Page:Alaskan boundary tribunal (IA alaskanboundaryt01unit).pdf/125

 their general trend bounded all of the const, including in coust, such coast as that at the head of Porthind Channel, which he in that con- nection expressly designated as coast,

If he meant the mountains nearest the sea, or those hounding the sea. he never sought in any way to press the idea, and clearly aban- doved it when it was rejected by Russia and he agreed to the lan- guage embodied in the treaty.

It appears from a letter from Mr, Cunning to Sir Charles Bagot of July 24. Tsu4. that be had communicated to Count Lieven a draft convention nade by him, with a request that he would note any points in it upon whieh he conceived any ditliculty likely to arise, or any explanation likely to be nevessurv. Ile enclosed to Sir Charles a memoruidunt made by Count Lieven, and said:

Your excelluney will observe that there are bat two points which have struck Connt Lieven az susceptible of any question, The first, the assnmyption of the base of the mountains instead of the summit as the line of boundary; the second, the estension of the right of the navigation of the Pacitic to the sea bevond Bebring's Straits.

As to the first, no great inconvenience van arise from your excolleney (if pressed jor that alteration) consenting to substitute the swuinit of the monntaing instead of the seaward base, provided alwars that the stipulation as to the extreme distance from the coast to whiel: the lisifre ix in any case to run be adopted (which itistance T have to repeat to your excellency should he made as short as possible), and pro- vided a@ stipulation Ie added that ne forts shall be established or fortifications erected) by either party on the sampiit or in the passes of the mountains. ¢

There is not the least intimation here that Mv. Canning was talk- ing ahout any different mountains from those proposed by Russia. If he had proposed different mountains Count Lieven would cer- tainly bave been struck by it, and he sys expressly that only two points struck him. He shows that he knew that Count Lieven understood his proposition as simply ‘tthe assumption of the base of the mountains instead of the summit as the line of boundary.” and that he was not proposing any mountains different from those previously indicated by Russia.

Count Lieven certainly understood that he referred to the ‘chain of mountains” already designated und not to some different moun- tains. In a letter to Count Nesselrode, Jiily 13. Ls23. he says:

As regards the froutier of the respective possessions to the south of Mount Elias,

Mr. Canning makes it roan along the base of the mountains which follow the sinn- = is ; rele A go :


 * 1) ULS. C, App, 187-188,