256 APPENDIX TO CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN. 



western coast of America iiortli of 42°. It follows tliat all the discov- 

 eries made by her navigators beyond that limit now belong' to the 

 United tStates. It is a "historical fact," and one too well autlienticated 

 to admit of doubt, and it is stated by M. de Humboldt in the work 

 before quoted (i>. 313), that "Francisco Gali,in his voyage from Macao 

 to Acapulco, discovered in fifteen hundred eighty-tico the north-west 

 coast of America, under the 57° 30'."-^" On correcting the old observa- 

 tions by the new in places of which the identity is ascertainedj we find 

 that Gali coasted part of the archipelago of the Prince of Wales, at 

 that of King George." Here we find that the land was discovered and 

 its shores examined 159 years before the voyage of Tchiricoff, and from 

 2 degrees farther north than the cape seen by that navigator, a fact 

 that puts the Eussian claim to discovery out of the question. As little 

 do we believe in the validity of the claims resulting flY)m the occupation 

 of Norfolk Sound in 1799. This sound was first discovered and exam- 

 ined by the Spanish expedition under Heceta, Ayala, and Quadra iii 

 1775, and received the name of "Bay of Guadalupa." A few years 

 afterwards it was visited for commercial purposes, and, abounding iii 

 valuable furs, soon became the general resort of all those engaged in 

 that trade. It was frequented by the vessels of Great Britain, France, 

 and the United States several years before the Russians had extended 

 their excursions so far eastward, and it is therefore clear that at that 

 time they had no claim on the ground of occnpation. If, then, prior to 

 1799 Russia possessed no rights on this part of the coast but sUch as 

 were common to and enjoyed by other nations, we confess ourselves 

 unable to perceive why the establishing of a few hunters and 

 34 mounting some cannon in the corner of Sitka Bay should give 

 her the riglit of restraining an intercourse and interdicting a 

 commerce which had hitherto been free as air, and prohibiting the 

 approach of vessels of other nations to shores which the navigators of 

 such nations first discovered and explored! The claim of Russia to 

 sovereignty over the Pacific Ocean north of latitude 51° on the pre- 

 tence of its being a " close sea''"' is, if possible, more unwarrantable than 

 her territorial usurpations. 



Mr. Adams, in noticing it, merely states the fact that " the distance 

 from shore to shore on this sea in latitude 51° is not less than 90 degrees 

 of longitude, or 4,000 miles ! " A volume on the subject could not have 

 placed the absurdity of these pretensions more glaringly before us. M. 

 de Poletica, in his tliird letter, declines further discussion on this sub- 

 ject, " as the Imperial Government," he says, "has not thought fit to 

 take advantage of that right." If interdicting the navigation of this 

 sea to the distance of 100 miles from the shore is not taking advantage 

 of the right to consider it a " close sea^" we ask M. de Poletica to point 

 out to us the " laws and usages of nations " by which such a measure 

 can be justified. 



We have thus attempted to lay before our readers the character of 

 the Russian claims to the north-west coast of America. It is difficult 

 to conjecture what are the ultimate views of the Rnssian Government 

 in relation to this coast. The ostensible object is, evidently, a monopoly 

 of the fur tiade. It is well known to the Russian Fur Comi)any that 

 nearly all the sea-otter skins, and most of the other valuable furs, are 

 piocured north of the 51st degree, and if "foreign adventurers" can be 

 l)revented from a])])roaching that part of the coast, the ('ompany would 

 soon be left in undisturbed possession of the whole trade, for south of 

 51° it is not of suflicient value to attract a single vessel in a season. 

 This woidd not only secure for them a monopoly im. the j^urcha.se,^ but 



