of territory or of limiting the extension of the Raseian possessions; that the disputes in which the Euglish Government flids itself envzayed at this moment with the United States Government, on account of a stipulation of the treaty of Ghent similar to the one proposed by our court, and which likewise fixed a chain of imowntains as the frontier between the possessions of the two States, had shown it all the inex- pelieney of a delimitation established on this principle, the mountains haying been found to deviate very cousiderally trom the direction given them on the maps which were thonglit to Ie the inost correct and the moet detailed; that this inexpediency having presentel itelf in the case of countries whose geography is mueh better known than that of the regions to which the stipulations of the eonvention of Febraary 16 (28), last relate, the English Government, in now insisting upon the fixing of a less varue boundary, thought that it gave a proof of the value which it attaches to the prevention of even the possibility of a diseussion as to the tenor of the transaction concluded between the two cabinets.[1]
Thus it appears that all the time they negotiated and contracted with reference toa chain of mountains, that the crest of this chain was to be followed, that the chain was one that was depicted on the naps us running around all the cousts, from the head of Portland Channel to Mount St. Elias, and that the mountains were not insisted on. with wny intention of, acquiring an increase of territory, or limit- iny the extension of the Russiun possessions.
If itxppear that no such chain exists, or that, if it may exist, it lies at no point within ten marine leagues of the coast, is that any reason for foreing the line to other mountains, which manifestly were not meant, and which defeat the very reasons which plainly eon- trolled in selecting the chain which, in reference to the coast, appeared to be suitably located¢ ‘The correspondence has been appealed to by both sides und the languaye of the treaty has been serutinized. It will be helpful to inquire what interpretation was put upon this particular feature of the treaty,
THE EVIDENCE OF THE MAPS ISSUED AFTER THE TREATY AS TO WHAT MOUNTAINS WERE MEANT BY THE TREATY.
In 1826 Russia issued an Admiralty Chart showing the boundary line.[2] This line is laid down nbout ten martne lergues from the veneral trend of the interior coast. ‘The map does not show any mountiins where the line falls. It shows distinctly mountains right at the coast, following all of its sinnosities, and other mountains covering « large part of the territory, situated buck of those next to
the sea, with an absolutely clear space between the boundary line,
