New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1903-10-18
THE ALASKA BOUNDARY.

The decision of the Alaska Boundary Com
mission completely justihes the claim of the
United States TO an unhrohen coast line through
out the extent of its northwest dominion The
main hope of Canada was to break through
that coast line, to separate the American terri
tory into two parts and secure q foothold on the
sea
For this purpose was trumped up the theory
that the boundary under the Anglo-Rus
treaty Of 1875, though it professed 10 follow the
'sinuosities" Of the coast, was really meant TO
cut across the great arms Of the sea. leaving to
Russia and its successor the United States,
merely the headlands. This contention was con-
trary TO the evident understanding of both
British and Russian negotiators in 1925. and to
that OF a long series of official and unofficial
map makers in Great Britain. 1t never would
have been made if the discovery Of gold in the
Hlondike had not awakened in the Canadians
strong desire for port on Lynn Canal, which
was the most convenient road to the mines. II
only the boundary ran little nearer the ocean,
so that this deep arm OF the sea carried navi-
gable water up into Canadian territory. then
Canada would have free access to the gold re-
Gion without paying any tribute TO the United
States.
The wish was father TO the thought, and i'm
mediately il was discovered that the boundary
had been drawn, as Sir Robert Finlay said IN
presenting the Canadian case TO the commits
sion. in ostentatious defiance of the treaty Of
1919" Inasmuch. however, as all the old rec
ords showed the boundary exactly where the
United States maintained it from the purchase
in 1871. and where Russia maintained it from
TIE treaty of 1925 if there had been any ques
ton about il in early days Great Britain would
never have acquired temporarily by treaty from
Russia. as she did. the privilege to navigate
these arms of the sea, when by asserting her
rights TO territory at their heads she could have
had those waters as her own for all time
As no decision of this controversy could have
been reached without the conversion Of at least
one member from the view of his own nation,
the decision in favor of the United States means
that the justice of its contention appealed to
The other side with convincing force. 1t is to he
hoped that the Canadians will take the finding
against them in good part, whether it proves TO
have been made by the vote of the colonial rep
resentatives on the commission or only by that
OF Lord Chief Justice Alverstone.
The United States wins its case absolutely ey-
cept ia one trifng point. The London dis
patches do not exactly indicate what conces-
sion is made TO Canada with regard to Portland
Canal but apparently Pearse Island. q small
a~A rnimportant bit Of land at the mouth Of
the canal and al the far south end of the boun-
dairy line, is conceded to Canada. and the tail
OF Alaska is merely cut short a few miles. The
only significance OF this is to give up exclusive
Iy to Canada one entrance to Portland Canal
which is a common arm of the sea. drawing the
boundary line in the middle Of the other en-
trance. instead Of drawing the line in the middle
of the south channel. and reserving the north
one exclusively 10 the United States. Neither
account of territory navigation is this
concession 10 be regretted. If il reconciles
Canada TO disappointment of her eager desire
TO secure a rort for the Klondke. she is well
come 10 il. Whether she is satisfied or not. the
settlement Of the entire question is most crafty
ing. 1t removes from the field Of controversy
the one point of serious difference that might
ross bly, disturb tie harmony of the two great
AngIo-SaXon nations. Both countries have rea-
son to be thankful to the commissioners who
have with wisdom and tact reached this happy
conclusion and the United States has reason to
give its APP rovaI and its thanks to the advocates
WHO have so ably and successfully defended it's
rights before the commission.