control claimed

not impute to Russia an intention to treat the one- Character of hundred-mile belt as territory belonging to her, over Bering Sea. with the right to exclude therefrom vessels of other nations for all purposes. Nor have the United States any wish to dispute the construction given by the British Government at pp. 38 to 40 of its Case, so far as it is designed to show that the main purpose of the ukase of 1821 was the protection of Russian interests upon the shores of the colonies, and that its maritime provisions were only intended to serve the purpose of effectually carrying out such protection.

territorial juris

The distinction between the right of exclusive No exclusive territorial jurisdiction over Bering Sea, on the diction clained. one hand, and the right of a nation, on the other hand, to preserve for the use of its citizens its interests on land by the adoption of all necessary, even though they be somewhat unusual, measures, whether on land or at sea, is so broad as to require no further exposition. It is the latter right, not the former, that the United States contend to have been exercised, first by Russia, and later by themselves.

The ukase of 1821 evoked strong protests, and the character of these protests is explained at

pages 50 and 51 of the Case of the United States. It is further pointed out at pages 52 and 53 that in the treaties resulting from these protests

Protests against

ukase, and result

ing treaties.

Protests against a clear distinction is intended to be drawn beukase, and result

ing treaties. tween the Pacific Ocean and Bering Sea, and that by formally withdrawing the operation of the ukase as to the Pacific Ocean, but not as to Bering Sea, a recognition of its continued operation over the latter body of water was necessarily implied. The chief evidence, aside from that contained in the treaties themselves, upon which the United States rely to establish this conclusion, is the seventh paragraph of the conference report of the Russian imperial committee, appointed in 1824, which report is referred to at page 54 of their Case.1

Case of the l'earl.

At pages 57 and 73 of the British Case an incident arising out of a voyage of the American brig Pearl is cited to prove that, in the year following the promulgation of the ukase, Russia acknowledged the maritime jurisdiction claimed therein to be without warrant as to any of the waters to which it related. The facts of the case are not, however, susceptible of such an interpretation, as will appear from the following:

(1) The Pearl was in the year 1822 suddenly ordered out of the harbor of New Archangel, where she had been lying for nearly a month.2

(2) The day following she was boarded by the

1 The revised translation of this report appears in the Appendix to the Counter Case, p. 157, and should be consulted.

2 Post, p. 175.

Pearl.

Russian cruiser Apollo, but there is no evidence Case of the to show that this boarding occurred in extraterritorial waters; on the contrary, the just inference from the words used in the protest "Ordered to leave the coast immediately," and from the single casual mention of the occurrence, is that it took place near the shore.1

(3) The owners not only pleaded complete ignorance of the ukase (and in this they were sustained by the fact that the vessel had sailed before the United States had received notice of the same), but they distinctly admitted that they would have obeyed its injunctions had they known of it.2

(4) The Russian Government insisted up to the very last that the Pearl had violated Russian law, and that the indemnity was paid only with a view "to cement those amicable relations to which the convention of April 5-17 has just added new value."3

PERIOD FOLLOWING THE TREATIES.

The strict colonial system, inaugurated by Continuation of Russia through the ukase of 1799 and recognized

in express terms to exist by the treaties of 1824 and 1825, was continued throughout the period

1 Post, p. 176.

Post, p. 177.

3 Post, p. 180.

colonial system.

riot.

following the celebration of those treaties, and

clear evidence of this is furnished by the case of Case of the Lo- the Loriot, cited at pp. 79 to 83 of the British Case. Deeming this incident only indirectly relevant to the question of right in and about Bering Sea, the United States dismissed it in their Case with a very brief mention; but the importance given it by the British Government. now requires a more complete statement of the facts and issues involved.

The treaty of 1824 granted for a term of ten years certain trading privileges upon the coast between Yakutat Bay and latitude 54° 40′ north.2 On May 19, 1835, the United States were notified by the Russian Minister that the privileges had come to an end and that the captains of two American vessels at Sitka had been requested to take notice of this fact. The United States thereupon initiated strenuous efforts to obtain a renewal of the privileges in question, and while doing so news was received of the seizure by the Russians of the Loriot, an American vessel, for trading upon the Northwest Coast, in latitude 54° 55′ north, i. e., just above the southernmost limit referred to in the treaty of 1824.

1 Case of the United States, p. 59.

2 Case of the United States, p. 58.

riot.

Vigorous protests followed on the part of the Case of the Lo United States and compensation was demanded,

the protests being used to strengthen the claim already put forward for a renewal of the ten years' privileges. A summary of the diplomatic correspondence will be found in the Appendix hereto.1 It is sufficient to say here that the Russian Government was so obdurate in its refusal to recede from its position, that the United States Government was eventually compelled to recognize the correctness of the same and to completely abandon its claim. In so far, then, as the Loriot case has any bearing upon the questions here involved, it shows that the United States Government recognized and acquiesced in the colonial system which Russia maintained, even to the south of Sitka.

the British Case.

Chapter IV of the British Case treats of the waters Chapter IV of of Bering Sea and the Pacific Ocean adjacent to the Northwest Coast during the period following the treaties. Some of the vessels referred to as having made voyages to those regions visited the Northwest Coast only where, it is to be remembered, for ten years after the treaties trade was carried on by American and British citizens with the express consent of the Russian Government. After 1835, however, most of the voyages that extended 1 Post, p. 180-184.