Page images
PDF
EPUB

You say: “Assuming that the sprinted] arguments will be delivered in the same manner as the cases and counter cases, the argument upon the American side will reach London about the 11th or 12th of September.” The British Government was advised more than two months ago that the printed argument of the United States would be delivered in London in time for a meeting of the tribunal on September 3. Under date of May 20 Ambassador Choate telegraphed the Secretary of State that he had urged upon the British Government the meeting of the tribunal on 3d of September to hear or arrange for an early oral argument. Under date of June 19 Mr. Choate addressed a note to the Hon. Sir Robert Finlay, attorney-general of England and senior British counsel before the tribunal, in which he stated that the printed argument would be delivered on September 3, and he at the same time proposed that the oral argument begin September 10. Your absence from London may have prevented you from becoming fully conversant with the foregoing facts, but the British Government has not been ignorant of the intention of the United States to deliver its printed argument at London on or before September 3.

I will endeavor to comply as promptly as possible with your request to transmit a copy of your letter to me of July 29 to the American members of the tribunal, but I regret to say that it will require some time to reach them. As has been announced in the public press, two of these members have already sailed from New York, and the third member is about to take passage, in order to be in London in due season for the convening of the tribunal on the 3d proximo. Some delay must therefore occur before I can satisfy your desire to be informed of the views of the American members of the tribunal on your proposition.

I may, however, remind you that the communications already passed between the two governments must have indicated to you what views they will entertain upon the subject. Their expectation as to the time for the assembling of the tribunal is shown in the communications of Mr. Choate above cited. In his letter of June 19 to Sir Robert Finlay he urged an early date for the oral argument, as he had explained to him verbally that there was a necessity that the American members of the tribunal should return to the United States at any rate by the end of October.

In March last, when Sir Michael Herbert suggested an extension of time for the delivery of the cases, he was informed by the Secretary of State that such extension was not compatible with the official engagements of the American members of the tribunal. In your communication to me of May 15 last you asked for an extension of time for the delivery of the counter case. You will recall that in my telegraphic reply of May 25, 1 said the "American members of tribunal say impossible to consent because of special session of Congress as heretofore stated to British ambassador.” When the ambassador, under date of June 12, renewed the request for an extension of time for the delivery of the counter cases, the Secretary of State, in his note of June 16, reiterated these reasons, and he added the further statement that when the treaty of January 24, creating the tribunal, was being negotiated the British ambassador was informed that it was the President's wish that the tribunal should conclude its labors within the time indicated, and for this reason the periods for the different stages of the proceed ings could not be extended.

I may add that it is the expectation of the United States agency staff and counsel to sail from New York on the 21st instant, and to reach London in time to deliver the printed argument in that city and to attend the assembling of the tribunal on the 3d day of September. I am, with great respect, your obedient servant,

John W. FOSTER, Agent of the United States before the Alaskan Boundary Tribunal.

Mr. Loomis to Mr. Choate.

[Telegram.]

AUGUST 4, 1903. General Foster has received from Sifton, British agent, a letter dated Ottawa, July 29, in which he suggests that about October 15 would be a suitable time for preliminary meeting of tribunal to organize, settle questions of procedure, fix time when oral argument will begin, and deal with any other questions presented. He incloses copies of the letter to me to be forwarded to American members of tribunal, and asks me to obtain their views on the proposition. General Foster has answered him by letter, stating that more than three months ago Ambassador Choate informed British Government that our printed argument would be delivered in London by September 3, and that it was desired that oral argument should begin as soon after that date as possible, and in a letter June 19 to Attorney-General Finlay he repeated this notice, and stated that the American members of the tribunal must return to the United States not later than last of October; that Sifton's absence from London may have prevented him being conversant with these facts, but British Government was fully informed. General Foster stated that it was difficult for him to communicate promptly with American members, as two had already sailed for London, and third about to sail in order to be in season for the expected session September 3. He, Sifton, must, however, have been informed by the communications of our Government that the American members could not agree to his proposition. General Foster reiterated the various communications, showing their official duties would not admit of any postponement of periods named in treaty, and notified Sifton that our printed argument would be delivered in London on 3d September, and that American agent and counsel expect to sail for London the 21st instant.

You will address to the foreign office a note repeating the notice already given to the British Government that the Government of the United States earnestly desires and expects the tribunal to assemble September 3, and will say, furthermore, that the President will find himself unable to consent to any further postponement.

FRANCIS B. LOOMIS,

Acting Secretary.

Mr. C'hoate to Mr. Ilay.

No. 53.]

[Telegram.)

LONDON, August 7, 1903. Referring to your telegram of the 5th [4th] August, it is agreed that tribunal shall meet on September 3.

CHOATE.

Mr. Raikes to Mr. Lvomis.

British EMBASSY,

Newport, August 10, 190.3. DEAR MR. ACTING SECRETARY: I have just received a telegram from Lord Lansdowne instructing me to apply on behalf of Mr. Clifford Sifton for permission to inspect, photograph, or make certified copies of the original Russian documents, translations of which are given in the appendix to the counter case of the United States before the Alaska tribunal on pages 1 to 35 and pages 84 and 85.

The British agent also desires permission to make copies of the plans or maps to which reference is made on pages 12, 80, and 85.

Mr. Clifford Sifton supposes that it will be possible to inspect in London, in the course of the hearing before the tribunal, the originals of the numerous depositions of which copies are contained in the appendix to the United States counter case, and I am directed by Lord Lansdowne to inquire whether the British agent is correct in his supposition that these documents will then be made available for inspection. Believe me, dear Mr. Acting Secretary, yours, very truly,

ARTHUR S. RAIKES.

Mr. Loomis to Mr. Raikes.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

Washington, August 14, 1903. MY DEAR MR. CHARGÉ: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your note of the 10th instant, applying, on behalf of Mr. Clifford Sifton, for permission to inspect, photograph, or make certified copies of the original Russian documents, translations of which are given in the appendix to the counter case of the United States before the Alaskan Boundary Tribunal, and stating that the British agent desires permission to make copies of certain plans or maps mentioned therein. You also inform me that Mr. Sifton supposes that the originals of the numerous depositions printed in the appendix to the counter case will be available for inspection in London during the course of the hearing before the tribunal.

In reply, I have the honor to inform you that all the documents produced in the case and counter case of the United States required to be used in London are now being packed for transportation, and that in view of the early departure of the agent of the United States for London, and of the necessity that all books, documents, maps, etc., be transported at the same time, it is now too late to have the inspection requested take place in Washington, but that ample facilities will be afforded in London for the inspection of all documents the production of which he [the British agent] is entitled to ask. I am, etc.,

FRANCIS B. Loomis,

Acting Secretary of State.

Mr. Choate to Mr. Ilay.

[Telegram.]

LONDON, August 14, 1903. Arranged that first meeting of Alaskan Boundary Commission shall be at foreign office at 11 o'clock September 3. Please notify Secretary Root, General Foster, and all the counsel.

CHOATE.

DECISION OF THE ALASKAN BOUNDARY TRIBUNAL UNDER THE TREATY OF JANUARY 24, 1903, BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND GREAT BRITAIN.

Whereas by a Convention signed at Washington on the 24th day of January 1903, by Plenipotentiaries of and on behalf of His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and of the British Dominions beyond the Seas, Emperor of India, and of and on behalf of the United States of America, it was agreed that a Tribunal should be appointed to consider and decide the questions hereinafter set forth, such Tribunal to consist of six impartial Jurists of repute, who should consider judicially the questions submitted to them each of whom should first subscribe an oath that he would impartially consider the arguments and evidence presented to the said Tribunal, and would decide thereupon according to his true judgment, and that three members of the said Tribunal should be appointed by His Britannic Majesty and three by the President of the United States:

And whereas it was further agreed by the said Convention that the said Tribunal should consider in the settlement of the said questions submitted to its decision the Treaties respectively concluded between His Britannic Majesty and the Emperor of All the Russias under date of the 28th (16th) February A D 1825 and between the United States of America and the Emperor of All the Russias, concluded under date of the 18th (30th) March A D 1867, and particularly the Articles III, IV and V of the first mentioned Treaty, and should also take into consideration any action of the several Governments or of their respective Representatives, preliminary or subsequent to the conclusion of the said Treaties so far as the same tended to show the original and effective understanding of the partfes in respect to the limits of their several territorial jurisdictions under and by virtue of the provisions of the said Treaties

And whereas it was further agreed by the said Convention, referring to Articles III, IV and V of the said Treaty of 1825, that the said Tribunal should answer and decide the following questions:

1. What is intended as the point of commencement of the line? 2. What channel is the Portland Channel?

3. What course should the line take from the point of commencement to the entrance to Portland Channel ?

4. To what point on the 56th parallel is the line to be drawn from the head of the Portland Channel, and what course should it follow between these points?

5. In extending the line of demarcation northward from said point on the parallel of the 56th degree of north latitude, following the crest of the mountains situated parallel to the coast until its intersection with the 141st degree of longitude west of Greenwich, subject to the conditions that if such line should anywhere exceed the distance of 10 marine leagues from the ocean, then the boundary between the British and the Russian territory should be formed by a line parallel to the sinuosities of the coast and distant therefrom not more than 10 marine leagues, was it the intention and meaning of the said Convention of 1825 that there should remain in the exclusive possession of Russia a continuous fringe, or strip, of coast on the mainland not exceeding 10 marine leagues in width, separating the British possessions from the bays, ports, inlets, havens, and waters of the ocean, and extending from the said point on the 56th degree of latitude north to a point where such line of demarcation should intersect the 141st degree of longitude west of the meridian of Greenwich?

6. If the foregoing question should be answered in the negative and in the event of the summit of such mountains proving to be in places more than 10 marine leagues from the coast should the width of the lisière, which was to belong to Russia be measured (1) from the mainland coast of the ocean, strictly so-called along a line perpendicular thereto, or (2) was it the intention and meaning of the said Convention that where the mainland coast is indented by deep inlets forming part of the territorial waters of Russia, the width of the lisière was to be measured (a) from the line of the general direction of the mainland coast, or () from the line separating the waters of the ocean from the territorial waters of Russia, or (c) from the heads of the aforesaid inlets?

7. What, if any exist, are the mountains referred to as situated parallel to the coast, which mountains, when within 10 marine leagues from the coast, are declared to form the eastern boundary?

And whereas His Britannic Majesty duly appointed Richard Everard, Baron Alverstone, G.C.M G. Lord Chief Justice of England, Sir Louis Amable Jetté KCMG Lieutenant-Governor of the Province of Quebec, and Allen Bristol Aylesworth one of His Majesty's Counsel, and the President of the United States of America duly appointed the Honourable Elihu Root Secretary of War of the United States, the Honourable Henry Cabot Lodge, Senator of the United States from the State of Massachusetts and the Honourable George Turner of the State of Washington, to be members of the said Tribunal.

Now therefore we the Undersigned having each of us first subscribed an oath as provided by the said Convention and having taken into consideration the matters directed by the said Convention to be considered by us, and having judicially considered the said questions submitted to us, do hereby make Answer and Award as follows:

In answer to the first question The Tribunal unanimously agrees that the point of commencement of the line is Cape Muzon.

In answer to the second question

The Tribunal unanimously agrees that the Portland Channel is the Channel which runs from about 55° 56' NL and passes to the north of Pearse and Wales Islands.

A majority of the Tribunal that is to say Lord Alverstone, Mr Root Mr Lodge and Mr Turner decides that the Portland Channel after passing to the north of Wales Island is the channel between Wales Island and Sitklan Island called Tongass Channel. The Portland Channel

« PreviousContinue »