The San Juan islander. [volume] (Friday Harbor, Wash.) 1898-1914, 1899-07-20

this part Of the British possessions. It
affirmed that the strip Of land stretch
ing along from Portland Canal to
Mount st. Elias, with a breadth Of ten
marine leagues, "must eventually be-
come the property Of Great Britain,
either as the direct result Of the devel-
opment Of gold, or for reasons which
are now yet in the beginning, but
whose results are certain" At that
time the British Colonist looked for
ward to obtaining this strip from Rus
STA either peaceably or forcibly, and
conjured up a vision of the British lion
and the Russian bear looking at each
other from the opposite sides of Bering
straits. Possibly Russia also may have
felt that such a contest was coming
and wisely saw that for her, situated
as she was. 1t would be improbable.
Not caring to stand at the door of Brit
ish America on the Pacific, she proba-
bly, counted upon making the United
States doorkeeper. And this Is a role
that, until recently, would have been
pleasant enough to the United States.
The events Of the last year have, how
ever, greatly modified the traditional
feeling between the two countries, and
the present Is, therefore, most oppor-
tune time to arrive at satisfactory
settlement of all territorial or other
questions at issue between the two
countries.
Some Of the Difficulties.
But to arrive at such a solution 1t is
necessary to know where the equities
lie. Those being determined, 1t is next
requisite to ascertain what, If any
thing, the other party has to offer in
return for waving or yielding any Of
these equities. This is the difficult
part of the subject. BY the terms of
the treaty of 1926 between Great Brit
ain and Russia, the provisions of which
were adopted at the treaty Of cession
between Russia and the United States
In 1867, the line Of demarcation be-
tween Russian America, as 1t was then
called, and Great Britain's North
American possessions, was defined.
When this treaty was made It was
supposed there was a range of noun
tains running down the entire coast,
practically, thus forming natural
watershed and line of demarcation.
The Russians cared only for a foothold
along the coast. as it was with the
fisheries they were concerned. The
treaty, however, made provision as to
how the boundary should be deter
mined should it be found that at any
place there Is no such natural bound
airy by limiting the Russian (now Uni
ted States) territory to a distance of
ten marine leagues, or thirty miles,
from the coast. The Canadian and
British contention. as now made, turns
upon the Portland canal. The British,
at least until recently, have claimed
that the words Portland canal or chan
mel In the convention were q mistake
for Benin canal, or Clarence inlet, or
else that what is now called Portland
canal was not then 80 called.
Construe Treaty Differently.
This difference ip the respective
American and Canadian boundary
lines Of the Alaska panhandle strip
arises from wholly different methods
Of constituting the treaty. There are
many intricate questions involved in
the methods Of construction. For in
stance. IN determining the ten marine
leagues from the coast to which, II the
absence Of mountain chain, the
American territory extends, shall sin
uosities Of the shore Of the mainland
be followed or should the line be run
from headland to headland7 Again,
shall the line be considered to run ten
marine leagues east Of the outer shore
Of the islands7 In that case In many
instances the line would not reach the
mainland. - some Of the islands are