The PRESIDENT. Would you like to have it read for you, Mr. Watson?

Mr. WATSON. Oh no, Sir; I thank your Lordship. I will not trouble; I can read it.

The PRESIDENT. Don't you trouble. If you wish to have anything read for you, you can have it done at any

time.

Mr. WATSON. I am very much obliged to you indeed. That Ukase provides, in p. 25 of the American Appendix:

"Whereas in an Edict of His Imperial Majesty issued to the directing Senate on the 4th day of September, and signed by His Majesty's own hand, it is thus expressed :

66

'Observing, from reports submitted to us, that the trade of our subjects on the Aleutian Islands and on the North-West Coast of America, appertaining to Russia, is subject, because of secret and illicit traffic, to oppression and impediments; and finding that the principal cause of these difficulties is the want of rules establishing the boundaries for navigation along these coasts, and the order of naval communication, as well in these places as on the whole of the Eastern Coast of Siberia and the Kurile Islands, we have deemed it necessary to determine these communications by specific regulations, which are hereto attached.'"

And I call your attention to the fact that here again it is the North-Western Coast of America appertaining to Russia, it is the whole of that North-Western Coast from Behring Sea down to the 55th parallel of the coast, and the Ukase is as to the secret and illicit traffic-it says this secret and illicit traffic oppresses and impedes the Russian-American Company, and then notice how quaintly Russia expresses the situation that the principal cause of these difficulties is the want of rules establishing the boundaries for navigation along those coasts. That she was the exclusive owner she did not doubt, that she had the right to make those rules she did not doubt, and the trouble with her was, she said, that she had not established those rules for the boundaries of navigation along those coasts. I call your attention now to the fact that so far no complaint is made of an approach upon these coasts from the interior, the Hudson Bay Company never came near it. I think I am borne out by all the testimony in this case that the nearest post of the Hudson Bay Company was 150 miles from there, and that the Hudson Bay Company or traders never came down to this coast from the 56th parallel up around the Lynn Canal, about which we are now particularly talking, it was solely the approaches that were made from America here along the Pacific Ocean, and along these inlets and bays.

Lynn Canal and these other bodies of water were not sufficiently protected, and it is against that that this Ukase was especially issued, but do you not see that here again in 1821 in the most unmistakable and forcible way Russia is re-asserting, as if there could not be a question about it, her exclusive ownership over all those coasts?

343

Now, the rules that she established to prevent this interference with this trade-I will read from the bottom of p. 25 of the United States' Appendix-are as follows:—

"The pursuits of commerce, whaling, and fishery, and of all other industry on all islands, posts, and gulfs, including the whole of the North-West Coast of America, beginning from Behring Straits to the 51st degree of northern latitude, also from the Aleutian Islands to the Eastern Coast of Siberia, as well as along the Kurile Islands from Behring Straits to the south cape of the Island of Urup, viz., to 45 degrees 50 minutes north latitude, is exclusively granted to Russian subjects."

S. Doc. 162, 58-2, vol 6- -24

And you will notice that it is the pursuit of commerce, the whaling fishery and all other industries, whatever the industries be, whether commerce, whether fishing, on the inlets, or the islands or in the gulfs mentioned, particularly these inland waters which run up these canals and inlets, including the whole of the North-West Coast from Behring Sea down to the 51st degree of north latitude that is exclusively granted to Russian-American subjects. Again, a most pronounced assertion by Russia of her undoubted ownership of these entire North-Western coasts.

Second: It is therefore

66 ** * prohibited to all foreign vessels, not only to land on the coasts and islands belonging to Russia, as stated above, but, also to approach them within less than 100 Italian miles. The transgressor's vessel is subject to confiscation, along with the whole cargo."

Article IV reads:

“Foreign merchant-ships which, for reasons stated in the foregoing rule, touch at any of the above-mentioned coasts, are obliged to choose a place where Russians are settled, and to act as hereafter stated."

And Article XIV:

"It is likewise interdicted to foreign ships to carry on any traffic or barter with the natives of the islands, and of the North-West Coast of America in the whole extent here above mentioned."

Now, it is the whole extent, the whole of the North-West Coast, from Behring Sea down to the 55th degree of latitude, to which the rights of the Russian-American Company have been carried. It is to that whole extent of coast that the Russian-American Company was given the exclusive right, and all other persons were prohibitedabsolutely prohibited-from carrying on any traffic or barter with the natives of the islands and of the North-West Coast of America. Does anyone for a moment imagine that when Russia issued that Ukase she merely intended to warn people from trading on the main line of the coast? Did she not include that entire north-west coast? Did she not assert her title to it? Did she not say, and is not that the meaning of that Ukase that you cannot cut up Lynn Canal, the Taku Inlet, or any of these indentations in the shore. It is all prohibited to you, and the exclusive right and all the profits and advantages, both for fishing and for trading and for hunting up all these inlets, and through all these waters, and along that entire coast, is given to the Russian-American Company.

66

And here now, in this Ukase of 1799, and again in this Ukase of 1821, Russia, in the most forcible manner, asserts her ownership of this entire north-west coast; and she uses the word "coast." I submit, beyond all peradventure, she uses that word coast to include all the bays and inlets, all the indentations of the shoresno matter whether they may be inlets 80 miles long or bays 1 mile long; she includes them all, and she says that she is the owner of all that coast down to the 55th parallel, and the exclusive right along all that coast she granted to the Russian-American Company for trading and hunting. And here you have, right in the forefront of this

dispute, the designation by Russia in the most unmistakable 344 way what she meant by the word "coast "-the entire coast wherever the land touches the water, including these inlets

and bays; and you have a direct negative of the possibility that Russia there was talking about the main coast, or the general trend of the coast, or the coast of the general ocean, and an affirmation that she did include its arms, its bays, and inlets.

Now, let me turn for just one moment to particular reasons which Russia gave for issuing that Ukase, and I turn first to Baron de Nicolay to Lord Londonderry, p. 96 of the United States AppendixI read from the top of the page:

"On the point of renewing the privilege of the Russian-American Company, and submitting to a revision the rules concerning its commercial operations, the Imperial Government was obliged to devote special attention to the complaints to which the undertaking of smugglers and foreign adventurers on the North-West Coast of the America belonging to Russia have more than once given rise. It has been recognised that those undertakings have not only as an object a fraudulent trade in furs and other articles exclusively reserved to the Russian-American Company, but that they appear even often to betray a hostile tendency, inasmuch as vagabonds come and furnish arms and ammunition to the natives in the Russian possessions of America, and excite them, to a certain extent, to resistance and rebellion against the authorities which are established there. It was then essential to oppose severe measures to those proceedings, and to guarantee the Company against the considerable losses which resulted from them, and it is with this view that the regulation herewith has just been published."

Please notice that here we are talking about the whole North-West Coast of America, and we are talking not only with reference to the interference with the trade in furs, but you will notice that Baron de Nicolay is talking also about the interference and the attack upon the sovereignty of Russia as the owner of that north-west coast, because he says: "These vagabonds often betray a hostile tendency," by giving to the natives the means of rebellion as against the sovereignty of Russia. And I turn again to Baron de Poletica's letter to Mr. Adams. On p. 35 there is one other letter that I want to refer to if I can just turn my eye to it. But I now refer to the letter of Count Nesselrode to Count Lieven at p. 99:--

On the point of renewing the privilege of the Russian-American Company, and submitting to a revision the rules concernng its commercial operations, the Government was obliged to devote especial attention to the complaints to which the undertakings of smugglers and foreign adventurers on the NorthWest Coasts of America belonging to Russia have more than once given rise. It has been recognised that the undertakings have not only as an object a fraudulent trade in furs and other articles exclusively reserved to the RussianAmerican Company, but that they appear even often to betray a hostile tendency; inasmuch as vagabonds come and funish arms and ammunition to the natives in our possessions of America, and that they excite them to a certain extent to resistance and rebellion against the authorities which are established there."

And then Count Nesselrode goes on to observe in a very suggestive manner, that probably the best way would have been to absolutely prohibit anybody coming there and exploiting that neighbourhood. But as a matter of fact they put the reason for the issuing of the Ukase upon two grounds-that it interfered with the profits of the Russian-American Company, and undoubtedly that was the chief reason. But undoubtedly it was also an interference-those vagabonds had interfered with the sovereignty of Russia as the owner of all this property.

Now, you will notice that the mode in which Russia tried to get rid of these vagabonds was prohibiting the approach within 100 miles of

any vessels at all, giving some minor provisions in reference to vessels that might be driven under stress of weather, and she claimed that she had the right under the circumstances to do so, and I 345 believe she cited as a reason for it the provision of France and England, under the Treaty of Utrecht, where a very large boundary was effected, as well as the Treaty between Spain and Great Britain, where Great Britain admitted 10 marine leagues to be a lawful boundary to keep off the coasts of Spain in South America.

The PRESIDENT. We must interrupt you, Mr. Watson, there. (Adjourned till to-morrow at 11 a. m.)

346

NINTH DAY.-THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 24, 1903.

All the Members of the Tribunal were present.

Sir ROBERT FINLAY. We have here the original report of Colonel Cameron. I cited the passage which was omitted from the Canadian Sessional Copy which had been extracted in the Appendix. I have got here the original report.

Mr. WATSON. The Tribunal will have noticed yesterday that the Ukase of the 4th September, 1821, carried the limit of the territory of Russia from the 55th degree of latitude down to the 51st degree of latitude on the North American Coast, thereby adding to Russia's claim 4 degrees in the neighbourhood, and you will also remember that to guard the exclusive rights of the Russian-American Company in the trading and hunting along that whole coast, and also to guard her own sovereignty as the owner of the coast, Russia claimed the right to prohibit all other nations and all subjects of other nations from approaching within 100 miles of the coast.

When that Ukase was made known, as I have already narrated, to England, she objected to it mainly and chiefly on the ground of the claim to the 100 miles jurisdiction at sea, and asserted that the great ocean itself was navigable, and all nations had the right to go to it for the purpose of navigation and fishing, and America, at the same time, objected on that ground as well as on the ground of the additional territorial claim down to the 51st degree of latitude on the coast, and Great Britain, as the discussion proceeded, added her objections to this claim down to the 51st degree of latitude on the coast; but while it is true that in an informal manner some discussion was raised in reference to the Russian sovereignty, even down to the 55th degree of latitude, yet still the negotiations are a proof of the fact that the Russian claim to the sovereignty down to the 55th degree of latitude of these North-Western Coasts, was never seriously disputed, especially by England.

And your Honours now have the first of my suggestions yesterday, of what the trouble was in 1821 which the Parties were to settle, and the trouble was this claim of Russia to this extraordinary jurisdiction of 100 miles at sea, and this additional claim of Russia to 4 degrees of latitude on the North-Western Coast, and objection to this was made by England, and I say also was made by America.

Now, how did the Parties proceed, which was my second proposition, to settle the trouble and the dispute that thus arose? They did that by negotiation, and in order that the Tribunal may be as far as possible back now to 1822, 1823, and 1824, and as it were talking with Mr. George Canning in London and in correspondence with Count Nesselrode in St. Petersburgh, let me call your attention as briefly as I may to what the situation was as to the respective claims of Great