The Hawaiian star. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu]) 1893-1912, 1903-09-12


/ that distance a range of mountains.
| The contention is further made that
/ there is no such mountain range. 1t
/ also is urged that the United States
| has occupied this strip of territory
ever since it's acquisition from Russia
and that Russia had controlled it since
| the treaty of 1925 until ceded to the
! United States i'm 1867.
| In its counter-statement the Ameri-
can Commission makes rejoinder to
points covered in the presentation of
the British side of the case which it
| appears contains twenty or more docu-
ments which heretofore have not been
! given to the public.
The additional evidence referred to
| bears upon the negotiations which
! took place between Great Britain and
| Russia during the sears from 1923 to
! 1925, and it is contended that this new
evidence in no way alters any ma
terial contention made in the original
allegation, but that, on the contrary,
1T confirms and strengthens the posi-
ton of the United States"
| These documents consist largely of
statements made and letters written
! by Pelly, who was at that time deputy
governor of the Hudson Bay Company,
and it is contended that his letters
fully sustain the assertion that in fix
ing a line of demarcation the British
! Government acted solely in the inter-
ests of that company.
The Commissioners discuss at some
length the claim made by their oppo-
Inents that many protests have been
filed by British officials against the
American claims in reference to the
boundary line. They admit that from
time to time there have been informal
representations, but these they assert
We're, in the main, without sufficient
data to justify serious consideration.
Indeed, they say that never until after
the Klondike gold discoveries were
made in 1896 did the British Govern
ment take up the question seriously.
They admit that in 1898 attention was
called to the claim of the British Gov
eminent that the ten-league strip eX-
tended only from the main waters of
the ocean, but they say that this con-
tention was not made absolutely clear
until the British case was delivered to
the present tribunal on the I'd of May
last
In support of the American con-
tention that the strip should measure
from tidewater and from the heads of
bays and inlets, a number of deposit
tons are produced in connection with
icupation of this strip by settlers from
the United States since 1880. Espe-
cial effort is directed toward showing
head of Lynn canal, including the
sites of the towns of Dyea, Skagway,
White Pass and Lake Bennett. 1t is
also stated that numerous documents
have been preserved which had been
given to Indian chiefs and others by
officials of the United States showing
the presence in the Lynn canal inlets
of naval and other authorities of the
United States annually for twenty
years after the United States acquired
the territory. 1t is contended that
this occupation and control were
known to the Canadian Government
and it's people.
Discussing the boundaries proposed
by Great Britain, the claim makes ref
Ierence to the instability of the Cana
dian contention on this point and con-
cludes that the United States has
| from the time of cession of Alaska to
the present day maintained but one
Interpretation of the treaty of 1926
It's position has been open and known
to the world. 1t is the same which
was presented to the tribunal in its
case and which it now reiterates in
this counter-case.
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
nome the facts presented in the state
ments to which reference has been
made. Considerable space is devoted
to the part played by the KlondilIe
gold discoveries in arousing Great
Britain's interest in the controversy
and in this connection notice is taken
OF an assertion made by the British
commissioners that the towns of Dyea
ana SkagWay owed their existence to
the migration to the Klondike. They
assert on the contrary that Dyea was
founded in 1886 and Skagway in 1888.
They contradict fatty a contention
made by the British Commissioners to
the effect that Canada's claim to
the territory at the head of the Lynn
canal was at the time well-lknown to
the United States Government"
This" they say, lis gratuitous
assertion. There is no proof to sustain
1t. Canada never put forward any
such clai INTO the United States. The
claim was as made in 1898 by Great
britain before the Great Joint High
| Commission. 1t is said that If the
canadian Government had instructed
British vessels to disregard these regu-
lations there would have been grave
danger of a serious collision There
undoubtedly would have been a col
llsion, just as certainly as if they had
been instructed to disregard the regu-
lations of the port or New York"
Strong exception also is taken to
the contention that there was reser-
walton on the part of the British Gov
eminent when the United States vol
unteered to create a port of entry at
Dyea. The argument asserts that
whatever reservation there was, was
made by commissioner of customs
and that he had no authority in the
premises.
COAST EARTHQUAKES.