Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1903-09-03

having been submitted in connection with
the British contention bears upon the ne
EQUATIONS which took place between Great
Britain and Russia during the years 1929.
1874 and 1925. It Is cohtended that this new
evidence In no way alters any material al
legAtion made In the original presentation,
but on the contrary confirms and strength
ems the position therein set forth"
Especial mention rs made of eleven of the
new documents. and referring to these the
commission say: TT is a significant fact
that Of the eleven PIGMENTS mentioned in
tse aas 1en
office. These not only fully sustain the as
sertiOns made In ther case Of the United
States that in fixing q line Of deHarkation
interest Of the Hudson Bay COMPANY but
they establish other Atts. which the United
States was unable to. state with certainty
until the production OF the documents-that
ish negotiator upon the subject Of the boun-
dairy originated at the Hudson's Bay house
in London: that the historical and geo.
graphical facts employed by the British
randa from time to time furnished the fer
eign office by Mr.. Peily. the deputy governor
OF the company: that all the Important cor
respondence was delivered to the directing
solicited by the foreign ONCE: and that the
Hudson's Bay Company advised and in a
measure controlled the British government
in each step Of the negotiations relating to
the boundary" tits further certtsn,lei That
so far as the British government is con-
hoerned the territorial auesGsoa was ct the
time the documents ware prepared Sub
sidiary to that of maritime jurisdiction.
Reference having also been made in the
British presentation to a map made BY w.
Faden Of London 1S28 as having been
Endorsed by Mr. Canning. 1t Is argued that
1t merely embodied geographical informa-
ton in accord with the memoranda Of the
Hudson Bay Company fnctosed to the
British minister. and also that 1t showed
the boundary desired by that company. 1t
Is also conceded that this map formed an
important part in the negotiations of 1924.
1t Is claimed on the part of the American
commissioners that Of the ten other docu-
ments relating to the negotiations which
are produced on behalf Of Great Britain
but one Is important. This is the treaty
draft inclosed with Mr. Canning's instruc-
the draft which he subsequently submit
ted to the Russian plenipotentiaries. 1t Is
incidentally stated that the British in the
presentation of their case concede that the
line of demarcatfon begins at Cape Muzon.
while differing from the Americans as to
its subsequent course.
As to Protests.
In the course Of the presentation of their
counter case the representatives Of the
tons on the part of their opponents that
protests have been made to this govern
ment at various times against its claim as
mitted that some protests have been made
1t IL claimed that in many cases no specific
complaint was made on the part Of Great
Britain. and 1.-The United States submits
that the acts stated and the so-called pro-
tests all fall FAR short of the requirements
Of international law and the practice OF
nations in cases OF such Importance and
gravity as those involving large areas OF
territory and rights Of navigation and COM
merce of the highest value
In this connection contention of the
United States Is asserted to be that up to
August 1. 1898. when the British govern
ment gave Its instructions to the high joint
commission. It had mo- distinct and official
entertained views respecting the treaty Of
1925 materially at variance with those uni
formly put forth and maintained by the
United States from 2Es TBS date Of the asauisi.
not until the British case was delivered,
on May 2 last. Was there q distinct and
formal averment made by that government
that It contested the, water boundary as
laid down upon all the official maps Of the
United States since 1851
Numerous DISPOSITIONS.
In addition to the evidence already sub
mitted a number eft dispositions are pro-
duced in connection with the counter case
showing the eccepation suf the strip or
iesiere by the United States. and especially
in the vicinity OF the head OF the Lynn
canal. since $780, Especial pains are taken
control over Dyea, Skagway, White
Pass Lake Bennett. &c. It Is also stated
that there 'are numerous documents pre-
served 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 the first
twenty years after the cession by Russia.
In short. 1t Is c0ntended that the United
States has been IN complete and peaceful
occupation Of the territory about the head
of Lynn canal since 1867; that this occupa-
ton and control were well known to the
Canadian government and its people, and
that no claim was advanced by them to this
territory or any protest made against the
American occupation previous to 1893. The
commission adds:
I'm the presence Of these facts and of the
public declarations, Of the present prime
minister of Canada and OF the minister of
the interior that Russia had been in pOsses-
sion of the territory from time immemoriaI.
and that In 1867 1t passed into the hands
OF the Americans, by whom 1t was held In
und1sputed possession up to 1898. 1t Is sug-
gested that the contention In the British
should have no influence upon the tribunal
The presentation then enters upon a some
what prolonged discussion of the boundaries
proposed by Great Britain. and again
makes reference to the insta bility of the
Canadian contention on this point, and
concludes by coming back to the original
contention. which is here pressed In the
following language:
The United States has from the time
OF the cessfon OF Alaska to the present day
nrn into
treaty of 1926. Its position has been open
and known to the world. 1t is the same
which was presented to the tribunal in it's
case and which 1t now reiterates in this
counter case"
Counter Case Summarized.
The counter case Is summarized as fol-
lows: It Is contended that the new evidence
presented by the British commissioners sub
Stimulates the statement of facts as orisf-
nally set forth by the United States; that
the channel described In the treaty of 1925