Pagina-afbeeldingen
PDF
ePub

that any protest has ever been raised by any Government against the occupation of Nyea and Skagway by the United States. It is only in recent years that the attention of the public has been drawn to it.a

The foregoing are the declarations of the Minister to whose department the subject of the boundary specially pertained, and of the head of the Dominion Government-the two officials best qualitied and most fully authorized to make a public statement of the facts involved. It is not to be presumed that they spoke unadvisedly or without a proper investigation of the official records. But the published “Debates show that in the month following, after ample time had elapsed for examination, the subject was before the House of Commons again, upon a motion by the leader of the opposition, Sir Charles Tupper. In his reply, the Prime Minister, Sir Wilfred Laurier, said:

Now I will not recriminate here; this is not the time nor the occasion for doing so; but so far as I am aware no protest has ever been entered against the occupation of Dyea by the American authorities; and when the American authorities are in possession of that strip of territory on the sea which has Dyea as its harbour, succeecling the possession of the Russians from time immemorial, it becomes manifest to everybody that at this moment we can not dispute their possession, and that before their possession can be disputed, the question must be determined by a settlement of the question involved in the treaty.

When it is remembered that all the acts which are cited as “ protests” in the British Case, with one exception, had a presumed relation to the territory about the passes at the head of Lynn Canal, the Tribunal may determine, in the light of the public declarations of the Prime Minister and the Minister of the Interior of the Dominion of Canada, relating to what Lord Landsdowne terms “the main question in this controversy," what weight should be attached to the averments now made on behalf of Great Britain.

AMERICAN OCCUPATION.

The C'nited States submitted in its Case an overwhelming array of evidence to establish its complete, continuous and uncontested occupation and control over the territory which it received from Russia, and upon that evidence it would be quite content to leave to the Tribunal the decision of the question, how far that occupation and control, in connection with the acts of the litigant parties respecting it, affect the true interpretation and meaning of the treaty.

"L'. S. Counter Case, App., p. 170.

Ibid., p. 172.

But the British Case, in treating upon this subject, contains some strange assertions of fact and conclusions, which it is deemed proper should receive attention. It contends that, up to a recent day, there has been a marked absence of control by the United States throughout the lisière; it is able to cite but two cases between 1869 and 1890 " to show the very slight nature of the control occasionally exercised by the United States over the inhabitants of Alaska"); it states that the isolated acts of possession of citizens of the l'nited States at the head of Lynn Canal bear no importance in the present case and that they were in violation of law; that the primitive condition of the country remained unchanged until about 1896, which date is fixed as the beginning of the mining exploitation; and that the assumed claim of the United States, that the possession about Dyea and Skagway should influence the Tribunal in its decision, "is wholly disputed.""

By reference to the Case of the United States it will be seen that for several years after the cession of Alaska it was held, so far as the Visiere was concerned, mainly as an Indian territory and that the laws of the United States, except so far as was necessary for the preservation of order and the protection of commerce and the revenue were concerned, were not extended over it. This naturally had a restraining influence upon immigration and white settlement. But it was shown by indubitable official evidence that during that period the authority of the l'nited States was continuously exercised by the army, the navy and the revenue service throughout the whole of the lisière, and especially along the Stikine River and up to the heads of all the inlets; that peace and order was enforced among the Indians in those regions, and they were made to recognize the unquestioned authority of the United States; and that the customs regulations were in operation throughout the territory. It also was shown that during the same period surveys of all the coasts of the lisière, including the inlets and the rivers emptying into them, were made.

It was not until 1884 that the Congress of the United States decided to give the territory a civil government, but a considerable white settlement had existed at Wrangell at the mouth of the Stikine from the date of the cession; in 1880 the town of Juneau on the mainland was founded, and about the same time a mission school was established at Haines at the head of Lynn Canal and white settlers began to enter

[blocks in formation]

that region. Thenceforward, as has been shown in the Case of the United States, the reign of law and the administration of justice, under the undisputed authority of the United States has continued.

In view, however, of the statements in the British Case, it has been determined to submit to the Tribunal, in rebuttal of these statements, further evidence relating to the occupation of the districts at the head of Lynn Canal since 1880, and more particularly the depositions of officials as to the character of the authority exercised in that region.

It was not deemed necessary to adduce further proof of the absolute control of the Indians, so fully established in the Case of the United States, but there are added certified copies of several documents, still preserved, given to Indian chiefs and others by the officials of the United States" which, with those in the Case, show the presence in the inlets of Lynn Canal of naval and other authorities of the l'nited States annually for the first twenty years after the cession.

In addition to evidence already submitted, depositions are now produced showing that a trading post was established at Haines on Chilkoot Inlet in 1880, another soon followed, and in 1886 a third trading post was located at a place since called Dyea; that a small permanent settlement of Americans existed at Haines in 1888; and that “during the 80's" from one to two hundred American miners were passing to and from the Yukon region, and making this point their place of supply, and they constantly increased in numbers until the great “rush" occurred about 1897. It is also shown that in 1883 there were three canneries in operation at and in the vicinity of Pyramid Harbor; that by 1888 their annual output amounted to 55,000 cans; and that they were among the tirst and most important in Alaska. It appears in the Case that immediately after the civil government was established in 188+ the Presbyterian mission at Haines was surveyed and the survey filed in the land office at Sitka. Depositions now submitted show that surveys were made of the early trading posts and notice of their location filed with the United States collector at Sitka, and that various official surveys were made by the l'nited States deputy surveyor from 1889 to 1891, and a map of the surveys in Pyramid Harbor in 1891 will be found in the Atlas accompanying this Counter Case, Map No. 32."

In 1887 a Canadian exploring survey party to the Yukon, under the direction of William Ogilvie, arrived at Haines. This party was

[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]

« U.S. Counter Case, lpp., pp. 212–214, 288. (Ibid., PP. 220, 230, 231. bIbid., pp. 220, 230, 233.

« Ibid., pp. 220, 229, 231,

235.

*

*

operating with another Dominion party under Dr. George M. Dawson, which had entered upon its work through the Stikine route. The boats of the party were towed up from Juneau to Taiya Inlet by the United States naval vessel "Pinta," Commander Newell. While waiting there for supplies Ogilvie made some surveys at the head of the inlets; Commander Newell reported, “having previously asked authority from me to begin these, which request I cheerfully granted.” a Mr. Ogilvie had much difficulty in inducing the Chilkoot Indians to transport bis supplies and instruments over the mountain passes on his way to the interior on account of their anger at the British because the Hudson's Bay people had killed some of the tribe, It appears there was a party of Stick Indians from the interior of British territory trading at Haines, who were ready to do the packing over the trail, but they were not permitted by the Chilkoots who held them to be foreigners. Mr. Ogilvie had to appeal to Commander Newell, who, Ogilvie in his official report says, “ kindly aided me in making arrangements with the Indians.

Commander Newell told him [the Chilkoot chief] I had a permit from the Great Father at Washington to pass through his country safely, that he would see that I did so, and if the Indians interfered with me they would be punished for doing so.

I am strongly of the opinion that these Indians would have been much more difficult to deal with if they had not known that Commander Newell remained in the inlet to see that I got through without accident."'

Mr. Ogilvie on his return from the Yukon again passed through Haines where he was joined by Dr. Dawson. C'nited States Deputy Marshall Healy deposes: “I had considerable talk with them during their visit. They made no protest against the occupation at the head of Lynn Canal by Americans, and made no claim to the region as belonging to Canada."

In view of the voluminous official reports of the surveys made by Messrs. Ogilvie and Dawson, and of their visit to the head of Lynn Canal in 1857, it can not be seriously maintained that " until 1996 the Governments of Great Britain or Canada knew little or nothing" of that region, or that they were ignorant of the exercise of sovereignty by the United States over that district.

*

[ocr errors]

al'. S. Case, App. p. 391.
OL. S. Counter Case, App., pp. 215–217, 234, 235.

cIbid.,

P.

23.5.
( British Case, p. 92.

In the year 1887 Francis H. Poindexter was appointed justice of the peace for the district in and about Pyramid Harbor, and acted in that capacity until he left Alaska in 1891. In the discharge of his duties he took cognizance of both civil and criminal cases arising on the shores of Chilkat Inlet and in the country adjacent thereto. Poindexter after leaving Alaska resided in California until his death in October, 1898."

About the year 1889 John J. Healy was appointed United States deputy marshal, and in 1890 he was also commissioned as deputy collector of customs, and exercised the functions of these offices over the country about the head of Lynn Canal, including Chilkat, Chilkoot, and Dyea Inlets. Other officials in the enforcement of the revenue laws about the same time seized and contiscated liquors in the vicinity of the summit of Chilkoot Pass.

In 1897 John L'. Smith was appointed by the President of the United States commissioner for the judicial district of Alaska. He states that he reached Drea, Alaska, in July of that year. Soon after his arrival, being informed that a number of Canadian officials were stationed at Skagway, he went to that place and found them located in tents; that he addressed the person who represented himself to be in charge of the party, and who was dressed in the uniform of a Canadian mounted police, stating that he hoped there would be no difficulty between them as to the exercise of jurisdiction and authority at Skagway and Dyea; that the Canadian official said there should be none, and that he and his party withdrew beyond the mountain pass to Lake Tagish. He further deposes that he was present as United States commissjoner when the resident citizens of the United States met to locate the town of Skagway under the United States laws, and likewise at Dyea when similar proceedings were had, and that neither then nor at any time before he ceased to act as commissioner in May, 1898, was any protest made by Canadian officials or subjects who visited these localities, against these proceedings, nor any claim made by them that those towns were within Canadian territory.

Commissioner Smith states that on the trail which extended from Skagway over White Pass to Lake Bennett, a distance of about thirtyfive miles, and on the trail from Dyea to Lake Linderman a distance of thirty miles he exercised jurisdiction and that on numerous occasions he sent deputy marshals over those trails to make arrests; that

[ocr errors]

a

(Ibid.,

p. 221.

til'. S. Counter Case, App., pp. 218, 230, 282. o Ibid., p. 235.

« VorigeDoorgaan »