CO885-(10-11) — Page 154

2

The propriety of forthwith sending a properly qualified person as Vice-Consul to Key West seems apparent, more especially if (as is suggested) the present Acting Vice-Consul is the Marshal of the United States Prize Court established there. This, however, is entirely for your Lordship's consideration.

We have, &c. (Signed)

The Earl Russell,

&c.

&c.

5606.

J. D. HARDING. WM. ATHERTON. ROUNDELL PALMER.

MY LORD,

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

--------------

C.O. 885

Reference :-

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- |COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO

10 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

No. 116.

(BRITISH COLUMBIA.)

QUEEN'S ADVOCATE to FOREIGN OFFICE.

Doctors' Commons, May 31, 1862. I AM honoured with your Lordship's commands, signified in Mr. Hammond's letter of the 29th May instant, stating that he was directed to transmit to me a letter from the Colonial Office enclosing a Despatch from the Governor of British Columbia, in which the question is raised as to the right of navigating a river which after leaving the British territory flows through Russian territory to the sea; and to request that I would take these papers into consideration, and furnish your Lordship with my opinion as to the rights of navigation, under the circumstances mentioned by the Governor of British Columbia, which can be claimed for British subjects by the terms of the treaty with "memorandum" on the subject, Russia of 1859; and he was also pleased to enclose a together with a copy of the treaty.

In obedience to your Lordship's commands I have taken these papers into considera- tion, and have the honour to

Report

That by the last clause of the 19th article of the Treaty of St. Petersburgh, 1859, it is stipulated that “in regard to commerce and navigation in the Russian possessions "on the north-west coast of America, the convention concluded at St. Petersburgh ** on the 16/28 February 1825 shall continue in force." The sixth article of this convention (of 1825) is in the following words :-" It is understood that the subjects "of His Britannic Majesty, from whatever quarter they may arrive, whether from the ocean or from the interior of the continent, shall for ever enjoy the right of navi- gating freely, and without any hindrance whatever, all the rivers and streams which, "in their course towards the Pacific Ocean may cross the line of demarcation upon "the line of coast described in Article 3 of the present invention."

44

case.

J

The "Stickeen River clearly appears to be one of such rivers; and Russia appears. with reference to the expedition fitted out in 1834 by the Hudson's Bay Company for the purpose of forming a trading establishment on that river (mentioned in the Foreign Office Memorandum" transmitted with these papers), to have admitted this to be the Under these circumstances I am of opinion that the rights of navigation which can be claimed for British subjects by the terms of the treaty with Russia of 1859, as regards the Stickeen River, and all other rivers in the same position geographically, with reference to the line of demarcation between the British and Russian possessions, and the line of coast in question, are precisely those contained in the sixth article of the Convention of 1825; ie., the right of navigating such rivers either from the ocean or from the interior, freely, and without any hindrance whatever,

With reference to the further rights of commerce and navigation within Russian territorial limits, either on land or water, on the north-west coast of America which may be claimed by British subjects, I can only say that these will be the general rights of commerce and navigation secured to them by the treaty of 1859, modified, however. as to the particular territory now in question, by the special stipulations relating thereto which are contained in the convention of 1825 (see more particularly the articles from the 5th to the 11th thereof inclusive).

With reference to the 13th paragraph of the Governor's Despatch, Article 10 of the convention will apply, as to taking shelter and refitting in Russian “ports," in case " of storms or accident." With reference to the remainder of that paragraph, I can only say at present that I do not see how the Russian Government can claim, consistently with the convention, to levy duties on goods "in transitu" to the British possessions in the interior, assuming that vessels conveying such goods do not put into Russian so to do; but adverting to Articles 7. ports, unless "compelled by storms or accidents

55

9, and 10 of the convention, it may rightfully claim to place certain restriction 2011 vessels resorting to the "bays and harbours of the coasts, as well as at the mouths of creeks and rivers," without being thereto "compelled by storms or accidents.'

The 11th paragraph of this Despatch appears to be perfectly correct.

0 16278.-537. 23.-2/86.