In Canada the feeling was very different from that expressed by President Roosevelt. There, the dissatisfaction was intense. The two Canadian Commissioners had opposed the award, while Lord Alverstone cast his vote with the three Americans, which provoked the accusation that his decision had been given, at the instigation of the British Government, not judicially, but diplomatically, for the pleasing of the United States, at the sacrifice of Canadian interests and rights. The groundlessness of such defamatory suspicions became plain when Lord Alverstone made public the reasons for his vote. A recent historian of Canada ends his account of the matter with the following remarks: "In vain did students and experts declare that they had felt before the tribunal met that Canada had, in very many respects, a weak case. It was pointed out that some of the Canadian surveys gave the line as the Americans claimed it, that Americans had by long occupation got a hold upon and a right of possession to various ports and sections, and that against this occupancy there had been no British protest whatever. Finally one distinguished citizen reminded the Canadians that if they had been allowed to select one man as sole arbitrator they would have been glad to accept Lord Alverstone. Lord Alverstone was really the one arbitrator and judge. Had he decided against the Americans, the case would have been deadlocked for years. In time Canadians came to a more sober and reasonable attitude on the subject. They came to see that Lord Alverstone could not have been prejudiced and that his decision was really the only one that was fair and unbiased. Some came also to see that the American case was much the stronger, and that in this light the decision was a just one. But they were not and are not ready to believe that the whole scheme was anything but one contrived at Washington to get the contest settled to the advantage of the Americans." _F. B. Tracy, Tercentenary History of Canada, Volume 3, page 1044 (Macmillan Co., New York, 1908)._ A full account of the arbitration with the correspondence preceding it, and the opinions written by the arbitrators severally, is given in the British Parliamentary _Papers by Command (United States, Number 1, 1904), Cd. 1877._ ALASKA: A. D. 1906. Convention to provide for final establishment of the boundary line. Final proceedings for establishing the boundary line of Alaska were provided for in a Convention between the United States and Great Britain, signed April 21, 1906. The need and object of the Convention were set forth in its preamble as follows: {10}