Willmar tribune. [volume] (Willmar, Minn.) 1895-1931, 1903-09-09

AsAOA VcSaDUl08 territory
London, Sept 4.-The Alaskan
boundary commissioners held their
first meeting Thursday in the confer
ence room of the foreign Office
Prior to the formal assembling the
commissioners met in their private
conference room and selected Reginald
II. Tower, of the British diplomatic
service, formerly attached to the lega-
ton at Washington, and recently min
lister to Siam, to be secretary of the
commission. ]. r. Carter, second Sec
rotary of the United States embassy,
and Mr.. Pope, a representative of the
Canadian government, were appointed
assistant secretaries. Lord Chief JUS
t1ce Alverstone was subsequently chos-
en- chairman of the commission.
1t was announced that oral argu-
ments would commence September Is,
and Lord Alverstone expressed the
hope that they would be finished by
October 9.
Lord Alverstone, after formally an
nouncing that the commission was in
session, stating that he had been Sc
lected as president, an honor which
he highly appreciated, asked counsel
when they desired to begin the oral
arguments. Sir Robert B. Finlay, the
attorney general, in behalf Of the Brit
1sh counsel. suggested that at least two
weeks would be required for prepara-
ton, to which Judge John M. Dickin-
son, representing the American coun-
sci, assented, though he said the
American counsel would be ready in a
week. Lord Alverstone asked when
the oral arguments would be finished
and Attorney General Finlay suggested
October Is, but his lordship remarked
that he thought shorter period was
advisable, and October 9 was fixed up
on.
The commission decided to sit five
days per week, commencing September
Is, and excluding Saturdays, and to be
in session from II a. m. to D. m.
daily, and granted permission for a
limited number Of representatives of
the press to attend the sittings.
In order that the presentation of the
cases may be exhaustive, it has been
arranged that three of counsel for each
government shall make arguments, the
British opening and being followed al
Tentatively by Americans and British,
the former securing the advantage of
delivering the closing argument.
The commission then removed the
Injunction of secrecy on all documents
hitherto exchanged, and the sitting
was adjourned.
The American Case.
The documents covering the Amer
ican presentation Of the case are COM
prised in three volumes, making to-
tai of about LOO pages. In addition
there are also two volumes of maps.
The largest of the volumes Of text con-
tains the original statement by the
American commissioners, while one of
the smaller volumes presents the
American counter case in rejoinder to
the British case and the other argu-
ments of the American commission
ers.
In the first volume the questions at
issue, namely, what is intended to be
the point of commencement Of the
line of demarkation between the Unit
ed States and Canada; what is the
Portland channel; what course the line
should take to the entrance of that
channel; to what point of the Seth par
allel the line should be drawn from
the head of Portland channel, and 9TH
er familiar questions are discussed.
There also is extensive discussion of
the extent Of the strip of territory
along the coast on the mainland that
Russia conveyed to the United States
by the treaty of 1867.
The argument in the case is a care
full study of maps, treaties and other
documents bearing upon the boundary
contention and it is intended to drive
home the facts presented in the state
ments.
Klondike Gold Discoveries.
Considerable space is devoted to the
part played by the Klondike gold dis
coveries in arousing Great Britain's
interest in the controversy, and in this
connection notice is taken of an as
sertion made by the British commits
sioners that the towns of Dyea and
Skagway owed their existence to the
migration to the Klondike. They as
sert to the contrary that Dyea was
founded in 1886 and Skagway in 1888.
They contradict fatty contention
made by the British commissioners to
the effect that "Canada's claim to the
TERRITORIES at the head of Lynn canal
was at the time we'll known to the
United States government"
'.This," they say, lis gratuitous
assertion. There is no proof to sus-
tain it. Canada never put forward any
such claim to the United States. The
claim was first made in 1898 by Great
Britain before the joint high commits
sion. It is said that IT the Canadian
government had instructed British YES
sells to disregard these regulations
there would have been grave danger
sof a serious collision There undoubt-
edly would have been a collision, Just
4. s,E-- lA ~. - g.