Page:Alaskan boundary tribunal (IA alaskanboundaryt01unit).pdf/94

 seas, struits and waters which the litnits assigned to Russia may comprehend,”

Ou July 12. Is2t. Me. Canning wrote to Sir Charles Bagot, that:

Aiter full consideration of the motives which are allugal by the Russian (Coy. ermmiment for adhering to their list propositions respecting the line of demarcation, ew, © * ® it was resolved to consent to teke as the line a line dimown from the southermmest point of Prince of Wales Island from south to north through Portkoul Channel, til it strikes the tuainhued in latitude 46 degrees; thence fol- lowing the sinnesities of the evast, along the base of the mountains nearest the sea to Mount Elias, and thence alony the tuth degree of longitude to the Polar Sea.

Thus it was conceded that the motives alleged by the Russian Govermuent should control. Tt was fully nnaderstood that these motives were to secure w strip of the coast over which Russia had for so long a time chimed sovercignty, and that this strip was to be of stteh a nature, as to be a barrier, except throngh navigation of rivers. from the British side. and that it was to preserve their commerce, through the establishment of sovereiunty over the coasts, as they had always been defined. There ix no pretext for claiming that Russian ever had in mind a politicul coast, from whieh, under the laws of nations, the sovereign right was to be projeeted beyond the actual coast. but on the contrary. everything showed that Russia contemplated only. an actual and sinuous const, forming an unbroken strip.

With this letter Mr. Canuine transmitted a ‘draft convention™ in French and English, which was submitted to Russin,

The line to the south was as yet unsettled, but as te some things there was perfect aceord. ‘The most important of these, in view of the present controversy. was what all parties understood by the word ‘const.

lt is therefore of the utmost significance to consider the lineuage in which he set forth in his draft, what he knew to be the nnder- standing of the parties on this point. Note should be taken that there had not onty never heen any controversy as to what the prurties understood the term ‘coast’ to mean, but that no such controversy eyer arose at any time, from the beginning of the negotiations to the execution of the treaty. and that, in respect

av. s. C. App, TS, HELA CL App, 18h.