The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1895-04-08
THE ALASKA BOUNDARY.


The Victoria Daily colonist. admittedly
the leading Journal OF British Columbia
develops a pergerss Inconsistency in It's
treatment of the Alaska boundary ques-
ton, which. we regret to state, Is an I'M
warranted departure from its usual iosi-
cal and otherwise able course. We fail TO
comprehend what ultimate beneiit can ac-
crue TO either the Canadian or British Co
lumbar governments. and more particu-
larly~so the people of the last mentioned
province. by the press across the line CIV
ing out 10 it's readers misleading articles
and IL not misstatements. emitting 10
state the whole truth. A few extracts from
the columns of the colonist under var
ious dates. as given below. nantes; the
wanton recklessness with which that
Journal at least handles this subject. that
has now become indisputabiy one OF in
creassng Importance. A leading editorial.
under date OF February IL. reviewing the
points Of their alleged claim. says:
1T seems 10 be a mystery how the pres
ent line came TO be drawn. IL is certainly
not the one agreed upon by the convention
Of iszs. IL would appear that the error
has arisen from a mistake made in the
name OF channel. Some one appears TO
made biunder. and others. without TAX
ing the trouble TO inquire. have followed
in the track OF the blunderer. and conse-
quently the wrong boundary has come To
be generally accepted instead of the right
ONE
Here then follows It's contention that
the Benin canal Is the channel intended in
the treaty OF Ise5 and asserts that when
~ Il a5z h.H nal
pears TO have had no name and that
Portland canal has been substituted for
the strait CBehm canal that is situated
between Prince of Wales island and the
mainland"
When these assertions were made the
Coionlst knew that absolutely no grounds
ever existed or exit from which IL could
assume that either Great Britain or Rus
STA had been guilty OF any blunder in
framing the treaty of lse5. or that the
Benin canal was not named at that date.
Immediately following these pretentfous
as well as dlsingenuous assertions. IL sets
forth the language of the treaty OF fs-5.
and Intentionally omts the name of the
Portland channel. as therein specifically
recited. II would I'm the next place argue
itself lamentahly ignorant of the history
Benin canal had been named by Capt.
George Vancouver between the years 1872
and 1874. when he explored the Pacific
coast, as shown at page 3ss. second vol
urne of his works. 1t then proceeds with
an ad cap;andum argument 10 contend
that Portland channel could not possibly
be the channel mentioned In the treaty"
and INDUCES in the following twaddle:
-
fortunately been wide awake in the matter
of the Alaska boundary line" II contends
that the assumption that the words port
land canai' are IN the original treaty is
entirely erroneous and without authority
20 sustain a. "a parliamentary paper be-
fore us says this. and adds. that from
all the information that the government
can obtain IL has reason 10 believe that
these words will not be found In the orig
iual. or, If there, the term has been mis-
applied
These statements were given out 10y the
Coionlst I'm it's issue OF February IL uit.
and. Of course. prior 10 the publication
OF the very able report Of the committee
Of the Chamber OF Commerce of this city
In our issue of April : inst. BY refer
ence 20 our files OF that date Il Nlu be
found that subdivisions numbered 3 and
Of paragraph I of that report definitely
described the Tine 81 demarkation I'm the
language or the treaty. OF ISIS. and that
Portland channel" Is distinctly therein
named. Again, tho Colonist In its issue
OF Aprii inst publishes the report Of che
committee of our Chamber of Commerce
In full save these Identical sectio rs. which
| contain the language OF the treaty and
sllghtingiy remarks that the report re-
cites an Impossible description"
These discrepancies might possibly he
regarded. 20 use It's own language. "a
! some % the plumbers which 1t SAYS the
| "nHninlon officials have followed sheep
| like" but certainly the perverslty of the
| leader Of that paper of April I cannot be
1 taxed TO the Observation-Disclosures OF those
| officials IN an editorial Of that date
| caatloned Very neuonstrattve" Il TO
! ceeds 10 crtiic!se the Chamber OF Com
| sncrce 81 this city. and makes the as
/ founding statement that this paper does
| not quote the text % the treaty az iS25.
! and speaks 90 e a. a Significant crnis-
/ sion" The intention being 20 show SIS
! RAIDERS that neither the Chamber OF Com
/ mercen or this paper reported the text Of
/ that treaty In whtch the channel called
! Portland canar' was named zna then
! with cool nerve proceeds 50 set fort h
) In tire diplomats Language % the treaty
/ the very aTttcle : which Il. the Cclontst.
/ had festEredly osnftte3 - publish as ra-t
/ % the IMPORT ~ eur Chamber az Gem
/ ulerce. and "a published ~ THIS yager.
{ tg contains the vortiS Portland chan
Z ne}.T the channel waica n SIS article -
/ February ~ last Il denied would be found
tn the WORKS ~ the treaty.
II the peoIs3e Ct BrstiSaa Columbia are
90 set the ''tr,se inwafvfaeSs'' % the houn-
1 dary contention from the columns OF the
; CcloDt~s hereafter. is Is safe 70 say shat
I they VIII ~ f0GHd following 'sslun iers''
I az sAe~plike. as the Coloutst SAYS. the
1 Dominion of8clals nave herrtof fore doae.
---------------------
/ THe s'Eus - reforming prosperity are
! heoot8ioS miare Observable IN the markets
I ~ 5ne Ea<t Especially - thls ths - Sc
! "a rexar3 90 the sroR trade. BesssEueF