ORAL ARGUMENT OF SIR CHARLES RUSSELL, Q. C. M. P. 151 



Then be goes on : 



The Russian Ministers will very probaltly assimilate their claim of dominion as 

 thns verbally explained to the claim which we are supposed to have of dominion in 

 the Narrow Seas, which it was attempted to bring into discussion at the Congress at 

 Vienna in 1815. We avoided the discussion, and ex])laiued the practice of giving 

 and receiving salutes prevailing in the British Navy in a manner satisfactory to all 

 parties. But we never relinquished the claim of the dominion. 



On the other hand, we have not recently claimed the dominion in a proclamation, 

 and warned others not to approach it. 



900 I now pass on to the letter from Mr. George Canning to the 

 Duke of Wellington, which will be found at page 21. He says: 



Your Grace is already in possession of all that has passed both here and at St. 

 Petersburgh on the subject of the issue in September of last year, by the Em[)eror of 

 Russia, ot an Ukase indirectly asserting an exclusive right of sovereignty from 

 Behriug's Straits to the 51st degree of north latitude on the west coast of America, 

 and to tlie 45th degree North on the opposite coast of Asia, and (as a qualilied exer- 

 cise of that right) prohibiting all foreign ships, under pain of conhscation, from 

 approa<hing within 100 Italian Miles of those coasts. 



He then alludes to the opinions of Lord Stowell, and of the Advocate 

 General, and refers to the question of title founded on mere discovery 

 and the point whether possession was necessary. I need not trouble 

 you with that. Then follow some sentences which are important. 



With respect to the other points in the Ukase which have the effect of extending 

 the territ(jrial rights of Russia over the adjacent seas to the unprecedented distance 

 of 1(K) miles from the line of coast, and of closing a hitlierto unobstructed passage, 

 at the present moment the object of important discoveries for the promotion of gen- 

 eral commerce and navigation, these pretensions are considered by the best legal 

 authorities as positive innovations on the right of navigation. As such, they can 

 receive no ex])lanation from further discussion, nor can by possibility be justified. 

 Common usage, which has obtained the force of law, has indeed assigned to coasts 

 and shores an accessorial boundary to a short limited distance for purjioses of 

 protection and general convenience, in no manner interfering with the rights of 

 others, and not obstructing the freedom of general commerce and navigation. 



But this im])ortant qualification the extent of the present claim entirely excludes, 

 and when such a prohibition is, as in the present case, applied to a long line of coasts, 

 and also to intermediate islands in remote seas where navigation is beset with innu- 

 merable and unforeseen difficulties, and where the principal em{)]oynient of the 

 fisheries must be pursued under circumstances which are incompatible with the 

 prescribed courses, all particular considerations concur, in an especial manner, with 

 the general principle, in repelling such a pretension as an encroachment on the 

 freedom of navigation, and the unalienable rights of all nations. 



I have indeed the satisfaction to believe, from a conference which I have had with 

 Count Lieven on this matter, — that upon these two points, — the attempt to shut up 

 the passage altogether, and the claim of exclusive dominion to so enormous a dis- 

 tance from the Coast, — the Russian Government are prepared entirely to waive their 

 pretensions. The only eflbrt that has been made to justify the latter claim was by 

 reference to an Article in the Treaty of Utrecht, which assigns 30 leagues from the 

 Coast as the distance of prohibition. But to this argument it is sufficient to answer 

 that the assumption of such a space was, in the instance quoted, by stipulation in a 

 Treaty, and one to which, therefore, the party to be affected by it had (whether 

 wisely or not) given its deliberate consent. No inference could be drawn from that 

 transaction in favour of a claim by authority against all the world. 



I have little doubt, therefore, but that the public notification of the claim to con- 

 sider the portions of the ocean included between the adjoining coast of America and 

 the Russian empire as a mare clausum, and to extend the exclusive territorial juris- 

 diction of Russia to 100 Italian miles from the coast, will be publicly recalled, and 

 I have the King's commands to instruct your Grace further to require of the Russian 

 Minister (on the ground of the facts and reasonings furnished in their despatch and 

 its inclosures) that such a portion of territory alone shall be defined as belonging 

 to Russia as shall not interfere with the rights and actual possessions of His Majesty's 

 subjects in North America. 



That is a statement which is I think accurate in point of law, and 

 you will see that while it is emphatic and distinct in its opposi- 



901 tion to the claim of exclusive dominion 100 miles from the coast, 



