ORAL ARGUMENT OF JAMES C. CARTER, ESQ. 67 



According; to Mr. Blaine — this was bis argument — that contention 

 was settled between the United States and Knssia by the treaty of 18134, 

 and between Great Britain and Russia by the treaty of 1825, and that 

 the ukase of 1821, except so fiir as it was nioditied and displaced by 

 these treaties, continued to stand. That was his raaiu proposition; 

 that to a certain extent the pretensions asserted by the ukase of 1821 

 were yielded and surrendered by those two treaties, and so far as they 

 AYere not thus yielded and surrendered, they continued to stand. 



Now, according to his argument, the only particulars in which those 

 jiretensions were surrendered were these: a boundary line was estab- 

 lished — a southern boundary to the pretensions of Knssia, and that was 

 51°, 40'. The territory in dispute, which was between 60° and 51° was 

 thus divided, you may say, in two parts. 54°, 40' was taken as the 

 dividing line. Down to tliat dividing line, by this treaty, the sover- 

 eignty of Russia was recognized as complete and perfect; and south of 

 that boundary, the sovereignty of Russia was excluded by her agree- 

 ment not to make any more settlements south of it. lu the course of 

 this whole discussion, no pretension was ever made by either Great 

 Britain, or the United States, to any trade in these Bering Sea regions, 

 or to any interests in these regions at all. Great Britain and the 

 United States made no assertions of any interest in these regions of 

 Beiiiig Sea at all. They had none at that time. Everything embraced 

 by those regions was in the undisputed possession of Russia. There 

 was no desire to interfere with it, and, consequently — this was the 

 conclusion of Mr. Blaine. — 



The President. You speak of the coasts only. 



Mr. Carter. Well, I speak now of the sea as well. I am giving Mr. 

 Blaine's argument now. 



Lord Uannen. It is not yours — you do not adopt it? 



Mr. Carter. I am not now adopting it. Whether I will adopt it or 

 not, and how far I adopt it, will be seen at a later stage in the argu- 

 ment. But this is his argument, that all the pretensions of Russia, 

 whether upon the sea, or upon the land, North of the GOth degree, and 

 including all the islands in Bering Sea and the jjeninsula of Alaska 

 wdiich constituted the Southern boumlary of Bering Sea, were recog- 

 nized as the undisputed possessions of Russia, and no contention was 

 made in reference to them. 



Sir Charles Russell. North of 54°, 40' you mean? 



Mr. Carter. No: north of 00°, I mean, at the time when the pro- 

 tests were made, and the negotiations were entered into. Everything 

 North of 00° was undisputably the property of Russia, and no (;onten- 

 tion was made on the part of eitlier Government in reference to it. 

 The region of controversy was South of that, between that, and lati- 

 tude 51°. The whole controversy was in reference to that region, and 

 the adjustment affected that region alone. It did not affect, and was 

 not designed to affect — it could not have affected — the undisputed part 

 of the territory. So the linal conclusion of Mr. Blaine was that the 

 pretentions of Russia asserted by the ukase of 1821, so far as respected 

 Bering Sea and the islands in Bering Sea, and so fiir as respected land 

 and water both, were unaffected by the treaties of 1824 and 1825, and 

 therefore they stood not only unaffected by those treaties, but, because 

 they were left unaffected by those treaties, admitted by those two 

 powers to be valid and legitimate. That is his argument. 



How far that argument may be sound, and where it may be weak, if 

 it is weak at all, will form the subject of a brief discussion, upon which 

 I shall enter at a subsequent stage. I am now merely presenting the 

 argument contained in this letter of Mr. Blaine's. 



