THE ALASKAN BOUNDARY.

Press, Volume LX, Issue 11503, 9 February 1903, Page 4

THE ALASKAN BOUNDARY.

Tbe latest news regarding tJi« AJaden boundary diepote does not encowage t3» hope that the end of tie long struggle (or British rigbto is new a* head- A few days ago there <&iseem a proqpecfc that an asmcable settlement of tiaa vexed question would ba atrived at by tie aid of wWtwtioiL Oolonel Jdhn Hay, the United States Secretary of State, «od tbe British Minister at Washington signed a treaty for the eettl*meat of the dispute by • Commission to •winch each side sfoonld appoint three jurist*. According to a cable message ifc wa* expected that the American Senate would accept tie terms of tie treaity, and the New York comepondent of "The Times" ventured to predict "a greater diplomatic "triumph for all concerned than the Hay- " Pounceforte -treaty." The later meesagee, however, are by no means in accord witi this optuxristio view of the situation. Both President Booeevefc and Colonel Hay, it ia reported, coneider that the ratification of the Alaska treaty is 'practically hopeless." The reason for thie'opinion is suggested by tie attitude of tie Senators representing the Norti-Westem States of America, They maintain that "there is nothing in connec"tion with the Alaskan boundary requiring " arbitratioo," consequently they may Bβ expected to oppose the trooty, and perhaps prevent ite ratification by the Senate. To say that there is no need for arbitration is characteristic of American policy in regard to this much-debated question. For a Power -which hoe declared its faith in "the " honourable rest and justice found in Inter- " national Arbitration, , and which has urged Great Britain into arbitration over eeveral disputes—the Alabama claims, the Bearing Sea fisheries, tbe Venezuelan boundary— America has shown herself strangely reluctant to take advantage of this method of settling the British claims regarding the Alaakan boundary. Tbe chief point at issue, of course, is the ownership of the towns and settlements at tide-water—Skagway, Dyea, Haine'e Mission, and others. Under the BueeoEnglish treaty of 1825 it is provided that the Alaskan boundary "ehall for a specified " distance follow the summit of tie mountains situate parallel to the coast, but " whenever these are more than ten man"time leasrues from the ocean the line shaH "be formed by a line parallel to the -wind- " ing of the coast, which ehall never exceed "the distance of ten maritime leagues "therefrom." The .dispute has arisen over the definition of this "winding of the "coast." America, since she purchased Alaska from Russia, has always claimed tfiat the ten leagues should be measured inland from tie head of tie remotest waterway. Acting on this contention, America has treated the whole extent of each inlet as territorial waters, and the tide-water cettlemente ac American property. Canada, on the other hand, contends that tie wording of tie treaty applies only to the main coast line, and that tie boundary line should cross the longer inlets or arms of tie sea at tie distance of ten marine leagues from tie ocean. This would give Canada a free port to tie Klondike mining district, whereas tie American interpretation completely bars Great Britain's free access to the Pacific Ocean through these inlets, guaranteed to bar by the treaty of 1825. ' For thirty years Canada has been urging upon tie United States the necessity for settling the point at iasue, and securing a properly-defined boundary. And the United States as consistently have refused arbitration, or accepted it only on impossible conditions. While taking up this attitude, moreover, they have remained in possession of the ground in dispute, subjecting Canadian trade to restrictive Customs duties, and hampering the administration of Canadian criminal law. The members of the North-West Mounted Police of the Dominion are, says the Crown Prosecutor of the Yukon, writing in the " Empire Review," compelled to remove their uniforms when passing over the disputed strip, and he quotes instances to show tint "tie spread-eagle element "at Skagwoy (in disputed, territory) has "been persistent in exactions directed "against the force." The baneful influences of an undetermined boundary, he declares, permeate every department of Government- Yet repeated representations on tie part of Canada and Great Britain have brought the question no nearer settlement, and after thirty years of negotiations the American attitude still appears to be, in effect, that "there is nothing in "connection with the Alaskan boundary "requiring arbitration I" Unless a more friendly and conciliatory spirit than this is manifested on the American side, the prospects of a epeedy settlement of a vexatious dispute can hardly be said to be encouraging.