ORAL ARGUMENT OF SIR CHARLES RUSSELL, Q. C. M. P. 175 



light extending to the maritime belt of three miles beyond her terri- 

 tory. 



929 (Senator Morgan. — As to that marginal belt, T understood you 

 to say a moment ago that Eussia at tbat time said that the Nations 



had not agreed to the 3-mile limit as a matter of international law. 



Sir Charles Kussell. — In order that the Tribunal may follow this 

 exactly, I will repeat tlie question that you. Sir, have been good enough 

 to address to me in relation to my limitation of the Smiles on the coast: 

 you suggest to me tliat, in one of the communications from Eussia, it 

 had beeu stated that the 3-mile marginal belt was not then determined, 

 or fixed or universally agreed upon limit of territorial waters. 



I think there is truth in that suggestion. It was, to a greater or 

 less extent, indeterminate. It was I think generally fixed at the 

 length to which cannon-shot could be carried, and that may have varied 

 more or less; but it is quite true to say that at that time it was not 

 quite clearly fixed, whether it was 3 miles, or 4 miles, or 5 miles, but 

 beyond that there was no ditference. There was a certain marginal belt, 

 the precise limit of which has in later years come to be recognized at 3 

 miles, or a marine league. 



The President. — It has no relation to our subject, and perhaps it 

 would be better not to press that question too tightly even to day. 



Sir Charles Eussell. — No, because as the power of arras is 

 increased, it may be the application of that principle terrce dominium 

 finitur uhifinitur armorum vis may receive a greater expansion. It is 

 not a question, I would venture to say, that need trouble us. It is 

 admitted that there is a marginal belt which to-day may be indetermi- 

 nate, but indeterminate only within narrow and confined limits. 



Senator Morgan. — Then, I take it, it was entirely indefinite how 

 far Eussia claimed at that time jurisdiction in a territorial sense in Beh- 

 ring Sea. 



Sir Charles Eussell. — Do you mean before or after the Ukase? 



Senator Morgan. — At that time. 



Sir Charles Eussell. — There is a great difference. It is clear 

 that by the Ukase if that had been persisted in she claimed territorial 

 jurisdiction over the whole of Behring Sea. As I have pointed out she 

 was insisting on 100 miles from the land, which 100 miles from the land 

 would have shut Behring Sea and made it a mare clausum. 



Mr. Justice Harlan. — May not that throw some light on the fact, 

 which struck me in the corresj)ondence, that Mr. Canning did not at 

 any time mention the Behring Sea or the Sea of Kamschatka, but 

 seemed to have constantly in his mind keeping open Behring Straits, 

 because if the 100-mile limit was enforced that would close Behring 

 Strait. Of course he must have proceeded on the ground that Eussia 

 disclaimed any jjurpose of keeping foreign vessels out of the open 

 waters of Behring Sea. They could not get out to the Arctic Ocean 

 unless Beliring Straits were open. 



Sir Charles Eussell. — With deference that is not what the corre- 

 sjwndence shews, because the question of Behring Straits being 



930 closed comes up in relation to a different subject — the access to 

 the Arctic Ocean beyond it. 



Mr. Justice Harlan. — Mr. Canning said — We cannot get to the 

 Arctic Ocean with vessels of discovery unless we go through Behring 

 Straits. 



Sir Charles Eussell. — True he uses the reference in a very signifi- 

 cant way. He says the Power that could propose to itself the notion 

 of treating the Pacific Ocean as mare elausum might think it right to 

 close Behring Straits, which is only 16 miles wide. That the Ukase 



