Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1891-01-06

complicated. are often found after prolonged
discussion, to depend on the settlement OF a
single point Such. in the Judgment Of the
President, is the position in which the United
States and Great Britain find themselves In the
pending controversy touching the true con-
struction Of the Russo-American and Anglo
Russian treaties Of 1924 and 1925. Great Britain
contends that the phrase Pacific ocean, as used
| in the treaties, was intended to include and
does include the body Of water which is now
known as the Behring sea. The United States
contends that the Behring sea was not men,
toned or even referred to in either treaty,
and was in no sense included in the phrase
Pacific ocean II Great Britain can maintain
her position that the Behring sea at the time Of
the treaties with Russia Of 1924 and 1925 was
| included in the Pacific ocean the government
OF the United States has no well-grounded COM
plant against her. II, on the other hand, this
government can prove beyond all doubt that
the Behring sea, at the date of the treaties, was
understood by the three signatory powers to be
a separate body of water, and was not included
In the phrase Pacific ocean, then the Ameri-
can case against Great Britain Is complete and
undeniable."
WHAT rs THE NORTHWEST coAsT?"
The Secretary says that the dispute involves
the meaning Of the phrase northwest coast"
or northwest coast Of America" which he
contends means the coast Of the Pacific south
Of the Alaskan peninsula south of the
sixtieth degree. He says that so absolute has
historian, Hubert Howe Bancroft, has written
an accurate history Of the northwest coast,
illustrated by a carefully prepared map ire
produced in the letter., including precisely the
area which has been steadily maintained by the
United States IN the pending discussion. The
Secretary next takes up the treaties Of 1924
and 1925 and, in answer TO Lord Salisbury, says:
The government of the. United States cor
daily agrees with Lord Salisbury statement
that throughout the whole correspondence
cOnpactal with the formation of he tra tins
there was no reference whatever by either side
to any distinctive name for Behring sea, and
for the very simple reason. which have already
indicated, that the negotiation had no refer
ence whatever to the Behring sea. but was ell
tirely confined to a strip of land on the north
west coast and the waters Of the Pacific ocean
adjacent thereto"
IT WAS THE SEA OF KAMscHArKA.
Continuing upon the same theme the Secre-
tary says that the same sea had been regarded
separate from the Pacific ocean long before
1925, and its most widely recognized name was
the sea of Ksmschatka. and Roberts map pre-
pared under direction of Capt. Cook. the most
eminent English navigator of the eighteenth
century, put it in absolute contradistinction to
the great South sea- or the Pacific ocean.
The Secretary incloses 105 maps published dur
ing the ninety years prior to 1925, on every one
of which. he says, the body of water now
known as Behring sea was plainly distinguished
by a name separate from the Pacific ocean, n
few using the name of Behring. The Secretary
asks whether with this great cloud of witnesses
before the eyes of Messrs. Adams and Canning
they would simply include the in the
phrase, Pacific ocean," and make no allusion
to II as separate sea. He says
. ''When we contemplate the minute partcu-
larity, the tedious verbiage, the Implications
and the redupiications employed to secure I'M
Iaistakable plainness in framing treaties, il is
impossible to conceive that fact of this great
10 kax.. A.
instructions written by MIR. Adams and aIr G.
Canning, secretaries for foreign affairs in
their respective countries, impossible that such
fact could have escaped the notice of Mr.
Middleton and Count Nesselrode. of Mr. STRAIT
ford Canning and MIR. Poletic.i. who were the
neSotiators of the two treaties. 1t is impossi-
BILE that in the Anglo-Russian treaty Count Nes-
serode Mr.. Stratford Canning and Mr.. Pole
tica could have taken sixteen lines to recise the
titles and honors they had received from their
respective sovereigns and not even suggest the
insertion of one line, or even word. to secure
so valuable a grant to England the full free
dom Of the Behring sea-
He cites the history of the Russian American
Fur Seal Company. showing that Russia claime!
absolute jurisdiction over Behring sea. and
that this was not disputed by Great Britain at
any time. The enormous profits of the Russian
American company in the fur trade Of the
Behring sea continued under the Itiissian flag
for more than forty years after the treaties OF
loZf anu loo nhu Deen concluded. Ana vet
Lord Salisbury contends that during this long
period Of exceptional profits from the fur trade
Great Britain and the United States had as
good right rs Russia to take part in these highly
lucrative ventures.
NO FUR SEALS TAKEN FOR YEARS.
American and English ships in goodly num-
bers during this whole period annually visited
and traded on the northwest coas. on the Pa
eff, ocean. And yet Of all these vessels of the
t.l vafx Ilr,to
sought to disturb the fur fisheries OF the Beh-
ring sea or along its coasts either OF the CONT
nent or of the islands.
The fact that the ships of both nations re-
Trained during that long period from taking
single fur seal inside the shores of that sea ia n
presumption of their lack Of right and their
recognized disability SO strong that. independ-
emily OF all other arguments. it requires the
most authentic and convincing evidence to re-
but it. That English ships did not enter the
Behring sea to take part in the catching OF seais
is not all that can be said. Her acquiescence in
Russias power over the seal fisheries was SO
complete that during the forty years OF Rllssia's
supremacy in the Behring sea (that followed
the treaties Of ls24-25) it is not believed that
Great Britain even made q protest, verbal or
written. against what Bancroft describes as the
Russian monopoly"
Mr.. Elaine cites quotations from the negotia-
tions between the United States and Russia to
show that Mr.. Middleton's dispute of the juris-
u
nc ocean and not to Behring sea.
This earnest protest by Mr. Middleton, it
viii be noted. was against the ukase of Alex
der, which proposed to extend Russian SOW
ereignty over the Pacific ocean as far south
as the tifty-frst degree Of latitude. at which
point as Mr.. Adams reminded the Russian
minister. that ocean is OO0 miles wide 1t is
also to be specially noted that Mr.. Middleton's
double reference to 1.-The free seas would have
no meaning whatever if he did not recognize
that freedom on certain seas had been re-
stricted. He could not have used the phrase il
he had regarded all seas in that region AS free
seas
After citing further passages of diplomatic
correspondence with relation to the Russo
American treaty, sustaining his position, Mr..
Blaine SAYS:
Lord Salisbury has deemed it proper in his
dispatch tn call the attention Of the govern
ment of the United States to some elementary
principles of international law touching the
freedom of the seas. For our hotter instruction
he gives sundry extracts from Wheaton and
kent-Our most eminent publicists-and for
further illustration quotes from the dispatches
of Secretaries Seward and Fish, all maintaining
the well known principle, that nations juris-
diction over the sea is limited to three marine
miles from its shore line. Commenting on
these quotations his iordship SAYS:
"a claim of jurisdiction over the open sea
which Is not in accordance with the recognized
principles of international law or usage may of
course. be asserted by force, but cannot be said
to have any legal validity as against the vessels
Of other countries, except in far it is posi-
f<a1 in,