Page:Alaskan boundary tribunal (IA alaskanboundaryt01unit).pdf/109

 Init to say that, ix Co say that the treaty means something ditferent from what he thought it meniut.

The Treaty was made to express the understanding at that time of the parties. and no constriction can he put mpon it which starts ont with n predicate that Mr. Canning did not understand it.

Referring to the rights claimed by Russia under the Ukase of 1821 and to the monopoly granted to the Russian Cotipany in the year Is2 after the treaty, Sir Richard Webster said:

Ta 1788, it was down to me 5a°s aod, in PS2l, if was down to 41° in terme; and, in 182, it is the whole area assigned to Russia. Tt most bave been, and was, the whole North West Coast of America above 44° 40%, which was the part exclusively assigned to Roskia, as compared te that below, which was exclosively assigned to the Unitet States. Observe that 54° 40’ was to be the dividing line, ete.’

LA CRETE DES MONTAGNES,

THE CONTENTION OF THE UNITED STAVES Is, THAT SHE NEGOTIATORS PIP NOT MEAN THE MOUNTAINS NENT THE SEA NOR ANY OF THE MOUNTAINS CONTENDED Fon BY GREAT BRITAIN, BUT NOUNTAINS OTHER THAN THOSE, CONSTITUTING 1 CHAIN SEPARATED PROM THE SEA BY ENTEREENING MOUNTAINS, WICH THEY INTENTIONALLY REIBOTEN: IND THAT THEY BID NOT CONTEMPLATE INEIVIDCAL MOUNTAINS WHOSE SUMMITS WERE Tee BE CONNECTED TOGETHER, OR BUEN siiteent RANGES ILIVING A TREND ACROSS THE SINE OF COAST OF SUCH WATERS IS TARO INLET ANE LYNN CANAL, BIT A GENERALLY (CONTINO GOTS RANGE OF MOUNTAINS STPMSED TO BEGIN NEAR TUE HEAL OF PORTLAND CANAL ANN TO CUNTINGE WITH A ENE TREND PARULLED WITH THE ereAsT) ARNGUENS: THE MEAL OF LYNN CANALS AND) TILT THE ASSUMPTION OF THLE ENISTENCE LF St CH A RANGE, ANE THE AGREEMENT IX KEPERENCE TO TT) Ws STRORDINATE TO. AND IN TARMONY WUT THE FUNDAMENTAL POSTULATE THAT “COTE” NEANT ALL OF WILT OMOCLY BE INCLUDED EY THAT TREM, AND NOT ANYTHING LESS, TO WIT: ALL OF THE NORTHWEST (COAST OF ANERICA NORTH OF N° 40 OVER WHICH RiSsLi Map CLAUMED JURISDICTION,

The disenssion of the tnountains contemplated hy the treaty is mee essarily involved ins consideration of the Fifth Question, and carries with it an answer to the Seventh Question,

It ix said in the British Cause that. the deseription of the meouwntaius in the Treaty, which are situated purmllel to the coast. ‘indicates a general parallelism only, Mountains being a onaturad feature could not, of course, be expected to run uniformiy parallel to the const. whether straight or winding.” ”

“Bur Seal Arbitration, Vol. 1, 46%, 6B. Cp. ab,