untry remained unsettled the definite boundary was not
so material, but since the first Cleveland Administration the
Alaskan boundary had been an important subject of dispute. The
feeling among our people in Alaska and among the Canadians became
very bitter. This was one of the principal reasons for the creation
of the Joint High Commission in 1899, whose purpose it was to settle
all outstanding questions between the United States and Canada,
the principal one being the Alaskan boundary. The Joint High
Commission made considerable progress in adjusting these questions,
but failing to reach an agreement as to the Alaskan boundary, the
commission adjourned without disposing of any of the subjects in
controversy. President Roosevelt and Secretary Hay, in view of
our long and undisputed occupation of the territory in question,
declined to allow the reference of the Alaskan boundary to a regular
arbitration at the Hague, but instead, Secretary Hay proposed the
creation of a judicial tribunal composed of an equal number of
members from each country, feeling confident that our claim would
be successfully established by such a body. There was very great
opposition, and there were many predictions of failure, but on
January 24, 1903, a treaty between the United States and Great
Britain was signed, providing for such a tribunal.

The treaty was duly ratified, and the tribunal appointed, and on
October 20, 1903, reached a conclusion which was a complete victory
for the United States, sustaining as it did every material contention
of our Government.

The settlement of the Alaskan boundary was a very notable diplomatic
triumph, and Secretary Hay is entitled to much credit for it.

I cannot go into the many important matters which Mr. Hay disposed
of as Secretary of State. He left a splendid record. I made it
a point to keep in constant touch with him by visiting at his office
frequently, and he always talked with me frankly and freely concerning
the important negotiations in which he was engaged. The only
criticism I have to make of him as Secretary of State is, that he
was disposed, wherever he could possibly do so, to make international
agreements and settle differences without consulting the Senate.
And, in addition, I never could induce him to come before the
Committee on Foreign Relations and explain to the committee personally
various treaties and important matters in which the State Department
was interested. Why