630 APPENDIX TO CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN. 
the civilized world, distinguished the sea, no matter under what name, as altogether 
separate from the Pacific Ocean. (See Inclosure B. ) 
Is it possible, that with this great cloud of witnesses before the eyes of Mr. Adee 
and Mr. George Canning, attesting the existence of the Sea of Kamschatka, they 
would simply ‘include it in the phrase ‘‘ Pacific Ocean,” aud make no allusion what- 
ever to it as a separate sea, when it was known by almost every educated man in 
Europe and America to have been so designated numberless times? Is it possible 
that Mr. Canning and Mr. Adams, both educated in the common law, could believe 
that they were acquiring for the United States and Great Britain the enormous 
rights inherent inthe Sea of Kamschatka without the slighest reference to that sea, or 
without any description of its metes and bounds, when neither of them would have 
paid for a village house lot unless the deed for it should recite every fact and feature 
necessary for the identification of the lot against any other piece of ground on the 
surface of the globe? When we contemplate the minute particularity, the tedious 
verbiage, the duplications and the reduplications employed to secure unmistakable 
plainness in framing Treaties, it is impossible to conceive that a fact of this great 
re ary could have been omitted from the instructions written by Mr, Adams 
and Mr. x. Canning as Secretaries for Foreign Affairs in their respective countries— 
ani that such a fact could have escaped the notice of Mr. Middleton and 
Count Nesselrode, of Mr. Stratford Canning and M. Poletica, who were the negoti- 
ators of the two Treaties. It is impossible that, in the Anglo- "Russian T reaty, Count 
Nesselrode, Mr. Stratford Canning, and M. Poletica could have taken sixteen lines 
to recite the titles and honours they had received from their respective Sovereigns, 
and not even suggest the insertion of one line, or even word, to secure so valuable a 
grant to England as the full freedom of the Behring’ 8 Sea. 
There is another argument of great weight against the assumption of Lord Salis- 
bury that the phrase ‘Pacific Ocean,” as used _in the Ist Article of both the Amer- 
ican and British Treaties, was intended to include the waters of the Behring’sSea. It 
is true that, by the Treaties with the United States and Great Britain, Russia prac- 
tically withdrew the operation of the Ukase of 1821 from the waters of the north- 
west coast on the Pacific Ocean; but the proof is conclusive that it was left in full 
force over the waters of the Behring’s Sea. Lord Salisbury cannot have ascertained 
the value of the Behring’s Sea to Russia when he assumed that, in the Treaties of 
1824 and 1825, the Imperial Government had, by mere inclusion in another 
40 phrase, with apparent carelessness, thrown open all the resources and all the 
wealth of those waters to the citizens of the United States and to the subjects 
of Great Britain. 
Lord Salisbury has, perhaps, not thought it worth while to make any examination 
of the money value of Alaska and the waters of the Behring’s Sea at the time the 
Treaties were negotiated and in the succeeding years. The ‘first period of the Rus- 
sian-American Company’ s operations had closed before the Ukase of 1821 was issued. 
Its affairs were kept secret for a long time, but are now accurately known. The 
money advanced for the capital stock of the Comp any atits opening in 1799 amounted 
to 1 1238, 746 roubles. The gross sales of furs and skins by the Company at Kodiak 
and Canton from that date up to 1820 amounted to 20,024,698 roubles. The net profit 
was 7,685,000 roubles for the twenty-one years—over 620 per cent. for the whole 
period, or nearly 30 per cent. per annum. 
Reviewing these facts, Bancroft, in his ‘‘ History of Alaska,” a standard work of 
exhaustive research, says: 
“We find this powerful monopoly firmly established in the favour of the Imperial 
Government, many Nobles of high rank and several members of the Royal Family 
being among the shareholders.” 
And yet Lord Salisbury evidently supposes that a large amount of wealth was care- 
lessly thrown away by the Royal Family, the Nobles, the courtiers, the capitalists, 
and the speculators of St. Petersburgh in a phrase which merged the Behring’s Sea 
in the Pacific Ocean. That it was not thrown away is shown by the transactions of 
the Company for the next twenty years. 
The second period of the Russian-American Company began in 1821 and ended in 
1841. Within that time the gross revenues of the Company exceeded 61,000,000 
roubles. Besides paying all expenses and all taxes, the Company largely increased 
the original capital, and divided 8,500,000 roubles among the shareholders. These 
dividends and the increase of the stock showed a profit on the original capital of 55 
per cent. per annum forthe whole twenty years—a great increase over the first period. 
It must not be forgotten that, during sixteen of “these twenty years of constantly 
increasing profits, the Treaties which, according to Lord Salisbury, gave to Great 
Britain and the United States equal rights with Russia in the Behring’s Sea, were in 
full force. 
