On March 30, 1867, the territory of the Russian Empire decreased by a little more than one and a half million square kilometers. By the decision of the emperor and autocrat of Russia Alexander II, the territory of Alaska and the group of Aleutian Islands near it were sold to the United States of America.
There are many rumors around this deal to this day - “Alaska was not sold, but only leased. The documents are lost, so it’s impossible to return it”, “Alaska was sold by Catherine II the Great, because this is sung in the song of the Lube group”, “the deal for the sale of Alaska must be declared invalid, because the ship that carried the gold for payment sank” and etc. All versions given in quotation marks are complete nonsense (especially about Catherine II)! So now let's figure out how the sale of Alaska actually took place and what caused this deal, outwardly not beneficial for Russia.The actual discovery of Alaska by Russian navigators I. Fedorov and M.S. Gvozdev happened in 1732, but officially it is considered to be opened in 1741 by Captain A. Chirikov, who visited it and thought to register the discovery. Over the next sixty years, the Russian Empire, as a state, was not interested in the discovery of Alaska - Russian merchants mastered its territory, actively buying furs from local Eskimos, Aleuts and Indians, and creating Russian settlements in convenient bays of the Bering Strait coast, in which merchant ships waited non-navigable winter months.
The situation changed somewhat in 1799, but only outwardly - the territory of Alaska began to officially belong to the Russian Empire as a discoverer, but the state was not interested in new territories in any way. The initiative to recognize ownership of the northern lands of the North American continent came, again, from Siberian merchants who pooled their paperwork in St. Petersburg and created a Russian-American company with monopoly rights to minerals and commercial production in Alaska. The main sources of income for merchants in the North American territories of Russia were coal mining, fur seal fishing and ... ice, the most common one supplied to the USA - the demand for Alaskan ice was stable and constant, because refrigeration units were invented only in the 20th century.
Until the middle of the 19th century, the state of affairs in Alaska did not interest the leadership of Russia in any way - it is somewhere “in the middle of nowhere”, money is not required for its maintenance, it is also not necessary to protect and maintain the military contingent for this, all issues are handled by the merchants of the Russian-American companies that pay taxes properly. And then, from this very Alaska, information comes that deposits of native gold were found there ... Yes, yes, and what did you think - Emperor Alexander II did not know that he was selling a gold mine? But no - he knew and was well aware of his decision! And why did he sell - now we'll figure it out ...
The initiative in the sale of Alaska to the United States of America belonged to the emperor's brother, Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolayevich Romanov, who served as head of the Russian Naval Staff. He suggested that his elder brother-emperor sell "extra territory", because the discovery of gold deposits there will certainly attract the attention of England - a longtime sworn enemy of the Russian Empire, and Russia is not able to defend it, and there really is no military fleet in the northern seas. If England seizes Alaska, then Russia will receive absolutely nothing for it, and in this way it will be possible to gain at least some money, save face and strengthen friendly relations with the United States. It should be noted that in the 19th century, the Russian Empire and the United States developed extremely friendly relations - Russia refused to help the West regain control over North American territories, which infuriated the monarchs of Great Britain and inspired the colonists of America to continue the liberation struggle.
Negotiations on the sale of the territory of Alaska were entrusted to Baron Eduard Andreyevich Stekl, the envoy of the Russian Empire to the United States. He was given an acceptable price for Russia - $ 5 million in gold, but Stekl decided to charge the American government a higher amount, equal to $ 7.2 million. The idea of buying a northern territory, albeit with gold, but with a complete lack of roads, deserted and characterized by a cold climate, was received by the American government of President Andrew Johnson without enthusiasm. Baron Steckl actively intrigued, bribing congressmen and editors of major American newspapers, in order to create a favorable political climate for the land deal.
And his negotiations were crowned with success - on March 30, 1867, an agreement on the sale of the territory of Alaska to the United States of America took place and was signed by official representatives of both parties. Thus, the acquisition of one hectare of the territory of Alaska cost the US Treasury $0.0474 and for the entire territory equal to 1,519,000 square kilometers - $7,200,000 in gold (in terms of modern banknotes, about $110 million). On October 18, 1867, the North American territories of Alaska were officially transferred to the possession of the United States, two months earlier, Baron Stekl received a check for 7 million 200 thousand in US treasury bonds, which he transferred to the Baring brothers' London bank to the account of the Russian Emperor, withholding his commission $ 21,000 and $165,000 he spent out of his own pocket in bribes (overhead).
According to some modern Russian historians and politicians, the Russian Empire made a mistake by selling Alaska. But the situation in the century before last was very, very difficult - the States were actively expanding their territory, annexing neighboring lands and following the doctrine of James Monroe from 1823. And the first major deal was the Louisiana Purchase - the acquisition of the French colony in North America (2,100 thousand square kilometers of inhabited and developed territory) from the Emperor of France, Napoleon I Bonaparte, for a ridiculous 15 million dollars in gold. By the way, the states of Missouri, Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, Oklahoma, Nebraska and significant territories of a number of other states of the modern USA are located in this territory today ... As for the former territories of Mexico - the territory of all the southern states of the USA - they were annexed free of charge.
Sale of Alaska
The question of the fate of Russian America arose in the early 1850s. In the spring of 1853, the Governor-General of Eastern Siberia, Nikolai Muravyov-Amursky, presented a note to Nicholas I, in which he detailed his views on the need to strengthen Russia's position in the Far East and the importance of close relations with the United States.
The Governor-General recalled that a quarter of a century ago, “The Russian-American Company applied to the government with a request to occupy California, then free and almost owned by no one, while communicating their fears that this area would soon become the prey of the United States of America ... It is impossible it was not foreseen at the same time that these states, having once established themselves on the Eastern Ocean, would soon take precedence over all maritime powers there and would have a need for the entire northwestern coast of America. The dominion of the North American States over the whole of North America is so natural that we should not regret very much that twenty-five years ago we did not establish ourselves in California - sooner or later we would have to cede it, but, yielding peacefully, we could receive in return other benefits from the Americans. However, now, with the invention and development of railways, we must be more convinced than before that the North American States will inevitably spread throughout North America, and we cannot help but bear in mind that sooner or later they will have to cede the North American our possessions. However, with this consideration, it was impossible not to have another thing in mind: which is very natural for Russia, if not to own all of East Asia, then to dominate the entire Asian coast of the Eastern Ocean. Due to circumstances, we allowed the British to invade this part of Asia ... but this can still be improved by our close connection with the North American States.
The authorities in St. Petersburg reacted very favorably to Muravyov's note. The proposals of the Governor General of Eastern Siberia to strengthen the position of the empire in the Amur region and on Sakhalin Island were studied in detail with the participation of Admiral General, Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolayevich and members of the board of the Russian-American Company. One of the specific results of this work was the emperor's decree of April 11 (23), 1853, allowing the Russian-American company "to occupy Sakhalin Island on the same grounds as it owned other lands mentioned in its privileges, in order to prevent no foreign settlements."
For its part, the Russian-American Company, fearing an attack by the Anglo-French fleet on Novo-Arkhangelsk, hastened in the spring of 1854 to conclude a fictitious agreement with the American-Russian Trading Company in San Francisco on the sale of all its property for 7 million 600 thousand dollars for three years. , including land holdings in North America. But soon news came to Russian America of an official agreement between the RAC and the Hudson's Bay Company on the mutual neutralization of their territorial possessions in America. “Because of these fortunately changed circumstances,” the Russian consul in San Francisco Pyotr Kostromitinov reported in the summer of 1854, “I did not give further movement to the act forwarded from the colonies.” Although the fictitious act was immediately annulled, and the colonial authorities were reprimanded for being too independent, the idea of a possible sale of Russian America to the United States not only did not die, but after the end of the Crimean War it was further developed.
The main supporter of the sale of Russian America was the younger brother of Alexander II, Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolayevich, who sent a special letter on this subject to Foreign Minister Alexander Gorchakov in the spring of 1857. Most of the most influential statesmen, although they did not object in principle to the sale of Russian possessions in America, nevertheless considered it necessary to discuss this issue in advance. It was proposed first to ascertain the situation in Russian America, to probe the ground in Washington, and in any case not to rush into the practical implementation of the sale, postponing it until the expiration of the RAC privileges in 1862 and the liquidation of the contract for the supply of ice by the American-Russian trading company in San Francisco. Gorchakov and employees of the Asian Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs adhered to this line, and most importantly, Emperor Alexander II himself, who ordered to postpone the decision on the sale of Russian America until the contract with the company in San Francisco was liquidated. Although the US government considered the acquisition of Russian possessions in America very profitable, it offered only $ 5 million as a reward, which, according to Gorchakov, did not reflect "the real value of our colonies."
In 1865, after lengthy discussions, the State Council of Russia approved the "main foundations" of the new charter of the RAC, and the company's board even managed to receive additional benefits from the tsarist government. On August 20 (September 1), 1866, the emperor "deigned" to pay the RAC an annual "allowance" of 200 thousand rubles and remove from it a debt to the treasury in the amount of 725 thousand.
The company was not satisfied with this and continued to seek new privileges, which also had its negative side: the tsarist government only asserted its opinion about the expediency of getting rid of burdensome possessions in distant America. In addition, the general state of Russia's finances, despite the reforms carried out in the country, continued to deteriorate, and the treasury needed foreign money.
The end of the civil war in the United States and the subsequent friendly visit of the American squadron led by Gustavus Fox to Russia in the summer of 1866 to some extent contributed to the revival of the idea of selling Russian colonies in America. However, the direct reason for the resumption of consideration of the question of the fate of Russian America was the arrival in St. Petersburg of the Russian envoy in Washington, Eduard Stekl. Leaving the United States in October 1866, he stayed in the royal capital until the beginning of the next year. During this time, he had the opportunity to meet not only with his immediate superiors in the department of foreign affairs, but also to talk with Grand Duke Konstantin and Finance Minister Mikhail Reitern.
It was after conversations with Stekl that both statesmen communicated their views "on the subject of the cession of our North American colonies." The sale of Russian possessions in America seemed expedient to Reitern for the following reasons:
"one. After seventy years of existence of the company, it did not in the least achieve either the Russification of the male population, or the stable establishment of the Russian element, and did not in the least contribute to the development of our merchant shipping. The company does not provide significant shareholder value... and can only be supported by significant donations from the government." As the minister noted, the importance of the colonies in America has decreased even more, since "now we have already firmly established ourselves in the Amur Territory, which is in incomparably more favorable climatic conditions."
"2. The transfer of colonies ... will save us from possession, which in the event of a war with one of the maritime powers, we are not able to defend. Reitern wrote further about the company's possible encounters with enterprising merchants and seafarers from the United States: "Such encounters, unpleasant in themselves, could easily make it necessary for us to maintain, at great expense, military and naval forces in the northern waters of the Pacific Ocean in order to maintain privileges a company that does not bring significant benefits to Russia, or even to shareholders, and to the detriment of our friendly relations with the United States.
The most influential figure in the discussion of the fate of Russian possessions in America remained the Grand Duke Constantine, who spoke in favor of the sale for three main reasons:
1. The unsatisfactory state of affairs of the RAC, the existence of which must be supported by "artificial measures and monetary donations from the treasury."
2. The need to focus on the successful development of the Amur region, where exactly in the Far East "Russia faces the future."
3. The desirability of maintaining a "close alliance" with the United States and eliminating anything "that might give rise to dissent between the two great powers."
After familiarizing himself with the considerations of two influential dignitaries and knowing well the opinion of Stekl, who also spoke in favor of the sale of Russian America, Gorchakov came to the conclusion that the time had come to make a final decision. He proposed holding a "special meeting" with the personal participation of Alexander II. This meeting took place on December 16 (28), 1866 in the front office of the Russian Foreign Ministry on Palace Square. It was attended by: Alexander II, Grand Duke Konstantin, Gorchakov, Reitern, the head of the naval ministry Nikolai Krabbe and Stekl. All participants spoke in favor of selling the Russian colonies in North America to the United States, and the departments concerned were instructed to prepare their views for the envoy in Washington. Two weeks later, “in pursuance of the sovereign will announced by His Imperial Majesty at a special meeting,” Reitern sent Gorchakov his considerations, who considered it necessary to provide that “Russian subjects and residents of the colonies in general” be given “the right to stay in these or to leave without hindrance to Russia. In either case, they retain the right to all their property, whatever it may be. At the same time, the minister made special reservations about ensuring the freedom of “their liturgical rites.” Finally, the Secretary of the Treasury indicated that the "monetary reward" for the cession of the colonies should be at least $5 million.
Returning to Washington in March 1867, Stoeckl reminded Secretary of State William Seward "of the proposals that have been made in the past for the sale of our colonies" and added that "the imperial government is now disposed to enter into negotiations." Having secured the consent of President Johnson, Seward already during the second meeting with Stekl, held on March 2 (14), was able to discuss the main provisions of the future treaty.
On March 18, 1867, President Johnson signed official credentials to Seward, and negotiations between the Secretary of State and Stekl took place almost immediately, during which a draft treaty was agreed in general terms for the purchase of Russian possessions in America for $7 million.
painting by Edward Leintze
From left to right: State Department official Robert Chew, William Seward, State Department official William Hunter, employee of the Russian mission Vladimir Bodisko, Eduard Stekl, Charles Sumner, Frederick Seward
At four o'clock in the morning on March 18 (30), 1867, the treaty was signed. Among the territories ceded by Russia to the United States on the North American continent and in the Pacific Ocean under the treaty were: the entire Alaska Peninsula (along the line passing along the meridian 141 ° W), a coastal strip 10 miles south of Alaska along the western coast of British Columbia; Alexandra archipelago; Aleutian Islands with Attu Island; the islands of the Middle, Krys'i, Lis'i, Andreyanovsk, Shumagin, Trinity, Umnak, Unimak, Kodiak, Chirikov, Afognak and other smaller islands; islands in the Bering Sea: St. Lawrence, St. Matthew, Nunivak and the Pribylov Islands - St. Paul and St. George. The total size of the land territory ceded to Russia was 1,519 thousand square meters. km. Together with the territory, all real estate, all colonial archives, official and historical documents relating to the transferred territories were transferred to the United States.
In accordance with the usual procedure, the treaty was submitted to Congress. As the session of Congress ended just that day, the president called an emergency executive session of the Senate.
The fate of the treaty was in the hands of members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. The members of the committee at that time were: Charles Sumner of Massachusetts - chairman, Simon Cameron of Pennsylvania, William Fessenden of Maine, James Harlan of Iowa, Oliver Morton of Indiana, James Paterson of New Hampshire, Raverdy Johnson of Maryland. That is, it was up to representatives of the Northeast to decide on the annexation of the territory, in which the Pacific states were primarily interested. In addition, the majority clearly disliked their former colleague, Secretary of State Seward.
The decisive opponent of the treaty was, in particular, Senator Fessenden. During the discussion, the caustic senator remarked that he was ready to support the treaty, "but with one additional condition: to force the Secretary of State to live there, and the Russian government to keep him there." Fessenden's joke drew general approval, and Senator Johnson expressed his confidence that such a proposal "would be passed unanimously."
However, it was not the obvious hostility towards the Johnson-Seward administration and not the caustic jokes of Fessenden that determined the attitude of the committee members to the new treaty. Most senators, and above all Sumner, were guided by objective data and real benefits from the acquisition of Russian America.
Moreover, given Sumner's influence on the Foreign Affairs Committee and in the Senate, it was his position on the treaty that became decisive. Initially, the chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee even suggested withdrawing the treaty from discussion, since it supposedly had no chance of success. In the future, however, Sumner's views underwent a major change, and on April 8, 1867, he was already a strong supporter of the ratification of the treaty with Russia. The change in Sumner's position was not accidental, but was the result of a thorough study of the issue with the involvement of a huge amount of factual material. An important role was also played by the assistance rendered to the senator by persons most aware of the state of affairs in the Pacific North, including experts from the Smithsonian Institution.
All this significantly strengthened the positions of the supporters of the treaty and finally convinced Sumner of the importance of joining Russian America. As a result, on April 8, the Foreign Affairs Committee decided to submit the treaty to the Senate for approval.
On the same day, Sumner presented the treaty to the Senate and gave the famous three-hour speech in support of ratification, which made a great and even decisive impression on the listeners. There were 37 votes in favor of ratification and only two against. They were Fessenden and Justin Morrill from Vermont.
Without any complications, on May 3 (15) ratification took place in St. Petersburg, and the official exchange of instruments of ratification took place in the American capital on June 8 (20), 1867. Subsequently, in accordance with the established procedure, the contract was printed, and then included in the official collection of laws of the Russian Empire.
The decision to allocate 7.2 million dollars under the agreement was made by the House of Representatives of the US Congress a year later, on July 14, 1868 (113 - "for", 43 - "against" and 44 congressmen did not take part in the vote). On July 15, an order was issued for the receipt of money; on August 1, Stekl left a receipt in the treasury stating that he had received the entire amount in full.
The fate of the proceeds from the sale of Alaska is a favorite topic of newspaper speculation. The most popular version is that a ship with gold from America sank in the Gulf of Finland. But in reality, everything was less romantic and tragic.
On August 1, Stekl instructed the Riggs Bank to transfer $7,035,000 to London, to the Baring brothers' bank. The “missing” 165 thousand were spent by him in the USA. A telegram to St. Petersburg with the news of the conclusion of the agreement cost 10 thousand, 26 thousand was received by the lawyer of the Russian mission, Robert Walker, 21 thousand was the royal award for concluding the agreement to Stekl and another employee of the mission, Vladimir Bodisko. The rest of the money, according to the researchers, Stekl spent on bribing journalists and congressmen. At least, such a conclusion can be drawn from the instruction of Alexander II to credit the funds spent by the envoy for “the use known to His Imperial Majesty” as an actual expense. Such wording usually accompanied expenses of a secret and sensitive nature, which included bribes.
The same money that reached London was spent on the purchase of steam locomotives and other railway equipment for the Kursk-Kiev, Ryazan-Kozlovskaya and Moscow-Ryazan railways.
By buying Russian America, the United States, as subsequent events showed, made one of the most profitable deals in its history. This territory turned out to be rich in natural resources, including oil and gold. It occupied an advantageous strategic position and ensured the predominant influence of the United States in the north of the continent and on the way to the Asian market. Together with the Hawaiian and Aleutian Islands, Alaska became a stronghold of US influence in the vast expanse of the Pacific Ocean.
Text by N.N. Bolkhovitinov from: History of Russian America: in 3 volumes. M., 1999. V.3. pp. 425-488.
(with additions from other sources)
On March 30, 1867, exactly 145 years ago, the territory of the Russian Empire decreased by just over one and a half million square kilometers. By the decision of the emperor and autocrat of Russia Alexander II, the territory of Alaska and the group of Aleutian Islands near it were sold to the United States of America. There are many rumors around this deal to this day - “Alaska was not sold, but only leased. The documents are lost, so it’s impossible to return it”, “Alaska was sold by Catherine II the Great, because this is sung in the song of the Lube group”, “the deal for the sale of Alaska must be declared invalid, because the ship that carried the gold for payment sank” and etc. All versions given in quotation marks are complete nonsense (especially about Catherine II)! So now let's figure out how the sale of Alaska actually took place and what caused this deal, outwardly not beneficial for Russia.
Territory of the Russian Empire before the sale of Alaska
The actual discovery of Alaska by Russian navigators I. Fedorov and M.S. Gvozdev happened in 1732, but officially it is considered to be opened in 1741 by Captain A. Chirikov, who visited it and thought to register the discovery. Over the next sixty years, the Russian Empire, as a state, was not interested in the discovery of Alaska - Russian merchants mastered its territory, actively buying furs from local Eskimos, Aleuts and Indians, and creating Russian settlements in convenient bays of the Bering Strait coast, in which merchant ships waited non-navigable winter months.
The harbor of the Russian-American merchant company on the coast of Alaska
The situation changed somewhat in 1799, but only outwardly - the territory of Alaska began to officially belong to the Russian Empire as a discoverer, but the state was not interested in new territories in any way. The initiative to recognize ownership of the northern lands of the North American continent came, again, from Siberian merchants who pooled their paperwork in St. Petersburg and created a Russian-American company with monopoly rights to minerals and commercial production in Alaska. The main sources of income for merchants in the North American territories of Russia were coal mining, fur seal fishing and ... ice, the most common one supplied to the USA - the demand for Alaskan ice was stable and constant, because refrigeration units were invented only in the 20th century.
Until the middle of the 19th century, the state of affairs in Alaska did not interest the leadership of Russia in any way - it is somewhere “in the middle of nowhere”, money is not required for its maintenance, it is also not necessary to protect and maintain the military contingent for this, all issues are handled by the merchants of the Russian-American companies that pay taxes properly. And then, from this very Alaska, information comes that deposits of native gold were found there ... Yes, yes, and what did you think - Emperor Alexander II did not know that he was selling a gold mine? But no - he knew and was well aware of his decision! And why did he sell - now we'll figure it out ...
The initiative in the sale of Alaska to the United States of America belonged to the emperor's brother, Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolayevich Romanov, who served as head of the Russian Naval Staff. He suggested that his elder brother-emperor sell "extra territory", because the discovery of gold deposits there will certainly attract the attention of England - a longtime sworn enemy of the Russian Empire, and Russia is not able to defend it, and there really is no military fleet in the northern seas. If England seizes Alaska, then Russia will receive absolutely nothing for it, and in this way it will be possible to gain at least some money, save face and strengthen friendly relations with the United States. It should be noted that in the 19th century, the Russian Empire and the United States developed extremely friendly relations - Russia refused to help the West regain control over North American territories, which infuriated the monarchs of Great Britain and inspired the colonists of America to continue the liberation struggle.
Baron Eduard Andreevich Stekl
Negotiations on the sale of the territory of Alaska were entrusted to Baron Eduard Andreyevich Stekl, the envoy of the Russian Empire to the United States. He was given an acceptable price for Russia - $ 5 million in gold, but Stekl decided to charge the American government a higher amount, equal to $ 7.2 million. The idea of buying a northern territory, albeit with gold, but with a complete lack of roads, deserted and characterized by a cold climate, was received by the American government of President Andrew Johnson without enthusiasm. Baron Steckl actively intrigued, bribing congressmen and editors of major American newspapers, in order to create a favorable political climate for the land deal.
Signing of the agreement on the sale of Alaska
And his negotiations were crowned with success - on March 30, 1867, an agreement on the sale of the territory of Alaska to the United States of America took place and was signed by official representatives of both parties. Thus, the acquisition of one hectare of the territory of Alaska cost the US Treasury $0.0474 and for the entire territory equal to 1,519,000 square kilometers - $7,200,000 in gold (in terms of modern banknotes, about $110 million). On October 18, 1867, the North American territories of Alaska were officially transferred to the possession of the United States, two months earlier, Baron Stekl received a check for 7 million 200 thousand in US treasury bonds, which he transferred to the Baring brothers' London bank to the account of the Russian Emperor, withholding his commission $ 21,000 and $165,000 he spent out of his own pocket in bribes (overhead).
Gold mine in Russian Alaska
According to some modern Russian historians and politicians, the Russian Empire made a mistake by selling Alaska. But the situation in the century before last was very, very difficult - the States were actively expanding their territory, annexing neighboring lands and following the doctrine of James Monroe from 1823. And the first major deal was the Louisiana Purchase - the acquisition of the French colony in North America (2,100 thousand square kilometers of inhabited and developed territory) from the Emperor of France, Napoleon I Bonaparte, for a ridiculous 15 million dollars in gold. By the way, the states of Missouri, Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, Oklahoma, Nebraska and significant territories of a number of other states of the modern USA are located in this territory today ... As for the former territories of Mexico - the territory of all the southern states of the USA - they were annexed free of charge.
Such is the story - it turns out that the sale of Alaska at that time was justified from the point of view of politics and economics ...
In Washington, 150 years ago, an agreement was signed on the sale of Alaska by Russia to America. Why this happened and how to treat this event has been a fierce debate for many years. During the discussion organized by the Foundation and the Free Historical Society, Doctors of Historical Sciences and Yuri Bulatov tried to answer the questions that arise in connection with this event. The discussion was moderated by a journalist and historian. publishes excerpts from their speeches.
Alexander Petrov:
150 years ago, Alaska was ceded (that's what they said then - ceded, not sold) to the United States. During this time, we have gone through a period of rethinking what happened, different points of view were expressed on both sides of the ocean, sometimes diametrically opposed. Nevertheless, the events of those years continue to excite the public consciousness.
Why? There are several points. First of all, a huge territory was sold, which currently occupies a key position in the Asia-Pacific region, largely due to the development of oil and other minerals. But it is important to note that the deal was not limited to the United States and Russia. Such players as England, France, Spain, various structures of these states were involved in it.
The very procedure for the sale of Alaska took place from December 1866 to March 1867, and the money went later. These funds were used to build railways in the Ryazan direction. Dividends on the shares of the Russian-American Company, which controlled these territories, continued to be paid until 1880.
At the origins of this organization, created in 1799, were merchants, and from certain regions - the Vologda and Irkutsk provinces. They organized the company at their own peril and risk. As the song says, "Don't play the fool, America! Catherine, you were wrong. From the point of view of the merchants Shelekhov and Golikov, Catherine II was really wrong. Shelekhov sent a detailed message in which he asked to approve the monopoly privileges of his company for 20 years and give an interest-free loan of 200 thousand rubles - huge money for that time. The empress refused, explaining that her attention was now drawn to the "midday actions" - that is, to today's Crimea, and she was not interested in a monopoly.
But the merchants were very persistent, one way or another they forced out the competitors. In fact, Paul I simply fixed the status quo, the formation of a monopoly company, and in 1799 granted it rights and privileges. The merchants sought both the adoption of the flag and the transfer of the main department from Irkutsk to St. Petersburg. That is, at first it was really a private enterprise. In the future, representatives of the navy were increasingly appointed to the places of merchants, however.
The transfer of Alaska began with the famous letter from Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolayevich, brother of Emperor Alexander II, to the Minister of Foreign Affairs that this territory should be ceded to the United States. Then he did not accept a single amendment and only strengthened his position.
The deal itself was made in secret from the Russian-American company. After that, the approval of the Governing Senate and the Sovereign Emperor from the Russian side was a pure formality. It is amazing, but true: Konstantin Nikolayevich's letter was written exactly ten years before the actual sale of Alaska.
Yuri Bulatov:
Today, the sale of Alaska is given a lot of attention. In 1997, when the UK handed over Hong Kong to China, the systemic opposition decided to promote themselves: since Hong Kong was returned, we need to return Alaska, which was taken from us. After all, we did not sell it, but gave it up, and let the Americans pay interest for the use of the territory.
Both scientists and the general public are interested in this topic. Let's remember the song that is often sung on holidays: "Don't play the fool America, give back the land of Alyasochka, give back your dear one." There are a lot of emotional, interesting publications. Even in 2014, after the annexation of Crimea to Russia, there was a live broadcast of an interview with our president, in which, in the light of what happened, he was asked the question: what is the prospect of Russian America? He emotionally replied, they say, why do we need America? No need to get excited.
But the problem is that we do not have documents that would allow us to find out what really happened. Yes, there was a special meeting on December 16, 1866, but the phrase "special meeting" in our history always sounds bad. All of them were illegitimate, and their decisions are illegal.
It is also necessary to find out the reason for the mysterious sympathy for America of the Romanov dynasty and the secret of the sale of Alaska - there is also a secret here. The document on the sale of this territory stipulated that the entire archive that existed at that time in Russian America, undividedly passes to the United States. Apparently, the Americans had something to hide, and they wanted to play it safe.
But the sovereign's word is a golden word, if you decide that you need to sell it, then you need it. No wonder in 1857 Konstantin Nikolayevich sent a letter to Gorchakov. While on duty, the Minister of Foreign Affairs had to report on the letter to Alexander II, although earlier he had avoided this issue in every possible way. The emperor inscribed on his brother's message that "this idea is worth considering."
The arguments that were given in the letter, I would say, are dangerous even now. For example, Konstantin Nikolaevich was the chairman, and suddenly he makes a discovery, saying that Alaska is very far from the main centers of the Russian Empire. The question arises: why should it be sold? There is Sakhalin, there is Chukotka, there is Kamchatka, but for some reason the choice falls on Russian America.
The second point: the Russian-American company allegedly does not make a profit. This is not true, because there are documents that say that there were incomes (maybe not as large as we would like, but they were). Third moment: the treasury is empty. Yes, indeed it was, but 7.2 million dollars did not do the weather. Indeed, in those days, the Russian budget was 500 million rubles, and 7.2 million dollars - a little more than 10 million rubles. Moreover, Russia had a debt of 1.5 billion rubles.
The fourth statement: if there is any military conflict, we will not be able to hold this territory. Here the Grand Duke prevaricates his soul. In 1854, the Crimean War was fought not only in the Crimea, but also in the Baltic and the Far East. In Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky, the fleet, led by the future Admiral Zavoyko, repelled an attack by a joint Anglo-French squadron. In 1863, by order of Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolayevich, two squadrons were sent: one to New York, where it stood on the roadstead, the other to San Francisco. In doing so, we prevented the American Civil War from turning into an international conflict.
The last argument is disarming in its naivety: now, if we sell to the Americans, then we will have wonderful relations with them. It was probably better then to sell it to Great Britain, because at that time we did not have a common border with America, and it would have been more profitable to make a deal with the British.
Such arguments are not only frivolous, but also criminal. Today, on their basis, it would be possible to sell any territory. In the west - the Kaliningrad region, in the east - the Kuril Islands. Far? Far. No profit? No. Is the treasury empty? Empty. There are also questions about retention during a military conflict. Relations with the buyer will improve, but for how long? The experience of selling Alaska to America showed that not for long.
Alexander Petrov:
There has always been more partnership than conflict between Russia and the United States. It is no coincidence that, for example, the historian Norman Saul wrote the work Distant Friends - Friends at a Distance. For a long time after the sale of Alaska, there were practically friendly relations between Russia and the United States. I would not use the word "rivalry" in relation to Alaska.
As for the position of Konstantin Nikolayevich, I would not call it criminal, but untimely and inexplicable. Criminal - this is when a person violates certain norms, rules and those attitudes that existed in the society of that time. Formally, everything was done correctly. But the way the deal was signed raises questions.
What was the alternative then? Provide opportunities for the Russian-American company to continue to operate in the region, allow it to populate this region with immigrants from Siberia and the center of Russia, to develop these vast areas as part of the continuation of the peasant reform, the abolition of serfdom. Another matter, would be enough for it forces or not.
Yuri Bulatov:
I doubt that relations between the two countries were friendly, and this is evidenced by the facts and the speed of this transaction.
Here is an interesting example: in 1863, Russia signed an agreement with the Americans on wiring a telegraph through Siberia with access to Russian America. But in February 1867, a month before the sale of Alaska, the American side canceled this agreement, declaring that they would lead the telegraph across the Atlantic. Of course, public opinion reacted extremely negatively to this. For four years, the Americans were actually engaged in intelligence activities on our territory, and in February 1867 they suddenly abandoned the project.
Photo: Konrad Wothe / Globallookpress.com
If we take the agreement on the transfer of Alaska, then this is a contract between the winner and the vanquished. You read six of his articles, and the wording simply hits your head: America has rights, and Russia must fulfill the specified conditions.
So the top of the Romanov dynasty had mercantile relations with the United States, but not friendly ones. And our society did not know what was happening. The Chairman of the Council of Ministers, Prince Gagarin, Minister of the Interior Valuev, Minister of War Milyutin had no idea at all about the deal and learned about all this from the newspapers. If they were bypassed, then they would be against it. Relations between the two countries were not friendly.
ALL PHOTOS
In Russia, only six people knew about the preparation of the deal: Alexander II, Konstantin Romanov, Alexander Gorchakov (Minister of Foreign Affairs), Mikhail Reitern (Minister of Finance), Nikolai Krabbe (Minister of the Navy) and Eduard Stekl (Russian envoy to the United States), and the public was informed only two months after the signing of the contract. At that time, Russia was in dire need of a three-year foreign loan, 15 million rubles a year, and Russian America required constant investment.
As for gold, which individual prospectors had already begun to extract in Alaska, the Russian government feared that American troops would follow the prospectors and smugglers, for which Russia was not ready. Another problem was the "creeping colonization" by the Mormons, which US President James Buchanan himself spoke openly about.
Lenin and Stalin are to blame for the loss of Alaska
The Alaska thread on the CPRF forum mentions that the treaty, signed on March 30, 1867, was drawn up in English and French. Thus, copies of the treaty in Russian that exist on the Internet with a facsimile of the emperor and autocrat of the All-Russian Alexander II are fakes. Forum users put forward several theories: firstly, they insist that the contract dealt with a lease for 99 years, and not a sale. Secondly, supporters of the largest Russian communist party believe that the $7.2 million in gold stipulated in the document was not sent to Russia, because the government of the empire, through the London Bank, paid off this money for locomotives and steam engines.
In addition, an original theory was expressed at the forum - the deal was fictitious, the US Congress spent these expenses under the guise of paying rent for Alaska, aiming to compensate Russia for the costs of participating in hostilities on the US side of two Russian squadrons under the command of Rear Admirals Stepan Lesovsky and Andrey Popov.
"After the revolution of 1917, through confiscation and simple robbery, the Bolsheviks concentrated in their hands huge wealth in currency, securities, gold, etc. However, they could not buy weapons for the Red Army: the West banned trade with Russia. To "break through" this blockade, Lenin offered the United States a renunciation of claims to Alaska in exchange for lifting the ban on trade.As a guarantee, Lenin offered to give the Americans all copies of the signed agreements that were kept in Russia and confirmed her rights to Alaska.So Alaska was really sold for the first time. During the war against fascism, Stalin made a statement in Yalta that the USSR would not claim their rights to Alaska, which surprised the Americans, who believed that this issue was finally settled under Lenin.Stalin simply wanted to portray that he was making a concession for the right of the USSR take control of the countries of Central Europe.So Alaska was sold a second time ... Finally, under Brezhnev, the lease period came to an end. e previous, you could still try to lay claim to Alaska. It was only necessary to officially declare that these two, so to speak, politicians, Lenin and Stalin, had no right to sell Alaska, their actions were never confirmed by the Supreme Council and, therefore, were legally invalid from the very beginning. Well, and, of course, present money for payment! However, the General Secretary of the CPSU was not capable of this ... "- the published study says.
Probably, supporters of the Communist Party are referring to the fictitious agreement on the sale of Alaska from 1854, which was drawn up in the amount of $ 7.6 million and was supposed to force the British to give up their claims to Russian possessions. The newspaper Zagranitsa writes about the circumstances of this deal.
A ship with gold bars was blown up by an American saboteur
Russia really did not receive money for Alaska. 7.2 million dollars (11 million rubles) were, according to the payment order, transferred to the account of Baron Stekl, the Russian envoy, which fundamentally contradicted the terms of the agreement. Millions were transferred to one of the London banks, from where they were supposed to get to Russia in the form of gold, but this did not happen.
At the beginning of July 1868, the ingots were loaded onto the Orkney barque, but on July 16 the ship sank on the way to St. Petersburg. The insurance company went bankrupt, and Russia received no compensation.
In 1875, it turned out that the disaster was not an accident. The explosion was set up by US citizen William Thomson, who served in the sabotage division of the Secret Service Corps (SSC) during the American Civil War. Being caught in the explosion of another ship, he, after a suicide attempt, told how he ended up in prison for a drunken brawl and received an unusual offer from a cellmate. For 1,000 pounds, Thomson disguised himself as a loader transferred a time bomb to the Orkney.
A hundred years later, in 1975, a Soviet-Finnish expedition discovered the remains of a barque in the Baltic Sea. The examination confirmed that there was an explosion and a fire on the ship. But there was not a single gold ingot.
Eduard Stekl, who lobbied for the treaty from Russia (by the way, married to an American and involved in the highest circles of the United States), received a reward of 25 thousand dollars and an annual pension of 6,000 rubles for his work, which he was very dissatisfied with. As the Russian Seven clarifies, he briefly arrived in St. Petersburg, but then left for Paris and shunned Russian society until the end of the year, as he turned into a pariah and was mercilessly criticized for his mediocre cession of Russian land.
And not sold, and not rented
As for the main question, whether it was a sale or a lease, one of the most balanced versions is put forward by users of the Submarine forum - in their opinion, the uncertainty arose due to a linguistic misunderstanding.
According to the text of the treaty, it is clear that Alaska was "... to cede to the United States ...". The contract does not use the word "sell", and the expression "to cede" can be understood as a grant or transfer of physical control. Thus, it follows from the agreement that legally Alaska belongs to Russia, but transferred to the physical administration of the United States.
"Thus, Alaska was not sold to the United States and was not leased to the United States, which everyone is now arguing about. It was transferred under the seda agreement, i.e. under the agreement on the transfer of physical control over the territory without selling the territory to the United States of America. Since the seda agreement the term for the transfer of the territory to physical administration was not specified, then Russia has every right to demand Alaska back at any time, since according to the treaty concluded with the United States, Alaska continues to belong to Russia, and the United States has only been transferred the right to physical administration of the territory. the validity of the agreement, it is recognized as valid until the moment the owner makes a demand for the return of the right of physical control, i.e. until Russia declares its right to physical control of the territory, which must be returned to it immediately by the United States of America upon the first declaration of this from the Russian side," the article says.
A typewritten text of the treaty is available at the online library Bartleby.com, where it is cited from American Historical Documents, 1000-1904. The handwritten original of the treaty has never been published.
The Russian flag in Novo-Arkhangelsk, the capital of Russian settlements in North America, was lowered on October 18, 1867. In 1884, Alaska received the status of a district, in 1912 it was officially declared a territory of the United States. Alaska became the 49th state of the United States in 1959.
1863 The capital of Russian America Novo-Arkhangelsk, now the city of Sitka in Alaska
Merchant Initiative - RAK
Catherine I, the widow of Peter the Great, hardly even heard of the existence of such a land during the two years of her reign. Russian explorers and industrialists did not get there yet. And in the reign of the second Catherine, the development of Alaska by the Russians just began.
Then Russia acquired Alaska, thanks to a private merchant initiative. The first Russian settlements in North America were founded by the merchant Grigory Shelikhov on Kodiak Island in 1784 to procure and buy furs from local residents. Novoarkhangelsk became the center.
In July 1799, by decree of Paul I, the Russian-American Company (RAC) was created to develop Russian lands in America. The company organized 25 expeditions, 15 of which were around the world. The activities of the RAC today are assessed in different ways. On the one hand, the company conducted a predatory fur trade, on the other hand, it really mastered the territory, introduced arable farming, cattle breeding, and gardening. But since the beginning of the 19th century, the activity of the RAC was complicated by the struggle for furs with American and British competitors, who were arming the Indians to attack the Russians. The sale of Alaska took place under the great-grandson of Catherine II, Alexander II, on March 30, 1867. For some reason, this deal is considered to be extremely unprofitable for Russia.
Most of all, of course, they regret the lost gold and oil (although it was discovered only in the middle of the 20th century). Indeed, almost thirty years after the sale, by the mid-90s of the 19th century, large-scale gold mining began in Alaska. Few people in their youth did not read Jack London's brilliant prose about that era of the northern "gold rush". But at the same time, the same London emphasized that after 10 years, gold mining had practically come to naught. It didn't take long. The happiness of the gold diggers turned out to be deceptive. Lucky for the most part were those few who managed to stake out plots in time and managed to sell their mines just as timely. So what is still unknown - was more gold obtained from the bowels of Alaska or spent on its development?
Ross Fortress in 1828 I must say that for Russia, Alaska quickly ceased to be profitable. The period when Russian America brought serious dividends to shareholders turned out to be not too long. The economic situation of the territory was fragile and worsened. Fur trade continued to be the economic base of the colony, but sea otters with their precious fur were almost completely killed. True, the number of seals was still in the millions, but their skins were not highly valued at that time, and minks, foxes and beavers had to be bought from the Indians who hunted on land.
The vast territory was practically undeveloped. Very rare settlements, trading posts, and slaughter bases were located only along the coast and at several points along the Yukon. Penetration into the continent, in order to avoid clashes with the Indians, was forbidden to the colonists.
English and American merchants supplied the Indians with weapons and incited them to rebellion. In the remote part of Alaska, in the Upper Yukon, penetrating from Canada, the British established a trading post in 1847. And the Russians had to put up with this invasion. The coastal waters of Alaska teemed with whaling ships of various powers. And the colony could not cope with them either.
International law recognized as its property only a strip of water "at a distance of a cannon shot from the shore."
And the whalers behaved like bandits, depriving the Alaskan Eskimos of their main livelihood. Complaints to Washington - "quit your filibusters" - did not achieve the goal. In order to somehow stand on its feet, RAC was forced to sell coal, fish and Alaskan ice (the buyer was San Francisco, refrigerators were not yet produced at that time). The company stopped making ends meet. State subsidies were needed to maintain the territory. Which was extremely difficult for the treasury.
In addition, due to the territorial remoteness, it is incredibly difficult to defend a loss-making overseas territory in case of war. And at court the idea arose to sell Alaska.
The signing of the treaty for the sale of Alaska on March 30, 1867. Left to right: Robert S. Chu, William G. Seward, William Hunter, Vladimir Bodisko, Eduard Stoeckl, Charles Sumner, Frederick Seward Dangerous Neighbors
For the first time, they tried to sell Alaska to the Americans fictitiously, retroactively, because of the fear that in the outbreak of the Crimean War, the British, who possessed a powerful fleet, would tear away a distant, unprotected colony. The fictitious sale did not take place. But Washington was interested in the idea.
The United States vigorously, as Grand Duke Konstantin put it in a note to Alexander II, rounded off its territory. Napoleon, when he was bogged down in European military affairs, was offered to sell Louisiana. He immediately enlightened: “if you don’t sell it, they’ll take it for free” - and agreed, having received $ 15 million for a vast territory (twelve current central states). In the same way, Mexico (after Texas was taken by force) ceded California for $15 million.
The United States was intoxicated by the continuous expansion of the territory. "America is for Americans" - that was the meaning of the proclaimed Monroe Doctrine. The publications and speeches contained thoughts of "destiny" to own the entire continent in the northern part of America.
It was obvious that further "rounding" would inevitably affect the Russian colony. There was no visible threat to Alaska then. Relations between Russia and the United States at that time were emphatically friendly. During the Crimean War, the United States openly declared this. But there was a potential threat.
Alexander II understood everything, but hesitated - it was hard to part with the territory opened by the Russians, revered as "royal pride". Finally the emperor made up his mind. But one problem remained. And as paradoxical as it sounds, the problem was to persuade American statesmen to make a deal. Russian envoy Eduard Stekl, who arrived in Washington, was supposed to turn things around so that the purchase initiative came from the United States. The Russian Emperor agreed to sell Alaska for no less than $5 million. As a result, they agreed on 7 million 200 thousand dollars (that is, 5 cents per hectare). On March 30, 1867, the Alaska Sale Treaty was signed.
$7.2 million check presented to pay for the purchase of Alaska. The amount of the check is approximately equivalent to 123.5 million US dollars in 2017 ice box
In the US Senate, the ratification of the treaty was not enthusiastic: "we pay money for a box of ice." Then for a long time they dealt with the one to whom the Russians gave bribes after all?
And they really had to give. Newspaper editors received their pay for articles of the relevant direction, politicians for inspirational speeches in Congress. Petersburg "on matters known to the emperor" spent over a hundred thousand dollars (serious money at that time). The original version was put forward by the American researcher Ralph Epperson, arguing that US Secretary of State William Seward (one of the main participants in the deal) simply paid the Russian tsar for help against the likely intervention of England in the civil war on the side of the southerners.
We are talking about the appearance of Russian warships off the coast of North America at the end of the summer of 1863. Two military squadrons - the Atlantic under the command of Rear Admiral Lesovsky and the Pacific under the command of Admiral Popov - quite unexpectedly for England and France entered the ports of New York and San Francisco. For almost a year, Russian warships cruised off the coast of the United States. And the expenses of the Russian treasury cost almost 7.2 million dollars (exactly the amount for which the deal was concluded).
Transfer of Alaska and raising the flag The version, of course, is original, but controversial. One of Seward's speeches a few years before the deal has survived: “Standing here (in Minnesota - A.P.) and looking to the Northwest, I see a Russian who is preoccupied with building harbors, settlements and fortifications at the tip of this continent, like outposts Petersburg, and I can say: "Go on and build your outposts along the entire coast, even to the Arctic Ocean - they will nevertheless become the outposts of my own country - monuments of the civilization of the United States in the Northwest." Comments are superfluous. As a result, the States were satisfied, although they have not yet appreciated the huge “appendage” to their territory. Enemies of Russia gloated - the sale of Alaska was an admission of weakness. The official transfer of the colony to the Americans took place on October 18, 1867. The square in front of the residence of the Russian governor in Novoarkhangelsk was filled with colonists, Russian and American soldiers. The Russian flag was lowered from the mast and the American flag raised. In total, there were 823 people in the Russian colony at that moment. 90 of them wished to stay. The capital of the Russian colony, Novoarkhangelsk, was renamed Sitka. Twenty families remained to live here... At first, the former Russian territory had the status of a district, then - a territory. And only in 1959 Alaska became a separate state of the USA.
Then it turned out that the real wealth of this region is not furs and not gold, but oil. Alaska's oil reserves are estimated to be between 4.7 billion and 16 billion barrels. But the Russian emperor Alexander II could not know about this (and it would hardly have decided anything) ...
