from Behring's Strait on the north to the 55th parallel on the American coast, and as far south as Japan on the coast of Asia; and invested the Russian-American Company with its absolute control, and, if necessary, the land and naval forces of the Empire were ordered to maintain their jurisdiction. To this Imperial act no protest was made on the part of any of the nations, nor were Russia's rights disputed or questioned. Thus tacitly, at least, all the nations conceded her rights, based first upon discovery, and next upon continued occupancy and peaceful and undisputed possession for nearly three-quarters of

a century.

In 1821, upon the complaint of this Company to the Russian Government that their rights under their Charter were being disturbed by the interference of foreigners, the then Emperor Alexander issued his Manifesto, extending his dominion to the 51st parallel on the North American coast, and prohibiting foreign vessels from approaching within 100 miles of the shore. I quote from said Manifesto as follows:

"Section 1. The transaction of commerce, and the pursuit of whaling and fishing, or any other industry, on the islands, in the harbours and inlets, and, in general, all along the north-western coast of America, from Behring's Strait to the 51st parallel of northern latitude, and likewise on the Aleutian Islands, and along the eastern coast of Siberia, and on the Kurile Islands-that is, from Behring's Strait to the southern promontory of the Island of Urup, viz., as far south as latitude 45° 50′ north--are exclusively reserved to subjects of the Russian Empire.

"Sec. 2. Accordingly, no foreign vessel shall be allowed either to put to shore at any of the coasts and islands under Russian dominion, as specified in the preceding section, or even to approach the same to within a distance of less than 100 Italian miles. Any vessel contravening this provision shall be subject to confiscation with her whole cargo.

To this edict, the Governments of the United States and Great Britain entered protest, in so far as it extended the dominion of Russia 4° south, and to the 100-mile limit. Mr. Adams, then Secretary of State, conceded the boundary named in the Charter to the Russian-American Company, viz., to the 55th parallel on the coast of the North Pacific Ocean, but resisted the claim of Russia to the coast between the 51st and 55th parallels north, also the exclusion of American ships from the North Pacific Ocean, stating that "with the Russian Settlements at Kodiac, or at Sitka, the United States may fairly claim the advantage of a free trade, having so long enjoyed it unmolested, and because it has been, and would continue to be, as advantageous to those Settlements as to them."

Mr. Adams also said, "It may suffice to say that the distance from shore to shore of this sea, in latitute 51° north, is not less than 90° longitude, or 4,000 miles," having exclusive reference to the Pacific Ocean.

A careful examination of the protests before mentioned and the correspondence in reference thereto, as well as the Treaties which settled the controversy-that of 1824 between Russia and the United States, and that of 1825 between Russia and Great Britain will disclose the fact that they all had reference to the coast and waters of the North Pacific between the 51st parallel north latitude and Mount St. Elias and east of the 141st meridian of longitude. In all the protests, correspondence, negotiations, and Treaties, there is no allusion to Behring's Sea, the Aleutian Islands, or to any region of country or sea within 1,000 miles of its eastern border; hence the sovereignty asserted and maintained by Russia over that sea from its discovery to its partition and cession to the United States, a period of over 140 years, has never been officially questioned or denied.

At the time of and when negotiating these Treaties, the High Contracting Powers all knew of the existence of Behring's Sea, the Aleutian Islands, the Prebilov Islands (St. George and St. Paul) within Behring's Sea, and the valuable life on them and in their surrounding waters, and that these constituted the chief value of Russia's possessions on the North American coast and waters. Charts had been published before and as early as 1805 by England and Russia, as accurately bounding and defining the waters of Behring's Sea on the north-west coast to the North Pacific Ocean, as do the Maps of to-day, Behring's Sea then being called the Sea of Kamchatka.

In these Treaties, there is no allusion to, or surrender of, Russia's dominion over Behring's Sea and the Aleutian chain of islands by expression or inference. Russia surrendered or abandoned her claim only to the control of the North Pacific Ocean and to the north-west coast south of latitude 54° north, yet her title to the Aleutian Islands, extending as far south as 51° north latitude and longitude 166° to 167° west, is not and never has been disputed or invalidated.

It will be observed by the description of territory granted to us in our purchase of Alaska, that its western boundary divides Behring's Sea between us and Siberian Russia, and the fact cannot be successfully denied, as it is a matter of history, that Russia, from her discovery of Behring's Sea down to the cession to the United States, has controlled the navigation of its waters and the taking of its marine life. To this end her navy has patrolled it, and, in pursuance of her laws, taken, confiscated, and burned marauding vessels; she has since pursued, and is now pursuing, the same policy on her part of Behring's Sea.

In confirmation of this, I quote from the official order issued by the Russian Government, as late as the 13th January, 1882:-

"Notice. At the request of the local authorities of Behring and other islands, the Undersigned hereby notifies that the Russian Imperial Government publishes, for general knowledge, the following:

"1. Without a special permit or licence from the Governor-General of Eastern Siberia, foreign vessels are not allowed to carry on trading, hunting, fishing, &c., on the Russian coast or islands in the Okhotsk and Behring's Seas, or on the north-east coast of Asia, or within their sea boundary-line.

"5. Foreign vessels found trading, huuting, fishing, &c., in Russian waters without a licence or permit from the Governor-General, and also those possessing a licence or permit who may infringe the existing byelaws on hunting, shall be confiscated, both vessels and cargoes, for the benefit of the Government. This enactment shall be enforced henceforth, commencing with A.D. 1882.

"6. The enforcement of the above will be intrusted tc men-of-war, and also Russian merchant-vessels, which, for that purpose, will carry military detachments, and be provided with proper instructions."

There is nothing ambiguous in the language of this Proclamation. It means that Russia will enforce her sovereignty over the western half of Behring's Sea, within her "sea boundary-line."

The cession of Alaska to the United States by Russia, and the terms of the Treaty making such cession, were well known to all nations, yet no protests or objections were made, though it was well understood to convey the title to the waters of Behring's Sea. The discussion of the Treaty in the United States' Senate was notice to our nation and to all the world. In confirmation of which, I quote from the remarks of Mr. Charles Sumner, Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the Senate of the United States, at the time of the consideration of the Treaty. Mr. Sumner said, speaking for the Treaty:

"The seal, amphibious, polygamous, and intelligent as the beaver, has always supplied the largest multitude of furs to the Russiam Company.' After enumerating the land furs, the value of the walrus for ivory, he adds: 'I mention the sea-otter last; but in beauty and value it is the first. In these respects it far surpasses the river and land otter, &c. 1 come now to the fisheries, the last head of this inquiry, and not inferior to any other in importance; perhaps the most important of all. What even are sea-otter skins by the side of that product of the sea, incalculable in amount, which contributes to the sustenance of the human family ?" "

Thus showing that the acquisition of the products of Behring's Sea, its fur-bearing animals, and fisheries, were regarded as the chief object of the purchase.

Again, Mr. Summer, in the course of his remarks, said :

666

Traversing Behring's Sea midway between the Island of Attoo on the east and Copper Island on the west, to the meridian of 173° east longitude, leaving the prolonged group of the Aleutian Islands in the possessions now transferred to the United States, and making the western boundary of our country the dividing-line which separates Asia from America.""

Mr. Summer again said :—

"In the Aleutian range, beside innumerable islets and rocks, there are not less than fifty-five islands exceeding 3 miles in length; there are seven exceeding 40 miles, with Oonimak, which is the largest, exceeding 73 miles. In our part of Behring's Sea there are five considerable islands, the largest of which is St. Lawrence, being more than

Note the expression of the distinguished Senator, "In our part of Behring's Sea." This, coming from so high an authority, in language so plain and explicit as not to admit of misconstruction, evinces the intention and understanding of the Contracting Governments, which was the partition of the sovereignty of the waters of Behring's Sea by a south-westerly line through it, the eastern portion, with Alaska, being the territory of the United States, and the western portion, with Siberian Asia, that of Russia, their combined territory and shore-lines surrounding Behring's Sea, except the northern and southern outlets.

The discussion in the United States' Senate, and its final action upon this Treaty and question, was a notice to the world of Russia's right to transfer this valuable marine territory, to which not even a suggestion to the contrary has ever been raised on the part of any nation.

If more were needed to convince us of the rights and intentions of the High Contracting Parties, we have only to refer to the correspondence between our then Secretary of State, Mr. Seward, and our Minister at St. Petersburgh. (Printed in executive documents for the use of Congress.)

"Sir,

In May 1867 our Minister writes as follows:

"Your despatch No. 241 of the 1st April, 1867, inclosing the Treaty between Russia and America, ceding us all Russian America, was duly received. I awaited the expression of European and Russian sentiments in reference thereto before answering you.

"I congratulate you upon this brilliant achievement, which adds so vast a territory to our Union, whose ports, whose mines, whose waters, whose furs, whose fisheries are of untold value, and whose fields will produce many grains (even wheat), and become thereafter, in time, the seat of a hearty white population."

Again, in November 1867, the American Minister at St. Petersburgh, giving a description of Russian America, says, in reference to the Aleutian Islands :

"The Aleutian Islands may attract transient traders, but no permanent settlers. To inhabit them one must be an Aleut, and if it were not for the sea surrounding the islands, this country, owing to its unfavourable climatic conditions and the sterility of its ground, would have never been inhabited at all."

From the first extract, it will be observed that the American Government exercised caution before concluding the Treaty, and awaited the expression of European sentiments in reference to the same. Its acts were open and free to criticism, and the last quotation is conclusive on the point that our Go. ernment fully comprehended the value of the waters of Behring's Sea, and for this reason mainly was the purchase made.

Had it been understood that the waters of Behring's Sea and its marine life were free to the fishermen of all nations, including ours, there could have been no incentive on the part of our Government for its purchase at the price of 7,200,000 dollars. In any other view of the case it would have been absurd, but, on the contrary, it was known that Russia did, from the time of its discovery, control these waters, and that she had ever asserted her title and maintained her dominion by causing her ships of war to patrol them.

It is admitted on all sides that whatever title Russia had at the date of the transfer of the territory we acquired and still possess, and the United States being in possession and claiming ownership, our right must be conceded until it is established that our grantor, Russia, had no title to this territory, or that she did not maintain dominion over it, which, I apprehend, cannot be successfully accomplished.

There was no concealment of this Treaty or its purpose. Russia divided her possessions of Behring's Sea with us in the presence of all nations, to which there was no remonstrance on the part of any of them.

By an Act of Congress, approved as early as the 27th July, 1868, it is provided: "The Laws of the United States relating to customs, commerce, and navigation are extended to and over all the mainland, islands, and waters of the territory ceded to the United States by the Emperor of Russia." It also provides that (see Revised Statutes, section 1956) "no person shall kill any fur-seal or other fur-bearing animals within the limits of Alaska territory, or in the waters thereof."

In 1881, it coming to the knowledge of the United States' Government for the first time that unauthorized persons were illegally taking seals in Alaskan waters, the Secretary of the Treasury caused to be published a notice to all that the Law prohibiting the killing of seals in Alaskan waters would be enforced against all comers, and its penalties be

inflicted (Congress having made provision to equip the vessels of the Revenue Marine for that purpose); since which time this notice has been yearly published, and to-day, both this and the Russian Governments are protecting their respective dominions in the waters of Behring's Sea, as they ever have done, from all unauthorized comers.

It might be interesting to continue the history of the legislation of Congress on this subject, and ascertain upon what facts it based its late action, the necessity for such action, and to speculate upon its probable results, but my time and your space will not permit. Suffice it to say, Congress had entire confidence in our title, the justice of our cause, our ability to maintain our rights, and believed that not to have maintained those rights would have been unwise, beneath the dignity of the nation, and even craven.

Sir,

Inclosure 2 in No. 245.

Extract from the "New York Evening Post" of October 18, 1889.

THE BEHRING'S SEA QUESTION.

A Reply to Congressman Felton.

To the Editor of the "Evening Post."

Salem, Mass., October 6.

THE Honourable Charles N. Felton published in the San Francisco "Argonaut" of the 12th August last an attempt at a vindication of our seizures of foreign sealing-vessels in that part of the Pacific called Behring's Sea, and he says of it that it is a statement of the facts. Mr. Felton was a member of the last Congress, and also a member of the Conference Committee which had to compromise the difference between Senate and House over our last very sapient piece of legislation concerning the waters of Alaska. The positions held by Mr. Felton led the "Argonaut" to say of him that he is thoroughly conversant with the subject, a belief probably shared by many who are themselves ignorant of it, and who will therefore accept his "statement of the facts" as reliable and perfectly conclusive.

There are, however, others, and they are not few in number, whose investigations of this question have proved to them that the facts connected therewith are diametrically opposed to those alleged by Mr. Felton, and who have consequently arrived at an entirely different conclusion.

Mr. Felton's plea is not new in itself, and it does not gain by his way of stating it, which is confused and often unintelligible. The line of argumentation followed is that now forced upon the special pleaders in vindication of these seizures, by the fact that the theory originally advanced, of Behring's Sea being by international law a closed sea, has been too thoroughly exploded to leave it available any longer. They therefore try to argue that if it is not a closed sea by international law, it is a closed sea by international acquiescence! And then, remembering the showman's hint that, though a leopard cannot change his spots, you can do it for him with a brush and a little paint, they set to work to manufacture corroborative evidence. By dint of judicious suppressio veri and suggestio falsi, they get up a semblance of proof, well calculated to impose upon the public, a good enough Morgan until after exposure. Meanwhile the one end, never lost sight of, is gained. The seizures go on, foreign competition is at least checked, and the Alaska Commercial Company is " protected" as far as possible.

In order that your readers may clearly understand the points at issue between the defenders of the seizures and those who condemn them, let me summarize these points.

The hypothesis of the defenders is, that in settling the controversy arising out of Russia's pretensions of 1821, a discrimination was made between Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea; that while the high seas (all outside of the customary 3-mile shore belt) of the Pacific were declared free to all the contestants, the high seas of Behring's Sea were acknowledged to be under Russia's "exclusive dominion;" that this exclusive dominion was never denied nor questioned by any Power, was always maintained by Russia, and finally was made over by her to us, so far as it concerned our part of Behring's Sea; that consequently onr title to such dominion is unimpeachable.

The argument of the opponents of seizures, on the other hand, is that there was no discrimination made between the Pacific and Behring's Sea, and that there was no call nor excuse for any, as they are identical in all that constitutes either an open or a closed sea,

the only two kinds of sea which international usage and law recognize; that the absence of the term "Behring's Sea" from all the documents is perfectly natural, because that name is of more modern origin than the date of those papers, and because the parties to the controversy followed the safe and well-established custom of using only the common nomenclature of the times, which did not include the name "Behring's Sea;" that all the waters of the present Behring's Sea were then, and now are, considered by all authorities on geography as belonging to, and forming part of, the Pacific Ocean; that consequently the stipulations of the Treaties of 1824 and 1825, declaring freedom of navigation and fishery in any part of the Pacific, apply to every part of Behring's Sea, and are binding on all the nations which signed these Treaties; that Russia never after the date of these Treaties asserted or claimed any jurisdiction over Behring's Sea, and never afterwards interfered with the fishing by the vessels of other nations in its waters; and last, but not least, that Russia never ceded nor pretended to cede to us any sea or dominion of any kind over any sea whatsoever.

The defenders of the seizures do not produce, or even allege that there exists, any direct documentary proof of the pretended discrimination between Pacifie Ocean and Behring's Sea, or of any acknowledgment, in express terms, of Russia's exclusive dominion. Neither do they offer any reason for this discrimination-this making fish of one and fowl of the other, nor do they show any object that was to be gained by us by this abandonment of our rights under international law to the free use of Behring's Sea. Per contra, the opponents do bring ample proof, drawn from official documents, in support of every point in their arguments, as will now be shown. A collection of these documents, in convenient form, has recently been published, as Sen. Ex. Doc. No. 106, 50, C. 2 S., from which I will quote. (In support of the assertion that the question of navigation and fishery was treated as concerning the whole of the Pacific, without discrimination between its different parts.)

(P. 210.) Secretary Adams' letter, July 22, 1823, to our Minister at St. Petersburgh, summarizes the Russian claim as extending to "an exclusive territorial jurisdiction from the 45th degree of north latitude, on the Adriatic coast, to the latitude of 51° north, on the western coast of the American Continent; and they assume the right of interdicting the navigation and the fishery of all other nations to the extent of 100 miles from the whole of that coast."

The United States can adinit no part of these clains."

(P. 214.) Our Minister at St. Petersburgh to Secretary Adams, April 19, 1824. Report on the Minutes of the Conference proceedings :-"That I must now frankly tell them [the Russian Ministers] that my instructions required that I should obtain two points as necessary conditions to the third object contemplated by the project of Convention: (1) the revocation, either spontaneous or by Convention, of the maritime provisions of the Ukase of September 4 (16), 1821; (2) the adoption of the commercial principle (or something similar) agreed upon between the United States and Great Britain in their Convention of 1818, in relation to these coasts; (3) that, these preliminaries being settled, a territorial delimitation for settlements at 55° might be agreed upon.'

(In support of the assertion that all the waters of the present Behring's Sea were, at the time of the Treaties and since, officially recognized as belonging to the Pacific.)

(P. 206.) Russian Minister at Washington to Secretary Adams, February 28, 1822 :— "I ought, in the last place, to request you to consider, sir, that the Russian possessions in the Pacific Ocean extend, on the north-west coast of America, from Behring's Strait to the 51st degree of north latitude, and on the opposite side of Asia and the islands adjacent, from the same strait to the 45th degree.'

(This includes every part of the present Behring's Sea.)

(P. 248.) Treaty of Cession, 20th June, 1867. Last clause of Article I, stating western limit of the cession: " ... so as to pass midway between the Island of Attou and the Copper Island of the Komandorski couplet or group in the North Pacific

Ocean .

(Attou lies in 52° 57', and Copper Island in 34° 35′ to 54° 55′ north, or about 100 miles more northerly than the Aleutian Island of Attou, and there is no chain of islands between Copper Island and our coast-line from Behring's Strait to the south end of the Peninsula of Alaska, nothing to set off that portion of the Pacific in which Copper Island is thus officially stated to lie, from that portiou which washes our coast.) (In support of assertions concerning Treaty stipulations.) (Pp. 220-221.) A summary of the Treaty of 1824:

Article 1. It is agreed that in any part of the great ocean commonly called the Pacific Ocean or South Sea, the respective citizens or subjects of the High Contracting Powers shall be neither disturbed nor restrained, either in navigation or in fishing or in the power