretary of State. OK JOINT HKJII COMMISSION. 163 [Eiiclosiu-L'] Mr. VHIin-slo Mr. Wlnfr. Foreign Offkk, Juinunij JJikI, 1903. SiK, I tvlVrrt'il to the proper Department of His Majesty's Government your note of the olst Deeemher last, a.'^kint: to l)e supplied witli copies of a Heport on the Alaska Houndary by Colonel 1). K. Cameron. I now have the honour to inform you that this report has only been printed eon- tidentially for the information of His Majesty's Government, and I regret therefore that I am not able to comply with your recjuest. I have the honour to be, etc. (For the Manjuess of J.ansdowne) F. H. VlLLIEKS. II. White, Es(p, itc, 6cv., &.i-. EXTRACTS FROM DEBATES IN THE CANADIAN PAR LIAMENT. BOUNDARY OF ALASKA. [T'y't'/// Dehates, Tloiixe of Commonx^ Dominion of Cunada^ sct<-no')i 1879, Vol. /, 2)' 2-30, March 10, 1879.] MOTION FOR PAPERS. Mr. DeCosnios moved for a cop}' of a memorandum of the circum- stances that led to the conclusion of the Convention between Great Britain and Russia, of February 1825; also, a copy of the Convention, if any, between Great Britain and the L'nited States, of February, 1835, mentioned in Sessional Papers, 1878, 125, pao-es '^ and 30; also, a copy of the most reliable maps and charts of the Territory' of Alaska, that existed in 1825, and that have been made since, including- Russian, British and American maps and charts; and also, any reports that may have been made to the Government respecting- the Alaskan boundary, that have not yet been published. He said that, as it had been suggested, by the Hon. the Minister of Pul)lic Works, that some reports had l)een made respecting the Alaskan boundary, it would l)e as well to include them in the return. He had heard it stated that the United States Government intended to make some provision for the government of Alaska and to ask our Government to join them in defining the l)oundary between Alaska and British Columbia. Unfortunately for our country, the Imperial Government had neglected taking care of the interests of the western portion of this Dominion. When the Treaty of Washington was negotiated, in 1871, we were only allowed the right of free navigation in two or three of the rivers flowing from British Columl)ia through Alaska. Under the Conven- tion of 1825 with Russia, we had the right to navigate all the rivers that ran out of our territory and through Alaska, but by the act of Russia in 18(37, in transf(>rring the territory of Alaska to the United States, we lost the right of navigating the rivers. He thought the Joint High Commission at Washington might have included all the rivers the same as the Convention of 1825, although he did not blame the Commission for not having done so, because anv nation might abrogate a treaty by its own act, oi- bv a new treat}'. But Alaska was now becoming of some im}K)rtance from its furs and minerals. Several steamers were running lietween Stikine, British Coluni))iu and Alaska, conveying from 2.iK)'s Sea. an arm of the Pacilic Ocean. He asked, in his motion, that the Kussian maps, as well as the British and Ameri- can, should be brought down, lie ludieved that the AVestern Union Telegraph Company, when exploring that country for telegraph pur- poses had published a map giving a great deal more correct informa- tion respecting the geography of the country than the other maps, and he believed that the interior of Northern British Columbia, as well as Alaska, would l)e found nuich better laid down by the topographical stall' of the Western L'nion Company than l)y anybody else. How- ever, he asked that the papers might be brougiit down, and the infor- mation placed before the House in advance of any negotiations that might take place with the United States Government with respect to Alaska. Mr. Mills said he had no doubt the Hon. the Minister of the Interior had looked into this question, and was able to say if it was possible to bring down the maps that had been asked for. He (Mr. Mills) believed it would take a good deal of time, and some expense would l)e incurred in preparing all that the motion asked for. nor did he think the docu- ments would throw any additional light upon the subject. He supposed the correspondence would include the memorandum of Sir Charles Napier, relating to the Treaty of 1825, between Great Britain and Russia. There was no treaty, he believed, concluded between the United States and Great Bri ain, at that time. However, there was correspondence between thetAmerican Government and that of St. Petersburg, upon this subject, because the Territory upon the Pacific coast at that point was claimed by the three Powers, (irreat Britain, America and Ilussia. If the lion, gentleman obtained the correspond- ence, he would see that negotiations had taken place, in the tirst instance, between the Governments of St. Petersl)urg and Great Britain, who failed to arrive at any settlement of the matter: that ultimateh' the points in dispute between the two Governments were disposed of in the Treaty of 1825. which gave to liussia a narrow strip of territory upon the coast south of Mount St. Elias, extending as far south as Portland Channel, upon the express condition that all the rivers flowing through this Russian territory should l)e open to navigation l)v Great Britain, for all purposes whats'oe\er. It would be seen, ])y the correspondence, that both Governments claimed the sovereignty of the soil, that Great Britain ceded to Rus- sia the territory which she claimed, but. at the same time, retaining an equal right, or an equal sovereignty, in the rivers flowing through this relinquished territory to the ocean; so that these rivers were not only open to Great Britain for the purpose of ordinary commercial navigation, but were open to the people of Great Britain, and to any persons who might settle in the interior country, subjects of Her ^lajesty. for any purposes of navigation whatsoever. It was under this treaty that the British Columbian authorities undertook to take ]Mr. Martin from the northern part of British Columl)ia down to Stikine River, with the view of im])risoning him at \'ictoria for the offence for which he had been convicted, TIk^ correspondem-e would also show that the Law ( )ilicers of the Crown had, in answer to a com- munication dated the Idth August last, from the Colonial Secretary. Lord Carnarvon, expressed the opinion that the people of Canada had lost the rights which they ])ossessed under th(> Treaty of St. Peters- 166 p:xtka(ts from debates tmro-, l)y the ncii-otiatioiis Avliich took place at Wasliiiiu'toii in ISTI. and l)y the treaty hy which tliose iie*>"otiations were eoncludecl. The hon. ^eiitleniaii (Mr. DeC'osmos) would see that .statement liix'en in a coinmnnieation l)y the Law OtHcers of the Crown, and quoted hy the then Minister of Justice. Tliev said that, although Great Britain did not withdraw ai^y riuiit. nor could she have lost any rioht. ])y any neootiations between Russia and the United States in ISCT. because Russia, in conveying- the territory of Ahiska to the United States, could not convey to the United States any greater interest than she actually possessed, and she could not convey to the United States the interest that the (iovernnient or tln^, Crown of Crreat Hi'itain had in the navigation of these rivers, because the_v stated that that could not be done without the consent of Great Britain. But they further advised, upon this ground, that, because the Treaty of St. Petersburg- had b?en abrogated hy the Treaty of Wshington, the Government of Canada should, at the earliest moment, release ]\Ir. Martin. The hon. gentlenrin would see, therefore, that, if the people on the western coa-it were now in a worse position than they were before, it was due to the negotiations which took place at ^^'ashing■ton, and which were consununated l)y the celebrated treaty known as the Treaty of ^Vash- ington. ]VIr. DeCosmos said he could not agree with the hon. gentleman (Mr. Mills) when he said that the people of the Pacific coast were not in as good a position now as formerly; and that it was due to the Treaty of Washington of 1871. The Russian Government, in 1867, by selling the Territory of Alaska to the United States, abrogated the Convention of 1825. So far as the objection raised b^^ the hon. gen- tleman, even supposing the Convention negotiated in 1825 still existed, it would l)e a matter of doubt whether it would be within the terms of that treaty to use the Stikine and other rivers except for purposes of commerce. He contended that the negotiators of the Washington Treaty, 1871, neglected their duty. Sir John A. Macdonald said there were two opinions on that sub ject. Perhaps the liest international lawyer in P^ngland, Mr. Mon- tague Barnard, a mem])er of the Conuuission at Washington, and Lord Tenterden, who had taken part in sonH> of the most important treaties that England had negotiated, both werV> united in the opinion that, by the transfer of Alaska, the etlect of the ti-eaty of 1S25 was gone. It was also theo})inion of ]Mr. Gladstone's Government, and if that opin- ion were correct, the fact that the three rivers had been put into the treaty could do no harm. If the papers could be brought down within a reasonable time, they would be brought down. Mr. Mills said that he had observed that it was very strange these opinions were not communicated to the British Aml)assador at Wash- ington. He had met Sir Pxlwaixl Thornton, wdio, he knew, was not aware of the exist(M)ce of any such opinions. Sir John A. Macdonald said he could not tell what conversation the hon. member for l^othwell (Mr. Mills) had with Sir Edward Thornton; but it was a matter for him whetluM- he should repeat that conversation or not. Motion ac/reed to. IN THK CANADIAN IWKLl A M KXT. 167 yroni till (IrlxlfrX nf the S, /it/fr of ('(ln(l/■' ( '(iiKiiJd. 'PiirusDAY, Ffhi'iiary 2ofIi, lHf)2. [Kxtruct fi'din tlio Spuocli irom tlic Throm-.] * -Jt -X- * * * * The ineetin.ii' which had htM-n iuianucd with the Tiiitcd States Gov- ernment for a day in Octoher hist, for an infoimal discussion on the extension of trade between the two countries, and on other international matters recjuirino- adjustment, was post]!one(l at their request. But, in compliance with a more recent intimation from that (iovernment, three of my Ministers proccMnled to Washington, and conferred ^vith representatives of the Administration of the United States on those subjects. An amicable understanding was arrived at respecting the steps to be taken for the establishment of the boundary of Alaska; and for reciprocity of services in cases of wreck and salvage. Arrang-e- ments were also reached for the appointment of an International Com- mission to report on the regulations which may be adopted l)y the United States and Canada for the prevention of destructive methods of tishing and the pollution of streams, and for establishing uniformity of close seasons, and other means for the preservation and increase of fish. A valuable and friendly interchange of views respecting other important matters also took place. * * * (See Debates of the Senate of Canada, pp. 3 and 4.) Monday, Fehrvnry '29th, 1892. [Extract from speech on the motion to adopt the Address to be presented to the (Jovemor General in reply to the speech from the Throne.] Hon. Mr. Scott." * * * We do not know what happened the other day at Washington, because the ^Ministers have not advised us. They simply state that something did occur with reference to the extension of trade between the two countries, but the Speech is per- fectly silent as to what th(> result was. It is quite true that an amica- ble understanding was arrived at respecting the steps to be taken for the establishment of the boundary of Alaska. It was not necessary to go to ^^'ashington to discuss that. The question has been discussed in des])atches for twenty years. There was no dispute as to the bound- ary of Alaska. Hon. Mr. Abbott — Hear, hear. Hon. Mr. Scott. My hon. friend says ''hear, hear." It was settled in the treaty of 1825. The line was defined. l)ut not marked out. There is no doubt a dispute as to where it goes. It conunences at Portland channel and extends along the sununit of the mountains, where those mountains do not extend more than l(» marine leagues inwards, and if they are more than 1<> marine leagues, then lo leagues is the limit to a certain meridian, and from that point it is a straight line to the frozen ocean. That is nractically the position of it, and the only reason that it was not settled twenty years ago was that the expense was too heavy. The United States at one time proposed a «"Hon. Richard William Scott, Senator; Secretary of State of Canada since 1896; * * * Commissioner of Crown Lan; Secre- tary of State, 1873-78; Leader of ( Jpiiosilion in Senate, lS7iMi(;/' ' Frnm "Who' Who, 1903, London, 1903. ) 1()S EXTRACTS FROM DP:BATES voto for the purpose aiul it was then said tiiat it would cost ahout two uiiliion dollars. Tho population was siuall. and thov did not fool warranted at the time in making that particular survey. It is purely a (juestion of survey. The terms of the treaty are not disputed. I think as a matter of compromise at the time it was agreed hetAveen the two countries that we should njark off the line where it crossed tho Stikine and other riv(M-s, but it w^as going to cost too nuich entirely to run out this particular ))oundarv. That, I think, is what actually occurred. I)ecause J rememl)er something of it m^'self. iV number of despatches ]jassed l)etween the two countries twenty years ago. Kow'. today I see l)y the American returns that the jwpulation of Alaska is nearly 0,000 whites and some 33,000 Indians. 1 do not know what the population of our own North-West, and British Columbia adjoining that, is, but it cannot be very much, and it is doubtful if there is an}^ necessity to define the boundary, now, unless it is to remove a certain degree of friction. To my mind, the natural way l)etween two friendly countries would be to arrange a conventional boundary until the population on the one side or on the other was sufficient to warrant the necessity of positively making cut this par- ticular line. No doubt it is a very expensive l)oundarv. The expen- sive part is, of course, the fringe of land that runs along the coast up to the particular part where the meridian runs, because it is entirely a matter of cost; 1 have never heai'd of any dispute as to the interpre- tation to be given to the treaty, because the treaty is plain and speaks for itself. I have the terms of it under mj" hand here this moment, if it is desirable to read them. I do not suppose it is; it cannot ])e disputed. * * * (See Debates of the Senate of Canada, i)p. 14 and 15.) From Dehates^ FIousc <>f Chiiiiiioois, Dominion of Canada^ 189S, Vol. /, jK 405, Fehrminj 11, 1898. Sir Charles Hihbert Tupper. Before the Orders of the Day are called, I would like to call the attention of the Government to an important telegram pu])lished in the ^Montreal '"Gazette" of this day. in regard to two im])ortant sut)iects that have Vieen mentioned in the House, namely, the Yukon Railway Bill and the <|uestion of coasting regulations. * -x- * * * * * May I also ask the (TOvernmcMifs attention to what it seems to me would be of great assistance in the debate of the railway Bill, and 1 ask the particular attention of the Minister of the Interior, wdio is familiar with the sultject and understands how far in coimection with the present negotiations regarding the boundary it is ))ossible to com- ply with my suggestion, ^ly suggestion is that upon a copy of the map already prescMited to the Mouse there should be ])laced indications, for instance, red marks would do, showing the positions in the dis- puted territory that the United States at present occupy by customs or other officers. 1 think that would be quite sufficient. Of course, I do not know how far the Govei'nment would l)e warranted in mark- ing what is disputed territory, nevertheless I think it would n(^t con- found any proper conception to mark the points they have already occupied in the territory with customs officers. The Minister of Marine and Fisheries (Sir Louis Davies). It IN THE CANADIAN PAKLIAMENT. 169 initilit !)(' ii-; liai'd to liiul the disputed boiuidurv as tho real houiid- arv. Sir CiiAKLKS Hii5i5KRT TuiTKR. 1 do iiot pposs for any inii)ro|)ricty being- connnitted. but I think this can he done, that on the map could be marked the points the United States occupy by officers of any cliar- acter, customs, or otherwise. The Minister of the Interior (Mr. Sikton). First, with respect to the (juestion asked as to the boundary line. The difficulty arises at three points particularly. First, in the teri-itory ai'ound th(^ Stikine River. There is, however, a provisional boundary, which was ruu some years ago aud provisionally adopted by both (Tovernments. jNlr. Foster. How far inland is that:? The Minister of the Interior. 1 scaled it on the map and from the mouth of the river it is about twenty-two miles — not twenty-two miles ill a straight line, but that distance following the windings of the river. There is therefore no present difficulty there. Our officers have been sent there for the purpose of establishing a post just within the provisional line of the Stikine River, and they have l)een furnished with maps showing the provisional boundary line. Sir Charles Tuiter. When was that provisional boundai-y line established i The Minister of the Interior. Speaking from recollection, it was some time in 1S7() or 18TT. Difficulties also arose in the White Pass, behind the village of Skagway, and at Chilkat Pass behind Dyea. I believe our contention is that Skagway and Dyea are realh' in Cana- dian territory, but as the United States have had undisputed posses- sion of them for some time past, we are precluded from attempting to take possession of that territory. Sir Charles Hihrkrt Tuiter. May I be excused for saying that I do not think the hon. Minister meant to sa}'^ '"undisputed possession". The Minister of the Interior. There have been no protests made. It must be taken as undisputed when there has been no protest made against the occupation of that territoiy by the United States. Sir Charles Hibbert Tupper. A claim, I suppose, was made and adhered to^ The Minister of the Interior. There is nothing in the records to show that any protest has Ixhmi made — an unfortunate^ thing for us, ])ut it is a fact. I do not know that that particularly atiects the dis- cussion, because there has ])cen no real discussion al)()ut tliat particular point. We have taken the position that there can be no doubt raised as to the Canadian territory l)eginning at the summit; we have taken the position that the claim of Canada to occupy the territory inside of the summit from the boundary at White Pass and Chilkat Pass is not deniable, and we cannot admit it is debatal)le, and we have instructed our officers to estal)lish posts as near the t)oundary as ]>hysieal con- ditions will permit. Mr. Foster. How far from the water line^ The ^IiNisTER OF THE INTERIOR. About fifteen miles fi-om tide water. An accurate survey has not l)een made in th(^ \\'liite Pass, but the distance is al)()ut the same, fifteen miles. Therefore, so far as possil)le under the present coiulitions, the idea of the hon. gentleman has been carried out, and our officers have been instructed to locate themselves as nearly as possible to the summit on the north-eastern side and to take the summit of the White Pass and Chilkat Pass as the boundary line, without making any admission as to the right of the L'nited States to the territorv on the seaward side. 170 EXTRACTS FROM DEHATP:S I'i'oin Dchatt'S^ Jlousr of Coiiiiiionx^ iJoiiKiiion of CaiKula. 1S9S. I d. 7. 'p. filO. Frhniar;/ IG. 1S!)S. UNITED STATES OCCUPATION OF DYEA AND SKAGAVAY. Mr. Prior. Before the Orders of the Dn.\ are called, I wish to ask the right hon. First jNIinister whether his attention has been called to certain paragraphs that haxe appeared in the press, both in the United States and in Canada, to the effect that the United States Government are about to send two companies of troop to l)e permanently stationed at Dyea and Skagway. at the head of the Lynn Canal. That is, as you know, in disputed territory. It is a highway to the Yukon coun- try, and the reason given in these papers is, that there are a large number of disorderly characters assembled there at present, and that troops are required to prevent any riotous proceedings taking place. I also wish to ask the right hon. gentleman wdiether his Government has seen tit to let the United States Government know that the}' have no objection to these troops being sent there, but that such permis- sion nuist not be considered as an admission on the part of Canada that our claim to that territory has been withdrawn. We saw, in times past, how the sending of troops to San Juan affected the argu- ment before the arbitration, and I, for one, would not like to see the same thing occur again with regard to D\'ea and Skagway. The Prime Minister (Sir Wilfrid Laurier). The Government has not been informed of the intention to which my hon. friend has just referred. The Government did not know it was the intention of the American Government to send their troops to Dyea and Skagway. ]\Iy hon. friend is aware that, although this is disputed territory, it has been in the possession of the United States ever since they acquired this country from the Russian Government in 1867. and, so far as my information goes, I am not aware that any protest has ever been raised l)y any Government against the occupation of Dyea and Skagway by the United States. It is only in recent years that the attention of the pul)lic has been drawn to it. I may say to my hon. friend, that the importance of having a delimitation or settlement of the boundary between Canada and the United States in that region is at this moment enoaiiino- our attention. From Dclxifcs^ Ilous, of Commons^ Dominion of (yinfi(h(. 189S,YoJ. /, 'j>. 127 If, March 7, 1898.^ THE YUKON RAILWAY — THE ACTION OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE. Sir Charles Tuim'Er. B(>fore the Orders of the Day are called. ]\Ir. Speaker, I draw the attiMition of my right hon. friend (Sir ^\'ilfrid Laurier) to the statement which has just been made by the hon. mem- ber for Halifax (Mr. Kussell). I wish to ask my right hon. fricMul if he is aware of the action which the Senate of the United States have taken in the most formal and unmistakable manner, and whether in view of it he proposes to proceed w ith the Bill now before the House. M}' right hon. friend will remember that when this action of the United States was tirst pr()})osed. I drew his attention to it, and his reply to me was: that it was impossible to suppose that the legislature of any country like the United States of America could possibly adopt a IN THP: CANADIAN I'AHLIAMENT. 171 measure of that kind. The riulit hon. o-cuth'iiiaii therefore (h.H'liiied at the time to consider seriously a proposition of such an extravagant character. We are now ))r()u_iiht face to face with the fact that the Senate of the United States, so far from treatin Bill is concerned. I am quite certain that my right hon. friend and his colleagues will receive the hearty support of both sides of this House, in taking that manly and inde- pendent course which is absolutely due to the character and position of this country, and in devising such measures as will ett'ectually pre- vent our being subject(Kl to the ])ase humiliation we will l)e subjected to, if we were to submit to such terms as the Senate of the United States propose to dictate to the Government and Parliament of Canada. I beg. Mr. Speaker, to move the adjournment of the House. The Prime Minister (Sir Wilfrid Laurier). I agree very sincerely with the sentiments which have been uttered this moment bv my hon. friend (Sir Charles Tupper). I agree very sincerely w ith every- thing that he has said in regard to the maintenance of the dignity of this young nation. We are only a small nation yet. We are willing to 1)6 on the most fi'iendly terms with the powerful nation to the south of us. but 1 agree with the hon. leader of the Opposition that nothing should be given away of our national dignity. Though I agree with the sentiments which he has expressed in this regard. 1 am sorry that I cannot at all agree with him in the conclusions which he has based upon these sentiments. And 1 venture to believe and ho])e that when he has reflected upon this subject, he will come back to the opinion he himself expressed at one time outside of this House, and has since repeated in this House, that the only route we could have taken to have access to the Yukon country was that l)v the Stikine River, if we wanted to have the advantage given to us by treaty and to avoid the possi})le hostility of our American neighl)ours in regard to trade arrangements. When we had to determine upon the policy we woidd adopt and upon the route we would select, in order to afl'ord to Canadian trade and to the Canadian people access to that part of their own territory which lies in the region of the Yukon River, it was ai)parent that there was only one of two routes to lie chosen. We had either to take the route by the Lynn ('anal and Dyea, or the route t>y the Stikine River. The advantages of the one had to ho set against the disadvantages of the othei- and vice versa. The advantages of the route l)y the Lynn Canal were that it was shorter and more direct than the route l)y the Stikine River. But if W(^ had a(lo])ted the route l)y the Lynn Canal, that is to say. had chosen to build a railway from Dyea by the Chilkat Pass up to the waters of the Yukon, we would have to place the ocean terminus of the railway upon what is now American territory. I agree with the statement which has l)een made on the Hoor of this 172 EXTRACTS FROM DEBATES house, on more tluin one oeeasioii. that Dyea. if the treaty is correctly intei'preted. is in Cairadian territory'. It ought to he; but the fact is, as my hon. friends know very well, even those who do not belong to the leoal profession, that possession is nine points of the law; and even though by the letter of tlie treaty, l)\'ea is in Canadian territory, the fact remains that from time inmiemorial Dyea was in possession of the Russians, and in 18(57 it passed into the hands of the Americans, and it has been held in their hands ever since. Now, 1 will not recriminate here; this is not the time nor the occa- sion for doing- so; but so far as 1 am aware no protest has ever been entered against the occupation of Dyea by the American autliorities; and when the American authorities are in possession of that strip of territory on the sea which has Dyea as its harl)our, succeeding the pos- session of the Russians from time immemorial, it becomes manifest to everybody that at this moment we cannot dispute their possession, and that befoi'e their possession can be disputed, the question must be determined by a settlement of the question involved in the treaty. Under such circumstances, Dyea Avas practically in American terri- tory — at all events, in possession of the Americans; and, therefore, if we had undertaken to Iniild a railway from Dyea to the Yukon country, we Avould have l)een placed at the mercy of the American authorities with regard to the bonding privilege. We would have been in this position, that though we had built a railway, the ocean terminus of that railway was not in our own country, and we could not send a ton or a pound of goods over that railway unless we had the permission of the American authorities. From DelxitcK^ House of Conotiiojis^ Douiinlon of Canada. 1901. Yol. //, p. U07, May 6, 1901. ' THE ALASKAN BOUNDARY. Hon. E. G. Prior (Victoria, B. C): Before the Orders of the Day are called, 1 would ask the right hon. leader of the House to give his attention to some correspondence 1 have received concerning the Alaskan boundar}- dispute. Last year I asked in the House: Has the large map of the Dominion, whioh was lately exposed to view in the vestibule of this building been sent to the Paris exhibition as an olKcial map of Canada exhibited by the government? Is it true that the boundary between Canada and Alaska, coimiioidy known as 'Alaska boundary', is marked on that map arcording to the United States contention, and tliat the boundary according to the Canadian, or British Colundjia, contention, is not shown at all? To this question, the hon. the Minister of Agriculture, replied: The map in question was sent to Paris as one of the exhibits of the Department of Public Works, but not as an official majx It is true that the boundary between Canada and Alaska, connnonly known as the 'Alaskan boundary', is marked on that map in two ways, marking the American contention and the Canadian conten- tion as to the lioundary, and each of these markings is distinctly stated to be what it represents, so that I do not think there can be any possiljle dilticulty or doubt as to what is meant. Last year I wrote to Mr. Begg. who has taken a great deal of inter- est in this question, and we both wrote to Mr. Brymner, who was then in Baris, asking him to go to the exposition and examine the map. 1 have not got Mr. BrA'mner's answer to myself, as I imfortunately left IlSr THE CANADIAN PARLIAMENT. 173 it ut home, but 1 luive a letter here from ^Nlr. 15eo-o- on the .sume sub- ject, dated 17th April, 1901: I have been lookiiifz over the letter sent to me by 'Sir. Brymner of Pari8, who visited the exhibition at yonr reciuest, and mine, to s^ee if it \va8 as represented — one provisional Ixunuhiry for British Cohniibia and another for Tnited States. In liis letter to me dated July 17, IHOO, he says: 'I had your note re the frontier question, also a letter from Col. Trior, House of Conmions, Ottawa, askinji me to ji;o and see if it was really as you stated, that the boundary marked ran up Poitland Canal, and not up C'larence .Sound, and if two boundaries were given and marked " provisional." There is but one boumlary marked, and that is the one claimed by United States, and there is absolutely no mention made of its being provisional. ' There is no dis- tinct colour between American and Canadian territory, so it is very difficult to trace the line, the area being so great (covered liy the ma])) that nearly all the names have been left out, so that neither Portland Canal, mir Clarence Sound are men- tioned. Wrangcl being the only name given in that neighborhood.' Mv object in alluding to this matter now is that this same map may be sent to Glasgow exhibi- tion, and it would be well to know if the erroneous boundary is marked running up Portland Canal, and if the British Columl)ia provisional boundary along Clarence Straits, as shown on British Columl)ia maps, is entirely left out. ]Mr. Brymner's statement is undoubtedly correct, and it agrees with Mhat I sup- posed were the facts of the case. Of cour.'^e, I have not seen the map m\ self, but if Mr, Brymner'.s statement, both to Mr. Begg- and my.self be correct, namely', that the only boundary marked on the map is that which the Americans con- tend for, the government is greatly to blame for having allowed such a map to be put on exhibit. No doubt if on this map only the Ameri- can contention is shown, that will be brought in as an argument in favonr of the United States whenever the matter goes to arbitration. I would ask my right hon. friend whether he will find out if it be true that the Ameriean I)oundary is the only one indicated on this map, or whether there are two distinct boundaries marked on it and both stated plainly to be provisional^ The rKniE Ministek (Rt. Hon. Sir ^^'ilfrid Laurier). I shall call the attention of my colleague the Minister of Agriculture to the rep- resentations of my hon. friend. I may say, however, that in view of the advice we have received from our law officers, it is very hard to maintain that the boundary runs up Clarence channel. The treaty says in so many words the Portland canal, but there is a difference in opinion l)etween the Americans and ourselves as to where that channel is. We claim that it is west of Pearse Island. They claim that it is Ol)servatory Inlet. As to endeavouring to have the line pass along Clarence channel, which is a pretension Mr. Begg has often submitted to me, I do not think any one, who will take a careful view of the mat- ter, can be convinced of the correctness of that pretension. The point on which we iind the Americans do not agree, is as to what is Poi-t- land channel. They want to make it run up Observatory Inlet and rhcii to the west, making out that Observatory Inlet is only a small inlet rumiing into the interior. We, on the other hand, contend that Portland channel is as it is described on the map of \'ancouver on which the treaty of 1S25 .seems to have been based, namely, all that channel of water which runs west of Pearse Island. Hon. Mr. Prior. I do not think that this has anything to do with the (luestion whether the map is wrongly marked. Whatever bound- ary is described on it, should be marked provisional. The Prime Minister. The only provisional line we have agreed upon is around Lynn canal, and if my hon. friend will look carefully at the relief mapwhich is exhibited in the library, he will see that that is the only provisional line we have agreed to. 26626— AP 12 CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES COAST AND GEODETIC SURVEY AND THE CANA- DIAN ^MINISTER OF THE INTERIOR, 18SS. (In the Appendix to the Briti.sh case. p. iJH6. there appears a letter from the Superintendent of tlie United States Coast and Geodetic Sur- vey, dated December 14. 1888, addressed to the Minister of the Inte- rior of Canada, relating- to a proposed surve}" of the boundary' of Alaska. Upon its face it shows that it was only a part of the corre- spondence on the subject. It is herewith given in full so far as is shown from the records of the office of the United States Coast Survey.) Tlie Sujjerhdendent of tJie Coast Survey to the Secretary of State. Treasury Department. C)ffice of the Coast and Geodetic Survey, Wa.sh!ngton. D. C, June 3, 1903. Hon. eToHN Hay, Secretary of State. Sir: In response to your request. I forward herewith copies of the correspondence which took place in 1888 between this Office and Mr. Dawson and the Minister of the Interior of Canada. So far as the records of this Office show the correspondence ended with the letter of the Minister of the Interior dated December 27, 1888. Very respectfully, O. H. Tittmann, Sujyerlntendent. 31/'. Colonna to Dr. DaiDSon. U. S. Coast and (^ieodetic Survey Office, Washington, D. C, Nov. 26, 1888. Prof. G. M. Dawson, Geological Survey of Canada., Ottawa., Canada. Dear Sir: I regret veiy much that when you were in Washington last winter I did not have the pleasure of meeting you. Knowing that your time was very fully taken up by some gentlemen in the City, and being very busy myself, I lost the opportunity of making your acquaintance. I beg now to ask your aclvice in a matter of interest to us ])oth. 174 CORRESPONDENCE OF 1888 RELATING TO A BOUNDARY SURVEY. 175 CongToss at its last Session made an appropriation for the bcoinnino- of a preliminary survey of the Boundary Line between Alaska anc! British CoUuul)ia. the work to be done by the United States Coast and Geodetic Survey. At the instance of the Superintendent of the Coast Survey Her Majesty's Govermnent was asked throuoh our State Department to send expert surveyors alono- with ours in order that all the sur\eyino- work which was done migiit receive the official sanction of both Governments. This proposition 1 have been informed was very favoral)ly received, but I have heard nothing- further from it for some time. Inunediately after Christmas we will begin the ecpiipment of our parties, and I believe that much good can be done bv having a thorough understanding with the Dominion Government as to just wh'.it we will do; but I do not know to whom I should apply for infor- mation oi- coojxn-ation. 1 therefore i)eg to suggest the matter to vou and ask if you will kindly interest 3'ourself in tt so far as you think it would be proper, and as you may be personally inclined, to the end that we may work in entire harmon}' and for the l)est interests of all concerned. If you will designate the person or persons to whom we should address ourselves formally, 1 will request the Superintendent of the Coast Survey to take whatever steps are necessary to ))ring al)out the desired end. Yours respectful 1}^, B. A. COLONNA Ata^lxfdiif in charge of Ojjice. Dr. Doiv-soii to Mr. Colon na. Department of the Interior Canada Geological & Natural History Survey. OttavKi, 1 Beceinhcr. 1S8S. Dear Sir: I have to acknowledge the receipt of your kind note and must express my regret that I had not the opportunity of meet- ing you personally when in \Vashington last winter. I have no doubt it will ])e found possible to make arrangements agreeable to both parties in connection with any survey of Canada- Alaska boundary which may be undertaken, and I shall be pleased to render any assistance in the matter which may be in my power. Referring to the immediate subject of your letter, I think vou had better communicate with Hon. E, Dewdney, Minister of Interior. Any surveys undertaken from here would prot)al)ly be under his Department and I believe that you will tind him thoroughly conver- sant with the main features of the t)oundary matter and ready to give innnediate attention to anything which may be addressed to him on the subject Beliexe me, yours truly, George M. Dawson. B. A. Colon XA, Es(i., As-'sistant in Charge of Ofice^ U. S. Coast and Gtodtt'ic Sarm/, Wai^hington. 176 CORRESPONDENCE OF 1888 The Siqyerintendtnt of tJu- Coai the Canadian Jltnister of thi^ I nt trior. U. S. Coast and Geodetic Survey Office, WasJiington^f Dec. llf.., 18SS. Hon. E. Dewdxey. Moiisttr ably be four. Except as it mav l)e necessarily interrupted by climatic or other causes, it is expected that the survey, once begun, will be continu- ously prosecuted and that the parties will not I'eturn from Alaska until its completion within three, and ])ro1)ably two, years from the actual connnencement of work in the tield. rp:lating to a bouxdauy sukvp:y. 177 In view of the foreo'oino- considerations it is understood that the expediency of such joint action by surveyors, etc., of the two g-overn- ments as is above outlined, has been made the sul)ject of corropoiid- encc between the two g-ovei'iunents. I have ventured to ])rino- the niattiM- to your attention now inasnuicli as the shortening of the time ])ri()r to the opening of the working sea- son i-enders it desiral>le that all the interval should be rendered avail- able to you for provisional or contingent selection of surveyors, etc., in anticipation of the formal action of your govenmient, which it is hoped mav be favorable to such joint work ))y the surveyors and astronomers of l)oth g'overnments. Any expression of your views in the premises, with which you deem it proper to favor me, will be duly appreciated by Verv respectfullv. Your obedient ser\ant, F. N. Thorn, Superintendent. The Canddian Mlnixtei' of the Interior to the Svperhdendt))t of the Coast Survey. Department of the Interior, Canada. Ottavxi, Beer. '27, 1888. I)p:ar Sir: I beg to acknowledge the receipt of 3"Our letter of the IJrth instant, in relation to the preliminary work about to be carried out by the United States Government in connection with the survey of the frontier line between Alaska and British Columbia, and to thank you for your suggestion that we should cooperate with your surveyors in this work. In reply I beg to state that I have submitted your letter to the (Gov- ernment, and that the matter is now under considei-ation. I hope to be able to comnuuiicate with you further on the subject. Yours truly, (t. Dewdney. F. M. Thorn. Esq., Sujjerintenelent^ U. S. Coast and Geodetic Survey Office., Washington. D. C. EXTRACTS FRO:\[ BlilTlSH AND CANADIAN PUBLICATIONS. Kd'ddrKtl ffoni ^^Thc C'oloji !i5 between Great Britain and Russia it was stipulated and agreed that an imaginary line should be drawn from the 60th degree of North latitude on the Pacitie to the 70th degree of hititude on the Arctic, which supposed line should mark the Boundary between the North Aiuerican possessions of the two powers. It was also stipulated in order to secure for Russia certain adyantages which were hers by right of discoyery that that power should hold and possess a narrow strip of Territory on the sea-board extending from 54. lO to the 00th degree of North Latitude, and running back 1<> leagues following the indentations of the Coast, and including all the adjacent islands. By this Treaty Russia secured the great Peninsula forming the extreme NorthAVestern portion of the Continent, while Great Britain reseryed for the use of her subjects the Territory lying SouthAVest of the Boundary line and East of the narrow Coast strip with the free navigation of the rivers emptying into the Pacitie be- tween 54.40 and 60. The mouths of Stekin and Taco rivers with 10 leagues of the land lying })ehind them are in Russion Territory, ])ut the subjects of Great Britain have secured for their vessels the priv- ilege in perpetuity of ascending these streams to communicate or trade with the British Territory without being sul)ject to any port or other charges. No goods other than Russian however can lie landed anywhere within 10 leagues of the Coast-line without paying duties. The Hudson Bay Company al)out the time that this Treaty was ratified leased from the Russian (iovermnent the right to trade with the Indians inhabiting this narrow strip. This lease expired some years ago and has since been renewed yearly. The present lease will expire in June next, but should the Treaty not ])e renewed or the Russian possessions pass into the hands of the Americans, the Company's vessels will have the privilege of ascending all rivers emptying into the Ocean between 54*^40' and 60^ of latitude, and trading with the Indians of the interior. Russian Navigators first discovered the country lying to the North of us and the strip was accorded that power to compensate her for the vast Territory (now known as British Columbia) to which she had consented to abandon all claim. The Pacific end of the line that stretches to the Arctic is mai'ked by ^Nlount Elias whose head is white with the frosts of Eternal Winter, and who stands like a grim Senti- nel watching, as it were, to protect the interests of both Nations, and to. see that no violation of the Treaty is committed by either with im- 178 p:xtra('ts fk(»m hkitish and Canadian i'Ublications. 17^> piinity. The Ku.ssian American Pcssessions are about 1,U0U inile.s in lenoth l>y 750 in breadth. The Fur Company exercise undisputed Authority over that vast extent of country which ha.s proved a mine of wealth to them. The country is represented as rich in precious and base metals. Thm-e -.ire traditions aHoat amono- Traders, who have vis- ited the sea coast that the Fur Com})any collect larue (juantitics of Gold Dust annually from the Natives. Such stories seldom contain a particle of trutli and u-eiieially exist only in tht> vixid imaoinalions of those who relate them. Hut it is a wellknown fact that copper in a pure state is found on the Ana River and that the sheets of bright native copper on which are traced Indian hieroglyphics said to possess great anti(|uity and found among the aborigenes on that portion of the coast were obtained on its banks and converted into their present form by some process known only to the Natives. Several large streams heading in British Territory How through the Russian possessions, and emi)ty into Behring Straits. These streams were partly explored last year by the Russian Telegraph Kmplovees. and one of them the Kvickpak. ascer- tained to be navigal>le for steam boats a distance of 14U<» miles. The Water in the vicinity of the Coast of Sitka as well as the Aleutian Islands (an important group lying to the South-East of the Peninsula of Alaska) furnish valuable fishing grounds, and the vessels of several Companies, with their Head-quarters at San Francisco, are extensively engaged through the Summer in catching and curing- cod-fish for the California market. The Russian Fur Company own several large steamers which visit the various stations at stated periods and secure rich freights of furs which are sent to Europe. The Coast is almost destitute of timber, and no good coal has been discovered there. The want of two such important essentials to life and comfort as these nuist ever prove a serious barrier to the rapid settlement of the country; it matters not into whose hands it may fall. From a Commercial point of view the establishment of a Colony of energetic go-ahead people who would open the mines of latent wealth that are represented to abound there, and would improve and turn to account every other advantage that the land may possess, would certainly prove beneficial to us. but looking at the Cession from a Political standpoint we con- fess we are not a little startled to ol)serve the strides that our Anun-i- can neigh])or is making on all sides to hem in and cut otf from every chance of Territorial expansion the British North American Confed- eracy. To Russia the possessions to the North of us are of no Political importance, but to the United States they may prove of incalculable value in view of the great and important change that has lately taken place on the Continent. The sum demanded for this Territory is said to have been ^T.ooo.doo. but from the opposition afiorded by the American Press we fancy it is nearer !^^7•>.•XM^(Ml(l. To judge from the despatches received last night it would appeal' that the ratification of the Treaty by the American vSenate is doubtful. Nothing pleases an American more than a knowledge of the fact that his country isadding to her Real Estate: extending her area: taking slow but positive steps towards the realization of the dream indulged in by Mr. Munroe whose "doctrine" was that the United States should inchidethe whole North American Continent. The position of the Senate is therefore strange and can only be accounted foi' upon the gi-ound that the Radicals are fearful that Mr. Johnson by accjuiring additional Territory should become so popular as to secure a re-election. 180 EXTRACTS FROM BRITISH Editorial froiH ''The CoJ(misf\ Mcforhi, li. C, dated Apr!! 17 th 1SG7. THE RUSSIAN TREATY RATIFIED. Our Special Despatch annouuces the ratitication of the Treaty whereby Ru.ssia agrees to sell and the United States ag-rees to Tmy all that tract of land lyino- North and West of the 60th degree of latitude and known as the Russian Possessions in North America. The im- portance of this purchase cannot l)e over-estimated. It opens to American enterprise the inexhaustil)le Fisheries and the extensive Fur trade of that region, besides giving the United States control of a strip of sea-l)oard 10 leagues in width from Fort Simpson to the 60th degree of latitude. Award that power San Juan Island and Great Britain will have scarcely a foothold of Coast on the Pacific that she can call her own or with which in case of war with our neighbor she w^ould not find it next to impossible to communicate, flohn Bull in America is being hemmed in by Brother Jonathan in a manner much more forcible than agreeable, and if the Duke of Buckingham really stated as reported that the cession of the Russian Territory to the Americans is a matter of inditference to Her Majesty's Government, he was either ignorant of the subject on which he spoke or the Home Government is trying to rid herself of her Colonies. The understanding between the United States and Russia is cordial, and although the cession of this Territoiy does not indicate an Alli- ance offensive between the two powers it would seem that Russia is preparing for trou])le on the Eastern question and is endeavoring to buy the moral support and sympathy of America in the struggle w^hich the whole World is aware must soon take place. A Report of a Committee of the Jlonoarahle tJie Executive Coimcil of British Cohnidna on the question of the Boundary hetu^een Canada and Alaska. [From "Sessional I'apers. 1SS5, Alaska Boundary Question," pp. 451, etc.] There are two points submitted for consideration: First: Whether it is desiral)le that steps should be taken to have the Boundary defincnl lietween Canada and the United States Possessions in Alaska. Second: A Requisition for Information in the possession of the Government of British Columbia on the subject, or that can be obtained. As to the first — For many reasons, apart from the national object of avoiding* grounds of dispute l)etween Canada and the United States, it is desir- able, as ert'ecting British Columbia particularly and the I>ominion incidentally, that the Boundary line referred to should be settled as soon as possible. Alaska ^vas purchased from Russia by the United States, on the i;^>th March, 1S67. for ^T,2oo,ooo. At that time its present importance was not exactly understood or appreciated. Its lately discovered sources of wealth in the seal fur trade, deep sea and river fisheries, gold and other mining, and groat extent of internal navigation In' AND CANADIAN PT^BLICATION^^. 181 niouiis of the laro'o rixcrs Yukon and I'orcupiiic. have added ^-reatly to its iniportaiK-e. and are tending' to inerea.se. in a projjortionate d(\uTee. the value of importance of the adjoinino- territory, helonging- to British C'ohuubia and the Dominion. The Stikine liiver, I'unning- into Britisii Columbia, communieating- with Dease Lake and Kiver. and ultimately with the Peace and ]Mac- kenzie Rivers and the surrounding- Noi-th-West Territory, has its outlet in American Teri'itory. Thi^ navigation of the Stikine. for l)ur})Oses of conmierce. was i'eser\-ed to both countries by the Treaty of \\'a>hington. isTl. In l.S7o. gold was discovered in the Cassiar District, about the upper waters of the Stikine. Dease lake and Ki\er. and the other streams in that vicinity. In 1874, trade rapidly developed itself. A mining population flowed in. and supplies of A'aluable goods and merchandise were required. In INTO, the volume of trade amounted to about ^o5o.O(M), and the duties paid to the Dominion Revenue, at Victoria and Glenora. on goods consumed in the Cassiar District, amounted to ])etween ^85.000.' and ^-1-O.(»0i>. Returns to ISSU show a somewhat tluctuating trade, as is connnon to all mining' centres, but the average taken amuially is still of consider- al)]e amount, namely, from 1S77 to 1880. from !^2i>n.0OO. to 1^215,000., and taken fi-om 1880 to 1881. diminishing- on the Stikine. but so increas- ing- along- the coast as to keep the average at the same point. Thus. a]:)art from all considerations as to the future value of this northern ])ortion of British Columbia, when the advancing- progress of settlement from the eastern sections of the Dominion shall have reached it. we have at present an existing- annual trade of upwards of §80<>. (•(»(», vielding- to the Dominion Revenue per annum S;-}5.O(»0 or $4(>.<>00. " This trade is seriously jeopardiz(>d ))y the unsettled nature of the <|uestion. that is the uncertainty of the l)oundarv line — not that there is the slightest uncertainty where it is to be found, but that it has not been laid down territorially, and locally detined between the two countries. As illustrating this danger, a short statement of facts will lie useful: — The entrance to the Stikine River is within American territory. The Am(>rican Port of Entry at its mouth is Fort Wrangel. There all goods intended for the interior have to be transshipped, or an American othcer put on board the British vessel to see that they are not landed in the American territory in transitu. Every merchant knows that this adds to the expense and delay of transportation, which expense and delay would be entirely avoided if. within the Bi-itish line, a port of Entry was established, to which seagoing vessels from (Mthei- British or foreign ports, with cargoes, could go direct, without breaking bulk, coming in no way within the purview of the coasting- trade ()l)iections. Within what is here claimed as undou])t(Hl British Territory- al)out 3<» miles from the mouth of the river— fa(-ilities for establishing such a port exist. Captain Irving, the present manager of the Canadian Pacific Steam- boat and Navigating Ct)mpany. an experienced and able navigator on this coast. Avho navigated the Stikine for two years when business commenced in that direction in 1873-71. states that the depth of water from the mouth of the river to P)uck"s. 3(» miles up. is from ♦'» to 8 182 EXTRACTS FROM BRITISH feet at low water, easily navil, Captain Irvino- was himself subjected to the most arbitrary and inex- cusal)le possil)ilities by the Custom House officers at Fort Wrang-el, resultino- in the illeg-al seizui'c of his steamer and the loss of several thousand dollars, fi'om which he had idtimately to seek redress in the Courts of the United States. At this place, called Buck's. 30 miles up the river, in 1876, a French Canadian, named Choquette, carried on a very laro-e trade with the Indians of the neig'hborhood. who, from old associations w'ith the Hudson's Bay Company, preferred dealing in British goods. The extent of Choquette's business may be estimated from the fact that from one firm alone in Victoria his purchases amounted to $25,(>0(), annually, and his sales several times in one day alone to a single Indian would amount to $1,200. in blankets, bv way of barter — a blan- ket, from the old Hudson's Ba}- Company's custom, being- a unit of value. It was the policy of the American authorities to divert this trade to the American markets, and, in October, 1ST6. Choquette was served with an ofhcial notification from the Custom House authorities in Alaska to remove from his place of l)usiness, or pay American duties on his stock, giving him until the spring of ISTT to obey. To see more immediately the application of this circumstance, it is to be mentioned that, in 1875. to avoid dithculties likely to arise from this undefined boundary, it had been agreed between the Custom House authorities of the United States at Alaska and the Dominion authori- ties of British Columbia, but without any direction or sanction from the Dominion Covermnent, to establish, pending or until a final set- tlement, a conventional line, crossing the river about two miles below ''Buck's", which, up to that time, had been recognized as admittedly within British territory; and in the vicinity not far from Buck's. Mr. Han)lev. the Collector of Customs for'British Columl)ia. had stationed a revenue officer, Mr. Hunter, to collect the Dominion duties. Finding, after a short time that, in so extremely isolated a position, it would not be safe for a revenue officer with moneys collected to remain, or reasonably concluding so from the reputation of the Indians and the dangerous characters resorting to the mines. Mr. Hamley deemed it prudent to remove his officer to Glenora. the head of the boat navigation on the river, where a vigorous settlement had sprung up. and where the duties collected in the seasons of 1875 and 1S76, extending from -lune to SeptemlxM', amounted to nearly ir^lo.ood. In making this removal, Mr. Hamley did it for the protection of the public funds and the safety of the pu])Iic officer. It is presumed, however, that the local American authorities regarded it. or assumed to regard it, as an admission of al)andonment, and immediately claimed the l)oundary line to Ix^ 30 or 4o miles further up the river, or about 60 miles from its mouth, and accordingly served Cho([uette with the notification above-mentioned. It is proper here to ol)serve that Clio(|uette's case was, l)V letter dated the 16th Octolxn-, ls76, conununicated bv Mr. elustice Grav, the AND CANADIAN ITHLIC ATIONS. 183 rJiulg'o of the SupioiHc Court wlio had Iuh'ii holding tlie Assizes at Cassiar, to the Dominion Government, and an arrangement was made l)et\veen Canada and the United States by which the threatened action of th(> American authorities at Alaska was stayed. Thus, we have the fact, not oidy that there is a good trade on the Stikine, but that there are facilities for preserving and extending the trade within the power of the Dominion Government, whih^ there is danger of losing it by diday in atl'ecting a settlement of the dispute as to the boundary. Other important eonsid(M'ations are also involved, which may have to form the subject of negotiation, rather than the demand of right. Under the Treaty of Washington, in ISTI. it was questioned wliether the right of navigation of the Stikine had l)een narrowed. By the Convention of 18-i."). l)etween Russia and Crreat Britain, in foiVe at the time of the transfer to the United States, there was no express limitation as to the purpose for which the navigation was to be used. By the Treaty of \\'ashington, made since the transfer, it was expressly limited to conunerce. This raised the question as to the right of the Dominion Government to transport criminals arrested or fonvicted through that part of the Stikine undoubtedly within Amer- ican territory; and. after much correspondence and negotiation with Her Majesty's Government and tlie United States, it was finally con- ceded the Dominion Government had no such right. Practically the absence of such right a))olishes all but the death penalty in that north- eastern portion of British Columbia. Tlu^ state of the country does not admit of the building and main- taining there peiiitentiaries or prisons, and the transport of convicted felons through ♦»(io miles of unbroken wilderness is practicallj^ almost an impossibility. This leaves that district in a most unsatisfactory and anomalous position as to the administration of justice. In another r(vsp(>ct also, in view of any ulterior extension of the Canadian Pacitic Railway, or its branches, to an ocean terminus at Port Sini]ison. the settlement of this Boundary line is important, both in a strategical [)()int of view, as atl'ecting the sea approaches to the port, and in an economical point of view, as atl'ecting the co. lection of revenue. These objections will more clearly appear when the second or topographical branch of the case submitted is under discussion. By delay, erroneous impressions also, as to the true terms of the Treaty become engrained in the public mind, which increase the diffi- culty of <)))taining a settlement. Already lai'ge munbers of the residents of Alaska though only tem- porary, entirely ignore oni^ of the most marked (dements governing^ the line, and convert a negative direction into an affirmati\(» right. For instance, when the line is directed to l)e along the sunnuit of the coast range of mountains, but in no case to exceed 1(> marine leagues from the coast, though the sunnnits of the coast range might not be more than 10 to 15 miles. This idea, by degrees, is taken to be the Treaty, and has to be removed with nuich labour before the public sanction would be given to any other line. How unjust this would be to l)ritish Cohunbia will be shown hereafter. These and manv other r<'a>ons ai'c conclusive that it is essential for 184 EXTRACTS FROM BRITISH the welfiire of British C()lunil)i:i. that the true bomidarv line, or soiii(> clear line of deniarcatioiu should he at once agreed upon, or settled between the two countries. Takino- up the second branch of the case, as to where the boundary line should be, it may be at once assumed, as an axiom, that unless by sanction of the contracting- parties or their representatives, it must be in accordance with the line laid down in the Convention between Great Britain and Kussi^i in 1825., There has been no ag-reement between Great Britain and the United States relative thereto, and the latter succeeded only to what Russia had. We have then hrst to see the terms and language used l)y the con- tracting parties in 1825. 2: The initial or starting point then agreed upon. 8rd: The course from that point directed to be followed. ■1: The effect of following that course as to compliance or non-com- pliance with the topographical features of the country pointed out in the Treaty as objects for guidance. 5: Whether the line claimed ]>y I)ritish Columbia does not in every respect coincide with the terms and language used })v the contracting parties. 6: \\'hether the line claimed or alleged to be claimed by the United States authorities is not, in ever}^ essential particular, a departure from such terms and language? The tirst point to be determined is — What were the exact terms and language used by the Convention between Great Britain and Rus- sia in 1825:! In McCulloch's Commercial Dictionary (edited by Henry Vethake. LL. D., Professor of the University of Pennsylvania, published at Philadelphia in 1852) will l)e found the full text of the Convention, signed by Stratford Canning, Nesselrode, De Poleticas. The line is there thus described:— 3. 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 Prince of Wales Island, which point lies in the jiarallel of 54 degrees 40 minutes North Latitude, and between the lolst and 133rd degrees of West Longitude (Meridian of Greenwii-h), the said line shall ascend to the north along the channel as far as the jioint of the conti- nent where it strikes the 56th degree of North Latitude; from the 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 same Meridian); and finally from the said point of intersection of 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 I3ritish Possessions on the Continent of America to the North West. In Hertslet's Collection of Treaties (volume 8) will also be found the text. It is identically the same, except that in the line "shall ascend to the north along the channeU'. it adds the words "called the Portland channel." AVheaton — the American writer on International law, (>th edition, edited by Wm. Beach Lawrence, pul)lished at Boston in 1855 — does not includ(> these latter words as part of the original instrument, but inserts them in his text and adds the words "Eastward to the Gi'eat Inlet in the Continent called Portland Channer". which Hertslet does not use. AND CANADIAN PUBLICATIONS. 185 In givino- his details of this Convention or Treaty as lie t-alls it. at page 2'2-i. after stating that it was signed at St. Peters})urg, Fel)ruarv 28th, 18:^5. and established a permanent l^oundai'v line between the territories respectively claimed by them (e. g.. Great liritain and Kussia) on the Continent and Islands of North Western America". AMieaton sa3's — By the 3rd and 4th Artirle^it was ajirreed that the Hue of demarcation l)etween the PossessionfJ of the hi, it is not set out in full. l)ut is declared to be in force bv the Treaty of Commerce 186 EXTRACTS FROM HRITISH and Navigation between Great Britain and Russia, signed at St. Peters- burg-, January li^th, 1859, the IHtti section of whicli says: In regard to Commerce and Navigation in the Russian possessions on the Xortii- Avest Coast of America, the Convention conchided at St. Pt'tcrshiug on tlu' Itith Fehruarj-, 1S25, shall continue in force. It is a singuhir circumstance that, in all the negotiations and corre- spondence with the LInited Sttites and the directions l)\' the Dominion Government to its own officers, it has been assuined tJii'oughnut that the original Treaty or Convention between Great Britain and Russia did contain those words "called the Portland Channel," as appears Ijy the Return made to the Dominion House of Commons on the 2ord of April, 1878, to an Address dated 21st February. 1878. for information on the sul)ject of the boundary line, as connected with the subject of the escape of one — Martin; United States Customs notitication to Choipiette; and the contemplated issuing of a Conmiission jointly with the United States to run the line, and published in extenso in the Sessional papers pp. 23 to 146, Vol. XI, No. 2, 1878 (125). The Government of British Columbia contends that this is entirelv an erroneous assumption without authority to sustain it; and that from all the information that Government can olitain it has reason to believe that those words will not be found in the original, or if there, the term has been misapplied — not as to where the Portland Channel really is, but as to its being the channel contemplated by the Treaty. In the earlier versions of the Treaty obtainal)le in British Columbia, they are not found. They are not in McCulloch's version, published at Philadelphia in 1852, already quoted. The}^ are not in the version of the Treaty in " Steels Shipmasters Assistant." A new edition published and corrected to the 1st of March, 1837, (just twelve years after the Treaty), by J. Slikeman. Secretarv to the East India and China Association, containing " Information for persons connected with Mercantile Affairs, Commercial Treaties. tVcc," and printed by Logman & Co., Paternoster Row, London. The}^ are in Wheaton, published at Boston in 1855, and in the ver- sion in Hertslet's Collection of Conmiercial Treaties, published at London in 1856. The Government of British Columbia further contends that those words are entirely inconsistent with the description, terms, and con- ditions laid down in the Treaty itself as guides for detining the ))Oundary. And further, that even if such words are found in the transfer of the Alaska Territory from Russia to the United States, Great Britain was no party to that transfer, and cannot l)e atfected or depri\'ed of her territorial rights therein'. Having exhausted the information that can l)e ol)tained in British Columbia relative to the terms and language of the Convention, it becomes our duty to see which description, that of McCuUoch, Herts- let, or Wheaton tallies most correctly with the geogi-aphical and topo- graphical features of the country, and thereby, under Wheaton's rule of construction, carries with it internal evidence of its being the Ian guage of the Convention used by the Contracting parties. An undoubted test of the accuracy of a description relative to land, is its accord with the territorial features found on the land, and the facility and certainty witii which land marks maybe found, recognized and identitied. AND CANADIAN ri'HLICATIoNS. 187 It may with 0(|ual coi'i-eotness be stated that positive territorial hind- luarks capahh^ of ideiititication. clearly defined, and existinii' within the limits and on the spot di'lincated. cannot he overridden t>y the use of words of nonuMU'laturc inconsistiMit with such description and their existence — words which niayliave beiMi and perha[)swere inadvertently used, or accidentally mis|)laced; nor can such an identilication be superceded l)y the interpolation of ttM'ms. without which th(> descrip- tion requirino' such terms would be so inaccurate as to ))e utterly inai)plicable and inadmissible. Kemembering these rules of construction, we turn to the languao-e of the Convention and the features of the country, as the latter are delineated on the Acbniralty Charts and other maps herewith enclosed. The initial or starting jjoint is declared to be from the southernmost point of the Island called Prince of Wales; which point lies in 54' 4U' N., and between l.'U and l;-};} West Longitude. We find that point at Cape de Chacon. Thence to ascend noi-therly along the channel until it strikes the continent at oH^ X. Following that instruction, we turn northerh' from tliat point, ascend the channel, and strike the continent at 56- on the N. W. point of Burrough's Bay. Thence the sununit of the mountains parallel to the coast, at or Avithin ten marine leagues from the coast, as far as the intersection with Ui' W. L. In like manner, following that course from Burrough's Bay, we find the sunniiit of the coast range within the distance specified, and at 19 or UU miles above the mouth of the Stikine. Insert the words ''Portland Channel" as found in Hertslet and from the starting point instead of northerly you have to go east fully 16.66 marine leagues or 50 nautical miles, before you turn north. Again, you cannot ascend the Portland Channel until you strike the Continent at 56 . Thirdly, you could not from the head of Portland Channel — assiun- ing these Admiralty surveys are correct — strike the summits of moun- tains parallel to the coast, because there are several intervening ranges, and the line would necessarily run far more than ten marine leagues from the coast — in fact o\er twenty. Then with AVheaton's definition you have to insert not only '' Port- land Channel"", but his word '* Eastward", which is not found in either text of the Treaty: and to assume that the summit of the range of mountains that would be found, where a line i-unning north up the Portland Channel would strike the continent at 56- would be within ten leagu(>s of the coast, whereas it is shown by actual measurement on the chart that it must necessarily be more than twenty marine leagues oil. The oidy possible solution that can be found for the con- tention on behalf of " Portland Channel" is, that in the entrance of this channel is an island called "Wales Island", the southernmost point of which is in 54"^ 40' N. L., and from which point a northerly course would ascend Portland Channel. l)ut which Island is not only not in the longitude specified. l»ut. as aln^ady stated, is 50 nautical miles to the east of that initial point. Moreover, it may be observed, that Portland Channel, from its enti'ance to its head, is so entirely within the contiiuMit that by ascend- ing it vou could hardlv be said to strike the continent. 188 EXTRACTS FROM BRITISH Whereas the northcily coui'.se from the sturtino- point to Burroiigh's Bay. actually passes anioiio- the islands, and does not strike the con- tinent until you reach M) . Tiius, with reference to McCuUoch's version of the Treaty, you reconcile every word and term with the t»-eouraphical and topooraphieal features of the country directed to be your oiiide; while to adopt the version of Hertslet or Wheaton, you have to ignore all — nay, even to reconcile themselves to themselves, you have to interpolate words which are nowhere to be found, and which, while suiting- one part, are utterly inconsistent with every other part. As eonhrmatory of the construction in favor of McCulloch's version, the first sul)division of the 4th Article of the Convention may also be cited. It there declares that the island called Prince of Wales Island, shall belong wholly to Russia; a declaration unnecessary if the line was to go up the Portland C'hannid. A most striking illustration of the truth of these views is found in the position of the coast range of mountains where it crosses the Stikine. That range rises not far from the tide waters, and the summit of that range is within 20 miles of the sea. This is proved by the fact that in following up the valley of the Stikine, the axis of the range is passed tit al)out 11»^ miles from the coast. Up to about this point the Stikine makes a somewhat easterly course from the sea. Thence rounding the range in (jiiestion. it takes a more northerly course, receiving four or five glaciers, which flow in an easterly direc- tion from the summit of the range into the valle}' of the Stikine. Therefore there can be no difficulty in ascertaining the line contem- plated ]>y the Convention. From the head of Portland Channel to reach a distance of even ten marine leagues from the coast to find the coast range, would render necessary the crossing of at least two intervening mountain ranges, a circumstance wholly irreconcilable ^vith the Treaty, the head of that Channel being where a protraction of it would strike the 5t> parallel, over 20 marine leagues from the coast. The survey of Mr. Hunter, C. E., appointed by the Dominion Gov- ernment to examine and report, will be found at page l-tG of the Ses- sional Papers 125 above referred to, and conclusively establishes the coast line range of mountains at the crossing of the Stikine to be about 20 miles from the sea, and within lo marine leagues; and the Russian maps, tracings from which are enclosed herewith, show, with equal certainty, that both above and 1)elow the Stikine the coast range runs approximately at the same distance down to the 5(ith pai'allel; where the line ascending northerly from the southernmost point of Prince of Wales Island, Cape de Chacon, would strike the continent — an impos- sibility if the Portland Channel be assumed to be the line. On this latter point also, as to the position of the coast range below the Stikine down to Cape Camano, Mr. McKay, an old factor of the Hudson's Bay Company, atl'ords the most direct personal observation, having on three several occasions coasted the whole distance in canoes, and confirms, in th(^ strongest manner, the pt)sition of the coast range as above stated, and the correctness of the delineation on the Russian maps, and the language of the Treaty in that ])articular. His evidence is in such detail, and is so thoroughly reliable, fi'om his standing and experience in the country, extending over -iO years, that it is o-iven in full. AND CANADIAN PUHLK'ATIONS. 189 The set'tidu of country Avliich lies bctwci'ii tlic mouth of the Stikine and Cape Cainano if< very rujrged, fouHistinfi; of short rai j;es of mountains which follow the general trend of the coast, and whicli are intersected by numerous deej) ]irecipitous gorges. These gorges are the outlets of series of more elevated and wider valleys following the general direction of the coast ranges and dividing tln-sc from the more fomi'act ranges of the interior. The coast ranges rise ahrui)tl\- from the sea. The distances of their summits from the seashore may he statesinnj)tion that the Russians in using the language they did thoroughly understood the meaning they intended to convey,' but it is a well-known tradition among tliose who were acquainted with the country many years back, that the language did express the sole and only object tlie Russians then had in view. 20026— AP 13 190 EXTKACTS FROM BRITISH There hud been a conihitmtion of the Indians extendlno- all alono- tlie Coast, from Sitka doAvn to Prince of Wales Island. ])v which Sitka in early years, after the Russian settlement, had been talien and burnt. After its recovery the Russians wished to l)e phiced in a position by which they could command this coml)ination of the Indian tribes, and for this reason in their division and settlement with Great Britain, they secured the narrow ])elt alono- the coast, cuhninatino' with the summit of the Coast Rani>e, bcA'ond which the ^Maritime Indians were not wont to pass. It was not land the Russians desired, and this Convention ]ilaced them in a position to punish the Indians without any infraction of the rights of Great Britain. Whether this tradition be true or not, at an}' rate, it was well cal- culated to accomplish Avhat it is alleoed it was intended to do. To some degree as corroborating this view, we find it mentioned by a traveller on the Stikine in 1870 that as a general rule the sea-coast Indians do not go into the interior. The Taltan Indians, a line river tril)e. — honest and industrious and priding themselves on their good name — claim th(> lordship of the river, and refuse to permit the Naas or sea-coast Indians to come into the interior. Of course an Indian's permit depends upon his power to enforce what he forbids, and there must have been occasions when the Sea- coast Indians penetrated into the interior, but it can well be under- stood that this known hostility of the inner and outer Indians would induce the Russians to believe the narrow l)elt along the coast sufficient for their purpose. Thus we have the hmguage of the Treaty, as ]\Ir. McCulloch gives it, coinciding not oidy with the topographical features of the country, l)ut accomplishing the ol)ject which tradition assigns as the reason for its adoption. The Government of British Columbia contends that any recognition of the words "'Portland Channel'' as being in the Treaty, was a grave mistake, and most injurious to the interests of British Columbia. vS- * * * * * .: * Extract from the British Case in the Far Seal Arhitration. {(Vm- (jressional Edition^ Vol. .^, ^>«(7tf.9 o£, 53.) The works of Mr. Robert Greenhow. Translator and Libraiian to the United States De])artn.ientof State (well known in connection with the discussion of tin* "Oregon ([uestion"). afford a detailed and con- clusive means of ascertaining the views officially held by the United States Government on the meaning of Paeijic Ocean, Beltr!n sio-nification of the terms Nort/i-irest coast and Paelfjc Oci'dii^ and the meaning attached to the relintiuishment of Russian claims by the Convention of 1S24, the lirst part of the "• Memoir," under the heading '• (icography of the Western Section of North America," contains the following passage: The north-n-eKt coast* is the expression usually employed in the United States at the present time to distinguish the vast i)ortion of the American continent which extends north of the 40th parallel of latitude from the Pacific to the jrreat dividing ridge of the Uocki/ .)fo>n}tal stream by the aborigines. To the more northern parts of the continent many api)ellations, which will hereafter be mentioned, have l)een assigned by navigators and fur traders of various nations. The territory bordering u})on the Pacific southward, from the 40th parallel to the extrem- ity of the peninsula which stretches in that direction as far as the Tro])ic of Caiu-er, is called Otlifornia, a name of uncertain derivation, formerly ai)plied by the Spaniards to the whole western section of North America, as that of Florida was employed by them to designate the regious liordering upon the Atlantii'. The north-west coast and the west coast of California, together form the west coaxt of North America; as it has been found impossible to separate the history of these two portions, so it will be necessary to include them both in this geographical view (p. 1). Mr. Greenhow here gives the following note: In the following pages the term coast will be used, sometimes as signifying only the sea-shore, and sometimes as embracing the whole territory, extending therefrom to the sources of the river; care has been, however, taken to prevent misapi)rehen- sion, where the context does not sufficiently indicate the true sense. In order to avoid repetitions, the aorth-ved coast will be understood to be the north-vest coast of Xorth America; all iiitilndes will be taken as nortJi latitudes, and all longitudes as ivest from Greenwich, vniless otherwise expressed. KctracU from Bi'itisli Counter Case in the Fur Seal Arbitration {Con- (/rcss/ona/ FAitlon^ Vol. 8, jxtges 1(3-1^6, ^8). "XOKTII-WEST coast" WAS USED THROUOIIOUT PREOMINARY NE(40- TIATIOXS TO INCLUDE COAST FROM BEHIIIN(4 STR.AIT TO LATITUDE 51- NORTH. It is proved in the Hritisli Case, by numerous extracts from tiie cor- respondence which preceded the Treaties, that the words "north-west coast" were used, throughout the negotiations, to include not less than the whol(^ of the Xoi-th American coast from Behring Strait to latitude 51- north. -X- * * * * * A * N. 15. — The it(dii-s in this and sub.^jequcnt iiuotations are those employed by < rreenhow himself. 192 EXTRACTS FROM BRITISH Mr. G. Canning wrote to Mr. S. Canning' [.stli DeceuilHT. Ib24] a.s follows: GKEAT HHITAIN PKOPOSES TO ADOPT ARTICLE IV OF AMERICAN TREATY, WITH I'lS RECIP- ROCAL LIBERTY OF ACCESS TO NORTH-WEST COAST. We are content also to assign the .period of ten years for the reciprocal liberty of access and coninicrce willi each othi'r's territories, which stipulation may be best stated precisely in tlic terms of Article IV of the American Convention. . BUT THE ''LISIERE'* WAS TO BELONG TO RUSSIA. This shows that Mr. Canning did not understand the term ''north- west coast" to be confined to the ''lisiere.'" the pi'oposals relating to which had one unvarying condition, namely, that it was to belong to Russia. Had the term been so confined, the careful provision of Article IV, that "the ships of loth Powers, or which belong to their citizens or subjects /'r.sjh-ct/'n/h/, may reciprocal/ 1/ frequent, without any hindrance whatever, the interior seas,"" &c., becomes meaningless as far as anv advantage to Russia is concerned. ARTICLE II OF 1825 TREATY SPEAKS OF BRITISH ESTABLISHMENTS ON "north-west coast," PROVING THAT THAT COAST WAS NOT CON- FINED TO THE "lISIERE." Article II, likewise, is in substantially the same form in each Treaty that of 1(S25 concluding thus: Russian subjects shall not land without permission at any British establishment on the north-west coast. Therefore, '' north-west coast" here, too, cannot mean the "lisiere." Article III, in the original French, begins: La ligne de demarcation entre les possessions des Hautes Parties Contractantes sur la cote du continent et les iles de I'Am^rique nord-ouest, sera trac^e ainsi qu'il suit: The line is then defined. It runs from an initial point, described as being .situated in 54* 40' north latitude, to the Arctic Ocean. Article IV defines tlie boundary between the narrow strip of coast already referred to as allotted to Russia and the British possessions. The strip is described as — la lisieie de cote mentionnee ci-dessus comme devant appartenir a la Kussie. Articles V and VI both distinguished between "cote" and "lisiere." * * * * * * * MEANING OF " NORTH-WEST COAST." OREEXriOw's DEFINITION AGREES WITH BRITISH CONSTRUCTION. Recurring to the expression "north-west coast" or '"north-west coast of America," it is rarely that the expression in either form is found as a geographical term, or that its precise signification is spe- cially defined in words. One instance is the definition gi\en b}' Greenhow, and quoted at p. tiO of the British Case, which corresponds precisely with the position maintained by Great Britain. The term is not often found on Maps, but a somewhat extended examination of these has resulted in the discovery of a few instances of its use. at AND CANADIAN PUBLIC ATIONS. 193 diites l)()th hoforo and ut'ttM* that of tlio Troaty of 1825. From an iiispootioii of th«\s(> Maps, it is (luitc apparent that tho exprossion was employed in a Aerv lax and oen(M-al sense, and without pieeisicni of nn^aninii' in respeet to lines of latitude and loniiitude. -:<- * * * * * * A NOTICE BY THE UNITED STATES IX 1845 ASSUMES THAT THE TREATY OF l>f24 INCLUDES THE WHOLE RUSSIAN-AMEKICAN COAST NORTH OF LATITUDE 5-t- 4<»'. Further evidence that no distinction was drawn by the United States Govermnent between the coasts of Behring Sea and those of the rest of the Facitic is afforded by the Notice which is referred to at p. 59 of the United States Case, and is printed in full in United States Appendix, vol. i. p. 1>1. The Notice which was publish(>d on the 26th September, 1845. at the request of Russia 1)V the United States Government, is as follows: The Russian 3Iinister at Washington has informed the Secretary of State that tlie Imperial Government, desirous of affording official protection to the Russian terri- tories in North America against the infractions of foreign vessels, has authorized cruizers to be established for this purpose along the coast by the Russian-American Company. It is, therefore, recommended to American vessels to he tareful not to violate the existing Treaty between the two countries, l)y resorting to any point upon the Russian- American coast where there is a Russian estalilisliment, without the permission of the Governor or Commander, nor to fretpient the interior seas, gulfs, harl)Ours, and creeks upon that coast at any point north of the latitude of 54° 40'. It is clear that this Notice was not intended to apply only to so much of the Russian- American coast as lies between latitude (id- or latitude 59^ 80', or any other particular ))oint, and latitude 50- 40'. Its real object was to remind the su1)jects of the United States of the provisions of the Treaty of 1824 which restrained their rio'ht to visit places on the Russian-American coast where there were Russian estab- lishments, without the permission of the Governor. E.i'fn let from Pi'/nted Aiuiunicut In tln^ Fur StuJ Arhitiuition. [Con- grr.ss/otiaJ Edition, rol. JO, jxtges W^ '21.) Throuohout the neo-otiations which jireceded the Treaties, the words •■ noi'th-west coast " were used to include not U>ss than the whole of the North Ameiican coast from B«>hrino- Striiits to 51' north. If it had been intended to limit this o'(>neral term to a certain portion of the coast, explicit lanouajj-e would have been used. One contention of the United States, in effect, limits the '"north- west coast'- to the llslere defined in the IlIrd Article of the Treatv of 1825. Whilt^ on the one hand Artich^ \'l of the Treaty was confined to the lislerr liallqurA', on the other hand, thi^ recii)rocal lil)erty()f access and commerce with each other's territories secui'cd by Article VII was clearly not contined to the //.v/V/v ; the main ))roposals mad(» with reo-ard to this related to its j)ossession by Russia. The other )iro})osals. includino- that as to reciprocal lil)erty of access, related to the whole of tlu^ north-west coast. In th(» woi-ds of Mr. Uannino-, writino- in 194 EXTRACTS FROM BRITISH 1824, the object was to secure reciprocal access to the territories of the respective Powers. This was effected by adopting-, as Article VII of the British Treaty, Article IV of the United States Treaty, which gave to Kussia and the United States a reciprocal rig'htof frcciuenting for ten years the interior seas on the coast mentioned in Article III of that Treaty. This coast was clearly the whole of the north-west coast from Behring Strait southwards to about 54' 40', Russia .igreeing not to form any establishment south of 54-^ 40', and the United States agreeing not to form any to the north of that latitude. -X- -X- -x- * * * * Article III of the Treaty of 182.5 traces the line of demarcation between the two Powers on the coast of the (;ontinent and the islands of North-western America. Article IV defines the Eastern l)oundary of the lisicrc which Avas to belong to Kussia. Article V emphasizes the possession of the Hsltrc by Russia b}" reiterating that the reciprocal j)rohibition against forming estal)lish- ments in the possessions of the two parties respectively applied in the case of the Russian possessions both to the coast and to the //s/V'/'^ com- prised within those possessions. Article VI dealt only with the //v/c/r, granting to Great Britain a perpetual right of navigation of all the rivers llowing to the Pacitic across the line of demarcation of the Ji-nere indicated in Article 111. Article Vll, on the other hand, dealt with the coast of the continent mentioned in Article 111: it gave to the two parties a reciprocal right of visit to all the inland waters, harbours, iScc, on this coast: it applied, therefore, to the coast of the whole of the Russian possessions, as well as to the whole of the coast of the British possessions. If the right of access under Article VII were limited to the coast of the lislere, the reciprocal character of the Article would l)e destroyed. The text of the Treaty clearh^ shows, therefore, that the expression "north-west coast" included the whole of the coast on the north-west of the American continent; and that the term " Pacific Ocean " included all the waters washing the north-west coast, including Behring Sea. This argument is supi)orted by the fact that in the Treaties of 1841, 1848, and 1859, concluded by Russia with Great Britain and other Powers (and which are examined in the British Gounter-Case, pp. 51-52), the tei-m "North-west coast of America*' is used in a manner blowing conclusively that it included the coast of Behring Sea. The Treaty of I85i) did not expire till lS(i!>, /. t,, after th(> cession of Alaska to the United States. Extract fi-o II I the Oral Argument of Sir Richard Webster in the Fur Seal A7'hitration. {Congressioual Edition, vol. IS, pages 4^50-4^52.) Sir Richard Webster. * * * Will you kindly turn now to the British Treaty on page 53 of the British Gase, and I will endeavor to tak(^ it as shortly as p<)ssil)le. It will not be waste of time to run through it without reading tlu^ articles at length. The scheme of that Treaty is of some little importance in order to com})lete my argument upon the pomt. Article I corresponds with, and I sav is th(^ same as. Article II in the United States Treatv. Aiticles HI and \\ tind no A^D CANADIAN rrHLICATIONS. 195 j)hu-e in the rnitcd States Treaty. They relate to the //.v/V/v. It is not nec(\ssarv that I should do more than explain in one sentence what it was. that my story may he conii)lete. It was neeessary to determine a land l)oundaiT between liritish America and Alaska, and accordinoly Articles III and IV' relate solely to what that land boundary should be. Article V corresponds with Ai'ticle III of the Tnited States Treaty. It is an aorecment l)etween (ii'eat Britain smd Russia as the previous aureeiuent existed l)etween the United States and Kussia, that no establishment should be formed by Gi-eat Britain north of the line of delimitation. 4'lien Article VI refers to the rivers crossing the llslere. It was necessary l)ecause it finds no place in the United States Treat}', because there was no l!>on the line of coast. The expression "' line of coast" is not the ]>ro]ier translation — it ought to be ^^ strip of coast". '"Strip" is the correct translation of " lisiere", if I may be permitted to say so Mr. President, and no doul)t if 1 am wrong you will connect me. "Lisiere" is "seh'age" — "strip" — like the edge of cloth — '"boixUn-". Lord Hannen. — You might suggt-st yet another word — "margin". Sir Richard Webster. — I will read now Article \\\. which corre- sponds with the American Articl(> \\ . 190 EXTRACTS FROM BKITISH It is also iinilerstoixl tliat, for the sjnu-e nl ten years I'ruin the signature of the pres- ent Convention, the vessels of the two Powers, or those belonjiino; to tiieir res))eetive suljjeets, shall mutually be at liberty to frecjuent, without any hindrance whatever, all the inland seas, the gulfs, havens, and creeks on the coast mentioned in Article III, for the purpt)ses of fishing and of trading with the natives. Not the h'.sie/'e,' and it" you look at the P'reiich. which is ])('rf(M-tly plain description, the words are: Les golfes, havres et criques sur la cote mentionnce dans I'Article III ^^'ithollt any r(> fere nee to "liHieri''' at all. The only feeling 1 have in d(»alino' with this- matter, is that it is a little cruel to ni}' friends to be exposino- the inipossil/dity of niaintainino- the aro-unient l)v which Mr. Carter has said, in his opinion, Mr. IMaine, to his entire satisfaction was completely successful in showing- that Behring- Sea was excluded from the Pacitic Ocean, and that Northwest coast had this meanino- hy those treaties. Mr. Justice Harlan. — Would you turn to Article III and tell me what is the ''coast" mentioned there. Sir Richard Webster. — Yes. The coast mentioned in Article III, is — The line of demarcation lietween the possessions of the High Contracting Parties upon the coast of the continent and the islands of America to the north-west. T/uft is from about 5-i 40' right up to the point where 141^- West longitude strikes the Arctic Ocean, and I submit there is no question about it. The line of demarcation runs behind the lisiere until it gets to Mount St. Elias, and then it goes straight u]). Mr. -lustice Harlan. — What do you say is the point of the shore referred to as the ''coast'' in Article YIK Sii- Kichard ^VEBSTER. — The "coast" is the whole of the coast up to Behring Straits. Mr. Justice Harlan. — Up to Behring Straits^ Sir KicprARi) ^^^EHSTER. — The line of demarcation is a complete line. It divides the British possessions from the Russian possessions; it has nothing to do with the lisiere. Now I wnll read the translation, and ]ierhaps, ^Ir. Picsident, you will kindly follow it in French. I am reading fi-om ]>age 54 of the British Case. It is not my translation but I beli(ne it is correct. It is this: The line of demarcation between the j)ossessions 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: Conunencing from the southernmost part of the island called Prince of Wales' Island, which point lies in the parallel of 54° 40' north latitude, and between the RSlst and the l;Wrd 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 tlie 56tli degree of north latitude; from this last-mentioned point, the line of demarcation shall follow the sunnnit of the moun- tains situated j^arallel to the coast, as far as the point of intersection of the 141st degree of west longitudt- "of the same meridian"; and, finally, from tlie said jxiint of intersection, tiie saitl meridian-line of the 141st degree, in its prolongation as far as the Frozen Ocean, shall f(jrm the limit between the Russian and Rritish posses- sions on the continent of America to the north-west. I submit (remembering that the liiu» of thnnarcation was to l)e com- plete with reference to tiie coast referred to as the north-west coast of the continent, and the Islands of America to the north west), that nol)ody who can take an impartial view of this matter can come to any AND CANADIAN PUBLICATIONS. 197 other conclusion than that the coast I'eferred to in Aiti( le \\l is the whole coast: and \vh( n we leineniber that in the Tnited Stat(>s the expri>ssion //.svV/v does not occur at all. and that Article III of the I'nited States treaty speaks of the north-west coast of America north of oU^ 4<)'. and that 1 am justitied in saying" that Mr. George Canning- believed that he was getting the same for Great Britain as the United States had got from Russia — there is not any answer, at any rate, apparcMit (uidess 1 hav(> made some grave hlunder) to the contention that the right oi Great Britain to visit, during ten years, iidand cn^eks. and harbours, and to \isit for the ]nirpose of navigation and tishing the seas which washed the American coasts extended right away from i'A 4o' up to the point to which I have called attention. ■K.rfi'adxfi'oni the Spen-Ji hy the Hon. Churl i^h Sumner, of 2L:L^sachiifietti<, "u tht' Cession of Rii> dollars, to be paid l)v the United States. On the one side is the cession of a vast countiT with its jurisdiction and its resources of all kinds, on the other side is the purchase-money. Such is this transaction on its face. BOUNDARIES AND CONFIGURATION. In endeavouring to estimate its character I am glad to l)egin with what is clear and beyond question. 1 refer to the boundaries fixed b}' the Treaty. Commencing at the parallel of 54^ 4i»' north latitude, so fauious in our history, the line ascends Portland Channel to the moun- tains, which it follows on their suimnits to the point of intersection with the 141- west longitude, which line it ascends to the Frozen Ocean, or. if you please, to the North Pol(\ This is the eastern boimd- ary, separating this region from the British jjossessions. and it is borrowed from the Treatv between Russia and Great Britain in 1825, e.sta])lishing the relations between these two Pow^ers on this continent. It will be seen that this l)oundarv is old; the rest is new. Starting from the Frozen Ocean, the western boundary descends Behring Straits, midway between the two islands of Krusenstern anil Ratmanov, to the parallel of 65 30', just l)elow where the Continents of America and Asia ap|)roach each other the nearest: and from this ])oint it i^rocecnls in a course nearly south-west through Behring Straits, midway l)etween the Island of St. Lawrence and Cape Chonkotski. to the meridian of 172- west longitude, and thence, in a south-westerly direction, travers- ing Behring Sea, midway Ijctween the Island of Attou on the east, and Copper Island on the west, to the meridian of 1W6^ west longitude, leaving the prolonged group of the Aleutian Islands in the possessions now transferred to the United States, and making the western bound- ary of our country the dividing line which separates Asia from America. Look at the map and see the contiguration of this extensive region, whose estimated area is more than .■)7< '.<«»<• scpiare miles. I speak In' the authoritv of our own Coast Survev. Including the Sitkan Archi- 198 EXTRACTS FROM BRITISH pelao'o at tho south, it takes a niarii'm of tlic mainland, frontin*:' on the ocean 80 niih\s l)roa(lan(l oOU niih\s lonu-. to Mount St. Elias, the highest peak of the continent, when it turns with an elhow to the west, and then along- Behrino- Straits northerly, when it rounds to the east along- the Frozen Oceau. Here are upwards of 4,(XH) statute miles of coast, indented by capacious baA's and commodious harbours without number, embracing- the Peninsula of Alaska, one of the most remarkable in the world, 50 miles in breadth and 300 miles in length; piUnl with moun- tains, many volcanic, and some still smoking; pcMK^trated by navigable rivers, one of which is among the largest of the world; studded with islands which stand like sentinels on the coast, and flanked l)v that narrow Aleutian range which, starting from Alaska, stretches faraway to flapan, as if America were extending a friendly hand to Asia. This is the most general aspect. There are details specially disclosing mar- itime advantages and approaches to the sea, which properh' belong to this preliminary sketch. According to accurate estimates the coast- line, including bays and islands, is not less than 11, '270 miles. In the Aleutian range, besides innumerable islets and rocks, there are not less than tifty-tive islands exceeding 3 miles in length; there are seven exceeding -lO miles, with Ounimak, which is the largest, exceeding 73 miles. In our part of Behring- Sea there are live considei'able islands, the larg(\st of which is St. Lawrence, being more than t»6 miles long. Add to all these the group south of the Peninsula of Alaska, including- the Shumagins and the magnificent Island of Kodiak, and then the Sitkan g-roup, being- archipelago added to archipelag'o. and the whole together constituting- the geographical complement to the West Indies, so that the north west of the continent answers archipelago for archi- pelago to the south-east. AXTIOIPATION OF GREAT BRITAIN. 4. Another motive to this acquisition ma}- be found in a desire to anticipate the imagined .schemes or necessities of Great Britain. With regard to all these I confess m}^ doubts, and yet, if we may credit i-eport, it would seem as if there was already a British mo\ement in this direction. Sometimes it is said that (ireat Britain desires to bm' if Russia will sell. Sir George Simpson, Governor-in- chief of the Hudson Bay Company, declared that without the strij) on the coast underlet to the foriuer ])y the Russian Company the interior would be ••'comparatively useless to England.'' Here, then, is a provocation to buy. Sometimes report assunuvs a graver character. A German scientific journal, in an elaborate paper, entitled, "'The Russian Colo- nies on the North-west Coast of America," after referi'ing- to the con- stant "pressure" upon Russia, proceeds to say that there are already crowds of adventurers from British Columl)ia and California now at the gold mines on the Stikine, which Hows from British territory through the Russian possc^ssions, who openly declare their purpose of drixing tlu^ Russians out of this region. I refer to the ''Archix' fiir Wissenschaftliche Kunde von Russland," edited at Berlin as late as 18<)3, by A. El-man, vol. xxii, p|). ■47-70, and uncjuestionably the lead- ing- authority on Russian questions. At the same tinie it pi-esents a curious passag-e bearing- directh^ on British polic}' from the '' Ij/-/'f/sh Colonist,''^ (( newspaper of Mct(>r!((, ou Ydncouver's Zs/((/t(7. As this ■WHS reg-ardcd of sufficient importance to be translated into German for AND CANADIAN PUHLICATIONS. MU) the iiistriu'tioii of the readers of a scicntilie journal. I shall be jiistitiecl in laying" it before you restored fi'oin the (ieriuan into Kiiolish. It is as follows: [77//'6- (ii'iicle from ilw '''British Colonist" ojqx'ors In ihe United States Case, Aj)j)cNd/',e. par/es, 321-32-).} Thus, if we wvay credit this colonial ejaculation, caut4iit up and pre- served by German science, the Russian possessions were destined to round and complete the domain of Great Britain on this continent. The Russian ''Eagle"' will give way to the British "IJon."' The Anglo-Norman was to be master as far as Behring Straits, across Avliich he might survey his Russian neighbour. How this was to be accom- plished is not precisely explained. The promises of gold on the Stikine failed, and it is not improbable that this colonial plan was as unsub- stantial. Colonists l)ecome excited easily. This is not the first time in which Russian America has been menaced in a similar way. During the Crimean war there seemed to be in Canada a spirit not unlike that of the Vancouver journalist, unless we are misled by the able pamphlet of Mr. A. K. Roche, of Quebec, ^vhere, after describing Russian America as ''richer in resources and capabilities than it has hitherto l)een allowed to ])e either by the English who shamefully gave it up, or l)y the Russians who cunningly obtained it,"' the author urges an expedition for its conquest and annexation. His proposition fell on the happy termination of the war, but it exists as a warning, with a notice also of a former English title "shamefully'" abandoned. This region is distant enough from Great Britain; but there is an incident of past history which shows that distance from the Metropoli- tan Government has not excluded the idea of war. Great Britain could hardlv be more jealous of Russia on these coasts than was Spain in a former day, if we may credit the Report of Humboldt. I quote again his authoritative work, "Essai Politiquesur la Nouvelle-Espagne"' (Tom. 1 p. o-to). where it is recorded that as early as ITSS, (>ven while peace was still unl)roken. the Spaniards could not l)ear the idt-a of Russians in this region, and when in LT'.H) the Emperor Raul declared war on Spain the hardy project was formed of an expedition from the ^Mexican ports of Monterey and San Bias against the Russian Colonies, on which the philosophic traveller remarks, in words which are recalled by the Vancouver manifesto, that "'if this project had been executed the world would have witnessed two nations in conKict. which, occupying the opposite extremities of P^urope. found themselves neighl)ours in another hemisphere on th(> eastern and western boundaries of their vast Empires.'" Thus, notwithstanding an intiM'viMiing circuit of half the globe, two Great Powers were about to encounter each other on these coasts. But I hesitate to beliiMC that the British of our day in any considerable numbers have adopted the earh" Spanish disquietude at the presence of Russia on this continent. J/ia/'strr Scott on thr Alonluin Ixmiolary. [Extract from Debsitos of the Seiintc of tlic Dominion of Cnnndii, Third Session. Soventli I'arlinment. Jiinunry 30. 1893. p. 15.] This boundary of Alaska is a very old suljject. It crops up period- ically. It was up some fifteen or twenty years ago, and at several periods since. Alaska, as hon. gentlemen probably know, is that part 200 EXTRACTS FROM BRITISH of the fountiy ceded by Hussia to the I'liited Stutes on this coiitiiieiit. By the treaty between (irefit Britain and Kussia in 18:^5. a boundary line was estal)lislied between British territoi'y and Russian territory on tlie western side of this continent, and I am sorry to say that, as in the case of a great many other treaties where the lands of Canada were made the subject of treaties by plenipotentiaries from the mother country, Canada got the worst of it. If any one looks at the map he will see how ver}^ illogical it is to give away, or to consent to a foreign country occupying so nuich of the coast line of this continent as Kussia then insisted upon occupying of our Canadian territoi-y on the north- west. But the l)oun(lary line between the two countries was made rathcM- a \nv///Ae: Prince of Wales Island (strange to say, one would have thought the very name would have saved it as a possession of the British Crown) was freely given away to Russia, and the line was then run to the head of Portland channel and by a devious crooked line to Mount Elias. It is that very devious crooked line that is now engaging the attention of the two Governments. If I had any advice to offer to the two Governments, I should say adopt a true line running straight north, wholly irrespective of the height of land mentioned in the treaty. Under the treaty the line was to follow the height of land. Where the height of land was more than ten marine leagues distant from the shore, then a line riuming parallel to the shore and ten leagues from it was to be followed. The mountains of course do not follow the coast in a direct line, they bend towards the shore, and the}'' bend inland, and so the line is an exceedingly diftieult one to draw. I think, therefore, that the two Governments ought to agree upon a degree of longitude, a straight line which would run north to Mount Elias. The Ahi-' Hudson's Biiy and Russian Fur Companies, they must have known that the wealth of furs and tish alone would have justilied its purchase, to say nothing of rounding oil their North American pos- sessions. * * *• Russia acted wisely in relie\ing hersidf of a responsibility that brouuht little or nothing in return, (ireat lU-itain lost an inunense AND CANADIAN PUBLICATIONS. 201 ()l)p()rtuiiity thereby, and inherited as a coiiseciueiice tlie Behrinu- Sea dispute and the Ahiska Houndarv (luestion, the costs of which coni- bined, it is safe to say. would ha\e paid for the territory. Since that time Alaska has developed rich gold mines, a great fur trade, and a salmon canning industry that have rendered it extremely valua])le, wnth possibilities of much greater things. * ■:;■ * * i'r -T -» Numerous requests on the part of the Canadian ( iovernment, inspired by representations from British Columbia in the interests of law and order, were made to the United States through Great Britain, to have the l)oundary line delined. The question had not then been raised as to the Portland Canal. The latter was practically accepted by both parties as the projiei" boundary. It was important, owing to the interest taken in mining matters, that there should he no mistake as to where the boundary really was according to the terms of the treaty. Although th(> American (iovernment professed an anxiety to have it settled, and a bill was introduced in Congress in I8T1! to give eti'ect to a commission of incpiiry. nothing was done, on the ground that more important leg- islation demanded attention, and that Congress would not vote so large a sum of money as was required, something like a million and a half dollars. A suggestion was made by the American Government that in lieu of an accurate and exhaustive determination it would be '"(juite sufiicient to decide upon some particular points, and the ])i'incipal of these they suggested should be the head of the Portland Canal, the points where the l)oundary line crosses the Rivers Skoot, Stakeen (Sti- kine), Taku, Islecat and Cheelcat. Mt. St. Elias, and the points where the 141st degree of west longitude crosses the Kivers Yukon and Por- cupine." The Canadian Government was quite willing to accept the proposition, but for some reason or other nothing more was done, not- withstanding that the question was pressed time and again on tluMr attention ))y the Canadian Government. In 1877 ]\Ir. Joseph Hunter, civil engineer. Victoria, was delegated ])V the Dominion Government to make a survey of the Stikine Kiver for the purpose of defining the l)oundary line wh(>re it crosses that river. Of course his r(>port w^as not expected to l)e final, and tlie work was necessarily hurried: ])ut it was important, and settled the matter for the time being. He fixed the boundary line at 1;>.1;^> miles from the coast at right angles, and 24.7-1 miles by the river. His findings were accepted without prejudice to the rights of their contention l)y the American Government, and it so stands until finally settled l)y the present commission. From Mr. Hunter's obserAations it is quite clear that there is a range of mountains running parallel with the coast, the summit of which forms the boundary. That I t)eli(>ve is the Canadian contention. The Americans, on the other hand, have claimed that there is no defined mountain range governing the case, and that the line must follow the sinuosities of the coast. Up to 1885 it does not appear that a line "through Portland Chan- nel'' was ever questioned as the true boundary line. The issue was raised by the late Mr. Justice (Jray. of Victoria. B. C.. one of the fathers of Confederation, and an able jurist. As It stands, the Alaska Boundary (Question presents two phases, one being the delimi- tation of the line from the "head of I'ortland Channel," wherever that may be shown to be. and the other is the inteipi-etation of Article III. A\'ith the foruKM- w{> will not deal. It is a matter of sui'vev. and is in 202 EXTRACTS FROM BRITISH the hands of competent men. The hitter involves an interpretation of Chiuse III. of the treaty. In 1885 Mr. Justice Gray made a report to the British Columbia (xovermnent, in which he pointed out that the line running- through Portland Channel, as marked on the maps, did not harmonize Avith the other conditions of the Article. To understand his contention involves no tine legal skill; it is a plain statement. The line commencing at the* southernmost point of Prince of Wales Island, Cape Chacon, is to "asccMid to the north along the channel called the Portland Channel."' Portland Canal is lifty miles from Prince of Wales Island, and a line to there would not ascend to the north, l)ut go in a south-easterly direc- tion. It may be iield that it does go north on the ground that the gen- eral direction is north; and if no other conditions were demanded, that might hold good, although not strict interpretation. It. however, is required that tlie line is to go north along the Portland Chaimel, luitil it strikes the 56th degree of latitude at a point of the anit'nicnt. Portland Channel does not reach the 56th degree of latitude at all, and being wholly irltliin the continent, a line following its channel could not possil)ly strike a point on "the continent." Then, again, it is stipulated that Prince of Wales Island is to belong "wholly '" to Russia. There can be only one inference from that, when we consider that a large g-roup of islands, the principal of which is Revilla Gigedo, inter- venes between Prince of Wales Island and the mainland, and that is that some other channel than Portland Canal was intended, otherwise it would have ))een stipulated that the group of islands inside of it, and not Prince of Wales, should belong ** wholly " to Russia. The channel separating Prince of Wales island from these islands, or in other words, Clarence Straits, nuist have been meant. If Prince of Wales Island is to belong wholly to Russia, what about the group of islands which intervenes '. If, on the other hand, you discard the Portland Canal, and carry your line up either Behm's Canal or Clarence Straits, you meet all conditions, striking the continent exactly at the 56th degree of north latitude, leaving Prince of \A^ales Island wholly within Alaska territory. More tliiin that, the Portland Canal lioundarv, in continuing it, lands you into a second absurdity. As was pointed out by JMr. Justice (iray, the head of Portland Canal is far east of the Coast range of mountains, and in order to strike their sunnnit, the line would have to cross sev- eral interviMiing mountains, making as is shown in Mr. Hunter's map, a sudden dip at right angles. Continuing the boundary directly north- ward, from Point Chacon through Behm's Canal or Clarence Straits, you follow the Coast Mountain Range naturally. Every circumstance and reasonable assumption favors the contention that the Portland Canal of Vancouver's charts is not the Portland Chaiuud meant in the treaty. It is not known what mai)s were used at the convention. Doubtless X'ancouver's charts were. However, it is not likely that Great Brit- ain would concede more territory to Russia than Avhat Russian maps showed Russia claimed. There is in Victoria an old French map, 1815, copi(Hl from maps in St. I*etersl)urg bearing date of 1802, and the dividing line as shown thei'e is up Clarence Straits with Revilla Gigedo and all the islands included within the British Possessions. The ([uestion in this case is not one of delimitation so much as of construction. Taken bv themselves, the woi'ds "thi'ouuh the Port- AND CANADIAN ITKLICATloNS. '203 liuid Chiimior" tire explicit, and would eoiue under the rule that what is plain needs no interpretation, conse((uently bindino- without cavil; ])ut where, as in this, the provisions are inharmonious and contradict- ory, interpretations must be resorted to. The rules of interpretation are clear. We nuist take all the conditions of th(^ article and judge from the intention of the franiers. The Alaska Boundary question really resolves itself into tliree main physical divisions, each one of which is de])endent upon a distinct series of evidence oi- independent dtitti. which, taken in order, are: — 1. The construction of the clause of the Treaty of 1825 bv which the line of demarcation from Cape Chacon, the southernmost point of the Prince of Wales Island, is to be determined until it reaches a point of the Continent at the 56th degree of north latitude. 2. The determination of the line of demarcation from the last named point following along the coast line (see Clause III. of the Treaty quoted in the foregoing) until a point on the coast is reached where it is intersected by the lilst degree of west longitude. o. Fixing astronomically the lilst degree of west longitude and its pi'olongation northward ''as far as the frozen ocean."" The first of these involves, as has already been pointed out. the con- struction of the language of the Treaty act-ording to well-understood and tinnly established rules of interpretation adopted in international disputes of this character. This division of the subject has been fully dealt with in the foregoing. The third phase of the dispute is dependent entirely upon astronom- ical definition, and is a simple matter, having already been practically disposed of by the work of surveyors. The second is perhaps the most difficult of th(^ three and upon the x'ttlement of the dispute involved the most important issues hinge. Settlement rests not only upon physical data, regarding the recjuire- ments of which the character of the country presents many obstacles, but upon a judii-ial arbitrament as to what physical data ai'e admissible as evidence, and also as to how certain terms, such as "'coast," "ocean" and " sunnnit of the mountains" are to ))e construed in relation thereto. So far there has never been any official presentment of the respective facts made, as that stage of the proceedings has not yet l)een reached where a formal sul)mission of claims beft)i"e, or for the a[)pointment of, a court of arlntration is necessary, and hence there is no clear or authoritative definition of issues. The issues have ])een mainly for- nmlated in newspapers and magazines, 'and the territory in dispute has l)een indicated by map makers rather than jurists. The main fact to be observed is that the I'nited States Government have assumed possession, which to them has constituted the essential ■•nini- points of the law." Hrielly, however, it would appear that the r(\spective contentions are (these have been so succinctly and fairly outlined in a recent editorial on th(> sul)ject in the Victoria '" Daily Colonist" that the treatment cannot very well be improved upon by a layman, and tlu» li])erty is taken of transferring the editor's remarks to these columns): In a jreneral way tlie I'nited States is niiderstood to inteiul to hold that the word "ocean," in the treaty of 1S25 l)et\veeii (ireat JJritain and Kussia, means the waters inside of the ArchiiH'la.tio, that there is no "snniniit" witliin tlie nieaninir of the Treaty in the mountain ran<:e rnnnin'r alonj: tlie coast and within ten marine leajjues therefrom, wherefore tlie boundary must he drawn at a uniform distance of ten marine leagues from the continental coast line, disregarding the islands altogether, 204 p:xtka("Ts from i^kitish wliicli liiu' would l)e parallel to tlu' sinuosities of the eoast and lienee ])Ut all the inlets within Alaska. The Canadian position may, in the same jieneral sense, lie said to l)e that l)y the word "ocean" in the Treaty the hifrh s^ea outside of the Areliipel- ago is meant, and that the l)oundary nuist be drawn ten marine leagues from the outer rim of the Arehij^elago, except where the sunnnit is nearer the coast than ten marine leagues, in which case the line will follow such summit. This would give Canada all of the inlets and even a portion of some of the islands, which latter would ajipear to have l)een contem])]ated liy the Treaty, for that document expressly pro- vides that the whole of Prince of Wales Island shall belong to Kussia. The legal and natural inference from this would be that the whole of the other islands might not belong to Russia when the line was located. A secondary claim on the part of Can- ada is that, admitting the water on the shore of the Mainland to be the ocean, there is a sununit nearer the coast than ten marine leagues, and that the two inlets above- mentioned extend beyond it. Should the claim of the United States, as above defined, l)e sustained, Canada would have no harbour on the coast between the oBth and (SOth parallels of north latitude. If the Canadian claim is held good the head of Lynn Canal and of Taku Inlet would be in Canada, and if the contention tliat the boundary shall not be at a greater distance than ten marine leagues from the outer rim of the Archipelago ])revails, Canada would own the whole of the Stikine River. TJie Canadian rifir of the Alaskan houndani dh^^ute as stated hy Hon. David J/iHs, minister of justice^ iv an intervieio icith the correspondent eftJie CJilcago Ti'ihvne on the I'^tli August. 1899. [Piiblished by the Government Printing Bureau. Ottiiwa. 1899.] You ask me to state to you the Canadian view of the Ala.skan boundary dispute. I shall not in endeavoring- to meet your wishes, claim to do more than express my own view upon the subject. vr * * * * * * 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 Kussia had valid claim; tliat is. the part of the continent north of 54 degrees 4<> minutes of north latitude. The territories south of 54 degrees 40 minutes north latitude were territories that were still in controversy l)et\veen Great Britain and the United States. The tirst Article of this convention declares, wholly contrary to the action and contention of the government of the United States in refer- ence to-the Behring Sea. that the subject.s of the High Contracting parties shall not be troubled or molested in any part of the ocean, commonly called the Pacitic T)cean. either in navigating the same, in fishing therein, or in landing on the coast in parts not already occupied, to trade with the nati\es. Article H proAides that in order to prevent the right of navigating- and fishing exercised u})on the ocean by the subjects of the High Con- tracting i)arties from ))ecoming' a pretext for illicit commerce, they mutually agree that su))jects of His Britamiic Majesty shall not land at any place where there is a Russian establishment, without the per- mission of the Governor or Conmiandant. and that Ku.ssian subjects sliall not land without permission at any British estal)lishment on the north-west coast. Under these ai'ticles. the freedom of na\igation is recognized. Ai'ticle HI and Article IV ])rovide for the demarcation of the l)oundary which is to separat(^ the territ()ri(\s of the one. from the territories of the other. Let me read to you those articU^s in precise terms: * * * * * * ■ . * AND CANADIAN PUKLIC'ATIONS. 205 , It will he seen tluit the stiirtini; ])()iiit is the soutlu'nimost point of the Isliuui called Priiiee of Wales Islaml, which Vws in 54 deo-rees 40 minutes north latitude ar.d that this line is to ascend north. P^'om whence^ Wlw from the starting point — the southernmost point (;f Prince of Wales Island. It is perfectly true that the houndarv i;? to ascend north aloni>' the channel called i'ortland Channel but it cannot ascend north alonj;- the chaimel called Portli'iid Chiinnel by conunmenc- ino- at the southernmost ])oint of Prince of Wales Island, the place of ))etiinninii', a line more than one hundred miles in leno'th running due east, nmst be drawn from tho southiM'n end of Prince of ^^'ales Island ))efore Portland Chamiel can tx^ reaclunl. Tlu' first (juestion then to be considered is, -whether the description of the direction of the lati- tude and longitude of the line is to yield to the use of the word " Port- land Channel/' or whether the name "Portland ChanneT" must be .subordinated to the direction and description contained in these articles. If Clarence Channel, which lies iimned lately east of Prince of Wales Island is taken, there is an exact conformity to the description. You may ascend north fi'om the southernmost point of Prince of Wales Island along- Clarence Channel, but you cannot ascend north from the southernmost point of Prince of ^Vale.s Island alono- Portland Chamiel. You can ascend to a point on Clarence Channel as fai" as the point on the continent where it strikes the ^(ith degree of latitude. You cannot ascend Portland Channel to a point on the continent where it strikes the 56th deg-ree of north latitude, because Portland Channel does not reach that far north. The difference l)etween drawing- the l)oundary from Port- land Channel and from Clarence Channel is this — the boundary upon the mainland commences where the 5(>th deg-ree of north latitude cuts the shore in the on(^ instance, and in the other it commences at a point at the head of Portland Channel which falls short of the place desig- nated as the place of beginning. By Article IV, the line is to t)e drawn so as to leav(> the whole of Prince of Wales Island to Russia. If a due east line is to be draW' n from the .southernmost point of the island, to the entrance at Portland Channel, these words "leaving the whole of Prince of Whiles Island to Russia," are surplusage, l)ecause a dueeast line would not onl\' leave the w hole of the Prince of Wales Island to Russia, but would leave sev- eral other large islands, of wdiich no mention is made, l^'ing ])etween 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 AVales Island shall \)o left to Russia, because a line ascending from the southernmost point north, would cut otf 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 Chamiel. as it would not be a line "ascending north" from the southernmost point of Prince of \\'ales Island. It will be observed that this (|ualitication found in Article IV^ of the description given of the limitary line in Article III is unaci-ountable, if a line is tirst to be drawn eastward fi-om tho Prince of \\'ales Island to the entrance to Portland Channel. Why should this ])ortion of the descri))tion 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 commoidy 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 todraw^ 26626— AP 14 200 KXTRACTS FHOM JiKITISH tho line from tlic (Icsi-i'iptioii which tlic treaty I'urnislics. If he licLi'ms at the soiithci'iiniost point of Prince of ^\'ales Island, 'wliich lies in 54 cl(.o-vees. 4ummit of the mountains, situated parallel to the coast as far as the inter- section of the 141st degree of west longitude; and the fourth article provides that whenever the sunmiit of the mountains, which extend in a direction parallel to the coast from the 56th degree of north lati- tude, 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 par- allel 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 v.as to fol- low the coast range and the summit of that coast range, whether high or low was to l)e the boundary, when it was not more tlian ten leagues from the coast. In many places inlets extend throug'h canyons through the mountain.'., 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 ter- ritory, Ihe Vmv cannot be removed further inland, because there may be a gap in the mountains into which an arm of the sea extends. The coast I'ange approaches these inlets on each side, in most cases, near the waters of the ocean. WIumi you i)uss the Lymi Inlet, it will be found that the coast range eml)races i)eaks from lo.OiM) to 1S.()(»0 feet high, and it does seem to me preposterous to contend that the provisions of the treaty can be ap])lied ])y drawing a line in the rear of those mountains, as certainly would be done, if the Ixnuidary passed around the head of Lynn Inlet. It is, 1 think, manifest that the framers of the treaty assumed, that harbours, inlets, and ai'msof the sea. would be found, when the bound- ary was drawn, within British territory, and certain provisions of the treaty were entered into u])()n this assunq^tion. Article VI provides that the subjects of Her Britannic Majesty from whatever quarter th«\v may arrive, whether from the ocean, or from the interior of the continent, shall, forever enjo}' the right of navi- gation freely, and without any hindrance whatever, all the rivers and streams, Avhich in th(Mr course towards the Pacific Ocean, may cross the line of demarcation on the liiu^ of the coast. As some of those AND CANADIAN PUBLICATIONS. t>(.)7 rivers flow into licliriiiL:' Sea. it is piMtVctly olivious. that the coiitract- iiio- parties assuiiu'd tiiat the naviiiatioii of that sea was open to I)ritisli vessels. By Article \'II for a period of ten years, tiie \-ess('ls of the 'two powers, and of their suhjccts respectively shall mutually l»e at lihertv to freipieut all the inland seas, the gulfs, havens and cj'eeks on the coast mentioned in Article 111. The coast mentioned in Article 111 is not the entire coast of the continent, hut the coast north of 54 degrees 40 minutes. By Article X e\ery British or Russian vessel navig-atino- the Pacific Ocean, which may be compelled by storms or by accident to take shekel- 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 ])arty has within the ports of the other. It has been contended l)v 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 4side the ijuestion to refer to the con- vention l)etw(>en the United States aiid Ru-sia of the ]ir(nious year. It is as plain as anything can well be. that the contracting parties assumed that when the separating line came to be di'awn. under the treaty, that th(>re would be. in some places, harbours and inlets remain- ing on the British side of this boundary line, and Kussia stipulated for the right of Russian navigators to use them, and for her ships to take refuge in them, as she had conc(>ded a like right to the subjects of His Britannic Majesty. These would, indeed, be strange treaty stipida- tions. if upon the whole length of this boundary, from the 5(>th degree of latitude to Mount St. Elias. it never crossed an iidet. and at no point touched the sea. This is. in my opinion, a t-onclusion which no one who will eandidly examine the tr(^aty. can reach, and 1 ask a fair consideration of our side of the dispute by the people of tlu> United States, to whom justice is far moi'c important than success. 20S EXTRACTS FROM HKITISH Tlie Aht^ln htiiiiijari/." [Frmn tlio Eiliiihurijli Kuview. Ajiril. 1900.] A ivfereiico to Articles III. und IV. of the treaty of 1S:>5, ((noted above, shows that the line, startino- from the south(M'nniost point of Prinee of Wales Island, is to ascend to the north along the channel called Portland Channel, until it reaches the o6th degree of north laii- tude, from which point it is to follow the summit of the mountains situated parallel to the coast as far as their intersection by the 141st meridian, provided these mountains are within ten marine leagues from tlu^ ocean. Should the ir.our.tains at an\' point prove to be more than that distance from the ocean, then the limit shall l)e a line i)aral- lel to the windings of the coast, from which it shall never be farther distant than 10 marine leagues. Having ascertained the southernmost ])oint of Prince of. Wales Island, one is suddenly confronted by the fact that l)etween it and Portland Channel sixty miles of open ocean intei-vene. Furthermore, Portland Channel lies almost due east from the southernmost ])oint. How then is the line joining the two to ascend to the north {^ Again, the line is to ascend to the north along Poi-tland Channel, until it strikes the 5r.th degree of north latitude. IJut Portland Channel does not attain to latitude o*!, and thei'e is no provision made for the course the line is to take between the head of the channel and the point where the' mountains situated parallel to the coast are crossed by that paral- lel. Then follow the all-important questions, (1) which are the moun- tains situated parallel to the coast? and (2) what is the coast? Without pursuing the inquiry too minutely or entering into many of its details, it is proposed to set down here briefly the British and American interpretations of this treaty, in so far as their respective con- tentions can be ascertained from the published views and utterances of public men in Canada and the Cnited States, for neither Government has as yet given out an oflicial .statement of its claim. At the outset it may be observed that there exists a very general agreement to the effect that the negotiators of the treaty of 1825 relied largely upon Vancouver's charts and the narrative of his voyages for their information respecting the physical features of the country with which they found themselves called upon to deal. liotli parties concur in holding C'ape Muzon to be the southernmost point of Prince of Wales Island, though, as a matter of fact, it is not on Prince of Wales Island at all, and both acknowledge that the body of Avater to-day known as Portland Canal is, despite the erroneous description in the treaty, the channel along which the line is to ascend. Here, however, agreement ends. The L'nited State holds that the line should enter Portland Channel In' what since 1853 has been known as Portland Inlet, which is a part of the waters named by Vancouver 'Observatory Inlet.' The British contention is that the Portland Channel of the treaty is the channel so marked on Vancouver's charts and desci'ibed in his narrative in terms that lea\e no doul)t iis to the ))ody of water to which he intended them to apply. The deflection desired by the (I This article is printed' anonymously, but it is understood to have been written at Ottawa, and to have emanated from dtticial sources. AND CANADIAN ITHLICATloNS. 209 United Slates would oive to that Power the priiici])al ishuids 1\ iiij;- at the entrance of Porthmd Canal, and tlierebv the coniniand not merely of the inh't. i»ut also of the harhoui-of Port Sini])son in British Coluni- ])ia, which, by reason of its natural advantages, is destined to heeonie an impoi'tant connnei'cial and strategic i)()int. In support of this claim it is aroucd on the side of the United States that the line, dcpartinu- from the southernmost point of Prince of Wales Island, should follow alon<4' the parallel of 5i- 40', which would bring it in at the mouth of Observatory Inlet. They base their con- tention on the fact that this latitude is expressly mentioned in the treaty in connexion with the point of commencement, and they urg-e that the reason of the omission to state that the boundary should pro- ceed along that parallel is that the repetition Avas considered unnecesary. The Canadians reply that when in the course of the negotiations of 1828-5 Russia was forced to al)andon her extravagant pretensions put forward in the ukase of iSiJl. she took her stand upon the charter of the Emperor Paul, and claimed down to 55', To that line she stul)- bornly adhered throughout. Inasmuch, however, as the parallel of 65^ cuts Prince of Wales Island near its southern extremity, tlie Kus- sian plenipotentiaries proposed that the portion of the island below that line should be included in the Russian possessions. In order to effect this result the starting point was fixed at the southernmost point of Prince of Wales Island, which happens to be in latitude of 54- 4U'. Thus the extension to 54- 40' was merely a local exception to tit a par- ticular case. For similar nnisons of convenience the continental line was carried south a few minutes of latitude to Portland Canal, which atl'ords the first natural l)oundary on the continent south of 55 . There can i)e little doul)t froni the text of the treaty that the south- ernmost point of Prince of Wales Island and not the parallel of latitude was intended as the point of beginning. The geographical co-ordi- nates are given for the purposes of identification merely. If they were intended to govern, the wording would be different, for the defi- nition of a point by geogi'aphical co-ordinates must be by the inter- section of two lines, and not by a parallel of latitude and two meridians seventy-five miles apart. Seeing that the line is to "'"ascend to the north."' a claim that it is first to run sixty miles due east along a par- allel of latitude seems manif(\stly untenable. Canada also contends that, having determined the point of departure (Cape ]\Iuzon) and also the place on the continent where the boundary .strikes the coast (the mouth of Vancouver's Portland Channel), it is agreeable to the rules of legal construction to hold, in the absence of any specific directions, that the line joinino these two points should take the shortest way. which is not a parallel of latitude. l)ut along the arc of a great circle. Following the same rule of interpretation Canada maintains that the head of Portland Canal and the jwint where the 5»;th degree crosses* the mountains situated parallel to the coast within ten niariiu^ leagues from the ocean, should be joiiu'd by a straight line. The treaty continues: De ce dernier i>oint (that is, tiie intersection of the nionntain.* hy theoiith parallel) la lijrne de demarcation snivra hi crete des nionta.<.MU'>; .eitnees ]iaralleienient a h\ cote, jusqn'au jioint d'intersection dn 141-e de^MV de lon^'itmle onest. The difticulty here lies in the fact that this whole region is highly mountainous. There exists not one rano(\ but manv. ri>ing one 210 EXTRACTS KKOM HKITISH l>ehind the other in irrenuhir t'tishion, coiiiicctcd in niiiny phues l)y spurs, the whole form i no- more or le-ss a confused jumble of mountains. The United States, according to General Foster. tak(^s the o-round that the treat}' of iSrio was framed in the light of imperfect oeooiai)hic knowledge: that the nM)untain range depicted on Vancouver's maps as almost bordering the coast has no existence in fact: that there is no contiinu)us range or chain at all. and that consc(|uently it is nec«'ss:irv to fall l)ack upon the alternati\e provision of Article I\'., under which they claim that the l)oundary line should i)e everywhere ten marine leagues inland from the coast, the distance being measured from the head of tide water round all the inlets. It will be observed that the United States read this clause as if it meant that the boundary line is to be "everywhere not less than'' instead of "• nowhere more than "' ten leagues from the sea. The British claim is that ])y the cr^st of the mountains situated ])ar- allel to the coast is meant the tops of the mountains nearest the ocean. Great Britain denies the necessity foi* a continuous 'range' or " chain*, and points out that neither word occurs in the treaty. The W(>rd ■ parallel', it holds, is not to be taken in its strict geometrical sense as implying equidistance. It is unnecessary to search for mountains which are all at precisely the same distance from the coast, foi' Article IV. of the treaty contemplates the possil)ility of these mountains being sometimes more and sometimes less than ten marine leagues therefrom. It is a natural fact that mountains from ;-5.(H)() to o.ooo feet high lying within live or six miles of the sea border the coast throughout its entire length. When it is borne in mind that Van- couver had no knowledge of the interior country, his ol)servations having been made from his ships, it does not seem unreasonable to suppose that the mountains depicted on his charts are those seen from the sea as fringing the coast line, to the serrated appearance of whose tops, heightened by their irregularity of outline, the word 'crest' is peculiarly applica))le. Canada holds these to lie the mountains of the treaty. She maintains that in delimiting this l)oundarv the summit ridge of each of these mountains should be taken, and the valh\vs between crossed by straight lines from crest to crest, whether they contain streams, rivers, or such arms of the sea as do not form ])art of the ocean. Thus, while Canada seeks to restrict her neighbour to a narrow strip of sea coast, having an average breadth of perhaps four or five miles, the United States claim an extensive tract of country running l)ack in some p!ac(\s more than a hundred miles. * " " litvlcii' of ill,- Ahixld Piininildrii (Jurxtntn. Bi/ Ale.vander Higg^^'' AnfJinf of fhr Ilisfori/ i-tfis]i Columhia. [From tlie Scottish Guogniphical Mairaziiu". Fel)ruary, I'.iOl, pp. 90-91.] As shown in \'ancouver's Afhix, she(>t 7. the w;iters of the Pacific ocean washed Prince of Wales Island from Cape Chacon, the southei'ii- most portion of tlait island, along its eastern >hores, following the «"Mr. Alexander Beg^, the British Cohimbian hintorian, one of the very few intelHjient perpon? who have studied the question from the standpoint of oiir national interests." The Canadian .Magazine, January, 1902, p. 291. AND CANADIAN ITHLICATloNS. 'J 1 1 northern shore, and tiirninii' soutliwurd at Point I^akci'. the name " Puke of Clarence Strait" is uiven alone- the island from L'n\)v ("haeon until the .".(Uh deoree of latitude is reached opposite Cape neeision. On the chart refernnl to. it is recorded that Captain \'ancou\-er passed this point 2:^nd Septeml)er 1TU3 and ^-tth Aujiust IT'.*!. I'ut the treaty mentions that the boundary-line is retpiired to reach latitude 5<) at the coast of the continent. This is accomplished by passino' along- Clarence Strait and Ernest Sound to the coast. In Sir Charles Bag'ot's description (in Statement D) of the pro])osed line, to the Russian plenipotentiaries, which is recorded in a despatch to ^Ir. (i. Canning, he says: It would ai)pear that a line traced fnun the southern extremity of the straits named i)uke of Clarence Sound, by the middle of those straits, to the middle of the straits that se]iarate the islands of the Prince of Wales and the Duke of York and the islands situate to the north of the said islands; thence towards the east liy the middle of the same strait to the continent, and thence prolonjred in the same direction and manner already ])roposed by His Majesty's plenijiotentiary to Mount Elias, or to the intersection of the 140th {since changed to 141st) degree of longitmle, would form a line of demarcation which would conciliate, perhaps in a satisfactory manner, the reciprocal interests, present and future, of both Empires in this part of the globe. There is no mention of P(n-tlaiinient plan to do that would })e to retiace the line of deviation back to that already run through Clarenc(» Strait, named Portland Channel in the treaty, and continue that line along the eastern and northern shore of Prince of A\'ales Island, as already outlined in this i-eview. Such an arrangcMnent woidd ()bviat(> the attempts of forming a bound- ary lim> along thi^ frontier of the continent, \\hich woidd prove useless and impracticable. It would leave the frontier of British Columbia intact, and furnish the Cnited States (instead of Russia) with ample facilities to carry on any industry along the large islands fringing- the Pacific Ocean, and along the strip of continent extending about five degrees of longitude from (rlacier or Taylor's Hay. l)eyond Icy vStrait. It woidd give tluMu anv number of excidltMit harbours, and the control of valuable tisheiies. and the timber on Prince of Wales Island, and the other ocean frontier islands north to the continent at Cross Soinid. The arrangement was made b(>tween two fi-iendly powers, and after the treaty was signed, was acknowledged to be satisfactory to each, and it should !)e so to the present day. although many United States 83'mpathisers do not seem to interpret the treaty in that light. * * * PAPERS RELATING TO OCCUPATION ON LYNN CANAL. Lefteri< aiid Crrtliieafrs (jtrnt to Indinns at the Jirdd (if Li/iin CdnaJ. H. H. B. Co'.s, '"Steamer Otter" ChUcarfe Axf/u-st 1st ISOG. This testinionial is oiven to Caniistec to quiet him as he is bothering a great deal for one. lie is some son of a Cliief among the Indians but 1 believe not one of the old school. He would not be a l)ad ftd- low — if he was not such an intolleral)le niusance always bothering for something. But as he genin'ally has a good (juantity of skins that covers a nudtitude of sins: and eonsecjuently he is entitled to some seeming attention. I. Amoeey. ('/»;o rilhKjr. Chilhit Rii'i-r. A'H/ust 7, 1SG9. Befoic starting from Sitka upon the expedition to observe the solar total eclipse of this date at this place. Koh-klux, Principle Chief of the Chilkahts promised to give me his support and assistance and to insure a kind reception from his peo])le. He has fully cai-ried out his promises: vacating his principle house and placing it wholly at the service of the party: sujjplying us daily with an abiuidance of Hsh and fuel: furnishing men whenever needecl: and showing his good will in every instance. He is a man of great determination and ])ower and wi(dds a strong influence over the Chil- kahts who belie\e he }>ears a charmed life. lie is friendly to all Ameri- cans and when his contidence is gained he is good humouivd and com- municates information freelv. He drew for me a fair map of the country from the mouth of the Chilkaht to Fort Selkirk (Ghen-tub-san) on the Voukon. George Davisson ( '(>iii(V(j 7'J.iji<'(Iitio)i. I certify that the above is a true copy of the original [seal.] Sol Ripinsky. Notary PuJjUc in and for thi- District of Alasla. Haines, Alaska, May 8th 1903. 212 PAPERS KELATING To (KCUPATloN (»N LYNN CANAL. 213 U. S. Kevknui: Steamer '" Wayanda"" ( '// Ihult. A luxhl. SrpfriH h,',' 1S68. This is to coi'titV tlmt the hearer '"Kakie"" is sub Chief of the Lower Village, and I found him quite friendly, " ,1. W. White. F. S. /?. .V. I certify that the at)()ve is a true copy of the original. [SEAE.J Sol KiPlNSKY, XoidflJ Pilhl'n\ III (I lit! for i/ir Jj/sfrict of Al(l-e honestly carried out. He is and should be the leading man among the })ackeis. and 1 hold him responsible for the orderly conduct of all the Indians, and to sup- press any and all trouble among them. I am confident of his integrity. H. E. Nichols. Lt. Coaarr U. S. X Comdg U. ^. S. Pinta. I certify that the above is a true coi)y of the original. [seal.J Sol Ripinsky. Xotary Piddle, ni and for tin- District of A/a.sla. Haines, Alaska. May 9t/i. 1003. District oe Alaska. Krecutlre O-ffif'i, Sitka. August 13t/i. ISSO. To whom it may concei'u: The bearer of this Kla-not- i^nd chief of the Chilcats. claims that he has been belied, and that if he has in any instance wronged any white man. it has beiMi tht> fault of the int(>r]ireter '"Cultus .lack." He 214 PAPERS HKLATIXO TO appears so sincere^ in his statt'Uieiits and so oanirsUy clcclares his friendship for the whites that 1 am inclined to the belief that if fairly interpreted and honestly dealt with he will not be the cause of any further trouble. He has made me the most solemn promises of future o-ood behavior, only stipulatino- that white men ha\inp- business with hiiu shall l)rini>- some otliei' interpreter than "C'ultus Jack,*" upon whon) he lays the blame for all his trouble with the white people. I l)esp(>ak for Kla-not who ap])ears honest and well d(\sposed, a fair trial and ask that white m(Mi havino- dealini>'s with him be sure that ])oth he and th(\v fully understand the terms of any aj>reement that may be made with him. S. (t. Swinefort), (rovrruor. I certify that the above is a tru(> copy of the orioinal. [seal.] Sol Rii'inskv, Xotari/ Piibri(\ in (I lid f Of tJie District of Ala,sl, 1903. Drjws!t!on of Da rid ll-ee-shair. United States of America District (f Alaxl'd .y.y David Ik-ee-shaw being" first duly sworn deposes and says: I am a native of Alaska and a resident of Kluckwan ;ind a lunid man of the Karwanton family I have heard my people often speak of those medals which thev became possessed of in the following" manner: In earlj^ days three generations of chiefs back a Russian ship came up Lynu Canal and dropped anchor at what is now known as Pyramid Harbor, some of the OiKcers of the vessel sailed np the Chilkat Kiver, in small boat to Klukwan, and those medals were then presented to Chief Kith-Ia-Kah. Before Chief Kith-la-Kah died ht» turned over tlu^ medals to his son Shartrich and I David Ik-ee-shaw. received the mtnlals about 15 years ago from my wife's father old Chief Shartrich before his death. These three medals have been handed down from one to another as 1 have said and have never been out of our famih . his Daa II) X Ik-ee-shaw. mark Subscril)ed and sworn to tx^fori' me this li^th day of May, 1903. [seal.] Sol Ripinsky, Xotiir;/ PnlAic, in and fw thr Dixtrict iii<\ BtU, Troxd^ Peel^ and Maehmzie rivers^ hy Williiim 0(jilvit\ 1>. L. S. [From Caimdian Sossional I'apers (Xo. 11) Vol. XXIII, No. 11. 1S90.] Ottawa, 16th Jnttj, 1880. To the Honoral)le The Minister of the Interior, Ottaira. Sir: I have the honor to sul)mit the following report of my oi)era- tions on the Lewes or Yukon River, in the season of ISSlT (of which a preliminary sketch was pnl>lished in the Annual Departmental Report RrSSIAX MEDALS accoiuiiauyinir the ositioii is similar to the smiiller (>th of April, 1S8T. for Toronto, where I remained two (hiys doin^- some preparatory work in the mat)netic observatory having- rehition to the maonetic observations which 1 intended to make chirino- ide ])r()g'ress of my expedition, and also super- visino- some chaniies and repairs of instruments, the chief object of whicii was to h^ssen their wei^-ht. and tliiis facilitate })r()i>ress. I had to stop one d:iv at \Vinni})eo-. to obtain an astronomical transit (F. O. '2). On the evening of the lindof Mat I i-eached Victoria. H. C, where I at once set alioiit making the necessary preparations to start by the boat, which was advertised to leave on the 9th. The vessel did not arrive, however, until the 12th. I then found that she was much overloaded, and it was Avith some difficulty that 1 got Capt. Hunter to consent to take my outtit, which weighed in ail about six tons, and, under the circumstances, it was a real net of kiiubiess on his part to do so. Owing to the ]iea\ y load, we made slow progress, and it was not until the 18th of May tliat we reached Fort Wrangell, at the mouth of the Stikine Ki\'er. Here I parted from Dr. Dawson, whom 1 arranged to meet at the conlluence of the Telly and Lewes or Yukon River about the 20th of July following. We arrived at Juneau City on the even- ing of the 19th, remaining there and at Douglass Island until the evening of the 20th. At Douglass Island I had the opportunity of visiting the celebrated Treadwell gold mine and reduction works, con- taining one hundred and twenty stamps, wlui:h have since been doubled in numi)er. The output of tliis mine, with the suialler number of stamps, was generally estimated at about STo.OdO per montii. l)ut no one seemed to know the exact amount. .\s the boat was now much behir.d time she went direct to Sitka, instead of Chilkoot, as usual; thence in succession to Sitka, Killisnoo, Chilkat, and Chilkoot, where I landed in the moi-ning of the 2-l-th of Mav. and where mv work began. Section I. — -Ji,/-p/ortitori/ Siirvei/ from tJw ILad of Tahfa Inlct^ throuiih Tall/a PaSK, and doirn the Pelh/-Yxih)U Rlrcr to the Littniatlonal Boundary heticeen Alasla and the North- ITr.sY Trrritorles of Canada. On the ;!i>th of May I commenced the survey by connecting Pyramid Island in Chilkat Inlet with Chilkoot Inlet at Haines mission. At this point a Protestant luission was estal)lished some years ago; but it is now abandoned, owing, as I was informed, to the very unpleasant con- duct of the Chilkoot Indians. I could not learn that they had com- mitted any overt act of hostility, but it appears the missionary tried to relieve the sufferings of a sick Indian ciiild. Cnfortunately. the child died, and the father attril)uted the death to the missionary, and from that time acted in so suspicious a manner towards the children of the latter that he considered it unsafe to remain in the vicinity, and moved into Juneau City. The teacher of the United States (lovenuuent school for Indians at Haines mission, Col. Ripinsky, told lue he had got into trouble in the same way. A sick Indian to whom he administered nii^dicine at first became nuu-h worse, in conse(|ueuce, ap[)arenlly. of the treatment, and during this time the patient's relatives walked about in an excited 21() PAPERS RELATING TO luumicr, insuiitV'stiiio- very unpleasant sions of h(j.stilit_v. Fortunately the man finally recovered, but Col. Kipin.sky has no doul)t that his life Avould not have been safe had he died. The latitude and lon^'itude of Pyi'aniid Island wei-e detei'inined in lsr>!) ])y a United States Coast Survey ])arty, who were sent out to observe the eclipse of the sun in the month of Auoust of that year. The position then determined is uiven in the ''Alaska Coast Pilot" as latitude T)'.!- 11' 4;3".(i. longitude 13:) UT' 04".5. The lonoitude was deternnned l)v chronometers, thirte(Mi liavino- ])een used by the expe- dition. What point of the Island was fixed 1 could not ascertain, so 1 took the center. This ishmd is pvramidal in form, as seen from the 8oiith-west or north-east, and al)out 500 yards long by 200 wide. It is composed of sand and clay, and rises about SO feet above high tide, being evidently the rcsidt of glacial action. At low tide there is very little water on the north side of the island, and it is only a question of a few years until it will cease to be an island altogether, owing to the constant accumulation of drift ))roiight down by the streams flowing into the inlet. To carry the survey from the island across to Chilkoot Inlet J h;id to get up on the mountains north of Haines mission, and from there could see both inlets. Owing to the bad weather 1 could get no observation for azimuth, and had to produce the survey from Pyramid Island to Taiya Inlet by reading the angles of deflection between the courses. At Tai3'a Inlet I got my tirst observation, and deduced the azimuth of my courses up that point. Taiya Inlet has evidently ))een the valley of a glacier: its sides are steep and smooth from glacial action; and this, with the wind almost constantly l)lowing liindward. renders getting upon the shore difHcult. Some long sights were there- fore necessary. The survey was made up to the head of the inlet on the 2nd of June. Preparations were then commenced for taking the supplies and instruments over the coast range of mountains to the head of Lake Lyndeman on the Lewes lliver. Commander Newell kindly aided me in making arrangements with the Indians, and did all he could to induce them to be reasonable in their demands. This, however, neither he nor any one else could accomplish. They refused to carry to the lake for less than >^'20 per hundred pounds, and as they had learned that the expedition was an English one, the second chief of the Chilkoot Indians recalled some memories of an old (juarrel which the tribe had with the English many years ago, in which an uncle of his was killed, and he thought we should pay for the loss of his uncle by being charged an exoi-bitant price for our packing, of which he had the sole control. Conuuander Newell told him I had a permit from the (ri-eat Father at Washington to ])ass through his country safely, that he would see that I did so, and if the Indians inter- fered with mo they would be punished for doing so. After much talk they consented to carry our stufl' to the summit of the mountain for *i^lO per hundred pounds. This is about two-thirds of the whole distance, includes all the climbing and all the woods, and is by far the most difhcult ])art of the way. On the 0th of June 120 Indians, men, women, and children, started for the summit. I sent two of my party with theiu to see the goods deliver<^d at the place agreed upon. Each carriei' when given a ])ack also got a ticket, on which was inscribcHl the i-ontents of the })a(d\. its weight, and the amount the in(li\idual was to get for cari'ving it. (KXri'ATloN ON LYNN CANAL, 217 Tlu^v were iinulc t(; uiulcrsttiiul that tlu\v had to i)r()(hi<-i' thc.-e tickets on (leliverino- their packs, hut were not told for what reason. As each pack was delivered one of my men receipted the ticket and returned it. The Indians did not seem to understand the import of this; a few of therii pretended to have h)si their tickets: and as they could not o-et paid without them, my assistant, who had duplicates tjf every ticket, furnished them with receii)ted copies after examining their packs. ^ '.i ■.:■ 'A Vr % * While payino- them I was a little apprehensive of trouble, for they insisted on crowdinj;- into my tent, and for myself and the four men who were with me to have attempted to eject: them would- have l)een to invite troul)le. I am strongly of the opinion that these Indians wouUl have been much moie difticult to deal with if they had not known that Commander Newell remained in the inlet to see that I got throuo-h without accidtMit. Deposit fO/i of Sol Ripi iixhi . Unhed States of America Dhtrict of Aldshi, ss. Sol Kipinski, being iirst duh' sworn on oath deposes and says: 1 aui a citizen of the United States and a resident of the District of Alaska, that 1 am of the age of -I'l years: that I was born in Kypin. Poland. That I came to the Disti'ict of Alaska in the year IcSSl. That in the year 1S8() I came to Haines ]\lission at the point now known as Haines. Alaska, as a teacher for the Ignited States Govern- ment in the employ of the Interior Department. That I have resided continuously at Haines, Alaska at a point two miles west of Haines, Alaska, known as Chilkiit. Alaska, ever since said time. That prior to 1886 I had been Government school teacher in the employ of the Interior Department, stationed in the Aleutian Islands in the District of Alaska at Unalaska. That during all of my residence at Haines, Alaska and Chilkat, Alaska, all of the country along the shores of Lynn (anal and the shores of Chilkat Inlet and Chilkoot Inlet and tributary thereto was treated as and und(>r the jurisdiction of th(^ I'nited States. That the waters of Lynn Canal and Chilkat and Chilkoot Iidets were frequented from time to time ))y the vessels of the Cnited States both of the Navy and Revenue Service and that the olticials thereon and those under their command at all times svhen opportunity afforded, rendered assistance, aid and protection to the inhal)itants of the country tributary to Lynn Canal and Chilkat Inlet and Chilkoot Iidet, and in all cases when present and their assistance could reach them, attempted to enforce the laws of the Cnited States, and did so enforce them. That although not then present I remend)er an incident of consider- able notoriety occui'ring about the year l8St) when onc^ Bishop Sagers on his way into the interior at or near Dyea, Alaska, had been slap]ied by an Indian Chief known as Klanot, and that thereafter the said Kla- not came to Haines, Alaska Avhere I was then living, and A. P. Swine- 218 TAPKHS RELATING TO fi)r(l. (lovenior of the District of Ahiska caiiic to Hiiincs, Alask-a and caused the said Klanot to Uv taken into eustody and taken from Haines to Sitka. Alaska for the puri)ose of triak That 1 was present at Haines at t!ie time the said Klanot was appre- henchHl and taken into custody. That I have ypecitic recoUection of that expedition in Is.ST known as the expedition of William Qu-ilvie. That the said Ooihie was a British subject and arrived at Haines. Alaska sometime in the Spring- or early Sunmierof issT aiul was met at Haines. Alaska by the United States (Tunl)oat P'nit1, dilHculties arose upon Cliil- kat Inlet in connection with the killing by one Jack Wade and troul)les which grew out of said killing, and that I was at that time residing at Chilkat owning a store at that place, and was United States Postmaster at Chilkat and saw the killing which occurred in front of or near my store. That I recollect that among others arrested was one Indian Tom who was arrtvsted at or near the ])oint known as Oola- chan Patch on the Chilkat River near Chilkat Inlet. I recollect that at said time thearrest was made by Jack Dalton. United States Deputy ^Marshal, and Jack Lindsay. I remember that about the year 189o one F. H. Poindexter. than residino- at Chilkat in the District of Alaska on the shores of Chilkat OCCUPATION OF l.YNN CANAL. LM'.' IiiU't. was Unitod Statics ( 'oimnissioiicr or .Iiistice-of-lhc-lN'acc at said ])lacc and ('xi'i'cised tlio duties of that otiicc for a numlicr of years, and that he took coj>iii/aiU'e of ail cases eivii and eriniiiial within his jiiris- dietion ai'isino-on the shores of C'liilkat Inlet oi- in tlie country adjaeeiit oi' tributary thereto: and that from tinu^ to time he exercised such jurisdiction as occasion required. I also remejn))er that during the incuml)(Micv of said Poindexter a consio-miuMit of licjuors belonoing to one William Leak was seized by .John ,]. Ilealy. Deputy rnitecl States ]\lai-slial. and placed in the store of tb.e said l*oindexter on the shores of Chilkat Iidet. and thereafter said licpiors were stolen through the lioor of said store while under seizure. That as early as the year ISIU I was duly ;ipj)ointed and commis- sioned as a Notary Public, at Haines. Alaska, and have since that time until the present date exercised the duties of a Notary Public. That about the year 1898 i was appointed Unitetl States Commis- sioner at Haines, jind fronj that time until the year 11K)() I exercised the duties of said office and took jurisdiction of cases civil and crimi- nal ai-isino- u))on the shores of Lynn Canal or Chilkat Inlet and to points as fai' north as Pleasant Camp on the Klahena River west of Kluckwan in the DistriVt of Alaska. That dui'ino' all of my residence in Alaska 1 have had occasion to know and do know that the officials of the United States of all branch(\s of the service in the District of Alaska for the District of Alaska and the various United States Connnissioners" Courts for the District of Alaska have exercised their official authority and jurisdiction over the shores of Lynn Canal and Chilkat Inlet and Chilkoot Inlet unrestricted and unquestioned during all that time and in all countrA* adjacent and tributiu-y thereto as far north as the summits of the passes in the mountains north of the northerly termini of said bodies of water. That at no time during my residence in the District of Alaska have I ever lu^ard of or known of any official of the Canadian Government or of any of the British provinces or any British subject attem})ting to exercise official authority on the coast side of the passes in the mountains adjacent to said bodies of water, nor during my residence in the District of Alaska prior to the influx into said country known as the Klondike Hush, commencing in the year 1897 have I ever heard of any Bi'itish Official or sul)ject making any claim of authority or jurisdiction on behalf of the Canadian (Tovernment or any British pro\ince on the coast side of the sununits of the passes, in the moun- tains adjac(Mit to any of said bodies of water, nor prior to 1S97 diil there exist on the frontier of the British possessions or near the fron- tier of the I^ritish possessions in the country adjacent to said ])odies of water any Customs post or any other olfice of olHcials of the Cana- dian Government or of British Provinces: and so far as 1 have l)een able to ascertain: and that I have, during all of said time, been in a position to know- of the existence of such office had one existed. That during all of my residence in Alaska all notices of location, evidences of tith> and the means of enjoyment of rights have been evi- denced, claimed and ])rot<>cted under and by virtue of the laws of the United States; and all records in i-eference to titles or int(>rests in lands ov otliei' ])r()perty have bi'cn made in accordance with and under the jurisdiction of the laws of the United States in the country adja- cent to said bodies of water as far as the summit of the passes adjacent to said l)odies of water. 220 PAPEK?^ RELATING TO That ill fnM|iient occasions in said couiiti'v adjacent to said bodies of water lia\o the Land l)e))artinent of the L'nited States to my per- sonal kiio\vl(Hl(;e assumed jiirisdietion of surveys and ai)i)licati()iis for patent of lands and that ])ateiit has issued to a portion of the hind at Pyramid Ilarhor and Chilkat on the shores of Chilkat Inlet, nnd that l)at(Mit has issued to a poi'tion of the lands on the shores of Chilkoot Inlet a short distance from Haines. That during my incumbency as Tnited States Commissioner at Hain(\s. Alaska. I had occasion during the absence of the Tnited States Commissioner at Skagway, Alaska, to there sit as l'nited States Com- missioner and exercise jurisdiction over cases arising in and about the shores of Skagway Hay in tii'^ District of Alaska. Sol Ripixskl Sui)scribed and sworn to before me this 27th dav of March, A. D., 1903. [seal.] .1. J. Clarke, Deputy. Clerl- U. S. D/strtct Court f(>r Dlri^lon JVo. 1, Alaxh(. ■ United States Dlstrict Court. Ahixln. Deposit ion of Carl Sjnilin. United States of America District of Oregon., ss I, Carl Spuhn, being first duly sworn, depose and sa^': That I am a citizen of the United States, over the age of 21 years; that in the year of ISSO, I with others established a Trading Post at a ])oint now known as Haines, or Haines Mission, which point is near the head of Lynn Canal, in the Territory of Alaska; at said time there were no other white pei'sons residing at or near said point, except those who were associated with me in said enterprise, and a 3'ear or two later the Presbyterians established a Mission adjoining our said Trading Post. Our place was located in what is known as Chilcoot Inlet. In the jxar of 1S.S8 myself and associates constructed a Salmon Cannery at Pvra- mid Harl)oi' in the Chilcat Inlet. In the same year M. J. Kinney, of Astoria, constructed a Cannery in the same Inh^t about opposite the one constructed by myself and associat(>s. The only exercise of authority by the Ignited States Officials during that time, was exer- cised by the Collector of Customs at Sitka, Alaska, whose authorit}' was recognized, and also a general supervision by Officials of the United States Navy, who might be stationed in the vicinity of said Lynn Canal. In ac()uiring our right to occupy the land we filed notice of location Avith the Collector of Customs of Alaska, which was recorded by him in a Hook for that purpose; there had been no surv(\v of the said lands, nor was there any means for us to ac(|uir(^ title thereto. All of the settlers which I have named recognized the (Tovernment of the Ignited States as having jurisdiction over said locality, as did the settlers who came afterwards; there never was at any time or by any person rep- I'esenting the Camidian Government any protest or opposition made or any claim by any Canadian officers either directly or indirectly that the lands occupied l)v us was within the Canadian Territory. It was uni- OCCUPATION (IF LYNN CANAL. 221 versalh' conceded that the head of Lynn Canal being where the settlers above referred to were located, was upon American soil. At the time I located there it was ocncrally known and understood by all persons to l)e a fact that the Hudson's Bay C'onii)any. chartered under the laws of Great Bi'itain. composed of liritish sulijects. had recoo-iiized the title of the Russian (lovernment to all of the shores of Lynn Canal by accejitino- from that (Tovernment a lease of ri^ht of Fur Trading with the Cliilcat Indians and other Indians who inhabited said country. That the foregoing attidavit is true as 1 verily believe so help me God. Carl Spuhx. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 27th day of April, 1*J03. [seal] Edwin Mays, y^ofdri/ J*ii})l Ic for Oregon. Depo^'dhni of I. Jh/hrr Ilof^dil. United States of America I)i's l)eing impractica))le. That to my knowledge the ofHcei's of the United States exercised their jurisdiction upon Lynn Canal, and as fai' inland therefrom as the sum- mits of the mountains adjacent to said body of water. That during all of 111}' residence in Alaska I have never heard of, or known of an asser- tion of any official authority by officers of th(^ Cantulian Government, or any otiier sovereignty, than the L'nited States, upon the territory above described. 1. Myiikh Hofstad. Sutiscribed and sworn to before me this 1st day of May, 19(13. [seal. J C. C. Heid, Xoftirij PnhVic for A1a>f ILiiniii^ .w. John U. Siiiith, ])oino- first duly sworn accordino- to law, deposes and says that he is a eitiziMi of the United States of America, of the ag-e of thirty-tivc years, residing- at Ililo, on the Island of Hawaii, in the Territory of Hawaii. That in the month of June. A. I). 18l>7, he was residing- in the city of Portland, in the State of C)r(»gon, and (hiring that month was ap- pointed by the President of the United States as United States Com- missioner for the District of Alaska; and that subsequent thereto an order was issued by the President of the United States designating- D^'ea, Alaska, as the official residence of affiant, and that at som,^ time in the month of July, A. D. 18U7, said affiant left Portland, Oregon, for IVea, Alaska, arriving there in the latter part of said month of July. ^ And affiant further deposes and says that within a very short time after his arrival at Dyea aforesaid, it was reported to him that there were a number of Canadian officers resident at Skagway, distant by direct line about two miles and ))y sea about five miles from the said Dyea. That said affiant hearing a rumor that said Canadian officials might endeavor to exercise jurisdiction for all purposes over said Skag- way and said Dyea, visited said Skagway, said visit being made on or about the first day of August A. D. 1897. That upon his arrival at said Skagway said affiant was informed that certain Canadian officials had headquarters at certain tents in said Skagway, and in conseciuence of said information as to the residence of said officials, affiant \isited said tents; that upon his said visit affiant found there an official, whose name afiiant cannot now rememlier, who claimed to be and who appeared to be in cliarge of all Canadian police within said city of Skagway; that affiant isaccfuainted with the usual uniform of mounted Canadian policemen used in that vicinity at that time; that the person with whom affiant communicated on his visit to said tents was dressed in the usual uniform of the Canadian mounted police; that upon meet- ing said official, affiant informed said official that he, affiant, had ])een appointed United States Conunissioner for the District of Alaska and had come to Dyea to assume his duties as such Commissioner, and that he, affiant, hoped there would l)e no difficulty between him as such Commissioner and any Canadian officials over or about th(> (piestion as to whether the Unitcnl States officials or Canadian officials had juris- diction at eithei' Dyea or Skagway. That thereupon said official informed affiant that thei'e would l)e no difficulty relative to the ques- tion of jurisdiction, and that the Canadian officials resident at Skagway would, as soon as possible, move their headcpiarters '^ over the pass" and into the vicinity of LakeTagish, in order that the hcadciuarters of the Canadian officials should be at a point oonciM-ning which there could be no dispute whatever; that upon leaving Skagway the said Canadian officials would Unne at Skagway and Dyea some ]ierson to notify miners of what would be refjuired of tluMu upon arriving at the Customs Camp to be established in the vicinity of Lake Tagish or Lake Bennett, and to notify said miners of the requirements of the laws of Great Britain upon their passing into British territory in the vicinity of Lake Bennett and Lake Tagish, with their goods. OCCUPATION ON LTNN CANAL. 228 That from the conversation wliieh affiant had witli said- (official, afhant is satisfied that said ollicial was not clainnno' jurisdiction of any kindover either Skao-way or Dyea; that shortly aftei- said conversation, .said Canadian officials and all mounted police in Skiiuway transported their goods and effects ovei- the pass towards Lake Bennett. And afiiant further deposes and saj's that on or about the 0th day of August, A. D. 1897, he again visited said Skag'way, and there, as United States Commissioner for the District of Alaska, met a number of persons representing themsehes to l)e citizens of the United States of America, who desired to lay out the town of Skagway. and to locate and take up lots under the town-site laws of the United States of America; that at a meeting held for that i)ui'pose on or about the said (ith day of August, A. I). ISltl, a man l)v the name of A. .1. McKinner, formerly resident in Seattle, in the State of Washington, was elected Chairman, and Dr. H. K. Littlefield, now of Portland, Oregon, was elected Secretar\% and affiant was elected as Recorder of town lots; that the survey of said Skagway was made by one Frank H. Reed; that on or about said 6th day of August, A. D. 18117, various persons claim- ing to be citizens of the United States of An)erica. did post on various town lots of the said city of Skagway. notices of their intention to locate and take possession thereof, and did file with afhant for record duplicate copies of said notices, which said duplicate copies were recorded b}- affiant in a book, which said book was delivered by affiant to his successor, Charles A. Sehlbrede, now a resident of the city of Roseberg, in the State of Oregon. That during all of the time affiant was United States Commissioner, he received location notices for record, and recorded the same in the manner hereinbefore set forth; that the laying out and the survev of said town of Skagway. and the location of lots thertMn, and the tiling of lov-ation notices all took place with full knowledge on the part of the Canadian officials, and without any protest whatever from them. Affiant further depos(\s and says that from the time of his first visit to Skagway as hereinbefore set forth, until he tinalh' ceased to per- form the duties of United States Commissioner in the month of May, A. D. 1898, he, as United States Commissioner, from time to time held Court in said town of Skagway, and exercised full jurisdiction as such Commissioner. That during all of said time persons dressed in the uniform of Canadian officials, and generally known as such, visited said town of Skagway, l)ut never, on any occasion, attempted toexer- cise jurisdiction therein, or to interfere in aiu' manner with the juris- diction of affiant as United States Conuuissioner; that affiant kept a docket as such Conuuissioner which said docket was deliv7, the town of Dyea was laid out under the town-site laws of the United States of America, in a manner similar to that of the town of Skagway hereinbefore described; that the sur- veyor who sui'veyc^d the town of Dyea was one P>. F. Flood; that afffant was Recorder of said town of Dyea, and recorded instruments in regard to town lots in the same manner as at Skagway; that during all of the t'uuo of his i-esidence in Dyi^a, afhant from time to time held court as Unitcnl States Conunissioner, keeping a docket as such Com- missioner, which docket Avas delivered to his successor; that during all of said period Canadian olticials visited Dyea, and were acquainted with the fact that said afffant was holding Court as United States Com- missioner, and at no time made an}' protest relative thereto. And afhant fui'ther deposes and says that, extending inward and northwardlv from D\'ea to Lake Lindei-man. a distance of thirtv miles. Orcri'ATION ON LYNN ("ANAL. 225 was a trail over a pass known as C'hilkoot Pass: that dui-ini^- all of tlie time atfiant acted as Commissioner in and for the District of Alaska, he exercised jurisdiction over said trail, and issued, and had sei'ved, warrants for the arrest of persons charo-cd with breach of the laws of the United States occurring on said trail; that about fifteen miles dis- tant from said Dvea. and on said trail, was a settlement known as Sheep Cam]); that afhant on several occasions tried persons accused of the conunission of crimes at said Sheep Camp; and that on the "Jnd. clay of Januarv, A. D. ISOS, alHant, as Conunissioner, visited said Sheep Camp and performed a marriage ceremony there; that on numerous occasions said Conunissioner sent a de})uty United States Marshal along- said trail for the purpose of making- arr(>sts; that of the deputy marshals who acted in conjunction \\\t\\ attiant. he, the said iffiant, now remembers the name of A. A. Richards, formerly of Idaho. H. J. Mclnnis. formerly of Portland. Oregon, John Cudahee, formerly of Seattle. Washington, and John W. Snook, still at Skagway. And afHant further deposes and says that the fact that he exercised jurisdiction over said trail leading to Lake Linderman was well known to persons representing tiiemselves to be Canadian otticials. as such officials constantly visited Dyea; that at no time did any sucli officials in any manner protest against the actions of the affiant, and at no time, to the knowledge of attiant, did such officials themselves attempt to exercise any jurisdiction over said trail, except that, a short time prior to the date when affiant left Alaska, in May, A. D. 1808, attiant was informed that Canadian officials were on the sununit of Chilkoot Pass, about eighteen miles distant northerly and inland from Dyea, and attempting to collect toll from miners under the Canadian Customs laws. And attiant further deposes and says that ottenses of many kinds w^ere being constanth' connuitted along said trail, and that the Cana- dian officials in that section of the country nuist have had knowledge that such ottenses were being committed; that at no time did any Canadian otticial arrest anv person charged with the conunission of any ottcnse, or in any manner attempt to prevent the commission of ottenses or punish ott'enders. And affiant fnrther deposes and says that neither the assumption of jurisdiction l)y the United States officials in Dyea and Skagway and over l)oth of said trails, nor the failure of the Canadian officials to assume jurisdiction, nor the failure of said Canadian otticials to make any protest whatever, was in any manner the result of any fear on the part of said Canadian officials that the officials of the United States would forcibly assume and continue to exercise such jurisdiction; that during all of the time said affiant was in Alaska the Canadian otticials in the vicinity were much more numerous than the officials of the United States, and that had said Canadian otticials desired to have assumed and exercised jurisdiction. tluM'e was at their disposal a suffi- cient luunber of Canadian police to have forcibly ejected from any of the territory all otficers of the Uhited States, and to forcibly have pre- vented said United States otticials from acting-. And affiant further deposes and says that in the month of Septem- ber, A. D. ISOT, he received instructions from both the Commissioner of the United States General Land Office at Washington, Hon. Binger Hermann, and from Burton E. Bennett, United States Attorney at Sitka. Alaska, directing afKant to investigate an alleged illegal cutting 22(i PAPERS RELATING TO of timber on Amcrifun torritorv; that, for the purpose of making .such in\estioatioii. atHant proceeded bv the trail over Chilkoot Pass to Lake Ijinderman. thirty miU's distant from Dyea. })eino- accompa- nied by Deputy Marshal A. A. Richards, and Assi>;tant United States Attorney Alfred J. Daly: that upon his arrival at I^ake Lindernian, affiant foiuul American citizens en<>aged in cuttinL>- tinil)er. lloatino- it down a sn);dl creek to the head of Lake Linderman. and there sawing it into hnnl>er l)y hand; that whiU^ at Lake Linderman said affiant met a man known as Capt. Strickland, a\^k) represented himself to l)e, and who appeared to be, a Canadian oiiicial, in charge of all other Cana- dian officers in that vicinity: that wdiile in conversation with Strick- land at Lake Linderman, affiant aud Strickland were approached by a man claiming to be a miner, who represented to them that certain Indians had i)Ossession of his provisions and other })roperty at Lake Linderman, and were holding possession of them under an unfounded claim: that said miner further stated that he desired the return of his goods, and desired the proper officers to take the necessary steps to secure him his rights: that thereupon the said Strickland in the presence of affiant refused to have anything to do with the controversy: that thereupon, to the knowledge of the said Strickland, and without pro- test from him, the said affiant, as Commissioner, assumed jurisdiction, and settled said controversv: that no record of said case was made, however, because, upon affiant's assuming jurisdiction, the parties con- cerned amicably settled the entire matter. And affiant further deposes and says that some time about the first of Octobei'. A. D. 1S1>7, while affiant was at Dyea at the house occu- pied by him as an ofHce, he was \isited by a man by the name of Bevan, Avho claimed to be, and who affiant believes to have been, an Inspector of Canadian police; that said Bevan discussed with affiant the (juestion of jurisdiction over that part of the country, in order that there might be no clash; that said Bevan stated to affiant that the British Cohnnbia officials had received orders to assume jurisdiction up to a certain line; that thereupon affiant and said Bevan made a rough drawing or map, intended to represent the line where the jurisdiction of the United States ended and the jurisdiction of Canada commenced: that in said conversation it was agnHnl that the United States should exerciser jur- isdiction over both trails to the head of Lake Bennett and of all of the portages between the two Lakes Bennett and Linderman; that .said ]T)ugh map or drawing was prepared partly by affiant and partly by said Bevan, and was intended to show Lake Bennett and Lake Linder- man. the Skagway trail and the trail over the Chilkoot Pass to lake Linderman, and also the line dividing the jurisdiction of the United States and Canada; that affiant is unable to state who made the draw- ing itself, but remembers distinctly that the line dividing said jurisdic- tion was mad(> ])y said Bevan, and that the woi'd "'Skagway" written on .said drawing, intended to represent the Skagway trail, was written by the said Bevan; that attached hereto, marked Exhibit ''A"" and made a part hereof, is the .said map or drawing, in exactly the .same condition as at the time it was made. And affiant further deposes and says that, upon said Bevan depart- ing, he. affiant, made a memorandum of the occui'rence. and read said memorandiun to all ])ersons who had l)een present at the conversation; excejit Bevan. his guide, and W. J. Jones. Inspectoi'of Customs, there wer(e pr(\sent at said conversation Ix^tween affiant and said Bevan the OCCUPATION OX LYNN CAXAL. 227 follow! no- persons: Inspector Be van and ^uide, affiant, A. A. Richards, U. S. Deputy Marshal. W, J. Jones, Inspector of Customs for the United States, E. T. Casey, of Denver. Colorado, and John Herberoer, of Dyea. now resident at Skai>way: that affiant has preserved said memonuidunr. that the same is attached hereto and marked Exhibit *'1V; that said memorandum is in exactly the same condition as when completed, save and except that the words on the l)ack thereof "Bet Sept 1 t^c Dec 1" were phiced thereon by affiant a few da^'s ago; that said memorandum fairly gives the substance of the conversation referred to above, and was prepared and written by affiant within tive minutes of the time said conversation took place. And affiant further deposes and says that during the time he resided in Alaska many deeds conveying title to real estate in Dyea and Skag- way, Sheep Camp and Ilaynes Mission were tiUnl with him for record, and by him recorded: that the book in which the same were recorded was delivered ])y affiant to his successor; that a discussion and news- paper controvers}' arose as to whether or not said deeds should 1)8 recorded wdth affiant or with the United States Commissioner at Juneau, and that by reason thereof the knowledge that said deeds were being Hied for record with a United States official must have come to Canadian officials: and that at no time was any protest made by said officials against such transfers of land or against the recording thereof with officials of the United States: that at no time while affi- ant Avas in Alaska did Canadian or British officials establish any office or place at which land at any place mentioned in this affidavit and over which affiant exercised jurisdiction, coukl be taken up under their hiAvs, nor was any office or place established at which transfers of any such lands could be registered under British or Canadian laws. John U. Saiith Subscribed and sworn to before me this -ith day of May, A. D. 1903. [seal.] i\. B. Maling, CIcrl United States District Court, Territory of IJavxiii. (Exhibit "A") 228 PAPERS RELATING TO (Exhibit "• H*") MEMORAXDIM. In the presence of Inspector lievan and ^niide, J. U. Smith, V. S. Coniniissioner, A. A. Richards, U. S. Deputy Marshal, W. J. Jones, Inspector of Customs for the United States, E. T. Casey, from Denver, Colo., and John Ilerberirer, of Dyea, an a^'reement was made and it was understood that the jurisdiction of the United States Oliicers and the Canadian Ollicers should l)e as per attached drawin<)r at Lake Ben- nett and Lake l>inderman. The line marked "Skau;\vay" l>y Bevan means the iSkaijway Trail, and the line crossing at the head of Lake Bennett is the point at which the British Ofticials have received orders to assume jurisdiction, from which it will apiiear that the United States Officers are to exercise jurisdiction over both trails to the head of Lake Bennett and all of the portages between the two lakes. This memorandum was written within five minutes after the conversation was held, and in the presence of Messrs. Smith, Richards, Casey and Herberger. iJtposifion of J (linen W. Keen. I, James William Keen, a citizen of Seattle, King- County, of the State of Washington, of the United States of America, do make atti- davit as follows: — I was in the employ of the Hudson Bay C'ompany from 1S5S to 18H3, during which time I was on board the Hudson Bay Company's steamer " Labershere '" trading- along the Coast of British Columbia and the Russian American Coast and Islands, from Portland Canal to Chilcat and Cross Sound. We made from three to four trading trips yearly, during the spring, summer and fall, visiting Stickheen, Sundum, Tarku, Pyramid Har])or and Swanson's Harbor, as it was permitted us by the lease from the Russians to trade with the Stickheen, Tarku, Chilcat and Hoonah tribes, but while we were not legitimately allowed to barter with the Island tribes, as we understood, we did include in these cruises the following points where we met the natives and traded with them: — Security Bay ) Cape Bendle )- inhabited by the Kehk tribe Cape Fans haw ) Tsar ta heen — inhal)ited l)y the iVuk tribe Pavlolf Harl)or I • i i -,. i i ^.u xr i. u 4. *. -i T-.,,- mhabited bv the Hootz-ah-tar tribe Killisnoo \ Traders Island — The Sitka ti'ibe came here to trad(^ The Mainland Coast north of Portland Canal, including all of the Inl(>ts and l)ays, and Islands of the Alexander Archi])elag() were always considered and spoken of by the Hudson Bay Company's employees as Russian Territory, and we considered that we had only the privilege to trade therein. The Hudson Ba}^ Company never exercised any jurisdiction over this Territory or the native inhabi- tants therein. During this period, from 1858 to 1863, the Hudson Bay C, while master of the trading schooner "Sweepstakes" I accompanied Secretary Seward and party, consisting of General Jeti' Davis, U. S. Army, lienry Kiidvead, and Capt. Dall to the Chilkat village of Cluckwan. I also acted as interpreter upon this occasion. When Secretary Seward informed th(> Chilkat chiefs that the United States had purchased all of Alaska from Russia, one of the old chiefs replied — "Yes, the Russians stole it from us; they were big thieves and sold us as though we were all slaves, as this was only their coun- try in white man's fashion." James W. Keen. State of Washington, County of K'nuj^ .s-v. I, W. H. Llewellyn, a Notary Pul)lic in and for the State of Wash- ington, residing at Seattle in the above named County and State, duly commissioned, sworn and (jualitied. do herel)V certify that on this fifth day of May A. D. 1H»)3. l)ef()re me personally appeared James W. Keen to me known to be the individual descril)ed in, and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he signed and sealed the same as his free and voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. Given under my hand and official seal this fifth dav of Mav A. D. 1903. [seal. J W. H, Llew^ellyn, JS'otarii PiihUc In and for the State of Washington, residing at Seattle in said County. Deposition (f IIiK/h ^rui'iuii/. State of California City and County of San F'rancisco, ss. Hugh Murray, being first duly sworn, deposes and says: 1 am familiar with the location referred to in the annexed map, and have l)een familiar with it for more than ten (10) years last past. This map^' is a correct representation of the head of Lvnn Canal, Alaska, showing Pyramid Harl)or and the adjacent country, and also shows correctly the location of the United States surveys one (1). two (2), three (3) aiid four (-t). Pyramid Harlxn- is the only safe harbor on Lynn Canal in length over one hundred (lOO) miles, and is very near the head of the navigable w^aters of that canal. Hl(;ii Mukkay. Subscribed and sworn to ])efore me this ;sth day of May, A. I). 1903. [seal.] Geo. E. Morse. United States Comrnissionrr for tJie Northern District of California at San Francisco. a For reproduction of the map referred to in the foregoing affidavit see Map No. 82 in the Atlas accompanying this Countci- ( "k'^c 230 PAPERS RELATIISKJ TO Dt'poKit'ion of IIu(//i 2[>in(n/. State of Califokxia City and County of San l^nmcisco^ m. Hugh Mukkay, being- fiivt duly sworn, deposes and says: I am a white male citizen of the United States, aged fort^-nine (-1-H) years, and my post office address is No. 308 Market Street, San Fran- cisco, Califoi'nia; I am l)y occupation, superintendent of the salmon cannery at Pyr- amid Harbor, Alaska, and I have been such superintendent since the year 1888. In that 3'ear I went to this place as sui)erintendent and part owner of the Chilkat Canning- Compan}', for whom I built a can- nery in 1889 at a point on Chilkat Inlet, nearly opposite Pyramid Harbor. When 1 went there, there were alread}' two canneries in operation, one at Pyramid Harbor belonging to the Pryamid Harbor Packing Compan}' and the other belonging to the Chilkat Packing Company. I was informed that each of these canneries had been there four or live years tind they are among the first of the salmon canneries built in Alaska. The value of the improvements at these points was approximately as follows: Pyramid Harbor Packing Companv .?40, 000 Chilkat Packing Company * ?25, 000 Chilkat Canning Companj' $35, 000 and there was annually canned and exported by these three canneries about 5.5,000 cases of sabiion. The salmon was caught in the Inlet and in the Chilkat River by the Indians and by fishermen who were l^rought up from San Francisco. In 1888 there was a small settlement of American citizens at Haines' Mission and a small trading post at Dyea. At Haines' Mission there was a missionary establishment where there were about twenty-five Americans who lived there the year 'round and there were numbers of Indians who went to school at the mission. Dyea was the point of departure into the interior over the Chilkoot Pass and was a trading post of some importance. Since that time these places have become much more populous and the town of Skagua}" contains about 2500 people. I have known F. H. Poindexter. He came to Pyramid Harbor before I did and his place was adjacent to mine. He was a Justice of the Peace as an American official, and had an office and exercised his authority as such Justice in disposing of the cases which came within his jurisdiction and which chiefly concerned the Indian litigants. I have personally attended a trial in his court and he continued to act as such Justice of the Peace until he left Alaska in or about the vear 1890 or 1891. I know many of the Indians who live in this vicinity and who ha\e resided there all their lives. I have never heard from them or from anyone else that the Canadian officials ever claimed jurisdiction over any of said territory or made any opposition to the acts of the Ameri- cans in settling there. I have myself never seen a Canadian ofhcial in that country who was acting in his ofHcial capacity. About eighteen or twenty miles above Pyramid IIarl)or there is an Indian village called Kluckwane. It is very near the boundary line between the American and British possessions, as we have always understood that line: beino- on the American side. At this village OCCUPATION ON LYNN CANAL. 231 there are some old Russian brass cannon, wliieli the Indian*; have told nie were placed there bv the Russians prior to the cessions of the Unit(>d States. I am familiar with the surveys made by (J. N\ . (iarside. United States Deputy Surveyor for Alaska in the year lSi»l. known as sur- veys numbers one (1). two (2), three (8) and four (4). At that time, I was superintendent of a salmon caiiju^rv at Pyramid Ilarboi-. Alaska. I art'orded Mr. Garside at that time the assistance of two or three of my emplo3'es, to be used as chain-men and bi'ush-men. These men were employed about eight or nine days in assisting- Mr. Garside in making- surveys numbers one (1), two (2), three (3) and four (4). I saw Mr. Garside and my several employes, whom I have allowed Mr. Garside to select as assistants in surveying, actually at work making the surveys referred to. In fact, Mr. Garside frecpiently consulted me with reference to matters connected with surveys numbers one (1), two (2), three (3) and four (4). These surveys were made by jNIr. Garside, as above stated, in 1891, and to the best of my present recollection were made about the month of October, 1891. Hlgii Murray. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 21st dav of Mav A. D. 1903. [seal. J J. Manley, Lri'itt'd States Coiinnl^sloiier for the Nortln'i-n District of ('aUfornla^ at San Francisco. Dc2)ositi(rri of Hear II F. Fort maim. State of California City and County of San Francisco, sx: Henry' F, Fortmann, being first duly sworn, deposes and says: I am a citizen of the United States, over the age of forty (40) years, and my post office address is No. 308 Market Street, San Francisco. I am President of the Alaska Packers Association, a California cor- poration, and have been President of the Association ever since it was incorporated in 1893. I am familiar with the location of the canneries at Pyramid Harbor on the Lynn Canal, Alaska, and have been for many years past familiar with the l)usin(\ss there cai-ried on and th(> general nature of tlu» improve- ments in and al>out the harbor. Pyramid Harbor is located on the western shore of Chilkat- Inlet, Lynn Canal, and is l)y far the liest harbor on Chilkat Inlet, — having good holding- ground, sufficient depth of Avater and protection from wind through the high blurts surrounding- it. Our cannery, as shown by the map, is located on the southern shore of the harbor. The map of ISDI shows that Pyramid Harbor is almost at the head of dee]) water navigation. — the water shallowing uji rapidly about a mile al)Ove the cannery. The cannery site owned by us covers almost the entire level land which could lie used for landing or industrial i)ur])oses. The blurts on the east shore of Pyramid Harbor I'ise abruptly from the water. Our title to the location is derive Brofliers 1900 ' " 1901 ' Orieiitiil 1902 ' " 1903 ' Star of Fraitce OCCITPATION ON LYNN CANAL. 233 The Ignited States Fish C'ominissioner's Stoaincr " Alttatross,'" Cap- tain Joti'i'i-son F. Moscr coiiiniaiuliiiu'. made ({iiito cxti'iisivo iiivostio-a- tions of tills district, and copies of the reports are on tih' in the Fnited States Fish Coniinissioner's otHce, which would verify and \-erv likely add considerable to these statements. The cannery and location is by far one of the best and most exten- sive in Alaska. The cannery is thorouo-hly e(iiiipp(Hl with the most modern machinery, electric lioht plant, etc. The cannery locations and the l)usiness carried on at this point liave been very well known to all of the people wlio are familiar with Alas- kan atlairs, for many years. No interference has ever been attemj^ted to our possession and use of these locations, nor was there any adverse tile by any one during- the period of publication of postino- for the pur- <-hase from the Government of these surveys. Our predecessors in interest settled upon the land, and w'e have made the improvements under the belief that the territory belonged to the United States: nor did we ever know of any question of this l)Oundarv line until the com- mencement of the gold excitement of the Klondike in the year 1897. Pyramid Harbor is the terminus of the Dalton 'J' rail, which runs into the Yukon, and over which a large number of prospectoi-s go. Through our sutferance all this landing of passengers, freight and live stock has been made upon our survey, which is the only available place ill that neighborhood. Henry F. Fortmann. Subscril)ed and sworn to liefore me this Sth day of May, lli(>3. [seal.] Geo. E. Morse, United States Conanusionerfor the Novthei'v Dhtriet of California. Depox'ition (fjoha J. ILah/. State of Illinols. Cool- Comity. f<><. John J. Healy, a citizen of the Tnited States of the Territory of Alaska, lieing duly sworn, deposes and says: I hrst went to the Ter- ritory of Alaska in the winter of I8S0-6. I landed at Juneau and thence visited Sitka, returning to fluneau on the same steamer. Soon after my arrival 1 l)Ought a schooner for the purpose of exploring- and trading, and after obtaining at Sitka a license for her, 1 went to Haines Mission about April or May 188«5, where I found a trader named George Dickinson, an Ame^^ican citizen; his wife was an Indian and was very prominent as a missionary woman. Dickinson remained there till the time of his death. t)eing a resident for ten or twelve vears. Haines' Mission is situated on Portage Hav at tlu^ head of Lvnn Canal. Soon after my arrival, in May 1880 I estal)lislied a trading-post at a place now called Dyea, forming a partnershi]) under the name of Healy c'c Wilson with Edgar Wilson, a native of Ohio and a \eteran of the Ignited States Armv, who resided at Dyea uj) to the time of his death in 1895. Dickinson from Haines" Mission established a branch store at Dyea in opposition to us a few years after. In the so"s there were a hundred or two hundred transient Americans passing thiough to :iiid from the 284 PAPERS RELATING TO Yukon region, iind tho ))iisiiu>ss of our tiiin was in outfitting them with olotliing and ,sui)plie.s. About the year 18SS-S9 Captain William iSIoore ioeated the town of Skagway near the head of Dyea Inlet. His .son lienjaniin Moore eanie to settle there about the same time, and I understood that he took out iiis first papers as an Ameriean citizen in the United States Court at Juneau. He had to do this to enal)le him to hold such land as they might take up at Skagway. Captain William ]Moore had also to become an American citizen to hold land. The father and son have contiiuied to reside at Skagway up to the present time. During my residence at Dyea .about the year 1888 some difhculty arose ])etween me and the Chilkat and Chilkoot Indians. These Indi- ans are two clans of the Thlinkit tribe and live on the headwaters of Lynn Canal and on the streams which empty into the inlets at its \wnd. When the traffic across the passes into the Yukon region began to increase I saw that the Indians who had up to that time done all the packing over the passes would not be able to supply the demand, and I conceived the idea of putting a lot of mules on there. Some of the Indians went to Sitka and brought the Governor there to interfere and stop me. That was Governor Swineford. The Indians said I was using their old trail and the}" wanted to stop me. The Governor and some of hisstafi' went over the trail and viewed it, and told the Indians that I was within my rights; that I was not interfering with their trail; that I was only improving their trail, and h;ul a perfect right to use it. This trail follows the Dyea River to the Sheep Camp, at the foot of the ^Mountains. It used to be known on the map, in the earh'' days as the Perier l*ass. The trail went over the mountains, on to the summit of this pass, and then dropped off into the headwaters of the Yukon — into Crater Lake. The Indians IxMng native Americans under the Russian Treaty, considered that the country l)elonged to them, and that they had an exclusive use of the pass and to the business of l)acking over the trail, as they and their fathers exercised this right. In 18ST Mr. William Ogilvie, on his way into the Yukon countr}' arrived at Dj'ea, while 1 was there, wnth two or three Peterburg canoes. He took them all the wav from Peterl)urg, Canada. He was a land surve3'or of the Dominion of Canada. He remained about ten days waiting for instruments which, he claimed, were to arrive from France. He passed up the Dyea River and into Canada, I don't know how far. He went down the Yukon sevei'al hundred miles. He had expected to em|)loy the American Chilkoot Indians to pack for him over the summit to the head of tlie lakes at th(> headwaters of the Yukon, liut on account of the fact that these Indians, several 3'ears before, had some trouI)le with the Hudson Hay Company's rep- resentatives at Pyramid Harbor, at which a number of them were killed by the British, these Indians, by way of retaliation, demanded twenty dollars a hundred for packing, instead of nine dollars, which had been the customary price, and which was the price that Ogilvie had come prepared to pay out of govermnent funds. In this predica- ment, he sent word to Capt. Newell, of the United States man-of-war, ''Pinta," then l3ing at Haines' ]Mission. Capt. Newell came in his launch, and met Ogilvie in my store in Dyea. ^^'e talked fh(^ situa- tion over. Capt. Newell refused to use his authority to compel or induce the natives to take the work for Ogilvie at nine dollars per hundred. Ogilvie said he could get some "Stick" Indians (The OCCri'ATlON OiN LYNN CANAL. 235 "Takish" iiidiaiis), who were there at Dyea then, trading at my store, to do th(^ packini*- for hlni if they could he j^rotected from the assaults of the AmtM'ican C'hilcoot indians. Capt. Newell refused to extend anv such iirotection. sayino- that the ''Stick'' indians Avcre aliens, and had no rioht there. \Viiereui)on, I otiered to do th(» })ackin<>- for Oi^ilvie at nine dollars per lunulred. lie asked how I could do this. I replied that 1 would employ the " Stick'' indians. Og'ilvie said this coidd not be done without trouble between the American indians and the Cana- dian indians. Thereupon, I sug-o-ested he could employ the American indians to the summit, where the American territory was supposed to end, for ten dollars ])er hundred. That was to the sunmiit. about twenty mih\s from Dyea, and two-thirds of the wiiole portage; and then employ "Stick" indians to take the goods at the summit and pack them the rest of the way. This arrangement was made, and car- ried out. Owing to the fact that he was short of mone}-. I doubt ver}' uuich whether he paid the Canadian indians anything for their services beyond furnishing them with food; and in fact I think his own men did most of the work beyond the summit. In the fall, after the sunmier when Ogilvie passed through, Dr. Dawson, who had gone into the interior by the way of the Stikeen Kiver, and had passed from there down the llootlinka River to the Yukon and then by the Yukon, and out by the way of Dyea, came over Chil- koot sunuuit and down to Dyea, where he staid four or live days. He told me he was looking at the country geologically. He was a geolo- gist. He was joined at Dyea by Mr. McConnell shortly after hi.s arrival. McConnell had come up the Yukon River and over the pa.ss. Ogilvie, Dawson and McConnell Avere the only Canadian oflicials I saw in that region during the time 1 lived there. I had considerable talk with them during their visit. They made no protest against the occupation at the head of Lynn Canal by Americans, and made no claim to the region as belonging to Canada. Considerable sur\'eying was done at the head of Lvnn Canal, near Chilkoot in 18.^9, 1890 and 1891 l)y George W. GaVside, a United States Land Surveyor. He surveyed fishing sites for settlers. I had him surve}' a tishing site for me; and 1 had him survey a store site for a store that 1 built there. And he surveyed for canning compa- nies there. The}^ were all American companies. There was nothing- else doing business there. Previous to my leaving the Chilkat and Chilkoot country, which was in isiil, I was appointed and acted as a De})uty United States ^Nliirshal and Deputy Collector of Customs. jVly jurisdiction extended over all the stri[) of country at the head of Lynn Canal, including Chil- kat inlet, Chilkoot inlet, and Dyea inlet. As Deputy Marshal I was not contined to one district, but could go into any district where ni}' duties took me. As Deputy Collector I used to have ''a little hell of my own,'' destroying stills and whisk v made by Indians and brought in by snuigglers. I seldom had occasion to go far inland, but United States othcers went as far up Chilkat inlet and river as twenty miles after criminals. Al)out the year 1891, Max Edehnan, a Deputy United States Mar- shid. with my hel]), arrested George Shatrich, an Indian, at Pyramid Hai'bor. upon a charge of resisting otKcers. About 1889, on a pre- vious occasion, a great many indians threatened to take my store at Dyea, and during the troul)le two of the indians were killed. I sent 236 PAPERS RELATING TO OCCUPATION OF LYNN CANAL. a man in a boat down to Juneau for help, and about twent\' five white citizen.s of Juneau, led by a United States Deputy Marshal, came to our relief, and the trou])ie was settled with the natives. About the year ISsT. the American i'idians al)out Dyea intended to kill a slave girl, the property of old man Shatrieh, a Chilcat chief, who had died a day or so i)revi()usly. l»ecause her master had died. I went down to where the "Pinta" lay, at Haine's Mission, about twenty miles down the canal, and reported this matter to Capt. Nichols. He sent a launch with an ofhcer up to Dyea to get the girl away, l)ut she could not be found, and in fact never was found. John J. Healy. Subscribed and sworn to l)efore me this :^(>th day of May, A. D. 1903. [seal.] M. E. Patterson, Notanj PnhUc Cook Co., IlL GEOGRAPHICAL AND TOPOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION RELATIVE TO SOUTHEASTERN ALASKA. PORTLAND AND PEARSE CANALS. Super hdendent of Coaxt Sxrrey to the Sccreta/'t/ of State. Treasury Department, Office of the Coast and Geodetic Survey, AVa.^lihHiton, May 19. 190-3. The Honorable, The Secretary of State, Was/ihu/fo)). Sir: I have the honor to forward herewith for your information two papers rehiting to Portland Canal. The one dated May loth is b3' Mr. Herbert C. Grave.s, who holds the position of Nautical Expert in this Survey; the other, dated May 18, is by Mr. S. P. Shidy, Chief of the tidal Division, also in this Survey. Very respectfully. O. H. TiTTMANN, Superintendent. R>port of Herbert 0. Graves. Treasury Depart^ient, Office of the Coast and Geodetic Surrey. Washnujtrot, I), a. May 15, 1903. ]SIr. Herbert G. Og])EN, Inspector of Hydrography c6 Topograpliy., U. S. Coast and Geodetic Survey., Washington., D. C. Sir: — In compliance with your instructions to state tlie relative ad- vantuiivs from a mariners point of view of enterino- Portland Canal through the main channel between Pearse Island and Point Kanisden on the one hand, and through the passa^-es to the westward on the other, 1 submit the follow int;-: Portland Inlet is a broad open channel, free from danoers, with plenty of room for any vessel to work, and with moderate tidal cur- rents which run oenerally true with the channel. These conditions especially favor sailinu- vessels. There are no abrupt changes of course, and the pr()l)al)ility of holding winds that would be moder- ately true would l)c grcat»>r in the wider Portland Inlet than in the narrowiu- channels to the westward. These conditions would lead any man in a sailing vessel to select Portland Inlet if bound up Portland Canal: with ordinai-y precautions this channel can be navigated in the night. 237 26626— AP 16 238 GEOGRAPHICAL AND TOPOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION The channels westward of Pearse and N\ ah's ishmds are very nar- row in places, have many known daniiers in places and a proljahility of others not known, have several ai)rupt chaiiues in direction, and have strong- tidal currents (veloeitv 8 to 4 nautical miles an hour) which do not run true with the channel and form l)ad swirls over the numerous danu(>rs and at the junction of the various channels. In those narrow channels the winds ai-(> confined and increased in force, l)eing felt in heavy gusts or williwaws. Tht^se conditions render the channels westward of Pearse and ^\'ales islands undesirable for all vessels, especially for sailing vessels. The deep water in these pass- ages malvcs close to the dangers, rendering it unlikely that an anchor- ag-e could be made in case of necessity, and if a vessel should become unmanageal)le through baffling winds she would almost certainh' go on the rocks or ashore owing to lack of room to maneuver. Some of these passages re{|uire good conditions of daylight and clear weather even for those with good local knowledge to use them, and their navi- gation at night or in thick weather is out of the question. Steamers, while not influenced by the same reasons as sailing vessels, would avoid the contracted and in places dangerous passages with strong tidal currt'nts and swirls, for the broad clear passage where they could run during either day or night and at full speed throughout. The matter of distance by the two routes is ditlerent for the several approaches. In approaching from southward in Chatham Sound the shortest route up Portland Canal is through Portland Inlet. In approaching from westward in Dixon Entrance the distance is a))out the same by going up Portland Inlet, or by going through Tongass Passage and Pearse Canal. For a steamer coming from the vicinity of Cape Fox the distance would be somewhat longer by the way of Portland Inli^t. but from my knowledge of the conditions I would say that no master would be justified in attempting the other route. Small local steamers, like those used by the canneries, might tind it to their advantag'e in bad weather to enter northward and eastward of Tongass Island, or throug'h Tongass Passage, between Sitklan and Wales islands, and go through Pearse Canal, ])ut these vessels go sinywhere, and take risks that other or larger vessels would not be justified in doing. In corr<)tK)ration of my opinion of these passages I su])mit the fol- lowing extracts from the report of Lieut. Comdr. (now Captain) Charles M. Thomas, U. S. Navy, who surveyed them in 1888. These opinions were endorsed by the late Captain H. E. Nichols. U. S. Nav}', who used almost the same language in the Alaska Coast Pilot (edition 1891), pages 78 and 80-81. [Extracts from rt'iiurt diitod Mnrdi SI, ]sS9. of Lieut. Comdr. Charles M. Thomsi*;, V. S. Navy, eom- manrtitiK V. S. Cua^t iV- {icoilt-tir Survey steamer Patterson, engaged in the survey of Porthmd Canal and vicinity. Southeast .Vlaska, during is.ss.] Portland Inlet and Portland Cajial are free from all hidden dangers and the navi- gation of these waters is i)erfectly simple if a vessel keeps an ordinary distance from the shore line. The nnnierous outlying islets and detached rocks are close inshore and well indicated n])on the chart. Pearse Channel from its junction with Portland Canal to Wales Passage is clear to navigation, l)ut south of this i)oint t) the end of the channel near its junction with Tongass Pass it is foul ground and tlie most ordinary prudence would forbid its attempted navigation. Ail that portion of Pearse Channel abreast Fillmore Island is filled with numerous islets, some of them thickly wooded, some with nothing but a light growth of brush and standing low out of water, wliile others are entirely RKLATIVE TO SorTHEASTKKN ALASKA. 239 barren, and tlit'iv are a irivat niinilier uf mcks at varying' distances frdni the main i^liore line on eaeh side, a few of them l)ein^' near the middle ef the channel. These rocks vary in lieiixht from those that are awash or sli same opinion of Port- land Iidet and the passag-i's westward of Pearse and Wales islands as expressed i)y Lieut. C'omdr. Thomas, for whom h(^ served as pilot while engaged in the surveys. I was assoeiated with Pilot Franei.s in 1JM)() and iitol engaged in the compilation of the 1901 edition of the Alaska Coast Pilot, and had good opportunities for learning his opinion on the subject. Yours respectfully. Herbeut C. Graves, Nautical E.rpcrt., C. cfc G. Survey. Respect full}' forwarded Herbert G. 0(;dex, Iw of tidal water in the former is so nmch greater than in the latter, that at least !•<» per cent of the tides in Port- land Canal ebb and How through Portlatid Inlet. Respectfully yours. L. W SlUDY, Chief of Ti(h(l DiviMim. 240 GEOGRArillCAL AND TOPOGRAPH ICAL INFORMATION Tht Axxt> fin- S, ci'dnrn of State. War Detaktmext, Adjutant-General's Office, Wash it, (ft, 01. M, while erecting storehouse #1, Wales Island, a sudden storm of orcat violence sprung up and it l)ecame necessary for the U. S. Light House steamer ''Manzanita,'' from which supplies were being obtained to seek refuge in Winter Harbor. Pearse Canal, which was reached by passing through Wal(\>^ Passage and through a short stretch of Pearse Canal, which at the narrowest point encountered was ])ut about a tiiird of a mile in width. 15etweeu Winter Harl)or and the North end of Pearse Island, Pearse Canal is straight, has an average width of about a mile, with ample depth, and api)arently presents no special dithculties of navigation. In order to familiarize myself with all of the waters in this vicinity, I Avas very desirous of passing through that part of Pearse Canal bctwiHMi \Vales Passage and the waters of Dixon Entrance, liut xw^ ])ilot.Ca])t. J.E.L(>nnan,aman thoroughly familiar with Alaskan waters, strongly advised against my att(MU]>ting to tak(^ the steamer through this part of Pearse Ca)ial, calling my attention to the large numl)er of ol)structions shown on the Chart "(U. S. C. & G. S. #8lOt>) and the crooked nature of the channels, which he stated caused strong tidal cross-currents, and would prevent steering by compass at night, or when caught in one of the fogs to which this locality is very su))iect. He further stated that, in his opinion in addition to the charted obstructions, there were doubtless some obstructions not yet discovered. As Capt. Leiuian had {iroved himself an ethcient i)ilot and a man of sound judgment in niattm-s pcM'taining to his calling, I did not feel rilOTUGKArillC \' 1 K\\>: aocoiui)auyiiig the Report of Cai^taiu I). D. (iaillard. (Seepage 2-11.) BEAR RIVER VALLEY from a pciiiil near the 5Gth i>jiranel. BEAR RIVER VALLEY from rcirtlaiid CanaL RELATIVK TO SOUTHEASTERN ALASKA. 241 justiticcl in riskinu- the siifoty of the vessel, and reluctantly abandoned the idea of naxipitinu' this j)art of lVars(» Canal. As a eonse((ueiu-e of the menaces to naxi^-ation just dcscrilx'tl. P(>arsc Canal was at the time mentioned rai'ely used l)y steam vessels, and not at all hy sailini;' vessels. IIKAD OF rOKTI.AND CANAL AM) HEAK RIVEK VALLEY. Portland Canal terminates at its head in aflat foreshore of mud, the slope of which is so small that the distance between the hio-h and the low water lines is ahout half a mile. In prolongation of the same gorg-e in which Porthmd Canal is situated lies the valley of Bear River, a swift glacier-fed stream ap})arently draining a large stretch of country. A reconnoissance of nearly t(i'i II C/itirles Jf. TJi'iinos, U. 8.2^. U. S. K. S. Franklin, r .S. Navy Yard, NorfoU', T7^, May Wth, 1903. Sir: 1. In obedience to instructions contained in letter No. 2518-3- JKC^ under dute of May KJth, 19u3, from the Chief of Bureau of Xav- ioation, I left Norfolk. Viriiinia. on the evenino- of May 18th. 1903, and, upon arrival in ^^'asllin^'t()n, I). C. reported to the Chief of Bureau of Navigation for spcn-ial teun)orary duty, and was directed to prepare a re])ort from my observation as Chief of a Surveyino- Party in Poi'tland Jnlet. Portland Canal, and Pearse Channc^l. upon the nav- igal)ility of those waters. 2. During the latter part of January, 1887, I was ordered l)y the Secretary of the Navy to report to the Secretary of the Treasury. l)y letter, for duty under the Superintendent of the U. S. Coast and Geo- detic iSurvey, and by the latter Avas assigned to the Command of the U. S. C. & G. S. Steamer Patterson for the continuation of the Sur- vey in Alaskan Waters, and was retained on said duty until April, 1889, working two seasons in Alaska, 1887 and 1888. During tiie lat- ter year, and while (nigaged in the survey of Stephen's I'assage. I received instructions from the Superintendent, U. S. Coast and Geo- detic Survey about the latter part of May to cease work upon which then engaged, and to proceed to the vicinity of Portland Inlet for the survev of those waters, Portland Canal and Pearse Channel, and, in obedience to said instructions, commenced the latter survey July oth and concluded the same Septeml)er 19th, 1888. 3. From an inspection of the U. S. C. & G. S. Charts covering the waters of Southeast Alaska as above described, it will l)e seen that the best approach to Portland Canal for vessel coming through Dixon extrance or from Chatham Sound is via Portland Inlet. •i. For entering Portland Canal, navigation is clear A'ia Wales l*as- sage and Pearse Channel (now called Pearse Canal), but. iu the latter water, violent swii'ls will be encountered opposite the narrow entrance to Hidden Inlet, and from my report of the season's work (1888). under date of March 31st, 1889, and addressed to the Su})erintendent of the U. S. Coast and Geodetic Survey, I find the following remarks con- cerning this matter: Hidden Inlet, a narrow arm of five miles in length, empties into Pearse Channel, on the western side, eijiht miles below its junction with Portland Canal. The small passage connecting the main Ixidy of the Inlet with the Pearse Channel is not over i;^0 meters in width and about one-third of a mile in length, and through this limited space must pass the large volume of water tilling the Inlet at each flood tide and flowing out again on the el>l>, causing a current at this point estimated to be from 10 to 12 knots an hour, forming immense swirls at tlie full strength of the tide, similar to those observed in Seymour Narrows, B. C. These swirls extend across Pearse Channel about one-third of its width opposite Hidden Inlet. 5. The ai)proach to Portland Canal via Tongass Passage or Tongass Narrows, and Pearse Channel, is possil)le for steam vc'^sels of small size, but it is exceedingly dangerous on account of foul groimd. nar- row and contnu-ted i)assages. and violent swirls to be encoimtered at every change of the tide. Nopi'udent ntivigator would und(Mtake this method of reaching Portland Canal with the wide and unobstructed waters of Portland Iidet open to him. 6. During my two seasons surveying work (1887-1888) in the waters of Southeast Alaska, it was necessary for the V . S. C. & G. S. Steamer RELATIV?: TO SOUTHEASTERN ALASKA. 243 Patterson to stop at Port Sinipson. both g'oing tiiid rctuniinij;-. with ocrusioiKil visits duriiio- the season tor the i)urpose of reecixiny;' coul and supplies, so I had t'recjuent interviews with the Factor of the Hudson Bay C\)nii)any. at Port Simpson, a Canadian, who pi'actically g'overned in that rejiion of British ('ohunl»ia. and when alhidino- to the various ishmds and waters in the vicinity of his charg-e, he invariably referred to W'ah's and Pearse Islands as ''your side" of the dividing waters, and to Port Simpson. Sonierville Island. Observation lidet, etc., as "our side." There was no discussion at all as to the boundary line, it being- well understood by the Factor, the Indians, and all i)arties concerned, that the line ran through the middle of Portland Inlet up through the middle of Portland Canal. I also consulted the Factor of the Hudson Bay Company c)n the sut)iect of ei'ecting Signal Stations upon the Can-.idian side of the waters that I was directed to survey, and to which he assured me that there was not the slightest objection. Of course. I made no such request concerning the Stations to be erected upon the north side of the Inlet, as there was. at that tim(\ no ques- tion as to its l)eing United States territory. Respectfully, CiiAS. ]M. Thomas, Captain. ZL S. JVavy^ Commanding. The SE(n{p:TAKT of the >savy. (Bureau of Navigation.) MAPS AND CHARTS. " [Note. — To avoid confusion the nuni1)ering of the maps and charts in this Ust is continued from the Ust submitted in the Appendix to the Case of the United States, pages 5n-"iL*0.] 88. (ISOi). Atlas du Voyage de ^'anc()uver. This is the French edition, published at Paris in the vear VIII of tlie rei)uhhoan calendar (1801). 89. (182»)). Atlas of the South Sea or Pacific Ocean, by Contre- Admiral Krusenstern. pu1)lished by ordei' of His Imperial jNIajesty the Fmperor of Russia, at St. Petersburg, in 1826. according to the Russian title-page, and in 18:^7 according to the title-page in French. It is called Part II in the Russian title. The double-page map No. Ifi is entitled "Carte Cienerale de I'Ocean Pacifiijue, IIemis]ihrre lioreal, ISL'7." The liuundary of Russian America is represented about in the usual way. Kast of the meridional part of the boundary and parallel to it is the insfrii)tion: " Limites des i)ossessions Kusses et Anglaises d'aprCs la Traite de 1825." The bi)undarv follows the usual continental course, around the head of each inlet, but is ratlier straighter than customary in the lower part of its course. 90. (1882). ''British North America. By permission dedicated to the Honourable Hudson's Bay Company, containing the latest infor- mation which their documents furnish. By their obedient serv- ant, J. Arrowsmith, London. 1.5 Fel)"v, 1882." On this map the Russian boundary is representearallel to the windings of the coast, to a jioint about 50 miles south of the Stikine River, where it runs off the map. This map is marked "London, Richard Bentley, 1S45." *J2. (1849). ''Atlas of the Northwest Coast of America from Borintj Strait to Cape Corrientes and the Ah^utian Ishmds. with tlie addition of certain places on the Northeast Coast of Asia. Com- piled bj Captain of the First Rank Tebenkof, 1852." The first map (preceding the numbered seiies and therefore perhaps an after- thought) is entitled "(.leneral Chart of the northern part of the Pacific Ocean, New Archangel, 1S49." It shows the boundary of Russian America from the latitude of 67° to the heail of the Portland Canal. The line follows al)0ut the usual course, though in the southern ))art of the lixif'n' it is rather straight, an I in conse(iuence it cuts close to the head of Taku Inlet. Neither Portland Canal nor ( >l)servatory Inlet is given a name, anil tlie common approach to them, generally called Portland Inlet, is very carelessly drawn, the southern shore l)eing swung so far back to the south- eastward as to make a Inroad gulf in the i)lace of the comparatively narrow passage which actually exists. The Nass River is called the " Naak " and is made to flow into the Alice Arm of Observatory Inlet. Several distinct and scattered ranges of moun- tains are indicated in the interior. 93. (18r)<»). ''Facts and Fio'iires relating to Vancouver Island and British Columbia," bv J. Despard Pemberton, Surveyor General V. I., London, 1860."^ This book contains a small map which shows only a very small i)art of Ru'^sian America. The boundary starts at the head of Portland Canal and sweeps to the northwest, as far as the edge of the map, about 131° west longitude. 94. (18()o). Russian Admiralty Chart. Plan of the river Stachine, from a survey in 18t);^> from the corvette Rynda ))y Sub-Lieu- tenant Butyrkine. This map is on (juite a large scale, aliout 2,376 feet to an inch, and shows the shore line, together with the islands and sand bars in the river and a line of soundings from the mouth to a jioint about 11 nautical miles above the so-called " Big Bend." No features of the topograjiliy along the river are indicated on this map, which in this respect is decidedly inferior to the small sketch map of Professor Blake, who accompanied the party that made this survey. 95. (1865). ""Vancouver's Island and British Coliuul)ia" by Matthew Mactie, F. R. (1. S., Five years resident in Victoria, Vancou- ver's Island. London, 1865. pp. 574. This work, which is dedicated to the secretary of state for the colonies, contains a iiiaji upon which the boundary of Russian America is draAvn frou) the head of the Portland Canal, following the usual course, to a point north of the Stikine River, where the map terminates. 96. (1865). "The North-west Passage l)y Land." By Lord Milton and Dr. Cheadlc, London, 1865. At the end of this volume is a map entitled "(Tcneral Map of British North Amer- ica, showing the route of Lord Milton it Dr. Cheadle in 1S62-.3." The border of the Russian territory is colored blue, and the boundary is drawn with substantial accu- racy. The name "Portland Canal" ap])earsin Dixon Entrance, but evidently intended to be applied to the whole of Portland Inlet and Canal, as the name terminates at a point close to the mouth of Portland Inlet. RELATIVE TO SOUTHEASTERN ALASKA. 245 97. (1S6T). V . S. Coast Survey map of Alaska. I'ultlislicd in con- nection with the speech of Hon. Charles Sinuner. (h'livered in the Senate of the T. S. in support of the treaty of cession of Ahiska. Printed at the Conj»'res.sional GIol)e Ofiice, IfcltJT. Map reproduced atJ Xo. 24, in Atlas accompanying the Case of the United States. 98. (1S(3S). Russian A(hniralty Chart No. 134.5. '" Chart of the Icy Sea and the Eastei-n Ocean, couipih'd from the hitest surveys at the Hydroti'raphic Dt^partnuMit of the Marine Ministry. 1844, Corrections to Istis." This niaji shows the western boundary of 18H7, accordiii!.'' to the treaty of cession to the United States, and also retains the lioundary separating the territory from the British possessions in the usual position. This line is marked " fV)rmei' boundary between Russia and Kiiiiland." The wonl "former" is not yet applied to the desig- nation of the territory itself, whieh is marked " Kussian Dominions." 99. (18t)8). ""Travel and Adventure in the Territorv of Ahiska," etc., by Frederick Whymper. London, 1868. This book eontain- a map of Alaska wl;ich shows the lioundary as following the course claimed l;»y the United States. 100. (1S6S). Journal of the Koyal (leooraphical Society of London, 18H8, vol. 38. This volume contains, at page lUi, a niaii entitled "Maj) of British Columbia reduced from the. original map by Mr. Alfred Wadilington." On this uiap the Alaskan boundary is drawn in the usual way from the head of Portland Canal. From that ])oint it runs to the northwestward for about 80 miles, without crossing or even closely approaching any inlet, to the edge of the map. Tlie name Portland Canal, in fair-sized Roman letters, parallels the whole length of the canal, l)ut does not extend below its junition with IVarse Canal. The name ()l)servatory Inlet appears in very small italics east of the head of the main arm and extenils in an easterly direction. The words "'United States Terr'y" extend nearly north and south in the portion of the //.s/m' shown on the map, west of Portland Canal and the boundary line. 101. (1868). The Handy Koyal Athis. A. Keith Johnston. Edinhuroh and London, 1S68. Map 3S, North America, shows "Ru.pearecl at the foot of the title page the following: "This List, though com])iled from otticial records, is not an otii- cial publication," which also was contained in the later issues. In the "Colonial Ottice List" for 1908 the map disai>pears, and the preface says: "A number of new Maps have been added (for which the Editors desire to express thanks to the Colonial (Jovernments concerned, ami to the British South .\frican Company), and some of the older maps have been discarded as out of date. They hope to replace the'-e with new maps in the future." 24<) (iEOGRAPHICAL AND TOPOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION 103. (ISl)'.)). Map of Alaska. Plate No. lit. at vud of Petermann's Mitthoiluiiiit'ii for lst)'.». acconipaiiyinj:" an article by W. H. Dall. entitled '* Die TeleiiraplK'n-lvxiu'ditioii auf deiii flukou in Alaska." This map is similar to the one i)r('pare(l in ISti? at the ('oast Survey Ottice for the Department of State, except that it is niucli smaller. The title is ''Xordwest- Amerika niit dem von Kussland an ilie Verein. Staaten cedirten Territorium Alaska. Mit Benutzunjj der neuesten Amerikanischen Anfnahmen, besonders der unter W. II. Dall im Coast Survey Office Bearheiteten Karte. Von A. Petermann. ^laassstal) 1: 9,000,000." Alaska is tinted red and the border is outlined by a narrow baml of deei)er tint, which is carried out through Dixon Entrance. 104. (1871). "Map of British Columl)ia to the ."^.tith Parallel. North Latitude. Compiled and drawn at the Lands ami \\'()rks Ottice, Victoria, B. C. under the direction of the Honourable J. W. Trutch, M. Inst. C. E. ,F. R. G. S., Chief Connnissioner of Lands and Works and Surveyor General. 1S71. J. B. Laun- ders, Draughtsman. Lands and ^^'orks Office, Victoria, B. C, May !»tli, ISTO. Additions to January, 1871. Scale 1:1 ,584,00(') or 25 Eno-lish statute miles to 1 inch." The boundary of Alaska is shown l)y a waving, Ijroken line from the north eilgeof the map, in the latitude of about 56° 30', to the head of Portland Canal, which is here called Portland Channel. The line curves to follow the bends of the coast at a distance of approximately 30 statute miles from the heads of the {)rincipal indenta- tions of this jiart of the coast. From the head of Portland Canal the line is continued southward through the middle of the passage, but west of Hattie Island, to the northeastern jjoint of Pearse Island. So far as indirated the line of demarcation here terminates, but Portland Inlet is properly named and the islands and theneigh- l)oring shores are drawn with a good degree of accurai-y, showing the passage north- west of Pearse and Wales islands as narrow and obstructed by islets. 10.5. (1874). Map in ''Canada on the Pacific, etc." l)v Charles Horetzky, Montreal, 1874. This map shows the boundary in Portland Canal and for a short distance to the northward, on the continent. 106. (1874-1880). "Province of Manitoba and North- West Terri- tory," Ottawa, 1878. This volume contains a small, but fairly good map of the Dominion of Canada, on which the Alaskan Ixiundary is drawn with substantial accuracy from the head of Portland Canal to a point north of Mount Fairweather. In the second edition of the volume this maj) is given in colors and with the date 1880. In the first edition the map is dated b'-i74. In the volume called "Letters by James Trow, ^I. P., Department of Agriculture, Ottawa, 1878," the uncolored map of 1874 also ai)pears. 107. (1875). Chart of the World on Mercator's Projection, con- structed l)y Hermann Berohaus. Gotha. flustus Perthes. Eiohth edition, 1875. (First edition. 1803.) The boundary of the British possessions on the Northwest Coast is shown as on the first edition, which was reproduced in the Atlas accom{)anying the Case of the United States (Map No. 21). The name Alaska ajipcars in jilace of the former Rus- sian America, and this is the only noticeable change. 108. (1875). The new standard atlas of the Dominion of Canada. pp.,lvi. 151. 47 mai)s, fol. Montical and Toronto, Walker and Miles, 1875. Tlie maps in this atlas show the boundary with substantial accuracy. 109. (1875). "Daysprinu- in th(> Far West." Sketches of Mission- Work in North- west Amei-ica by AL E. J. With twenty-four eno-ravinos and a map. London, 1875. RELATIVE TO SOUTHEASTERN ALASKA. 247 The map fariii'r tin- titk'-pajie, prepaieany proores^ rejwi't on the explora- tory surNey^, 1877, Sandford Fieniino-, Enoineer-in-Chief. This map, marked "Sheet No. 1," was drawn by J. Johnston, C. D., Dominion Lands Ottice. It shows the southern portion of Alaska and represents the boundary as i)assinu; through Hixon Kntranoe and up the Portland Canal, beyond which estu- ary this map does not extend. 11^. (1878). "Map of part of North America, desioiied to ilki.strate the offieial reports and the discuss-ions relatinoto the boiuidaries of the Province of Ontario, and shewino- the bonndaries as set- thnl l)v tlie Arl)itrators, viz: The Riuht Hon. Sir Edward Thorn- ton, the Hon. Sir Francis Hincks and the Hon. Chief -lustice Harrison, on the Srd Auonst, ls7s. Compiled under the direc- tion of the Governmentof Ontario by Thomas Devine, F. K. G. S., etc., Deputy Survej'or General, Ontario, 1878." Scale 80 miles to an inch. This map includes the whole of the Alaskan l)oundary, which is drawn in about the usual way to the head of Portland Canal. 113. (1880). Phvsical Atlas, etc., of the Dominion of Canada. By J. Beaufort Hurlbert, M. A., LL. D. Entered, etc., 1880. Map No. 1 is entitled " (Polar Projection) General Map shewing- the Provinces and Territories of the Dominion of Canada. Published by authority of the Rt. Hon''''' The Minis- ter of the Interior." The political subdivisions are indicated by different colors. The Ijoundary of Alaska agrees almost exactly with tliat claimed by the United States. All of the other maps in the atlas are similar. 114. (1880). " Dominion of Canada, comprising the provincesof Prince PMward Island. Nova Scotia, New Brunswick. Quebec, Mani- toba. British Colmnbia, North-West Territories. Ottawa. De- partment of Agriculture. 1880.'' This volume contains a small, but fairly good map of Canada and juirt of the United States, "comiiiled from the latest authorities', 1880," printed by the Burland Lith. Co., Montreal. The .\laskan boundary starts from the head of Portland Canal and runs around the heads of all the inlets to a point north of Mount Fairweather, where it runs off the edge of the maj). 115. (1884). '• Malby's Teri'cstrial Gi()b(>. comjiiled from the latest and most authentic sources, includino- all the recent oeooraiihical discoveries. Manufactured and i)ul)lished under the superin- tendence of the Society for the Ditiusion of Csefid Knowledge l)y Thomas Malb\ tSc Son. Ma]) and (ilobe sellers to the Admi- laltv. 37 Parkei Street, Little Queen Street, Holborn. London, January 1st, 1884." The lioundary of Ala.«ka is drawn in the usual way from the Arctic Ocean to the head of I'ortland Caual. which name appears on the glolte. IVarse and Wales islands are indicatol by the tint as belonging to Alaska. A delinite mountain range is represented as running all the way from Puget Souml and New Westminster to the head of Lynn Canal. The British territory is bordered by a red line, which runs widelv clear of Lvnn Canal. 248 (4E()(iRAl»HirAL AND T()P()(4RAPHIC AL INFORMATION 116. (ISSS). Coloiiiiil ("Imrcli Histories. Diocese of Miickciizic River t)y Riu'ht Kt'\(M('ii(l W'illiuni Ctirpenter Honipus, I). I).. Hisliop of the Diocese, wit!) iiia}). l.,(jii(lon. 1SS8. The small map faciiiir the title-] lairt' shows the Alaskan hnuiidarv with sultstaiitial accuraey. 117. (188tt)- Caiiadu. A uioinoi'ial volume published luuler the direc- tion of the (iovernnient Departnieiits. hy E. B. Biiigar, Mon- treal. London, 1889. This vohiine contains a map of Canada, on which the Alaskan Ixjundary is almut tlie same as that drawn l)y the U. 8. Coast Survey. lis. (ISSU). Canada. Ontario. Sessional Papers, vol. XXI. part VI, 3d Session of Sixth Leeislatiire (^f the Province of Ontario, S.\ss:on of 188!», Toronto, l^S'.h This paper c'lntains a map of part of North America, upon which the southern ])orti'>n of tile Alaskan boundary is shown as a continental line, from the head of the i'ortlan 1 Canal well an toward the Takn Inlet, which is off tiie map. 111». (18!H)). Prol)lenis of Oreater Britain. By the Kioht Honourable Sir Charles Wentworth Dilke, IJart. Lonch^n and New York, ISiio. This work contains a map of British Nortii Americ-a (prei)ared Ity Stanford's geojiraphical establishment) which rejiresents tiie boundary of Southeastern Alaska with sul)stantia] accuracy. 1-20. (18!)0). Lil)rary Keference Atlas of the World, hy John Inirthol- omew, London, 181H). Map 58, North America, is a small-scale map, on which the Alaskan boundary is correctly drawn. Map 59, Dominion of Canada, is on a lar^rer scale. On this map the northern part of the boundary is correctly drawn until the vicinity of Burroughs Bay is reached, when the line is detiected to that estuary and thence runs down Behm Canal and Clarence Strait. 1^1. (ISH)). Philips' inii)erial Atlas of the World, London, 181»0. Map 56, North America, shows the Alaskan boundary correctly as far'south as the head of Portland Canal, l)ut does not repre.sent it in tiie water passages. Pearseand Wales islands are not given. Map ()1, British Columbia, etc., l)y William Shawe, F. K. H. S., on the scale of 48 miles to the inch, shows the boumlary very well from a point a little north of Ber- ners Bay to the head of Portlaml Canal. At the point of beginning, i. e., at the north edge of the niap, the line is drawn (|uite close t(j Lynn Canal, apjiarently upon the summits of the mountains rising directly from the sea, and then swings eastward well up tile valley of the Taku, then gradually back again toward the coast, cross- ing the Stikine below the confluence of the Iskoot, then running to the .southeast- ward a little east of a nearly straight mountain range, marked "Lincoln Mts.,'' to the head of Portland Canal, below which point the line is not continued. The tint- ing of the shore line, however, shows that l)oth Pearse and Wales islands are con- sidered part of Alaska, an). Complete Atlas of the World, hv (Jeoroe W. Bacon, F. K. G. S., London, 1890. I\Iai)s of Nortli America and of the Dominion of Canada show the Alaskan bound- ary substantially as claiuied by the United States. On the map of the Dominion, which is on a larger scale than the general mai). Mount St. Klias is at the angle of the boundary. 123. (1891). Bacon s. Complete Atlas, London, 1891. Map of the Dominion of Canada shows the Alaskan boundary with sul)stantial accuracy. KELATIVE TO SOUTHKASTEKN ALASKA. 249 12-4-. (IS'.M). (leot^rapliv of the Dominion of ( aiiada and Ncwfounfl- land. by Kov. Wi'Uiaiu Parr GivswcU, Oxford. lsi>l. A *rt'iieral inap of Canada, facing i>ajre 1, is small and poorly draw n. The Alaskan boundary remains upon the eontinent until it reaches Burrouirhs P.ay. The ])hysical map of Canada, farinjr pajje 17, shows the l)oundary correctly. The map of British Columhia, facinay and thence down Clar- ence Strait. There is also another line (merely a streak of >rreen) from the ])oint where the Stikine is crossed to the head of Portland L'anal and down the west side of same to its mouth. This may be intended to rejiresent the claim of the I'nited States, for comparison, but if so, there is nothinjr to so indicate. Map 46, Dominion of Canada (Western Sheet), shows the boundary from near INIouut Fairweather to the Portland Canal substantially as claimed by the United States. The line nowhere cuts the I'oast line, and the line of color borderinir the British possessions runs down the left (east) l)ank of Portland Canal and Inlet, leaviu": l)oth Pearse and Wales islands to the United States. This majtis on a much larger scale than the general map. 126. (ISIX)). '^Throuo-h the 8ul)-Arctic Forest." W. Pike. London and New York. 189(5. This book contains a map of Alaska and Bi'itish Columbia, upon wliicli the boundary line is correctly drawn. It is also carried down through Portland Inlet and out by Cape ^Inzon. 127. British Admiralty Charts, especially Nos. 787, 2168. 2172, 2288. 2430, 2431, 2458. 2461, 2462, 2558*, 2683. 128. (1870-1S5>7). Chambei-s Encyclopedia, Edinburgh. 187(». "America, Russian — now Alaska, a territory of the United States — was purchased from the Kussian Government in 1867 for s7, 200,000. It is boun. Encyclopedia Brittmnica. The eighth edition gives a map of North .America upon which the boimdary of Russian .America is correctly drawn. The name of Portland Canal is not given, but the Ixiundary starts from the head of the canal. The ninth eritish Colundjia, and the Northwest Territories, on the scale of 120 English statute miles to 1 inch. In most respects it closely resembles the maps already described, l)ut the larger scale permits more detail to be given. The name Portland Canal appears west of that passage and parallel to it, al)ove Pearse Island. The name Observatory Inlet runs off to the eastward from a jxiint al)ove Nass Bay. The boundary, as represented by a l)roken line, is drawn throughout the length of Portland Canal and Inlet, passing east and south of Pearse and Wales islands, and from the mouth of Portland Inlet is carried westward on a parallel of latitude past Cape Muzon. No. 110 is a map of Alaska, on the scale of 120 English statute miles to 1 inch, the same as No. 60, which it very closely resembles. The name Portland Canal extends southward to the vicinity of Cape Fox. An in.set map, on the scale of 60 miles to an inch, shows Lynn Canal and the coast southward to the vicinity of Fort Wrangell more clearly. The line of demarcation preserves the same characteristics as already described. 130. Maps of the Dominion of Cantida and New Fomulland, piil)lished by the Canadian Department of the Interior. 1902. MISCELLANEOUS. EXTRACTS FROM A VOYAGE OF DISCOVERY TO THE NORTH PACIFIC, ETC., CAPTAIN GEORGE VANCOUVER, LONDON, 1798. [Vol. I, Dedication.] Under the auspices of Your Majesty, the late indefatio-able Captain Cook had already shewn that a southern conti- nent did not exist, and had ascertained the important fact of the near approximation of the northern shores of Asia to those of America. To those oreat discoveries the exertions of Captain Vancouver will, I trust, be found to have added the complete certainty, that, within the limits of his researches on the continental shore of Xorth-West America, no internal sea, or other navig'al)le connuiuiication whatever exists, uniting the Pacitic and Atlantic oceans. [Introduction, pages V-VI.] The charts accompanying the accounts of their voyages, representing the North West coast of America to be so much broken by the waters of the pacitic, gave encouragement once more to hvpotheses; and the favorite opinion that had slept since the RKLATIV?: TO SOUTHEASTERN ALASKA. 251 puliliciition of C'liptain Cook's hist vo3'ii(»'(\ of a north-oastcni coniimi- nicatioM bi'twtM'ii the waters of the pacific aiul atlaiitic oceans, was aoaiii roused from its state of slmiil>er. aiul t)roii nioi'e the ai'chipelauo of St. Lazarus was called forth into l)ein<:\ and its existence almost assumed, upon the authority of a Spanish a(hniral named De Fonte. De Fonta. or De Fuentes; and of a Mr. Nicholas Shapely, from Boston in America, who wa.s stated to have penetrated through this archipelago, bv sailing through a mediterranean sea. on the coast of Norlli-West America, within a few leagues of the oceanic shores of that archi])elago: where he is said to have met the Admiral. The straits said to have been navigated by Juan De Fuca were also brought forw;ird in sui)p<>it of this o])inion; and. although the existence or extent of these discoveries remained still to l)e jiroved by an authenticated survey of the countries which had been thus stated to have been seen and passed through, yet the enthusiasm of modern doxit phUo><<>2y}iy, eager to revenge itself for the refutation of its former fallacious speculations, ventured to accuse Cap- tain Cook of '"hastily exploding" its systems; and. ranking him amongst i\\^ purHHera of peltry, daied even to drag him forward him- self in support of its visionary conjectures. - [Instructions appearing in Introduction, pages XVIII-XIX.J "In which examination the principal objects which you are to keep in view, are, ■"1st. The ac(]uiring accurate information with respect to the naturd and extent of any water-communication which may tend, in any con- siderable degree, to facilitate an intercourse, for the purposes of com- merce, between the north-west coast, and the country upon the opposite side of the continent, which are inhabited or occupied l)y His Majesty's subjects. "■^dly. The ascertaining, with as much ])recision as possible, the number, extent, and situation of any settlements whicii have l)een made within the limits al)ove mentioned, by any European nation, and the time when such settlement was tirst made. "With respect to the tirst object, it would be of great importance if it should l)e found that, by means of any considerable inlets of the sea, or even of large rivers, communicating witli the lakes in the interior of the continent, such an intercourse, as hath been already mentioned, could be established: it will therefore be necessary, for the purpose of ascertaining this point, that the survey should be so conducted, as not only to ascertain the general line of the sea coast, but also the direction and extent of all such consideral»le inlets, whether made by arms of the sea, or by the mouths of large rivers, as may be likely to lead to, or facilitate, such communication as is above described. [Introduction, page XX.] "'The particular course of the survey nmst depend on the ditierent circumstances which may arise in the execution of a service of this nature; it is. however, propei' that you should, and you are th(>refore her(^l)v re(|uired and directtMl to })ay a particular attention to the examination of the supposed straits of fluan de Fuca. said to be situated between 4s and 41» north latitude, and to lead to an opening through which the sloop Washington is reported to have passed in iTsit, and to have come out again to the Northward of Nootka. The discovery of a near communication betwcMMi any such sea or strait, and any river running into, or from the lake of the woods, would l)e particularly useful. 252 GEOGRAPHICAL AND TOPOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION "If you should t'iiil of discovcriiio- any sueh inlet, as is above nieu- tioiuHl. to tlio southward of Cook's river, there is the o-reatest prol)a- ))ility that it will he found that the said river rises in some of the lakt\s alrtnidy known to the Canadian traders; and to the servants of the Hudson's l)ay eonipany; which point it would, in that case, be material to ascertain: and you are, therefore, to endeavour to ascer- tain according-ly, with as much precision jis the circumstances existino- at the time may allow: but the discovery of any similar comnnuiication more to the st)uthward (should any such exist) would he nuu-h more advantageous for the })urposes of connnerce, and should, therefore, be pi'eferalily attended to. and you are, therefore, to gi\'e it a preferable attention accord ini^ly." [Extract from Advertisement from the P^ditor.] The two first vol- umes, excepting- the introduction, and as far as page 28S of the third and last volume, were printed: and Captain Vancouver had finished a laborious examination of the imi)ression, and had compared it Avith the engraved charts and h(M\dlaiids of his discoveries, from the eonunence- ment of his survey in the year 17l»l, to the conclusion of it at the port of Valparaiso, on his return to England in the vear 17H5. He had also prepared the introduction, and a further ])art of the journal as far as page 408 of the last volume. The whole, therefore, of the impor- tant part of the work, which comprehends his geographical discov- eries and improvements, is now presented to the public, exactly as it Vould have been had Captain Vancouver been still living. The notes which he had made on his journey from the port of Valparaiso to his arrival at St. Jago de Chili, the capital of that kingdom, were unfor- tunately lost: and 1 am inde))ted to Captain Puget for having assisted me with his o))servations on that occasion. [Vol. HI, pages 504-505.] The extensive archipelago, in which De Fonta had sailed through crooked channels 2<)0 leagues; the river navigable for shipping that flowed into it, up which he had sailed in his ship ♦50 leagues; the water becoming fresh after he had entered and passed in it 20 leagues; its conuuunicating by other lakes and rivers with a passage, in which a ship had arrived from Boston in New England: are all so circumstancially particularized, as to give the account, at first sight, an air of proba])ility. and on examination, had it been found reasona])ly connected together, which is by no means the case: a trifling diflerence in point of description or situation would have l)een pardoned. The Rio de los Reyes Mr, Dalrymple states (according to the Spanish geograi)hers, under the authority of which nation De Fonta is said to have sailed) to l)e in the 43d: according to the P'.nglish in the 5od; and according to the French, in the (iSd degree of north latitude, on the western coast of North America. If it ])e necessary to make allowance for the ignorance of De Fonta, or the errors in his observations, any other parallel along the coast may be assigned with equnl correctness. Under the 43d parallel of north latitude on this coast, no such archi- pelago nor river does exist; but between the 4Tth and 57th degrees of north latitude, there is an archipelago composed of imumiera))le islands, and crooked channels; yet the evidence of a navigal)le I'iver flowing into it. is still wanting to prove its identity: and as the scrupulous exactness with Avliich our survey of the continental shore has been made within these limits, precludes the possil)ility of such a river hav- ing ))een passed unnoticed by us, as that described to be of Rio de los RELATIVK TO SoFTHKASTKHN ALASKA. 253 Reyes, I reiiuiin in full coiirKlcncc. tlmt some crcclit will licroiifter be given to tlic testimony roultiiii;- from our researches, and that the'i)hiin truth undisuuiseil, with which our hil)ours have been repre- sented: will i)e justly a[)pveciated. in refutation of ancient unsupi)orted traditions. 1 do not, however, mean i)ositively to deny the discoveries of De Fonta. I only wish to investigate the fact, and to ascertain the truth; and 1 am content with having used my endeavours to prove their improt)ability as pul)lished to "the world! The broken region which so long occupied our attention, cannot possibly be the archipelago of St. Lazarus, since the principal feature by wdiich the identity of that archipelago could be proved is that of a navigable river for shipping flowing into it, and this certainly does not exist in that archipelago which has taken us so nuieh time to explore; hence the situation can- not l)e the same, and for that reason I have not attixed the name of De Fonta, De Fonte, or Fuentes to any part of those regions. It is however to l)e rememl)ered, that our geography of the whole coast of North West America is not yet complete, and that the French navi- gators, who have stated the archipelago of St. Lazarus to be in the H3d degree of north latitude, may yet not be in an error. The stupendous liarrier mountains certainly do not seem to extend in so lofty and connected a range to the northward of the head of Cook's inlet, as to the southeastward of that station: and it is possible that in this ptirt, the chain of mountains may admit of a connnunication with the eastern country, which seiMus to be almost impracticable fur- ther to the southward. In this conjecture we are somewhat warranted by the similarity ol)served in the race of people inhabiting the shores of Hudson's bay and those to the northward of North West America. In all the parts of the continent on which wo landed, we nowhere found any roads or paths through the woods, indicating the Indians on the coast having any intercourse with the natives of the interior part of the country, nor were there any articles of the Canadian or Hudson's bay traders found amongst the pe()])l(^ with whom we met on any part of the continent or external sea shores of this extensive countrv. LETTER FROM SIR .1. II. I'KI-LY, l'.ART., TO KARL (MJKY. DATED Lo SKP TEMBER, 1841> — PAIJLIAMENTAUY PATKHS. IIOISE OF COMMONS. 11 JULY, 1850. '• " * * I have now the iionour to forward to you a statement of the rights as to territory, trade, taxation and govermnent claimed and exercised by the Hudson's Bay Company on the Continent of North America. accomi)anied with a map of North America, on which the territories claimed l)y the Hudson's Hay Com]mny, in virtue of the charter granted to them l)y King Charh^s the Second, are coloured green, the other British territories pink, and those of Russia yellow. I have, etc.. (Signed) J. II. Pei.ly." [Note. — The map referred to is the one reproduced as No. lit in the Atlas accompanying the British Cas(>. | •2^'S-2id — AP 17 254 GEOGRAPHICAL AND ToroC^KAI'HICAL I>JF(»KM ATION l/UNIVKRS. I'AHIS. lS4tl. I'lKMIN DIOOT FHKHKS, KUITEUHS. [Fame »)l\ I Article: LDrej^on: " Kn 1825 uii autre traite fiit con- clu entre la Kus.sie et la Grande-Bretaji'iie. qui tixait ainsi la doliiuita- tioii (lu territoiro de eetto dorniere puissance en Aineri(iue. Ello dcvait coninuMicer dorenavant au point le plus ,sud de Tile du })i'ince de (lalles, par Ics o-i"- 4(1' vers Test. jus(ju" a la oiande entree sui- le continent apj)elee Portland Cliannel. en se ])rol()no-eant par le milieu de ce pa^sau'e jus()u' au 5(i de latitude. A i)artir de la on lui t'aisait suivre le sonunet des nioiitagnes hoi'dant^ la cote a dix lieues de pro- fondeur nord-ouest jusqu' au niont Saint-Elias; puis on la prolonj^'eait au nord, en la diriocant jusfju' a rintersection des niontaoncs avec le 141^ de lono-itude (nieridien ouest de Greenwich) jus(iu* a la nier (ilacial." [Pa_5.] " I/Aineri(|ue Kusse conipiend la partie la ])lus reculee de la cote nord-ouest; son etendue est ainsi tixee rres vers Tocean Arctique." [Translation.! [Pao-e (ij?.] '' In 1S25 another treaty was concluded l)etween Kussia and ( Treat Britain which thus tixed the boundary of the American tei-ritory of the latter-power. This boundary was henceforth to begin at the most southern point of Prince of Wales Island, to proceed eastward along the parallel of 54 40' as far as the great inlet of the continent which is called Portland Channel and to extend to the 5«5th degree of latitude, passing through the middle of this chaimel. From that point the line was to follow the snmmit of the mountains extending along the coast at a distance of ten leagues therc^from. as far as Mount St. Elias; and after reaching the intersection of the mountains with the I4lst degree of longitude west of (Treenwich it was to run due north to the Arctic Sea.'' [Page 65.] "Russian America includes the most remote pai't of the Northwest Coast; its geographical extent is thus stated by Mr. Yer- niolotf; The southern extremity of these possessions conmiencivs in the island called Prince of Wales, at 54 40' of north latitude; the l)ound- ai'v then extends to the north-northwest, along the continental coast, including all of that coast itself and the adjacent islands. Fi'om Mount St, Elias the inland boundary turns abruptly to the north-east and runs across coiaitry towai'd the Arctic Ocean.'' EXTRACT FROM "THE SEA OF MOUNTAINS, AN ACCOUNT OF LORD DUF- FERIN's tour THROUGH BRITISH COLUMBIA IN iNlCi. m' MOLYNEUX ST. .JOHN." LONDON, HURST & BLACKETT, 1877. Volume I, page ;^.so. the author says, speaking of miners returning from th(> Cassiar diggings: "These men were on th(Mr way southward from the Cassiar luines, up the Stickeen Kivei', where there are about RELATIVK TO S()l"l IIEASTKKX ALASKA. 255 two tlioiisuiul men workiiiu-. The mines are in British territory, hut there is a stri]) of Alaska, al)oiit tliirtv jniles broad, whieh interv enes between Canada and the sea at this point and the miners therefore make th(Mr way to ^^ ranuel. where they are picked up by the vessels from Sitka." RErOHT OF II. .1. CAMBIE, ENGINEER IN CHARGE OF RAILAVAY EXPLOR- ATORY SURVEYS. SESSIONAL PAPERS. 115 TO 208, CANADA. VOL. XIII, NO. 11, 1880. P. 8!i. (appendix no. 2)' [Extract in roganl to Wark Inlet.] '■ Point \\'ales is situated opposite the entrance and would ap]iear from tile chart to be only about three and a half miles distant, while in reality it is little if an^^thing- .short of eioht miles distant. This is a matter of some importance, for it is the southern extremity of Alaska, and were it as close as is shown, a batterv placed there by th(» Government of the United States could prevent vessels entering- or leaving- Wai'k Inlet." On page 71, in the report of Geo. A. Reefer, the following occurs: "The entrance to Wark Inlet from the Portland Channel, some eight miles wide at this point, is easy of approach. l)ut not excelling 2(i(>0 feet in width, with deep water to the l)ase of the blutis forming the shorivs on eith(>r side." A directory for the navigation of the north PACIFIC OCEAN, WITH DESCRIPTIONS OF ITS COASTS, ISLANDS, ETC., FROM PANAMA TO BEHRING STRAIT, AND JAPAN; ITS WINDS, CURRENTS, AND PAS- SAGES. THIRD EDITION. BY ALEXANDER GEORGE FINDLAY, F. R. G. S.. ETC. LONDON, RICHARD HOLMES LAURIE, 58 FLEET STREET. E. C. , 1886. [Page 556.] '" Maskelyne Point, the S. E. enti'ance point of Port- land Inlet, was so named after the astronomer: it lies 1^ mile X. ^ E. of Parkin Islands, and S. E. i S., 3 miles from Wales Point, the X. W. point of Portland Inlet entrance. |Page5»;i.| Wales Island, on the X. W. side of the entrance to Portland Inlet, is about 7 miles long east and west. * * * Portland Inlet extends X. by E. f E. from the X. E. part of Chat- ham Sound for Id miles, thence X. l)y E. for 10 miles, where it divides. Observatory Inlet continuing northward, and Portland Canal taking a X. W. and noriherly direction. It is from 2^ to 1- miles wide, and the shores are high and bold, especially the eastern. Needle P<((1\ on the S. E. side of Xasoga Gulf, is a shar]) snow-clad pinnacle, 50(Mi ft. high. The entranc(>, between Wales and ^laskelyne Points, is about o miles wide. Point Wales is situated opposite the entrance of Wark Iidet, and would api)ear, from the chart to be onh' 3^ miles distant, while in reality it is little, if anything, short of 8 miles distant. — ]\Ir. II. .1. Cambie (Engineer in charge of Railway Surveys in 187H). I Page 562.] Peaise Island forms the we.stern side of P<»rtland Iidet. York Islet, 5 cables X. E. of the north extreme of Wales Island (p. 561). 256 GPXKJRAPHICAL AND TdPOCJKAPHICAL INFOKMATION on the west side of Portland Inlet, is wooded and 100 ft. hig'h. [Cen- ter Id. ^J Abreast it an intricate chaiini'l [Wales Passao-e^J leads west- ward to Tonoas Passajj'e. " * '■ Portland Point, about IS miles within the inlet, lies 8^ n)iles north of Lizard Point: it forms the turning' point into Portland Canal, and is jiioh and hold. Kamsden Point, which di\ides()hs('r\atory Inlet from Portland Ciinal, lies '2i miles N. N. E. of Portland Point, and has a dangerous cluster of rocks, awash and sunken, extending 4 cables 8. E. of it. * ^^ * [Page 565.] Portland Canal (so named from the noble family of Bentinck) diverges from Point Hamsden, in a N. W. direction, for about <) miles; thence it trends north l;) miles farther, and from thence to its head the ])earing is N. W. ))y W. 42 miles, the canal trending westward of this line. It terminates in low, marshy land, in lat. 55-^ 56', 80 miles from its entrance in Ciiatham Sound. * * * Portland Canal is the boundary between the British possessions and the Alaska territory of the United States; it is only fre(|uented by the Hudson's Ba}' Company's officers in their steam-vessel for the purposes of occa- sional trade with the natives. The continental shore to the northward belonged to Russia and was ceded by purchase, to the United States in 18r>7, as detailed in the next chapter. Kamsden Point is described on ]). 562. '■" * * Tree Point is the north extreme of Pearse Island, and westward of it is the entrance of a channel leading to Tongas Passage. This channel runs parallel with the direction of the main inlet, and gradually de- creases in width southwestward. contimiing PJ miles from its N. E. entrance to an opening to the S. E. into the main channel. Pursuing the same direction, it enters much broken land, intersected by arms, forming an island at)out 10 miles in circuit, to the N. E. of which is an arm running in a N. E. direction, ending in low, steep, rocky shores. * * * Bear Kiver Hows between high mountains, tiirough an extensive wooded valley and flat, at the head of Portland Canal, and divides near its mouth into several streams. The Observation Spot, at the wooded high-water mark of the point near the centre of the mouth of Bear River, is in lat. 55'- 56' 3" N., long. 180^ 3' 27" W. The river rises 10 miles iidand, at the foot of Disraeli Mountains, the highest peak of which is a snow-clad pinnacle 7000 ft. high. * * * Tongas, the southernmost of the military posts established by the I'nited States in their new territory, is on a small island, one of the Wales Island group, which form the north side of the entrance to the Portland Canal. ^' GEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HLSTORY SURVEY OF CANADA. ALFRED R. C. SELWYN, DIRECTOR. ANNUAL REPORT, VOL. Ill, PT. 1." « Report on an Exploration in the Yukon District, N. W. T., and Adjacent North- ern Portion of P>ritish Cohnnhia. IJv George M. Dawson. KELATIVK TO SOUTHEASTERN ALASKA. ''lo i iiiore southoni |H)rti()ii of IJritish ("(riunil)!:!. Beyond the \icinity of Lynn Cauiil. this iiioiintiiin axis runs hchiiul the St. Eliiis Aljjs. ceas- in*i" to 1)0 the (.•oiitiiiciital t)<)r(lor. and may 1)0 sjiid to \)v ontircly iiukiiown, as any indications of mountains which haxc appeared on this part of the map are purely- conjectuial. Notwithstanding' the great width of the Coast Ranges, it is not known that an\^ of their constituent mountains attain very notable altitudes, l)ut it is probable that a great number of the peaks exceed a height of SOOO feet. These rang(\s are coniposed of very numerous mountain ridges, which are not always uniform in direction, and. so far as has been ()l)sei'\'ed. ther(> is no single^ culminating or dominant range which can be traced for anv considera1)le distance. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OK CANADA. (i. y\. DAWSOX. DIRECTOR. ANNUAL REPORT, VOL. MI, 1894. Rrpoi't on tltc (ii-Ki of the Kaiiihx/ps, Map-Slieet^ BriilxJi Cohmih/d, By George; M. Dairsoii. On referring to any general map of British Columbia, it will I)e seen :hat the Kamloops sheet includes but a narrow selvage of the inland ?ide of the Coast Ranges, or wide l)elt of mountainous country which runs ])arallel to the coast for the entire length of the province. This selvage consists in fact of but one of the component minor ranges of this complex of mountains, bounded to the east by the Fraser Valley and to the west by a somewhat important parallel depression which has not been explored, liut which appears to be occupied by the head- waters of the Salmon River and Quoieek River. The axis of this range is granitic, while both its flanks consist largely of altered stratified rocks, often schistose or slaty but not true crystalline schists. P^xcept in the greater importance of these stratified rocks here, this part of the Coast Ranges is, however, so far as known, identical in its charac- ter and structure with the whole extent of the mountainous country in this vicinity and may thus be taken as topical of it. From the valle\' of the Fraser, no adequate idea of the topograi)hy of the Coast Ranges can be formed, as the lower shoulders of the mountains preclude any general view of their higher parts. A line \iew of one part of the range may be had from the line of the I'aiiway. l)etween Lytton and Nicoamen. in ascending the Thom|)son xallev: l)ut in order to obtain a just concej)tion of its character, it must be seen from points along the east side of the Fras(>r of more than .')(,»0U feet in height, or fi'om some of its own sununits. The side of the range bordering the Fraser, is found to present a nearly uniform wall of mountain slopes to the river, and is composed of very steeply inclined high spurs of nearly similar form, each of which is separated from the next by a deep narrow gash, which may either l)e that of a small torrent or that of one of the main strctuus rising far back in th(> range. Above and behind these s])urs. the mountains become moi'e rugged in shape and show more hare rock, while h(M'e and there an ai)i)ai'ently dominant ])eak stands notably a))ove the rest anil carries largt> patches of snow throughout the sununer. 258 GEOORAl'IIK'AL AND r( »P()(;K A I'H IC A L I \ K( »KM A'l'K )N Such u view of the raiip' may he oaiiied from ahiiost any of the mountains on the east side of the Fraser, ])ut on ascending one of the peaks of the range itself to an eU'vation of 8000 feet or more, it is found that the points which seemed to dominate, as viewed from lower levels and from the eastward, owe this appearance chiefly to their proximity to the eclg-e of the range. From such a peak, it will l)e observed that there is little regularity in the trend of the component mountain masses of th(> range, t)ut that there is a very notable uni- formity in the elevation of its higher ])oints. It will be obser\ed that a large number of these approximate in height to SOOO feet, while a few only, reach or slightly surpass *J 00 feet; that there are few instiinces of really dominant summits with lesser subsidiary mountains grouped around them, l)ut that in widely extended views to the south, west, or north, the very numerous and closely set sharp summits run together to form a jagged, but in the main nearly level horizon line. To illustrate this point, it may be mentioned that, on ono occasion, from Stein Mountain, looking ()\('i' the crests of all th(> n(>arei' moun- tains, the sunnnit of Mount Haker. of the Cascade Range, moi'c tlian a hundred miles distant, was clearly recognized as a markedly out- standing point, although its elevation is not nuicli more than lO.iloO feet. THE YUKON TERKITORY, LONDON, 18!»8. [Coiilaiiiiii.i,' iiarrativL's by \V. II. Dall, (iuorge M. Daw.son and William Ogilvie.] Froii) tile iKii'i'dt'i r<_^ of ail v.vj)l(n'(ifu>u wade in 1S87 in the ITiihini District l>ii (iroiyr J/. Jhra^soa, I). A'., J\ G. S. [Pages 2-i8-250.] I therefore decided to set about the building of another boat, suitable for the ascent of the Lewes, and on the second day after we had begun work, Mr. Ogilvie very opportunely ap[)eared. After having completed our ])oat and obtained Mr. Ogilvie's prelimi- nary ii'port and map-sheets, together with the necessary provisions, we b(\gan tht^ ascent of the Leaves, and from its head-w\aters we crossed the mountains by the Chilkoot l^iss and reachinl the coast at the head of Lynn Canal on the 20th September. In addition to the })hysical obstacles to be encountered on the long route abo\e outlined, some anxiety was caused by reported Indian troul)les on the Yukon. On reaching the mouth of the Lew^s we ascertained that the story was entirely false, but it had none the less kept us in a state of watchfulness during a great part of the summer. Th(> entire distance travelled l)v us during the exploration amounts to 1,822 miles. This, taken in connection with the coast-line betAveen the Stikine and Lynn Canal, circumscribes an area of about (53.200 square miles, the interior being, even yet. but for the accounts of a few ])rosp(^ctors and I'eports of Indians. 1i rra incotjnita. The same desci'iption, with little (pialiHcation, a])])lies to the whole sui-round- ing region outside the sur\eved circuit, but much general informa- tion concerning the country has been ol)taine(l. The region traversed by the routes just mentioned, including the extreme northern part of British Columbia and the southern part of the Yukon district (as previously defined), is drained by three great river systems, its waters reaching the Pacific by the Stikin(\ the Mac- kenzie, (and eventually th(» Arctic Ocean), by the Liai'd. and Hchring RELATIVK TO S( )rTIIEA^^T?:KN ALASKA. 259 Si'ii, t>v llu' Yukon. Tlic soulh-ciistcni pai't of the r(' Stikiiic iiiakiny' its way (•<)ini)lot('ly tliroutili the Coast Haiiiics in a south-wosterly direction, while the Liard. on a noith-casterly liearino-, cuts across the Rocky Mountains to tlie Mackenzie valley. The water- shed separating- these rivers near Dease Lake has a height of 2. 73(1 feet, and both streams may be generally characterized as very rai^id. To the north-westward, l)ranches of the Stikine and Liard again inter- lock with the head-waters of several trilnitaries of the Yukon, which here unwater the entire great area enclosed on one side by the Coast Ranges, on the other by the Rocky Mountains. The actual watershed, between the Liard and Pelly, on our lin(> of route, was found to have an eleva- tion of 3150 feet, l)ut it is, no doubt, much lower in the central por- tion of the region between the Rocky Mountains and Coast Ranges. To the north of the Stikine, at least one otluu' river, the Taku, also cuts completely across the Coast Ranges, but its basin is comparatively restricted and little is yet known of it. It will lie noticed, that while the s(>veral branches of the Y^ukon con- form in a general way to the main orographic axes, the Stikine and Liard ajipear to be to a large degree indepiMident of these, and to flow counter to the direction of three mountain I'anges. The region, being a portion of the Cordilhn-a belt of the west coast, is naturally mountainous, l)ut it comprises as well important areas of merely hilh^ or gently rolling countrv, l)esides many wide, Hat-bot- tomed river- valleys. Higher in its south-eastern part- that drained by the Stikine and Liard — it subsides gradually, and apparently uni- formly, to the north-westward: the mountains at the same time l)ecom- ing more isolated, and l)eing sei)arated by broader tracts of low land. The general l>ase level, or hcMght of the main valleys, within the Coast Ranges, thus declines from about :i5(Kj f(>et. to nearly 1500 feet at the confluence^ of the Lewes and Felly rivers, and the average base-level of the entire region may be stated as IxMng a little over 2000 feet. [Page 2()4:.] The width of the belt of granitoid rocks composing the Coast Ranges is, on the Stikine, about sixty-tive miles, measured from their sea border inland at right angles to the main direction of the mountains. It is somewhat less in the latitude of the Chilkoot Pass, but may be assumed to occupy a border of the maiidand al)out hfty miles in width along the whole of this part of the coast. Hroadly viewed, however, the coast archipelago in r(>ality represents a i)artly submei'ged margin of the Coast Rang(>s, and granitic rocks are largely represented in it also. The t'xamination of these two northern cross- sections of the Coast Ranges, serves, witli observations previously made, to demonstrate the practical identity in geological character of this great orographic axis, from the vicinity of the Eraser River to the f)Oth parallel of north latitude— a length, in all, of about !>00 miles. [ Pag(> 2TS. 1 Since the year 1r has become a somewhat important avenue of conununication froiu the coast to the interior of the northern })art of liritish Columl)ia, Like the Fraser. the Skeeua. the Xaas and the s(>\-cral other smaller sti earns, it ris(\s to the east of the lu'oad belt of mountains which constitutes the Coast Ranges, and cuts completely through this belt with a nearly uniform gradient. In size and general character the Stikine closely resend)les the Skeena, which reaches the coast 200 mihvs fui'ther south. It is navigalde for stern-wheel steamers of light draught and good power, to (ilenora. 12(5 260 (IKOGKAl'IIICAL AND TUl'OGKAPHK'AL INFUHMATIOX miles fi-oni Kothsay Point, at its mouth, and imdor favoi'ablo circum- stances to Telcorapii Creek, twelve miles farther. Al)()\e Teleorai)h Creek is the ''(ireat Ciifion '' which extends for many miles and is (juite im})assal)le either for steamers or boats, thouyh ti'aversed by miners in winter on the ice. The headwaters of the Stikine are unknown, but lie for the most part to the south of the r)Sth parallel of north lati- tudt\ in a country said to be very moiuitainous. From Telegraph Creek, the head of navigation, a pack-trail sixty-two miles and a half in length, constructed by ihe British Columbian Government, follows the valley of the Stikine, generally at no great distance from the river, and eviMitually crosses from the Tanzillu or Third North Fork to the head of Dease Lake, which may l)e regarded as the centre of the Cas- siar mining district. [I'ages 2S1»-2!M). I Tliough the position of the Stikine is indicated on Vancouver's charts by the open channels of the I'iver. and the shoals about its estuary are mapped, tiie existence of a large river was not recognized by that na\'igator, who visited this part of the coast in 1793. According to Mr. W. H. Dall, the river was first found l)v fur traders in 179!». In 1834 the Hudson Bay Company fitted out a vessel named the Dryad i()Y the purposes of establishing a i)()st and colonv at the mouth of the Stikine. V)ut the Russians, being api)riscd of this circumstance, sent two small armed vessels to the spot, and constructed a defensive work, which they named Fort Dionysius, on the site of the ])resent town of A^'rang(^ll. Finding themschcs thus foi'cstalled. the Company retired. This dispute was com])romised in 1S37. when an arrangement was made l)y Avhich the Company leased for a term of years all that part of the Russian tei"ritory which now constitutes the ''coast strip"' of Alaska, and the ''fort" was handed over to the Company, the British Hag being hoisted imder a salute of seven guns, in June, 1840. 1 Page 34U.J The se\'eial ruine(l chimneys of Fort S«dkirk still to be seen, with other traces on the ground, are in thtMuselves evidence of the imi)()i'tant dimensions and careful construction of this post. The estal)lisliment consisted. I belie^•e, in 1852. of one senior and one junioi' cl(M-k, and eight men. The existence of this post in the centre of the inland or " \Vood Indian" country had, however, ver}' seriously interfered with a luci'ative and usurious trade which the Chilkoot and Chilk^it Indians of Lynn Canal, on the Coast, had long been accus- tomed to carry on with these p(H)ple: acting as intermediaries between them and the white tradcM's on the Pacitic and holding the passes at the headwatiM's of the Lowes with all the s})irit of robl)er barons of old. In 1.S52. I'umors were current that these |)eople meditated a raid upon the post, in conse(|uence of which the fi'iendly local Indians stayed by it nearly jdl summer, of their own accord. It so happened, however, that they absented themselves for a couple of days, and at that uiducky moment the Coast Indians arrived. The post was unguarded by a stockad(\ and. yielding to sheer force of nund)ers. the occupants were ex])elled and the ])lace was i)illaged, on the 21st of Auoust. Two days afterward Cam])I)ell. having found the local Indians, returned with them and surrounded the post, but the robbers had tlown. [Pages 374-37o. | Ma\ing heard I'epoi'ts of the existenc(> of a second pass from Taiya Iidet to the lakes on the head-waters of tlu^ Leaves. Mr. Ogdvie sent Capt. W. Moore to make an examination of it. with RKLA'IIVK TO SOrTHEASTKRX ALASKA. 2(>1 instruction^ to rejoin the })arty to the cast of tlic luouiitains. This pass Mr. Ooilvie has named AVhite Pass in honour of the hite Minister of the Interior. It knives the coast at the mouth of the Shka^way River ^' live miles south of the head of Taiya Inlet, and runs parallel to Chilkoot Pass at no t>reat distance froiu it. The distance from the C'oast to the summit is stated as seventeen miles; the first five miles are of le\el bottoiuTand. thickly timbered. ' The next nine luiles is in a canon-like valley where heavy work would lie encountered in con- structint>" a ti'ail. The remainiiiii" distance of three miles, to the sum- mit, is comparatively easy. Tlie altitude of the sunnnit is routihh' estimated at 2H(»(t feet. Peyond the summit a wide vallev is entered, and the descent to the tirst little lake is said to be not more than one hundred feet. The mountains rapidly decrease in height and abrupt- ness after the summit is passed, and the valley bifurcates, one bi-anch leading" to the head of Windy Arm of Tagish Lake, the other (down which the wat(M' drains) going to Pako Arm of the same lake. There is still another route into the interior, which the Indians occasionally employ \u winter when the travelling is good ovov the snow. This leaves the Nourse or west branch of tlie Taiya. and runs west of the Chilkoot Pass to the head of Lake Lindeiuan. The tirst map of the Chilkoot and Chilkat Passes and their vicinity is due, as mentioned further on, to Dr. A. Krause. The passes con- necting the coast with the interior countr}', from the heads of Lynn Canal to the upi)er waters of the Lewes, were always jealously guarded by the Chilkat and Chilkoot Indians of the coast, who carried on a lucrative ti'ade with the interior or "' Stick" Indians, and held these pe()})le in a species of subjection. Though the existence of these routes to the inteiior was known to the traders and prospectors, the hostility of the Chilkats and Chilkoots to the passage of whites long ])revented tluMi' (>x])loration. SAILING DIRECTION'S FOR BERING SEA AND ALASKA, INCLUDING THE NORTH-EAST COAST OF SIBERIA. COMPII-ED FROM VARIOUS SOURCES BY VICE-ADMIRAL J. P. MACLEAR. PL'HLISIIED BY ORDER OF THE LOHDS COMMISSIONERS OF THE ADMIRALTY. LONDON. ISHcS, [Page 27.] '^ Dl.i-on Kntnina-. — Vessels from sea bound to Port Simi)s<)n, B. C.. to Tongass. or to ^VrangeIl byway of Clarence sti'ait. usually enter here: it is pi"actical)le, however, to enter south of Queen Charlotte islands by Hecate strait, and by Brown and Edye passages into Chatham sound. The description of this last route is given in the British Columbia Pilot. The l)oundaiv line between British Columl)ia and Alaska runs east and west through Dixon entrance."" BRITISH COLUMBIA PILOT, SECOND EDITION, PUBLLSHED BY ORDER OF THE I,()RDS COM:\nssi<)NEPS OF THE AD:\riKAL'rV. LONDON. IS'.tS, [Page l.J •* British C()lunil)ia. a ])rovince of the Dominion of Canada, entered the confederation in 1S71. It includes ^'ancouver Island, (first constituted a British colony in 1849), also the numerous islands "So naiiuMl (.11 chart in l'. S. ("oast Pilot: Schkasrue Kiver of Krause. 2(V2 (;k()(;raphi("al and topogkaphical information and ;ulja("(Mit maiiiluiKl of North Aincrica lyinu- hetweon Roberts point in (iooroia strait, latitude 4'J N.. and tlie (-(Mitrc of Portland canal, latitude T)-!-^ 40' N. to 5H- N. The averao-e breadth of liritish Coluni- l)ia is about 25(i miles, and the area, inc iudino- \'ancouver island and Queen Charlotte islands, is roughly estimated at 4ti(;,'M»(i square miles.'' DcpOS/tHIII of IIllllK f /*. U'ltftl' Cmtei) States of Amerklv, San Francisco^ Cal/fonnd^ sx. IIouKM' P. Hitter ])eino- duly sworn deposes and says: 1 am a eivil and lopoo raphieal engineer l)y profession and at present in the service of the United States (xovernment holding- a position as assistant in the Coast and Geodetic Survey. I held this position in 1893 when I was ordered to dut}^ in Alaska as topographer. 1 was then thirtA'-eig'ht years of age. I proceeded from Victoria, British CoIuml)ia. on the steamer Ifos.Hhr and arrived at Holkham IJay on the tenth day of May, Th(^ next day 1 joined the Canadian toj)ographic party under Mr. A. J. P)rabazon. From this date until the s(>cond of September I depended upon this party for food and transportation. The area of country covered by the topographic reconnaissance made during this season extends from the entrance of- Holkham Hay on the north to Port Houghton on the south. I ascended tive or six different mountains with Mr. Brabazon from which I had a good view into the interior. From these view points I saw a great mountain system, the culminating peaks of which were l)eyond the limits of the topography delineated by us. The moiuitain masses are so distributed that no d(>Hned mountain range trending north and south pai'allel to the coast can be said to exist within the area descril)ed b}- me. Within the range of vision the altitudes of numerous ci'ags and peaks, which 1 saw. gradu- ally increase fi'om the coast inland. Homer P. Kitter, .1.S-.S-. U. S. C it' (r. Surrey. Swoi'n and sid)s('ril)ed to l)efore me this i}l»th day of April lllOo. Tllo:\IAS S. BURNES, Notanj PiihJ'ic, in and for the Cifij tt' i'oiini ij of Sun Franchco. My term of office expirees Jan. 8th A. D. llMil. There is seal wdiich reads: Thomas S. Burnes. Notary Pul)lic, City & Co. San Francisco. Cal. I)(j)osifiuri of JoJni F. Pr<(ff. United States of Amekica. Sraftl,-^ W I was forty-tiv<^ years of age. I was attached to the party of Mr. O. IL Tittmann, then an assistant in KELATTVE TO SOUTHKASTKKX ALASKA. 20)3 tho Coast and (icodetio Survpy. and accompanied him from Port Townscnd on the steamer /lasshr. As we appioached Foi't Wranyell we had a g-ood view of the monntains in tlie Stikine X'allcv. High snow clad peaks which were many iniles iidand were noted over the tops of the nearl)y mountains. On the loth day of May I joined the Canadian topographical ])arty under Mr. J. (xihhon and from that date until the thii-d of Sejitemher this i)arty furnished me with food and trans])ortation. 1 accomi)anied Mr. (Jihhon in the ascent of the ten t)r more mountains on the maiidand fi'om which the topography of the area hounded by the Stikine Kivei' on the south and east and on the north l)v a line at right angles to the coast through Thomas Bay Avas developed. During the season I ascended the Stikine KiNcr as far as the Great Glacier about 25 mile.s from Point Kothsay in an air line and climbed a peak on the west side of the river just below this point. From this elevation of 4.8(><» feet I obtained a good view of the mountains tow^ard the interior which are much higher than those toward the coast, and many of which do not appear on the Canadian map of the region. From this and the other peaks ascended hy me I could readily determine that there is no defined mountain I'ange anywhere within this region described by me within ten marine leagues from the coast, nor is there any formation of mountains which can be strung out into a range interrupted or pierced by the Stikine River. The great field of glacier with which a large portion of the country described by me is covered, slopes gently towards the coast, aird if not interrupted by the Stikine River would be continually higher as you recede from the coast. Again in 1894 I had charge of the survey around the head of Lynn Canal and during the season went up the Chilkat River to a point four miles above Kluquan and up the Taiya River and to the summit of Chilkoot Pass. In my trips up and down Lynn Canal I was imi)ressed l)y the topography of the country on each side. In general the moun- tains rise abruptly from the sea but the mountains increase in eleva- tion from the south towards the passes and east and west from the shores of the canal. The disposition of the mountain masses about Lynn Canal is such that no mountain axis trending in an easterly iind westerly direction is anywhere interrui)ted by the canal. Along the entire coast from Chilkoot Pass to the Stikine River I have seen only a broken irregular mountain system, with ])eaks l)ecoming higher as you go from the coast, without .mything like the continuity of a moun- tain range extending north and south parallel to the coast. J. F. PlIATT. Sworn ;md subscril)cd to before me this 1st day of May, VMVd. [SKAL.J William B. Allison, Xotdrif Piihllr III iiikJ for the State of Wns/iiiK/fon, R, x'nji ii(;KAl>Iir('AL AND T()l'()(iRAl'HI("AL INFORMATION assistiiiit ill the Coast and (ii'odctic Survov. I hclil this position of assistant in ls!t;-> at which time 1 was 86 years of aye. In this year, 1893, I accompanied the party of Mr. H. (t. Ogden. an assistant in the Coast and (ireodetic Survey, on the steamer Pattei')«m sailing- from Port Townsend. Washington, for Ahiska. On the 11th of Ahiy 1 was landed at the entrance of Endicott Arm of Ilolkliam Bay and joined the Canadian topographical party in charge of Mr. .1. .1. McAithur, and on this party 1 became dependent for food and transi)ortation. The Held work of the season connnenced on ]\lay '1\ and continued until the tirst day of September. During this season I made not less than lifteen ascents of mountain peaks ranging from i^.dddfeet to5,(»00 feet, and over, in height. Tliese mountain peaks, ascended, are dis- tributed along the coast from a YK)int near the entrance to Endicott Arm, to a point near the head of Taku Inlet, and are within twenty miles of the continental shore: the one most remote from the shore being about tive miles from the mouth of S]:)eel River. Over this entire area the shores are very steep and rocky, and landing places for the cano(^ and sail boat scarce; especially al)out the head of Ilolkliam Ray where in many places rocky cliti's rise almost jierpendicularly from the water's edge to a height of 3,000 feet and over. Almost the entire interior of the country is covered with glacier bearing mountains. From the various mountain peaks that 1 ascended on the mainland, I ol)served the general character of the topography of the country, as far inland as twenty to thirty miles beyond the inner limits of the country explored. The highest peaks which are visible are from twenty to thirty miles further inland than the inner limits of the explored region and ai'e not shown on the maps of the International Boundary Commission Survev. One of the inner peaks, which I called Tent Mountain, which was distinctly higher tlian any peak on Holkham Bay or Tracy Arm, I determined to lie nearly in the axis of Tracy Arm and about two miles from its head. Although the results of my tojiographical reconnoissance show spurs of mountain ranges running in almost all directions, the entire country explored by me during the season of 18!)3 is really covered by one immense connected mountain system, the protruding ])eaks of which increase^ in height with the increased distance from the coast. My oi)})()rtunities for seeing the mountain masses along the stretch of coast and in the interior within the teri'itory described by me were ample to permit me to say that nowhere within ten marine leagues from the coast does there exist within these regions, a delined moun- tain range which extends in a direction north and soutli parallel with the coast. There does not exist within this territory anything like a defined mountain chain, running north and south generally parallel to the coast, which in its course crosses Endicott Arm, Ilolkhani I^iy, Ti'acy Arm. Port Siiettishain. Taku Kiver or eitluM' of them, neither is there such a range which might be considered as pierced by all or eithei' of them. P. A. Wki.kkk. Sworn and subscribed to before me this 7 day of May. 11M»3. Fkaxk Dklaney, Xotunj PnhJic. There is seal which reads: Frank Delaney. Notary Public. Monroe Countv, Florida. KELATIVE TO S( ICTH HAS TKHX ALASKA. 21)5 Dtqvtxif'nm ()f./i)Jiii At /.so/). L'nitkd States of Amkiuca. \] (Is/uiK/fo/l . I). ('.. ■S->>-. flohn Nelson heino' duly sworn. (l('[)oscs and says as follows: 1 am a civil cnoineer by profession. I am now oniployed in the Coast and Geodetie Survey as an assistant, and in 1S08 in this capacity was enoaoed in makino- a topooraphieal survey of the area, on the east side of Ciiilkoot Iidet which surrounds the valley and tril)utaries of the Kat/ehin River. In the accomplishment of this survey I ascended the \'allcv of the said river for ji distance of about fifteen (I.")) miles. From my ]i()ints of observation on the summits of the mountains in this reoMon I was enabled to note the ciiaracter of the topography to a dis- tance of thirty (:^)i<) miles from the coast. There exists in this I'egion no (leHnite mountain range lying in a north and south direction par- allel with the trend of the coast, but rather a serie.s of snow-capped peaks from five (5) to seven (7) thousand feet high, which increase in lieight as you recede fi'om the t-oast. From my points of observation at tlu^ head of tlie Katzehin Kiver I did not see any water shed or divide, tho drainage being all toward the Lynn Canal. John Nelson*. Sworn and subscribed to l^efore me this -iC) day of May. 1U0;>. [seal] N. (r. Henry, Aof(n-// PnhVif. DcjX'xlfloii of (Jeoiyc If. Il<{l]>'ni. United States of America. Norflnrii Dixii'tct of Ca/ifoni/d. Cifi/ (did (ouiitjj of San J^ranei^eo.^ .y.s. Cieorge H. Halpin. being tirst duly sworn, deposes and says that he is a citizen of the United States, above the age of tw'entv-one 3'ears, and a resident of the city and county of San P^rancisco. State of Cali- fornia. That he is the manager of the tirm of Hritton iSc Key. litho- graphers, whose place of business is situated at nundier ^>'lh Commer- cial street, in the city and county of San Francisco. State of California, and as such manager of such tirm is the custodian of and has the cus- tody and control of the books of said tirm, including the l)ook known as and called the "Stone Index Book", the "fJournal". and the "Ledger", containing the retpiisite entries of the business of said tirm during the year 1870. Afhant further makes oath and says that the docum(Mit which is hi'reunto aniH»xed and marked Exhil)it "A" and made a part of this affidavit, is a true and correct copy of the entri(»s which appt^ar in the '•Stone Index Book" of said tirm for the months of .lamiarv. Fel)ru- ary. March. Ajjril and May. in the yeai' 1S7H. which entries appear upon a single page of said book, and which ])age is not nuiubered. Alliant further makes oath and says that the document which is annexed hereto and marked Exhibit " B". and made a part of this affidavit, is a true and correct copy of the entries which appear in the book called the "Journal" of said firm during th(> year Is7<). at page 41 of said book. 2(>() GEOGRAPHICAL AND Ton xiKAI'H KAL INFORMATION Aditiiit fiu'tliiM- makes oatli and says tl)at tlu' (lociuiiont wliich is hore- uiito aiinox(Hl ami marked Kxhildt "C and made a ])art of this atti- davit, is a ti'ue and correct coi)y of the entries whicii ai)pear iii)on tlie ^ ledii'ei-'' of said tirm durino- the year 1S70, at page 213, of said book. Ailiant further makes oath and says that, according' to his best information and belief, and based upon the entries which a])pear in the ditferent books of said tirm hereinabove mentioned, on(> thousand copies of a Map of the Cassiar Distiict. in P)ritish Columt)ia, were lithoyraphed by th(> said tirm of Hritton vSc Ivcy. at the re<|uest and oi'der of the British consul, at San Francisco, in the n^onth of Febru- ary, in th(> year ISTO. AlHant further makes oath and says that, according to his best information, and belief, the said tirm is not now in the possession of a copy of said map, and that the engraving upon the stone from which said maps were produced or lithographed, has long since been erased. Gko. H. Halpin. Subscribed and ssvorn to ])efore me this !^5th dav of ]\Iay, 1903. [seal] J. S. Manley. liiifcil States Coinhihsioncr for thr JVortJier/} Dlxtr'ct of Collfoi'nhi, at San Franeisco. Exhibit "A". 1S7(). ./(iiiiKiri/. out 167 Moore & Co. Bourbon 8ululs. 10300 Neck 5000 Sur 3 colors. Br. 56 Mai)s of Kern River Hydraulic Mines, etc. ' 1000 156 Mount iNIoriah pennason C/D 100 111 :Meredith M. Co Share 1000 69 The :Mackay 31. Co. Share 2000 out in colors. ]\Iap of the Cassiar District 1000 in colors out Map of Iviji'htening Creek 1000 out The :\reredith Share 1000 Large ]\lap of Santa Monica 3300 Marrh Large Map of Santa ^Monica Meadow Valley share 78 Merchant's Exciiange Circular 116 INIelchers Successor's receipts 75 " C/D 220 " 1.2.3. Ex Blank 6 ]\Iaps of Sutter Street Carey 20 ]\lap of University of Cala. Piece Mariotts Aero-Plane Nar. Co. Share Merchant's Ex. ]5ank Kx on London 5000 1000 Do ul)le 2000 Hat cap 1000 1000 500 i sets, 100 100 2d page 500 Do RELATIVE TO sOUTHEASTERM ALASKA. 267 April 1(14 -Mac.iiKlray 12.S4 Blank 2 Taks oOO sets. M ."Map Oliicv i^- Co. hackl. 3800 + 9 Muri>hy (iraiit Check I!('(l ill Don. Kelly Co. 5 1000 + 22 Kiiiety ( ireen" 1000 27 Maps of Car,<()ns i*c Pinkertdii's .\(){) 'Slavouilnx Neck Laliels :;000 Large ^lap of Cornstock Lode for News Letter 2 colors 11 200 X 9 Mitchell G. cnnting 1000 b. & no 75 185 Selby Smelting and Lead Co. Lith. Silver Creek and binding same 7 156 Leopard Alining Co. Lith. 2000 C of S. binding c'i no. 80 143 Bank of Nevada Co. Printing 1000 checks stam])ed i)ai>er Binding and mmd)ering 3850 142 Hideout and Smith Printing 400 Exchange. Bind & no. 10 196 Owens and ^loore. Altering heading A printing 1500circ. and 1000 headings. 35 189 Floo.l and O'Brien. Engraving letter head and printing 3 reams 35 211 Sj)rucemont Mining Co. Engraving C. of S. printing 1000 h. ln__ Sept. Oct. 11 To Mdse. 127 375t) Oct. 30 " 28 " " 1.37 25 0250 Nov. 17 To Mdse. 146 4250 Nov. 28 By Cash r>ec. 18 To Mdse. 160 2(i Dec. 28 By Cash 47 5(1 6(> 79 111 10 136 6250 6250 152 4250 14 2(i MISCELLAXEOUS DOCUMENTS, ETC. Insti-iirtioitx (jl I'en. to l)i'. MnuJi nluiU . Dki'akt.mknt of State, W(iin, D. C.^ Septemlx^r 8^ 1892. Thomas C. Mexdexhall, Esq.. Sitp^^r'ndi'ndi'ut off/n' Jjnihd Sff/frs (_'or/st and Geodetic Surcei/, Wdsli'nKjtoii . I). C Sir: 1 enclose herewith a commission !i})pointino" you the ("oniinis- sioner of the United States under the Convention conchuled in this city on July 22, 1892, providing for a joint delimitation of the exist- ing boundary line between the United States and her Britannic Majesty's possessions in North America, in respect to such portions of said l)ound- ary as may not in fact have been permanently marked in virtue of treaties heretofore concluded. Article 1 saj^s: That a coincident or joint survey (as may be found in practice mof?t convenient) shall be made of the territory adjacent to that partof the boundary line of the United States of America and the Dominion of Canada dividing the Territory of Alaska from the Province of British Columbia and the Northwest Territory of Canada, from the latitude of 54° 40' North to the point where the said boundary line encounters the 141st degree of longitude westward from the meridian of Greenwich, by Connnission- ers to be appointed severally by the High Contracting Parties, with a view to the ascertainment of the facts and data necessary to the permanent delimitation of said ])oundary line in accordance with the spirit and intent of the existing treaties in regard to it lietween (treat Britain and Russia and lietween tlie United States and Ivussia. By Article II: The High Contracting Parties agree that the (rovernment of the United States and of Her Britannic Majesty in behalf of the Donunion of Canada, shall, with as little delay as possible, appoint two Commissioners, one to be named by each ]mrty, to determine upon a method of more accurately marking the boundary line between the two countries in the waters of Passamaquoddy Bay in front of and adjacent to Eastport, in the State of ]\[aine, and to place buoys or lix such other Ixiundary marks as they may determine to be necessary. The Act providing for deficiencies, appro\ed May IP), ls;)"2. appro- priates the sum of Twenty-five thousand dollai's to be availal)le luitil expended, for the purpose of making the preliminary survey. It also provid(vs that the "whole (»xpense of this survey on the part of the United States shall not exceed the sum of sixty thousand dollars."* Congress has seen fit to place the money under the control of the Treasury Department. You will, therefore, have to consult the Sec- retary of the Treasury as to the mode of utilizing it. Moreover, it being especially assigned as an appropi'iation for the Coast and Geo- detic Survey, I presume you will tiiul no dilliculty in having the expen(litur(\s of it met through the Disbursing Oiliccr of the United States Coast and (jcodetic Survey. 268 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS, ETC. 269 Article I of the Convention })rovides that the ifspcetive Coniniis- .sioners shall meet at Ottawa within two months after the necessary appropriations shall have Ixh'h made, and shall proceed as soon as practicable thereafter to the active discharoe of their duties. They shall complete the survey and submit their final reports thereof within two years from the date of their tirst meetinu-. It is further provided that' The ComniiHsioners shall, so far as they may be able to a^ree, make a joint report to each of the two jrovernments, and they shall also rejKjrt, either jointly or severally, to each trovei'iunent on any points njion which they may be unable to agree. I deem it only necessary to invite your attention to these conven- tional provisions, feelino- every confidence that your intellio-ence and ability in prosecuting- such work will enalile you to successfully com- plete it to the siitisfaction of our Government and with the least possi- ble delay. I am. Sir. Your obedient servant, (Signed) John W. Foster. P^nclosures: Conuuission as above. Copies of treat}'. THE ALASKA BOUXDAIJY. BY T. C. MENDENHALL. [From tlu' Ailaiilic Montlily. Boston, April, 1S%.] * * * The conventi()n of 1^-2-i 1)etween the United States and Kussia, and that of 182.5 l)etween Kussia aiid Great Britain (in which are to be found the boundary-line articles quoted above), were the result of a determination on the part of the two Engdish-speaking nations to break down the Russian Emperors ukase of 1821. in which territory extending- as low as 51 - north latitude was claimed by Russia, as well as complete jurisdiction over nearly all water north of this line, thus threatening th(^ fishing and whaling interests and the carry- ing-trade of both nations. The limitation of Russian possessions to that part of the coast above 54^ 40' north latitude and the grant- ing of certain maritime privileges for a limited time were the princi- pal results sought after and accomplished, and unciuestionably little thought was given to the definition of a boundary line which traversed a region esteemed to be of little value, either present or prospective. In consequence of this indifference and the ap])arent absence of geo- graphical instinct in framing the treaty, we have an agreement through which it is now proposed to "drive a coach and six" in the interests of the ever aggressive and persistently exi)anding British Empire. It is therefore important for inteliigent Amei'icans to understand the weakness of the articles of agreement upon which our Alaska boundary claims are assumed to rest. They can best bo considered in the order of definition in the treaty. In the first paragraph is found the not uncommon but always unfortunate error of "' double definition", or rather, in this particular case, of attempting to fix an astronomical position by international treaty. It could not be known in 182.'). and. as a matter of fact, it is not now known, that the southernmost point of Princ(Mif Wales Island is on the parallel of ."i-l- 4<>' north latitude, for it is almost al)solutely certain not to be on this parallel. No harm comes from this, however. 26626— AP 18 270 MISOELLANP:<)rS DOCUMENTS, ETC. as in a sul)so(|iU'nt articlo (1\'.) the ])()ssil)ility of this detinitioii rosult- ino- ill a divided jurisdiction over the lower extremity of that island is prevented hy the provision that the whole island shall Iielono- to Russia (now to the L'nited states). The incident is quite worthy of note, however, as illustratino- the claim that the doiiihuint ida tras tJw 54° 40' line. The prominence of this idea, indeed, in the minds of the several powers was so great as to after passing Cape Chacon, the eastermost of the two capes at the soutliern extremity of I'rince of Wales Island, and •'ascending to the north'' through Clarence Strait and Ikdmi Canal, and iinally intersecting the q\M\\ parallel of north latitude in Burroughs Bay. The effect of this would be to throw the wdiole of the great Kevilla-Gigedo Island, together with a large territory between that and Portland Canal (all of which has been almost universally recognized as belonging to Alaska), over to the British side. Preposterous as is this claim, it has for some years received official support at the hands of the Canadian authorities, who have so drawn the line on several of their official maps. It is found on a general map of the Dominion of Canada published by the Interior Department in 1887, and it is drawn in the same way upon what purports to be a copy of an official Canadian map of 1884 (accompanying K^xecutive Docu- ment 146, Fiftieth Congress, second session), although an original, now before me, of same date and title, and with which the copy is almost identical in other respects, exhil)its the line as following the Portland Canal, in accord with the traditional claims of the Cnited States. In recent English dispatches it has l)een announced that new facts relating to the treaty have been discovered which grcnitly strengthen the later Canadian interpretation of this part of the line, but it is hardly to be believed that English diplomats will consider this lino in any other light than as affording excellent material with which to •'trade"*' in convention, or on which to "yield"" in arbitration. On entering the mouth of the Portland Channel, which is struck almost in the center l»y the .54- 40' line, we meet with another claim of comparatively recent date. Just to the north of what must be admitted to l)e the real entrance to this cliannel aiv two consid(M-able islands, Wales Island and Pearse Island. North of these is a narrow, dangerous chtmnel sei)arating them from the mainland, and joining Portland Canal above with the open sea. It is claimed that, admitting Portland Channel, as laid down on the maps, to be the real channel referred to in the treaty, this comparatively narrow passage is a part of it, and tln^ boundary line must be drawn through it so as to put MISCP:LLANE(»rs DOCl'MKNTS, ETC. 271 Wales Jslaiul and Pcarso Island on the Canadian side. This ehiini is not reeoo-nized on the otiieial Canadian map refen-ed to above, dated 1SS4, hut it i;? upon that of 18^7. It ean have hut little value, except when it couies to the "general .seranible" whieh is evidently bcintr prepared for. The Portland Canal presents another ditHculty in the fact that it does not aetually reach tiie "'.jtith degree of north hititude'", a.s seems to t>c implied in the language' of the treaty, and this has Iteen used as an argument to prove that Portland Channel was not really the chan- nel through which it was originally intended to draw the boundary line. But this canal comes to within a very short distance of the 56th parallel, probably falling short of it by not more than three or four miles, and possibly by not more than a fraction of a mile. The Salmon and Bear rivers debouch into this canal at its head, and the t)ed of either may represent the extension of the inlet to the 56th parallel. In any event, it is a matter of no great impoi'tance, as some sort of hiatus nuist necessarily exist in a line passing from the level of the sea to the summit of luountains. Altogether the most serious troul»le is to be anticipated in the interpretation of that part of the treaty which dehnes the line as it is to l)e drawn from the head of Portland Canal to the l-tlst meridian of west longitude near Mount St. Elias. In Article III. the language used is that "'from this last-mentioned point'' (where Portland Channel strikes the 56th degree of north lati- tude) "'the line of demarcation shall follow the sunnult of the moun- tains situated parallel to the coast as far as the point of intersection of the l-llst degree of west longitude," etc. But as there was, appar- ently, even then a doul)t as to the position if not the existence of such a range, the second paragraph of Article IX. was inserted, defining the distance of the line from the winding of the coast, in case the assumed mountain range might be found to run further from the shore than was then supposed. Although most interested in the other features of the treaty, it is evident that British diplomacy, with its accustomed shrewdness, was looking after secondaiy as well as pri- mai'v (juestions, and was by no means disposed to trust to the possible meanderings of any little-known range of mountains, even though drawn ui)on the ma}) by its own exi)I()rers. It was provided, therefore, that while the "summit of the mountains parallel to the coast" should furnish the boundary line whenever such line would be ten marine leagues, or less, from the coast, if it should appear in the future that said mountains carried their smumits to a greater distance inland, then the line was to be drawn "parallel to the winding of the coast." and so as never to "exceed the distance of ten marine* leagues therefrom." It is important to note that this article may be regarded as containing something stronger than a (|uasi-admis- sion on the part of (ireat Britain that the strip of territory conceded to Ix'long to Kussia should be in width ten mariiu> leagues from the coast line: it also im])lies that this is the ma.rliKiiin width to which she will consent, and that there is nothing in the treaty to prevent her making it one league or half a league, if, in the future, she is able to do so, and the inountaiiis pa>'ly just to say that they were intended only as conventional representation of the fact that mountains were seen in almost every dii-ection, and especially in looking from the coast toward the interior. A\'ithin the past few years many topographical maps have been executed, and many photogiaphs have l)een made of these mountains as viewed from the summits of some of those which are accessible. Very excellent views have ])een obtained from elevations of four thousand and live thousand feet, looking towards the interior and extending far l)eyoiid any claim of the Tnited States. These show a vast "sea of mountains'" in every direction, g-enerally increas- ing- in elevation as the distance from the coast increases. Seen from a distance or from the deck of a ship at sea. they might easily create the impression of a range or ranges "'parallel to the wind- ing of the coast ''. As a matter of fact, there is nothing of the kind, but only the most confused and irregular scattering of mountains over the whole territory, at least until the Fairweather range, south of Mount St. Elias, is reached. Of course it is quite possil)le to draw a series of lines from mountain suuuuit to mountain summit, which would form a line i)araliel to the coast, or any other assumed line, but no one can deny tliat the language of the treaty implies a range of sunuuits extending "in a direction parallel to the coast.'' As the mountains which actually exist cover the territory down to the water's edge, the logical application of the mountain-summit definition, if it is to be applied at all, is to draw the line from peak to peak along the seacoast, and this our friends on the other side have not hesitated to do. It is so drawn on the official ( anadian ma}) dated 18S7. and also by Dr. (t. M. Dawson, director of the Dominion (xeological Survey, on his map su])mitted to show proposed conventional boundary lines. Naturally, this line, in conunon with all recently drawn maps of the Canadian g-overnment, practically leaves little to us except the group of islands 13'ing off the mainland. While nominally allowing us a nar- row strip, which is ])erhaps not (juite all covered by high tides, it makes several short cuts which serve to l)reak the continuity of our coast line, and to give considerable seacoast to British Columl)ia. Against th(> mountain-summit theory, the contention of the United States is, or should be, that as it is uncpicstionably proved that no such range of mountains exists as was shown on the chai'ts of Van- couver, and as the high contracting parties evidently had in mind when they agreed to the treaty, it becomes necessary to fall back upon the alternative definition, which i)laces the line "parallel to the winding of the coast,"" and not more than ten marine leagues distant therefrom. It may be claimed that this was to have application only in localities where the range of "mountains jiarallel to the coast" was more than ten marine leagues from the coast, and that it vanishes when said range disappears. In reply it may be said that there are indications strongly pointing to tlu> actual existence of such a range MISC^KLLANKOUS DOCUMENTS, ETC. 278 far hevoiul tlic hoiiiulaiv limit towards tlic interior: l)ut even if it he tinally Isiiown that no siu-h ranoe exists, either more or less than ten marine leauiies from the sea. the httcnf of the a*i'reen)ent ran he dis- tinctly proved: and in the iuipossihility of exeeutinti' one of its pro- visions, an alternative, s])eeially provided for the failure of that one. must l)e accepted. But as soon as we sut>u-est that l:oth the spirit and the letter of the treaty would l)e satistied l»y drawint;' tlu' line ten marine leatiues from the coast, we are met with some astounding- arj^umtMits as to what is meant hy the coast. A well-known Knulish authority has contended, in etl'ect. that the coast line from wliich this distance should he measured should l)e drawn tangent to, and so as to include, the islands lying- alonu' the coast. The effect of this would he practically to ex- ehide us from the mainland, and to throw valual)le ])arts of the islands thenisehes over to the Canadian side. In the face of the plain state- ment that the lini> is to he drawn "'parallel to the winding {sii,H<»<(tt><) of the coast." it is not l)elieved that this point can l)e seriously urged. Should it he found possihlc to ])rojeet a line satisfactory to lioth parties, from Dixon's Entrance, at some point of which it nnist begin, to the region of the Mount St. Elias Alps, thei'e will he no ditliculty in agreeing upon the ri'mainder of the boundary. From the point Avhere it strikes the l-tlst meridian west longitude it is to be extended along that meridian "as far as the Frozen Ocean." Since it is an astronomical line its ])osition can be ascertained as accurately as cir- cumstances require. In order to r«Muove a not unconuuon but erroneous impression that the Alaskan l)or.iidary line is now. and has been foi' some time, in a state of adjudication, it may be well to say that thus far nothing has been tlone exce})t to execute such surveys as have been thought desir- able and necessary for the construction of maps. l)y which the whole subject could lie ))roperly presented to a j*)int boundary-line connnis- sion whenever such should be appointed, and on which the location of the line could be definitely laid down if a mutual agreement sh(mld be reached. Such a survey was tii'st brought to the attention ot Con- gress in a message of President Grant in iST:^. It was not until 1889, however, that the work was begun by the I'nited States Coast and Geodetic Survey, which sent two inirties to the valley of the Yukon, in the vast inttMior of the territory, with instructions to establish camps, one on that ri\"er and the other on its l>ranch the Porcui)ine, both to l)e as near the 141st meridian as possil)le. These parties were to carry on a series of astronomical ()l>servations for the purpose of determining the location of the meridian, to execute such triangula- tions and toi)ographical sui veys as were necessary for its identification, and to establi.sh permanent monrments as nearly as might he upon the meridian line. They remained at their posts, under stress of weather and other unfavoral)le c-onditions. for two years, during whii-h their work was done in a manner (piite sutKcient for any demands ever likely to be made upon it. The two most important ])oints on tlu> boundary, wliere it inter ects the two great livers named above, were thus determin(»d. and a year or two later the j)osition of the l)oundary meridian in nda- tion to the sununit of Mount St. Flias was estal»lished. It is difhcidt to see what more will be re(|uii('d for a long time to come, as far as 274 MISCKLLANEorS DorFMENrs, ETC. rolatos to this part of the l)oiin(larv line. In southern Alaska, where all the uiieertainties as to detinition of the boundarv line exist, peculiar and in a certain sense insuperable t)l)stacles are met with in the actual survey or ""runnino-" of a line in the ordinary sense. In nearly allof the ])roi)ose(l routes most of the line passes through a i-e^ion ])racti- cally inaccessil)l(>. or at least not accessible without tlu^ cx])en(liture of enormous sums of n.onev and many years of time, wholly (lispi-o|)or- tionate to the end to be oained. To atteujpt to make anythino' like a detailed to})Oi>raphical survey of the wide reo-ion covei'ed ))y the sev- eral claims, of sutKcient accuracy to satisfy the conditions, and to "run" a line whenever it should finally be located, would involve labor and (^xpense impossible to estimate in advance, but sui-e to be exti'aordinai'ily ^reat. In view of these facts, it was determined to make such a survey as would enable a l)oundarv-line conunission to fix upon any one of several ''(■onventionar" lines which had )>een >.ug'oested already as satisfactory sul)stitutes for that of the treatv now generally admitted to l)e impos- si])le of realization. In fluly, 1892. an agreement was entered into between the United States and Great Britain for the execution of a joint or coincident survey of this region, for boundary-line purposes. It was agreed by the commissioners appointed to make this survey to carry out, in effect, the plan nuMitioned above. Astronomical stations wew to ])e established at the mouths of the principal riviM's which tiow across the lioundary line, namely, at the head of Hurroughs Bay, the mouths of the Stikiiu' and the Taku, and the head of Lynn C'anal. A series of triangles were to be run from th(>se up the river valleys, until a point bevond the proi)able or possil)le location of the boundarv was reached. Topographical sketches w-ere to be made and a good deal of photographic topogi'aphy was to be done, especially l)y the Canadian parties. This i)lan. which was successfully carried out. received the ap})r()val of the Department of State, and the repi'csentatives of the two go\ernments cooperatcnl in its execution. It is believed to hav(^ fur- nished all information. I)esid(\s what had been previously accumulated, necessai'y to a full discussion and a complete settlement of the con- troversy. One of the imi)ortant results of this work has been the accunudation of evidence, if indeed any were needed, of the impossibilitv of the "mountain-summit'"' line, and the consequent necessity of falling back upon a line at a measured distance from the coast. That this distance, in accordance^ with the spii'it and intent of the treaty of 1825. should be practically ten marine leagues is apparent from the treaty itself and fi'om contem])()raneous history. It was e\idently meant to con- vey, or rather to contirm. to Russia a "strip of tlu^ coast", complete and unbroken, from the })arallel of ^A 40' north latitude to Mount St. Klias. The word //VvV/v^ used in the treaty to describe this strip, and which becomes "line" in the English version, means much more than that, being- originally e<|uivalent to "border", "selvage", "fringe", or "list" of cloth, always standing for som(>thing of very definite width and contimiity. ('ontem})orary writers might be (juoted, show- ing a conunon belief among Knglishmen themselves that the treatj' accorded to Russia a \ery detinite and continuous strip of the main- land, which l)y cutting off direct access to the coast, "rendered the great interior of comparatively little value". MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS, ETC. 275 111 coiK-lusion, tlic situation may Ix' suiiuntHl up as follows: Our purchase of Alaska from Kussia in lsefore a board of arbitration, the English Government has only to set up and vigour- ously urge all of the claims referred to above, and moi-e that can easily be invented, and it is all but absolutely certain that, although by both tradition and equity we should decline to yield a foot of what we pur- chased in good faith from Kussia. and which has become douldy valu- able to us by settlement and exi)Ioration, our lisiere will l)c promptly broken into fragments, and. with nmch show of inq)artiality. divided between the two high contracting parties. It is to be regretted that our shai'e in r:'cent imi)()rtant events lia> tended to lead us toward this end rather than away from it. ^^'e have thrust ourselves into a controversy over u boundary line on another continent, in which we can have no interest, except perhaps that which 276 MISCELLANEOrs DOCUMENTS, ETC. ^rows out of u very foo-o-y and uii(jei-tuin sentiineiit. We luive assumed that a European power is about to "extend its system" to a part of the western continent, or that England is on the point of ""oppressing" the peo})le of a South American republic, oi- of •'controHinii- the des- tiny" of their o-oxernment. Ao"ainst this we have an active and aooressi\e protest, and have clearly intimated that if (xreat Britain does not submit this, boundary question to arbitration we shall make trouble. In so doino- we have once more ])ut ourselves exactly where far-siohted Enolish statesman- ship would have us. Under ordinary circumstances our attitude on this (|uestion would be considered as almost an offence, and the chan- nels of di})lomatic correspondence would not ho as clear and uninter- rupted as they now are. The truth is that Great Britain is meetino- our wishes in this matter with almost indecent haste, because the arbitration of the Alaska boundary line. l)y which she hopes and expects to acquire an open sea coast foi- her oreat northwest teri-itories. and to weaken us by luvakino- our exclusive jurisdiction north of o-i"- -iC. is enormously more im})()r- tant to her than anything- she is likely to g-ain or lose in South America. Having driven her to accept arbitration in this case, it will be impos- sible for us to refuse it in Alaska, and we shall tind ourselves again badly worsted by the diplomatic skill of a people who, as individuals, have develoi)ed intellectual activity, manliness, courage, unseltish devo- tion to duty, and general nol)ility of charaeter. elsewhere uneoualed in the world's history, but whose diplomatic policy as a nation is and long has been characterized by aggressiviMnvss.gi-eed. absolute inditl'er- ence to the rights of others, and a splendid facility in ignoi-ing every principle of justice or international law whenever conuuercial interests are at stake. T. C. Mendexhall. In-stn(cf!()ihs /'s.sHct/ !n ISiOf. hi/ J)r. T. ('. ^IciidvnlndK xnpti'infendent of the United St(d(x i'lxixt and (xcodrtlr Strri'ei/. Wasiiinotox, I). C, JLo: ^ht^ 189^. J. F. Pratt, ^l^/stant (\ <(' (r. Sufecy, •Sctt/r. lIT/.s//. Sir: As you are already aware from })revious instructions and from ver))al conference you will again be assigned to duty in Alaska in connection with the Boundary survey. On the recei])t of these instructions you will ])lease arrange to pro- ceed by the Steamer "Hassler", which will furnish transjiortation to and from the field for your party and outfit and which will sail from Seattle about April 27 to Lynn Canal. wluM-e you will execute the triangulation and topographical reconnaisance of the Chilkat and Taiya hdets to the 10 marine league limit. You will also establish an astronomical station on the west side of Chilkat Inlet and connect it V»y triangulation with the old station on Pyramid island. The astron- omer attached to your jiarty will attend to the astronomical and magnetic observations, and on each return of the "'llassler" which will carrv chronometers to and fro l)etween vour astronomical station MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS, ETC. 277 and that at Sitka, will make coiiiparisoii of the carried rin-oiionictcr.s with thost' of your station. The traveling- astronomer, in eharj^e of the carritMl chronometers will indei)endently make the same compar- isons, and in case of disaofeement a repetition by both will be neces- sary. Time observations should be made as frecjuently as })ossible so that a o'ood rate for tlu^ station chronometers may be obtained. Assistant E. F. Dickins w\\\ on the completion of his work on the Unuk Kiver transfer his party to the Chilkat and render such assist- ance to your party as may be necessary'. Sub Assistant F. A. Youni;', Aid J. F. Hayford and Temijorary Aid A. L. Baldwin and a Recorder will b/ assioned to your ])arty. Mr. Hayford Ix'ino- the astronomer who will be left in charge of the astronomical station. The traveling astronomer Mr. .1. Page for con- venience will be considered as attached to Assistant Morse's ])arty. but in case of sickness or disability of Mr. Hayford. will relieve the hitter at your astronomical station. Messrs Young. Hayford and Baldwin will report to you at Seattle in time for the sailing of the '* Hasslei*", and have each l)pen instructed to ])urchase round trip tickets from ^\'ashington good. for eight months and to render the accounts for tlu'ir traveling expenses to you for settlement. Their compensation and that of your recorder will be as follows: F. A. Yoiintr %>! , -JOO per annum .1. F. Hayford V)00 per annum A. L. Halilwin HO per month Keconler <>() per month and eai'h will also receive actual sul>sist micl^ and tr.ucling expenses. Prior tf) taking the tield, you will as heretofore arranged procure for the Alaska parties the requisite numb?')- of canoes and see that they are properly shipped to their respective destinations. The Hydrographic Inspector will furnish a boat and outtit and a steam launch for the use of your party. Parties undei' the charge of Messrs ,J. A. Flemer and H. 1*. KitttM' will be oi)eratiiig in the mountain regions adjoining the ("hilkat and Taiya Inlets and will use your camps as a base of supplies. &c.. and you will please cooperate with them in every way possible without interfering with the progress of your own work. It is also prol)al)le that Assistant McCJrath after comjileting the work assigned to him in the vicinity of Yakutat Bay will reinforce your party and assist in the completion of your survey. It will be borne in mind that the triangulation to th(> In marine league limit and the topographical reconnaissance of the up})er portions of the inlets are of th(^ first im])ortance and if it is found necessary to leave anv part of the work untinished it should l>e the topography of the lower portions. At the close of the Reason youi' party and outtit will be carriinl to Seattle by the Steamer "Hassler". and Messrs Young. Hayford and Baldwin will then proceed to Washington and your Recorder to San Francisco. Th(>se instructions will cover all necessary expcMise of trav(d and transportation incurred in their execution. Respectfully, yours. T. C. Mkndemiall. St/^h/-/>ift /i(h/tf. "278 miscellaneous documents, etc. United States Coast and Geodetic Survey, ^Vas],•nHJf,,|,, I), a, Mar. 2M, 1891^. Fremont Morse, Axsi stunt C. c6 G. Snrri-ij^ Sun F'nnicl.sro^ Col. Sir: Diirino- the coniiiio- .season you will ao-ain he assioned to duty as astronomer in connection with the Alaska Boundary Survey and on recei})t of these instructions you will ])lease arrange to proceed to Sitka, at such time as the Steamei' '"Patterson" may l>e ready to sail. pr()l)al)ly about Ai)ril 'list. Your duties at Sitka will be the same as durino' last year and chro- nometers will 1)0 carried l)y the Steamer "Hassler" l)etween 3'our station and one to be estal)lished on the Chilkat Inlet by Assistant Pratt. Mr. J. Pag"e will attend to the chronometers on the ** Hassler"' and will be considered as a member of your jmrty. He will at each station make the comparison of its chronometers with those of the vessel and the station astronomer will do the same independently, and in case of disao-reement the comparison will Ije repeated 1)\- both. Incase of the sickness or disaV)ility of either astronomer. ^Ir. Pag-e will take his place and the care of the Hassler chronometers will then devolve upon one of the otticersof that ship. Mr. Page's compensation will be ^(iU per month and subsistence at the rate of $1.()0 per day and his traveling- expenses to and from the Held will be paid. He will purchase here a round triy) ticket to San Francisco, and will render to you all accounts for expenditures incurred under his instructions. ^Magnetic ol)servations will again l)e made at Sitka and the instru- ments will then be forwarded to the Chilkat static)!!. th(M"e l)eing but one set of instruments availal)le. At the close of the season you will without further instructions pro- ceed to San Francisco, transportation being furnished you by the "Patterson"" or '" Hassler" as the case may be. These instructions will cover all necessary expenses of travel and transportation incurred in their execution. Respectfully, yours. T. C. Mendeniiall, Sniierintciident. United States Coast and Geodetic Survey. W^isJuiHjtnn, T). a, Mar. md. 189'^. E. F. DicKiNS, Assistant C. t5 G. Siu'iyy, San Fi'iinvisco, CaJ. Sir: As you have already ]»een informed you will be again assigned to duty in Alaska in connection with the Boundary Survey and you will ])l('ase ari-angc for the contiiuiation of the reconnaissance of the Unuk Ki\('r from the j)oint reached by you last yc^ar to the lo marine league limit. On the com})letion of this work you will be conveyed by the Steamer Hassler from I5urroughs Bay to the Chilkat Inlet, where a'ou will ren- der such assistanc(^ to the ])arty of Assistant Pratt as may ))e neces- sary. The funds for the Boundary Survey l)eing limited it will be necessary to pi'actice the most rigid economy, and it will be well to con- sider the advisa])ility of discharging most of your men on the comple- tion of the I'mdv work, their ex[)enses to their hotnes l>eing of course 'miscellaneous documents, etc. 279 paid. As the triiioiionictrical sui'vcv of the Chilkat and Taiya Inlets to the !<• niai'iiu' leaiiue limit is of the greatest iiiiportaiK-c. the topo- o-raphy (of the lower portions at least) l>eiii«i- secoiularv. you will tirst assist in the trianouhitioii. and for this purpose your full party will prol)al)ly not l)e re([uired. It will 1)0 neeessary to arrang-e in advance with the commanding officer of the Steamer '* Hassh^r " as to the time of calling for you at Burroughs Hay. and in case of failure to connect at that time a second trip may he made later unless in your judgment it is more economical to transport your reduced jvarty and outtit hy the mail steamer from Loring to Sitka and thence by the '* Hassler" to Chilkat. In forming 3'our judgment on this matter the cost of the Ilassler's trij) need not be takcMi into account, as she will have some work to do in the vicinity, which can as w(dl l»e done at that time as any other. Transportation to the tield will be furni>hed for your i)arty and out- fit by the Steamer *' Patterson ", which will sail from San Francisco about April 21st, ))ut you are authorized to proceed by rail to Port Townsend and join the ship at that point. ]\Ir. S. B. Tinsley will l»e assigned to your party as "'Temporary Aid", and will report to you at Port Townsend and accompany you on board the *' Patterson". His compensation will be at the rate of ^Ho.oo pei' month and actual sub- sistence and traveling ex})enses. The Hydrographic Inspector will furnish a whale l)oat and outfit for the use of your party and Assistant Pratt will attend to the purchase of such canoes as may ))e required. At the close of the season you will without further instructions return to San Francisco, the Steamer "Patterson" or "Hassler" as the case uiay be. furnishing .the transportation. Mr. Tinsley having a round trip ticket between \\ic^hington and Port Townsend will t>e landed at the latter point and will proceed to ^Vashington. I). ('. These iiixtructions will cover all necessary expenses of travel and transportation incurred in their execution, liespectfully. yours. T. C. Mendenhall, Suptrhitendeiit. rMTED States Coast and Geodetic Survey. Wdshhuftov, D: C, 2far. 2Jfth. ISOIt. J. E. Mc(iKATH. Ass/'.s/i/)i/ C. lb G. Snrrei/^ WaxJiingtoii, J). C. Sir: You are hereby assigned to the charge of one of the parties to be employed this season upon the survey of the boundary of South Eastern Alaska, and will please arrange to i)roceed to San Francisco in time to ship your outfit by the Steamer ** Patterson", which will sail about April iJlst. You will then ]iroceed l)y rail to Port Town- send, comjdete tin* orgtmi/ation of your party and join the Piitterson on hei" arrival there. Dr. II. W . Edmonds will be assigned to your })arty and will tie instiucted to rej)ort to you on your arrival at San Franciseo and to join the ship at that j^oint. His compensatiiMi will be at the same rate as last year, viz: — >>1(m» per month and actual sul)sistencc and travid- 280 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS, ETC. ino- ('X])('MS('s. aiul his ussionnicnts will take eti'oct fi'oni the date of his rcportiiiy' to yoii at Saii Francisco. The work entrusted to you will he the contiiuiation of the sui'vey from the South end of the Mal.ispina Base to the delta of the Tahtse River. You will l)e landed by the Patterson at Yakutat Bay and will then proceed to that part of the coast nearest to Mt. St. Elias wdiere you will measure another base line for the purpose of determinin>4- accurately the distani-e of the mountain from the coast line. You will at the same time secure all possil)le additional o'eooraphical informa- tion particulai-ly as to the distance and elevations of other })eaks and will then rui! a traxerse line to connect the new base with the one at ]\lalaspina. incidentally tra^•in^• the intervenino- shore line. The Steamcn- '" Patterson" will call for you at Yakutat at such tinu^ as you may have agreed upon witl) her commanding- t)tiicer and will then transport yourself and party to the head of Lynn Canal where you will render such assistance to the parties there at work as may be necessary to ensure the completion of that surv(\\'. On your way to Yakutat, or, if circumstances are not then favor- able, on your return therefrom, you will if practicable laud at Lituya Bay where you will measure another base and det(>rmine the elevations and distances from the c():ist of tlu> princi|)al mountain peaks in that region. As this Lituya Bay work will only occupy a short time, the Steamer will await its coiupletion and your I'eturn on board. After completing this work and that in the vicinity of 'Sit. St. Elias and Yakutat Bav you w^ill consider the advisa})ilitv of reducing your party by the discharge of such hands as will not be required for the work in Lynn Canal. Their traveling expenses by mail steaiuer to the point where engaged will of course have to l)e paid. At the close of the season you will proceed t)y the Steamer '"Patter- son""' to Port Townsend and thence l)v rail ( Vi(/ San Fi'ancisco if nec- essaiy) to Washington. Dr. Edmonds and such renr.iiiung members of your party as are engaged at San Francisco will coutinue on board the '"Patterson" until her arrival at that port, and the others will be discharged at Port Townsend. You will for the sake of economy purchase at ^\ ashington a round tri}) ticlvct to San F'rancisco, good for S or !» months. 'rhes(^ instructions will cover all necessary expenses of travel and transportation incurred in their execution. Kespectf ul ly . yours, T. C. MeNDENHALL, Siif), linfi n/i, I). (J. Sir: On rcn-eipt of these instructions you will jdease arrange to proceed to Alaska iind mak(^ a topographical reconnaissance of the country to the jiorthward and eastward of Taiya Inlet and River to the 10 marine league limit. You will pui'chase a I'ound trip ticket to Seattle, good for !» months, and })roceed to that point in timt^ to complete your arrangiMuents and join the Steamei" "Ilasslei'" which sails for Alaska about April liTth, MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS, ETC. 281 and which will t'uniish transpoi-tiitioii for yoursdt'. party and outtit to Chilkat Inlet 'I'lic work will he of the sanu* i^cncial charactt'i as that exet'utcd hv you last year, and you will olvc special attention to the skotchinii' and niapi)inL:- of the mountain peaks and ranues. if such exist, and locat(> them as accui'ately as the means and time at your dis- posal will permit. The party of Assistant Pratt will l)e enwayed in the survey of the Chilkat Iidetand river to the l)oundary, and his camps may be used l)v you as a l)ase of operations when practicahle. You will confer with him from time to time, as occasion otiers, relative to the progress of the work and the time of closino- tield operations, and on the latter point you will l)e t;"ui(led strictly 1)V his decision. At the close of the season you will retuiri by the SteanuM- '* Hassler"' or '■ Patterson" to Seattle or Port Townsend where you will discharge youi' party and without further instructions proceed to Washinoton, i). C. These instructions will cover all necessary expenses of travel and transportation incurred in their execution. Your estimates for the work have l)een duly approved in the sum of $1500 and an allotment of that amount has been placed to your credit. Respectfully, yours. T. C. Mendenhall, Stiperhdeiuhnt. I'xiTED States Coast and Geodetic Survey. ^YfLshin<|ton, D. C, Ajjl. 0th, 180 1^. Mr. Ho:mek P. Kittek. U. /S. Coast db Geodetic Sxrvcf/. Wns/iliK/tdn. J). ('. Sir: On recei])t of these iirstructions you will please ari'ange to |)ro- ceed to Alaska and make a t()i)ograpliical reconnaissance of the country to the northward and westward of the Chilkat Inlet and River to the 10 marine leagui' limit. You will purchase a round trip ticket to Seattle good for H months, and proceed to that point in time to join the Steamer " Hassler" which sails for Alaska about April 27th and which will furnish transportation for yours(df. party and outtit to Chilkat Inlet. The work Avill be of tlu^ same general character as that executinl by you last year at llolkham Bay. You will give special attention to the sketching' and mai)ping of the mountain peaks and ranges, if such exist, and locate them as accurately as the means and time at youi" dis- posal will permit. The party of Assistant Pratt will be engaged on the survey of the Chilkat Inlet and River to the boundary, and his camps may be used by you as a l)ase of operations when practicable. You will confer with him from time to time as occasion otters relati\'e to the progress of the work and the time of dosing- tield operations and on the latter ])oint you will be guided strictly by his decision. At the close of the season you will return by the Steamer ** Hassler" or "Patterson'" to Seattle or Port Townsend. where you will discharge your party and without fuither instructions proceed to Washington. D. C. These instructions will cox (M- all necessary expenses of traxtd and transportation incurred in their execution. Your estimates for the work have been ap])ro\ed in the sum of 'Sl.'iOi) and iin allotment of that amount has Ikhmi placed to your crcnlit. Respectfully yours , T. C. Mendenhall Siqi, rhitcndott 282 MISCELLANEOUS DOCTMENTS, ETC. Stati'liunt of Rer. Williitin Dnncdii. At tlie iH"(iiiost of the Stiite Dcpartiiiciit of tljc rnited States 1 the undersio'iied make the following statement this 2<>th day of May 1903 at Metlakahtia, Alaska. I was at Fort Simpson British Columbia in the year IS.")? and remained in the Fort over three years witii the Ofhcers of the Hudson's Bav Company from whom I learnt that for the privilege of trading with the natives of Alaska, north of Portland Inlet, their Company })aid a yearly rent to the Kussian (iovernment. In the year 1862 I founded the settlement of ]\Ietlakahtla. about 17 miles South of Fort Sim])Son, and on the 1th -luly lsr>;] I was appointed a .Justice of the Peaee for the district which othce I tilled for over 20 years. During all that tiiue 1 was under the impression that British jurisdiction did not extend north of Portland Inlet so that if a criminal succeeded in getting that far, he was alloAved to escape. It was in the years from 1,S65 to l>s6s (I think) British Naval Otiieers were engaged in a surveying ship all around the Northern waters of British Columlua. They visited Metlakahtia frequently Init w^e never heard that thev extended their labors ])evond or north of Portland Inlet. William Duncan, Z\ S. Coiiiiiiisi^hmei'. Dej)os!ti(>)i of Tltcoiloi'c Poindt'.der. United States of America, Northern Dis- | TRicT OF California, City and County of >.w. San Francisco. ) Theodore Poindexter, l)eing first duly sworn, deposes and says that he is a citizen of the United States, over the age of twenty-one years. That he resides in the City and County of San Francisco, State and Northern District of California. That he is the son of the late Francis Poindexter, who was a Justice of the Peace at Chilkat, Alaska, during the year ISST and for some years thereafter. That said Francis H. Poindexter died in the City of Los Angeles, in the State and Southern District of California about the month of October, in the year lS*jy. Theodore F^oindexter. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 3rd dav of June A. D. 1903. [seal] J. S. Manley. United States Connnl^xioner For the Northern District -:28. 1. which also established a perniaiiciit houiidary })et\veeii tht^ ((M-ritorics respecti\'ely claimed l)y them on the continent and islands of North-western America. This treat}^ contained the following stipulations: Akt. L It is a<:ree(l that tlie respective sniijeits of the iiiretext for an illicit commerce, it is agreeil that the subjects of his Uritannic >Iajesty shall not land at any place where there may 1)e a Russian establishment, without the ]iermis- sion of the governor or (•ommandant; and, on the other hand, that Russian subjtects shall not land, without permission, at any British establishment on the north-west coast. Hv the ord and 4th articles it Avas agreed that "the line of demarca- tion between the possessions of the high contracting parties upon the coast of the continent and the islands of America to the north-west," shoidd be drawn from the southernmost point of Prince of Wales's island, in latitude .54 degrees 4o minutes eastward, to the great inlet in tlie continent called Portland Channel, and along th(» middle of that inlet to the .5*)th degree of latitude, whence it should follow the summit of the mountains bordering the coast, within ten leagues northwestward, to Mount St. Elias. and thence north, in the course of the 141st meridian west from Greenwich, to the frozen ocean, •"which line shall form the limit between the Russian and the British possessions in the continent of America to the noi'thwest.** extract i'kom a proclamation of george iii. (1763) By the King. A PROCLAMATION. George R. A\'hereas we have taken into our roval consideration the extensive and valualtle acqiusitions in America, secured to our crown by the late dehnitix'e treaty of peace concluded at Paris the loth day of Feb- ruary last: and being desirous that all our loving subjects, as well of our kingdoms as of our colonies in America, may avail themselves, with all convenient speed, of the great benefits and advantages which must accrue therefrom to their connnerce, manufactures, and naviga- tion: we have thought fit, with th(> advice of our privy council, to issue this our royal proclamation, hereby to publish and declaiv to all our loving sid)jects, that we have, with the advice of our said privy coim- cil, granted our letters patent under our great seal of Great Britain, to erect, within the countries and islands ceded and confirmed to us ])y the Slid treaty, four distinct and separate governments, stiled and called bv the names of Quebec. East Florida, West Florida, and Grenada, and limited and bounded as follows, viz: * ***** * Fourthly, The government of (irenada. comprehending the island of that name together with the Grenadines, and the islands of Dominico. 8t. \ iiicent. and Tolxiuo. 284 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMKNTS, ETC. And to the end tliat tlic open ;iiul free tishcry ot" our subjects may he extended to. and carried on u{)oii tlie coast of Labrador and tlie adja- cent islands, we liave thought tit. with the advice of our said ])rivv council, to put all that coast, from the river St. flohn's to Hudson's Streii;hts. toj^'ether with the islands of Anticosti and Madelaint'. and all other smaller islands lying- upon the said coast, luider the care and inspection of our oovernor of Newfoundland. EXTRACT FROM HKITISH STATUTE. IItH (iEOHCiE III, CIlAl'TEU S3 (1774) J^e it enacted by the King's most excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the lords spiritual and temporal, and conmions, in this present parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, That all the territories, islands, and countries in Nortli Anierica^ belong- ing to the crown of (rredt Br'dd'in. '■ * '^ and also all such terri- tories, islands, and countries, which have since the tenth of FchnKini. one thousand seven hundred and sixty-three, been made pai't of the government of Xeii'frador and the said Islands so formerly aiuiexed to the GoviM'nment of Xeio- foiiiidland: And Whereas it is exi)edient that the said Coast of Lah- rador. and the adjacent Islands (except the Islands of 21adelaiji<) should be reannexed to the Government of A^eafoandland;'" Be it therefore enacted, That such Parts of the Coast of Labrador from the Rive S lint John to lludsonh Streights, and the said Island of Anticost MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS, ETC. 285 iuul nil other sniallor Isliiiids so annexed to the Government of Xmo- fintiiilhinil l)v the said Proclamation of the Seventh Day of Octofn'V One thousand seven hundred and sixty three, (exeept the said Islands of Ma(lclaint\) shall be separated from the said (Jovernment oi Lower Qtnadii^ and be ao'ain reannexed to the Govermuent of Xcwfoandland; any Thing- in the said Act passed in the Thirty-tirst Year of His present Majesty's Keiun, or any other Act, to the contrary notwithstanding. XV. And be it further enacted, That it shall be lawful for the said Supreme Court of Judicature^ of the Island of Xi^wfoiindldial to hold Plea of all Crimes and Misdemeanors committed, and of all Suits and Complaints of a Civil Nature arisino- within such Parts of the Coast of Lahi'dilor from the River S'ouit Jo/ik to IIu/'ador, shall l)e and the same are hereby re-annexed to and luade a Part of the said Province of Lou'r/- Canada^ and shall henceforward be sul)ject to the Laws of the said Province, and to none other; and so much of thi^ said recited Acts passed in the Forty ninth Year of the Reign of His late Majesty King George the Third, and in the Fifth Year of the Reign of His present Majesty, as relates to such Parts of the (^oast of L(d>rador as last aforesaid, and the said Island of Anticosti," and other adjacent Islands, shall lie and the same is hereby repealed. « Sic. 26626— AP 19 286 LOCATION OF MINING DISTRICTS IN SOUTHEASTERN ALASKA. The Diirctoi' of the Vnlted States GcoJoijicnJ Survey to the Secretary of State. Departmtnt of the Interior United States Geological Survey Wa.sJiliigtoii, I). 6'., 'June J^^ ^OJ. The flonorable The Secretary of State. Sir: In {U'cordaiice with your i'0([UO.st. 1 send herewith u statement prepared by Alfred H. Brooivs. (ieologist in charge of (xeolooic Work in Alaska, of the mines located and now in operation in that part of the Territory of Alaska known as the h'.siere. Yours with respeet, Chas. D. Walcott, Director. Statement as to Location of ^Lining Districts in Southeaster 7 1 Alaska Department of the Interior United States Geological Suraey Washington, D. ^'., June ^, ''03. Hon. Chas. D. Walcott, Director, JJ. S. Geological Survey. Sir: In accordance with your request, I have the honor to submit herewith a brief statement of the mines now being operatinl in the lisiere of the territoiy of Alaska. Th(^ following list of mining dis- tricts is arranged geographically, beginning at the north. porcupine district. lis district comprises several creeks which are tri])utarv from the h to the Klaheela (Klehini) River, 12 miles above its junction with Thi south _ ^ - / - 7 J the Chilkat. These creeks carry placer gold and extensive exploita- tion and development has been going on in the past -i j'ears. The district is 22 miles distant from tidewater, at the head of Pyramid Harl)or, a branch of Lvnn Canal. BERNERS BAY DISTRICT. Under this heading is grouped a luunber of important gold and sil- ver quartz mines, which are locatinl in the peninsula which stretches to the south between Berners Bay and Lynn Canal. These mines represent heavy investments of ca^jital and have })een large producers for al)out 10 years. JUNEAU DISTHU"r. Under this name is included a large group of important mines lying within 4 or 5 miles of tidewater at Gastineau Channel. The most important of these mines are in Gold Creek, which enters Gastineau Channel at Juneau from the northeast and on Sheep Creek which enters Gastineau Channel from th(» northeast, about .") miles soutlu^ast of Juneau. The Gold Creek mines, which include both placers and gold and silver quartz lodes, have Ixhmi heav\' producers for 20 years. They are all located a\ ithin -t miles of tidewater. LOCATION OF MINING DISTRICTS IN SOUTHEASTERN ALASKA. 287 Tho Sliocp Civok miiuvs inohulo ooUl iiiul silver (|Uiivtz lodes, which have heeii extensively developed mid iiii])ort!int producers for UKiny years. Tho mines are all located within 4 miles of tidewater. SNETTISHAM DISTRICT. This district includes several mines wliich are located close to tide- water, in the peninsula which lies to the south of entrance to Port Snettisham. One group of mines is on the east side of the peninsula, a])out 1 mile southeast of Sentinel Point, and the othei" on the north side of the peninsula, about 2 miles southwest of Sentinal Point. These mines now being- actively developed are chiefly gold and silver l)earing (juartz lodes. Some mining developments have also been made near the north end of Port Snettisham. about latitude 58^ H'. SUMDUM DISTRICT. This district includes a group of mines located on Endicott Arm. The mines developed are gold and siher bearing* quartz lodes. The most important mine of this group is located, on Sumdum Island. Other mining locations are close to tidewater, on the north side of Endicott Arm, northeast of Sumdum Island. A third mining localitj' in this district is also near tidewater on Sanford Cove, a minor inden- tation of the southern shore of Endicott Arm. This cove is about 2 miles southwest of Sumdum Island. WINDHAM BAY DISTRICT. This includes a group of mines which lies close to tidewater on "Windham Bay, which is tributary to Stephens Passage. The most important developments in this district are the so-called Schuck gold plac(n-s. which are located at the mouth of the Schuck River, at the head of AMndham Bay. UNUK RIVER DISTRICT. This comprises a newly developed district, located in the I'lud-c liivei- Valley. 25 or 30 miles from tidewater. The I'nuk River empties into Burroughs Bay. a branch of Behm Canal. The district, which comprises both gold placers and gold and silver bearing- quartz lodes, is being- rapidly ex])loited. KETCHIKAN DISTRICT. This is the southernmost of the mining districts of southeastern Alaska. It includes valuable gold, silvei", and (•opi)er deposits. These are located on Prince of ^^'ales, Gravina and Revilla-Ciigedo islands, as well as on the mainland. Of those on the mainland the most important ones are on Helm Bay, near the southermiiost point of the Cleveland Peninsula. In this region there are a numt)erof producing mines with extensixe equipments. Gohl placers have also l)een found in the K«^tcliikan District, near the head of Boca de Quadra, which is tril)utary from the northeast to Revillagigedo Channel. Very respectfully, AlKUKI) II. P)1{()<)KS. Geologifit in cJtKiye of geologic ^cork In Aliiskn. 288 MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS, ETC. Letters given to Indians hy ofjicvrs of the United States. U. 8. Coast Survf.y Station ''Koii-Klux," Kat-kaijli-too Milage, Clulhiht Eicer., August 7, 1869. Tu-eek, a daughter of Shakes, the well-known Stakeen Chief, and wife of Koh-Klux, the principal Chief of the Chilkahts, bears a good reputation for courage and tinnness, combined with kindness. Dur- ing the absence of her husband upon any undertaking she exercises all his power over the Chilkats, so that it is well to obtain her good will and confidence. George Davidson, Comdg. Exixdition. I hereby certify that the above is a true and correct copy of the original. [seal.] Sol. Kipinsky, Notary Pnhlic in and for the District of AlasJca. Haines, Alaska, May 28, 1903. The bearer of this is Ka-Klutch, the principle Chief of the Chilkat tribe. He is probably the most powerful chief for good or evil among the Kolotians. When he tirst made his appearance at my Head Quarters (in 18()8) his manners and action Avere very haughty and insolent. His ill feelings toward the Americans showed itself very conspicuoush' on many occasions. He was the principal provoker of the difficulty at Sitka on New Year's day, 1869. His confinement in the Guard House on this occasion seems to have wrought almost an entire change in his con- duct. 1 visited his village in the summer of 1865>, with the Hon. Wm. H. Seward, and Avas exceedingly courteously received by him and his tri))e. He is imperious and trustful 1 by nature, but a firm and just course followed in dealing- with him will, 1 think, manage him best. Jeff. C. Davis, Jjrf. Maj. Gen., Corn, of Dept. Steamer Neavheon, Chilh-at Harbor, July Jfth, 1870. I hereb}^ certify that the above is a true and correct copA' of the original. [seal.] Sol. Riitnskv, Notary Puhlic in and frr the District of Alaslxi. Haines, Alaska, May 28th, 190S. U. S. Flagship "Saraxac," Chilcat River, Alaska, July J 1st, 187 J. Koh-Klutch, Hig'h-Chief of Chilcats. visited this ship to-day and was entertained. His maniu>r Avas nu'ld and agreeable, and his unflinching" l)earingand fortitude during an examination made b}" ''Our Medicine- MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS, ETC. 289 man," which imist have necessarily caused him a oi'eat deal of pain, was a subject of general reniai'k. He is at present an invalid, and has our sincere hopes for a speed}' recovery. L. E. CllENEHY, Lunt. W. E. Taylok, Svrgeon {medicine ni Drijml, case of, resulted in lease of Ihit're 42 Dyea: Allejjed Canadian protest against occupancy of, l)y tiie United States. 73 Dyea and Skagway: Laurier's remarks in Parliament regarding 75-76 Elk, meaning of, in Article III of treaty of 1825 28 Evidence, additional Britisli, as to negotiations of 1824-25 strengthens case of the United States 2 Faden's map 15 Considered by Canning as the most authentic 3 Extent to which it figured in the negotiations 7 Faden maps 4 Fur Seal Arbitration: Position of (ireat Britain now is directly oi)posed to her position in 37 Gaillard's survey in 1893-94 20 Geographical data before the negotiators 13 Gold discovered on the Stikine River 54 Gold fields on Stikine found to be bej'ond Russian border 54 Gold yield of Cassiar district in 1875 and 1876 62 Gosnell's statement regarding boundary line on the rivers 60 Healy's deposition shows limits of lisien' .53 testimony as to American occupation of head of Lynn Canal 78 Hudson's Bay Company: British Government acted solely in the interests of 6, 7, 9 Claimed by British Government not to be its representative 49 Considered lisitn-c as belonging to Russia 45 Consulted by (ireat Britain 17 Earnestly sought right to hunt and trap in Usih'e 44, 4.5 Exercised the powers of government within its territories 50 Extent to which it figured in the negotiations 6, 7, 9 Gained no advantage by lease if British line is the correct one 46 Had before it the narratives of Cook, Vancouver, and others 2 Investigation of affairs of, by Parliament in 1857 47 Leasetl territory l)ounded on the south by latitude 54° 40' 19 Martin's testimony as to its relations with the British Govermnent 52 The representative of (ireat Britain 50, 51, 52 Requested to make observations on Eleven's note 5 Was the directing power in the negotiations 49, 50 Suggests chain of mountains as a lioundary .5 Suggests that range of mountains l)e not more than 10 leagues from shores 5 The de facto government west of the Rocky Mountains 49 The real party in interest 3 United States claims that the company was the representative of (ireat Britain 49 Withdraws from lisi^re in 1867 49 {See alxo Lisiere.) Hudson's Bay Company's: Claim against Russia 42 Establishments, supposed inlets comnmnioating with 23 Memorandum to Canning, Se|)teml)er 25, 1S22 2 Memorandum to Canning of .January 13, 1824 3 VI SUBJECT-INDEX TO THE COUNTER CASE. Hudson's Bay C()mi)any's — Cdiitiimed. Page. Post on the Stikine 62 Post more tlian 60 miles uj) the Stikine River 65 Posts marked on Faden's map 4 Posts west of the Rocky Mountains shown on Faden's maji 7 Humphrey's report on proposed boundary survey 57 Hunter claims to have found mountain range described in treaty 65 Hunter's survey and map of Stikine River 64-66 Iddesleigh calls attention to map showing boundary line on the Stikine 67 Inlets, nothing gained l)y Ureat Britain by lease if she owned heads of 45 If, meaning of, in Article III of treaty of 1825 28 Investigation of affairs of Hudson's Bay Company ))y Parliament: Maps showing leased territory 47 Rae's and Simpson's testimony as to extent of leased territory 48 Joint High Commission, British members of, not authorized to bring up question of boundary on Portland Canal 21 Jurisdiction of Russia in the liaiere: As instanced by the McLoughlin murder case 54 As shown by control of Indians 54 Labrador, use of word "coast" in proclamations and laws of Great Britain relating to 33 Langsdorff map of 1803-1805 possibly l)efore the negotiators 8 probably not consulted by the negotiators 13 Lansdowne's declaration respecting the boundary 75 Latitude 54° 40^: Intended as line of southern boundaj-y 11 Stated by Simpson to be the southern boundary of the Iitort the contention of the United States res]iecting the liifih-e 42 Maps: Admiralty chart of 1868 30 Arrowsmith maps of 1833 and 1857 15 A study of 85-87 Before the negotiators 7-8 British Admiralty map of 1865 15 British Admiralty charts of 1868 15, 16 British Columbian and British, illustrating inconsistent British claims. . 85 (Canadian official) cease to show boundary as United States claims since 1888 83 Changes in those emanating from British or Canadian sources 83-84 Explanation of some discrepancies in two United States maps 90 Faden's 4 For seventy-five years after treaty show boundary as claimed l)y the United States 30 Published after the treaty, what a comparison of, shows 16 Pul)lished since treaty corroborate claim of the United States as to southern boundary 15 Quartermaster-General's maj) of 1802 13 Russian copies of Vancouver's charts consulted during the negotiations. 3 United States Coast Survey map of 1867 15 Martin (Peter) case of 58, 64 Martin (R. H.) states that Hudson's Bay Company materially aided Can- ning in the negotiations 49 testimony of, as to tlie relations of the Hudson's Bay Company with (ireat Britain 52 ^ledals conferred by Russia on native chiefs 53 Mendenhall's instructions to United States surveyors 34, 35, 36 iNIills's opini(m as to loss of British rights by treaty of 1871 59 Views as to boundary 84 Mendenhall's views on the boundary (piestion 34, 36 Mines: How affected by new line ])roposed by Great liritain 88 Location and character of 88 Mudm nreiidi of 1898-99 grew out of British note of Feljruary 23, 1898 73 Monopoly of hunting and fur trade in /isirn by the Russians 44 Mountain range described iu treaty, claimed to have been found I)y Hunter. 65 Mountains: Continuous range of, shown on Russian map of 1802, Faden's of 1823, and Vancouver's chart, and one of Arrowsnnth's maps 38 How they are to range witti the sinuosity of tlie coast 5 No range of, parallel to the coast, within 10 leagues, exists 39 Peaks of, are not la crtte ilea moiilagnes, etc 91 Mount St. Elias is not in British territory 41 Navigability (comparative) of Portland and Pearse canals 25-27 Navigation of inland waters not claimalde as of right by citizens of another nation 26 SUBJECT-INDEX TO THE COUNTER CASE. IX Navifratiim of rivers of Alaska: Bernard and Tenterdeu's opinions as to loss of liritisli rijiht to 00 Mills's oi)inion as to loss of British ri^ht to 59 Rijrhts of Great Britain to, lost by treaty of 1S71 59 Nomenclature of mountains shown on Admiralty chart of 1868 30 Neutrality between Kussia and Cireat Britain on the northwest coast in ltion of 2() Did not connnunicate with Hudson's Bay Company's establishments .. 23 Line through, would debar the United States from its territory 26 Line through, would give (ireat Britain control of both shores of Port- land Canal 27 Pearse and Portland canals: Comj)arative navigability of 25-27 Pearse and Wales islamls: Not officially claimed by Great Britain until submission of its Case 22 Storehouses erected by the United States on 20 Strategic value of 27 Pelly, J. H. (See IIuihi>n\^ Bai/ ('o)iip(nii/, and ('orrrsjiOiKleiici .) Perrier Pass, location of 71 Peter Martin case 5S. 64 Physical coast line, definition of -M I'inta, courtesies of commander of, to Ogilvie's surveying party 7!' X SUBJECT-INDEX TO THE COUNTER CASE. Page. Political coast line, description of a 32 Portland and Pearse canals, comparative navigability of 25-27 Portland Canal (See, also, I'urtlnnd Inlet) 11-28 Boundary line to be drawn between, and Blount St. Ellas 56 Boundary on, uiuiuestioned until meeting of Joint High Commission .. 19 British Joint High Connnissiouers not authorized to bring up question of boundary on 21 Character of country along extension of valley of 29 First mention of 12 Head of, may be mouth of a river. 9 Joint survey of 1893 and 1894 began operations at head of 20 Location of, first officially questioned in British Case 25 Marking of boundary at, ancl at other points, believed to be sufficient.. 56 No stated difference of opinion as to location of 22 On Arrowsmith's maps 14 On Faden's map 15 On Vancouver's map 15 Vancouver's evidence as to location of 8 Quotation from Bagot's amended proposal has no bearing on location of. 23 Silence of Cireat Britain for twelve years as to United States claim to boundary on 20 Statement in jL' Univers as to location of . 24 Statement in Wheaton as to location of 24 Strategic value of 27 Terminates in low, marshy land 10 The broad inlet so named in Scott's report 24 The evidence shows it to be " Portland Inlet " 25 What it is not 90 Why no discussion of, is made in the Hudson's Bay Company's corre- spondence 13 Of the negotiators — The real question 12 What the United States contends it to be 15 Of Vau^oiiver, inquiry as to what was, immaterial 1 Portland Inlet: As located by the British Case 19 Bayard's view as to boundary on 20 Line of demarcation enters .• 11 Prince of Wales Island, reason for mention of, in the treaty 11 Protest against boundary shoulksteiu, ]\Iarch 16, 1874 61 From Eckstein, March 20, 1874 61-62 To Treasury Department, April 2, 1874 60-61 Choate, Joseph H. — From Villiers, May 13, 1899 124-125 From Salisbury, May 17, 1899 125 To Salisbury, May 18, 1899 125-127 To Salisbury, May 19, 1899 127-128 From SaHsbury, July 1, 1899 128-129 To Salistniry, August 9, 1899 129-132 To Salisbury, January 22, 1900 138-155 Choquette, A. — From Berry, September 19, 1876 70 To Brodie, September 29, 1876 70-71 Christie, D. — To Dufferin, November 21, 1873 55 Collins, Geoi'ge — Statement of, relative to Leach's survey 73 Colon na, B. A. — To Dawson, November 26, 1888 174 From Dawson, December 1, 1888 175 Cpnant, Charles F. — From Fish, June 24, 1876 74 To Fish, June 27, 1876 74 To Fish, September 16, 1876 76 Dall, ^Yilliam H.— To Bayard, February 13, 1888 94 To Bayard, December 19, 1888 97 Memorandum on Alaskan Boundary 98-108 Supplementary memorandum on Alaskan Boundary 108-113 Darling, Charles M. — To Secretary of State, .^lay 22, 1903 241 Davis, J. Bancroft — From Thorton, July 31, 1873 53 To Thornton, September 15, 1873 53-54 Dawson, George M. — From Colonna, Noveml)er 2(i, 1888 174 To Colonna, December 1, 1888 175 {See also Extracts.) Derby, Earl of — From Thornton, September 27, 1875 68 Dewdney, G. — From Thorn, December 14, 1888 176 To Thorn, December 27, 1888 177 lY INDEX TO THE APPENDIX. Correspondence — Contimu'd. Page. Diekins, E. F.— From Mendenhall, March 22, 1894 278-279 Douglas, J. — From p:tholine, November 12, 1840 9-12 Dufferin, P'.arl of — From Christie, November 21, 1873 .< 55 To Thornton, November 25, 187o 54—55 To Kimberley, February 1 3, 1874 58 From Carnarvon, March 14, 1874 59 From Burpee, June 4, 1874 62-63 To Watson, July 20, 1874 62 From Carnarvon, October 22, 1875 67 {See also Extracts. ) Duncan, Eeverend WilHam — Statement as to settlement founded by, in Alaska, in 1862 282 Eckstein, D. — To Chapman, March 16, 1874 61 To Chapman, :\Iarch 20, 1874 61-62 Etholine, A. — To Lindenberg, July 23, 1840 84-85 To Douglas, November 12, 1840 9-12 Fish, Hamilton — From Kichardson, September 12, 1873 54 From Thornton, December 1, 1873 55-56 From Richardson, December 10, 1873 57-58 To Thornton, December 13, 1873 57 To Thornton, January 2, 1874 58 To Thornton, February 17, 1874 51 From Sawyer, April 25, 1874 60 To Thornton, "Slay 2, 1874 59-60 From Watson, July 30, 1874 63 From Bristow, August 12, 1874 64 To Watson, August 18, 1874 64 From Bristow, September 13, 1875 66 To Bristow, September 23, 1875 67 From Bristow, June 20, 1876 72-73 To Conant, June 24, 1876 74 From Conant, June 27, 1876 74 From Morrill, July 25, 1876 75 To Morrill, July 29, 1876 75-76 From Conant, September 16, 1876 76 Flemer, J. A. — From .Mendenhall, April 9, 1894 '. 280-281 Foster, John W. — To Mendenhall, September 8, 1892 268-269 From Hay, November 4, 1899 121 To Hay, November 7, 1899 122-123 Frelinghuysen, Frederick T. — From West, November 5, 1883 88 To West, November 17, 1883 88 Gaillard, Captain David D. — Description of Pearse and Portland canals 240-241 INDEX TO THE APPENDIX. V Correspondence — Continued. Page. Gortfhakov, Prince — From Reiitern, March IH, 18(57 32-33 Graves, Herliert C. — Report on Portland Canal 237-239 Hall, Colonel William V.— To Secretary of State, ?tlay 21, 1903 ' 240 Hay, John — " To Foster, November 4, 1899 121 From Foster, November 7, 1899 122-123 To White, I)eceinl)er 18, 1902 162 From White, .January 23, 1903 162 From Tittmann, June 3, 1903 174 Helyar, H. O.— To Bayard, March 12, 1886 :- 91 Hovi^ard, General O. O. — From Wood, January 15, 1877 78-81 Hunter, Joseph — From Johnson, :\Iay 18, 1878 82 Humphreys, General A. A. — To Secretary of War, Jamiary 29, 1873 51-52 Jocelyn, Captain S. P. — Report on necessity for survey of boundary 78-80 Johnson, J. — To Hunter, May 18,1878 82 Kimberley, Earl of — From Dufferin, February 13, 1874 58 Kniajevitch, A. — To Russian minister of foreign affairs, March 3, 1859 23 Kupreyanoff, Captain Ivan — From board of directors of Russian American Company, April 17, 1839 <>-9 Lansdowne, Lord — To Raikes, August 18, 1902 156-161 Lindenberg, Lieutenant — From Etholine, July 23, 1840 84-85 ^IcCrary, (ieo. W. — To Secretary of State, May 4, 1877 78 McGrath, J. E. From Mendeuhall, March 24, 1894 279-280 Mendenhall, Superintendent T. C. — From Foster, September 8, 1892 268-269 To Pratt, March 21, 1894 276-277 To Dickins, March 22, 1894 278-279 To Morse, [March 22, 1894 278 To McGrath, March 24, 1894 279-280 To Flemer, April 9, 1894 280-281 To Ritter, April 9, 1894 281 {Si'e also Extracts.) Merriam, C. Hart — Memorandum on "The Beaver " -1'"^ Miles, General Nelson A. — Instructions to Lieutenant Schwatka, April 7, 18S3 89-90 VI INDEX TO thp: appendix. Correspondence — Continued. Page. Moore, Captain William — Report of expedition to Cassiar District, November 29, 1873 85-86 Morrill, L. M.— To Berry, July 14, 1876 69-70 To Fish, July 25, 1876 75 From Fish, July 29, 1876 75-76 From Berry, August 24, 1876 77 From Berry, October 12, 1876 77 From Berry, March 29, 1877 71-72 Morris, William C. — From Callbreath, July 11, 1878 82-83 Morse, Fremont — From Mendenhall, March 22, 1894 278 Xesselrode, Count — Report on lease of lifoundary of Xewfound- land, etc ' 283-284 Report of Select Committee on Hudson's Bay Company 36-46 Simpson, Sir George — Trip through Russian America 35-36 Sumner, Charles — Speech on cession of Russian America 197-199 A'ancouver, George — "Yoyages" — Purpose in exi)loring northwest coast of America, etc 250-253 Webster, Sir Richard — Interpretation of treaty of 1825 1 94-197 Wheat on' s International Law—" Treaty of 1825 " 282-283 Fortniann, Henry F. (>SVe Depositions. ) Gosnell, R. E. {See Extracts.) Greenhow, Robt. • {See Northwest coast.) Halpin, Geo. H. ((See Depositions. ) Healy, John J. {See Depositions.) Hofstad, I. Myrhe. (*S'cp Depositions. ) Hudson's Bay Com[)any: Trading operations in the lislere 1-2 Report of Count Nesselrode on lease of llxiere 3 Reciprocal neutrality with Russian American Company's territories 17-18 Testimony before Select Committee as to jurisdiction exercised by 37-46 Map showing territories claimed by, in 1850 253 Indians: Letters and certificates given to, by Russians 212-214 Letters and certificates given to, by \J. S. officials 288-290 Medals given to, by Russians 214 Keen, James W. {See Depositions.) Labrador: Jurisdiction over coast of 283-285 INDEX TO THP: Al'PKNDIX. XI Laurier, Sir Wilfrod: Page. Remarks in Debater on Alaskan boundary 1 70-1 73 Lease of llslPre: Report of Count Xesselrode on o Cori'espondence between Simpson and Wrangell relative to 4-5 Translation of a portion of Article I of 6 Statenient of provisions of 6-9 renewal of, Correspondence relative to 1 2-14, 21-32 Proposition for, by the United States , 33-35 Letters. {See Correspondence. ) Lisib'e: Description of territory comprised in 7-8; 21 Rental of, to be paid in land-otter skins 8-9 Neutrality of, recii)rocally with British possessions 14-21 Pn iposition of United States to lease or purchase 32-33 Memorandum on lease or purchase by the United States 3.3-35 Sir Richard Webster's definition of meaning of 195 {See also Lease of lisi^re, and Neutrality.) Lynn Canal: American occui^ation of 212-236 Indians at head of, Letters and certificates given to 212-214 Depositions relating to American occupation of 21 7-236 Garside's surveys on 231, 232, 235 Ogilvie's survey of 1887 commencing at head of 214-217 Maps: Wright's, transmitteil to State Department 76 List of 243-250 of Cassiar District, Depositions relative to 229-231, 265-267 of territories claime;ton 58 Survey : of boundary, Necessity foi- 68-69 Agreement of Canada to, by a commission 91-92 Correspondence of 1888 relative to 174-177 Ogilvie's, on Lynn Canal 214-217 Garside' s, on Lynn Canal 231-235 Mendenhall's instructions for 27(j-281 Treasury Department: Instructions of, relative to free navigation of the Stikine Kiver 54, 58 Prohibition by, in 1868 of navigation of the Stikine River by foreign vessels 56 Views of, as to navigation of Stikine River 57-58 Treaties: Treaty of Washington — Free navigation of the Stikine River granted 1 jy 55-58 Treaty of 1903— Correspondence leading to 124-161 Tapper, Sir Charles H. : Remarks in Debates on Alaskan boundary 168-170 Vancouver, Geo. {See Extracts.) Webster, Sir Richard. {See Extracts. ) Welker, P. A. (>SVe Depositions.) () EB 13 1904