126 ORAL ARGUMENT OF JAME8 C. CARTER, ESQ. 



the whole importance of the dispute lay iu the possession of that 

 Northwest coast. That is all there was about it. There was indeed a 

 sentijuental assertion — I call it a sentimental one— that no further 

 acquisition, no further settlements by European powers upon the Amer- 

 ican continent, would be permitted; but that did not amount to much, 

 for iu the very letter he ottered to draw a boundary line with Russia at 

 55 degrees which would give her exclusive possession of a very consid- 

 erable part of this disputed region. Practically the whole of the 

 interests that were affected by this dispute centred upon that North- 

 west coast trade. And I might as well here strengthen that point. 

 Mr. Adams, you will remember, refers in that letter of instructions to 

 two articles iu certain well known periodicals of that time as containing 

 very correct information about this region. He refers to an article in 

 the Quarterly Review, and to an article iu the North American Review. 

 Here is an extract from the article thus referred to in tlie (Quarterly 

 Review. It will be found on page IU of the first volume of our 

 appendix: 



Let us examine, however, what claim Russia can reasonably set up to the terri- 

 tory in question. To the two shores of Bering Sea we admit she would have an 

 undoubted claim, on the score of priority of discovery, that on the side of Asia 

 having been visited by Deshnew in 1648, and that of America visited by Bering in 

 1741, as far down as the latitude 51^ and the iieaked mountain, since generally 

 known by the name of Cape Fairweather; to the southward of this point, however, 

 Russia has not the slightest claim. 



That is carrying the position and claim of Russia under the claim of 

 prior discovery much farther south than the 60th degree. 



Here is the extract from the North American Review. That article 

 in the North American Review was, I think I may undertake to say, 

 written by Mr. William Sturgis of Boston, a very distinguished mer- 

 chaut of that day, of the firm of Bryant, Sturgis and Comi)any, who 

 carried on an extensive trade on this very coast; and he had himself 

 been, as a member of that house and engnged in this navigation, many 

 years on that coast. It was ])erfectly familiar to him, with its history, 

 and with the trade Avhich had arisen there. It is also on page 12: 



We have no doubt but Russian fur-hunters formed establishments, at an early 

 period, on tlie Aleutian Islands and neighboring coast of the continent; but we are 

 equally certain that it can be clearly demonstrated that no settlement was made 

 eastward of Bering Bay till the one at Norfolk Sound (Sitka), in 1799. The state- 

 ments of Cook, Vancouv'ei', Mears (Mirs), I'ortlock, and La Ferouse prove, what we 

 readily admit, that previous to 1786 the Russians had settlements on th<>, island of 

 Kadiak and in Cook's River; but we shall take leave to use the same authorities to 

 establish the fact that none of these settlements extended so far east as Bering Bay. 



[The Tribunal here took a recess.] 



Mr. Carter. Mr. President, the diplomatic papers, and especially 

 the instructions from Secretary John Quincy Adams to the Auierican 

 negotiator of the Treaty with Russia and the historical evidence referred 

 to in that letter and other historical evidence which was alluded to by 

 me, establish, as it seems to me, without question, that, so far as the 

 United States were concerned, their objections to the Ukase of 1821 were 

 substantially confined to the unwarranted assertion of authority on the 

 part of Russia — for such the United States deemed it to be — over the 

 North-west Coast, where the United States had very valuable commer- 

 cial interests. And it appears equally clear that, so far as the posses- 

 sions of Russia north of the OOth parallel of north latitude, which 

 includes the whole of Alaska and the whole of Bering Sea and the 

 Aleutian Islands, the title of Russia to the possession and enjoyment 

 of those territories was undisputed and constituted no subject of com- 

 plaint on the part of the United States; and that, so far as resx)ects 



