462 APPENDIX TO CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN. 



establisliinent in the Bay of Kiuai. In fine, Captains Mirs, Portlock, 

 La Peyrouse, unanijiionsly attest tlie existence of Russian establish- 

 ments in these hititudes. 



If the Imperial Government had at the time published the discoveries 

 made by the liussian navigatois after Behiing and Tchiricoft", viz., 

 Chlodiloff, Serebreanicotf, Kiasihiicotf, Paycoff, Pouslicareft", Lazeieft, 

 Medwedeff, Solowieff, Lewashetf, Kremtsin, and others, no one could 

 refuse to Kussia the riglit of first discovery, nor could even any one 

 deny her that of first occn])ation. 



Moreover, when D. Jose iMartinez was sent in 1789 by the Court of 

 Madrid to form an establishment in Vancouver's Island, and to remove 

 foreigners from thence, under the pretext that all that coast belonged 

 to Spain, lie gave not the least disturbance to the Kussian Colonies and 

 miwgators. Yet the Spanish Government was not ignorant of their 

 existence, for this very IMartinez had visited them the year before. 

 Tlie b'ei)ort which Captain Malespina made of the results of his voyage 

 proves that the Spaniards very well knew of the Kussian Colonies; 

 and in this very Report it is seen that the Court of Madrid acknowledged 

 that its possessions upon the coast of the Pacific Ocean ought not to 

 extend to the north of Cape Blanc, taken from the point of Trinity, 

 sitnated under 42° 59' of ninth latitude. 



When in 1799 the Emperor Paul I granted to tlie present American 

 Company its first Charter, he gave it the exclusive possession of 

 2 the northwest coast of America, which belonged to Russia, from 



55th degree of north latitude to Behring Straits. He iK'rmitted 

 them to extend their discov^eries to the south, and there to form estab- 

 lishments, provided that they did not encroach u])on the territory occu- 

 pied by other Powers. 



This act, when made public, excited no claim on the part of other 

 Cabinets, not even on that of Madrid, which confirms that it did not 

 extend its pretensions to the OOth degree. 



When the Government of the United States treated with Spain for 

 the cession of a part of the north-west coast, it was able to acquire, by 

 the Treaty of Washington, the right to all that belonged to the Span- 

 iards north of the I2nd degree of latitude; but this Treaty says noth- 

 ing positive concerning the northern boundary of this cession, because, 

 in fact, Spain well knew that she could not say that the coast as far as 

 the (>Oth degree belonged to her. 



From this faithful ex])osition of known facts, it is easy. Sir, as appears 

 to me, to draw the conclusion tlnit the rights of Russia to the extent of 

 the north-west coast, specified in the Regulation of the Russian-Amer- 

 ican Company, rest uyion the three bases required by the general law 

 of nations and immemorial usage among nations — that is, uj)on the 

 title of first discovery; upon the title of first occupation; aiul, in the 

 last place, upon that which results from a peaceable and uncontested 

 possession of more than half a century — an epoch, conse<|uently, sev- 

 eral years anterior to that when the United States took their place 

 among independent nations. 



It is, moreover, evident that, if the right to the possession of a cer- 

 tain extent of the north-west coast of America, claimed by the United 

 States, only devolves upon them in virtue of the Treaty of Washing- 

 ton, 1819 (and 1 believe it would be diflicult to make good any other 

 title), this Treaty could not confer upon the American Government any 

 right of claim against tlie limits assigned to the Russian possessions 

 ui)on the same coast, because Spain herself had never pretended to 

 such a right. 



