The two other stipulations are different in character. They are not declared to be "forever" and do not stand on any principle of public law.
From this survey of the treaty, as seen in its origin and the questions under it, I might pass at once to a survey of the possessions that have been conveyed, but there are other matters of a more general character which present themselves at this stage and challenge the judgment. These concern nothing less than the unity, power, and grandeur of the republic, with the extension of its dominion and its institutions.
Foremost in order, if not in importance, I put the desires of our fellow-citizens on the Pacific coast, and the special advantages that they will derive from this enlargement of boundary. They were the first to ask for it, and will be the first to profit by it. While others knew the Russian possessions only on the map, they knew them practically in their resources. While others were still indifferent, they were planning how to appropriate Russian peltries and fisheries.
These well-known desires were founded, of course, on supposed advantages, and here experience and neighborhood were prompters. Since 1854 the people of California have received their ice from the fresh-water lakes in the island of Kodiak, not far westward from Mount St. Elias. Later still their fishermen have searched the waters about the Aleutians and Shumagins, beginning a promising fishery. Others have proposed to substitute themselves for the Hudson Bay Company in their franchise on the coast. But all were looking to the Orient, as in the time of Columbus, although like him they sail to the west. To them China and Japan, those ancient realms of fabulous wealth, are the Indies. To draw this commerce to the Pacific coast is no new idea.
For a long time most, if not all, the sea-otter skins of this coast found their way to China, excluding even Russia herself. China was the best customer, and therefore Englishmen and Americans followed the Russian company in carrying these furs to her market.
To unite the east of Asia with the west of America is the aspiration of commerce. Of course, whatever helps this result is an advantage. This treaty is another advantage, for nothing can be clearer than that the western coast must exercise an attraction that will be felt in China and Japan just in proportion as it is occupied by a commercial people communicating readily with the Atlantic and with Europe. This cannot be done without consequence not less important politically than commercially. Owing so much to the union, the people there will be bound to it anew, and the national unity will receive another confirmation. Thus the whole country will be a gainer.
The extension of dominion is another consideration, calculated to captivate the public mind. Few are so cold or so philosophical as to regard with insensibility a widening of the bounds of country. Our territorial acquisitions are among the landmarks of our history. If the United States have from time to time added to their dominion they have only yielded to the universal passion for annexation, although I do not forget that the late Theodore Parker was accustomed to say that among all people the Anglo-Saxons were remarkable for "a greed of land." It was land, not gold, that aroused the Anglo-Saxon phlegm. I doubt, however, whether this passion is stronger with us than with other nations, except, perhaps, that in a community where all participate in government national sentiments are more active.
More than the extension of dominion is the extension of republican institutions, which is a traditional aspiration. In this spirit independence was achieved. In the name of human rights our fathers overthrew the kingly power, whose representative was George III. They set themselves openly against this form of government. They were against it for themselves, and offered their example to mankind.
“Neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.”
– Romans 8:39