ORAL ARGUMENT OP SIR CHARLES RUSSELL, Q. C. M. P. 107 



848 Then lie mentions the western boundary, which is the line on 

 the map, and then proceeds at the bottom : 



The courts have the same right and power, when called npon to interpret a public 

 Treaty, to derive aid from contemporaneous interpretation, and by ascertaining the 

 intention of those whose duty it is, under the Constitution, to make Treaties, as they 

 have in the interpretation of any other law. What then was the object in purchas- 

 ing Alaslca? Manifestly to extend our Northwest bouudiiry line so as to include the 

 ■whole group of the Aleutian -islauds. 



Then he refers to Senator Sumner's speech, and then: 



Subdivision 2 of section 2 of the Constitution in defining the powers of the Presi- 

 dent says. 



He sliall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make 

 Treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur. 



Then: 



Judge Story, in considering this clause of the Constitution, says: It will be 

 observed from this that the power to malce treaties is by the Constitution general, 

 and, of course, it embraces all sorts of treaties for peace or war, for commerce or 

 territory. 



Then : 



It is argued that this question belongs to the political department of the Govern- 

 ment, and that it should be there adjusted, Vnit this position is, I think, wholly 

 untenable, at least at this stage of the controversy. 



Then the learned Judge cites Story on the question of making 

 Treaties; and then I had better read at the bottom of page 120. 



Congress recognized the right of the United States to the whole of the new acqui- 

 sition by appropriating $7,200,000 to pay for the new territory, and on the 27th day 

 of July, 1868, extended the laws of the United States relating to customs, commerce, 

 and navigation over all the mainland, islands and waters of the territory ceded to 

 the United States by the Emperor of Russia. [See Revised Statutes, sec. 1954.] 



Showing unmistakably the understanding of the Government at the time as to 

 what had been acquired, and that our boundary line was located at the one hundred 

 and ninety third degree of west longitude. The longitude of a place is the arc of 

 the equator intercepted between the Meridian passing through that place and some 

 assumed meridian to wl)ieli all others are referred. Different nations have adopted 

 different meridians. The English reckon from tiie Royal Observatory at Greenwich ; 

 the French from the Imperial Observatory at Paris, and the Germans from the Observ- 

 atory at Berlin, or from the island of Ferro. In the United States we sometimes 

 reckon longitude from Washington, and sometimes from Greenwich. But in estab- 

 lishing the western boundary line of Alaska the reckoning of longitude was from 

 Greenwich, which reaches the Hue divitliugthe Continents of Asia and North America. 



The purchase of Alaska was unquestionably made with a view to the revenues to 

 be derived from the taking of fur-seal in the waters of Behring Sea, and especially 

 on the Islands of St. Paul and St. George, both of which were, by Act of Congress of 

 March 3rd, 18(59, made "a s))ecial reservation for Government purposes". 



Secretary Seward was a skilled diplomat, a learned man in statecraft, and he evi- 

 dently foresaw the income to be derived by the Government from the seal industry 

 on and adjacent to those islands. Hence, in the negotiation he insisted upon, 



849 and Russia conceded, tliat our boundary line should be extended to the meridian 

 named in the Treaty. The industry and consequent revenues would be hope- 

 less without the residuary power of the United States to protect and regulate the 

 taking of fur-bearing animals in that part of our domain. The effort of the United 

 States to seize and drive out the illicit piratical craft that have been navigating 

 those waters for years, indiscriminately slaughtering fur-bearing animals, the con- 

 tinuation of which can but result in the wanton destruction of the rookeries, the most 

 valuable in the world, is a legitimate exercise of the ]>owers of sovereignty under 

 the law of nations, with which no nation can lawfully interfere. 



The question of the constitutionality of the Act of Congress of July 27th 1868 

 (Revised Statutes, page 343), scarcely deserves notice, since it has been sustained by 

 this court. 



The conclusion I have reached is that the demurrer must be overruled, and it is 

 so ordered; and that judgment of forfeiture to the United States be entered against 

 each of the vessels separately, together with their tackle, apparel, furniture and 

 cargoes, saving to the masters and mates their private property, such as nautical 

 instruments and the like. 



