A a 
APPENDIX TO CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN. 629 
will be found to include precisely the area which has been steadily maintained by 
this Government in the pending discussion. (For Map, see opposite page.) 
The phrase ‘‘ north-west coast of America” has not infrequently been used simply 
as the synonym of the ‘‘north-west coast,” but it has also been used in another sense 
as including the American coast of the Russian possessions as far northward as the 
Straits of Behring. Confusion has sometimes arisen in the use of the phrase ‘‘ north- 
west coast of America,” but the true meaning can always be determined by refer- 
ence to the context. 
The Treaty between the United States and Russia was concluded on the 17th April, 
1824, and that between Great Britain and Russia was concluded on the 28th Feb- 
ruary, 1825. The full and accurate text of both Treaties will be found in Inclosure 
(A). The Treaty between the United States and Russia is first in the order of time, 
but I shall consider both Treaties together. I quote the first Articles of each Treaty, 
for, to all intents and purposes, they are identical in meaning, though differing 
somewhat in phrase. 
The Ist Article in the American Treaty is as follows: 
“Article I, It is agreed that, in any part of the Great Ocean, commonly called the 
Pacitic Ocean or the South Sea, the respective citizens or subjects of the High Con- 
tracting Powers shall be neither disturbed nor restrained, either in navig ation or in 
fishing, or in the power of resorting to the coasts, upon points which may not 
already have been occupied, for the purpose of trading with the natives, saving 
always the restrictions and conditions determined by the following Articles.” 
The Ist Article in the British Treaty is as follows: 
“Article I. It is agreed that the respective subjects of the High Contracting 
Parties shall not be troubled or molested, in any part of the ocean, commonly called 
the Pacifie Ocean, either in navigating the same, in fishing therein, or in landing at 
such parts of the coast as shall not have been ‘already oceupied, in order to trade 
with the natives, under the restrictions specified in the following Articles.” 
Lord Salisbury contends that— 
“The Russian Government had no idea of any distinction between Behring’s Sea and the 
Pacific Ocean, which latter they considered as reaching southward from Behring’s Straits. 
Nor throughout the whole of the subsequent correspondence is there any reference 
whatever on either side to any distinctive name for Behrine’s Sea, or any intimation 
that it could be considered otherwise than as forming an integral part of the Pacific 
Ocean.” 
The Government of the United States cordially agrees with Lord Salisbury’s state- 
ment that throughout the whole correspondence connected with the formation of 
the Treaties there was no reference whatever by either side to any distinctive name 
for Behring’s Sea, and for the very simple reason which I have already indicated, 
that the negotiation had no reference whatever to the Behring’s Sea, but was 
39 entirely confined to a “strip of land” on the north-west coast and the waters 
of the Pacific Ocean adjacent thereto. For future reference I call special 
attention to the phrase ‘‘strip of land.” 
I venture to remind Lord Salisbury of the fact that Behring’s Sea was, at the time 
referred to, the recognized name in some quarters, and so appeared on many authen- 
tic Maps several years before the Treaties were negotiated. But, as I mentioned in 
my note of the 50th June, the same sea had been presented as a body of water sepa- 
rate from the Pacific Ocean for a long period prior to 1825. Many names had been 
applied to it, but the one most frequently used and most widely recognized was the 
Sea of Kamschatka. English statesmen of the period when the Treaties were nego- 
tiated had complete knowledge of all the geographical pointsinvolved. They knew 
that on the Map published in 1784 to illustrate the voyages of the most eminent 
English navigator of the eighteenth century the ‘‘Sea of Kamsehatka” appeared in 
absolute contradistinction to the ‘Great South Sea” or the Pacific Ocean. And the 
Map, as shown by the words on its margin, was ‘“‘prepared by Lieutenant Henry 
Roberts under the immediate inspection of Captain Cook.” 
Twenty years before Captain Cook’s Map appeared, the ‘‘ London Magazine” con- 
tained a Map on which the Sea of Kamschatka was conspicuously engraved. Ata 
still earlier date—even as far back as 1732—Gvosdef, Surveyor of the Russian expe- 
dition of Shestakoff in 1730 (who, even before Behring, sighted the land of the 
American continent), published the sea as bearing the name of Kamschatka. Mul- 
ler, who was Historian and Geographer of the second expedition of Behring in 1741, 
designated it as the Sea of Kamschatka in his Map published in 1761. 
I inclose a list of a large proportion of the most authentic Maps published during 
the ninety years prior to 1825 in Great Britain, in the United States, the Nether- 
lands, France, Spain, Germany, and Russia—in all 105 Maps—on every one of which 
the body of water now known as Behring’s Sea was plainly distinguished by a name 
separate from the Pacific Ocean. On the great majority it is named the Sea of 
Kamschatka, a few use the name of Behring, while several other designations are 
used. The whole number, aggregating, as they did, the opinion of a large part of 
