550 APPENDIX TO CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN. 
any less power or authority than it was willing to concede to the Imperial Govern- 
ment of Russia when its sovereignty extended over the territory in question. ‘The 
President is persuaded that all friendly nations will concede to the United States the 
same rights and privileges on the lands and in the waters of Alaska which the same 
friendly nations always conceded to the Empire of Russia.” 
In answer to this declaration, Lord Salisbury contends that Mr. John Quincy 
Adams, when Secretary of State under President Monroe, protested against the 
jurisdiction which Russia claimed over the waters of the Behring’s Sea. To main- 
tain this position his Lordship cites the words of a despatch of Mr. Adams, written 
on the 23rd July, 1823, to Mr. Henry Middleton, at that time our Minister at St. 
Petersburgh. ‘he alleged declarations and admissions of Mr. Adams in that des- 
patch have been the basis of all the arguments which Her Majesty’s Government 
have submitted against the ownership of certain properties in the Behring’s Sea 
which the Government of the United States confidently assumes. I quote the por- 
tion of Lord Salisbury’s argument which includes the quotation from Mr. Adams: 
“After Russia, at the instance of the Russian American Fur Company, claimed in 
1821 the pursuits of commerce, whaling, and fishing from Behring’s Straits to the 
dist degree of north latitude, and not only prohibited all foreign vessels from land- 
ing on the coasts and islands of the above waters, but also prevented them 
498 from approaching within 100 miles thereof, Mr. Quincy Adams wrote as follows 
to the United States Minister in Russia: 
“The United States can admit no part of these claims; their right of navigation 
and fishing is perfect, and has been in constant exercise from the earliest times, 
thronehonut the whole extent of the Southern Ocean, subject only to the ordinary 
exceptions and exclusions of the territorial jurisdictions.” 
The quotation which Lord Salisbury makes is unfortunately a most defective, 
erroneous, and misleading one. The conclusion is separated from the premise, a 
comma is turned into a period, an important qualification as to time is entirely 
erased, without even a suggestion that it had ever formed part of the text, and out 
of eighty-four words, logically and inseparably connected, thirty-five are dropped 
from Mr. Adams’ paragraph in Lord Salisbury’s quotation. Noedition of Mr. Adams’ 
work gives authority for his Lordship’s quotation; while the archives of this Depart- 
ment plainly disclose its many errors. I requote Lord Salisbury’s version of what 
Mr. Adams said, and in juxtaposition produce Mr. Adams’ full text as he wrote it. 
Lord Salisbury’s quotation from Mr, Adams. 
“The United States can admit no part of these claims; their right of navigation 
and fishing is perfect, and has been in constant exercise from the earliest times, 
thronghout the whole extent of the Southern Ocean, subject only to the ordinary 
exceptions and exclusions of the territorial jurisdictions.” 
Full text of Mr. Adams’ paragraph. 
“The United States can admit no part of these claims; their right of navigation 
and of fishing is perfect, and has been in constant exercise from the earliest times, 
after the peace of 1783, throughout the whole extent of the Southern Ocean, subject 
only to the ordinary exceptions and exclusionsof the territcrial jurisdictions, which, 
so far as Russian rights are concerned, are confined to certain islands north of the 55th 
degree of latitude, and have no existence on the Continent of America.” 
The words in italics are those which are left out of Mr. Adams’ paragraph in the 
despatch of Lord Salisbury. They are precisely the words upon which the Govern- 
ment of the United States founds its argument in this case. Conclusions or infer- 
ences resting upon the paragraph, with the material parts of Mr. Adams’ text 
omitted, are of course valueless. 
The first object is to ascertain the true meaning of Mr. Adams’ words which were 
omitted by Lord Salisbury. ‘Russian rights,” said Mr. Adams, ‘are confined to 
certain islands north of the 55th degree of latitude.” The islands referred to are as 
easily recognized to-day as when Mr. Adams described their situation sixty-seven 
years ago. The best known among them, both under Russian and American juris- 
diction, are Sitka and Kadiak, but their whole number is great. If Mr. Adams lit- 
erally intended to confine Russian rights to those islands, all the discoveries of Vitus 
Behring and other great navigators are brushed away by one sweep of his pen, and 
a large chapter of history is but a fable. : 
But Mr. Adams goes still further. He declares that ‘‘ Russian rights have no exist- 
ence on the Continent of America.” If we take the words of Mr. Adams with their 
literal meaning there was no such thing as ‘Russian possessions in America,” 
although forty-four years after Mr. Adams wrote these words the United States paid 
Russia 7,200,000 dollars for these ‘ possessions,” and all the rights of land and sea 
connected therewith. 
