time immediately preceding this controversy, the declarations made repeatedly and unequivocally are that the body of water south of Ramsden Point was never understood by the British Government to apply to Observatory Inlet.

Now, I ask attention, and I will be brief on that, to the United States' official maps.

The first map to which I call attention is the map of 1867, as prepared by the United States' Coast Survey at the time of the purchase. It appears on p. 24 of the United States' Atlas. This map does not give the name of Observatory Inlet at all, but it does give the name of Portland Canal in large, heavy-face letters reaching from a point above the head of that canal down almost to the ocean, and the significant part of this map is that the islands south of the channel which Great Britain denominates Portland Channel, are coloured as American territory.

Now, I recall, of course, and I have not forgotten, that his Honour the President said that not much importance was to be attached to the colouring. I suppose he meant where the colours are shaded into each other in the small maps, but I think importance is to be attached to the colouring here. The colouring on this map of these islands is just as distinct as any other part of the map, and it could not be accounted for by any suggestion as to hand colouring, or that the colours shaded into each other. It is clear and distinct. It is a declaration, just as plainly as if it were written on the map, that the islands in question were the territory which the United States understood she was purchasing from Russia, and that Portland Canal, which was the natural boundary between Russia and Great Britain, was that body of water running south of those islands.

This map was published. I do not suppose it will be contended for a moment that it was not known to Great Britain. We all know that Governments which are on the alert, as all these great Governments are, are just about as well posted as to what transpires in matters of this sort as those who do the acts. When we take into consideration that they were official publications, I do not suppose the idea will be advanced or attempted to be maintained by anyone for one moment that Great Britain did not know this map of that territory, and what it purported to claim.

The PRESIDENT. It is not very important, Mr. Dickinson, for the reason I gave, but although they are very small, as showing you how carelessly the colouring is done, the small islands to the south there, which are undoubtedly British, are also coloured brown--there is no dispute about them. They are quite small ones, I agree, but they have got the brown colour upon them.

710

Mr. DICKINSON. Yes, I see it; they rather appear to be black.

The PRESIDENT. I only show you one; we have had it over and over again; I do not think this was hand colouring, but people did not imagine that they were making these State declarations that you have been referring to when they were colouring these maps.

Mr. DICKINSON. These islands you refer to, Mr. President, appear to me to be a black colour, not the same colouring, but at any rate they appear to be quite small.

The PRESIDENT. They are.

Mr. DICKINSON. And the other island is large and distinct, and

the colouring is brought out just as emphatically as it is on the mainland.

The PRESIDENT. That is a fair observation to make.

Mr. DICKINSON. Still I made the observation I intended to make, and present it to the Tribunal, and of course it will carry as much weight as it is entitled to.

The PRESIDENT. I understand.

Mr. DICKINSON. The United States' Atlas, No. 31, is a sketch accompanying the Report of Colonel Scott. I have already called attention to that map in connection with the discussions on Fort Tongass, but this map shows that at that time when Colonel Scott made his sketches there he brought Portland Channel down south of Wales Island, and the other islands in controversy.

This now concludes all that I have to say upon the Portland Channel. I have no doubt the Tribunal feel very much relieved that we have got over the tedious examination of these maps. It seems to me to have been established that there is no evidence as claimed by Great Britain that Vancouver's narrative was not merely known-I admit that it was known, at least there is the presumption that it was known to the negotiators—but that it was relied upon by them in determining the terms of this Treaty and their application.

To proceed to the next point. When we look to the maps that were known to be before the negotiators, the result of all of these maps, and certainly the result of the Faden map, would be to impress upon their minds the fact that the channel which Count Nesselrode referred to when he spoke of Portland Channel was the one which came out to the ocean nearest to the parallel of 54 degrees 40 minutes. Some comment has been made upon the significance of 54 degrees 40 minutes, and I have but one suggestion to make in regard to that. Russia, in the Ukase of 1799, had claimed down to the 55th degree. When she issued the Ukase of 1821 the claim was made further south and was attempted to be extended to the 51st degree. Then the claim was also set up simultaneously in regard to the right of control of navigation 100 miles from the coast. This was challenged by Great Britain and the United States, and out of this grew the controversy which led to this Treaty. In her endeavour to reach a settlement of this question, Russia was willing to withdraw her line as set up to the 51st degree to the 55th degree, claiming that that had been unchallenged at all times, and had never been disputed. Down to the time of the conclusion of the American Treaty the negotiations proceeded upon the idea that they would reach an understanding, so that the dividing line would be at the 55th degree, but to be extended sufficiently south to take in the two points Prince of Wales Island so as not to cut it in two.

But when the American Treaty was concluded a new and significant feature was introduced into the transaction. The American Treaty had fixed the line between Russia and the United States at 54 degrees 40 minutes, and at that time, and upon the very day that the Treaty was concluded, Count Nesselrode emphasized the fact that Russia would bring its boundary line up to 54 degrees 40 minutes, and

connected it directly with the American Treaty. The Treaty 711 between Russia and Great Britain was concluded, so far as

Portland Canal is concerned, directly upon the proposition that was made by Count Nesselrode, and growing, as I contend,

largely from the fact that the same boundary line had been fixed between Russia and the United States. It is not to be supposed that there was any very great controversy at that time as to which particular channel they were to go up. It is, I think, a fair conclusion to say that when it was known that the boundary line between Russia and the United States had been fixed at 54 degrees 40 minutes, all parties understood that it would be well to make the two boundary lines coincident, and that, therefore, 54 degrees 40 minutes being directly before their minds, and in connection with Portland Channel, could not be overlooked as a significant fact in pointing to the identity of the Portland Channel that they had in mind. As I pointed out before, it was a matter comparatively unimportant as to whether they proceeded along 54 degrees 40 minutes, but it is a matter of the very greatest importance as to whether or not 54 degrees 40 minutes demonstrated the channel which they had in view when they spoke of Portland Channel.

I now proceed to discuss the third question, and that is whether the line shall go directly to the ascertained Portland Channel, that is to say, after this Tribunal shall have answered the second question, if they shall answer it, and say which channel is Portland Channel, or whether the line shall proceed along the parallel of 54 degrees 40 minutes and thence to the Channel. I do not want to suggest anything that would weaken the contention of anybody or of any views advanced by our side in this Argument, and I accept the arguments that were made upon that point, and the views that were advanced, and leave them exactly where Mr. Watson left them.

But after the channel shall have been determined I believe that it is a matter comparatively unimportant as to just how that line shall be drawn, and it seems to me there is very little more to be said upon the third question.

The fourth question is, to what point of the 56th parallel is the line to be drawn from the head of Portland Channel, and what course should it follow between those points? The language of the Treaty is:

A partir du point le plus méridional de l'île dite "Prince of Wales," lequel point se trouve sous le parallèle des 54 degrés 40 minutes de latitude nord, et entre le 131 et 133° degré de longitude ouest (méridien de Greenwich), la dite ligne remontera au nord le long de la passe dite "Portland Channel," jusqu'au point de la terre ferme où elle atteint le 56° degré de latitude nord; de ce dernier point la ligne de démarcation suivra la crête des montagnes situées parallèlement à la côte.

(Adjourned till to-morrow at 10.30 a. M.)

792

SEVENTEENTH DAY.-TUESDAY, OCTOBER 6, 1903.

All the Members of the Tribunal were present.

Mr. DICKINSON. Mr. President, when we adjourned yesterday afternoon I had just reached the fourth question and that part of the Treaty which I read bore directly upon the fourth question. To repeat just a few words, the language is:

La dite ligne remontera au nord le long de la passe dite "Portland Channel," jusqu'au point de la terre ferme où elle atteint le 56° degré de latitude nord.

The contention of the United States is that "le long" is not only intended to qualify the direction of the line along the channel, but also its continuation in the same direction until it reaches the 56th degree of latitude. It seems to me that when one direction is given, and you proceed along that direction and a further point is designated-unless a new departure or a new direction is indicated-the plain inference is that you follow the direction which has been indicated until you reach the point to which you are to proceed. The direction is to proceed along the channel up to the point, and I contend that the fair and natural construction of that is that you are to proceed to the north, not only along the Portland Channel, but until you reach that point.

Sir L. JETTÉ. I believe the question would be, what is the point? Mr. DICKINSON. The point on the 56th degree is the point that is designated.

Sir L. JETTE. The Treaty, I believe, says the end of Portland Channel, it means that.

The PRESIDENT. Mr. Dickinson is contending that "le long" indicates that you are to go on in the same direction.

Mr. DICKINSON. That you are to go up in the same direction. My contention is that you are to follow the calls which are given in a deed or in a survey, that where one direction is given, and an objective point is indicated, until a new departure is expressly mentioned, you follow the same direction until you reach that objective point. The direction here was to the north along Portland Channel up to that point, and I say that the fair inference is that "north was to characterize the direction of the line, not only while it proceeded along Portland Channel, but until it reached that point.

They all conceded that the maps were not accurate, and it is conceded by everyone, in argument, that they made the Treaty with reference to the location as shown by the maps, as indicated on the pictures which were, to all intents and purposes, part of the Treaty. They made the Treaty in the light of the maps and with reference to them. When they contracted that the line should proceed up

Portland Channel to the 56th degree, and when the contract was made with reference to the mountains that were indicated on 713 the maps, the intention was that the line should go along in the same direction up to the 56th degree, and that it should reach the mountains somewhere in the neighbourhood.

I call attention to a passage in the Argument of the AttorneyGeneral on this subject at pp. 171 and 172:—

There is no intention given as to the course of this line at this point except that it follows Portland Canal till the 56th degree.

Well, that seems to assume absolutely that Portland Canal does reach that degree, and I think that that is made very clear if one bears in mind what took place during the negotiations upon this point. If it be conceded that they assumed absolutely that Portland Canal was to reach that degree, and if it appear during the negotiations that that was their intent, then, the intent being thus plainly disclosed, it is the duty of anyone who construes that instrument to carry out the intention thus clearly expressed. It seems by the concession, or rather the view that is taken of this question by the Attorney-General, that they understood that Portland Channel was to reach to the 56th degree, and in the same direction along which they were then proceeding.

In the same connection, if you will turn to pp. 174-5, you will find that he further says:

As you are going along the pass called Portland Channel till you get to the point where terra firma reaches the 56th degree of latitude north, what is to happen if your guide, the Portland Channel, fails you before you get to that point? One always recurs to the same difficulty, and I submit that as soon as the channel-"la passe "-ceases there is no indication given by these words as to the direction in which the line is to go-that that can be sought only by seeing what is the next point which you are going to make for.

And further on, at p. 181, in the same connection near the bottom of the page, it reads that:

The Russian counter-draft, which is at p. 94 of the same Appendix, varies the expression in this way :—

'Jusqu'au point où cette passe se termine dans l'intérieur de la terre ferme au 56° degré de latitude nord."

Then the Attorney-General proceeds:

That, of course, requires attention, because there the Russians vary the expression so as to make it plain that in their view this channel was one which terminated at the 56th degree.

If it be conceded that that was their view, and their understanding, and it seems to be conceded as plainly as language could make it, can there be any possible question as to the construction that should be put upon the Treaty? Does it not make plain, clear, and unequivocal, the understanding the Parties had as to where the line was to go? Now, on p. 182, near the top, he says:

My contention is that the true answer to this question is an answer which, perhaps, is not exactly an answer in terms-that from the head of the Portland Canal you must go to the commencement of the line of mountains. That is my submission.

And further down:

And if that is to be answered, I say it is the point on the 56th parallel where you find your mountains. I have now completed what I have to say upon these first four questions, which form a group by themselves.