The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1890-07-20
'.rHE LARGEE ALASKAN QUESTION"

The above Is the title of an article in
which the New York Times OF July Is. pre-
SCENTS new and highly interesting view of
what has been known as the Behring Sea
question. in which is included data not
heretofore published. giving much al
tered aspect to the controversy, greatly to
the apparent advantage of the United
States.
The TTmss treats it as definitely settled
that Mr.. Blaine has chosen to reject the
proposed international agreement for a
close season for seals, and to rest our case
upon the strict rights of our country in the
Alaskan waters, whatever arbitration may
decide these rights to be.
This" says the Times, "enlarges the
contention from dispute over seals to
claim to the waters they swim in. and to
all that these waters contain beside" And
therein. with much force 1t Is claimed, lies
far more than the value of the seals, great
as that may be. Compared with the fisher
les OF the Newfoundland coast, about which
England and France are contending to the
edification of the whole world, the cod,
halibut, herring and mackerel fisheries OF
the Alaskan waters are inestimably more
valuable. And the Times. which has not
been friend or an admirer of Mr.. Blaine,
admits that II he can make good the claim
which he is urging he will have won "an
imperial stake" Astounding in wealth be-
yond avarice."
In support Of the claim Of the United
States these points are presented:
In the controversy of 1s24-5 neither Eng
land, Russia nor the United States had a
word to say about Behring sea or any
water within 1000 miles OF it. England
and this country successfully resisted
Russia's pretensions to forbid alien vessels
Ia approach within Colleagues of ''the great
ocean, and to exclude commerce from the
"open sea north of latitude 81" But
Russia, in yielding this point in Section /,
made distinct grant OF privilege to trade
and fish in all interior waters" which.
Mr. Blaine insists, meant, and was in
tended to mean. and on ali sides was
recognized as meaning. Behring sea.
Then comes the fine point that England
IN ISIS made similar treaty containing
the same clause. thus recognizing Russia's
rights in the premises and accepting fish,
ing and trading privileges in that sea at her
hands. But to further clinch the matter,
II is held that Russia is the grantor of the
United States in this matter, and that she
intended to and did convey all of her
rights. And as bearing on the question of
what those rights were, Ii is claimed. with
what seems TO be unanswerable logic. that
She grant to this country was intended TO
be, and actually was, no less restricted
than her previous grant to the Russian
American Company. of which the United
States became the successor. 1t is shown
that.the grant to that company was freely
made by Russia, and for generations was
fully acquiesced in by all the world.
As evidence of whatwss conveyed By that
grant, excerpts from the document itself ara
presented: I'VE. Paul the First" IL saws.
"haye noticed the advantages resulting 10
our empire from hunting and trading in
tue seas and along the coasts of America
wherefore, by right of discovery
and possession, We convey TO the
Russian-American Company the rights,
to use and profit by everything
which has been or shall be discovered in
those localities, without anv
competition by others, - the
exclusive right TO use and enjoy all profits
and advantages derived from hunting
trade, industries. and discovery of new
lands, prohibiting the use and enjoy.
ment OF these profits and advantages
TO those who would wish to sail to those
countries on their own account, and after