Page:Alaskan boundary tribunal (IA alaskanboundaryt01unit).pdf/27

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.
ARGUMENT OF THE UNITED STATES
19

FIFTH.

First Question.What is intended as the point of commencement of the line?

On this question there is no controversy. The United States requests the tribunal to decide that Cape Muzon is the point of commencement.[1]

In the British Case occurs the following:

But Great Britain concedes that it sufficiently appears that Cape Muzon, the more southerly point, fulfills the essential conditions of the Treaty, and should be held to be the point of departure.[2]

SIXTH.

Second Question: What channel is the Portland Channel?

Answer Proposed by the United States:

The United States requests the Trimual to answer and deeide Chat Tiortiand Chanuel is the same baby of water onw ecomimenly known aml deerribe as Portland Canal, which, passing from the north benveen Ramelen Point on the wiainiand and Pearse Island, and thenee southwarnl of said island omel Wales Island, enters Dixon Entrance between the island last mentioned aml Compton Island.

THE INTENTION OF THE NEGOTIATORS.

Portland Channel. as the course of the bonndary, first iappenrs in the discussion in Russia’s proposal of Fel. 12 24. 1s24. The line of demarcation starting fron: Prince of Wales Fsland was to “follow Portland Channel up to the mountains which border the coast.”[3] Russia had previously. on Oct. 2, 1524. proposed the 54- of latitude (Poleties to Nesselrode, Nov, 3. bs28p.[4] Sir C. Bagot had understood him to offer the 55° (Bayot to Canning. Oet. 17, 1823),[5] but the (ues- tion had not been seriously discussed between thent hecause, as stated hy Sir C. Bagot, M. Poletiea was not empowered to treat or, indeed to pledge his govermment to any precise point.” aud Sir Charles “abstained from entering with hint as fully into the matter” as he otherwise would haye done, He also assigned us an additional reason for not ailvancing the negotiations thit, in view of the position of the United States, he did vot think it sufe to venture further into the question” itil he had learned the opinion af His Majesty's Govern- thent upon the pretensions advanced by the United States.


  1. U. S. Case, p. 104.
  2. B. C., p. 46.
  3. U. S. C. App., 158.
  4. U. S. C. App., 139.
  5. U. S. C. App., 131.