134 ORAL ARGUMENT OF JAMES C. CARTER, ESQ. 



Whetlier tlie word " Grand " belongs there before tlie word "Ocean " 

 or not, is of no consequence; I assume tliat the same thing was intended 

 by the Articles in each Treaty. That was the Treaty negotiated between 

 Great Britain and Russia, Now, applying the same method of inter- 

 pretation which 1 have to that of the United States, let me say that we 

 know, of course, the views with which the Russian Government entered 

 into the negotiation of this Treaty with Great Britain, for they were 

 substantially simultaneous with the negotiations with the United 

 States; and of course the Russian (iovernment must have approached 

 the negotiations with Great Britain as it approached those with the 

 Government of the United States. In reference to the views of Great 

 Britain, it does not follow that she had the same purposes as animated 

 the United States Government. Her purposes may have been widely 

 different from those of the United States negotiators, or those of the 

 United States Government; but we have this tact, that the negotiations 

 were carried on conjointly, and, j^resumably, the views of the two Gov- 

 ernments were substantially alike. But, so far as the instructions of 

 Great Britain to her negotiators are C(mcerned, I must freely and fully 

 admit that, instead of being mainly confined, as in the case of the 

 United States, to the question of the disputed territory on the !North- 

 West Coast, they placed special importance on the maritime pretension 

 of one hundred miles over the sea. The negotiators representing Great 

 Britain were instructed that that was a point which they must si)ecially 

 and, primarily, attend to, and that it was of inore consequence than 

 the disputed question of territory on the North-West Coast. In that 

 respect there was a difference. But how was this point arranged? Mr. 

 George Canning instructs Mr. Stratford Canning at St. Petersburg 

 how to proceed on that point. At page 2(50 of the first volume of the 

 American Appendix is found a letter of instructions from Mr. George 

 Canning to Mr. Stratford Canning at the Court of St. Petersburg, in 

 reference to the manner in which he was to conduct the negotiations 

 (quoting) : 



The correspondence which has already passed upon this subject has been submitted 

 to your perusal. And I inclose you a copy. 



i. Of the "projet" Avhich Sir Charles Bagot was authorized to conclude and sign 

 some months ago, and whicli we liad every reason to expect would have been entirely 

 satisfactory to the Russian Goverument. 



2. Of a "coutre-projet" drawn up by the Russian plenipotentiaries, and presented 

 to Sir Charles Bagot at their last meeting before Sir Charles Bagot's departure from 

 St. Petersburg. 



3. <^f a dispatch from Count Nesselrode, accompanying the transmission of the 

 "contre-projet" to Count Lieven. 



Now further on it said: 



The whole negotiation grows out of the ukase of 1821. 



So entirely and absolutely true is this proposition, that the settlement of the 

 limits of the respective possessions of Great Britain and Russia on the northwest 

 coast of America was proposed by us only as a mode of f.icilitatiug the adjustment 

 of the difference arising from the ukase, by enabling the court of Russia, under 

 cover of the more comprehensive arrangements, to withdraw, with less appearance 

 of concession, the offensive pretensions of that edict. 



It is comparatively indili'ereut to us wliether we hasten or postpone all questions 

 respecting the limits of territorial possession on the continent of America, but the 

 pretensions of the Russian ukase of 1821 to exclusive dominion over the Pacific 

 could not continue longer unrepealed without compelling us to take some measure 

 of public and effectual remonstrance against it. 



You will theri;fore take care, in the hrst instance, to repress any attempt to give 

 this change to the character of the negotiation, and will declare without reserve that 

 the point to wliich alone the solicitude of the Biitish Government and the jealousy 

 of the Britisli nation may attach any great importance is the doing away (in a man- 

 ner as little disagreeable to Russia as possible), of the affect of the ukase of 1821. 



