Page:Alaskan boundary tribunal (IA alaskanboundaryt01unit).pdf/64

 to the upper part of Vancouver's Portland Canal, make together the * Portland Canal’ of Vancouver as elaimed fw Britain.

And there is thus here an express admission that, at this stage of the nego- tiation, it was that canal, and no other, which the Parties meant hy Portland Canal.

This is based on a mistuderstanding of the passage quoted. The effect of the words “together with the islinds lying between Clar- ence Strait” ete. is overlooked, They are intended to he taken with the words. “an irregularly shaped portion of the continent” ete. It wax meant to say that it had shrunk to a dispute over the por- tion of continent, within the hounds desiwnated. together with the islands deseribed. This is plain from the concluding words which sty. that they (meaning the islands) are situated north and west of Portland Canal and between it and the continent. No such adntis- sion as that stated was made bw the United States.

[t ts submitted on behalf of the United States therefore that the Portland Channel of the treaty, when tested by the intention of the negotiators, by the language of the treaty. and by the understand- ing of the parties as shown by their subsequent actions is clearly identified with that body of water commouly known as Portland Channel in accordance with the answer proposed by the United States in answer to the second question.

** What course should the line take trom the point of commenerinent to the cutrance of Partha Channel?

The United States requests the Tribunal to answer and «decide that the line from Cape Muzen should je drawn in an casterly direction until if intersects the center of Portland Channel at its opening into Dixon Entrance.

The British Case says:

The question rightly assumes that the course of the line must be from the point of commencement to the entrance of Porthand Channel.

The view of the United States can be more definitely stated by saying that the line should be drawn along the parallel of latitude