The Alaskan Boundary Tribunal 



9 



of about 650 pages and an atlas of maps, 

 and the British case was of approxi- 

 mately the same length and character. 



After receipt by each government of 

 the Case of the other, a Counter-case in 

 reply thereto was to be prepared and 

 delivered within a like period of two 

 months. Upon receipt of the American 

 Case the British agent asked for an 

 extension of two months, stating that it 

 would be impossible to prepare a Coun- 

 ter-case for Great Britain within the 

 period fixed by the treaty. Our 

 government declined to agree to this 

 extension of time on the ground that 

 the reasons contemplated by the treaty 

 had not been alleged and did not exist. 

 The Counter-cases were accordingly 

 exchanged within the period fixed 

 therefor. 



The third step in the pliminar}^ pro- 

 ceedings was the preparation by coun- 

 sel of a printed Argument, based upon 

 the Case and Counter-case, and this also 

 was to be prepared and delivered within 

 two months after receipt of the Counter- 

 ■case. This delivery was effected on 

 September 2, and on the 3d of that 

 month the Tribunal held its first meet- 

 ing in London. 



There was set apart in the Foreign 

 Office in Downing street a series of 

 apartments for the use of the Tribunal 

 and those connected with it. The pub- 

 lic sessions were held in the ambassa- 

 dorial reception-room, a large and com- 

 modious hall, well lighted and artistic- 

 ally decorated. Adjoining this was a 

 consultation-room for the private ses- 

 sions of the Tribunal, and connected 

 with it was the state dining-room, where 

 a bountiful collation was served at the 

 daily recess of the Tribunal. Adjoin- 

 ing the other end of the ambassadorial 

 hall were a number of spacious rooms 

 devoted to the use of the agent and 

 counsel of the United States and the 

 British agent and counsel. 



I mention this matter in some detail 

 in order that you may contrast it with 



the inadequate accommodations which 

 are provided by our government for its 

 foreign office, the Department of State. 

 It has no facilities whatever for receiv- 

 ing and entertaining courts of arbitra- 

 tion, international commissions, and 

 special diplomatic missions which are so 

 frequently assembled in Washington. 

 When the Anglo-American Joint High 

 Commission met here a few years ago, 

 quarters had to be taken at one of the 

 hotels for its sessions, and we experi- 

 ence the same mortification almost every 

 year. It is earnestly to be hoped that 

 the present Congress will not adjourn 

 without adopting adequate measures to 

 remedy this discreditable condition and 

 provide the Department of State with 

 such accommodations as will enable our 

 government to receive with proper cour- 

 tesy its international guests. 



The first meeting of the Tribunal was 

 confined to an exchange of credentials 

 of the members of that body and of the 

 agents of the two governments, fixing 

 the days and hours of the sessions, and 

 the method which should be observed 

 by counsel in the oral argument which 

 was contemplated by the treaty. It 

 was arranged that sessions should be 

 held five days in the week, adjourning 

 on Fridays to the next Monday, and 

 that they should continue from 1 1 a. 

 m. to 4 p. m. The British counsel 

 were to open the argument, and it was 

 to be closed by the American counsel, 

 three lawyers on each side to speak al- 

 ternately. The Attorney General of 

 England, Sir Robert B. Finlay, opened 

 for Great Britain, followed by David T. 

 Watson, Esq. , for the United States; Mr. 

 Christopher Robinson, of Canada; Hon. 

 Hannis Taylor for the United States; 

 the Solicitor General of England, Sir 

 Edward H. Carson; and Hon. J. M. 

 Dickinson closing for the United States. 



An adjournment of nine days was 

 taken for the convenience of counsel, 

 and on September 12 the oral argument 

 began. It occupied eighteen days, the 



