The Montgomery advertiser., 1903-12-08

HtQ or mountains slsirting the coast, ns ngur- T.. - tne charts of The early navisAlors. It had ct no time been possible for either
 patty sn interest to lay down, under the
 " exact according to its provisions as to commaad the assent of the other. For
 lsAriy three-fcurths of . century the eb-
 Ing the axercise of positive Jurisdiction on either side of the border left the question
 dormant In 1878 questions of revenue
 on suhins River led to the ton. crossing the channel between two high peaks on either side about twenty
 Tour miles above the river mouth. In extraordinary deveioplnent of mining in- teresfs In the region about the head of Lynn Canal brought about Q temporary moaps vivendA by which a convenient sep divides cf the White and chiikcot passes and to the north of Klukwan, on the klehini River. These partial and tsnta-
 nature Of thinss, a satiafactory % or sns or iast @
 ing. A permanent q zposition of the mat ter became imperative. After unmavaiiing m attempts tc reach an mission, followed bg prolonged nsgotta- tions. conducted in an arnicable spirit, Q convention between the United States and 1908, providing for an examination of the subject by mixed tribunal of six mem bers, three on side, with @ view to its nnal .disposition. Notifications were ex- two governments appointed their respec- tive members. Those on behalf of the United States were Elihu Root, Secretary
 tSe untea ssses and Gsorse an ex-Senator of the United States, while Great Britain named the Right Honoura.. ble Lord Alverstcne, Lord Chief Justice of England; Sir Louis Amabie Jett, K. c. M. G.. retired judge of the Supreme K. C., of Toronto This tribunal met in
 dency Of Lord a Aiverstone. sa Tf The a proceed ings were expeditions, and marked by friendly and conscientious spirit. The respective cases. counter cases, and argu- fully. On the zOth of October majority of the tribunal reached and signed an agreement on all the questions submitted
 sward ard % tse light n s of the Snited staes the control of a continuous strip or border Df the mainland shore. skirtfng all the tide-water inlets and sinuosides of the
 land Canal fc1neerning which legitimate
 doubt appeareO is defined as passing by Tongass Inlet and to the northwestward of Wales and Pearse islands, a line IS
 drawn from the head of Portland Canal 1 to the fifty-sixth degree of north latitude; and the interior border line of tine strip is fixed by lines connecting certain moun-
 Canal and Mount St Elias. and running along the crest of the divide separating the coast slope from the inland watershed
 at the only part of the frontier where within the distance of ten marine leagues stipulated by the treaty as the extreme width of the strip around the heads Of Lynn Canal and it's branches.
 While the line so traced fo1lows the provisional demarcation of 1SIS at the
 crossing of the Stikine River, and that of koot passes. 1t runs much farther inland from the Klehini than the temporary line of the later modus vivendi, and leaves the
 entire mining district of the Porcupine River and Glacier Creek within the 5uris- diction of the United States.
 The result is satisfactory in every way. It is of great material advantage to our
 people in the far far NSrthwest at,r It has d re
 possible danger 2 question liable to be- passing year. Finally, it has furnished
 with which two friendly nations can ap- proach and determine issues involving
 national sovereignty and by their nature
 incapable of submission to a third power The award is self-executing on the vital points. To make 1t effective as regards the others 1t only remains for the two governments to appoint, each on its own
 behalf, one or more scientific experts, who
 shall, with all convenient speed, proceed together to law down the Boundary line
 in accordance with the decision of tue majority of the tribunal. I recommend
 that the Congress make adequate p.oviss ion for the appointment, compensation. and expenses Of the members to serve on
 this, joint boundary commission on the
 part of the United States.
 Claims Against NenREue1R.
 It win be remembered that during the
 second session of the last Congress Great
 Britain. Germany, and Italy formed an
 alliance for the purpose of blockading the
 ports of Venezuela and nssiis such other means of pressure as would secure a set.
 tlement of claims due. as they alleged, to
 certain of their subjects, Their employ ment of force for the collection of these
 claims was terminated by an agreement
 brought about through the offices of the
 diplomatic representatives of the United
 States at Caracas and the government which was bound to cause increasing frte- fion. and which jeoparded the peace of the continent Under this agreeInent Ven- zuela agreed to set apart certain per centage of the customs receipts of two
 of her ports to be applied to the payment
 of whatever obligations might be aseef-
 tained by mixed commissions apointed for
 that purpose to be due from her. not only to tho three powers already mentioned, whose proceedings against her had result ed in a state of war, but also to the United States. France spain. Belgium and Mexico. who had not employed force for the collection of the claims alleged to be due to certain of their eitzens.
 Claims Submitted to the Permanent
 Court of Arbitration at The Hague.
 Ademand was then made by the so- called blockading powers that the sums ascertained to be due to their citizens by such mixed commissions should be ac- corded payment in full before anything was paid upon the claims of any of the so-called peace powers. NeneEaela on the other hand, insisted that all her creditors should be paid upon a basis of exact equality. During the efforts to adjust this dispute 1t was suggested by the powers in interest that it should be referred to me for decision, but I was clearly of the opinion that a far wiser course would be to submit the question to the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague. It seemed to me to offer an admirable opportunity to advance the practice of the peaceful settlement of dis putes between nations and to secure for The Hague Tribunal a memorable in- crease of its practical importance. The nations interested in the controversy were so numerous and in many instances so powerful as to make it evident that bene- ficent results would follow fr0m their ap- pearace at the same time before the bar of that august tribunal of peace.
 Our hopes in that regard have been realized. Russia and Austria are ;ep- resented in the persons of the learned and distinguished jurists who compose