Pagina-afbeeldingen
PDF
ePub

in the proclamation and statutes of Great Britain, which granted to the Province of Newfoundland jurisdiction over the adjacent coast of Labrador," and which is interpreted in the map of the Dominion of Canada issued in 1902 by the Canadian Department of the Interior.'

As an example of the use of the word "coast" in the negotiations, attention is directed to the following, which appears in Mr. Canning's draft convention of July 12, 1824, "the line of frontier

* * *

shall ascend northerly along the channel called Portland Channel, till it strikes the coast of the continent." The same expression is again used in the draft accompanying the instructions to Mr. Stratford Canning, December 8, 1824. It is evident that the "coast" referred to at the head of Portland Canal was the physical coast of the continent.

Sir Charles Bagot, in a paper which he delivered to the Russian plenipotentiaries at St. Petersburg, used in the same sentence the expressions, "distant de la côte de 10 lieues marines" and "à la dis tance de 10 lieues marines du rivage." Sir Charles thus used the words “cote" and "rivage" synonymously. The latter word could never be construed so as to refer to a political coast line. It is invariably applied to the physical coast.

The same use of the word is found at the present time, the word "coast" being applied to the margin of inlets far beyond the artificial coast of the British Case. Dr. George M. Dawson, who was familiar with the Canadian contention in its early stages, and informally discussed the question with Dr. W. H. Dall in February, 1888, stated, in a narrative of his exploration in the Yukon region, made in 1887: "We began the ascent of the Lewes, and from its head-waters we crossed the mountains by the Chilcoot Pass and reached the coast at the head of Lynn Canal on the 20th September." He wrote of the White Pass: "It leaves the coast at the mouth of the Shkagway River five miles south of the head of Taiya Inlet." And again: "The passes connecting the coast with the interior country, from the heads of Lynn Canal to the upper waters of the Lewes, were always jealously guarded by the Chilkat and Chilkoot Indians of the coast.9”

a

Thus Dr. Dawson, before his conference with Dr. Dall, employed

@ U. S. Counter Case, App., pp. 283–285.
Ibid., p. 250, No. 130.

CU. S. Case, App., p. 183.
d British Case, App., p. 116.

U. S. Case, App., p. 159.

U. S. Counter Case, App., p. 258. g Ibid., p. 261.

the natural and customary meaning of the word "coast," in the same way that it was used by the negotiators of the treaty of 1825.

The British Case asserts that "it is clear that 'côte' and 'Océan' refer to the same thing." If this statement is correct, then if the latter word is applied to the waters at the head of Lynn Canal it confirms the meaning of "coast" contended for by the United States. In 1898 Sir Wilfrid Laurier, during a debate in the Dominion House of Commons, said: "But if we had adopted the route by the Lynn Canal, that is to say, had chosen to build a railway from Dyea by the Chilkat Pass up to the waters of the Yukon, we would have to place the ocean terminus of the railway upon what is now American territory." A little later in the same debate he spoke of "that strip of territory on the sea which has Dyea as its harbour;" and repeated the expression "ocean terminus."

It is clear that the Canadian Prime Minister used "sea" as a synonym of "ocean," and that he considered them applicable to the salt water in the neighborhood of Dyea, that is, at the head of Lynn Canal.

In connection with the meaning of "côte" adopted in the British Case, much importance is given, and considerable space is devoted to the instructions issued in 1893 by Dr. T. C. Mendenhall, superintendent of the United States Coast and Geodetic Survey, to his subordinates who were to take part in the joint survey to be undertaken under the convention of July 22, 1892; in which he directed them to carry their operations inland "thirty nautical miles from the coast of the mainland in a direction at right angles to its general trend."

While the United States appreciates the fact that this official used an expression which might be construed into an admission on his part that he coincided with the Canadian view, it emphatically denies that such was his intention. In an article subsequently published he clearly defined his attitude upon the construction of the treaty, which he, as an official, had no authority to do under the instructions issued to him prior to the joint survey. His position in regard to the boundary, as shown by this article, was directly opposed to the construction which has been placed upon his words by Great Britain.

a British Case, p. 72.

U. S. Counter Case, App., p. 171.

Ibid.,

p. 172.

d British Case, pp. 73, 74.

U. S. Counter Case, App., pp. 269–276. f Ibid., p. 268.

a

Furthermore, Dr. Mendenhall was superintendent in 1894 and issued instructions to the United States surveying parties, which were in the field that year. Several of the surveyors were assigned to the region about the heads of Chilkat and Taiya Inlets. In their instructions the following appear: "As the trigonometrical survey of the Chilkat and Taiya Inlets to the 10 marine league limit is of the greatest importance, the topography (of the lower portions at least) being secondary, you will first assist in the triangulation." "On receipt of these instruetions you will please arrange to proceed to Alaska and make a topographical reconnoissance of the country to the northward and eastward of Taiya Inlet and River to the 10 marine league limit. party of Assistant Pratt will be engaged in the survey of the Chilkat Inlet and river to the boundary." "On receipt of these instructions you will please arrange to proceed to Lynn Canal, where you will execute the triangulation and topographical reconnoissance of the Chilkat and Taiya Inlets to the 10 marine league limit. Parties under the charge of Messrs. J. A. Flemer and H. P. Ritter will be operating in the mountain region adjoining Chilkat and Taiya Inlets, It will be borne in mind that the triangulation to the 10 marine league limit and the topographical reconnoissance of the upper portions of the inlets are of first importance." e

*

*

[ocr errors]

* **

* * *

The

* * *

According to the British contention the artificial coast line would cross Lynn Canal some 60 nautical miles south of the heads of Taiya and Chilkat Inlets which would, therefore, be over 25 miles beyond a lisière of 10 leagues in width based upon such a coast line. The United States parties in 1894 were assigned by Dr. Mendenhall to survey Taiya Inlet and River and Chilcat Inlet and River, with a view to the ascertainment of the facts and data necessary to the permanent delimitation" of the boundary; and it should be noted that an attaché of the British commissioner accompanied one of the United States parties which surveyed both inlets and rivers.

66

The instructions issued to the Canadian surveying parties in 1894 have not been made public nor have they as yet been produced before

[blocks in formation]

the Tribunal. Their contents, therefore, can only be conjectured from the localities in which the parties operated. These are shown by the charts of their survey," and the joint report of the Commissioners. The significant fact is, that they surveyed the shores and head of Lynn Canal. It appears, therefore, that the Canadian officials deemed it essential to obtain data for determining the boundary far beyond a line drawn ten leagues from the "coast", which is now contended for in the British Case.

* *

*

It is needless to comment further upon the argument in the British Case, founded upon Dr. Mendenhall's words "the general trend" of the mainland coast. His instructions of 1894 are conclusive against the interpretation placed upon them by Great Britain; and the acts of the Canadian surveyors in operating about the head of Lynn Canal are far more confirmatory of the position of the United States than Dr. Mendenhall's inadvertent expression is of the British contention. The "argument in support of the British contention based upon Article VII of the Treaty" is that the inland seas, gulfs, havens and creeks of the possessions of each power, to which the subjects of the other could resort for the term of ten years, were confined to the mainland coast of the lisière, and that it was, therefore, implied that some of these waters were within the British dominions. This assertion rests upon interpreting "the coast mentioned in article three" to be the coast used in determining the limits of the lisière and not the coast of the continent and islands of America to the Northwest", which is the use of the word in its descriptive sense and refers to the region commonly known as the "Northwest Coast".

Article VII of the British treaty is merely a repetition of Article IV of the American treaty of 1824. Mr. George Canning, in his instructions to Mr. Stratford Canning, said that the stipulation for reciprocal privileges of trade could be best stated precisely in the terms of article 4 of the American convention.” The two articles

are as follows:

[ocr errors]
[blocks in formation]

BRITISH TREATY.

VII. Il est aussi entendu que, pendant l'espace de dix Ans, à dater de la signature de cette Convention, les Vaisseaux des deux Puissances, ou ceux appartenans à leur sujets respectifs, pourront réciproquement fréquenter, sans entrave quelconque, toutes les Mers intérieures, les Golfes, Hâvres et Criques sur la côte mentionnée dans l' Article III, afin d'y faire la pêche et le commerce avec lés Indigènes.a

AMERICAN TREATY.

Il est néanmoins entendu que pendant un terme de dix années à compter de la signature de la présente convention, les Vaisseaux des deux Puissances, ou qui appartiendraient à leur citoyens ou sujets respectifs, pourront réciproquement fréquenter sans entrave quelconque, les mers intérieures, les golfes, hâvres et criques sur la Côte mentionée dans l'article précédent, afin d'y faire la pêche et le commerce avec les naturels du pays.b

The coast mentioned in the "preceding article" of the American treaty is “la Côte nord ouest d'Amérique," which is stated to be both north and south of the parallel 54° 40′. It is evident that the intention of these articles is the same. British subjects were privileged to frequent the waters of the Russian possessions north of 54° 40'; Russian subjects had a similar privilege in regard to the waters of the possessions of Great Britain south of that line.

It should be added that the position now assumed in the British Case is directly opposed to that taken by Great Britain in the Fur Seal Arbitration. The British Counter Case, filed in that arbitration, stated, that it had been proved in the British Case "that the words northwest coast' were used, throughout the negotiations, to include not less than the whole of the North American coast from Behring Strait to latitude 51 north.". After referring to the words of Mr. Canning, which are quoted above, it is asserted: "This shows that Mr. Canning did not understand the term northwest coast' to be confined to the 'lisière,' the proposals relating to which had one unvarying condition, namely, that it was to belong to Russia."a

* *

*

In the printed argument of Great Britain submitted to the tribunal at Paris, the following appears: "Article VI dealt only with the lisière Article VII, on the other hand, dealt with the coast of the continent mentioned in Article III: it gave to the two parties a reciprocal right of visit to all the inland waters, harbours, etc., on this coast: it applied, therefore, to the coast of the whole Russian possessions, as well as to the whole of the coast of the British posses

a U. S. Case, App., p. 13.
Ibid., p. 9.

U. S. Counter Case, App., p. 191.

d Ibid.,

p. 192.

« VorigeDoorgaan »