Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1899-10-13

The Alaskan boundary controversy has
assumed most satisfactory phase. accord
ing to a late dispatch from London. Sir
Henry Davies, Canadian minister of ma
rine and fisheries, announced yesterday in
an interview that he had just given Cana
da's consent to a temporary definition Of a
boundary line. thus practically settling the
whole matter for the present. The line
agreed upon to preserve peace on the Dor
der will run. 1t Is said. across Chilkoot pass.
thus following the line of the American
contention and maintaining existing condi
lions to territory and national jurisdic-
ton This modus vivendi will serve until
some permanent settlement Of the boun-
Diary can be effected by direct negotiation
or otherwise.
1t has been feared from time to time dur
ing this controversy that the United States,
rather than precipitate friction with Cana
da, would placate the dominion by granting
the temporary use of harbor on the Lynn
canal, in exchange for the placing of the
temporary boundary northeast of Dyea and
Skaguay. There seemed to be disposition
on the part of those engaged in the nego-
tiations to yield somewhat from the strict
letter of the American claim in view of
Canada's pressing need for an ocean outlet
at this point. 1t was apprehended that the
concession of a harbor without any real
recompense would establish bad prece-
dent, aside from the inroads which such
concession would cause upon the territorial
claims themselves.
According to Sir Henry Davies statement
Canada will not secure access to the ocean
by means of this temporary arrangement,
but nevertheless does not in the least re-
linquish her claim or intend to permit the
provisional line tn Sf nd &c
necessary. This means. of course, that the
controversy will be kept alive on the Ca
madam side. and it may therefore be ex-
pected that 1t will become an important
factor in future dominion elections The
provisional arrangement, however, leaves
the United States in possession. and puts
upon Canada the burden of establishing her
adverse claims.
Thus far in the controversy Canada has
advanced nothing more tangible in the dis
pute than the assertion that the Russian
treaties were intended to provide for
boundary line running through the irregu-
larities of the coast In opposition to this
assertion the United States has first point
ed to the long and virtually undisputed re-
cognition of the more inland boundary. and
has then proceeded to demonstrate that
Russia could never have had the intention
of securing a strip of coast land broken
into fragments and of no value for harbor
purposes. Thus the Canadian claim has
been shown to be contrary both to fact and
to reason. The substance Of Canada's an
swer to this presentation is the declaration
that she ought to have harbor because
she needs one in order to have a means of
partially controlling trade to the gold fields
In her territory. In response to this the
United States can only suggest that if she
needs an ocean outlet so badly she should
be willing to purchase one instead of try
ing to secure one by diplomatic devisings.
AT the same time this country Is not in the
market with harbors to sell, nor has Cana
da any valuable commodity which would
serve in such a bargain