New-York tribune., 1897-08-02
PRICE THREE CENTS.
RIVAL CLAIMS IN ALASKA
GOLD DISCOVERIES GIVE NEW INTEREST
TO THE BOUNDARY DISPUTE
THE GROUNDS on WHICH THE CONTROVERSY "a
BASED. AND THE EFFORTS WHICH HAVE
BEEN MADE TO SETTLE IT.

Il.
lBY TELEGRAPH TO THE TpIsuSEI
washington, Aug. 1.-Much confusion Of ideaf
appears to exist concerning the nature of the
Alaska boundary contention between the
united States and Great Britain which has sud-
denly assumed greater Importance than ever in
the pubic estimation on account Of the rich gold
discoveries and developments in the Yukon
basin. All boundary disputes between the
United States and Great Britain seem 10 be in.
terminable. Disputes OF that sort which arose
from the treaty of 1888 are still unsettled.
despite the negotiations and provisions OF the
Treaty Of Ghent In 1914 and the Webster-Ash-
burton Treaty Of 1872. both Of which were in
large part designed clearly to define the bounda-
rles OF the respective countries as well OF at
ieast nalf-dozen other treaties and conyen-
'iohs and as many international commissions
According to the annual Message OF President
Cleveland for 1886, the commissioners ap-
pointed TO mark the International boundary In
rassamaquoddy Bay according to the descrfp-
tfon or the Treaty OF Ghent. have not yet fully
agreed and IN the same Message attention was
called to the unsatisfactory delfmitatton OF the
respective Jurisdictions Of the United States and
the Dominion Of Canada in the Great Lakes at
the approaches to the narrow waters which con-
meet them, and IA Joint commission to de-
termine the line was declared to be "a neces-
sity for which immediate provision should be
made" And yet most persons had supposed
that these boundaries. which had been pre-
scribed by the Treaty OF Client, and marked and
described by the commissioners under that
treaty more than seventy years ago. were estab-
lished for all time to come, or at least until such
time as all Canada should become a portion Of
the United States.
THE CHIEF POINTS IN DISPUTE
In view Of these and other historical facts
which might be cited. 1t would not be surprising
if the Alaska boundary controversy should still
remain unsettled in the evening of the twentieth
century 1t is we'll. however for this generation
to obtain correct idea Of the grounds Of the con-
troversy One, and that which offers the great
est difficulties. relates to that portion Of tho
boundary line which follows the contour Of the
coast from the soutkernmost point of Prince OF
Wales Island until 1t strikes the Hist meridian
Of longitude at or near the summit Of Mount ST.
Elias; the other relates to the physical location
Of the 141st meridian, which forms the eastern
boundary of Alaska from Mount ST. Elias north
wardy TO the Arctic Ocean. 1t Is the latter por-
ton CT the boundary which crosses the gold
fields Of the Yukon basin. In his annual Message,
dated December Q 1895 the President dwelt
on the Importance of having this portion Of the
boundary defined and marked soon as prac-
ticabe. Among other things he said:
The ascertanment OF a given meridian at par
ticular point is work requiring much time and
careful observations and surveys Such observa-
lions and surveys were undertaken by the United
States Coast and Geodetic Survey in 1880 and ISL.
while similar work in the same quarter under Brit
results; but the surveys have been independently
conducted and no international agreemeht 70 marx
those or any other parts OF the lilst meridian hy
permanent monuments has yet oeen made. In
the mean time the Valley. Of the Yukon is beeom;
ing highway through the hitherto unexplored
wIlds Of Alaska; and abundant mineral wealth has
near the junction of the boundary meridian with
the Yukon and its tributaries. In these circun-
that the jurisdictonsI limits Of the respective gov.
srnmsnts in this new region be speediy deter
proposed "A joint delimitation Of the Hist meridian
by an international commission OF experts; which,
if Congress will authorize ii and make due pro-
vision therefor. can be accomplished with no un
reasonable delay.
MR.. PITNEY'S EXPLANATION.
Congress did not hesitate to provide the
money required. joint resolution appropriating
1000 for this object having passed both
houses and been approved on February 20. 1896.
When this resolution was pending in the House
Of Representatives Mr.. Pitney, Of New-Jersey,
then and now member Of the Appropriations
Committee, delivered speech in which he
clearly set forth and explained the grounds OF
what had already been done In relation to the
southeastern boundary between Prince OF
Wales Island and Mount st. Elias Mr.. Pitney.
among other things. said:
on the Canadian side OF the question two claims
made. In the first place. they claim that. while
leagues from the coast or thereabouts there Is
mainland and that the line should be run there
the coast. which would leave in British terri,
IGg gn cans Ps wo great esnars Which esteRd into
the interior. This would bring the British posses
sons down very close to the ocean, and at the
same time the American territory OF Alaska would
be ana II would be M rrrT l9r us
to the other without the eonseht OF the british & au;
establish forihcations upon tidewater. could run
branch of the Canadian Pacific Railway TO Taku
those two great entrances into the interior of the
country. The second claim on the part OF the ca
nadians Is that the ten marine leagues, or thirty
nautical miles equivalent to about thirty-hye stat.
ute miles wncn NJ are 90 oe 5s shoud be- measured
NOT from the coast OF the main continent but from
ns ness ba cSnne The result OF aowns tha
claim would be to throw the control OF all these
waterways into British hands
MARKING THE IAST MERIDIAN.
Mr.. Ptney further explained that ''the joint
or coincident typographical survey OF this
par, OF the boundary, under the convention OK
1892 between the United States and Great Brit
ain. had been completed and report signed by
the commissioners December 81. 1893. but
that the maps had not been engraved and the
matter was not in a condition to be laid before
Congress Mr.. Pitney then went on 10 discuss
that phase Of The question which relates 10 the
boundary n0rth or MOUNT St. Eiids' EAiilohb
other things he said:
The second great question between the British
authorities on the one side and the Government and
neonle OF the United States on the other relates 10
me true location upon the surface OF the earth o.
the lilst meridian OF west longitude. and II is 10
this branch OF subject that this present resolu
tion mainly relates. In regard TO that meridian
no doubt arises from the LANGUAGE o. the treaty.
The doubt arises only in attempting to mark upon
the earths surface the location OF the meridian;
THAT location Is be ascertained by astronomical
survey not by the ordinary typographical survey,
but by observation OF the stars. and IT Is very ex-