88 



slioultl not obtain exactly the like satisfaction; that for reasons of the 

 same nature Great Britain could not consent that the liberty of navi- 

 gation through Bering Straits be stated in the treaty as a boon 

 from llussia; that the tendency of such a statement would be to give 

 countenance to those claims of exclusive jurisdiction against which 

 Great Britain on its own behalf, and on that of the whole civilized world, 

 protested. 'No specification of this sort, lie said, was found in the Con- 

 vention with the United States of America, and yet it could not be 

 doubted that the Americans considered themselves as secured in the 

 right of navigating Bering Straits and the sea beyond them, " It can 

 not be expected," he said, "that England should receive as a boon 

 that which the United States hold as a right so unquestionable as 

 not to be worth recording. Perhaps the simplest course after all will 

 be to substitute, for all that part of the ''in-ojeV and 'counter projeV 

 which relates to maritime rights and to navigation, the first two articles 

 of the convention already concluded by the court of St. Petersburg 

 with the United States of America in the order in which they stand 

 in that convention. Eussia can not mean to give to the United States 

 of America what she withholds from us; nor to withhold from us any- 

 thing that she has consented to give to the United States. The uni- 

 formity of stipulations in pari materia gives clearness and force to 

 both arrangements, and will establish that footing of equality between 

 the several contra(;ting parties which it is most desirable should exist 

 between three powers whose interests come so nearly in contact witli 

 each other in a part of the globe in which no other power is concerned." 

 British Case, Vol. 2, ylpp.,73. 



In view of these and similar declarations by British representatives, 

 made before the negotiation of tlie treaty of 1825, it is earnestly con- 

 tended that that Ireaty must receive the same interpretation that would 

 be given to the treaty of 1824 as construed by Eussia and the United 

 States. And it is said that Eussia and the United States, before the 

 ratification of the treaty of 1824, substantially agreed that that treaty 

 (lid not refer to the waters of Bering Sea, and, consequently, it is 

 argued, "Pacific Ocean," as used in both treaties, must be held not to 

 include that Sea. 



The facts upon which these oontentions, in respect to the treaty of 

 1824, are based, may be thus summarized: 



The treaty of 1824 was signed at St. Petersburg April 5 (17), 1824. 



