New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1899-08-10
THE CLAIMS OF CANADA.
AIR. MILISs ALLEGED STATEMENT RE-
GARDIyG ALASKAN PORTS.

canadian members of the Joint High Commits
sion. which has only recently attracted public
attention. is perhaps the most amusing develop
snent Of the Alaskan boundary question. at least
40 the American negotiators. who had seen moth
ing but newspaper clippings purporting TO rep
resent Sir wilfrid Laurier as saying that Russia
IN the boundary treaty with Great Britain. upon
which the United States depended for title, dis
.inctly recognized the right OF England to a
MORT or ports in the disputed territory at the
head OF Lynn Canal and at other points There
does not seem 10 be any warrant for believing
that the Canadian Premier has ever said any
thing OF the sort, and Americans who have been
associated with him in the recent negotiations
regard him as incapable OF making such a ride
ulous claim. The statement has also been con-
nected with the name OF Sir Charles Upper
whose familiarity with the subject would give
such declaration some weight but II turns out
upon investigation that the proposition first APP
reared in an interview said 10 have been de-
uberately authorized by the Canadian Minister
OF Justice. Senator Mills, Of Ottawa, about ten
DAYS ago The article in which the claim ap-
reared dealt principally with a reasonable state
nent from Sir Charles Upper on the boundary
question containing might be expected from
him nothing new. sensational or Objectionable.
The sensation is supplied by introducing Senator
Mills as perhaps Canadas leading constitu-
tional lawyer" and proceeding TO have him
carefully make this declaration:
Just why the Americans refused to arbitrate
or 70 compromise except on conditions impos-
sihe TO us is shown in the treaty of 1925 BY
The seventh article Of that treaty the vessels Of
Russia and England or those belonging TO their
respective subjects were mutually TO be at lio-
erty. without any hindrance whatever, to enter
all the inland seas. CULTS, Ravens and creeks for
the purposes Of fishing and trading with the
natives. BY Article X the British and Russian
vessels navigating the Pacific Ocean II COM
reIed by storm or accident were allowed 10
take shelter in the ports Of the respective par
ties and were at liberty to reft there
Now. is II not too clear 10 admit OF question
that the contracting parties assumed that under
the provisions Of this treaty there were ports
and estuaries along the coast that were under
the sovereignty Of each? Yet If the United
states contention is correct there were no
ports and waters remaining 10 Great Brit
ain
The Canadian Minister Of Justice must have
had poor opinion Of American intelligence II
he thought any one in the United States would
swallow such garbled quotation Of the sew
entb article Of the treaty Of February 16 1925,
between Great Britain and Russia.
The article is follows:
Article VII II IS also Understood that for the
space Of ten years from the signature OF the
present convention the vessels of the two POW
ers or those belonging TO their respective SUB
1ects shall mutually be al liberty TO frequent.
without anv hindrance whatever all the inland
seas the CULTS Ravens and creeks on the coast
mentioned In Article III for the purpose OF fish
Ing and OF trading with the natives
The ten year limitation acquiesced in by Great
Britain has been uniformly agreed TO constitute
complete recognition by England in $50 or
Russia's uncontroverted right TO all the inland
seas the CULTS. havens and creeks" which were
subsequently coded 10 the United States in 1864
For that reason Article VII has always been
studiously avoided by Canadians in boundary
NEGOTIATIONS. II the one article that demon
strated England's concession 10 Russian owner
ship Of every inch OF watershed that drained
into the Pacific The Canadian claim to har-
bors therefore vanishes absolutely before the
Russian and American undsputed ownership Of
every creek for the last seventy-four years. II
Senstor Mills has been correctly quoted he has
put his foot into IT,
II might be interesting and instructive for him
II know Just how Article VII came TO be put
into the treaty of 1925
II was due 10 the fact that year before, in
1924 the United States and Russia concluded
and ratified a treaty which included the follow
ing:
Article " II is neve -theless understood that
during a term Of ten years, counting from the
signature Of the present convention. the ships or
both Powers or which Delong 10 lneT ClIlZens OF
subjects respectively may reclprocaliy frequent
without any hindTanCe whatever the interior
seas CULTS, harbors and creeks upon the coast
mentioned in the preceding article ror the pur-
pose OF fishing and trading with the natives OF
the country.
THE coast mentioned in the preceding
ticle" was therein described as the northwest
coast Of America" and the islands adjacent TO
the north of 81 degrees and 40 minutes of north
latitude" AS 2 matter Of fact, Great Britain
or1v secured for the Hudson Bay Company the
zen veare' permit 10 FISH and trade given by
Article VII in the treaty Of 1928 because the
United States had already secured the privilege
for the Alaska Company. and ten years later,
when both these companies begged for an ex-
tension for another ten years through their pro-
tecting governments. Russia declined 10 grant II
70 Great Britain but subsequently, leased TO the
Hudson Bay Company such rights for another
ten year period, and al the expiration OF that
lease refused 10 renew it. Great Britain thus
for a second time gave emphatic recognition to
Fussia's ownership of all the creeks. Ravens,
CULTS and inland north OF "a degrees ~
minutes.
Canadians must regret that Article VII mas
been revived by their leading constitutional
LAWYER" and they will scarcely find any comfort
,r hts discovery OF Article X Of the same treaty,
which is the customary clause in all conven-
tons relating 10 reciprocal navigation rights In
the waters of neighboring maritime nations. II
It had been quoted in fun nothing more could
have been made from II than Great Britalns
guarantee that distressed Russian ships could
seek refuge and repair in British ports south OF
~ degrees 40 minutes in return FOR similar
courtesy TO British ships north OF that line
II Article has any bearing upon the present
controversy it consists in corroooratns the rec
ogn,,,on nv Great Britain in 1926 of Russia's
absolute control Of all navgable harbors in the
terr,,o-v m which Canada now raises preposter-