IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 I.I 1.25 ;» iiiM -'' m :: ti^ 12.0 M 22 1.4 1.6 ^^^ <^ A omf. /A ^JV'^ o / Photographic Sciences Corporation 33 WEST MAIN ST iEET WEBSTER, NY. 14580 (716) 872-4503 CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICIVIH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques 1980 Technical and Bibliographic Nctes/Notas techniques et bibliographiques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur I I Covers damaged/ D D D D D D Couverture endommagde Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaur^e et/ou pelliculde I I Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque I I Coloured maps/ Cartes gdographiques en couleur Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) I I Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Reli6 avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La reliure serr^e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge intdrieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajoutdes lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6t6 filmdes. Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppldmentaireu: L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a 4t6 possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-Atre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la methods normale de filmage sont indiqute ci-dessous. I I Coloured pages/ D D D D D D Pages de couleur Pages damaged/ Pages endommagdes I j Pages restored and/'or laminated/ Pages restaurdes et/ou pellicul6es Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages d^colordes, tachetdes ou piqudes Pages detached/ Pages ddtachdes Showthrough/ Transparence Quality of print varies/ Quality indgale de I'impression Includes supplementary material/ Comprend du matdriel suppi^mentaire I I Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont 6t6 filmdes A nouveau de fa^on d obtenir la msilleure image possible. Th to Th po of filr Ori be th( sic oti fin sin Ol Th shi TIf wt Ml dif en' bei rig rec mi This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filmd au taux de reduction indiqu6 ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X 26X 30X y 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X ails du >difier une nage The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: Library of the Public Archives of Canada The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. L'exemplaire film* fut reproduit grAce A la gAntkrosit* de: La bibliothAque des Archives publiques du Canada Les images sulvantes ont 6tt reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition at de la nettet* de l'exemplaire film*, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated Impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated Impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed oi illustrated impression. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol -^ (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les exemplaires orlglnsux dont la couverture en papier est imprimie sont fiimis en commenpant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la dernlAre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, salon le cas. Tous las autres exemplaires originaux sont filmte en commenpant par la premiere page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par la dernlAre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. Un des symboles suivants apparaltra sur ia dernldre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbole — ► signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbols V sig.^ifie "FIN". Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent 6tre fiimis A des taux de reduction diffdrents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour Atre reproduit en un seul ciichA, il est film* d partir de Tangle supArieur gauche, de gauche d droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images nAcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la mAthode. irrata to pelure, nd n 32X 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 "^^^ «pPHip I UH.. REVIEW OF THE Alaskan Boundary Question By ALEXANDER BEGG, Author of the History of British Golumbia. Re-printed from the June, July and August numbers of the British Coi^umbia Mining Record for the year Iqoo. In writing a "review" of the Alaskan Boundary question, it will be necessary, in order to arrive at an intelligent view of the subject, to take a retrospective glance at the circumstances connected with the passing of the Treaty, going back as far as September, 1821, when the Emperor of Russia issued an edict or ukase containing regulations relative to trade on the north- west coast of America ; on the eastern coast of Siberia, and the Aleutian, Kurile and other islands of the Pacific. The treaty referred to, which defined the line of demarca- tion between that portion of the continent of North America claimed by Great Britain and Russia, was passed at St. Peters- burg in 1825. Its final location, however, has not as yet been settled, although seventy-five years have elapsed since its pass- mg, except that portion of the line of demarcation from the Arctic Ocean running south along the 141st meridian to the North Pacific Ocean. The balance of the international line, which has now come to be required as the boundary between the United States (Alaska) and Canada (British Columbia), southeasteirly to the southernmost point of Prince of Wales Island (Cape Chacon), is the portion yet in dispute. The ukase occupied nearly ten pages of a closely printed pamphlet as laid before the President of the United States, and contained sixty-three sections. The first section set out by stat- ing that "the pursuits of commerce, whaHng, fishing and other 2 ALASKAN BOUNDARY REVIEW. • industry, on all islands, ports and gulfs, including the whole north-west coast of America to the 45" 50' north latitude, arc all inchided in the edict for the purpose of granting the same exclusively to Russian subjects." The second section "pro- hibits all foreign vessels not only from landing on the coasts and islands belonging to Russia, but, also, does not permit them to approach those coajts and islands writhin less than one hundred Italian miles, without the vessels being subject to con- fiscation, along with the whole cargo." (An Italian mile mea- s\ res 2,025 ystrds.) A writer in the North American Review, (new series, number 37, printed in Boston, 1822,) remarks: "We doubt if preten- sions so extravagant and unfounded — so utterly repugnant to the established laws and usages of nations — have been set up by any government claiming rank among civilized nations since the dark ages of ignorance and superstition, when a bull of the Holy See was supposed to conv«?y the rights of sovereignty over whole continents, even in anticipation of their discovery." * * * * Even the attempts of Spain to usurp the exclusive navi- gation of the South Sea, in the vicinity of her American posses- sions, arbitrary as they were, and violating as they did the in- disputable rights of other nations, must, when examined with reference to the different periods when they were made, yield in absurdity to the claims now before us." President Adams, on receiving the Russian edict, along with a note from the Russian Ambassador, M. de Pcletica, ex- pressed surprise at the extraordinary claim set forth, and inquired if M. de Poletica "is authorized to give explanations of the grounds of right upon principles generally recognized by the laws and usages of nations, which can warrant the claim and regulations contained in the edict?" M. de Poletica, in reply, declared himself "happy to fulfil the task," and wrote a lengthy letter to the Secretary of State, from which it would appear that the edict chiefly related to, "as he said, 'the new reflations adopted by the Russian Aiierican Company, and sanctioned by His Majesty the Emperor, i elative to foreign commerce, in the waters which border upon the estab- lishments of the said company on the north-west coast of America.' " The reply of M. de Poletica, which, according to his prepo- sition of fulfilling the task, was to contain certain historical facts, is published in full in the Review, and is shown to be incorrect and erroneous, in many of the important points which the am- bassador undertook to establish. In his criticisms, the writer in the Review goes on to say: "A few years afterwards, it (Norfolk Sound) was visited for com- the whole :ude, are all I the same :tion "pro- the coasts not permit is than one ject to con- i mile mea- es, number t if preten- pugnant to n set up by IS since the of the Holy Mgnty over sry." * * lusive navi- :an posses- did the in- nined with de, yield in iict, alongf rletica, ex- forth, and mations of ized by the claim and )y to fulfil y of State, ted to, "as A riisrican >r, lelative the «stab- coast of lis prcpo- rical facts, incorrect h the am- )n to say: 1 for com- ALASKAN BOUNDARY REN^EW. 3 merdal purposes, and, abounding in valuable furs, soon became the general resort of all those engaged in that trade. It was frequented by the vessels of Great Britain, France, and the United States several years before the Russians had extended their excursions so far eastward, and it is, therefore, clear that they had no claim on the ground of occupation. If, then, prior to 1799, Russia possessed no rights on this part of the coast, but such as were common to and enjoyed by other nations, we confess," the reviewer contiiues, "ourselves unable to perceive why the establishing of a few hunters and mounting some can- non in the corner of Sitka Bay, should give her the right of retaining an intercourse and interdicting a commerce which had hitherto been as free as air, and prohibiting the approach of vessels of other nations to shores which the navigators of such nations first discovered and explored. The claim of Russia to sovereignty over the Pacific Ocean, north of latitude 51°, on the pretence of its being *a close sea,' is, if possible, more unwar- rantable than territorial usurpations." "We have," the Review writer continues, "the authority of Humboldt for stating, that in 1802, the Russian government limited their territorisd claims to the north of 55'. They are now extended to 51°, and M. de Poletica informs us, that this is only a moderate use of an incontestible right — intimating that the just claims of Russia extend still further south. If these usurp- ations are submitted to, is it improbable that a further use may be made of 'incontestible rights ?' With the ingenuity which that g'^ntleman has displayed, it would not be difficult to extend the Russian claims quite to the borders of California, and establish them there as satisfactorily as he has done to the 51st degree. The Russians have already made a considerable settlement on Spanish territory at Port Bodega in latitude 40°,' and it is pos- sible that, guided by the -"^ame spirit of philanthropy which prompted the dismemberment of Poland, the august Emperor may choose to occupy the fertile but defenceless province of California and annex it to his already extensive dominions. * * * * Great Britain, we apprehend, may see fit to advance claims that will be found to conflict with those of Russia. * * * * * In justice to the memory of her celebrated navi- gfators, Cook and Vancouver, we must declare," continues the reviewer, "that the world is more indebted to their indefatigable labours for a correct knowledge of the coast than to those of all others who have visited it. Her subjects were the first Euro- peans who engaged in the fur trade, and a free access to the interdicted shores, is, at the present time, as important to them as to those of any other pow ir." ALASKAN BOUNDARY REVIEW. A reference to "Captain George Vancouver's voyages of Discovery" in the years i79>'9i-'9i?-'93-'9+ and '95, shows that during the summer of 1794, two of his boats in charge of officers Whidbey and Johnstone had been engaged in exploring and surveying the northwestern :oast of North America, from Cape Spencer to Port Conclusion. They had instructions from Cap- tain Vancouver in concluding the survey, and in the event of the f all adjacent Umits, in the 3 and succes- o the full ex- d to that the "stopping to > crews drawn dischfirge of iities usual on g was served drinking His parties having ss, Frederick, lin Vancouver derick Sound, ^lew Cornwall by discovery, nd islands as was unqnes- he promulga- enting to the sty could not n the ukase, etary ot State British pleni- to proceed to e ukase abro- jreat Britain sis of the in- The Russian nperial Chan- Secretary of and counter- id over two ALASKAN BOUNDARY REVIEW. 5 vears. In a despatch from G. Canning to Sir C. Bagot, dated *20th January, 1824, a letter from Mr. Pelly, chairman of the Hudson's Bay Co., is referred to. It represents that the most southern establishment of Russia on the northwest coast ol America is Sitka, in latitude 57°. Mr. Pelly positively affirms that the Russians have no settlement on the mainland, nor any commerce to the eastward of the coast. In the same despatch Mr. G. Canning remarks: "The questions at issue between Great Britain and Russia are short and simple. The Russian ukase contains two objectionable objections : First, an extrava- gant assumption of maritime supremacy; secondly, an unwar- ranted claim of territorial dominions." ♦ ♦ * Sir Chas. Bagot, on 17th March, 1824, sent a despatch to G. Canning stating "it is with feeling of considerable disappoint- ment that after constant negotiations for more than six weeks, after having gone to the utmost limit of your instructions, and after having taken upon myself to go beyond them, I should, nevertheless, have to acquaint you that I have entirely failed in inducing the Russian Government to accede to what I consider to be a fair and reasonable adjustment of our respective pre- tensions on the northwest coast of America, or the adoption of any line of territorial demarcation which appears to me recon- cilable under the spirit of your instructions, with our legitimate interests in that quarter of the world." "In order that I may put you in complete possession of the whole course of my negotiations upon this subject, and may explain the precise grounds upon which I have felt myself com- pelled to suspend for the present all further proceedings in this business, it will, I fear, be necessary that I should enter into detail, and that I should load this dispatch with several papers which are now become of importance. It was on the i6th of last month that I had my first conference with the Russian pleni- potentiaries. * * * I laid before them Count Leiven's note to you of January 31st, 1823, proposing that the question of strict right should be provisionally waived on both sides, and that the adjustment of our mutual pretentions should be made upon the sole principle of the respective convenience of both countries. * ♦ * This basis of negotiation was willingly accepted by all parties." A proposal was verbally made by Sir Charles Bagot "to make as the boundary, a line drawn through Chatham Strait to the head of Lynn Canal, thence northwest of the 140th degree of west longitude, and thence along that degree of longitude to the Polar Seas." This proposal was taken for consideration by the Russian plenipotentiaries, who at the next conference offered a contra project, which was reduced to writing, and marked F*" " mfifi*mikifm^imm*' 6 ALASKAN BOUNDARY REVIEW. "A." It was, generally speaking, found to be inadmissible. Sir Charles Bagot then submitted a modification of his original pro- posal — marked "B," to be submitted at the next meeting of con- ference. At the next meeting, paper "B" was met by objec- tions, and a paper marked "C" brought in by the Russian pleni- potentiaries, which was replied to by a paper from Sir Charles, nrarked "D," which contained his ultimate proposition, and stated that it never had been affirmed by the plenipotentiaries of His Imperial Majesty, that Russi?. possessed any establishments whatever on the mainland south of 60" or 59° north latitude. Ten days after Sir Charles Bagot had presented paper "D" he was invited to another conference, when he was informed that the Imperial Government had, after anxious consideration taken their final decision, and that they must insist upon the demarca- tion as described by them in the first paper marked "A." Find- ing this to be the case, Sir Charles stated to them that he had ^ready gone far beyond the utmost limit of his instructions, and that he was sorry to say that he must "now consider the ne- gotiations as necessarily suspended, so far, at least, as the ques- tion of territorial demarcation was concerned." "Such has been the course of my last negotiations upon the question, and such the grounds upon which I have thought it my duty to suspend it for the present." On the 1 2th of July, 1824, the Right Hon. G. Canning^] sent another despatch to Sir Charles Bagot stating — "After full consideration of the motives which are alleged by the Russi Government for adher' ig to their last propositions respectiuj the line of demarcatio.i to be drawn between the British an Russian occupancy on the northwest coast of America, and o the comparative inconvenience of admitting some relaxation i the terms of Your Excellency's last instructions, or of leavin the question between the two governments unsettled for an in definite time. His Majesty's government have resolved to author ize Your Excellency to include the south points of Prince o Wales Island within the Russian frontiers , and to take as a lin of demarcation a line drawn from the southernmost point o Prince of Wales Island, from south to north, through Portlan Channel, till it strikes the mainland in latitude 56°; thence fol lowing the sinuosities of the coast along the base of the moun tains, nearest to the sea to Mount Elias, and thence along th 139th degree of longitude to the Polar Sea" (The degree o longitude was afterwards corrected to the 141 st meridian.) Th despatch continues: "The advantages conceded to Russia b the line of demarcation traced out in this convention, are s obvious, as to render it quite impossible that any obl^ jection can reasonably be offered on the part of the Russiar' u F Df n i( h( a ei t fh & le ig ii f in >a re TT ci V n s ALASKAN BOUNDARY REVIEW. idmissible. lis oi meeting met e R^*"^ P^®j"J" [This is done by a process that that line shall in no case be car- °"l>?c;firin and ied further to the east than a specified number of leagues from .roposmon, *uu ^^ ^^^„ ^^^ distance specified in the treaty is ten marine '^^^^oSmpnta cagues from the ocean— and "shall never exceed the distance of y establishments » j j therefrom.'MArticle IV. of Treaty.) orth latitude, ented paper "D" Sir Charles Bagot was succeeded as British plenipotentiary ;« as follows: "Sir,-His Majesty having been graciously TJ ''A'' Find-r***^d ^^ "*"*® y°" ^** plenipotentiary, for .- sidering and i that he had ig"»n€r with the Russian Government a conventi»'i^ for termin- :hem tnai p ^^^ discussions which have arisen out of the promulgation his instructions, ^-^^ Russian ukase of 1821, and for settl" tj th.» resper'lve r <^o"s.*^®^^^^"^ " g. irritorial claims of Great Britain and Russia, on the mrthwest ^^c uh h<»en ^*st of Amc-ica, I have received His Majesty's commands to t"*^ Sd such ^^^^ y°" ^'^ ^®P^^ *o ^*- Petersburg for that t jrpose, and to "^j^ *^"'_ -..c-,»««/il'"^'''h you with the necessary instructions for terminating this ng protracted negotiation. * ♦ * ♦ * The whole nego- b r r ninjyi'^^n gTOws out of the ukase of 1821. * * * So entirely aiid .SUL « A ft^r }iill|so^"tely true is this proposition, that the settlement of the '' "' its of the respective possessions of Great Britain and Rus- on the northwest coast of America was proposed by us, only a mode of facilitating the adjustment of the differences aris- from the ukase, by enabling the Court of Russia, under er of the more comprehensive arrangement, to withdraw, :h less appearance of concession, the offensive pretensions of .t edict. The rights of his subjects to navigate freely in the A t thor-t^*^^ cannot be held as a matter of indulgence from any power, esolved to autn livjng once been publicly questioned it must be publicly ac- bints of Prince off i«jg^d„ ^ 74 P / d to take as a una ,j^ j^ comparatively indifferent to us whether we hasten liernmost point ojp^g^pQj^^ ^1 questions respecting the limits of territorial through rortianc ggggj^^ ^n ^^ Continent of America; but the pretensions e 50 ; thence 10 ■ ,^^ Russian ukase of 1821, to exclusive dominion over the jase ot the moun- .j^^ could not continue longer unrepealed without compell- , /^^^ along tn< ^^ ^^ ^j^^ some measure of public and effective remon- (The degreeo ^^^^ against it." * * * * Th« despatch from the Right tmendian.) ine ^ q Canning, covering the appointment of Stratford Can- ided to Kussia da ^ concludes by stating: "It remains onl/ -n recapitulation jonvention, are sc remind you of the origin and principles of the whole negotia- te t?at any oDj It is not, on our part, essentially a negotiation about limits, irt ot the Kussiar g ^^ demand of the repial of an offensive and unjustifiable iting— "After full id by the Russi sitions respectin n the British am America, a.nd o ome relaxation i Qus, or of leavin: iscttled for an in 8 ALASKAN BOUNDARY REVIEW. arrogation of exclusive jurisdiction over an ocean of unmeas- ured extent; but a demand qualified and mitigated in its man- ner in order that its justice tr; y be acknowledged and satisfied without soreness or humiliation on the part of Russia. * * * We negotiate about territory to cover the remonstrance upon principle. But any attempt to take undue advantage of this voluntary facility, we must oppose. If the present prpject is agreeable to Russia we are ready to conclude and sign the treaty. If the territorial arrangements are not satisfactory we are ready to postpone them ; and to consider and sign the essen- tial part, that which relates to navigation alone, adding an article stipulating to negotiate about territorial limits hereafter. But we are not prepared to defer any longer the settlement of that essential part of the question ; and if Russia will neither sign the whole convention, nor that essential part of it, she must not take it amibs that we resort to some mode of recording in the face of the world our protest against the pretentions of the ukase of 1821, and of effectually securing our interests against the possibility of its future operations." Mr. Stratford Canning, before proceeding to St. Peters- burg, as plenipotentiary to succeed Sir G. Bagot, was furnished with a royal diplomatic letter of introduction from His Britan- nic Majesty, King George IV., which doubtless had a beneficial effect on the success of his mission. The royal letter was as follows : "His Majesty King George to the Emperor of Russia : "Sir: My Brother, — In pursuance of your Imperial Maj- esty's invitation to nominate a plenipotentiary to assist on my part in the conference which your Imperial Majesty is desirous of holding at St. Petersburg for considering a plan of pacification between the Ottoman Porte, and the Greek Provinces, I have selected for that special commission, the Right Honourable Stratford Canning, a member of the Privy Council, late my en- voy extraordinary to the United States of America, when cir- cumstances which have no doubt been already stated to Your Imperial Majesty, by Your Imperial Majesty's ambassador at my court, and which will be more fully explained to Your Im- perial Majesty by Mr. Stratford Canning himself — oblige me to hesitate in taking a part in those deliberaiions. Being, how- ever, equally animated with a sincere desire to ccme to a com- plete understanding with Your Imperial Majesty on the import- ant subjects to which these conferences have related, I have still determined to direct Mr. Stratford Canning to proceed to your court for the purpose of explaining to Your Imperial Maj- esty, with perfect frankness, my sentiments thereupon. He is authorized to conclude certain other negotiations which have • ALASKAN BOUNDARY REVIEW. 9 been some time pending with Your Majesty's government, re- lating to the navigation of the Pacific and to the boundaries of our possessions on the northwest coast of America; and the experience I have had of his talents and zeal for my service, as- sure me that he will render himself agreeable to Your Imperial Majesty. "I request that Your Imperial Majesty will give ciedence to all he shall say to you on my part, more especially when he shall reiterate to Your Imperial Majesty the assurances of my earnest desire to cement more and more the union and good understanding which have so long and happily subsisted be- tween our two crowns. "With sentiments of invariable friendship, I am, sir, my brother, "Your Imperial Majesty's Good Brother, MANU REGIA. GEORGE R. Carlton Place, 8th December, 1824. To My Good Brother, the Emperor of All the Russias. Mr. Stratford Canntmg, on February 17th, 1825, for- warded a despatch to Mr. G. Canning containing the treaty which had been concluded and signed on the i6th of February. Very slight changes were made in the convention. The line of demarcation along the strip of land on the northwest coast of America, assigned to Russia, Mr. Stratford Canning states, "is laid down in the convention agreeably to your directions. * * * * The instance in which you will perceive that I have most availed myself of the latitude afforded by your instruc- tions .to bring the negotiations to a satisfactory and prompt conclusion, is the division of the third article of the new project, as it stood when I gave it in, into the 3rd, 4th and 5th articles of the convention signed by the plenipotentiaries. ***** The second paragraph of the 4th article, had already appeared parenthetically in the 3rd article, of the project, and the whole of the 4th article is limited in its signification and connected with the article immediately preceding it by the first paragraph.'.' Again, Mr. Stratford Canning states to George Canning: "You ai e aware, sir, that the articbs of the convention which I con- clude, depend for their force entirely on the general acceptance of the tertns in which they are expressed." The 3rd, 4th and 5th articles of the treaty forwarded by Mr. Stratford Canning are as follows : "III. The line of demarcation between the possessions of the high contracting parties upon the coast of the continent and the islands of America to the northwest, shall be drawn in the manner foUov/ing: Commencing from the southernmost point ;o ALASKAN BOUNDARY REVIEW. of the island called Prince of Wales Island, which point lies in parallel of 54 degrees, 40 minutes north latitude, and between the 131st and 133rd degree of west longitude (meridian of Greenwich), the said line snail ascend to the north along the channel called Portland Channel as far as the point of the con- tinent where it strikes the 56th degree of north latitude ; from this last mentioned point, the line of demarcation shall follow the summit of the mountains situated parallel to the coast, as far as the point of intersection of the 141st degree of west longi- tude (of the same meridian) ; and finally from the said point of ' intersection, the said meridian line of the 141st degree, in its prolongation as far as the frozen ocean, shall form the limit be- tween the Russian and British possessions on the continent of America to the northwest. "IV. With reference to the line of demarcation laid down in the preceding article, it is understood : "First. That the island called Prince of Wales Island shall belong wholly to Russia. "Second. That wherever the summit of the mountains which extend in a direction parallel to the coast, from the 56th degree of north latitude to the point of intersection of the 141st degree of west longitude shall prove to be at the distance of more than ten marine leagues from the ocean, the limit between the British possessions and the line of coast which is to belong to Russia, as above mentioned, shall be formed by a line parallel to the windings of the coast, and which shall never exceed the distance of ten marine leagfues therefrom. "V. It is moreover agreed that no establishment shall be formed by either of the two parties within the limits assigned by the two preceding articl ;s to the possessions of the other ; consequently British subjects shall not form any establishment either upon the coast or upon the border of the continent com- prised v/ithin tlie limits of the Russian possessions, as desig- nated in the two preceding arricles ; and in like manner no estab- lishment shall be formed by Russian subjects beyond the said limits. "IX. The liberty of commerce shall not apply to the trade in spirituous liquors, in fire-arms or other arms, gunpowder or other warlike stores, the high contracting parties, reciprocally engaging not to permit the above mentioned articles to be sold or delivered in any* manner whatever, to the natives of the country." • On the receipt of the trepty duly executed from Mr. Strat- ford Canning the Right Hon. G. Canning under date April 2nd, 1825, acknowledged the same as follows: "Sir: Your dis- patches were received on the 21st March. Having laid them be- ' I » ALASKAN BOUNDARY REVIEW. II • \ I fore the King, I have received His Majesty's commard to ex- press His Majesty's particular satisfaction at tEe conclusion of the treaty respecting the Pacific Ocean and northwest coast of America, in a manner so exactly conformable to your instruc- tions, and to direct you to express to the Russian Government the pleasure which His Majesty derives from the amicable and conciliatory spirit manifested by that government in the com- pletion of tiiat transaction." The treaty having been completed and accepted as satis- factory by each of the high contracting parties, the occupancy of the northwest coast of America was thenceforward between the Hudson's Bay Company and the Russian Company — ^the former with headquarters at Fort Vancouver, on the Columbia River (transferred to Victoria, Vancouver Island, in 1843 — ^^^ original name, "Fort Camosun," was continued until 1846, when it was named Victoria) ; the Russian Company had headquarters at Sitka. The two companies managed their affairs without much friction under the treaty. About the year 1838, for mutual convenience, a lease was granted by the Russian governor at Sitka, to the Hudson's Bay Company of all rights and privileges possessed by Russia for an annual rental of two thousand land- otter skins. This arrangement was continued between the fur companies until about the time of the purchase of Russian Am- erica by the United States, in 1867. As soon as Secretary of State Seward obtained possession of the Russian territory, he had the Russian flag at Sitka lowered and the United States "Stars and Stripes" hoisted in its stead. For some time after the purchase of Alaska from Russia, public affairs in British Columbia were in a state of transition, from the Colonial government to that of Confederation ; so that but little attention was paid to what was going on in the remote and almost unknown regfions of Alaska. The federal government did not show very much interest in having the international boundary line defined and settled. British Columbia was not in a position to take the initiative, and her leading men had to be content with making representations to the Dominion Govern- irent. In 1885, the late Mr. T. F. Bayard, then United States Sec- retary of State, revived public interest in the subject, by apply- ing to Lord Salisbury, through the United States ambassador at the London Legation, for concurrence in appointing a com- mission to define the Alaskan boundary, as had been recom- mended by President Grant in 1872. Loul Salisbury concur- red in the appointment as requested. Colonel D. R. Cameron, R.A., was requested in March, 1886, to report on the boundary question. His report was completed September, if 86. 13 ALASKAN BOUNDARY REVIEW. The 'Communication to Lord Salisbury from Ambassador Phelps was chiefly an echo of Mr. Bayard's letter, requesting concurrence in the appointment of a commission to define the Alaskan boundary. This document now becomes specially im- portant, inasmuch as it embodies Mr. Bayard's views of the line, of demarcation from its commencement at the southernmost point of Prince of Wales Island, and as those are the views advocated bv the United States as being the boundary line set forth in the treaty, viz., via Portland Canal, to the 56th parallel of notth latitude. On the other hand, British subjects in British Columbia and elsewhere in the Dominion of Canada, base their views on the wording of the treaty, and on the line of direction stated therein, as outlined by the Right Hon George Canning in his despatch to Sir Charles Bagot, July, 12th, 1824, and enlarged in accordance with Mr. Stratford Canning's instructions of Decem- ber 8th, 1824, in connection with his letter to the Emperor of Russia from His Britannic Majesty, George IV., which, un- doubtedly, with the addition of the whole of Prince of Wales Island bei'ig conceded to Russia, had a pacific influence in ren- dering the treaty acceptable to the Russian court. Mr. Bayard probably expected that his route would pass unchallenged, when he rema:-ked that his conviction was "that it was the intention of the negotiators that the boundary line should directly follow the broad natural channel of Portland Channel, midway between the shores, and extend, if need were, inland in the same direction until the range of hills should be reached at or near the 56th parallel." "It is not," he continues, "therefore conceived that this water part of the boundary line can ever be called in question between the two governments." It may be remarked here that there was no such channel n>arked on any of Captain George Vancouver's maps or charts. Portland Canal was so named by him and referred to in his "Voyages" published in 1798, under the authority of the British government. Another edition of Vancouver's Voyages was pub- lished in 1801, and the change from Portland Canal to Port- land Channel is made in that edition without any remark or au- thority. The substitution of Portland Canal for Portland Chan- nel has caused the crucial difficulty in reconciling the description of the line of demarcation as given in the treaty. According to Mr. Bayard's interpretation, and also to that of Colonel Cam- eron, the line would proceed due east, instead of north from Cape Chacon, to reach Portland Canal. The Right Hon. G. Canning in his dispatch to Sir Charles Bagot, describes the line, as "run- ning from SOUTH to north, to the 56th parallel of north latitude ; so, therefore it appears, the description of the line of demarca- ^^ ALASKAN BOUNDARY REVIEW. 13 tion from Cape Chacon to the 56th parallel, given by Sir Charles Bagot in statement "D," together with the confirmation of the same by G. Canning in his -lespatch of 12th July, 1824. furnish proof that the framers of the treaty applied the name Portland Channel to Clarence Strait; Lut as the line of demarcation, ac- cording to Sir C. Bagot's iescription, had to leave Clarence Strait, on reaching Duke of York Island, to meet the require- ments of the treaty, and must proceed east\vard and follow Ern- est Sound until the coast of the continent was reached at 56 de- grees; the combined Clarem-e Strait and Ernest Sound, there- fore form the channel described in the treaty, which was called Portland Channel — in conformity with the treaty, but which would have been impracticable in connection with Mr. Bayard's or Col. Cameron's line of demarcation. Article IV. of the treaty modified and annulled several pro- positions made before the suspension of negotiations by Sir G. Bagot. which were allowed to drop. Amongst those were the zealous efforts of the Russi i.a plenipotentiaries to obtain Port- land Canal as a portion of the eastern boundary line. The dip- lomaftic action of Mr. Stratford Canning in connection with the letter of King George IV. foiled the expectations of the Rus- sian plenipotentiaries, and left them no option but to sign the treaty as made out in convention. This was accomplished by the concession of the whole of Prince of Wales Island to Rus- sia. It swept away many difficulties and left the terms of the treaty clear and capable of reasonable interpretation. It also pointed out a practicable water boundary from the s6th parallel of latitude where the line of demarcation reached the continent in accordance with the treaty, ten leagues from the ocean. To continue the line of demarcation f-rom the point on the continent at the 56th degree,, towards the intersection of the 141st meridian near Mount SHas, it would be necessary to re- trace westward through Ernest Sound, the former line from Cape Chacon along the east coast of Prince of Wales Island, and proceed along the extended line northward to the end of the itlai ; ':en marine leagues from the ocean, and thence northerly between islands Kuiu and Kupreanof to Prince Frederick Sound, and on reaching the 57th degree of latitude proceed west to Chatham Striit, which co ild be followed to lev Strait or to Taylor Bay for convenience of landing on the strip of land pro- vided on the continent within ten marine leagues from the ocean to the intersection of the 141st meridian. In an article on Ihe Alaskan Boundary, which appeared in November (1899) number of the National Geographic Magazine the Hon. John W. Foster, ex-Secretary of State for the United States, is reported as stating that "much of the difficulty on 14 ALASKAN BOUNDARY REVIEW. reaching an agreement on this point (the correct location of the boundary) grew out of the imperfect geographic knowledge of the period.'^ That need not follow, for Mr. Foster admits and writes that "in 1792-95, George Vancouver, under the direction of the Admiraltv, made the first accurate and scientific survey of the northwest coast of America, and his charts were published in 1798. These charts were for more than a generation the basis and source of information of all maps of that region." Mr. Foster, delineating the first section of the treaty of '825. quotes Article III. and states, it provides that "commenc- ing from the southernmost point of the island called Prince of Wales Island, which lies in the parallel of 54 degrees 40 minutes north latitude * * * the said ((boundary) 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." The foregoing quotation from the treaty should be enough to satisfy Mr. Foster, that as the treaty expressly and plainly says, the boundary should commence at the southernmost point of Prince of Wales Island and shall ascend to the north, etc., it is impossible to reach the 56lh degree on the continent by the line indicated in the treaty by going east to Portland Canal, which is not mentioned in the treaty ; neither is there any auth- ority in the treaty of 1825 .0 commence the boundary line at Cape Muzon as it has been drawn on the United States ofKdal charts and maps. Althougfh Cape Muzon is situated on Dall Is- land west of Prince of Wales Island it may yet be claimed by Great Britain as belonging to Queen Charlotte Islands, immedi- ately opposite across Dixon Entrance. "The United States holds," Mr. Foster further states, "that under this provision the line starting from the extremity of Prince of Wales Island, shall enter the broad, deep, and usually navigated opening of Portland Canal * * * and pass up to its head, and thence on the continent to the s6th degree of lati- tude." There is nothing in the treaty to indicate such a course ; besides, the opening of Portland Canal (or channel as Mr, Foster is pleased to name it) is seldom navigated, as there is no trade in that direction. In the same paragraph Mr. Foster undertakes to define "the present contenti m of Great Britain," which he says is understood to be "that the line from the extremity of Prince of Wales Island should enter the tortuous and narrow channel, now known on the British Admiralty charts as Pearse Canal, and thence up Portland Canal to the 56th degree ; thus placing Wales, Pearse, and a few smUl islands in British territory." No such contention has ever been published or advocated by any party having authority in Can? da or Great Britain to ALASKAN BOUNDARY REVIEW. 15 adopt such a route, which is entirely opposed to the wording of the treaty; and the statement or contention said to be held by the United States, that the line should "enter the broad, deep and usually navigated opening of Portland Canal, etc' is entirely fallacious.' Neither have those who have examined the ijuestion in an unbiased manner, ever thought of the boundary line going east by way of Pearse Canal or by Portland Canal. The conten- tion of British subjects who have studied and become acquainted with *his boundary question, is, that the line should from Cape Chacon, follow Clarence Strait north, nearly along the 132nd meridian, and in accordance with the description g^ven in the treaty, until opposite Ernest Sound, when it runs eastward through Ernest Sound, until it reaches the coast of the conti- nent at 56 degrees, as specified in the treaty; thence returning westward to tha boundary already outlined from Cape Chacon, along the east coast of Prince of Wales Island, it follows the coast of the island to its norchern end ; thence following a con- ventional water boundary, ten marine leagues from the ocean as i-equirad by the treaty until the continental shore oi the North Pacific is reached, and then along that coast, ten marine leagues from the ocean, to the 141st meridian, and thence along that meridian to the Arctic Ocean. This brings us to a late date in the review of this boundary question. The Joint Commission which had been appointed to de- termine the line between Alaska and Canada met at Quebec and discussed the question for weeks, without being able to agree on a settlement, so they adjourned sine die. They next met at Washington, D.C., in February, 1899; but found they were still unable to agree on the question. The British commissioners proposed it should be referrt-d to arbitration and that an "arbi- tral tribunal" be immediately appointed to consist of three jur- ists of repute, one on the part of Great Britian, one on the part 01 the United States, and of a third jurist to be selected by the two persons so nominated, *o be governed by the following rules : (a.) "Adverse holding or prescription during a period of fifty years shall make a good title. The arbitrators may deem exclusive political control of a district, as well as actual settle- ment thereof, sufficient to constitute adverse holding or make title by prescription." (b.) "The arbitrators may recognize and give eflFect to lights and claims resting on any other ground whatever valid accordmg to international law, and on any principles of interna- tional law which the arbitrators may deem applicable to the case, and which are not m contravention of the foregoing rule " 5 16 ALASKAN BOUNDARY REVIEW. (c.) "In determining the boundary line, if territory of one party shall be found by the tribunal to have been at the date of this treaty in the occupation of the subjects or citizens of the other party, such effect shall be gfiven to such occupancy as rea- son, justice, the principles of international law, and the equities of the case shall, in the opinion of the tribunal require." The commissioners of the United States accepted the fore- going proposals made as the basis of adjustment, but desired the rules modified as follows : Rules (a) and (b) to stand as submitted, "But (c) to read as follows : "In considering the 'coast' referred to in said treaties, mentioned in Article III, it is understood that the coast of the continent is intended. In determining the boundary line it terri- tory of one party shall be found by the tribunal to have been at the date of this treaty in the occupancy of the subjects or citizens of the other party, such effect shall be given to such occupation as reason, justice, and the pnnciples of international law shall, in the opinion of the tribunal, rec^ aire ; and all towns and settle- ments on tide water, settled unde*- the authority of the United States and under the jurisdiciion of the United States at the date of this treaty, shall remain within the territory and jurisdiction of the United States." In reply the British commissioners stated that they were "absolutely unable" to accept the change in rule (c), and said: "In considering th* 'coast' referred to, while it was probably intended by this clause that the line should be drawn upon the continent, the language used is open to misconception." They also objected to the words added "that all towns or settlements" on tide water, settled under the authority of the United States, etc., as being a marked and important departure from the rules of the Venezuela boundary reference, and could not be adopted. Referring to the arbitral tribunal proposed by the United States commissioners, which was to consist of six impartial jurists, three on the part of Great Britain, and three on the part of the United States — the United States comissioner. were of opinion that the selection of an umpire should be made from the American continent. It was finally agreed by and between the commissioners that all subjects before the Joint Commission should be referred to their respective governments. The com- mission then adjourned and separated. Since the appointment of the Joint Commission of the V/ashington Convention of 1892, which was formed "with a view tf' the ascertainment of the facts and data necessary to the per- manent delineation of the boundary line from latitude 54 degrees 40 minutes northward to the 141st degree of longitude, in ac- cordance with the spirit and intent of the existing treaties in ^ ALASKAN BOUNDARY REVIEW. «7 IS regard to it between Great Britain and Russia, and between the United States and Russia," great and important changes have taken place in those northern regions. The valley of the Yukon has been found to be one of the richest gold producing districts in the world. Lynn Canal, as the most available route to the Yukon country, has been adopted, with Skagway as the gateway to the Klondike and Dawson. Hundreds of thousands of min- ers and others crowded there in 1897-8, in the face of extreme danger and difficulty. In the meantime another gold mining district was found in the northern part of Cassiar, British Columbia, near Atlin and Teslin Lakes. A prospecting party, by way of Juneau, came through there in 1898 to Atlin Lake and discovered, in that neighbourhood rich gold diggings. Other oarties soon follow- ed, and before winter set in, over $100,000 had been mined. An Act of the Legislature of British Columbia (the Alien Act) was passed prohibiting miners not subjects of Great Britain from gold mining in British Columbia under cer- tain restrictions. This prevented a large number of intending niiners from taking up locations in the Atlin district, and limited the output ot 1899; yet it is computed 10 have reached lully one and a half million dollars. Intending miners, therefore, took up claims in the Porcu- pine district, within the boundary strip claimed by the United States. They made their healquarters at a small Indian village, Klukwan, fifteen miles from tide water, at the head of Chilcat Inlet, a branch of Lynn Canal. A modus vivendi has been passed on the Tlchini River, as a temporary boundary, as claims do not cross from one side of the river to the other. Neither has this temporary boundary any bearing on the main questioii of the 1825 boundary line proper, which must be left to future discus- sion and arrangement. A modus vivendi has also been passed at Dyea Pass and White Pass, at the summit — for similar pur- poses. So the matter rests at present, with the exception, however, that United States subjects continue to squat on locations for mining and fishing in and on the island Revilla Gigedo and other islands in that locality, which seems to add to and intensify the complications and difficulties of a final settlement of the bound- ary dispute. Although Hon. ex-Secretary of State Foster stated that **much of the difficulty of reaching an agreement on the correct boundary line grew out of the imperfect geographical knowledge of the period," an investigation of the circumstances shows by reference to Capt. Vancouver's maps and charts, that Mr. Fos- ter's assertion cannot be supported. For instance, the descrip- • \ > i8 ALASKAN BOUNDARY REVIEW. tion of Admiralty Island and the neighbouring continental shores point out most distinctly that along the precipices, inlets, and glaciers, was no suitable place for a boundary line. The modern engineers and surveyors of the Joint Commission prov- ed this clearly. They could not travel over those places, and were obliged to call in tLe aid of photography to arrive at the heights and distances of the region. Sir Charles Bagot, and the Home Secretary had Vancouver's maps, charts and descriptions before them, and so outlined the line of demarcation between Russia and Great Britain, according lo *he treaty, at the distance of ten marine leagues from the ocean. To make their meaning clear, they indicated a land mark on the continent at the 56th degree of latitude, and gave the whole of Prince of Wales Island to Russia. As shown in Vancouver's Atlas, sheet 7, the waters of the Pacific Ocean washed Prince of Wales Island, from Cape Cha- con, the southernmost portion of that island, along its eastern shore; following the northern shore and turning southward at Point Baker, the name "Duke of Clarence Strait" is given along the island from Cape Chacon until the 56th degree of latitude is reached opposite Cape Decision. On the chart referred to it is recorded that Captain VancDuver passed this point 22nd Sep- tember, 1793, and 24th Augu't, 1794. But the treaty mentions that the boundary line is required lo reach latitude 56 degree at the coast of the continent. This is accomplished by passing along Clarence Strait and Ernest Sound to the coast. In Sir Charles Bagot's description (in state- ment "D") of the proposed line, to the Russian plenipotentiaries, which is recorded in a despatch to Mr. G. Canning, he says : "It would appear that a line traced from the southern extremity of the Straits named Duke of Clarence Sound, by the middle of those straits, to the middle of the straits that separate the islands of the Prince of Wales and the Duke of York, and the islands situate to the north of the said islands ; thence toward the east by the middle of the same strait to the continent, and thence pro- longed in the same direction and manner already proposed by His Majesty's plenipotentiary to Mount Elias, or to the inter- section of the 140th (since changed to 141st degfroe of longitude) would form a line of demarcation which would conciliate, per- haps in a satisfactory manner, the reciprocal interests, present and future, of both Empires in this part of the globe." There is no mention of Portland Canal or going east in the foregoing description. Further, Mr. Canning in his instructions to Sir Charles, dated July 12th, 1824, distinctly says: "His Majesty's government have resolved to authorize Your Excel- lency to consent to include the south points of Prince of Wales ► ,; . ALASKAN BOUNDARY REVIEW. 19 , Island within the Russian frontiers, and to take, as a line of de- marcation, a line drawn from the southernmost point of Prince of Wales Island, from south to north through Portland Channel, till it strikes the mainland in latitude 56 degrees. The route was named Portland Channel, presumably, as Claience Strait, as we have seen, was left opposite Ernest Sound. It would be neces- sary, therefore, at the point on the coast of the continent, that a new departure should be made to reach the intersection of the line with the 141st meridian, near Mount Elias. It would appear from Article IV. of the treaty that Strat- ford Canning decided on the boundary from that point, being drawn ten marine leagues from the ocean. The easiest, fairest and most convenient plan to do that would be to retrace 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 Wales Island, as already outlined in this review. Such an arrangement would obviate the attempt of forming a boundary line along the fron- tier of the continent, which would prove useless and impractic- able. It would leave the frontier of British Columbia intact, and furnish the United States (instead of Russia) with ample facili- ties to carry on any industry along the large islands fringing the Pacific Ocean and along the strip of continent, extending about five deg^rees of longitude from Glacier or Taylore Bay, bey nd Icy Strait. It would give them any number of excellent harbours, and the control of valuable fisheries and the timber on Prince of Wales Island, nnd the other ocean frontier islands north to the continent at Cross Sound The arrangement was made between two friendly powers, and after the treaty was signed, was acknowledged to be satisfactory to each — and it should be so to the present day, although many United States sympathizers do not seem to interpret the treaty in that light. Political feeling runs very high m the United States and it nay ' - that this boundary question is used by the United States presb .0 influence parties pro or con as the case may be. It has been discussed by their leadinjr writers in the New York, Chi- cago, San Francisco and other papers. The Seattle papers, be- ing our nearest neighbours have been the most lively. The Seattle Chamber of Commerce has discussed very forcibly what they call "the British Claims." They, of course, advocate that the boundary line should be run along Portland Canal. The Victoria Colonist, in 1895, referring to a report of the Seattle Chamber of Commerce, says : "From the language of the e - ^y it w'l! be seen that the boundary commences at the most south- ernmost poinc of Prince of Wales Island and then runs north until it reaches a point on the mainland at the 56th degree of 30 ALASKAN BOUNDARY REVIEW. I north laJitwdo. Now, if any member of the Seattle Chamber of Commerce looks at the map drawn by Vancouver or anyone else, and starting north from the most southern point of Prince of Wales Island, and keeping on in that direction until he reaches the 56th parallel of latitude, he will certainly trace along a channel, but not what is called Portland Canal, nor will he go near the Portland Canal, or the line which our good neighbours contend is the true boundary line. It is easy to give a new name to a channel, or to mistake one channel for another, but the points of the compass have always the same name, and are al- ways in the same direction. Our contemporary and those who contend for the line now assumed to be the true one, must see that they start in the wrong direction. What would be thought of the 'surveyor who, when he was instructed to start from a point clearly defined northwards, ran his line due east, and after- wards had the inpudence to contend that the line was right, and according to his instructions? Let our American friends "stick tc the point" — Point Chacon — and go north as the treaty en- joins from that point, and they will find they will not get near the line they are trying to :nake the people believe is the right one. Besides, Portland Canal is not mentioned in the treaty. We trust we have been explicit enough in this article. We contend that our American friends start in the wrong direction ; and we need not tell them that in beginning to run a line it is of the utmost importance that the compass points exactly in the direction the description requires. The least variation the one way or the other vitiates the whole line and the work must be done over again. In this Alaska line our friends are something like 90 degrees astray." The House of Representatives of the State of Washington, in 1895, passed the following resolution, calculated to arouse anything but peaceful feelings amongst the people, relative to the fair settlement of the Ala-.kan boundary question. It reads : "Whereas England, with he- usual cupidity anu avarice, and pursuant of her time-honou ed custom of attempting, at all haz- ards, to get control of all 1 ewly developed sources of wealth, in whatsoever country situi ^d, and to appropriate to her own benefit the present and p, spective commerce of the seas, whether rightfully or otherwi -, has asserted claims to harbours, bays and inlets, through whic the greater portion of the com- merce and trade of and wit! the territory of Alaska must be carried on, and which, of right, belongs to the United States. "And whereas the United States will be robbed and des- poiled of the trade and co.nmerce of a veritable empire, and suffer a diminution of the wealth with which nature has en- ALASKAN BOUNDARY REVIEW. 31 dowed said territory, II the claims and policy of Great Britain as aforesaid shall prevail : "Therefore, be it resolve 1 by the House of Representatives of the State of Washington, the Senate concurring, that our members of Congress be requested, and our Senators instructed, to use all honourable means, that the righitul claims of the United States relative to said harbours, bays and inlets, be scrupulously maintained, and that an unequivocal policy on the part of the United Slates government in relation thereto, be fully carried out." The oditor of the Colonist, after quoting the resolution, quietly remarks: "This should be preserved as a literary and legislative curiosity. It is imazing that men, supposed to be intelligent and sensible, should stultify themselves by voting for such a resolution as the above. Those who supported it, we suppose, thought it would tickle the ears of ignorant and anti- British electors, for it seems there is nothing too absurd for the average American legislator to do or say, in order to in- crease his popularity. England, as far as we have heard, had done nothing ♦Dwards rectifying the boundary line between British Columbia and Alaska. The complaint in Canada is, that Great Britain on these boundary questions is a good deal too slack ; that she has allowed wide-awake American diplomatists to take advantage of her. With respect to this matter of the Alas- kan boundary she seems to oe quite apathetic. The matter has been quietly discussed in this province lately, but all that has been said is that Great Britam should take measures to ascer- tain the true boundary line, and not allow herself to lose terri- tory through the carelessness or the ignorance of officials, either British or United States. The members of the legislature of the State of Washington may make themselves easy about the Alaskan boundary. The British want no more territory than is justly and legally theirs, and that they believe they will get with- out trouble when the two governments concerned, go about settling the boundary question m earnest. If the coasts, har- bours, bays and inlets claimed by Great Britam do not belong to her, they will be readily surrendered when the day of settlement comes, let the State of Washington politicians resolute as they may. If they are not on the British side of the line British sub- jects are quite content that ihey should remain in the posses- sion of the United States. That is all there is about it." The librarian of the Province of British Columbia in a paper from him in the Canadian Magazine said : "Every circumstance and reasonable assumption favoured the contention that the Portland Canal of Vancouver's chart is not the Portland Channel •meant in the Treaty. A line through Portland Canal is wholly 23 ALASKAN BOUNDARY REVIEW. inconsistent with and contradictory of the general terms of the clause in question. Its acceptance in determining the boundary leads to an absurdity. Great Britain, therefore, is not bound to accept it as the boundary line." The Canadian Gazette, London, January 30th, 1896, has the following editorial remarks : "We publish this week a memor- andum by Mr. Alexander Begg, who has given careful study to the records here in London, which seems to show that the mean- ing of the treaty of 1825 is clear in determining that the bound- ary line, starting from the southernmost point of Prince of Wales Island, shall run northward along the channel which we now know as Clarence Strait, but which the treaty describes as Portland Channel. To assume, as United States maps do, that the channel meant is Portland Canal, an inlet into the British mainland, is not only to contradict the plain meaning of the treaty, but to make nonsense of the explanatory statements of Sir Charles Bagot and Mr. Canning, at the time of the nego- tiation of the treaty. We know no reason why Canada should handover three million P'^res of land, and an all-important ctia- tcgic position to the United States, when the treaty clearly stipu- lates that she should retain them." On the 5th of March, following, the Canadian Gazette re- turned to the subject, and said: "General W. W. Duffield, superintendent of the United States coast geodetic survey, re- plies to the statements in the Canadian Gazette of January 30th above quoted." The editor says: "I propose to examine the reply of General Duffield, for, as I shall show, it only strength- ens the case for an immediate inquiry into the circumstances, whereby United States maps claim as United States territory three million acres of land in a position of high strategetic im- portance on the Pacific Coast ; which the treaty of 1825 assigned beyond doubt to British sovereignty." General Duffield is stated to have said in his reply that he attaches no importance to the dispatch which asserts that the United States has no right under the Anglo-Russian treaty of 1825, to 3,000,000 acres of land opposite Prince of Wales Island. The General is said to discredit the statement for several rea- sons : First, because, as he puts it, the language of the Anglo- Russian treaty (and that used by Russia in the transfer to the United States), are identical as far as the boundaries are con- cerned ; those treaties prescribe that the starting point shall be the most southerly part of P.'ince of Wales Island, and that the line shall then proceed north through Portland Canal until it reaches the 56th parallel of latitudcv" "We are at one with the General as to the accuracy of the startin;j point as menti'^ned, but we must differ from him when ALASKAN BOUNDARY REVIEW. 23 he says: 'The line shall then proceed through Port- land Canal.' Here is where the difficulty comes in. Portland Canal is not mentioned in the treaty; neither does Port- land Canal reach the 56th degree of latitude. After referring to the proposed boundary along the coast, north of latitude 56 degrees General Duffield continues: "With this description in the treaties, I do not see how it is possible that there should be any difference between the two governments." "Differences, however, do exist," the Gazette continues, "and General Duffield will -equire to show 'how it is possible' to reach the entrance to Portland Canal, by going north as re- quired and described in the treaty, to the 56th degree of latitude, where the line of demarcation strikes the coast of the continent, before these differences can disappear. It may also be required that the United States representatives shall produce evidence to show why they have departed from the wording of the treaty and substituted a new line south of the 56th degpree. It is a mat- ter of fact that from the initial point of the line of demarcation, as mentioned in the treaty, the entrance to Portland Canal is slightly south of the said initial point, and about fifty miles to the east of it. It therefore follows, that to reach latitude 56 degrees, the point of intersection mentioned in the treaty on the coast of the continent, the line must run from south to north, and not east, or from west to east as the United States maps assume.", General Duffield further remarks: "Moreover, Portland Canal is clearly designated on the charts of Captain Vancouver, of the Royal Navy, which were in existence when the treaty be- tween Russia and England was entered into, so there can be no doubt as to where Portland Canal is." "Perfectly true: there is not the slightest difficulty about the locality of P(.>rtland Canal, neither is there any doubc that ihe framers of the treaty did not consult Vancouver's maps and charts and imderstood them thoroughly. They indicated very clearly where the meridional line of 132 degrees west longitude starting from Cape Chacon, should strike the coast of the conti- nent at the 56th degree of latitude. This will be seen by ex- amining the provincial maps of British Columbia, the Admiralty charts, or *he United States official charts of that region, which show that the meridional line runs along the east coast of Prince of Wales Island, through Clarence Strait and strikes the coast of the continent in Ernest Sound, making a slight deflection to the west around Cape Camuana, following the channel (called Portland Channel) as described by Sir Charles Bagot and the Right Hon. Georf ? Canning, in 1824." "The root of the matter is this," continues the Gazette: "Portland Canal is an inlet into the mainland, so named by Cap- II I! 24 ALASKAN BOUNDARY REVIEW. tain Vancouver in 1793 or '94; Portland Channel is a coastal water, so called by Canning in 18^4-5. They are entirely distinct waters, in different directions. The Portland Channel is named in the treaty as a prolongation of Clarence Strait and Ernest Sound — a natural boundary for British dominions. Portland Canal is a purely inland water running into British territory ; and to assume that when the treaty spoke of Portland Channel it meant Portland Canal, is to run in the face of all deUmitations of the treaty, and of what an examination of the map shows tw be the common sense of the qu=istion." The strategetic importance of that portion of Brit- ish Columbia now under review should be evident to every intelligent student of the map. The day will assuredly come, in the not very distant future, when new lines of railway and telegraph will cross the Canadian half of the con- tinent, and these lines which under the new Imperial policy will make Canada the western highway of the Empire, must play a large part in its consoUdation. Can we afford, therefore, to al- low valuable strategetic and commercial points on the Pacific coast to pass into the hands of a foreign nation, whe:: by treaty rights thev are unquestionably British f The necessity for such a protective arrangement was seen by the framers of the treaty ; hence the stipulation to make the Hne of demarcation from the 56th degree, at not more than ten marine leagues from the ocean. This can easily be secured un- der international law, and what is the "ocean coast" can be ascertained without any exoensive survey, and will furnish a just, practicable, convenient boundary line, in accordance with the wording of the treaty and prove an accommodation to ^iie subjects of both nations, who may require to use it, — which could not be said of the boundary contended for by the United States, over glaciers and rocky promontories. Since the appointment of the Joint Commission in 1892, the writer has carefully noted their reported proceedings. The United States commissioners have persistently contended for the boundary via Portland Canal from Cape Chacon; indeed, some of them have ^one further west, to a neighbouring island, and have made its southernmost point (Cape Muzon) the initial of the boundary, as is shown on the United States official maps and charts. It is stated on a large map of Canada, from Ottawa to the Paris Exhibition (1900), that the Alaskan boundary is delineated acr x'ding to the United States conten- tion, commencing at Cape Muzon, and thence due east to Port- land Canal. To arrive at as full an understanding as possible of the t:eaty of 1825, and the Portland Canal contention the writer of ALASKAN BOUNDARY REVIEW. 25 this review, in 1895-6 made a trip to London to consult the archives there. The Colonial and Foreig^n Offices gave him every opportunity to obtain information ; but the researches failed to disclose any r.hing in the records of negotiations or des- patches touching the Alaskan "boundary question, which gave the right of claim under the treaty to place the line of demarcation along or through Portland Canal. The direction and route indi- cated was by Clarence Strait and Ernest Sound to the 56th de- gree. The difficulties alluded to by General Duffield have arisen , from the ITniteH Spates starting; the line from Cape Chacon, on the wrong point of the comp iss — 90 degrees astray. In the House of Commons, Mr. Seton Karr (St. Helen's), in reference to the Alaskan boundary, asked the Secretary of State for ihe Colonies "whether his attention had been called to the result of the invp^1■io^atinns of Mr. Alexander -Begfe, hi'^torio- grdpher of British Columbia, regarding the boundary line be- tween Alaska and British Columbia, south of the 56th parallel of latitude, as detailed in the Canadian Gazette of April i6tli; whether it was a tact as contended by the British Columbia gov- ernment, that 3,000,000 acres of land of high strategetic and com- mercial importance, on the Pacific Coast, opposite Prince of Wales Island, which was assigned to Great Britain by the Anglo- Russian treaty of 1825, was now marked upon United States official maps and charts as United States territory ; and whether seeing that the Alaskan boundary south of the 56th parallel was not reported upon by the v*ecent Alaskan Boundary Commis- sion, he would suggest to the Canadian government that an early and independent investigation be made upon the subject." The Right Hon. Mr. Chamberlain replied : "Mr. Begg has comnmnicated to this department, from time to time, various memoranda, all of which have been duly transmitted to the Do- minion government. * * * * When the question is ripe for diplomatic discussion, the points raised by Mr. Begg will no doubt receive due consideration for what they may be worth." " The Canadian Gazette of May 7th, 1896, referring to Mr. Chamberlain's remarks in the House of Commons says : "We gather that as soon as the final reports of the Survey Commis- sion have been received, the most important aspect of the ques- tion will claim attention. Meanwhile it is enough to note Mr. Chamberlain's admission that the area which Mr. Begg main- tains was assigned to Great Britain by the Anglo-Russian treaty of 1825, is marked on all United States maps as United States territory. Mr. Chamberlain might have added, that it is so marked even on some Canadian maps, for a dependence on Washington chartography would seem, in this instance, to have misled even the alert officials at Ottawa." 36 ALASKAN BOUNDARY REVIEW. From the facts and statements in the foregoing review of the Alaskan boundary question, the following points may be accepted as fully demonstrated: — 1. That in 1793-4 Captain Vancouver discovered and took possession of all the islands of what he termed Prince of Wales Archipelago, from Cross Sound south to Dixon Entrance, in the name of and for the British sovereign. 2. That in 1799 *a charter was granted by the Russian Em- peror Paul to an association of Siberian merchants to form the Russian American Company to trade with the natives.' The Russians extended their explorations to Baranoff Island and founded Sitka. 3. In 1821 Emperor Alexander issued the notorious im- perial edict or ukase against which Britain protested. It was withdrawn under the united protest of Britain and the United States. 4. In 1825, the treaty which is now Under discussion, as to its interpretation, was passed, after considerable negotiation between the British and Russian plenipotentiaries. The Hud- son's Bay Company, being in possession of the British portion of the North American continent at the time, represented Great Britain under the treaty. 5. About the year 1838, the Russian possessions, south of Cross Sound to Dixon Entrance was leased to the Hudson Bay Company, as the Russians found they could not control the natives, nor prevent them from breaking the treaty by dealing with United States traders In intoxicating drink, fire arms, etc., in contravention of the treaty. The arrangements gave the Hud- son's Bay Company entire control of the whole continent west of the Rocky Mountains, including the western frontier and islands of the Pacific fronting thereon. 6. The United States government in 1867 purchased the Russian possessions under the treaty of 1825, with all its rights and privileges. 7. Their interpretation of the treaty, according to Mr. Bayard's letter to his ambassador in London in 1885-6 asking for a joint commission to decide on a permanent location of the line of demarcation between Alaska and British Columbia and the Northwest Territories to the east of the 141st meridian of longi- tude, has led to great difficulties, in fact has been the stumbling block in the way of the Joint Commission concluding a fair set- tlement of the line of demarcation, and it may further be said, ALASKAN BOUNDARY REVIEW, 9^ of be ok les in n- lie he id n- as ed :o m 1- n that until the clear wording of the treaty of 1825 is followed, pure and simple from Cape Chacon, and thence north — from soutli to north, as the Right Hon. Gsorge Canning so clearly expressed it in his despatch, dated July 12th 1824, to Sir Charles Bagot; and until the course described in the treaty and in George Can- ning's despatches, and Sir Charles Bagot's negotiations with the Russian plenipotentiaries are strictly adhered to, it is useless to expect that Great Britain will, or can obtain justice in the set- tlement. Mr. George Cannintf's despatch last referred to reads "His Majesty's government have resolved to authorize Your Excellency to consent to include the south points of Prince of Wales Island, from south to north, Portland Channel, till it strikes the mainland in latitude 56th degrees ; thence following the sinuosities of the coast along the base of the mountains nearest the sea to Mount Elias ; and thence along the 139th de- gree of longitude to the Polar Sea. ((The 139th degfree was cor- r«.cted in the treaty to 141st degree.) Sir C. Bagot enclosed m a despatch to Mr. George Canning, along with other statements, one marked "D" in reference to which Sir Charles had previ- ously informed the Russian plenipotentiaries; it contained his ultimate decision on that point. The statement plainly says, that the line of demarcation was to be drawn from the southern extremity of the strait called Duke of Clarence, through the middle of the strait, to the centre of the strait which sepai-ites the islands Prince of Wales and Duke of York from all the islands to the north of said islands ; thence toward the east by the same strait (which must 1 ave meant Ernest Sound in Van- couver's map or chart) to the mainland, and afterwards along the coast of Mount St. Elias." There is no mention of Portland Canal, nor of going east to reach it. The name "Portland Chan- nel" is not found on any of Vancouver's maps or charts nor any other maps or charts extant in 1824 or 1825, but Portland Chan- nel is described fully, as aforementioned. The island "Duke of York'* on Vancouver's map, referred to in the treaty negotiations has disappeared in United States maps and charts, and Etolin Island occupies it place. The authority for removing this land- mark is not given. 8. This tampering with the treaty and changing the line of boundary — its direction — initial point — the substitution of Cape Muzon for Cape Chacon, the recognized mlLial point of the line of demarcation, in the treaty — "the strip of land" claimed by the United States on the contin ^nt immediately to the north of the 56th degree, should all be disallowed, as not in accordance with the treaty. The deflection of the boundary line frorh Cape Cha- con, the southernmost point of Prince of Wales Island, running 'cast" instead of "north" alo'ig Portland Channel, and approxi- 28 ALASKAN BOUNDARY REVIEW. mately on the 132nd meridian of longitude, as signified in the treaty, creaties an impracticable and incorrect line entirely be- yond the hmits pointed out and defined in the treaty. Besides, there is no authority for usi ig Cape Muzon as an initial point, as it is not situated on Prince of Wales Island — but being a sep- arate island to the west of Prince of Waif > Island, may or may not be included in the final interpretation of the treaty as hav- ing belonged to Russia. 9. The water-boundary running north from Cape Chacon to the 56th degree of north latitude^ on the coast of the continent is accepted by a large number of British Columbians as being in accordance with the wor ling, spirit and sense of the treaty. It forms a convenient, reasonable and practicable boundary to accommodate both countries, which the line by way of Portland Canal wkmmHk is not, nor never can be. 10. As to the line frjm Cape Chacon, along Portland Channel to the continent at the 56th degree, it is contended by Biitish Columbians that the correct line from that new point of departure (the 56th degree) in accordance with the treaty, should be retraced through Ernest Sound (a portion of Portland Cha. nel) until the former line aljng the eastern coast of Prince of W^ales would be reached, and following that line to what is now known as Sumne, Strait (a portion of Clarence Strait on Van- couver s map and charts); thence crossing Sumner Strait, and working under the ten marine leagues measurement from the ocean coast, as a conventional boundary line, proceed northerly between the islands Kuiu and Kopreanof to Frederick Sound as far as the 57th degree of north latitude ; thence west ale .ig that parallel to Chatham Strait, and thence to Icy Strait to the con- tirental shore, at such point as might be deemed most conveni^ ent, to utilize "the strip of land' mentioned in the treaty; ar-d ♦.hence ten marine leagues from the ocean coast to the 141st degree of longitude ; and thence to the Arctic Ocean along the 141st meridian. It is but reasonable to conclude that Great Bri- tain desired to protect the frontier of British Columbia, to the t ast of Prince of Wales Island and north to Cross Sound. This was effectually accomplished by the deflection of a branch of the inain boundary through Ernest Sound to the continent at the S6th degree. Then by retracing the same line and joining the line of demarcation from Cape Chacon, continued along the east side of Prince of Wales Island as formerly mentioned, com- Itted the southern p'Tirtion. 11. The latest infringement in connection with the Cape u jzon extension line of boundary, is an imaginary line drawii NCJ ALASKAN BOUNDARY REVIEW. 29 from Cape Muzon, east to the entrance of Portland Canal, thence north to the head of the Canal, and then westward (forming an elbow) to Burroughs Bay, where the line is supposed to cross the 56th degree of latitude. Should the interpretation of the treaty according to the contention and belief of many British Columbians who have studied the question, together with not a few of the citizens of the United States, (amongst others, Mr. J. W. Treadwell, of San Francisco, who wrote a corjchisive article on the boundary question in 1897), be accepted, and the common sense, just view be adopted according to their con- tention, the Portland Canal boundary line, and its continuation along the frontier of the maiiiland must be abrogated, and the Portland Channel water boundary along Clarence to Cross Sound be accepted. The settlement — the just settlement of the question to both the United States and Canada, hinges on the dii ection of the line of boundary from Cape Chacon. 12. The Edinburgh Revieiv, April, 1900, has a comprehen- sive article on the Alaskan boundary difficulty. Amongst other thmgs it says: "It is commonly though erroneously supposed that the United States have exercised control at Dyea and Skag- way for a considerable period of time. The facts are that Dyea and Skagway did not exist prior to the spring of 1897. At the opening of that year thete was nothing more tiia».i a single log cabin or shanty at either i>kre. \n May the influx of miners to the Klondike began. Thousands of them arrived by steamer in the Lynn Canal, and congregated on its irargin where Dyea and Skagway now stand. The necessities of this migration caused considerable trade and commerce. Without any survey or further diplomatic action respecting the position of the boundary, the United States government assum- ed poitical control of these points and established cus*:om houses, pest offices and other evidences ofauthority, with such reason- at'le diligence as the extreme difficulties of accesp to this terri- tory and other circumstances permitted, Canada protested against this cavalier mode of solving the difficulty, and urged the desirability of establishing the boundary line as contem- plated by the convention of 1892." The United States people are continuing this sunimer to take possession of land in Clar- ence Strait, on Island ReviUa Gigedo, and on locations along Behm Canal — complications are increasing, and hence the greater necessity for an early settlement of the boundary. 13. A few points in the Edinburgh Review article from a British Columbian point of view require amendation. For ex- ample on page 287, last ^ar igraph, it is stated that : "Having ascertained the southernmost point of Prince of Wales Island, 30 ALASKAN BOUNDARY REVIEW. one is suddenly confronted by the fact that between it and Port- land Channel sixty miles of ocean intervene. Furthermore, Portland Channel lies almost due east from the southernmost point. ♦ » * ♦ Again, the line is to ascend north along Portland Channel, until it strikes the 56th degree of noith lati- tude. But Portland Channel does not attain to latitude 56 de- grees, etc." The difficulty here is the substitution of the name Portland Channel for Portland Canal. The name Portland Channel was not used by Capt. Vancouver in his maps or charts — only Portland Canal — ^and Portland Channel was only used in the description of the line of treaty by George Canning and Sir C. Bagot. The change of the name seems a small affair, but when it applies to a different boiy of water and gives th«: bound ary another line or direction .t makes twe trearv :n.practicable, and unworkable. That the name "Portland Channel" should have been written Portland Canal, appears evident from the ex- planations and the reference of 'sixty miles of open ocean" be- tween Cape Chacon and Portland Canal, whereas Portland Channel as named and described in the treaty is alongside Prince of Wales Island, and 'ur n'sh?s a water t». 'undary, as men- tioned by the framers of the treaty to lead to the 56th degree on the coast of the continent. The paragfraph quoted is there- fore, incorrect, except where it says the line is to "ascend north- along Portland Channel" to the 56th degree, and the erroi, though apparently trivial, has been Ihe cause of the principal mis- interpretations of the treaty. It affects the whole continental frontier of British Columbia from Cape Fox to Cross Sound. Also on page 28S, par. 4, a mistake occurs. It is stated that "both parties concur in holding Cape Muzon to be the southern- most point of Prince of Wales Island. * * * * and both acknowledge that the body of water to-day known as Portland Canal, is, despite the erroneous description in the treaty, the channel along which the line is to ascend." The foregoing ex- tract does not state fact. There is no erroneous description in the treaty ; "both parties do not concur in holding Cape Muzon to be the southernmost point of Prince of Wales Island :" where- as Cape Muzon is on Dall Island, which is over forty miles long, and is situated to the westward of Cape Cha- con. Again, the article quoted says : The British contention is that the Portland Channel of the treaty is the channel as marked on Vancouver's charts, and described in his narrative in terms that leave no doubt as to the body of water which he intended them to apply." There is no such British contention which would substitute Portland Channel as described in the treaty for Pc»rtland Canal; neither does Portland Canal afford the "first natural boundary on the continent, south of the 55th degree." ALASKAN BOUNDARY R£VIEW. 3» tee. The natural boundary conceded by British Columbians is Clar- ence Strait, (the Portland Channel of the treaty.) There seems to be a discrepancy on page 290, top paragraph, which says: "Canada also contends that, having determined the point of de- parture (Cape Muzon) etc., the reference appears untenable, and it may be that the word "Canada' has been substituted in error by the printer, for "United States." Numerous examples could be furnished to exhibit how un- just and tmwarrantable many British Columbians consider the action which their neighbours of the United States have taken in occupying the lands claimed by them under the treaty of 1825, but to which until the subject is decided, one party has the same light at the other. British Columbians blame their neighbours, • not only for the manner in which they take possession of the land but for the tardiness they manifest in allowing the disputed lands to come to a final settlement. British Columbia does not wish a foot of land from the United States, beyond what the treaty authorizes — but she expects to get the whole of that. Neither country is badly off for room or scarcity of land : that, however, does not affect the rights of either, nor the sovereignty of the lands in dispute. Many able writers in Canada and Bri- tain have expressed their views on the subject. Amongst others the Toronto Globe, which in an editorial which appeared in that paper in September, 1899, says : "When the Alaskan boundary question comes to be settled, we hope it will be settled in a man- ner worthy of civilized nations, and not in the manner of dogs fighting for a bone." From the Victoria Timsj, December 5th, 1900 : PRESIDENT M'kINLEY ON THE MODUS VIVENDI. To the Editor: In his annual message to Congress, De- cember 3rd inst. President McKinley refers to the settlement of the Alaskan boundary qu »stion. The smooth working of the fthdus Vivendi, passed in OctDber, 1899, for the convenience of miners near the head of Lynn Canal, belonging either to Canada or to the United States called forth expressions of satisfaction ; but the President remarks, "however necessary such an expedi- ent may have been to tide over the grave emergency of the situation, it is at best an unsatisfactory makeshift, which should not be suffered to delay the speedy and complete establishment of a frontier line, to which we are entitled under the Russo-Ani- crican treaty for the cession of Alaska." There need be no difficulty or delay in definitely marking the boundary where it follows the 141st meridian, nor after 33 ALASKAN BOUNDARY REVIEW. leaving the 141st meridian alons: the coast of the continent, as far as Cross Sound. From that point, however, it becomes necessary under international law, to have defined and establish- ed the position of the coast of the continent, as the treaty says: "The limit between the British possessions and the line of coa^t which is to beloncf to Russia, as above mentioned shall be form- ed by a line parallel to the windings of the coast, and which shall never exceed the distance of ten marine leagues therefrom." ALEXANDER BEGG. December 4th, 1900. ^It" ^