Page images
PDF
EPUB

boundary dispute, together with a communication from the agent of the United States to the agent of Great Britain.

I have the honor to be, with the highest consideration, sir, your most obedient, humble servant,

The Hon. F. B. LOOMIS,

Acting Secretary of State, etc.

ARTHUR S. RAIKES.

Mr. Choate to Mr. Hay.

No. 1151.]

AMERICAN EMBASSY,
London, July 3, 1903.

SIR: With reference to my No. 1113 and to other correspondence, I have the honor to transmit herewith, under separate cover, 17 copies (bound) of the British counter case in connection with the Alaskan Alaskan boundary, together with 17 copies of the Appendix to the same, Volume I, which have been sent to me by Mr. Sifton, His Britannic Majesty's agent; also 12 additional copies (unbound) of the counter case and of the Appendix, Volume I, and 7 copies (bound) of Volume II of the Appendix.

I inclose also a copy of Mr. Sifton's letter, from which you will perceive that he regrets that he has no extra copies of the Album (Appendix, Vol. II) to deliver, and explains, moreover, that the additional extra 12 copies of the counter case and Volume I of the Appendix are sent unbound for the reason that the notice has been so short. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant,

JOSEPH H. CHOATE.

[Inclosure 1.]

Mr. Sifton to Mr. Choate.

LONDON, July 2, 1903.

YOUR EXCELLENCY: I have the honor, pursuant to the treaty and the arrangement made with the United States agent, to deliver to you 7 copies of the counter case of His Majesty in the matter of the Alaska boundary, together with 7 copies of the Appendix to the same, Volumes I and II.

The additional extra 22 copies of the counter case and Volume I of the Appendix will be delivered to-morrow, but as the notice has been so short, they must necessarily be delivered unbound. I am sorry to say that we have no extra copies of the Album (Appendix, Volume II) to deliver.

I have the honor to be, etc.,

CLIFFORD SIFTON,

His Majesty's Agent before the Alaskan Boundary Tribunal.

Hon. JOSEPH H. CHOATE, etc.

[Inclosure 2.]

Mr. Sifton to Mr. Choate.

HOTEL CECIL, July 3, 1903.

YOUR EXCELLENCY: I have much pleasure in sending you herewith the 22 additional copies of the British counter case and Appendix, 10 bound and 12 unbound.

I had not expected to be able to send any of these copies bound, but have had better fortune than was anticipated.

I have the honor to be, etc.,

CLIFFORD SIFTON,

His Majesty's Agent before the Alaska Boundary Tribunal.

Hon. JOSEPH H. CHOATE,
United States Ambassador, 1 Carlton House Terrace S. W.

Mr. Raikes to Mr. Loomis.

[Personal.]

BRITISH EMBASSY, Newport, R. I., July 5, 1903.

DEAR MR. LOOMIS: I hasten to acknowledge with thanks the receipt of your personal note of the 2d instant informing me that certified copies of the documents in the Russian and French languages, of which translations were appended to the case of the United States, together with certified copies of certain diplomatic correspondence in the English language, also appended, were to be forwarded on July 3 for delivery to Mr. Sifton through the United States embassy in I am, dear Mr. Loomis, yours, very truly,

London.

ARTHUR S. RAIKES.

Mr. Loomis to Mr. Raikes.

[Personal.]

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
Washington, July 6, 1903.

MY DEAR MR. CHARGÉ: I am in receipt of your personal note of the 1st instant, in which you advance further considerations to support the application heretofore made for an extension of time for the delivery of the counter case before the Alaskan Boundary Tribunal.

In view of the fact that your note discloses an intention to submit these considerations to the attention of the tribunal, I might well be excused from discussing them further at this time but for two assertions in your note which can not be passed by in silence, as they involve the honor and good faith of the Government of the United States.

You state that you are directed by His Majesty's principal secretary for foreign affairs to make it known "that His Majesty's Government contend, and it is apparently not disputed by the United States Government, that, in appending to their case translations of documents on which they rely, the latter failed to comply with Article II of the convention, which provides that documentary evidence should accompany the case."

I beg to dissent in the most positive terms from the foregoing statement so far as it refers to the action of the Government of the United States. On the contrary, it has been most scrupulous in its action to comply with both the letter and the spirit of the treaty; and it has been because of its desire to have the treaty faithfully observed that

it has not been able to accede to the requests of His Majesty's Government, which had no support in the provisions of that instrument.

The further statement that the "evidence upon which the United States rely, "they [the United States] announce will not be open for examination until after the delivery of the counter case," I respectfully submit is not a just statement of the action of this Government. You will recall that on May 29 last application was made on behalf of the British agent for a personal examination of the greater part of the evidence produced in the case of the United States, and that on June 4 your embassy was informed that the British agent or his representative "will be given full opportunity to examine and verify the originals in the exclusive possession of this [the United States] Government of anything contained in the case of the United States," under a proviso which subsequent events demonstrated to be a wise one.

On June 12 your embassy made known the objection of the foreign office to this proviso, and under date of June 16 your embassy was advised that the restriction would be removed, and "that the British agent or his representative would be permitted at his convenience to examine all the documents adduced in the case of the United States to which reference is made," etc. Not until two weeks after that notice was given was your telegram of June 26 received, in which you communicated the inquiry of the British agent, whether the documents were ready to exhibit. The reply sent, June 27, was that they would be ready any time after July 3. This delay of six days was occasioned by the fact that the officials who were familiar with the documents were absorbed in the preparations for the delivery of the counter case of the United States, which under the terms of the treaty had to be made on July 3.

The foregoing recital will show upon what foundation was based the declaration that the documents in question were not open for examination until after the delivery of the counter case.

Having shown the scrupulous good faith of the United States on the points animadverted to by His Majesty's secretary for foreign affairs, the Government of the United States, entertaining no disposition to prejudice the deliberations of the tribunal, will omit further discussion of the considerations advanced in your note of the 1st instant.

Ι I am, my dear Mr. Raikes, very sincerely yours,

FRANCIS B. LOOMIS,

Acting Secretary of State.

Mr. Raikes to Mr. Loomis.

[Personal.]

BRITISH EMBASSY, Newport, R. I., July 6, 1903.

DEAR MR. LOOMIS; I have the honor to inform you that I have received a telegram from Mr. Sifton stating that Mr. Pope will arrive in Washington on July 7 in order to inspect the documents of which use has been made in the preparation of the United States case to be laid before the Alaskan Boundary Tribunal.

I have the honour to be, dear Mr. Loomis, yours, very truly,

ARTHUR S. RAIKES.

Mr. Raikes to Mr. Loomis.

BRITISH EMBASSY, Newport, R. I., July 9, 1903.

DEAR MR. ACTING SECRETARY: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your personal note of July 6 in reply to my communication of the 1st instant advancing further considerations in support of the application of His Majesty's Government for an extension of time for the delivery of the counter case before the Alaskan Boundary Tribunal. I have forwarded a copy of your communication to the Marquis of Lansdowne. Believe me to be, dear Mr. Loomis, yours, very truly, ARTHUR S. RAIKES.

No. 1157.]

Mr. Choate to Mr. Hay.

AMERICAN EMBASSY,

London, July 20, 1903.

SIR: With reference to your instruction No. 1125, of the 2d instant, which inclosed certified copies of documents in the Russian and French languages, of which translations are appended, to the case of the United States under the Alaskan Boundary Convention, together with certified copies of documents in the English language, and a communication addressed to the Hon. Clifford Sifton, I have the honor to inclose herewith a copy of a note from the foreign office, dated the 16th instant, acknowledging the receipt of the documents in question. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant,

JOSEPH H. CHOATE.

[Inclosure.]

Lord Lansdowne to Mr. Choate.

FOREIGN OFFICE, July 16, 1903.

YOUR EXCELLENCY: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your excellency's note of the 13th instant, forwarding certified copies of documents in the Russian and French languages, of which translations are appended, to the case of the United States under the Alaskan Boundary Convention, together with certified copies of certain diplomatic correspondence in the English language, and a communication addressed to the Hon. Clifford Sifton.

I have the honor to be, etc.,

F. H. VILLIERS.

For the Marquis of Lansdowne,

Mr. Raikes to Mr. Loomis.

BRITISH EMBASSY, Newport, R. I., July 28, 1903.

SIR: With reference to Sir Michael Herbert's No. 59 of March 19 last, it is my sad duty to inform you that the Hon. John Douglass Armour, judge of the supreme court of Canada, died in London on the 11th instant. In compliance with instructions which I have received from the Marquis of Lansdowne I have the honor to inform you that Mr. Aylesworth, K. C., of Toronto, has been selected as one of the

three British members of the Alaskan Boundary Tribunal in place of the late judge.

I have the honor to be, sir, with high consideration,
Your most obedient servant,

ARTHUR S. RAIKES.

Mr. Sifton to Mr. Foster.

OTTAWA, July 29, 1903.

DEAR SIR: In view of the fact that the time for the delivery of the written argument in the Alaskan boundary proceedings is approaching, it seems desirable that, if possible, an understanding should be arrived at as to the date when the tribunal will meet for the hearing of oral argument, and I am now addressing you with the purpose of endeavoring to reach such an understanding. Assuming that the arguments will be delivered in the same manner as the cases and the counter cases, the arguments upon the American side will reach London about the 11th or 12th of September. Time will then be required for the consideration of the argument and preparation for oral argument. It would seem, therefore, that about October 15 would be a suitable time for the preliminary meeting of the tribunal to organize, settle questions of procedure, fix the time when oral argument will be proceeded with, and also deal with any other questions that may be presented by either party for consideration. I would be pleased to know, through you, whether the course above suggested meets with the views of the American members of the tribunal.

On account of the fact that the tribunal is not yet organized, and there has therefore been no method settled for bringing such questions before it, I am inclosing under cover to you for the American members of the tribunal copies of this communication. I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant,

CLIFFORD SIFTON,

Agent for His Britannic Majesty.

Mr. Foster to Mr. Sifton.

ALASKAN BOUNDARY TRIBUNAL,

AGENCY OF THE UNITED STATES, Henderson Harbor, N. Y., August 4, 1903.

DEAR SIR: I have had the honor to receive, forwarded from Washington to this place, your letter of July 29, postmarked Ottawa, July 31, in which you suggest that about October 15 would be a suitable time for the preliminary meeting of the tribunal to organize, settle questions of procedure, fix the time when oral argument will be proceeded with, and deal with any other questions that may be presented. And you desire to know, through me, whether the course suggested meets with the views of the American members of the tribunal; and to this end you inclose under cover to me for the American members of the tribunal copies of your letter of the 29th ultimo.

I must in the first place direct your attention to the fact that your proposition seems to be based in part upon an erroneous assumption.

« PreviousContinue »