sufficient application to settle the true boundary between the possessions of the two nations. In this conviction all the available treatises on international law from Vattel to the present time were examined in their bearings on the question. During the course of this examination, attention was drawn to the fact that cognate questions had arisen between the United States and Spain regarding the boundaries between Louisiana and Texas, and between Great Britain and the United States with respect to the boundaries between this country and British Columbia. By an investigation of the correspondence on these questions, it was developed that there are certain rules in respect to the delimitation of boundary which have been generally acquiesced in by all nations, and may be said to have therefore become a part of international law; other rules whose validity was denied, and of which therefore it could only be safely said that it is doubtful whether they entered into the thought of the two nations in making this treaty; and still others which were mere claims on the part of one nation or another, and which were so generally denied that it must be assumed that they were not regarded in this treaty."

All published evidence, however, whether in the shape of correspondence, treaty, history, account of travel or map, was in a large measure unsatisfactory. No correspondence or treaty definitely stated the true boundary; histories and books of travel were conflicting in testimony, and based their statements in many instances upon unpublished papers and reports; while the maps failed to show a consensus of opinion among cartographers of the last three centuries as to the true divisional line.

In these circumstances the commission decided to obtain all the unpublished documents bearing on the case which it could get. To this end Professor Burr was sent to London and Holland, and spent from May 9 to October 28 in reviewing the documents in the Dutch archives and the Dutch documents in London which had been given by Holland to the English government. Through the assistance of Archbishop Corrigan, the documents in the archives of the Vatican at Rome, containing accounts of missionary enterprises in the disputed territory, were put at the disposal of the commission. By the month of November all the documents referred to, the British blue books, and a large number of papers obtained for the purpose by Venezuela from Spain, were before the commission. Early in that month advices from the secretary of state informing them of the approaching conclusion of negotiations for arbitration of the question before them put an end to their labors and made unnecessary an expression of opinion on their part.

The commission is now collating and will publish the results of its labors in four volumes as follow: Volume I., containing their report and several historical reports; Volume II., documents from the Dutch archives, prepared by Professor Burr, together with certain miscellaneous documents furnished by the Venezuelan government; Volume III., cartographical report; Volume IV., an atlas comprising seventy-five maps.

THE ALASKA BOUNDARY.

On January 30 there was signed at Washington by the American secretary of state, Mr. Olney, and the British ambassador, Sir Julian Pauncefote, a treaty providing for the appointment of a joint commission of two (one commissioner for each government) to ascertain and mark by visible objects "so much of the 141st meridian of west longitude as is necessary to be defined for the purpose of determining the exact

limits of the territory ceded to the United States by the treaty between the United States and Russia of March 30, 1867."

Before the text of the treaty was published it was rumored that it was of such a nature as to promise a final settlement of the long-standing dispute between Great Britain and the United States over the boundary between Alaska and British Columbia. That dispute, however, is not at all affected by the present convention, but remains practically in statu quo, being already in process of determination by other means (Vol. 5, pp. 340, 862).

The present treaty provides merely for the ascertainment and visible

marking of that portion JUSTICE G. E. KING OF THE CANADIAN SUPREME

of the Alaska boundary

concerning which there

has never been any dispute-namely, the portion lying north of the latitude of Mount St. Elias and constituted by the 141st meridian of west longitude as mentioned in the treaty of March 30, 1867, between the United States and Russia, and the treaty of February 28 (16), 1825, between Great Britain and Russia. The demarcation of this line is purely a matter of geodesy.

By one provision of the treaty the United States will gain some miles of land not strictly belonging to it. The commissioners are empowered to deflect the southern part of the line from the meridian, for not more than twenty miles, so as to make its terminus exactly coincide with the summit of mount St. Elias. That peak is in longitude 140° 55′ 47.3" west; or something more than two miles east of, and on the British side of, the 141st meridian. There will, therefore, be added to the territory of Alaska a wedge-shaped bit of land twenty

miles long, two miles wide at one end and tapering to a point at the other, with an area of about twenty square miles. As it consists almost exclusively of glaciers and rocky mountain slopes, its value is not great.

The boundary controversy, it will be remembered, relates to the southern portion of the divisional line, that running in a winding course southeasterly from Mount St. Elias and parallel with the coast down to the latitude of the southernmost point of Prince of Wales island, 54° 40' north, and defining what is known as the "Panhandle"

JUSTICE W. L. PUTNAM, UNITED
STATES BERING SEA CLAIMS

COMMISSIONER.

section of Alaska. The questions to be solved concerning it are whether Portland Channel in the old treaties means, as the Americans claim, Portland Channel, or, as the British claim, Behm Channel; and whether the line of coast, to which the boundary line is to be parallel at a distance of not more than ten marine leagues, is to be reckoned the mainland coast or the outermost margin of the fringe of islands. Upon the answer to these depends the ownership of Juneau city, Revilla, Gigedo island, Fort Tongass peninsula, and vast tracks of valuable coal and timber lands and coast fisheries.

BERING SEA DISPUTE. The preliminary statement made last fall by President D. S. Jordan of the Leland Stanford, Jr., University, head of the American expert commission appointed by President Cleveland to investigate the condition of the seal herds on the Pribilof islands (Vol. 6, pp. 343, 606), is fully borne out by President Jordan's formal report to the secretary of the treasury, which appeared late in January of the present year. The report recommends as the only means of saving the seal industry, a total abolition of an open season for pelagic sealing, it being the conclusion of the experts that the decline of the herds is attributable solely to the indiscriminate killing practiced by the pelagic hunters.

"The sole possible basis of adjustment," says Professor Jordan, "must be the protection of the fur seals through mutual concession, national courtesy, and self-respect. So long as pelagic sealing exists the restrictions governing it are of slight importance, and the rela tions between the owners of the Pribilof islands and the nations whose ships have the right to destroy the herds must be in some degree strained." The estimate made by Professor Jordan of the number of seals of all classes killed last summer is 440,000. About 27,000 pups died of starvation, and pelagic sealing caused the death of 29,398.

Pelagic sealing in Bering sea in August," the report says, 66 is in the highest degree destructive to the herd. If considered as an in

dustry it is a suicidal one, as it can be profitably continued only under conditions which must bring it to a speedy end. Pelagic sealing is therefore not properly an industry at all, as it adds nothing to the wealth of the world. Since it began more than 600,000 fur seals have been taken in the North Pacific and in Bering sea.

This means the death of not less than 400,000 breeding females, the starvation of 300,000 pups, and the destruction of 400,000 pups still unborn. In this calculation account is taken only of those of which the skins have been brought to market. No record of the animals lost after being shot or speared is available, though the number is known to be very great. Pelagic sealing in the judgment of the members of the pres ent commission, has been the sole cause of the continued decline of the seal herds. It is at present the sole fur obstacle to their restoration, and the sole limit to their indefinite increase. It is therefore evident that no settlement of the fur seal question, as regards either the American or the Russian islands, can be permanent unless it shall provide for the cessation of the indiscriminate killing of fur seals, both on the feeding grounds and on their migrations. There can be no 'open season' for the killing of females if the herd is to be kept intact."

In conclusion Professor Jordon says: "The ultimate end in view should be an international arrangement whereby all skins of female fur seals should be seized and destroyed by the customs authorities of civilized nations, whether taken on land or sea, from the Pribilof herd, the Asiatic herds, or in the lawless raiding of the Antarctic rookeries. In the destruction of the fur seal rookeries of the Antarctic, as well as those of the Japanese islands and of Bering sea, American enterprise has taken a leading part. It would be well for America to lead the way in stopping pelagic sealing by restraining her own citizens without waiting for the of other nations. We can ask for protection with better grace when we have accorded, unasked, protection to others."

INTERNATIONAL SANITARY CONFERENCE.

A conference of delegates from European nations to consider measures for preventing the introduction of the bubonic plague from India met at Venice February 17-9. Austria and Italy were prime movers in its call. This conference was the fourth held in recent years. The first of these, held at Venice in 1892 (Vol. 2, pp. 26, 137), dealt specially with closing the access for epidemics by way of Egypt. The second, at Dresden in 1893 (Vol. 3, pp. 50, 261), sought to define the protective measures which should involve the least hindrance to international traf

fic: it resulted in territorial conventions between many of the powers. The third, at Paris in 1894 (Vol. 4, p. 331), considered the great danger of the spread of epidemics by the immense annual pilgrimages of the Sunnite Mohammedans from India to Mecca and Medina. At the Venice conference of 1897 about fifty delegates were present; and Count Von Bonin, Italian under-secretary of state for foreign affairs, was chosen president.

The movement toward organized international action for prevention of the spread of epidemics dates back to a conference held in Paris in 1851, and is traced through similar meetings held in Constantinople, Vienna, Rome, and Washington; but, until very recently, little was accomplished in the way of the united adoption of practical sanitary plans.

The delicacy of international relations in Europe appears from the fact that the conference showed as much concern with political as with medical considerations. On the second day a division of the delegates was made, one diplomatic (including the ambassadors and ministers of the powers), the other technical or medical-the two bodies to meet separately, and the vote of both to be requisite in affirming any proposal. The programme seems to have avoided discussions of details, and to have included the general lines on which laws should be proposed for enactment by the various nations. Among the important questions discussed were:

1. Construction of a great international lazaretto near the northern end of the Red Sea, with quarantine of all ships from countries declared to be suspected.

2. Adoption of rules as to treatment of vessels arriving at European ports after having passed the aforesaid quarantine with clean bills of health.

3. Pilgrimage of Turks to Mecca-whether the European powers should request the sultan to forbid it in certain years.

After the second day the conference met with closed doors, and only selected items from it were immediately given out for publication. It is known that France and Russia urged the suppression of the Indian pilgrimage to Mecca this year; that Austria and Italy favored regulation of pilgrimage rather than prohibition of it; that Spain relied chiefly on efficient quarantine; and that England, after a century's experience, looked for protection to sanitary precautions at home, and had little fear of the plague, since even if introduced by diseased persons or by infected rags it could not spread in countries where sanitary rules