100 OKAL ARGUMENT OF SIR CHARLES EUSSELL, Q. C. M. P. 



Conclusion. 



The foregoing record may contain but a meagre idea of the indomitable energy 

 and perseverance displayed by the Russian people in acquiring empire in North 

 America, beginning with discoveries of Behring in 1728, and extending for more 

 than a century and a quarter, wherein they braved the perils of land and sea, over- 

 came a savage native populatiou, faced ice and snow, storm and shipwreck, to found 

 and maintain empire on these rugged shores. P^nough has been said to disclose the 

 basis of Russia's right to jurisdiction of the Behriug's Sea under the law of nations, 

 A'iz., original possession of the Asiatic coast followed by discovery and possession 

 of the Aleutian chain and the shores of Alaska north, not only to Behring's Strait 

 but to Point Barrow and the frozen ocean, thus inclosing within its territory, as 

 within the embrace of a mighty giant, the islands and waters of Behring's Sea, and 

 witii this the assertion and exercise of dominion over land and sea. 



Such is our understanding of the law, such is the record. Upon them the United 

 States are prepared to abide the Judgments of the Courts and the opinion of the 

 civilized world. 



Senator Morgan. — Is there any dispute about tliatlong and histori- 

 cal resume found in that statement? 



Sir Charliss Eussell. — I do not tliink anything which would need 

 criticism of it in any detail. I do not tliink it is historically'^ correct ia 

 some particulars, but I do not think they are of sufficient importance 

 to require notice. 



Senator Morgan. — Generally it is historically correct. 

 Sir Charles Russell. — I should say so. 

 840 Mr. Phelps. — Perhaps it is only fair to my learned friends to 



state that, upon any investigation we have been able to make, we 

 have no reason to suppose tliat that case was prepared by anybody 

 connected with the Government of the United States in Washington, 

 or used in that case. 



It is telegraphed from Ottawa, and that is the first and all that Ave 

 know about it. 



Sir Charles Russell. — Then I must say this is the most extraor- 

 diuary case of a forgery that tlie world has ever known. 



Mr. Phelps. — I do not mean to say that it was a forgery. It was 

 not used in the case, so far as we have learned. 



The Tribunal here adjourned for lunch. 



The President. — Sir Charles, if you will continue your argument, 

 we are ready to hear you. 



Sir Charles Russell. — Mr, President, I am not surprised, nor do 

 I in the least complain, of the interj)osition of my friends at the point 

 at which the discussion broke off. It is a very important point indeed 

 to ascertain whether this is a genuine brief, and important also, although 

 not so vitally important, to ascertain whether it was prej)ared at 

 Washington. But whether it was prepared at Washington or Avhether 

 it was prei)ared elsewhere, it was prepared by the Counsel who were put 

 forward to represent the views and the contentions of the United States, 

 and to formulate the grounds of fact and of law upon which those views 

 were based, and by which they were to be defended. 



Senator Morgan. — Are the names of those counsel given. Sir 

 Charles? 



Sir Charles Russell. — Yes: Mr. A. K. Delaney; and I will only 

 say that it is obvious upon the face of the document itself that it was 

 prepared not oidy by a man of considerable ability, but by a man who 

 had devoted considerable research and thought to the subject, and one, 

 moreover, who had access to official documents and records in the 

 preparation of this "brief" to be laid before the Court; and certainly 

 it is a very high testimony to the ability of the counsel in this rather 

 out of the way place, if, without instructions from Washington, and 



