IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 A 
 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 liS III 2.0 
 
 ^ 11= 
 
 11-25 IIIIII.4 llili.6 
 
 - 6" 
 
 P^ 
 
 <^ 
 
 /A 
 
 >^ 
 
 ^%/^ ^. 
 
 
 '#1,'''^ 
 
 -(^ 
 
 
 
 / 
 
 Photographic 
 
 Sciences 
 Coiporation 
 
 23 WEST MAJN • raEET 
 
 WEBSTER, N.V. 14580 
 
 (716) 872-45'?3 
 

 \° '"^ 
 
 i/x 
 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 
 Microfiche 
 
 Series. 
 
 CIHM/iCMH 
 Collection de 
 microfiches. 
 
 Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques 
 
 \ 
 
 \ 
 
 
 > 
 
Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques 
 
 The Institute has attempted to obtain the best 
 original copy available for filming. Features of this 
 copy which may be bibliographically unique, 
 which may alter any of the images in the 
 reproduction, or which may significantly change 
 the usual method of filming, are checked below. 
 
 L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire 
 qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Les details 
 de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du 
 point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier 
 une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une 
 modification dans la m^thode normale de filmage 
 sont indiqu6s ci-dessous. 
 
 n 
 n 
 
 D 
 D 
 
 n 
 
 n 
 
 Coloured covers/ 
 Couverture de couleur 
 
 Covers damaged/ 
 Couverture endommagde 
 
 Covers restored and/or laminated/ 
 Couverture restaur^e et/ou pellicul6e 
 
 Cover title missing/ 
 
 Le titre de couverture manque 
 
 Coloured maps/ 
 
 Cartes g6ographiques en couleur 
 
 Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ 
 Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) 
 
 Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ 
 Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur 
 
 Bound with other material/ 
 Reli6 avec d'autres documents 
 
 Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion 
 along interior margin/ 
 
 La reliure serr6e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la 
 distortion le long de la marge intdrieure 
 
 Blank leaves added during restoration may 
 appear within the text. Whenever possible, these 
 have been omitted from filming/ 
 II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajouties 
 lors d'une restauratton apparaissent dans le texte, 
 mais, lorsque cela itait possible, ces pages n'ont 
 pas At6 filmies. 
 
 r~\ Coloured pages/ 
 
 D 
 
 D 
 D 
 
 n 
 
 Pages de cou<«i.:r 
 
 Pages damaged/ 
 Pages endommagdes 
 
 Pages restored and/or laminated/ 
 Pages restauries et/ou pellicul6es 
 
 [~T| Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ 
 
 Pages d6color6es, tacheties ou piqu^es 
 
 Pages detached/ 
 Pages d6tach6es 
 
 Showthrough/ 
 Transparence 
 
 I I Quality of print varies/ 
 
 Qualitd in6gale de I'impression 
 
 Includes supplementary material/ 
 Comprend du materiel suppl^mentaire 
 
 Only edition available/ 
 Seule Edition disponible 
 
 Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata 
 slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to 
 ensure the best possible image/ 
 Les pages totalement ou partiellement 
 obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, 
 etc., ont 6t6 filmies A nouveau de fapon d 
 obtenir la meilleure image possible. 
 
 
 
 Additional comments:/ 
 Commentaires supplimentaires: 
 
 Various payings. 
 
 This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ 
 
 Ce document est filrn^ au taux de reduction indiqud ci-dessous. 
 
 10X KX 18X 22X 
 
 26X 
 
 30X 
 
 12X 
 
 16X 
 
 20X 
 
 24X 
 
 28X 
 
 71 
 
 32X 
 
The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks 
 to the generosity of: 
 
 Vancouvor Public Library 
 
 L'exemplaire filmA fut reproduit grAce A la 
 g6n6rosit6 de: 
 
 Vancouvur Public Library 
 
 The images appearing here are the best quality 
 possible considering the condition and legibility 
 of the original copy and in keeping with the 
 filming contract specifications. 
 
 Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed 
 beginning with the front cover and ending on 
 the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All 
 other original copies are filmed beginning on the 
 first page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, and ending on the last page with a printed 
 or illustrated impression. 
 
 The last recorded frame on each microfiche 
 shall contain the symbol — ^ (meaning "CON- 
 rilMUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), 
 whichever applies. 
 
 Les images suivantes ont 4t4 reproduites avec le 
 plus grand soin. compte tenu de la condition et 
 de la nettet6 de l'exemplaire film^, et en 
 conformity avec les conditions du contrat de 
 filmage. 
 
 Les examplaires originaux dont la couverture en 
 papier est imprimde sont filmds en commenpant 
 par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la 
 dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second 
 plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires 
 originaux sont film6s en commenpant par la 
 premiere page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration et en iierminant par 
 la dernidre page qui comporte une telle 
 empreinte. 
 
 Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la 
 dernidre image de chaque microfiche, selon le 
 cas: le symbole — »■ signifie "A SUIVRE ", le 
 symbole V signifie "FIN". 
 
 Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at 
 different reduction ratios. Those too large to be 
 entirely included in one exposure are filmed 
 beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to 
 right and top to bottom, as many frames as 
 required. The following diagrams illustrate the 
 method: 
 
 Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre 
 film^s d des taux de reduction diff^rents. 
 Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre 
 reproduit en un seul cliche, il est film^ d partir 
 de Tangle sup6rieur gauche, de gauche d droite, 
 et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre 
 d'images n^cessaire. Les diagrammes suivants 
 illustrent la m^thode. 
 
 I 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
. 
 
P>i:iIRlXG SEA. 
 
 Iti llliili ('oiiiiti'r>rnH«*.~Dr»ftM, 
 
 Couiiloi'-casp. Draft " A " - 
 
 Till' Jiriiiiiutioii of seal lifp on Piilivlnlf IsIuikN 
 
 'J'bc Unitcil States' systi'iii of iii(iii.)|miI_v, tlir k'ssccs iuhI tlic nativi's.. 
 
 St'<'o!iil draft of couiitiT-casr on liclialf nf (ircal ISritaiii. 
 
 I'rt'liiiiinarv ilrafl fouiiter-casu to moi't part II of Unitcil States' case. 
 
1- V (*-^ 
 
 f. 
 
 ' . 7 
 
 .• C , V. 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 yt 
 
 V. 
 
 s 
 
^^^^^m^^ 
 
 CONFIDENTLiL. / 
 
 ^5Sfe.-i^*''e-^'""' 
 
 DRAFT. 
 
 
 -1^-.' 
 ^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 s 
 
 
 Ibid., p. 33. 
 
 (A.) 
 
 United Statei' (a) 1. WHILE tho title of Russia to the 
 
 Caw, p. 2S. territory north and Avest of, and including, the 
 
 Peninsula of Alaska was universally recognized, 
 her claim to the north-west coast of the American 
 Coiitinent, hy which term it is intended to desig- 
 nate the coast between Prince WiUiam Sound 
 and the mouth of the Columbia Eiver, was 
 eai". estly disputed by more than one powerful 
 f nation. 
 
 (a) 2. While the claim of Russia to the 
 territory embracing the Aleutian Islands, the 
 Peninsula of Alaska, and coasts and islands of 
 Behring Sea was undisputed, the shores and 
 adjacent islands of the American Continent, 
 south of latiiude 60° as far as Calitornia, were 
 during the latter part of the eighteenth and the 
 first quarter of the present century the subject of 
 conflicting claims on the part of Russia, Great 
 Britain, Spain, and the United States. 
 
 The daSniticn of the north-west coast, upon 
 which much ol" tbo argument on behalf of the 
 United States appears to be based, appears now 
 for th-d fT9t i[ixi<i, a^ aboye, (.f) 1. 
 
 It is shown in the British Case that the words 
 " north-west coast " were understood, when the 
 negotiations took place, to apply to that portion 
 of the American Continent beginning at Behring 
 Straits. 
 
 Indeed, in another part of the United States' 
 Case these words are so used. 
 
 It is in another place, however, asserted that 
 the claim of Russia to the coast and islands from 
 Behring Straits to the 60th parallel of latitude 
 was undisputed, and that only that portion south 
 of latitude 60° formed the subject of the con- 
 flicting claims. 
 It will he noticed in this connection that while 
 [843] B 
 
 151:910 
 
 North-weit Coast. 
 United State»' 
 Cast, p. 36. 
 
 Britiih Caie, p. 60, 
 et leg, 
 
 United SutM 
 Caae, p. 35. 
 Sec alio p. 39. 
 United Statn' 
 Caie, p. 83. 
 
Mr. Blaine defines the north-west coast as 
 extending from '12° to 60° north latitude, and 
 marks it as terminating to the north at the 
 141st meridian, in one of the notes accompanying 
 his despatch of the 17th Deeemher, 1890 (see 
 United State' House of Representatives, Ex. 
 Doc, No, 144, Slat Congress, 2nd Session. British Cue, p. 60. 
 Also British Case, vol. iii), it is defined on p. 2(5 of 
 the United States' Case as extending from Prince 
 William Sound to the mouth of the Columbia 
 River, thus stretching beyond Mr. Blaine's 
 nortlicrn terminal point by at least IBO miles, 
 and falling short of his southern point by about 
 280 miles. Again, on p. 58 of the United 
 States' Case, as already (inoted, the nortli-ivcst 
 coast is said to bo limited to the west (at its 
 northern end) by Yakutat Bay and Mount 
 St. Elias, wbicti, though indefinite to the amount 
 of 50 miles or so, agrees more nearly with 
 Mr. Blaine's first quoted definition. The exten- 
 sion of the north-west coast to I'rince William 
 Sound does not, moreover, agree with the conten- 
 tion in regard to it held on p. 58. 
 
 In addition to what has already been advanced 
 in the British Case, Chapter III, pp. 59 to 7G, it 
 can be shown by actual reference to published 
 Maps aud documents (apart from the negotiations 
 leading up to the conclusion of the Conventions 
 of 1824 and 1825, elsewhere cited) :— 
 
 (1.) That North-west Coast of America and North- 
 west Coast are practically idoctical expressions, 
 " America " being in the latter case understood. 
 and the abbreviated form being merely arrived ac 
 by Wi. elision of that word. 
 
 (2.) That the full meaning of the term, in 
 either form, included the western coast of North 
 America from an indefinite point to the south- 
 ward, northward, and definitely as far as Behring 
 Strait. 
 
 (3.) That in one or other form, it has neverthe- 
 less been laxly employed in an indefinite wti.y as 
 a general name for various different parts of the 
 west coast of North America. 
 
 The term North-west Coast, or, more fully, NortIi-we«t Coa«t. 
 North-west Coast of North America, is in fact a 
 descriptive one of a somewhat peculiar character. 
 
 This term, however, appears in the title of 
 some very early Maps, such as that by Miiller, 
 dated 1761, which is entitled, "A Map of the 
 Discoveries made by the Russians on the North- 
 west Coast of America ;" that accompanying the 
 
original edition of Cook's third voyai^c, dated 
 1874, and entitled, " Cliart of the Norlh-wost 
 Coast of America and the Nortb-east Coast of 
 Asia;" and tliat in Vancouver's voyage (1798), 
 named " A Chart showing part of the Coast of 
 Noi'th-wcst A'.nerica." 
 
 The last aamcd Map shows that, in these 
 instances, wo should read in full " Coast of the 
 North-western part of the North American 
 continent," and, conversely, " Coast of the north- 
 eastern part of the continent of Asia." 
 
 This is particularly ohvious, when it is re- 
 membered that, especially in the case of the first 
 of the Maps above referred to, the explorations 
 set down were conducted from Russia, by way of 
 Okhotsk, in the ica of the same name;, and that, 
 conseqmmtiy, if direction from the point of 
 departure bad been considered, what is named 
 the north-east coast of Asia would have in reality 
 been the north-weal coast of that continent. 
 
 The descrijjtion " North-\, :!st Coast of America" 
 occurs in the title only in Miiller's Jfap, while 
 the coast delineated extends to what is now known 
 as Bchring Strait. 
 
 At the date of Cook's third voyage in 1784, we 
 again find a corresponding title, viz., " Chart of 
 the North-west Coast of i\merica and North-east 
 Coast of Asia." This Chart is drawn so as to 
 include the coast from the vicinity of the point 
 where it was first reached by Cook (about 
 latitude 4.4°) to Icy Cape, to the north of Behring 
 Strait, and in the Arctic Ocean. The same 
 remarks apply to the corresponding Map in 
 the Prench edition of Cook's Voyage, dated 
 1785. 
 
 A Chart published in 1802, by the Quarter- 
 master-General's Department, Russia, shows 
 (in Russian characters) the legend " part of 
 the north-west coast of America " running on 
 the continental laud from a point near the coast 
 and to the north of Behring Strait, continuously 
 to a point between the 53rd and 54th degrees of 
 latitude. 
 
 Numerous instances might be quoted showing 
 that the term was not restricted to the limits 
 contended for by the United States, and that it 
 has generally been used with the utmost laxity, 
 even by those likely to be best informed on the 
 subject. Witness the following • — 
 
 " North-west Coast of America, United States' 
 Coast Survey, Benjamin Peiroe, Superintendent, 
 
T 
 
1 
 
1868," sheets 1 to 3. These include the coast 
 continuously from the vicinity of the Strait of 
 Fuca (sheet 1) to some distance west of Kadiak 
 and Seven Islands (sheet 3), ending to the west- 
 ward between the 157th and 158th meridians, 
 and showing the eastern part of Bristol Bay. 
 
 Thus, in the United States' " Alaska Pacific 
 Coast Pilot," Part I, 1883, which was edited by 
 Mr. W. H. Ball (a gentleman whose familiarity 
 with all historical and geographical points con- 
 nected with the west coast is well known), on 
 p. 237, under "List of Charts issued by the 
 United States' Coast and Geodetic Survey — 
 Sailing Charts — North-west Coast of America," is 
 found catalogued " No, 4, Chirikoff Island to 
 Nunivak." This particular Chart is entered as 
 " in preparation," but its title carries the term 
 " north-west coast " up to or beyond latitude 60° 
 within Behring Sea. 
 
 In Mr. Blaine's despatch of the 17th December, 
 1890, particular importance is, however, attached 
 to a small and rather poorly engraved Jlap which 
 appears in Mr. H. 11. Bancroft's works, vol. xxvii 
 (188-4), which is the first of two volumes entitled 
 " History of the North-west Coast." 
 
 This Map is entitled " Map of the North-west 
 Coast," and is actually reproduced in fac-simile 
 in the despatch. This Map appears to be re- 
 garded as an argument conclusive in itself, and 
 it is said of it, " The Map will be found to 
 include precisely the area which has been steadily 
 maintained by this Government in the pending 
 discussion." * 
 
 If Mr. Blaine had written " precisely that part 
 /f the west coast of America," ho would have 
 been more accurate, for of this coast the Map in 
 question actually includes from about latitude 
 40°, in the vicinity of Cape Mendicino, to the 
 vicinity of that part of the coast where latitude 
 60° reaches the Pacific. 
 
 The area of the Map is, however, a very 
 different matter, as it stretches eastward so as to 
 
 * Mr. Dlsine does not appear to have noticed one curioui 
 circumstance connected with tliis " carefully prepared Map." In 
 the northern part of the Mnp, each tenth degree of latitude is 
 indicated, includinc' 70°, 60°, and S0°, and, on the west coast, the 
 40th parallel is also shown by a line correctly placed, to the 
 south of Cape Mendicino. It is, however, indicated in the 
 margin as latitude " 43." On the opposite or eastern side of tho 
 Map the line of latitude actually shown is latitude 43, and it is 
 correctly so named. This peculiar mistake occurs both un the 
 original and on the reproduction. 
 
Briliah Caie, p. 41. 
 
 include Hudson Bay and Strait, Davis Strait, 
 and the St. Lawrence Elver nearly to its mouth : 
 in fact, almost the entire norttem width of the 
 North American Continent. We arc fortunately, 
 however, not ohliged to criticize this point alone 
 by the exigencies which determined the lines 
 upon which this particular Map was cut off by 
 the draftsman — for it is evidently by its con- 
 struction a reproduction of some part of a more 
 inclusive Map of the continent. 
 
 The text of the work to which it is an appendage 
 explains the limits which the historian had placed 
 himself under, and, at the same time, very clearly 
 shows that he did not suppose the title of his 
 work alone would render 'ts scope clear to his 
 readers. On the second page of the first volume, 
 and in explaining the scope of his worlc, Mr. 
 Bancroft ^Tites : " Tlic term north-west coast, as 
 defined for the purposes of this history, includes the 
 territory known in later times as Oregon, Wash- 
 ington, and British Columbia ; " thus rendering 
 it obvious that for convenience he embraced 
 under that term certain parts of the west coast 
 which subsequently shaped themselves into three 
 distinct territorial divisions. As he )\id already 
 treated of the history of California (vol. ), 
 this was excluded, and as he proposed to treat 
 separately of Alaska (vol. xxxiii), this, also, was 
 eliminated. As a matter of fact, however, he 
 found it convenient to include in his Map a 
 greater extent of tlio west coast than that above 
 defined, to the north and south, as we have 
 already seen he did not scruple to do to the east. 
 His Map actually includes a considerable part 
 both of the coast and the interior of Alaska in 
 one direction, and of what is now the State of 
 California in the other. 
 
 The Treaties of 1813 (11th January) and of 
 1859 (12th January) between Great Britain and 
 Russia refer to the privileges of trade under 
 Article VII of the Treaty of 1825 to be exercised 
 on "North-west Coast." Article III of the 
 Treaty of 1825 shows the coast extended to the 
 Frozen Ocean. 
 
 The statements made in the United States' 
 Case and summarized in the paragraphs at the 
 head of this chapter (1 and 2) arc, it is submitted, 
 irrelevant to the main issues in dispute. 
 
 The ownership of tlie coast is immaterial, as 
 was in efEect said by Lord Londonderry in his 
 first letter. 
 
 [848] 
 
6 
 
 The British Case is accordingly confined to a 
 discussion of the user of the waters covered by the 
 TJkase of 1821 and to maritime rights. 
 
 It is not, therefore, proposed to exaniine at 
 length, in this Counter-Case proper, the claim of 
 Russia to title in America. 
 
 It is, however, impossible to ignore -wholly 
 some of the statements touching it put forward 
 by the United States in the Case. 
 
 It cannot be said with accuracy that the shores E^fly t''"^- 
 and islands of Behring Sea became as early as in 
 1821 an undisputed part of the llussian Empire. 
 Her title to this territory had in no way been 
 admitted, nor Avas it regarded as being indisput- 
 able by either England or the United States. 
 
 So far as regards prior discovery, Behring had, 
 it is true, in navigating that sea, discovered the 
 continent on its eastern shores, but he formed no 
 Settlements, and in no way took formal possession, 
 nor did he ever even land on the mainland. 
 
 The right gained by prior discovery in the 
 absence ■ f Settlements or possession, whatever it 
 may be, if asserted as to the whole coast of this 
 sea, or as to all but a very small part of it, Tnight 
 well have boon contested by England in right of 
 the explorations of Cook. 
 
 In fact, in 1819 there was but one Settlement 
 on the whole coast of Belu-ing Sea, at Nashagak 
 or Bristol Bay, established by Kossarovski in the 
 previous year. 
 
 Had any Power taken possession of any part of 
 that coast not actually occupied by Russia, it is, 
 at least, very doubtful whether Russia could have 
 successfully claimed against it. 
 
 The truth would seem to be that to a large 
 portion of the coast no valid title had been 
 established at all. 
 
 That this was the vi(!W taken by England and 
 the United States during the discussions on the 
 Ukase of 1821 will be shown later on. 
 
 It was unoccupied territory, the title to which, 
 by prior discovery, was open to doubt and dispute, 
 and if other nations had pushed their trade there, 
 as they did up to latitude 60°, there is at least no 
 clear ground on which Russia could have 
 successfully resisted their progress. 
 
 It suits the United States' Case now to say 
 that the title of Russia was " universally recog- 
 nized ;" and this assertion, and the arguments in 
 support of it, are rendered more plausible by the 
 fuct, that the territorial righl; by itself was not 
 thought worth disputing. 
 
British Caae, 
 App«ndix, vol* 
 ?. 33. 
 
 Ibid., p. 15. 
 
 United States' 
 Case, pp. Su, 51. 
 
 British Case, 
 Appendii, vol. ii, 
 p. 4. 
 
 The article from the " North American Review" 
 says that tho coast, even as far south as Bchring 
 Bay, was, for practical purposes, as worthless as 
 a floating iceberg, and that tho United States' 
 trade there had long hccn abandoned. The 
 "Quarterly," while it admits Russia's claim 
 to 59° north latitude on the score of priority of 
 discovery, shows, by the previous sentence, that^ 
 in tho absence of occupation, they regarded this 
 claim as doubtful, while the " North American 
 Review " (p. 33) denies its validity altogether. 
 
 At p. 34, the writer says Russia's object north 
 of 51° was evidently the monopoly of the fur- 
 trade, to secure which she desired to keep 
 foreigners off the coast. 
 
 The evident truth is that both Powers, Great 
 Britain and the United States, attached impor- 
 tance only to the claim of maritime jurisdiction. 
 
 The reason for the conflict between the Powers 
 evoking constant reference to the coast south of 
 the Alaskan Peninsula is obvious. 
 
 The interests of hunting and of commerce 
 undoubtedly centred there. The territory to the 
 north — uninhabited, as it was, by others than 
 the aborigines— was known chiefly to explorers, 
 none of whom attempted to make Settlements, 
 either temporary or permanent; but the state- 
 ment to the effect that the competition for trade 
 between Great Britain and the United States was 
 limited to the coast and islands between lati- 
 tudes 51° and 55° is, however, as shown by the 
 records in the British Case, without foundation 
 in fact. 
 
 It is to be borne in mind that, on the 28th 
 February, 1822, M. Poletica, in a letter to 
 Mr, Adams, had set out at length the grounds 
 on which Russia claimed title down to lati- 
 tude 51°, by reason of first discovery, first 
 occupancy, and peaceable possession of more 
 than half-a-contury, and this refusal to admit 
 any part of their claim is contained in the in- 
 structions to Mr. Middleton, who was about to 
 enter upon negotiations for a settlement of the 
 diflbrence. 
 
 Mr. Adams then refers to an article in the 
 " Nor. American Review " as showing that tho 
 rights of discovery, of occupation, and of uncon- 
 tested possession alleged by M. Poletica are all 
 without foundation in fact. 
 
 Ho points out (evidently quoting from TTum- 
 bolt's " Essay on New Spain," Book III, chap. 8, 
 
^% 
 
I 
 
8 
 
 p. 344) that beyond latitude 69° the Russian 
 factories are scattered and distant from each 
 other, communicatini,' only by sea, adding that 
 the new denominations, America or Russian 
 possessions in the new continent, must not lead 
 them to believe that the coast of Bchring Sea, 
 the Peninsula of Alaska, or the country of the 
 Ischugatschi, have become Russian provinces in 
 the same sense as given to the word when 
 speaking of the Spanish provinces of Sonora or 
 New Biscay. 
 
 In this article it is said : — 
 
 •'We further desire that our conception of the points 
 really at issue may be distinctly understood. It is not, 
 we apprehend, whether Euesia has any Settlements tliat 
 give her territorial claims on the continent of America. 
 This we do not deny, but it is whether the evidence of tliose 
 Settlements and the discoveries of her navigators are such 
 as they are reported to have been, and whether they 
 entitle her to the exclusive possmion of the whole territory 
 north of 51° and to sovereignty over the Pacific Ocean 
 leyond that parallel." 
 
 0). 
 
 of 
 
 (iii 
 
 It is true that this Reviewer afterwards admits 
 the claims of Russia north of Behring Sea in 
 latitude 59° 30' to have a plausible i'oundatioa, 
 and he confines the discussion to the territory 
 south and cast of it, explaining that in his view 
 for all practical purposes, from a territorial point 
 of view, the other is utterly worthless. The 
 Reviewer then discusses and doubts the right 
 resulting from mere discovery, and adds, "The 
 claim of Russia to sovereignty over the Pacific 
 Ocean north of latitude 51°, on the pretence of 
 its being a close sea, is, if possible, more un- 
 warrantable." 
 
 On the same day (the 22nd July, 1823), 
 Mr. Adams wrote to Mr. Rush, the United 
 States' Minister in London, that the discussion 
 of the Russian pretensions necessarily involved 
 the interests of the three Powers, and rendered 
 it manifestly proper that the United States and 
 Great Britain should come to a mutual under- 
 standing with respect to their respective preten- 
 sions, as well as upon their joint views with 
 reference to those of Russia. He therefore for- 
 warded to Mr. Rush copies of the instructions 
 to Mr. Middleton, and added :— 
 
 " The President wiahes you to confer freely with the 
 British Government on the subject." 
 
 Thli article liid been sent by Mr. 8. Canning, »l WashlDglon, 
 to Earl Dathurat, November »1. 1822. (British Caao, 
 Appiodii, vol. ii, p 26.) 
 
9 
 
 United States' 
 Caic, Appcndii, 
 vol. i, p. 146. 
 
 Q), Not quite ronaiatcnt with Mr. BUioe's account of 
 Ruuia'B title, and IiIh rercrenees to " all the dUcorerici 
 of VituH Behriug and other great navi^atora," Jud« 80 
 (ill, 49S), and Ruaaia'a "ancient poiawaiona." 
 
 In this letter Mr. Adams says :^- 
 
 "Wlion M. I'olotica, tlio raissian Minister here, was 
 called upon to set forth the grounds of right conformable 
 to the law.s of nations which called the issuing of this 
 Decree, ho answered in his letters of the 28th February 
 and 2nd April, 1822, by alleging lirst discovery, occu- 
 pancy, and uninterrupU^d possession. 
 
 " It apptars u])(>n examination that these claims have 
 no foundation in fact. The riijhl of discoeery on. this conti- 
 nent claimable by liiisnia is reduced to the jirobability that in 
 1741 Vaptdin Tehirihiff saw from the sea the mountain 
 called St. Elias in about the aOlh degree of north latitude. 
 Tiio .Siianirth navigators as early as 1582 had discovered as 
 far north as 57" 3iJ'. 
 
 "As to occupancy, Captain Cook, in 1779, had tlie 
 e.tpross declaration of M. Ismaidoff, the Chief of the 
 Eussiim .Settlement at Unalaska, that tliey knew nothing 
 of the continent in America ; and in the Nootka .Sound 
 controversy between .Spain and Great liritain it is expli- 
 citly stated in tlie Spanish documents that Russia had 
 disclaimed all pretension to interfere witli the Spanish 
 exclusive rights to beyond I'riuce William Sound, latitude 
 G7° 
 
 " It never has been admitted by tlie various European 
 nations which found Settlements in this hemispliore, that 
 the occupation of an island gave any claim whatever to 
 territorial possession on the continent to which it wa.s 
 adjoining. The recognized jirinciple luvs ratlier been the 
 reverse, &c." 
 
 British Case, 
 Appendix, vol. ii. 
 Hep iiencrally 
 pp. 12-16. 
 
 A'aahlngton, 
 ritiah t'sse. 
 
 Tlie Russian Government gave to the Duke 
 of Wellington a Memorandum, which concluded 
 as follows : — 
 
 " Consequently, the Emperor has charged his Cabinet to 
 declare to the Duke of Wellington (such declaration not 
 to prejudice his rights in any way if it be not accepted) 
 that he is ready to fix, by means of friendly negotiatitjn, 
 and on the basis of mutual accommodation, the degrees of 
 latitude and longitude which tlie two Towers shall reg.ird 
 as the utmost limits of their possessions and of their 
 establishments on the north-west coast of America. 
 
 "His Imperial Majesty is pleased to believe that this 
 negotiation can be completed vitliout dilliculty, to the 
 mutual .satisfaction of the two States ; and the Cabinet of 
 Russia can, from this moment, assure the Duke of Wel- 
 lington that the measures of precaution and superinten- 
 dence which will then be taken on the Russian part of the 
 coast of America will be entirely in conformity with the 
 rights derived from sovereignty and with the established 
 customs of nations, and that there will bo no possibility of 
 legitimate cause of complauit against them." 
 
 To this proposition the Duke, on behalf of 
 Great Britain, promptly objected, because it 
 recited an assumption of " exclusive sovereignty" 
 [843] D 
 
10 
 
 39. 
 
 in North America, as well as an oxclusivo 
 autliority over tlio sea. 
 
 I'iually, on the 29tU NoviMnbcr, 1822, lio nriiith Caic, 
 reports to Mv.G. Cannin- tlic Memoranda are JPF»Ji«, '"I « 
 withdrawn, and that the Ktnpcror of Russia is 
 ready to nc!,'otiate upon " the whoh; question of 
 the Emiioror's chiim in North Ameriea." 
 
 'riio IJritish Case proves that tiie object of the nriiiih Cut, p 
 Ukase of 1821 was " to extend lerrilorml juris- 
 diction over the north-west coast and islands, 
 and to prohil)it the trade of foreigners, rather 
 than to protect any existing or prospective 
 fishery," as is indicated by llegulation No. 70 of 
 tlie llussian-American Company. 
 
 M. de Polotica, the llussiau :Minister at Wash- ibid.; and 
 ington, further expiiiins tlie motive and purpose p];fii'|'N"',. 
 of the Ukase of fl821, in his letter dated the 
 28th February, 1822, as referred to in the British 
 Case. 
 
 M. de Poletica said that Russia's aim in this Britiih Caie, p. 40 
 Ukase was to acquire a " vast North American 
 territory." 
 
 Both the United States' and the British ibid. 
 Governments, upon receiving communication of 
 tlii^ Ukase of 1821, " immediately objected both 
 to the extension of the territorial claim and to 
 the assertion of maritime jurisdiction." 
 
 
11 
 
 
 United SUtes' 
 Cue, p. 33, 
 AppcnJii I, 13. 
 
 Ibid., p. 49. 
 
 Hrilish Cup, p. 27. 
 Ukate of I'aul. 
 
 United Ststei' 
 Caie, p. 34. 
 
 Ibid., p. 52. 
 
 (U.) 
 
 6(1.) That by the IJkaHO of 171)0 "Russia 
 claitncd tho exchisiv(! rif,'ht to all jjroducts of the 
 chas(! and cominerco nortli of fiT>°. 
 
 b (2.) That tho Ukase of lim, which set forth 
 a claim of exclusive llussiaii jurisdiction as fur 
 as latitude 55°, called for no protest from any 
 forcif^n Powers. 
 
 As stated in the British Case, the Ukase of 
 Paul f,'ranted exclusive rights only as a},'aiust 
 Russian subjects. 
 
 'i'his is oven evident from tlio United States' 
 Casi.', where it cstahlishes that the intention was 
 to create a monopoly in favour of the Company 
 as against the increasing trade Associations, 
 which developed soon after the discoveries of 
 1791, and whoso rivalry hccamo disastrous. 
 
 If it is infended to insist tliat the Russian 
 Company gave no positive permission, it may ho 
 true and is immaterial. Or if it is meaat that in 
 some official records the right I'.v cinimed to prevent 
 such visits and control the sea, it may he equally 
 true and equally immaterial. 
 
 The Ukase was purely domestic, and confined 
 to tho land. The language and the applicatiou 
 80 indicate. 
 
 Vivien do St. Martin, an authority referred to 
 in the United States' Case, says : — 
 
 '■Divpr.snmritiiiiL'auclcoldiiiziitiiinfiiiumL'icialCuiHpunius 
 were runneil up tii 8tL July, IV'Jl), wlieii the Kuipemr I'liul 
 uuiteil tlieni ull under the name of the Iiniierial JJussian- 
 Americau Fur Coiurany." 
 
 Ibid., pp. 49-S6. 
 
 British Case, 
 pp. 25-28. 
 
 Ibid., p. 28. 
 
 Mr. Middleton's explanation on behalf of the 
 the United States, in 1824, of the domestic 
 character of the Ukase of Paul, and his reason 
 for the absence of any notification thereof, fully 
 meet the statements now put forward by the 
 United States. 
 
 Writing to Mr. Adams, the Secretary of State 
 of the United States, on tho 7th (19th) April, 
 1824, he said :— 
 
 "The confusion prevailing in Europe in 1799, permitted 
 Russia (who alone seems to have ke])t her attention fixed 
 upon tliis interest during that period) to talie a decided 
 stop towards the monopoly of this trade, by the Ukase of 
 that date ■which trespa.ssed upon tho acknowledged rights 
 of Spain ; l)ut at that moment the Emperor I'aul had 
 declared war against that country as being an ally of 
 
12 
 
 France. This Ukase, which is, in its form, an act purely 
 domestic, was never notified to any foreign .-ftate witli 
 injunction to respect its provisions. Accoidingly, it appears 
 to have been passed over unobserved by foreign Powers, 
 and it remained without execution in so far as it militated 
 against their rights." 
 
 Mr. Adams, dea'-'-ig with the Ukase of 1779, 
 also Avrotc to ]\Ir. Middleton : — 
 
 " .... In M. l'(]lutica's letter of tlie 28th Feljruary, 
 1822, to inc, 1k' says that when the Emperor Paul 1 
 granted to tl- jirescnt American Company its first Charter, 
 in 17!I9, he ga\(! it e.ixlusive possession of the north-west 
 coast of America, whicli belonged to Ru.ssia, from the 
 55th degree cif nortli latilude to Piehring Strait. 
 
 "In his letter of the 2ii(l April, 1822, ho says that the 
 Charter to the Russian-American Company, in 1799, was 
 merely conceding to them a part of the .sovereignty, tir 
 ratltcr certain rxdusivc pririkgea of commerce. 
 
 " Tliis is the most correct view of the subject. The 
 Emperor Pa\d granted to the IiU.ssian-Auierican Company 
 certain exclusive privileges of commerce— exclusive with 
 reference to other liu.vsian subjects; but Piussia had never 
 before asserleil a right of sovereignty over any part of the 
 North American continent; and, in 1799, the people of 
 the United States had been at least for twelve yenr.s in the 
 constant and uninteiTiipted enjoyment of a profitable trade 
 with the natives of that very coast, of which the Uka.se of 
 the Emperor Paul could not di'prive them " 
 
 British Case, toI. ii. 
 Port II, pp. 4, 6. 
 
 The letter of the JJlst March, 1821, even as United States' 
 set out in the Case of the United States, indicates "*' ''■ *^' 
 no more tlmn that the Tfussian Company believed 
 their monopoly was to he .sooiired at last by the 
 Ukase of 1821, and all competition dostr"^, jd. 
 
 The "now i)rivilcges" which were to be 
 followed by " definite instructions how to deal 
 with foreigners who ventured to cross the limits," 
 &c., referred to the Ukase of 1821, which was 
 anticipated. 
 
 The United States' Case relies on a quotation J'^'<''. PP' *8, 49. 
 from this letter to show that the Ukase of 1821 
 was meridy doohi lory of pre-existing claims of 
 exclusive jurisdiction i.c to trade in Behring Sea, 
 which had been enforced for many years. 
 
 A c'.irefid translation of the letter in quijstion 
 proves that the foundation for such an assertion 
 cannot be upheld. 
 
 Two translations of the original appear below :— 
 
 (As in Unii.J States' Case.) (British transl.itmn.) 
 
 " . . . . The iirineijiles involved in tliis action of the " . . . , It will be your duty to act upon this order oil 
 Goverumciii you must uho observe in dealing wiili the Govorumeut, and to do your best to prevent fureignci J 
 
13 
 
 ■ rom visiting our Colonies. As soon as our new Charter, 
 kvhich has already been drawn up at the Ministiy, and is 
 
 unly awaiting the return of His Imperial Majesty, has 
 l)een sanctioned, we shall have Regulations showing us 
 
 how to deal with foreigners who may cross the limit of our 
 jurisdiction, and then it will be your duty to put tiiese 
 
 Refjulations in force." 
 
 foreigners who may visit our Colonics, using all the forci; 
 at your command to drive them from our waters. Togetlior 
 with our now privileges, which have already been pro- 
 mulgated by the Minister, and which iire only awaiting 
 the return of our Monarcli, we shall alsn n^ioivc delinite 
 iastruotions how to deal with foreigners who \enturo to 
 cross the limits of posse.ssion.s acriuireil long ago through 
 liussian enterprise and valour." 
 
 United States' 
 Case, Appendix, 
 »ol. I, p. 65. 
 
 In the Appemli.x to the United States' Case the 
 letter is transhited in full. It is necessary to 
 correct further errors wliicli there appear. They 
 areas follows : — 
 
 [British translation.) 
 
 " Liist year no Government vessel was sent round the 
 norld to protect our Colonies; now two are being sent 
 but under the command respectively of Tulubief and 
 I'ilatof, the former being the senior officer ; and wo arc 
 kbout to send out to you the " Rurik," under the command 
 pf Lieutenant KlotchkofT. The brig is to return home 
 ifter visiting the Colonic.?. You will get all the European 
 hews from the papers we are sending out to you by the 
 t Enrik," and we shall send you another letter by her." 
 
 (A.s in United Stales' C'a.se.) 
 
 " . . . . During the present year no naval vessel lia.s 
 been dispatched around tiie world loi the ]irotertioii nf our 
 Colonies, but now two slii])s are being titled out, to the 
 command of which Tulubief and Hlatof have been 
 apiiointed, the forijier being in charge of tlie squadron. 
 You will, thcrefori' have an ample foicc i)atrolling our 
 waters and ]mitectin_; our intcreats. In addilimi we send 
 you the brig " liurik," coinmanilcil liy Jlaslcr Klotclikof, 
 The brig is to return to us nftcr nuiziug in colonial waters. 
 In the acconipany';:g ncw.spupers and journals forwarded 
 by the " Rurik," with the additional despatches, you will 
 learn tlic .stale of iiiViirs in Europe and in other 
 couiuries. ' 
 
 The "claims " of exclusive jurisdiction leading 
 to this Ukase arc thus dealt with in the British 
 Case : — 
 
 British Caie, p. 37. " Long before 1821 the Company bad su.^ci.diMl I'nlly in 
 
 getting rid of its Russian rivals. I)omeslir cinnpelilion 
 bad, in fact, cca.scd, and the most serious drawback to llic 
 success of the ('omi)any consisli'd m llir I'limpclitiiui Irom 
 abroad. 
 
 HU, " Tlie difficulties resulting to iho Conniany •m account 
 
 of foreign competition appear ]ironiincntly in the coiu- 
 plaiids mado by its agiiils at the lime, and the new claim 
 of the right to e.xchule lorcigtnis from trade was embodied 
 in the Uka.se of IS L'l." 
 
 Ibid., p. 88. i>aioii •!.■ Nicolay, writinir to Lord London- 
 
 derry in Octoher 1S21, explains lliat the purposi; 
 of the Ukase of 1821 was to take "severe 
 measures" against the intrigues of "smugglers" 
 and " adventurers " on the coa.st, who not only 
 "engaged in fraudulent eomniei'ec," but also 
 "betrayed a hostile tendency." 
 
 [843] * E 
 
' ijiiw«yjij(fl^i.i».ji» 
 
 14 
 
 On the face of the Ukase is stated the justifica- 
 tion therefor, as follows : — 
 
 "And finding; tliiit tlic jniiiciiial cmi'so of these diffi- Uriiish Casp, p. 35. 
 culties [i.e., iiniiediiiieiits ciuiscd by secret and illicit tmiric] 
 is want of rules establishing the boundaries for navigation 
 along these coiists . . . ." 
 
 The coimuuuicitiou between the Board of L'niicd Statoi 
 
 Admiiuslratiou of IIk; Russiau-Aiuerican Com- '"'"'I''*'- 
 
 pany and their Cliiof Afanairer at Sitka, dated '^'"^- "<'' '• P- '^■ 
 
 the 2()tli September, 1821, and a letter of the ">;'i.. p. 42; and 
 
 ' vol. 1, p. 61. 
 
 28th February, 1822, from a member to the 
 Chief Managi'i-, ar(> now for the first time 
 produced. 
 
 As quoted in the Case, the above letters i^o no 
 further than to show that the llussian-American 
 Company expected to gain much from the 
 consequences of the Ukase of 1821. If the 
 Ukase of 17!)i) was for the purposes claintcd in 
 the United States' Case, the Ukase of 1821 was 
 hardly necessary. 
 
 In view of the abandonment .,f the Ukase 
 these documents, it is submitted, arc irrelevant to 
 the points involved, touching the question of 
 right between the nations concerned. 
 
 Had the Ukase been coulirmed, undoubtedly 
 the privileges they hoped to enjoy would have 
 been secured. 
 
 The letter of the 28th February, on which ibid, 
 reliance is placcnl, when read in full, as in the 
 Appendix, simply shows that shipments of seals 
 previously made had not been sold. The infer- 
 ence is clear that, with the exclusive privileges 
 under the Ukase, the annual number of seals to 
 be killed could be greatly reduced, with a corre- 
 sponding increase in the price for the seals sold, 
 which would, as the Chief Manager says, yield 
 an abundant harvest in the future. 
 
 But the paragraph in this letter which appears United States' 
 in the United States' Case is not found in the '^""'' ''■ ''^" 
 original. 
 
 A p^^i'^on of the letter of the 20th September, 
 1821, ' uitted in the text of the United States' 
 Case. 
 
 The Icii' .ving paragraph, however, appears: — 
 
 " In your dcnliny.s with forei^'Mcr.s ynii will act especially 
 under the provisions of tlie following paragraphs contained 
 in the new Eegulations; 35, 39, 41, 43, 44, 40-49, 51, 52, 
 53, 55-60, 62, 64, 67-70. These parngraph." bear plainly 
 
15 
 
 upon th(> iioints in ilispntc 1>Ptwm;n i;-; and (itlicr soafariii; 
 nations" 
 
 U rilish Case, 
 .V )■) endix, vol. i, 
 p. 11. 
 
 United States' 
 Ca>e, p. 41, 
 foot-note. 
 Appendix. 
 
 British Case, 
 Appendix, vol. ii, 
 p. 2. 
 
 Ibid., vol. i, p. 13. 
 
 A refcroiiee to the paragraphs which arc said 
 to "bear specially upon the points in dispute 
 between us and other seafaring nations" fails to 
 disclose instructions which go fiu-thor than pro- 
 hibition of trade with the islands where the fur- 
 bearing animals were got. 
 
 The paragraphs mentioned in the new Regula- 
 tions are found only in the llegulations of the 
 llussian-Auiericau Eur Company. 
 
 An important statement in this letter should 
 not be overlooked. 
 
 The "precious act" was, of course, the Ukase 
 of 1521, and the letter establishes that the Board 
 of Administration of tln' lUr-^iaii-Amorican 
 Company regarded this Ukase as establishing "a 
 new position." 
 
 This sustains the distinction, commented upon 
 in the Jh-itish Case, btjtween the effect of the 
 Ukase of 1799 and the Ukase of 1821. 
 
 But a careful translation of this document, 
 upon which the position of the United States in 
 this chapter is based, shows that the language in 
 the text and just considered is nowhere to be 
 found in the originals which appear at the end 
 of vol. i. 
 
 In the Appendix to this Counter-Case the 
 translation given in th" United States' Case, and 
 the translation made for the British Counter- 
 Case are given side by side. 
 
 Heading the British translation together with 
 the Regulations of the Russian-American Com- 
 pany, it is clear that the letters related to the 
 domestic airairs only of the Company, except so 
 far as in paragraphs GO, (52, and 70. 
 
 These Regulations are as foUovr : — 
 
 "00. in return for tlie confluence reposed in the Coin- 
 pitny by the (iovernnient in {.'ranting to it so vast an 
 e.\teiit of territory on tlie frontier of the Empire, tlie 
 Company is bound to al)stain from any action whieli might 
 cause an inteiTuptiou of friendly rehition.s witli nei<,'h- 
 bouring State.s. The Company must be careful to observe 
 all the Kules laid down by foroij,'!! Powers for the jjuidance 
 of tlieir subjects in tlieir relations willi foreigners, as well 
 as all the provisioius of the Treaties in force between 
 Russia and foreign countri(!s, especially those relating to 
 the Chinese Empire 
 
 " 62. For the guidance of the Company in tlic nmtter of 
 
16 
 
 the steps to lie taken in rpaiml to (oreipn sliips entering 
 the cdliinial waters, in oxfepticinal cast'M, ur in contrn- 
 ventiiin of the i.rivile},'es t,'ranteil to it hy tlio Knipernr, 
 special Rules have heen ilrawn up, entitled, ' He^'ulation 
 on the snhjeet of tlir I.innts of Nnvif;nlion and Commimi- 
 cation by Sea nloni! thi! shores of Kasleni Silierjii, Nortli- 
 AVestern America, anil the Alcnlian iniil K'lirile Lslands.' 
 
 "7l). A ship of war, al'tiu- visitinj,' not only the Com- 
 pany's Settlements, but also, and more )iartieularly, the 
 channels wliieh fureifjn nicrchant-ve.ssuls are likely to 
 frequent for the purpose of illicit tradinj; with the natives, 
 will return to winter whenever the fiovernment onlers it; 
 but if the Chief Jhina.L;er of the Colonies considers it 
 necessary for a shiji of war to winter in the Colonies, the 
 Commandei' will receive ordei's aecordinj;ly. 
 
 " The ( ■oninmnders of ships of war will receive orders to 
 capture all foreign ships Oaind in JJussian waters. 
 
 "(The Naval liegulatiori pnjhilntin.; the nfliccrs and 
 crews of men-of-war from en^iagiuf; in trade will be strictly 
 enforced.)" 
 
 Tliey afford fiirtlu-i- ovidcm-e that tlio oljjrct of Uritish Ca,e, p. 39. 
 the Ukase wa.s to extend tuiritonal Jiiiiscliftioii 
 OTcr flic nortli-wost coast and ishind.s, and to 
 proliibil Ihe trade of foivigiicrs, ratlior (liaii fo 
 l)rotcct any cxistiiii,' or prosjxK'tivo fisjioiy. 
 
 Tho rnle,s rofe.-ml to in paragmpl, 02 of (he Appcndi., vol. i, 
 Regulations above {irohihit forcij^n vessels !'• '3- 
 " landini; " on the eoasts and islands of Jlnssia r^,^ g. 
 in Behi'in!; Sea, or " approaehing " them within 
 100 miles. The ve.s.sol and cargo to l)e eonlis- 
 cated for transgression. 
 
 This prohibition extended from Hehring Strait 
 to 50 degrees of north latitude on the American 
 Continent. 
 
 In none of tho Rules or Regulations is there a 
 rcferenc(> (o sealing or to seal lislieries, while 
 there is fretiuent allusion made to trading vessels 
 and to their cargoes. 
 
 The letter of the 28th Feljruary goes as rendered 
 in the United States' Case to show that the 
 fur-seal industry— which hud been enjoyed by 
 admittedly precarious tenure previously — would 
 have been completely secured had the Ukase of 
 1821 been upheld. 
 
 It is shown in the British Case, with reference 
 to the Ukase of 1790, that :— 
 
 ■■ The Ukase in no way claimed any exclusive juris- British Case p 28 
 diction over the sea, nor W(!re any measures taken under > F' • 
 
 it to restrict the eonnnerce, navigation, or fishery of the 
 subjects of foreign nations, and this although, within tho 
 very area covered by the lJka.se, as has already been 
 
17 
 
 shown by tho facte stated, vessels of various imtiniis hint 
 been navigating and trading ;" 
 
 and, witli rel'crenco to the Ukase of 1821, tlint — 
 
 nritish Caie, p. 38. " ^'y l'''^ l'l<a«i.' Uiissiii lirst attciniitiMl to lascrl, us 
 against other nations, exclusive juiisilictioii or rijjhts iiviir 
 the shores of America and Asia, bonnding tin' I'acific 
 Ocean, certain islands therein, and over a jiortioii of the 
 I'acific Ocean, including what is now known as Itehring 
 Soa." 
 
 [843] t 
 
18 
 
 .51. 
 
 69. 
 
 (C.) 
 
 (c) 1. That after the Ukase of 1799 the United Suto 
 authorities of the Russian Company, acting ^"*' P" *^' 
 under the sanction of the llussian Government, 
 did not permit foreign vessels to visit Behring 
 Sea, 
 
 (c) 2. A considerable amount of correspondence ibid., p. 4S. 
 resulted, which illustrates the complete control 
 which Russia claimed and actually exercised 
 over Bohring Sea prior to 1821. 
 
 (c) 3. There is no record that hunting or ibid., p. 
 trading had ever been carried on within Bohring 
 Sea. 
 
 (r) 4. That prior and up to the dnte of the Ibid., y 
 Treaties of 1824-25 Russia did assert and exorcise 
 exclusive rights of commerce, hunting, and ash- 
 ing in all the waters of Beliring Sea. 
 
 The statement that Russia did not, after the ibid., p. 42. 
 Ukase of 1799, " permit foreign vessels to visit 
 Behring Sea," is unsupported by authority. 
 
 The Ukase has been shown to have been 
 regarded by the United States as purely 
 domestic. 
 
 Not an instance of any interference with 
 vessels in this sea by Russia between 1799 and 
 1824 or 1825 can be found. 
 
 While no regular record of voyages exists, the British Caw, p. 31. 
 United States' ship "Beaver" is known to have 
 been at the PribyloiT Islands in 1812. 
 
 The statement in effect that exploration, trade, United States' 
 colonization, and competition were conlined during ^''*^' P' '^^• 
 last part of the 18th and early part of the 
 19th century to the coast between Prince 
 William Sound and the mouth of the Columbia 
 is not and r^nnot be supported. 
 
 The British Case gives evidence in ehronoiogieal 
 order in refutation of this statement. 
 
 A reference to some of the cases is, reproduced. British Case, p. h, 
 It must be remembered that it was not until 
 1741 that the American coast of Behring Sea 
 was discovered. 
 
 Ilunters and -traders followed, and Bohring 
 Island and various islands of the Aleutian chain 
 were visited. 
 
 In 1701 to 1768 Synd, a lieutenant of the Ibid., p. 15. 
 Russian navy, made an expedition alons the 
 '•r::^! to Behring Strait. 
 From 1769 to 1779 single traders aiul small '^'J- 
 
19 
 
 United States' 
 Case, p. 31. 
 
 Ibid, p ii. 
 
 Ibid , pp. a2-i4. 
 
 Ibid., pp. 24-29. 
 
 Ibid., p. 24. 
 
 Ibid., p. 33. 
 
 Ibid., p. 34. 
 
 Companies continued the traffic with the 
 islands. 
 
 The United States' Case furnislies a contradic- 
 tion to the statement so far as explc-ations are 
 concerned. 
 
 In 1G84< a Russian ship sailed from the Arctic 
 Ocean throush Behrin;^ Strait to Kamtchatka. 
 
 Beliring sailed from Kanitchatka in 1728 ; 
 discovered St. Lawrence Island, and passed 
 through the strait that hears his name. 
 
 Another part of Behrini^'s expedition reached 
 th' continent at latitude 05"^, near the mouth of 
 the Yukon River. 
 
 In 1711 Behring made a second oxpcdilion, in 
 two parts, hoth of whicli reached America. He 
 landed at the Shumagin Islands, sighted a large 
 numherof the Aleutiim Islands, and was wrecked 
 on the Commander Islands, dying on Behring 
 Island. 
 
 The ahove led to numerous private expeditions, 
 and one Bossof gatliered oOl),000 dollars' worth 
 of furs on these islands hetwcen 1713 and 
 171!). 
 
 The voyages at this time were numerous, and 
 indicate great activity throughout the Aleutian 
 chain, island after island heing discovered. 
 
 Ahout this time several navigators under 
 Russian Imperial authority made furtlun' expedi- 
 tions into Behring Sea, and visited various parts 
 of the coasts. 
 
 In 178(5 the Prihylolf Islands were discovered 
 by Gerassim Prihilol', who had navigated these 
 regions *'or live years. 
 
 In 1778 Captahi Cook, " in co-operation with 
 an expedition sent by the British Admiralty," 
 passed into Behring Sea, and sailed along the 
 eastern shore as far as Behring Strait, giving 
 names to places along the coast — Bristol Bay, 
 Norton Sound, &c. " lie confirmed in the 
 strongest manner the early Russian discoveries " 
 along this coast. 
 
 In 1791 an expedition, plaimed by Catherine II., 
 passed from the Ahsutiau Islands to the nortliern 
 parts of Behring Sea, including St. Ijawrence 
 Island and Cape Rodney. 
 
 Other expedit'ons followc.'d at various times. 
 
 The shores and .adjacent islanils of the con- 
 tinent south of latitude 00 were the subject of 
 conllicting claims between Kussia, Great Britain, 
 Spain, and the United States. 
 
 The Russian -American Company soon after 
 

 u 
 

i«i« y.f .uiwi|,"i'i 
 
 Case, p. 34. 
 
 20 
 
 the discoveries of 1711 "began to develop a 
 lucrative fur-trado in the Aleutian Islands and 
 Behriiij^'Sca." 
 
 Forei-^n vessels certainly visited Behring Sea 
 before 1709, and continued to do so afterwards. 
 
 In 1778 Captain Cook, sent by the English United Stales' 
 Government, with two vessels explored the coast ^ "' 
 from about latitude 41" X. to Ii-y Capo, bc^yond 
 Behrmg Strait, taking possession of the coast. 
 
 An English vessel, the "Lark," sailed for Uritiah Case, p. 1 6 
 Copper Island in 178G. 
 
 In the same year Portlock ami Dixon and jbia. 
 Menrcs traded and explored far to the northward, jbia., „ jy. 
 and Tortlock and Dixon visited Cook's Inlet. 
 
 The Kussian Priliyloff discovered tlie islands . ' • . 
 that hear his name in 1780. 
 
 From 17S7 to 1791 several voyages ^vere made Ibid, 
 by EiUinf^s' Taissian scientific ex|)loring expedi- 
 tion in (he Behring Sea region. 
 
 In 17D0 ridalgo examined the north-west Ibid-, p. 19- 
 coast, including Cook Inlet. 
 
 This year a Swedish cruizer visited the Aleutian Ibid. 
 Islands. 
 
 Douglas was in Cook Inlet in 1791. 
 
 In 1703 ^'ancouvcr, dispatched by the British Ibid. 
 Government, explored all the remaining inlets 
 on the norili-west coast. 
 
 In 179 1 Vancouver surveyed Cook Inlet. Ibid., p. 20. 
 
 In 18()() the Russian envoy visited the Pribyloff Ibid., p. 80. 
 Islands, and reported that the traders in ships 
 from Boston were undermining the trade with 
 China. 
 
 In 1S12 tlie United State.s' ship "Beaver" Ibid., p. 31. 
 disposed of her cargo to Baranoit at Sitka, and 
 was th(-n sent to the Pribyloff Islands for fur- 
 seal .skins in payment. 
 
 In 1811, Caijtain Bennett (United States) sold Ibid, 
 two vcss;'Is with tiieir cargoes to Baranoff, and 
 took fur-seal skins from the Pribyloff Islands in 
 payment. 
 
 In 1818 and 1821 expeditions were dispatched ibid., p. 32. 
 by tlu! British Government in search of a north- 
 west passage from the Atlantic to the Pacific, 
 and in 1S21 and 1825 Parry, Beechey. and 
 Franklin were engaged in the same quest, with a 
 rendezvous at Kotzchue Sound. 
 
 In 1819 the United States' traders obtained ibid, 
 most of the trade with the Kolosh. 
 
 In 182G (.luly) Uer Majesty's ship « Blossom " Ibid., p. 78. 
 (Capfain Be(>chcy) sailed through Boliring Sea 
 into the Arctic Ocean. 
 
21 
 
 United Statfs' 
 Caae, p. 43. 
 
 Ibid., Tol. i, p. 49. 
 
 The request of the Minister of Einance in 1820 
 and 1821 to the Minister of Marine for cniizers 
 to protect the Company's interests do not 
 suggest the exclusion of foreign vessels from the 
 sea in question. On the contrary, they refer to 
 the policy of colonial extension: "Vessels 
 engaged in traffic or industry injurious to the 
 interests of the Russiaji Company." 
 
 The abstract of the letter of the Minister of 
 Finance, given in the Appendix to the United 
 States' Case, shows more clearly that trade 
 monopoly was the object of this request : — 
 
 " In view of the recent establishment of these Colonies, 
 and of the absence of forces required to prevent such 
 irregularities, and of the smaU number of Russians 
 .scattered over an area of nearly 4,000 versts, the Company 
 find.s it impossible to occupy all localities in sufficient 
 number to prevent the foreigners from maintaining their 
 il'tgitiniat<! intercourse with the native inhabitants" 
 
 Ibid., p. 40. 
 
 The letter suggests further instructions touching 
 " foreign contrabandists." 
 
 The request in this communication is based 
 expressly upon the testimony "of the Com- 
 manders of ships sailing in those regions," that 
 United States' vessels were then carrying on a 
 trade with the native inhabitants. It affords 
 direct proof, so difficult to find generally, for 
 obvious reasons, that previous to the ')tb April, 
 1820, foreign vessels were navigating the waters 
 of J3ehring Sea as far up the eastern coast of the 
 Kamtchatka Peninsula as (52" of north latitude, 
 and on the west coast of this sea, called the 
 "West Coast of North America," from 62° of 
 north latitude to the Island of Ounalaska. 
 
 Tlie United States I'clyon the following extract 
 from the letter of the 9th April, 1820 :— 
 
 " It appears of the utmost necessity for the preservation 
 of our sovereignty in the north-western jiart of America 
 and in the i.slands and waters situated between them to 
 maintain there continuously two .■ships of the lm)ierial 
 licet." 
 
 And, again, in referrinz to (lie directions for 
 the ships, it is said : — 
 
 ■' The other ships, however (.sailing from IVtropaulovsk), 
 having examined the eastern coast of Kamchatka Peninsula 
 up to 02° north latitude, and the west cuast of America 
 from this latitude to the Island of Uniilaska and the 
 intervening waters (Bering Sea), should proceed to 
 Kadiak aiui from there to Sitka fur the wintm The 
 [843J G 
 
22 
 
 object of the cruiziiij,' ol' two ot our iirmeil vessels in the 
 localities above mentioned is the proieetion of our Colonies 
 and the exclusion of foreign vessels engaged i'l traflic or 
 industry injurious to the interests of the Ruasian Company, 
 as well OS to tbosi, of tlic nntivc iuhiibitants of those 
 regions." 
 
 A more accuratt; traiislalioii of tlie Russian 
 document destroys all !;roini(l for the ar|,'iiinent 
 of the United States iipin this pdiut. 
 
 The ohjeet and mission of the ships is thu"* 
 described in the tr.iiislation, whieh is given in 
 the Appendix to this Counter-Case : — 
 
 " As the ColonieH have only \aU;\y been founded, and as 
 they do not possess sullicienL forces to remedy these evils, 
 a amall numlier of Knssians being scattered over an area 
 of nearly 4,000 verets, the Company is unable as yet to 
 occupy all points in ^n(>h a manner as to prevent the 
 Americans from continuing their forlndden intercourse 
 with the islanders, or exercising their infiuence over them. 
 Under these circumstances, c ■■^.dering that the interests 
 of the Company, its foundation, and its objects are 
 inseparably connected with the interests of the Govern- 
 ment, it appears to be very necessary, if we are to keep 
 our hold over our possessions in the north-western part of 
 America, and on the islands situated in the ocean, that 
 two ships of the Imperial navy should be kept constantly 
 in that part of the world." 
 
 And, again — 
 
 " . . . . The other ship, after inspecting the eastern 
 shores of the Peninsula of Kamchatka as far as 52° north 
 latitude, and the western shores of America from that 
 meridian to the Island of Unalaska, will pay a visit to 
 Kadiak, and thence proceed to Sitka, where she will 
 winter. 
 
 " The object of the eruizini; of these two armed vessels 
 in the localities mentioned above is the protection of our 
 Colonies and the prevention of the prohibited intercourse 
 between the foreign ships on the one hand, and the 
 Company's establishments and the native inhabitants on 
 the other." 
 
 The Case of the United States continues : — 
 
 " In the following yeur, 1821, two similar ships were to United States' 
 be dispatched, and in ' this maimer two ships oi war '^' P" ^*' 
 would always be present in the Cobniies, and chu Company 
 would be assured of their jirotection.' ' 
 
 The two translations of the original despatch 
 touching this paragraph arc as follows : — 
 
 (As in United States' Case.) (British translation.) 
 
 " In this manner two sliips of war would always be " By this arrangement two armed vessels would always 
 present in the Colonies, and the Company would be be present in the Colonies founded by the Company for 
 
28 
 
 their protection, and, apart from other advantages, the asaured of tlieir protection. In iidditioii to the other 
 olHccrs of the Imperial fleet would Imve iin excellent iidviiutiiges resultiii',' from tliin nriiuinfmciit, il would 
 opportunity of improving by practice their knowledge of afford a most (ixcelleiit oppurtunity for tho ollicers of the 
 the art of navigation." Imperial navy to perfect tiiumselve.s by practice in the 
 
 science of niivigiitiou." 
 
 *• VoTigeB made in 
 1788 and 1769 
 from China to 
 North-west Coast 
 of America," by 
 John Meares. 
 
 ^loa'cs, however, shows why inulers as a rule 
 avoiili'il till! districts wlifrc there were K,usbian 
 settlors. 
 
 In such places they were fortistalled. 
 
 In liis account of his visit to tin- Aleutian 
 Islands, Meares gives his reasons for avoiding t!ie 
 llusbian Settlements as follows; — 
 
 " Finding it, however, impossible to go to the southward 
 by tlie cbiiiincl through which we cimio, on iiecount of the 
 sUengtIi of the current, we bom up and went to ihi; north- 
 ward, ami having got as far U) the eastward us (Junalasbka, 
 we were so fortiniiite as to meet witii a strong nortii wind, 
 which eniililed us to get through between Unamah and 
 Ounaliislika. In these straits tho current could not run 
 less than 7 knots an hour, which caused a most tremendous 
 sea. 
 
 " Wlien we got round to tlie south side of the island, a 
 Russian eame off iiml piloted our sliip into an harbour 
 adjacent to that in which Captain (,'ook relitted. 
 
 " The Russians on ilwac isles came from Odiotsk and 
 Kamsehatka in gallcots of ahou', 50 tons burthen, having 
 from sixty to eighty men each. They heave their vessel 
 up in some convenii'Ut place during their station here, 
 which is for eight years, at the end of whicli time they are 
 relieved by anotlier party. Tliey hunt the sea-otters and 
 other animals whom Nature has clothed in furs. The 
 natives of llie dilferent districts are aI.-:o employed in the 
 same occupation, and are obliged to give the fruits of their 
 toil as a tribute to the Kmpress of Russia, to whom this 
 trade exclusively belongs. 
 
 " The only aninuds on these islands are foxes, some of 
 whidi are black, and whose skins are very valuable. 
 While we lay hero we endeavoured to engage the liussians 
 to trade with us ; but they set too high a value on their 
 furs to dispose of them to us, at least for anything we luid 
 to give in return, more particularly as they expected to be 
 relieved the following year. The harbour we entered is 
 about 10 or 12 miles from that where Captain Cook 
 refitted, and lies in tlie latitude of o-t" 2' north, longitude 
 193° 25' east of tireenwich. 
 
 " On the 20th day of August we sailed from Ouiial.ashka, 
 in order to run down the continent, till we should pass the 
 Shumagiu Islands, as Captain Cook describe! Kodiak one 
 of the .southern. Indeed, we wislieil to be clear of the 
 Russian Seltlement.s, as we knew nothing was to be got in 
 the vicinity of them, before we went on the coast." 
 
 sola would always 
 the Company for 
 
 United Sutei 
 Caae, p. 44. 
 
 The letter from the Rtissian-Americau Company 
 of the ir)th March, 1821, written by tlic Board 
 
24 
 
 of tho Company to the Chief Mann^'cr, deals with 
 domestic eoncerns, but <.'ontains no uuthority for 
 tho statcmcut tliai any interlVrctieo look place 
 witli .ither than Russian subjects. 
 
 Indeed, on rei'crence to tlic full text of the United Suie.' 
 letter in tlie Appendix, it will be seen that the ' ■•••■• 
 communication was founded upon a report of 
 one of tlie inspectors of the Company, who was 
 referrinfi' to the improvident killing; of these 
 animals on the Islands of St. Paul and St. George ; 
 and the instructions for the suspension of killing 
 are for the special g\iidance of the ofTiecM-s of the 
 Company. No document from tiic files of the 
 Company, or from the Russian archives, now in 
 the possession of the United States, has as yet 
 been presented to show that, under these instruc- 
 tions, anything occurred in the case of foreign 
 vessels. 
 
 There exists, however, a further serious dis- 
 crepancy between the translations of the Russian 
 documents between the United States and Great 
 Britain. 
 
 The paragraph lelied on h,v the United States 
 in this letter of the 15th March, 1821, is as 
 follows: — 
 
 " If, liiiwcvcr, the islands tn the iKirtliwiiril nre dis- 
 coveroii, and are found to be nvailalile fur soidini;, we may, 
 ill confonriity with M. Yaiinvsky's opinion, instrurt the 
 officials of St. Paul and St. Gcorfjo to work them every fifth 
 year, limiting tlie annual catcli in the interval on St. Paul 
 Island to 4(),n00 and on St. Georf;e to 1(1,000. We must 
 suppose that u total .suspension of killing every fifth year 
 will eftectually stop tiie diminution of the fur-seals, and 
 that it will be .safe at the expiration of tlie elose season to 
 resume killing at. the rate niention"d aliove. By strict 
 observance of s\icli rules, and a proliibition of all killing of 
 fur-seals at s(!a or in the passes of the Ahmtian Islands, we 
 may hope to make this industry a permanent and reliable 
 source of income to the Company, without disturbing the 
 price of these valuable skins in the market." 
 
 There is no language of this character to be 
 found in the original. 
 
 The corn'sponding paragraph in the British 
 translation is as follows : — 
 
 " If this arrangement is adopted the men will never be 
 idle, for when the time (ionies for one batch to be spared on 
 one island they can all go to the other, where all three 
 batches are to be killed. If the small islands supposed to 
 exist to the north are discovered, and are found to be 
 visited by seals, you should, as suggested by M. Yanovsky, 
 give instructions tf> the employ(<s of the Company on 
 St. Paul and St. George to go and kill seals there every 
 
25 
 
 suth year, and to coiUinuo to kill 40,000 on St. Paul and 
 10,001) (111 St. Oeor;,'e every year. At the end of every 
 fiv't years the kiUiiiH should cense on St. Paul and 
 St. (Jcorge for one year, for the propni^ation of the species. 
 During? that year the catch on the small islands to the 
 north will indemnify the Company for what it loses on 
 St. I'aul and St. Geor):;e ; and the following year the usual 
 operations will he resumed, and 40,000 seals killed on 
 St, I'aul and 10.000 on St. George. The.se measures will 
 preserve the fur-seal industry and adrauce the best 
 interests of the Company by preventing the price of the 
 furs from falling in the market." 
 
 i;„ii,d Bute,' The reference to the cancellation of contracts 
 
 C««e, p. 48. made with foreigners, even as stated, in no 
 
 respect supports tlie assertion that control was 
 exercised by Russia over Behring Sea prior to 
 1821. These licences had been granted for 
 hunting whales on the coast " of 1 tstern Siberia," 
 and included, admittedly, territorial waters on 
 that shore. 
 
 Nevcrtlioless, it affords additional proof tliat 
 foreigners were not "prevented from entering 
 Behring Sea," since it testifies to the existence 
 of Englishmen in 1819 on the very shores of the 
 sea in question. 
 Ibid. The letter of the 10th April, 1820, from the 
 
 Eussian Minister of Finance, shows, moreover, 
 that tlie proiiihition against foreigners applied to 
 the ports of Eastern Sil)eria, and not to the 
 whole sea. The Englishmen at Okhotsk and 
 in Kamtchatka were to be informed that the 
 Government " does not permit them to reside in 
 those places." 
 Ihid., Appendii, The letter from the Minister of Pinance ex- 
 
 vo . I, p. 51. prcssly recognizes the right of foreign merchant- 
 
 vessels to navigate these waters, since, by panu 
 graph 2 of the Proclamation of the Emperor, 
 they were to be permitted to enter ir. the ports 
 of Siberia in cases of disaster, but their cargoes 
 in these cases were not to bo discharged. 
 
 Taking the communication, however, in the 
 sense in which it is used for the United States' 
 Case, it discloses at the best that a year before the 
 Ukase of 1821 the Russian Government contem- 
 plated favourably the poUcy subsequently covered 
 by the Ukase. To this it can be said that neither 
 the instructions of 1820 nor the prohibition 
 contained in the Ukase were ever acted upon in 
 V the sense suggested by the text of the United 
 
 States' Case. 
 The British translation of this letter differs 
 [843] H 
 
 i5?.r,i.o 
 
26 
 
 seriously from that appearing in the Appendix 
 to the United States' Case. 
 A comparison is here made : — 
 
 (Extracts as given in United States' Case.) 
 
 " 2. The Commander of the f Jovernnient of Irkutsk is 
 hereby instructed to forbid all foreigners, except siicli as 
 have become Russian subjects, to enter tb« Mercantile 
 Guilds, or to settle in business in Kamcliiitka or Okhotsk ; 
 also to entirely prohibit foreign mercbant-ves:;els from 
 trading in these localities and from anchoring in any jiort 
 of Eastern Siberia, except in case of ilisiister (In such 
 cases, great care should be tak;n that no part of their 
 cargo he discharged or sold to anybody, under pain of con- 
 fiscation of the ship.) It is hcreliy ordered thiit the local 
 authorities shall inform the Kiighsbnian Davis at Okhotsk 
 and Dobello's agent in Kamchatka ibat the Government 
 does not ))ermit them to reside in those placort, much les.s 
 to erect buildings or other immovable pnjpi.'rty. 
 
 " . . . . 2. Having, for the benelit of tlie American 
 Company, excluded all loreigm.'vs from Kauicliatka ami 
 Okhotsk, iiiid prohibited tliem from engaging in trade and 
 from hunting and fishing in all the waters of Knstern 
 Siberia, the Government fully ('xpects that the Comi)any, 
 on its pait, will hold itself responsible for supplying these 
 regions with all necessaries." 
 
 TIk! letter of the 23rd April, 1820, from the 
 Company, as in the United States' Case, shows 
 simply tlie positioQ which, it is admitted, tlie 
 Company desired to maintain, and which, doubt- 
 less, promoted the issue of the Ukase. 
 
 In the following year, however, the contentions 
 set up in this coraiiunication fell, as tlie former 
 claim Vjascd upon them had fallen. 
 
 A comparison of translLtion is again given : — 
 
 (As in I'nited States' Case.) 
 
 " As .siion as the Imperial Government ascertained that 
 the contiacts made were in open violation of the privi'eges 
 granted the Company, it [injliibited at. once all foreigners 
 not only from settling in Kamcliatka or Okhotsk, but also 
 from all intercourse with those regions, enjoiniuj' the 
 authorities to maintain the strictest surveillance over their 
 movements. Basing your own action upon this proceeding 
 on the part of our highest protector, you as {.'nniinander of 
 all our Colonies must prohibit with eipial .^tiitncss all 
 foreigners I'l^im engaging in any inlercoun-:e or tnide with 
 native inhabitants, as well as from visiting the waters 
 frequented by sea-otters and fur-seals, over which our 
 operations extend, under the? i)eiialty of the most .sev(,'re 
 measures, including the conliscatinn of ships and the 
 imprisonment of crews engaged m this illegal trallic. You 
 must act with the greatest severity in eases wlu'ro 
 foreigner have .sold to the natives arms, powder, and le.id 
 They must be made to uudersUinJ that their presence in 
 
 (British translation.) 
 
 " 2. The authorities of Irkutsk are to be instructed not 
 to allow any foreigner, unless he has become a Ru.ssian 
 subject, to enter a .Merchant Guild, or to settle at Kamt- 
 chatka or Okhotsk, and they are not to jiermit any foreign 
 merchant-vessel to trade at those places under any 
 circumstances, or to enter the ports of Flastern Siberia 
 except in Civse of distress, in which case sucl. vessel is not 
 to b'^ allowed to unload any part of her cargo, or 
 endeavour to dispose of it, und(!r pain of confiscation of 
 the .ship and cargo. Furtbemiore, the Knglishman Davis 
 at Okhotsk and Dobello's agent in Kamtchatku are to be 
 informed, through your oflicials, that the Government 
 refuses thorn permission to remain at those places, or to 
 build houses or hold real property there ; the local authori- 
 ties shall afford them all projier facilities for disposing of 
 their property and leaving the country. 
 
 ' .... 2. Having, for the benefit of the American 
 Company, excluded all foreigners from Jtamtchatka and 
 Okhotsk, and forbidden them even to come to those 
 places to trade, the f iovernment expects that the Company, 
 on its part, will assist in providing those places with all 
 necessaries." 
 
 United Slates' 
 Case, p. 47 ; aud 
 Anpendix, vol. i, 
 p. 5J. 
 
 (British Translation.) 
 
 " In view of the fact that the Gcvemmcnt hai! perceived 
 that these schemes would have done much harm to the 
 Company, and has jirohibited (oreigiiers not only from 
 settling, b>it also from trading, at Kamlchatkii and Ok- 
 hotsk, where there tire estalilishcil authorities, and where 
 a surveillance can l)e exercised, it is your duly, as the 
 Manager of the Colony, to use your best endeavours to 
 carry out His Iui]ierial Maji -ity's orders, by strictly pro- 
 hibitriig tlie foreigners who may visit the Colony from 
 engaging in a trallic with the liulians, and, in eo.se any 
 of ihciu violate the neguUtions, not to be afroid to arrest 
 the buhl adventurers and seize their ships, if they carry on 
 a iralUc injurious to the Company's interests at places, or 
 on isl.inds. orcujiied by it, nod ispeiially if they supply 
 the Indians with Brmn, powder, aud lead. You should not 
 even allow them to enter your ports nnless you lind it 
 neces.sary to buy scunctliiiig from tlieui which the Company 
 urgently rei^ iire.s. In u word, you shouil udojit toward! 
 
S7 
 
 these adventurous traders such an attitude as it is proper 
 for the Governor of all the places occupied by the Company 
 to assume." 
 
 t>e instructed not 
 ;come a Russian 
 
 settle at Kamt- 
 Tmit any foreign 
 ices under any 
 Eastern Siberia 
 iicli vessel is not 
 
 her cargo, or 
 >f confiscation of 
 nglisliman Davis 
 ;liatka are to be 
 :hu Government 
 ios(5 [ilaccs, or to 
 be local autliori- 
 I for disposing of 
 
 ' the American 
 ilamtchatka and 
 come to those 
 lat the Company. 
 e places with all 
 
 nt has perceived 
 ch harm to the 
 
 not only from 
 sbatkii and Ok- 
 itics, and whire 
 ur duty, as the 
 ; endeavours to 
 
 by strictly pro- 
 le Colony from 
 nd, in case any 
 
 afraid to arrest 
 
 if they carry on 
 'Mts at places, or 
 )' if Ihcy siipjily 
 
 You should not 
 [less you find it 
 ch the Company 
 1 a<Io])t toward! 
 
 United States' 
 Case, p. 51, 
 
 Ibid., p. 42. 
 Ibid., p. 50. 
 
 Ibid., p. Sr. 
 Seop. 113 <•' ;, 
 Hritiih Cms, .'i> to 
 Kustia'a interi.reta- 
 tion of lipr maritime 
 rights after 
 1824-25. 
 British Cane, p. 65. 
 
 our waters ia contrary to our laws, and that they will never 
 be admitted to any port unl&ss you or your subordinates 
 convince yourselves that aucb is necessary for the saving 
 of life. In a word, you must preserve an attitude in full 
 accord with the views of the Imperial Government on this 
 subject, and protect against all intruders the domain of 
 land and water granted to us by grace of the Em- 
 peror, and necessary for our continued existence and 
 prosperity." 
 
 From the references in the United States' Case, 
 it appears that the Russian Archives have heea 
 searched in vain for an instance of action taken 
 undtT the instructions from the Board of 
 Administration of the Company set out in the 
 text. 
 
 The statement is made in the United States' 
 Case tliat there is " no record " of hunting or 
 trading by foreigners in Behring Sea. 
 
 The existence of traders in this sea has already 
 been sliown ; but until whaling developed in the 
 Northern waters, there was little inducement to 
 visit this sea. 
 
 The record between 1824 and 1825 of the 
 visits to Behring Sea by whalers and traders tells 
 with effect against the argument of the United 
 States based on the statement above, applied to 
 the periotl anterior to the Treaties between Great 
 Britain and Russia and bet^v;>cn the United 
 States and Russia. 
 
 After insisting tiiat under tlio Ukase of 1709 
 Russia prevented foreign vessels from hunting or 
 trading in Behring Sea, and having conti uded 
 that the Ukase of 1821 was declaratory of exist- 
 ing rights extending tlie Russian claim south to 
 latitude 51°, and that Russia's exclusive rights i'l 
 Behring Sea were recognized in 1824 and 182B, 
 the Aeent of the United States, with the record 
 of whalers and traders before him, is forced to 
 the admission that, subsequently to this Conven- 
 tion, in the latter years, Russia— 
 "never sought to prevent vessels from passing through 
 Behring Sea in order to reach the Aretie Ocean, nor did 
 she always strictly enfoiTO the proliibition of whaling 
 witliin thi> distance of 100 miles from its .chorea." 
 
 The opinion of tlie Russian Foreign Office in 
 184.7 was that thore was no right under the 
 Ukaseof 1821- 
 
 " to exclude foreign ships from that part of the great ocean 
 which separates the eastern shore of Siberia from the 
 uorth-western -here "f America ,' 
 
fi 
 
Caae, p, 4'J. 
 
 and the British Case contains a long list of 
 vessels which resorted to these waters so soon as 
 whaling developed in that part of the world. 
 
 Nevertheless, the United States' Case says of United States' 
 the Ukase of 1821 :— 
 
 " The only effect which could have been intended by 
 that Edict \ipon the coasts and waters of Behring Sea and 
 the Aleutian Islands was to strengtlien and confirm the 
 jurisdiction theretofore exercised by Russia, and tliis is 
 made clearly to appeal' from the official documents of that 
 period," &c. 
 
29 
 
 Unite.! State.' d (1). Neither in the protests, negotiations, 
 
 C«ie, p. 56. ^^^ Treaties is any reference found to Bchring 
 
 Sea. 
 ibia , p. 57. d (2). In the resulting Treaties no reference is 
 
 made to this (Russian) jurisdiction so far as it 
 related to Bchring Sea, although it is expressly 
 and conspicuously renounced as to the Tacilic 
 Ocean. 
 Ibid., p. 51 ««,.7. In the review of the Treaties of 1821-25, the 
 United States insist that the discussions pre- 
 ceding them, and the Treaties also, referred 
 only to " tiic maritime dispute " and to " the 
 territorial dispute relating to the north-west 
 coast." 
 
 Prcsumahly, this north-west coast is any one 
 of the various definitions hereinbcforo mentioned, 
 outside of Bchring Sea. 
 
 AVith a question of the right on the part of 
 the United Stati •* to control that part of the 
 North Pacific no-.v known as Bchring Sea, the 
 ahovc premises would not, it is submitted, be 
 fatal to the British contention ; as, however, these 
 questions liave been raised, and are before the 
 Tribunal in connection with the general subject 
 of exclusive jurisdiction in this sea, they will be 
 further examined. 
 
 The United States have not referred at any 
 length to the important United States' documents 
 toucliing these Treaties. 
 
 Tlipy are mentioned in the British Case, and 
 tlicy distinctly show that the United States denied 
 rights, when claimed by llussia, to any part of 
 the continent of America. It may be admitted 
 that ]Mr. .Vdams was chiefiy concerned in the 
 preservation of the rights enjoyed at the time by 
 United States' citizens on the coast south of the 
 Aleutian archipelago, and was ready to agree 
 upon a conventional boundary which would give 
 Russia control of and rights upon the northern 
 part of the continent. 
 
 The archives of the United States, however, 
 afford ample proof that upon good grounds 
 Mr. Adams combated with force what he termed 
 Rnssinn "pretensions" of authority upon any 
 part of 'h(! American continent. 
 
 'ilio Ukase, while clearly covering and in- 
 eluding Bchring Sea, did not refer to it in 
 terms. 
 
 [813] I 
 
 Drltisli Case, p. 50. 
 
I 
 
30 
 
 The protests against the Ukase, however, 
 excepted no portions of it. 
 
 The British protests have been shown to have Britith Cu«.p. 41. 
 covered as mtieli as the objectionable Ukase. It 
 is contended by the United States tliat the 
 omission of a reference to Behriiig 8ca in the 
 Treaties between the United States and Russia, 
 and Great Britain and Russia, i)roves tliat 
 Behring Sea was intentionally excluded from 
 the operations of t.ieso Conventions. 
 
 Vt'crc this case even iio put, iL hull remains for 
 the United States to show the law and i)racticc 
 of nations vested exclusive authority over that 
 sea in Russia, Ttlien she claimed to own the 
 eastern and western shores, and now in the 
 United States, when she owns only the shore 
 upon one side only. 
 
 There is abundant evidence! to show that 
 Behring Sea was covered by the Treaty. 
 
 But M. I'oletica, in opening the discussion 
 with the United States, the 2Sth Tebruary, 1S22, 
 United States' Appendix I, p. 133, distinctly 
 referred to Behring Sea as part of the I'acific 
 Ocean. Russia's possessions in the Pacific Ocean 
 extend, he says, from Behring Strait to lati- 
 tude 31°, 
 
 The negotiations continued for two years, and 
 ended in an Agreement that Great Britain should 
 be free to navigate and fish " in any part of the 
 Pacific Ocean." Wliere is the proof that Russia 
 in 1823 attached a dillerent and much more 
 restricted meaning to those words than in 
 1825 ? 
 
 There is no intimation or hint to that effect in 
 all the negotiations with England or with the 
 United States. It was for Russia to draw the 
 distinction, and reserve her jurisdiction over 
 Behring Sea if she intended or wished to do so, 
 but the correspondence leaves no room for doubt 
 either that the whole maritime jurisdiction 
 ckimed was objected to and abandoned, or as to 
 what Gi-eat Britain's answer would have been 
 to an attempt to retain any part of it. 
 
 The assertion made is that the objections tr u^^,^ „f J82i. 
 that Edict of 1821 were inspired by the claim of 
 jurisdiction over large portions of tlic Pacific 
 Ocean, as distinguished from Behring Sea, and 
 by the conflicting claims to the coast south of 
 55 degrees of north latitude, over %v'hieh Russia 
 then, for the first time, sought to extend exclu- 
 sive authority. It is said that this is shown by 
 
31 
 
 tlio forroHpondonce which f^rnw out, of the pro- 
 t( sts, and that the history of tho j)eriod and the 
 locality, tho discussion which followed the Ukase, 
 and the Treaties n'sultiii;,', attest that the; ohjeet 
 both of tlie United States and Great lirilain was 
 to maintain their claims to that part of tho coast 
 and to tlie full navigation of the ocean which 
 washed it. 
 
 It is well to rememhcr what was the state of 
 allaifs as reijards llshini^ and tlie hunting of seals 
 in tlie territory covered hy it at tlie time of its 
 passing. 
 
 The transactions of the Russian - American 
 Company had heen 1<rpt strictly secret. Their 
 right to tlie PrihylolV Islands was unquestionahle, 
 and the superior advantages or riches of that sea 
 as regards tlie fisheries or fnr-scals were unknown 
 to foreigners. 
 
 ^Ir. Jilaiiie, in his despatch dated tho 17th 
 Deceniher, 1890, says : — 
 
 " As 11 iimtt(>r of liistory, tliore was no trade and no 
 navi'^iitifiii (except the navigutidn of explorers) liy the 
 United States and Clieiit Britain in tiie Bihriiig Sea in 
 17SJ, or even at the time tliese Treaties were nego- 
 tiated." 
 
 There can he no douht, however, and none is 
 suggested, as to what rights tho Ukase actually 
 claims. 
 
 It asstimes to grant the ptirsuits of commerce, 
 whaling, and fishing e.vclusively to Russian 
 suhjects from ]3chring Sea to latitude 51°, and to 
 prohibit foreign vessels from approaching the 
 coast there claimed within iess than 100 miles, 
 and whatever Russia may have intended by the 
 subsequent Treaties, which will be spoken of 
 hcieaiter, it seems clear that no part of this 
 claim was admitted, but that the whole of the 
 jurisdiction, which is plainly asserted, was as 
 plainly protested against and denied. 
 Uuited Slates' On tlie part of the United States Jfr. Adams, 
 
 on the 22nd July, 1823, in writing to Mr. 
 iliddleton, their Ambassador at St. I'etersburgh, 
 defined accurately the claim made as extending 
 from the luth degree of north latitude on the 
 Asiatic side to the latitude of iJl" north on the 
 American coast, and as as-sumiiig the right of 
 interdicting the navigation and fishery of all 
 other nations to the extent of 100 miles from the 
 whole of that coast; and in reference to this 
 
 Casf. p. 50. 
 
^UHH 
 
 32 
 
 assumption of jurisdiction he declared, "The 
 United States can admit no part of these claims,'* 
 
 Sfuch comment and argument has been made 
 upon this statement ; but, having regard to the 
 material upon which it was made, and to 
 Mr. Adams' other letters, it would seem to have 
 expressed his exact meaning, and to deliiie accu- 
 rately the position assumed both by the United 
 States and (Irot ih-itain. 
 
 It can by no conslruction he made consistent 
 with an intention to admit any definite part of 
 the claim. 'l"ho Russians, in cIFcct, said : — 
 
 " We own t!u- AiiiiTican coasl to lutiliulu 51°, and 
 prohibit you from coniiiij; williin UK) iiiili;s of it." 
 
 To which Mr. Adams replied: — 
 
 "We do nut aihnit citlki- yoiu- ilaiiii of owiicrsiiiii or 
 your riglit to exclude u.s." 
 
 In the Confidential Memorandum j)repared by Britiah C«se, 
 Mr. ilid.lletou lor the inspection of the Russian Al'P™«'».^»l' ". 
 Emperor (see Am. For. Rel.-itii ms, vol. v, 
 p. Mi)), and forwarded to ^fr. Adams on the Ist 
 Doct.-mher, 1823, he states as the principle agreed 
 to by all jiiiists, that real occupation only 
 can give the rights to the projjcrty and to ♦he 
 sovercictnty of an unoccupied country ■■ wiy 
 discovered : — 
 
 "It is iiecessiiry, tlierefori'," lie i)roe«'ds to sny, "to See toI t, 
 i'Xuiiiille the two Jioiiita of fact : — Am. For. Rfl. 
 
 " Ist. If till! country to the south and east of liehring 
 Straits as far a.s the olsl de','ree of north lutilnde i.s found 
 strictly unoe, uj.jed. 
 
 " I'ud. If Iheri' lias been latterly a real occuptition of 
 till." vast lerrilury," 
 
 Ue then states that the only establishment on 
 this side of the OOth dcgnso was that on the 
 Island of Sitka (more than G degrees from the 
 soulliern limit fi.'Ced by the Uka.se), and adds : — 
 
 " The coneln.-iioii which must neires.sarily result fnnn 
 thi'se facts </o,,< not ,ijtpr„,- to .^lnlUth that the ti'nitory in 
 Hui^tion had been leyiiiniately incoriwrateil with the 
 RnsHJan Knipiru." 
 
 It is thus apparent that the title to the territory 
 claimed, or to any definite part of it, was re- 
 garded by the Fnitcd States as by no means 
 iudi.spulahle, .-md the language of .Mr. Adams 
 very fairly eiprr-sses this view, ^hile not in 
 terms denying tint Russia may have a right to 
 some part of the territory, he declines to admit 
 
H^IPJ. 
 
 33 
 
 it, leaving Russia to furnish the proof, though 
 willing, as he aftorwards says, to settle the 
 territorial elaim only at 55 degrees north latitude. 
 Claim or raaritinic But whatever may ho argued as to ]\Vr. Adams' 
 juri.<)iciion. language with regard to tlie territnri'il title, it \i 
 
 impossihle to find any admission throiigliout the 
 correspondence, cither expn.'ssed or imiilied, on 
 the part of Great Britain or the United States, of 
 the maritime jurisdiction claimed, or to (luestion 
 that it was cmpiiatically denied without reference 
 to the extent or validity of the title to the coast. 
 Russia did not pretend to rest her claiir to the 
 100 miles limit upon any other ground tlian her 
 right to treat Behring Sea as a mare clausum, as 
 appears from :M. Poletica's letter already referred 
 to of the 28th Fehruary, 1822, a claim which was 
 then regarded hy Mr. Adams as hardly worthy r' 
 answer, and is now d(>finitely disclaiiiird. It was 
 not then suggested that, as regards Behring Sea, 
 any reason could he assigned, a;art from this 
 doctrine, on which tiic limit of ItiO miles could 
 he u])hel(l, and ns to the prei-cdents referred to in 
 tlic United States' Case, p. 40, it is sufTicient to 
 say that they are founded ujion Treaiies which 
 alone could support Hiem. Tliey we\c mot with 
 good-natured ridicule hy Mr. Middletou in his 
 inteniew with the Governor of Siheria, reported 
 in his letter to Mr. Adams of tiie 8th .Vugust, 
 1822, which, in hi> view, was a trjatnu-uf both 
 appropriate! and elTcctive. 
 
 The extension of trade along the coast farther 
 north was not contemplated, and tlie limit of 
 territorial ownership north of Alaska was re- 
 garded as of comparatively little imi»)rtaiicc. As 
 to it alone, g\iarde<l carerully tVoni inchiding any 
 other of ihe rights claimed, Mr. Adams was 
 willing to agree to a houndary-liiie of .J5\ 
 (Adams, 22nd . I uly, 1823, p. 1.) 
 
 Mr. .Stratford Canning, in a letter of the 3rd 
 Fclmiary, 1822, reporting a cduversation to 
 Mr. Adams, wlio g.ave him to un(hTstan(l that it 
 was not the intentiim id' the American (iovern- 
 ment to admit the claim of Russia, adds : — 
 
 ■His .ibjfili.Mi nplifiirs M W imiiv ii.iilunlaily to ttie 
 exclusion of lorolHii vcasrU I., so great ii JisUuKe from 
 Hliore." 
 
 The King's advocate, to wliom the VAkl wa.s 
 referred for re]i.)rt, treats the ohjcct of the Ukase 
 
 as heing — 
 
 " to^obtiun fpiiu His Uriliumic. Atnj.'My's il.ivi'ranient an 
 
 (li!kiiowlnl;,MiK'iit (if I.Tiiloiiiil riylils wliicli aiv iissiim.' i by 
 
 [8W] K 
 
I jiiHiv 1 1 „j,i I.I ii| pfawrnr' 
 
 ■ tJiiy,' WJ ■— c ■ ^ ■ 
 
34 
 
 Kiissia ovt'f a portion of soa that mnj' bccoinu of great im- 
 piirtiiuct' with Inference to the trade of that part of the 
 World and the discoveries whicli are now directed to that 
 ciimrter." 
 
 This can liardly refer to tlie Pacific Ocean, or {j,i,|,i| (-^.^ 
 to the territory south of latitude G0°, where no Appendii, vol. ii, 
 further discoveries remained to 1)0 made. The o '[■ , 
 
 nee thi:s It'ttrr, 
 
 opinion of Lord Stowell of the 2(!th Uecember, 20t; November, 
 1821, points out tliat tlie mere discovery of Appl,„"f ^'l^i"'' 
 a coast cannot t;ive a right to the cxchisive P- ■■^• 
 possession of a wliole extensive continent to which 
 it belongs, and less to the seas that adjoin to a 
 very considerable extent of distance. 
 
 With these opinions in his possession, Lord 
 Londonderry wrote on the 18th January, 1822, 
 that His Britaniiie Majesty was not prepared to 
 admit that the ships of friendly Powers, even 
 supposing an iinq\ialilied sovereignty was found 
 to appertain to the Imperial Crown in those vast 
 and very iij;icrfeetly occupied territories, could, 
 by tlicackno'vledged laws of nations, bo excluded 
 from navigating within the distance of 100 
 Italian miles, as therein laid down, from the 
 coast ; the exclusive dominion of which is 
 assumed (but, as llis Majesty's Governmi.nt 
 concedes, in error) to belong to his Imperial 
 Majesty the Emj)cror of All the llussias. 
 
 In a letter from the Hudson Bay Company to British Caw, 
 Mr. G. Canning, of the 25tii September, 1822, it App-'mlii. vol. ». 
 is said this Company has trading establishments 
 on the Mackenzie River, whi(;]i falls into the 
 Frozen Ocean as far north as (iO" 30', wliich carry 
 on a trade with those Indians who inhabit the 
 country to the west of that river and to the north 
 of CO" of north latitude, and a Memorandum is 
 inclosed purporting to show on what slight 
 grounds the Russian claim rested. 
 
 The I)uk(> of Wellington was iippointcd to 
 represent England at the Verona Conference, and 
 these opinions, with the letter and Memorandum 
 nu'utioned, were sent to him by Mr. George 
 Canning on the 27tli September, 1822, with a 
 letter, in which it is said : — 
 
 " EuliRliteucd stfttftsnieii and jiiri.'jH liave lonf; hfld as 
 insipnificant all titlo.s of territory that are not (jtroiindcd on 
 ■ii:tual occupation 
 
 " I have little doubt, therefore, Imt that the public noii- 
 lii alion of the claim to con;ddcr the portions of the ocean 
 indiidcd lu'lwci II tbo adjoiiiiiij,' c<ia.st.s of America and the 
 Kussian Empire a,i a nuirc clnumim, and to extend the 
 
35 
 
 British Case, 
 Appendix, vol ii. 
 p. 25. 
 
 excluaive territorial jiirisiliction of Russia to lOi) Italian 
 miles from tliut const, will be ]iiil)Iiely rocallod." 
 
 The Duke of Wellington, thus instructed, gave 
 to Count Nesselrode a Mcr.iomndum on the 
 17th Oetoher, 1822, to which Count Nesselrode 
 answered, on the 27th November, in substance, 
 justifying the Russian elain-s. 
 
 In reply to this the Duke, on the 2Sth 
 November, deeliiied to Ibuii;' on that paper the 
 negotiations for a settlement, aJding that they 
 objected to the Ukase on the grounds that His 
 [mperial Majesty assumes thereby an exclusive 
 sovereignty in North America, of which we are 
 not j)repared to acknowledge tlie existence or the 
 extent, and tliat llis Imperial Majesty thcrol)y 
 excludes from a certain eousideral)le extent of 
 the open sea vessels of other nations: — 
 
 " We contend," lie says, " thiit the assum])tiiin of this 
 power is contrary to the law (jf nations, nnJ we laiir.jt find 
 u ne;,'otiation n]«)n a paper in wiiieh it is a^'ain broadly 
 asserted." 
 
 Hid., p. 54. 
 
 Both these Memoranda having been, by 
 arrangement, considered as non-avenus, the nego- 
 tiations were renewed. 
 
 In the course of them, the question of territorial 
 boundary being found diirictilt to arrange. Count 
 Nesselrode stated that if it was not completed he 
 saw no necessity for an aiireement respecting a 
 maritime (juestion. This suggestion Sir C. Bagot 
 met, as is stated in his letter to Mr. George 
 Canning of tiie 17th :March, lS24i— 
 
 " hy e.xplainini,' very di.'^tinelly, biith to him and to 
 M rolelica, thai the niaritinie preten.sion of Itns-iia was 
 one which, viulntinj,' as it did the tirst and mo.st e.stn- 
 lilished prin( iples iif all puhlic uiaritime law, admitted 
 neither of explaiiatinn nor modification, an<l that every 
 l!(iV(!rnnient considered themselves |ios,ses.seil of a clear 
 enyiifjeiiicnt on llie part nf I'lissia to retract in some way 
 or oth'T a pretension which conld nciihcr lie justified nor 
 enforced." 
 
 Ibid., p. 60. Mr. George Canning, on the 29th May, 1821, 
 
 writing to Count Lieveii, snys that be shall be 
 able shortly to give to His Miijesty's Ambassador 
 at St. retersl)urgh such instructions a.^ shall meet, 
 in a great de^jn-e, tlie wishes of the Russian 
 Court, and adds : — 
 
 Ibid., p. 61. " We take fm ;;raiitc 1 that llie exclusive claims of iiavi- 
 
 ({atiouaudjiui.-idiction over the North I'acilic Ocean, which 
 
' ■■ s. 
 
80 
 
 were first formulated in tlip Ukaso of September 1821, are 
 *n In' altogctiier withdrawn." 
 
 It is to be remarked that in the first draft Britiih Ca<o, 
 Convention inclosed by Mr. G. Canning to ^%°^"' ""'• "' 
 Sir C. Bagot on the 12th July, 182-1, Article I 
 purported to give to the subjects of each Power — 
 
 " the right of free navigation along thi' whole extent uf the 
 Pacific Ocean, comjirehending llic sea within Hehring 
 Straits." 
 
 It was suggested by Count Lieven that this 
 condition, an entirely now (i ■>, might cause the 
 Imperial Government hesitating in admitting 
 it— 
 
 " witlioiit modifying the actual stntenient so as not to Ibid., p. 66. 
 
 expHS' t!ic> coasts of hirAslnlic possessions on tlic Arctic 
 Occnii. Id ilillieulties tliat niiglil arise owing to visits by 
 foreign vessels." 
 
 The objection, therefore, related wholly to the 
 straits and the Russian Asiatic possessions beyond 
 them, and not to Behring Sea. 
 
 In answer, Jlr. Canning on the 24th February, 
 182 1, remarked that a — 
 
 " Power wliii li could tliiuk of making tlie Pacific a mart ibid., p. 65. 
 cliiusuin niiglil be su]iposed capable of a disposition to 
 apply the fMine character to a .strait eomprdicndcd 
 between twu shores of wliicli it becomes tlie undisputed 
 owner." . 
 
 The Russian Plenipotentiaries, however, dis- 
 claimed any intciition of maintaining any exclu- 
 sive claim tu the navigation of the straits or the 
 seas to the north of them, and this was accepted 
 as satisfactory. 
 
 Mr. George Canning cm the Stli December, 
 1821, tliere having been nuich dilllculty in con- 
 cluding the arrangement, writes to Mr. Stratford 
 Canning, the British Plenipotentiary for that 
 purjjose : — 
 
 " It is coni)iarativcly indifferent to us whether we ,, . , 73.75 
 
 hasten or postpone all (pieslions res]iecliiig tlie liniils of 
 territorial posses.sion on tliij continent of America, but tlie 
 pretension of tin? Russian Ukase of 1821 to exelusivo 
 diuniiiiiin ov r the Pacilic could not cuiilinue longer 
 uurepcaleil without compelling us to take some measure of 
 further effectual remonstrance against it. 
 
 " You will therefore take care, in the lirst instance, to 
 repress any atlcnii'l to give this change to the cliaracter of 
 the negotiations, and will declare without reserve that the 
 
c 
 
 :^7 
 
 |piMlll tn wllirll mIuIiI' lllr >^i .llill lllli' nl ill.' IItiIU'Ii (InVl-lM- 
 
 iiiciit ami till' Ji'iiliiusy ol tin' IJrilisli iiaiiuii aUarli any 
 ureal iiii]inrtaiK'i' is tlic> ilniiif.' away (in a inamu'r as liltlc 
 ilisa^'rci'alilc In llii'^sia as possiMi') n( tlio I'lTi'il nl' tln' I'kasi! 
 iif IHJl. . . . TiiiMij;lil of tin; sulijucts iif His liiitauiiie 
 Majesty tn iiavif;nte frut'ly in tlie I'nc'ilic cannot be held as a 
 iiiatlcr 111' imliiV^i'Mi'r IVuni any Powit. Ilavin;,' once lioen 
 pnlilicly c|ni'stii)ni'i|, it ninsl lie ]iulili(-ly iiiknii\vle.l;.'e(l. 
 ... It ii'inains (inly in reiajiitulalinn tn leniiml ynu of 
 the origin ami ])iineip.lcs of the wlmle ne;;iiiiatii)n. It is 
 not on (lUi- jiart essentially a nii;ntiali<iM alion'. limits. It 
 is llie ijemanil nf tlie n']ieal nf an nlfen^ive ami nnjusti- 
 liaMe assuinption nf nvilnsivi' jnrisilirtinii nver an oiean of 
 nnniensnrcd e\liiil, Imt a dcniaml i|nalilied and mitigated 
 in its manner, in nrde" that it-* justice may lie neknow- 
 ledu'ed and salislied witliont soreness and hnmiliation on 
 the part nf l.'nssia. ... If thi' li rntnrial arranu'einents are 
 not, .sal isfiKtorv \vi' are leady In |i(isl]ione (hem, and tn eon- 
 'lude find sign the e.ssenlial part — that whiuli relalea tn 
 navigation nlnne— adding an Article .stipnlatinL' to nego- 
 tiate uhiail territorial limits liereal'tci." 
 
 It would seem very ))l!tii(, tlici-croi'o, tliat the 
 cltiiiii ti) iiijii'itiinc jiirisiliclioii was tlio uiie to 
 whicii l)otli iliii^iadil ami the Uditcd States 
 attai'lii'd iiiijKiftai.cc ; that airaitist it the ])rotcst8 
 wliicli were i'iii|>l(atif and utKiiialilied were 
 tiiaiiily directed ; aitd that they demanded and 
 obtained not a jiartial, hut a total and uncon- 
 ditional adjustment of it. 
 
 While 15<'hiiiin; S(>a is not named in teims in 
 the Treatic'S, <fee., the ai'i^ument on this point is 
 against the position of the Uniteil States, since 
 the Treaty of 1825 (Russia and Great Britain) 
 expressly deals with the waters of the Pacific 
 Ocean from l5ohring Straits south. 
 
 Article 1 covers '•any part of the ocean, 
 commonly called the Pacirie Ocean.'' 
 
 Article IT is utdiinited in its a])pli('ation to the 
 continent of Ameiiea. 
 
 Article 1 1 1 refers to the '• coast of the con- 
 tinent " from the line of hoiindary l)Ct\»t'eii 
 Russian and Rritish possessions, which runs from 
 ahotit 5 1° 10' to the rrozen Ocean. 
 
 Article All provides that lor ten years Russian 
 and British vessels shall he at liberty to mutually 
 frc'picnt all inland seas the gulfs, havens, and 
 creaks, on the coast mentioned in Article III, for 
 the jinrposes of lishing and of trading. 
 
 Therefore, the Convention "f lS2r) iK)t only 
 setthul the maritime rights of the nations in 
 Hehring Sea. but secured the lilicrty to trade at 
 all ports therein ;is well. 
 
 r8-43l L 
 
88 
 
 'I'lif privilegt! was extended liy Treaty on tlie 
 lltli .lumiary, 1843, and attain on the .I2th 
 January, 1859, for ten years. 
 
 It is said that tiie niaritinio dispiito wns settled 
 by the first elaiise of the Conventions, and that it 
 is based upon the [llrd Article of the Coii- 
 Tciition uf 17!Hi lietween (Ireat Hritain and 
 Spain. 
 
 There is. ^howi-ver. an important dilTenniee 
 opposed to the Unili'd Slates in this resjieet. 
 
 In ihe ."sp.'inish Treaty the territory was 
 boiuided by llie n;iters of the I'aeilie Ocean, 
 where it included no other sea or subdivision. 
 Tho Article, in thai case, refers very |)roperly to 
 the " I'aeific Ocean " only. 
 
 In tlu' Conventions of IS'Jl and |s2.">, the 
 parties had been discussing a claim which in 
 terras ran from Hebriiii; Strait down into the 
 main waters of the North I'aeilie. This ocean 
 was separated from I lie .\rctic by IJehrintf 
 Strait. (!eoi,'rapbers, historians, discoverers, and 
 exjilorers of the day and subsequently have 
 referred to the walerof K;imtcbatka Sea, Hebring 
 Sea, and all the waters between the Straits and 
 to the Antarctic? Ocean, as waters of the North 
 Pacilie or South Sen. 
 
 The Ukase of 1S21 was abandoned, and in 
 the laniruatfc of the Treaties care was taken to 
 mak(> the retreat of Hnssia as uinileasant as 
 possible : — 
 
 "We ncgiitiatiMibdiit li-nitniy to cuvim- llic rtimmstraiire 
 upon ]iriiicii>lo,"- (CaiMiiii'j In CaiiiiiriL', 4lli Id'cciiilicr, 
 1824) 
 
 See Sumner't 
 •peecli, ISrilltli 
 Cai«, Tol. i, p. 51. 
 
 United Slates' 
 Caar. p. 5?. 
 
 Cnnnlii); to l!ago4, 
 Itritisti Cane, 
 Appciidiz, io\. ii, 
 p 32. 
 
 I).'if>ot to Canning, 
 iliiil., p. 40. 
 
 Cnnnin;; to Ilagol, 
 iliid., pp. 46-4y. 
 
 CnnninK toCunning, 
 ibid., pp. 72-78. 
 
 The Con\ention, therefore, drop|)ed the precise 
 limitations n.sed in the I'kase, but, w ith Article 1 1 1 
 of the Nootka Sound Convention before them, 
 the negotiators took care to enlarge the meaning 
 of "I'acific Ocean,"' and .so u.sed the words 
 "commonly called the I'aeilie Ocean," obviously 
 to include every jwrtion of the high seas which 
 the I'kase covered. The words are : " In any 
 part of the Great Ocean, commonly called the 
 Pacific Ocean or South Sea," in the llussian 
 '• Convention," while the corresponding words in 
 the Sj)anisb Article are simply: "In the Pacific 
 Ocean or in the South Seas." 
 
 In addititm to what has beiMi said upon this 
 subject in the British Case, it may here be added 
 that neither the name of Behring Sea, Sea of 
 
80 
 
 Kamtclmlka, nor :iiiy utiicr siilidiviHicpii of tlio 
 North Pncil'if ii|i|>cars in the Cliiii-U-r of 17'.>1*- 
 United Siau*' Iriilccd, tlii' waters of that sea and tlic watere 
 
 C..» App...,dn, i„,|„^ Nvhcicin lie Ihi' Kurih- Ishmds, arc. in 
 
 rol. i, p. 14 
 
 tin- I'li'sl |)ara!,'ra|)h nT the Chaitcr, calh'd tlic 
 " Noi'lli- l'!asli'iii Ocean." 
 
 No name se]iai'ate tVoni thi' i4;eiiei-al term for 
 th(! I'aeilie Mateps is found eitlier in the I'kaso 
 of Paul or of Alexiinih'f. 
 Iliid , p. IC. No disliru't or separate n:inie for sueii a seu is 
 
 found ill the " liuh's eslahhshed for tiio Limits 
 of Naviifation." 
 
 In tlie C(tnlirniation of tlie ('luirter of 1821 the 
 words " Nortii-l'',ast('ru .*«( " are attain applieil to 
 tlio waters of tiie I'aeilie as widl as to the waters 
 
 ••A«»unl of tlie Rui.i.n DiKof.ri.. bBlwMn A.i» .nd „,• „.||,,, |^ ,„,„ l^,,,^,, ,,s Hrhrill!,' Sea. 
 America, * t»7 Williiiu ( oiu. LuDdon, 1hu9. ^ 
 
 — An inspection of the Ma])s in Coxe indi- 
 
 Althoughlhe work qiiotfdalmvc j« not tlic fanicedii ion •« ,.,.(,,^ I,,,... i.n.., neons is file eoiltontion that tllO 
 that cltad In the Use of the LLitedBuui.it U a lourtb •^'"'^' """ < Hon( Oils Is riK umicnuoil Uiai luu 
 
 »di»ion, «naid.r»biy enlarged. words " KasttTii Ocean '' were ever intended to 
 
 apply exclusively to the waters now known as 
 " Hehrinir Sea ;" or that " Nortli-IOastei n Sea" and 
 " I'laslern Ocean" were two iif liie naiiies in most 
 eases used to ileline tii" v,. 'iter of ^('lirinL,' Si!a as 
 distinct from the water of the I'aeilie Ocean. 
 
 Ill the tirst .Maj), it will he seen that the 
 words ■' Ivistern Ocean " are written across tlic 
 waters which divide the Aleutian Islands, no 
 other name heiiii,' ijiven for the waters of the 
 <ireat Oecan lielow, tlionii;li the Kurile Islands 
 appear on the .Ma]). 
 
 In aiiotlier .Ma|) the words " ICastern Ocean " 
 
 are written so that the first word " Kastern " is 
 
 ahove the Aleutian [slands, and the last word 
 
 "Ocean" is helow those islands. 
 
 lliiit»d Siotta' We are, it must 1)(> reniemliered, asked lo 
 
 Ca&p, p. 53. . , ^ ,. 1 • ii i» * 
 
 ' examnie docunients, lound in the liitssiau 
 
 archives only, to iletermine the meaning,' of the 
 words in a Treaty lietwecn Uiissia and (Jreal 
 Britain, and accordin-Jily a letter fi(jin the Imjie- 
 rial Minister of Kinanee addressed to the Board 
 of Administration of the Itussiaii-.Vmerican Com- 
 pany is jiroduced. This only shows in detail the 
 waters from which foreiuii vessids were to he 
 extduded had the views of tlie Company prevailed 
 and the Ukase of 1821 heen iiplndd. Ahoiit this 
 there is no dispute. 
 
 It is sii;iiiticanl that, tlioui;h this letter of 1.S22 
 speaks of an intention to exclusively control "the 
 Sea of Okhotsk, Hehriii;; Sea, and the Sea of 
 Kamtchatka," no atli'inpt to exercise iiudusive 
 control was persisted in, in the ease of any of 
 
 1 
 

40 
 
 tliosf: sciis, until Iss.',^ niiil tlirii only 'in llic prirt 
 of the I'liilcil Sillies in ;i porlicm nl' Ucliriiiu 
 Sea. 'J"li(! letter is I'lirther si;,'nilie;wit in slmwint,' 
 tliat. Ucln'ini!' Se;\ .uid tin- Sea ol' Ivaiiiteiiatka 
 an^ ilicliided luiiler ihe mmiuc ■' North- Eastern 
 Ocean. " 
 
 Tlie words '■ North- I'.astern (Jeean " h.ave lieen 
 seen I o cover tliCM' scms, tin: sr.-i Im-Iiw and out- 
 .side. [I was iiiioIIht name lor Nurlli I'aeilie, as 
 U8e(l in Ihe iliissiarj lioeninents. 
 
 'I'liis letter and I la; lieelaratiou lollowin;; it 
 may eslMliiisli that the Itn^sian ( li>\ernnient in 
 tlie neudtiations wrif not enfh'avourini; to deal 
 fairly with either I'lr I .lited .S|;ites or (ireat 
 Uritjiin. 
 
 It matters little liiav this really wi-. in view 
 of t lie Treaties and t!ic l.-iihiri' suliseciienily to 
 jnodify or eha'.itre thi' lantfnavre Ihereor. 
 
 There oei'urs, in iliU e.iui.eeiion, a sn-jons 
 (lifTerenee lietween the tninslal ion appearint; in 
 tliP Uiiile(l States' Case and Ihe tmnslation of 
 the same doennient as insisted upon in this 
 Counter-Ca.se. 
 
 Tiie par;i!;i-it|>lis an' liidow : — 
 
 (As ill lllr I'llllcil Slulrs' ( int. ) 
 
 " 1. Tlial llaioic Tiiyll vnn .Scroskiiki'ii liii~ Kci-a 
 ■ppdinti'il ni siuit'ssrinr In .M. rulriirn in lli.' ["■siti.iii nl 
 Inipi'iiiii ltii.-<9iaii .\iuliagwtiliit iiinl .Miiiisti i I'liiiipoli'ii 
 tiuiy Id llic I'liitiil Ndilii AiiHTicaii Slates, uml ilial lie 
 liiis iilreadv laKeti Ins ili |iailiiri' lor \Va>liiii^'liiii in milcr 
 
 In cnll'-llll Willi lliu (i.iVrlllliii'llI llii'll- as tn siu'li iiuiasiue^ 
 
 a« iiiav priivc s.itisriir|i.iy in KmiIi. ami iiui I »itli miitiiiil 
 roiiscnt, nviiiiliii;; all I'lirlliir ililtiiiillics cunci'i'iiiiiv; mir 
 aiiitiiid ri>!lit.t in nininiti.iii \iitli our pnssesBiiiiirt nii tlie 
 liortli-wi'«l rnuMt (.1 .\iiirric a His |iriini|.al ni,|c(t will In 
 (ci iilinli-li all raiisc 111' i'.iMi|i| lail on tin' piirl df diir 
 Aiiii'iiiaii rdiiipuiiy I'diiiiriiiii'..' llic iiilnisivi' fiilerprisi' ol 
 ccrt.iiii siilijr. Is dl llir I'liMi.,! .slialca. and al-d to rclirvi' 
 lliciii df a stii'l dipscrvaiicc ul tlir Ivli'l .hili.l iIm- 
 
 ■till .S'pKMIllu'l, ISJI wlllill III in. TV dllirl lv,p,.. I iMIlit 
 
 111' siislaiiii'il. 
 
 '1' III ciirlii llial llai'dii Tiiyll s iiii;jdliiilidii.s iimy In' 
 larilitatdil and iiidiidjil td a spicily rdnchisjiiii, lie jiiui 
 lifi'ii (iiiiii-ihf.l Willi a liaiisiii|il df ilid IIiissiaii-AliU'riciiii 
 Cdinpanv'" mihs as td ihf liiilfs we iiiidd auk llif 
 (idViiiiiiniit III' llic Aiiicricaii I'mti'il .Statrn lo olmiTVu 
 Willi a view id till' III •iiiliiittii.d of Irii'iidly nilcii.imise 
 wiliidiit iiijinv Id iliti -.i.t niliicKii nl diir ('oiiipniiy and 
 ill hi' ol till' ii.MiVd inlialiilaiils nf ilial idiiiiiry. Tlif 
 Hnlcs to III iirnpiisid wdl pidlialily imply tliiil it is im 
 liiii(,'it iKMcHiary In pmlnliit lliu navi^iiili f ldii'i>;ii 
 
 (llritixh tnin.slntion.; 
 
 ■ I I'lariin Tiiyll vnu Soroikerkcn is to Iw appointcil 
 Irii)Mrial llii.ssian Knvny Kxtraofiliiiiuy ami ^!iIli^,l(>r 
 ririiipdliMiliary In llif I lulled States of North Anieriea in 
 pliuM' of M I'dletiia, and is lo pnioird to Wailiiimldii 
 u'illioiil delay, lo conciivt w illi the Amurii-an liovitiinuiil 
 ini'a<<un>!i to lio tukoii hy oiiiiiiion eoiisaiit to |in!vunt any 
 riii'ttier dispute on t.lip milijurt of llii> extent of tin' 
 ii'sjiertive jiirisdiilioie; of |{ii.s.sia anil the I'liili'il .Siali* 
 on till' iiorlli-west eiiMst of Aiiierii'a, lo put an end to llie 
 riiiiiplainls ol' our Aiiiericaii ('iiliiiiii'x of the pMeeediii^'i- 
 III iiTlMiii 1 ili/i'ns of the I'nili'd Stalcn, nnd by tliia uieiins 
 Id iiiako II iiiinrri'ssiiry Id cnfdroe Id tliiMr full I'ltinl tin- 
 Id •.'iilalidiis of ihr llli Srpl. iiil»r, 1K21. whnli wo slioidil 
 dllniwisd jiaM- Id applv ii(;dioii>ly 
 
 • -. Ill oriliT thai Ilaroii Tiiyll may he ranhled tlir iiidf 
 ea-ily 1" mrry out tlii< niissinii inlriisii'd lo Inni. Ihi' 
 l!iiiM<iHit-Aiu<'riejin Coinpany are lo fiiniiHli me im Koon ;us 
 |ios.-ilile Willi a siatoineiil of ilii> iiii>aaiirrs nliiili wu mi^dit 
 oidl upon llir (ioverumeiilof tin- I'mU'il Siittes of Aiiierua 
 Id lake, In onler that Ihi' soiiri .s finiii wlinli tin' Company 
 ill IIM' thuir ri'MMiiie may iini sillier, and in unl<T thai tin' 
 native iiilmliitunls III lliusc H'j^ioiih may not disturh our 
 Siiilnni'iilH hy larryiii;.' on philiiliiitil tniils. Thcw 
 nil' I'lin'.s slioiilil U' of siii'li a nature iik to make it 
 
 .tilliin wlllill 
 eiialilo 113 Id ' 
 iiii'li all e:.lu 
 miisiiliTi'il I' 
 ivliiuli has pn 
 
 nil itif I'lUUt 
 
 lnund nercssi 
 .itliick, anil I' 
 " In eomiiii 
 ■iiatler, llie II 
 ''iiiiipany's 
 
 dOCOUIll df I 
 
 l'iini|>aiiy liiv 
 IkIiiii);, anil 
 nf latitudi' wl 
 iliiiuinionM, »i 
 tLiisioiiH Hueli 
 
 The ll.a.l 
 I'liarttT liraiil 
 I7',''.l lixeil a- 
 iinrtli. unit n» 
 IH'W stations 
 lieloii);!!!); to i 
 lo tliesc two 1 
 that tWd Kn 
 
 lind lilt! 1 1 III I' 
 
 <t4IUeils estalil 
 iintinLMit.lH'); 
 inonlinjj td s 
 
 <-U for I' 
 
 lailioiied in the hlu'l ol thi- iiiintH-esiiwy for ns any loie^ri-r n, insist on ihe disUiiici' 
 
 4lh SeiilenilxT, isai.nnd thai wo will 
 
 laim jiiiisili. sl.ilid ill 111" Rules of the 4tli Sopteinl»'t, 1821, to bo that 
 
 il'inlinh inui' 
 7. That s 
 s IsTia ami o 
 ni/eil by all ll 
 llit'iiftm'saidi 
 i.ii'ntioni'd C 
 ti irilory on 
 .nlj.ireiil .ilai 
 liiiinded iH'ii 
 SiU'ria anil i 
 liii(,dy, Aimi 
 
n l>p appointpil 
 iiiii) Miiii.'iUr 
 mil Aliii't'irA ill 
 In Wil'illillKliih. 
 Ill (illVltllllllllt 
 
 til pri'vunt any 
 
 ■ •XlI'Mt ilf till' 
 
 I'liiti-il Stall'.* 
 I nil mil to till' 
 ho |in«i'i'iliiij,'!> 
 I liy tliia iiKiuiiK 
 
 fill! I'X'.IIll till! 
 
 Iiirli ui! hIioiiIiI 
 
 nliliMJ tlin iiiiir>' 
 I III liiiii. thi' 
 
 • III' IM 8IKIII :ls 
 i'lili'll wu iiii){lil 
 ti'H Ilf Aiiifrii.li 
 I lliM ('iiiii|iiiiiy 
 
 unlir tlmt tin' 
 Kit ilintiiili mil 
 tniil*. TImw' 
 ^ I." mulct' It 
 I tliii illHUllicr 
 rt'it. til 1)0 I hit 
 
 .Mihm wliiih till liiriMyii ^hip may ni lo, hikI such n.s in 
 eiinlile iia to coiiliiip oiirw'lves to <'xi)rfiHin^ u cniifrol ovit 
 iiii'li ail I':. tent of wiil<<r only a." in hy cotiiinoii ciiHtniii 
 n'liriiilTfil r- Ik) iiwirr ihn juri.silictinn nf any I'uwfr 
 which liii.i* pniNi luiiiii of till' sraluiiinl, ami lo llitrniliii'iii;^ 
 I'll til*- '•oiiat Hiirh n sysiHiii ii! «rirvi'illanri' a." iiiiiy In.' 
 iHiiiiil nweMiiry for tho piotcction of our territory fruiii 
 .illai'k, mill for llir prnvi'iili'ili nf illiiit ImiliiiK 
 
 ■' III toiiiiimiiii'utiiij; to III!' till! Kiiii»;riirs nnliTs iii ihm 
 iiiattiT, till! Ilruil of till! Kiiri'inii Olliir il«iiri'.'< that ihf 
 '^iiiipanyH cUiti'iuriit may !«• ai-iompaiiiril liy an lui.'uiali! 
 aodiiiiit of tliii localitiMi wlii-n- ilii- Itii.iiiiaii-Aimiricaii 
 l'.iiii|iany has liitliirto I'MirriMnl ihr rif-hl of hiiiitiiij,', 
 li^hiiij;, anil trailiii|j, u-h wi'II iik an iinli iilioii of tin' par.illrl 
 nf latituili' which can lie lixcd lu* the liirthi'-t limit nf our 
 ilominion.i, withniit yiviiij; riw to r"iiiiin.Hlraiici.» ami pn-- 
 ti'ii^ioiiH Hiich a<i thodi' which hai .1 lately liiitn cvnkiil 
 
 The lleail 111 the Korei'.;!! (Mli.e mliK ihul, whin llii- 
 I'harter (.'ranleil In the liufisiaii-Aniericaii ('iiiii|Kiny in 
 IT'.'ll liveil a.s thin Uninihiry the ."i.'itli ile^Tee nf latilmli- 
 iH'ilh, mill K"^" per.' i :> to the tninpany In i ^tallli^h 
 iii'w stations even hii>:'i, 1 ' this line, except in pK«es 
 licliinniiiR to oilier Powers, noro^i;!n (liivernmi'nt olijeceil 
 to thcHi' two jiointa, hut that, mi the i.tlier haml. it appei rs 
 ih.il Iwn I'lii'.^li-'Ii Cnmp.inii-^. the Nnrth-«e"t lniiipa/i> 
 iiriil the Hiiilson'a Hay rnnipany, have Inii'.i ii.ul tnelin^i 
 •taiions estaWinlieil mi the iim thwcl cn.ist nl the Aniericaii 
 
 niitinniit.ls'giniiiiiK fn.in fi J" north latilinle.uinl '•^ll ndint;. 
 
 innidinj; to smnc accounti, to ."iii" 
 
 I niHHJ Stjti-> 
 
 ClIM, |> .t'l 
 
 (I'.tilish iraiivlalicn ) 
 
 ' 7. That .Hinie llie iliiiiiinimi ol Ifii-^i.i nvi r the r.lime'^ni 
 ■■ Ihtiii mill nvii til. .Mi'iiliaii Ishuiils lia.s loiii,' Uen nio',' 
 Ill/I'll liV all the I'll we h<, there wa." no n'liitmi lor ni'iitionin^ 
 llivafiin'mtidnhmi'i ami iiiliiiiiUiii the Articli'.s of the alsive- 
 i.iinlioiiiil Cmireiilion, wliii h only ref(>i« to the lii.spiiteil 
 iritory on the iiorth-We-'l loa.st of Anierna ai.'l ihi 
 iiljiceiil jlainls, ami thai, ii l\iiin nii this vli-w, l;ii.i»i,i ha- 
 ("iiiiih'il (ivrnianent c.italiliHliiueiiti* Imth mi thenhmis nl 
 SiU'ria mill on the inlamlN of the Ahnitian i;niup, necnr 
 hii){ly, AmL>rii'4iii cili/i iii roiiM not.iiriier the llinl .Vrticle 
 
 41 
 
 linii liVor cnn.stwise waters licymiil the liniil.s acoepleil hy 
 any other Mnrilinie I'ower for the whole of nur coast 
 faciiij? the o|M'ii ocean Over all interior waters, liovvever, 
 mil over all waters incloseil hy Uiissian territor\ , .such iia 
 the Seu of ttkhnlsk, Ilulniii^' .Sea, or llie .'^la of Kami liatka, 
 as well as in nil unlfs, I'ays, anil enluarics within our 
 pii'.ite-.'.iniis llic riL,'hl tn the strictest lontrol will always 
 In' iiiaintaitii'il 
 
 III inforniinn mc nl tin- hi!;h«-'l will mi these pnint.", 
 the Manauini! Chief nf the Ministry of KoreiKn All'aii-, 
 I'Xpp's.se.s the lie.sire to iihtain a full and clear desciiptive 
 stateinelit .if all localilics which are at tliu pruaunt (. .y 
 nic iipieil hy the ltii>sian-Aiiieriiaii < 'mnpaiiy, and oier 
 which iiie saiii)> Coiiipany is iinw unjnyiM;; iU> exclii.sive 
 privileneiif tnide, navipition, and Hshcrv. m mtler to niokc 
 it po^silde to iLsiertain delinitely the |Hiint.s to which 
 liifeinn vesnels iiiav Im luloiitteil wiihoiit iiijiirv in tlw 
 I niiipiinv's vested ri'_'lits 
 
 The Maii:i;;inK Chief nf ihe Miii/sliy nl inii'ifjii .Alhur.s 
 inliin tli.ll when, in ihe l.'liarter irraiiteil tn ihe |,'ii.siiiaii- 
 .Vnnriian Cmiipany in ihe vein IT'.'O, the .'i.'itli de^'ri'e nl 
 iinrtiii'rn latitude wa* setlled upon a« the imiuhevn 
 iHinmlary, this line wa.s hioki'd upon a.'< well to llie iiortll- 
 waril of any po..-.e-vsioni cl.niiii'd hy nila r I'nwen ,ind inn 
 
 which loiild '■ah K I Iiaiued in la^r mil KussiiUl 
 
 American Cnii.pany slmiihl he f'aiml •« • iipviiuj leriitory 
 lutlnl' smith " 
 
 fili'llt ntri'HS ;is til till' iiiti'r|ir('t.'itiiili iif the 
 Tii^nly is Iniil ii|uiii ii ilcclnritinii nf Kiissin iiHor 
 
 it!< (>X('l-|llillM. 
 
 WliMl |Hir|iiiii I (o III' ati extract fnmi tlic 
 I'mliiiiil liatcil liir L'lsl .Inly, lH2i, uf tli- ('oil- 
 
 tVrt'tin" ill' a S|rt'i'|;il ( 'niiiiiiill I llir lii^liot 
 
 ilii^nitarii'K in tlii< Kiisiiaii l'!iii|iii'i' is s(!t mit in 
 llif i;iiili'(l States Ciisr. 
 
 'I'Ih aci'tiriiry of tlii' ir.iiisl.it imi nl iliisiliicn- 
 iiiciil is I'liaili'iiu'i'il 'I'lii- iliirrn'iK'f lii'lwi'i'ii tin- 
 tnitlslatimi nf tlir I liileil Stairs .'iiiil ill till' 
 llri!i>.li ('iiniitiT-t '.'isi' will a|i|M'ar lii'low. ;is far .'i.i 
 riilicrriis l||i' I'Nli.iil S.I iiiil III llii' I'liitt'il Stales' 
 ( 'as<< ; — 
 
 1 1 tiiii'd .siali . imr dalimi 
 
 7 Thai sill.. i|ii. -.oveiTi'^iiU "I llii'-i.i nver the 
 rtliori". of .Silieriaaml .\nicricii..ii will ii-> over Ihe Aleutian 
 IsliiInU anil the iiili rvciilllK seas, hai liiici since U-eli 
 aekiii'wliil^i'd liv ,i|l |'n\^ll^. these .'nn^id, islands, ami 
 sea.s pist naiiiisl could liol have lieell lelerled tn 111 llie 
 .Vltnlesiif the .liinve liieiilimnd Colivi'iitinii, whii h lattei 
 ' nni criiii (inly the disputed territory on the imith tvest 
 1'iiH.Kt of Aliierii.i and the ail,|ntiiiii)t islands, .iinl that in the 
 full nNsiiralice nl sin h iiiidisputisl ri>tlil HiKsia luo I'lii" 
 -once ei-l«lili'.hid piriiiaiieiil SetilcmenI-. nil llie i nasi n! 
 
 I«4:M 
 
 M 
 
42 
 
 Siborin iis well ;is fiii llic oliam uf llii' AliMitiaii Islimds, of (hi- Convention of tin- r.lli (I Ttli) April, cither Inml al 
 
 rdiisi'qiiciitly, Ainericaii siilpj.cls could not, on llie sl,reii(;tli tlje pliiceH on lliose coasts or liiiiil or lisli llii'ie wlllioiit llic 
 
 o|' Article II ot till- Conv. iition o| ilic ,"iili ( ITlli) Ajiiil, iierniission of our Coinumiicler.s or Uovernoi's. Moruovcr, 
 
 have made 1 liii.;-i on tli. ( oast or carrird on hunlinonnd tlie shores of .Siheriu and tlie Aleutian Islands are wiuslnM, 
 
 lishiii'4 wilhoiil llie ]iiriiii-.si I' our Coin mil ndc'is or not l,y the Soiitli Sea, which n alone mentioned in lln' 
 
 • lovciiior.. Tlie-ie ciia^t^ of Siheiia and of the Aleiilian Isl Article of tlu^ Convention, hii! oy (he Noilhern Ocean 
 
 Isl.inds are not washed liy the ,'^oiilhein or I'acilic Ocean, ami ihcSie- of Kamtch.itka and nliholsk, wliicli, accordiii!^ 
 
 of wliiili nii'iilioii i> iiia.le in Article I of the t'oiivMilion, 
 linl Ipv Ihc Arclic O'caii and the' Seas of KanichalKa and 
 Okhotsk, »liich. on .ill aiithciilic Charts and in all 
 oco;.'mpliic-;, toriii no ] art of the Soulhcni oi I'acilic 
 Oeenn." 
 
 !o all known Map.^ and geo^;mpliies. do not form part i if 
 h.' South Sea" 
 
 Tills (Icidiir.'itioii of Itiissiii, r.iado anterior Id 
 tlic .Coiivi-ntinii w.tli (ii'i'.'tt HriUiiii iiiul sulise- 
 i|Uont to that with the United Stjilcs, iipiHviis iii)« 
 for the tii'st Mm;:. 
 
 It is a (leclaration contriiry to the fact.s a.- 
 touchini? the acknoulodirmcnt ot tlic Powers 
 coniiernini; Ktissia's title in America. Hased 
 upon the siipiiosed ownership of the Siberian and 
 American eoa.st, it proceeds to argue that — 
 
 " American siili|cits could leit .pii ilie strenjjth of .\rticlc II 
 of the Convention ol th.' ."lli lITlli) April Imve moile 
 
 l.indiiies on tin asl or curried on linnliic.; and tishing 
 
 without tli(! |H'rinis.si(in of our Coniniiinders nnd 
 tfOviTnors," 
 
 CllilcJ SlKln" 
 
 ('ii§e, p. S4 
 
 It is to he ohserved thai tlii.s (h-clanition — 
 M purtp and incorriict as it is — is liased upon a 
 considemtion of Articli! II. 
 
 Article J I refers to the " Great Ocean " and 
 not to "any part of the Great Ocean commonly 
 jailed the ' Tueilic Ocean,' " which are tiie words 
 now in question. 
 
 Article II, moreover, conceins iandim,' on the 
 coasts. Article 1 relates lo ri-rht of navigation 
 or fis'>ini^ only. 
 
 The d'Mv. of the (Inited State's does not repro- 
 duce the ri'(|uest addressed to the (ioverntnenl of 
 Russia which forwarded this declariiiiun, a 
 document of obvious importance 
 
 i;n>)ue;h, however, is suted to show that, after 
 the reprcseiitution> to the f'ompany touching' 
 exclusive ritfhts and the intention of tlii' Oovcni- 
 mcnt to insist upon them, the'lVoaty of IH21 w.w 
 read with a far din'crerit siKnilicatioii l.y the 
 Russian ('om[)any. 
 
 The lettcrof the Minister ,<( Finance, iuclosint? liiiito.l Stairs' 
 the ih>claration, shows that llie Jtiissiui Covern- *-'""'■• P;.*^ ; «n<l 
 
 .... A|i|nMiilii, rol. I, 
 
 ment (umlined their actum to conimunieutin" p 67 
 witn the United States" Oovernment touching 
 
43 
 
 ril, citliiT Inml at 
 
 llll'IC WiUkMII. till' 
 
 riKirH. Morodvcr, 
 liiiiils arc \viuslii'<l, 
 [iK'iitiiini'il ill till' 
 
 !■ NiMllllTIl OrCMll 
 , Wllii:ll, ilCC'uIlliliL; 
 
 iiiit foriu piirt 111 
 
 Articlo H, and to the "trade r.nd fishery " upon 
 thr cnnsl. 
 
 Toucliing the (!xtcnt of coast lliniwii ojicii for 
 tradf and ftshertj, \\c pointed out tlmt it was 
 limited l).v latitude 51' 40' north in the sniith, and 
 by tlie l?ay Vuiviitat (or Herry Hay) in the north. 
 l,'nitpii StatPi" There is a t^ap in the eorrespondonco given in 
 
 Casf, Appcndi. I, the Appendix to the United .Slates' Case at this 
 point, and th's document of 1821 is tiie last pro- 
 ducwl from the Russian arciiives until tiiosn of 
 1853 are mentioned. 
 
 Information is given toueiiing the instruetions 
 of Haron Tuyl " to use every means at his com- 
 mand to persuade the Vashiiii^'ton f'ahinet that, 
 in favouring tiie limitation al)out to \w pro- 
 posed tiiere is no intention or desire to 
 
 give any provocation for furl iter (lis|)utes lietweeu 
 the two Powers," l)ut Ww drspatelies from Haron 
 Tuyl to the Russian {ioverninent, or subsequent 
 communications of tlie result of tliis negotiation 
 to the Russian-American Company, are not now 
 producH'd i)y tiie United States. Tiie United 
 States deals with the declaratiou only. The result, 
 of it is of some importance. 
 
 Baron Tuyl in liis note did not, however, 
 claim jurisdiction of any kind over Behring Sea ; 
 for, aft(>r stating that '-the Aleuti;, t isl.'inds, the 
 coasts of SilH'ria, and the lUissi-v possessions in 
 general on the north-west coa.s.. of .Vru'rica to 
 (the nortii of) W,f .'50' of north latitude are posi- 
 tively exempted from the liberty of hunting," lie 
 goes on to state that Russia would be siUitified 
 with a limit of 2 marine leagues to the nortii of 
 that latitude. 
 
 Tlie following is tin; Minute of note submitted 
 to Mr. Adams by Baron Tuyl, as (iiu)ted by 
 Mr. Hiaino in his note to Sir J. I'aiineefole, 17th 
 December, ]Si)():-- 
 
 Eiplantlory noir 
 from Kusiia. 
 
 " KN]iluii:iliiry imtc u^ hr jiiiscntcil in lln' (invciniiioiit 
 of till' I'niti'il States ill tlic time nf tlii' rxi-liiiiyf ol 
 rnliliciiliims, with a view tn icnKiving with more ( ertainty 
 all occasion for futi'nMlis(;us.aions ; by menus of wliieli note 
 it will lie seen that tht Aliiitian Itilands, tht (ousts i/ 
 Siberia, tiiul tin- /titistait yio.<.'ii.<.viyin nt i/hk rut mi tlic iioil/i- 
 ireal const of Ameri('a to 511 3o ()/ north lulitmlc aiv 
 jiositiviily oxeopled from tlie liberty of liimtiiii;, lisliiii},', 
 ami comuiorcu atipulatoil in labour of citizens of llie tJiiiteil 
 States for ten years. 
 
 "This .seems to lie only a iialiiial eniHeiiMeiiei,' of the 
 stipnliitiDiiH aj,Tee(l upon, for the ouiatii of Sihcriu are 
 wonlieil by the Sea of Dklmtak. the .Si'a I'f Kanielialka, and 
 tlic ley Sen, and not ij) tlif Smilli Sta inenlioneil in the 
 
[ 
 
44 
 
 Isl- Article' i)f tliu ConvTiitiim of lln' Rlli (I7tli) April 
 181!4. Tht AUutian Islninli iiro iilsn wusIkmI Ky tlio 
 Sua iif KiuiK'liiilkii, iir Ndrtlurn Oiiiui 
 
 "It is not tilt intention of lUmia to inijxdr the J'rie 
 nariijation of tht Pacijie Ocean. Sliti woiiiil liu mitislii'il 
 with iimsiiiji tci lie ri'(iii,'iiizt'il, iih wi-Il iiiiilrrstiMul iind 
 plai'L'il IkvuikI all iimiiiiir df dmilit, tlic |iriii('i|ili' lliitt 
 beyoml 5'J 30' no fiui'igii viwMel iiui iippnuicli lior coiistH 
 mid islands, nor fish or hunt within the distance of 
 2 niiirini' lcii^'iiu9. This will not |irt;Vfnt the rccciition of 
 forcijjn vosiuls which have hueii danm^;ed or licalcn hy 
 olorm." 
 
 Mr. Atlnma' account, i>f tliis tmnsactioii is as 
 follows : — 
 
 " Aforuliij/, (i/A, — liaroii Tiiyl. tliB Kussiun Mmi.slir, Eitraoiii from 
 
 wrote nie a not«i re(|ueNiing nn immediate interview, in " Mfmoiri of Jnhri 
 
 r ■ . . 1 .1 r 1 • Quiiicy Adam», 
 
 consBiiucnce of instnictions received yesterday nuni his ,j| yj nn. 48J-457 
 
 Coiii't. lie came, aiiil after iiitimatiM;{ tlial hi' was under 
 some emharrassmi'iit in oxtK'utin^' his iiiBtriietions, .said 
 that tlie l{ii.ssian-Aicicricaii Company, upon luaniin;^ the 
 [airport nf the .Nialli-we.st (Joast Coiivenliim concluded last 
 June liy Mr. Middleloii. were evlremely ili.s.satislled ("a 
 j(!ti' de hauls cris"). and hv means of tlicir inlliieiice had 
 prevailed upon his (rovernmiiit lo send him these instruc- 
 tions upon two |Hiiiils. One wii.s that I. c sliould deliver, 
 upon the e\chan^'e of the ratifications of the Conveiilioii, 
 an I'Xplaiiatory note, pnipoitiiej that llie Itussian (Jovern- 
 ineiit ihd not understand that llie Coiiveiilicin would ;,'ive 
 lihcrty to the citizens of tlu' L'l.itod States to trade mi (lie 
 coast of ,*'i)ieria and the Aleutian Islands. The oIIht whs 
 to propose a niodilication of tlie ('iMivcnliiin, hy which our 
 ve.ssels should he prohihited from trading on the north- 
 west coast north i>f latitude ii'". With regard to the 
 former of these pcpiiits. he left with me :i Miniili' in 
 writing;. 
 
 " I told him that we should 1«' disposeil to do everything,' 
 to accoininiKlate the views of his liovernment that was in 
 our power, hut that n modilication of IIm^ (,'oiiveiition 
 could he made no otherwise than hy a new Ciaiveiition, 
 and that 'he ccpnstruction of the (.'(aiveiilion as concluded 
 helong( i t(, other I lepartmeiits of the (iovernmeiit, for 
 which ti . Executive had no authority to stipulate; that 
 if on the exchaii^'e of the mtilicalions he .should deliver to 
 me a note of the |iurpoi't of tint which he now informally 
 gave me, I should i,'i\e him an answer of llial import, 
 namely, that the coiislniction of Treaties depeiidim; here 
 u|Kiu the Judiciary Trilmiials, iht' Kxecutive (loveinment. 
 even if disposed to acipiiesce in that of the J{iissian 
 Covernment a< aii'iouiiced liy him. could not he hinihng 
 upon the Court.s, nor u]ioii this nation. I added that the 
 Convention would he .suhmitted immediately to the 
 Senate ; that if anything affectiii),' its construction, or, still 
 more, modifying its meaning, were to he presented on the 
 part of the Itu.ssian (iovernmeiit liel'oie or at the exchange 
 of ratifications, it must he laid hefore the .Senate, ami 
 
45 
 
 (iiulil Imvr nil iillicr [iiissililc c'llrcl tliiin hI slaillnj; diMil.i-. 
 1111(1 |ji rliiiiii lic>iiliiliiiii, ill that ImmIv, ami iif favituiiiij? tliu 
 vii^WH of tliiisr. if .siuli tliilr Well', wlai iiii;;la ttlsll tn 
 ili'fcnt till' riititiiuitiim it«tlf of tlic t'oiivfiiticni. Tliiis wiia 
 all (ilijii'l of 1,'rC'at sulicitililc lu liotll OoviTIIIiU'llU, not 
 only lor the acljiistiiient of a iliHiiiiit >|iu!sti(iii which liuil 
 iiii^cn K'twi't'ii Ihciii, but lor lln' pronintioii of lliiil 
 hiiriiiony «liii li wiw so iihk li in tlii' poliiy of the two 
 lountrius, whic h iiii^;lil luipliatiially Ih' t<!iiiii'<l iiatiinil 
 frifiiils to carl I i.tlirr If, ilicn lort', lie woiiM piTiiiit iiu- 
 to su;,'i;r.st to him what I thoii^'litwo.ild Im the IjisI coiirsi'. 
 it woiiM III' III wait for the I'Xihan^i' of the ratilications, 
 mill niak(! it |anrly ami >ini|ily : that afterwanls, if the 
 iimtructiuiiii of his <iovcTninent wrin iniiiunitivr. Uv iiiif;lil 
 pn'scnl thu iiotr, to which I now inforninl him what 
 Moiilil hi! in -.alp>laii(c my an.swiT. It iii'crs^arily tiaiM 
 not Iji' othiTwisi'. Itnl if his inntrnctions hit it iUm- 
 inlionaiy with hiiii, he woiilil ilo -.till lirlUr to iiiforiii liix 
 (iovcrnnii'iit of tlir stati' of thin;{» hnc. of ihr purport of 
 our I'liifrirnci'. anil if what my miswrr wuiiM hr if hv 
 shoulil pn-iciit till' iiiiti' I liilicvicl iiii C'lmrl wouM llu'li 
 • llM'tn it lii'>t that III' sliiiiiM m>l pnsi'iil the imto at all 
 Their ap)in'lii'iisiiins had nicii I'Milnl hy iin interest ni i 
 Very friendly to the „'oiid undcr-itandiiii^ U'tween tlie 
 ffnitiil St.ites and liinsia. Our nurchints would not ;,'i> 
 to tiouhle the liiissi.iii-, on the loa.sl of .Sitieria, oi north of 
 the ."iTth de^'ii 1' of latilll.le, and it W;i.' wisest Hut to put 
 sneh faiieies mt'i tin ir heads. At least, the Imperial 
 (lovernnieiit ini'jht wait to see the (iii"ratioii of the 
 f'onventioii hifiro taking any further step, and I was 
 I iinfideiit they would hear no eonipluint ri'sultin^ from it. 
 If they Hhould, thun wiaild lie the lime for mljustino the 
 I onstriKtion or nejiutiiitint; n niodilieatiiin of the Con- 
 vention ; and whoevir mi;jht he at the head of the 
 Adiiiinistratiiiii of the L'nited Stute.s, hu mi^'ht b<! n-ssured 
 that every disposition wouhl hu cherished to reinovu all 
 causes of dissatisfaction, and to acc<immiiilate the wi.shes 
 and the just policy of the Ijiilu'ltir. 
 
 "The I'aiiiM s.iid that these iileas had occurred In 
 himself; that he had maile this apjiliialion in |>ursuancu 
 of his instructions; liut he w;i.s aware of the distrihution 
 of powers in our Constitution, and of the inconipetcncy ot 
 the Kxecutive to adjust such iiucstion.s. lie would 
 therefore wail lir the e.\chan^;i' of the ratilication- without 
 presontin;,' his note, and reserve for fuluru consideration 
 whether to |iresent it shortly aftcrwaiiU, or to iniorni hi.s 
 Court of wh it h.'. Iia.s done. .Ill I ask iheir further in>truciiiuis 
 upon what he -hall ilclinitcly do "ii the sulijc I, lie 
 therefore rcipcsted me to ciuLsiilcr wlial had now |',i.s.siil 
 lielweeii US as if it had imt taken place (' mm nveiine '), to 
 which I readily assenlcd, iussurinj,' him, as 1 had dmie 
 heretofore, that tin; President had the highest personal 
 contidenco in him, and in his exertion:) to foster the 
 harmony hetween the two countries. I reported imme- 
 diately to the riesident the sulist.ince of this ciinv.'i.iatioii, 
 and he loiiciined in the pMpricly of the liaion's hn.il 
 ilctermiiiaii'iu." ■_ 
 
 LM3J 
 
 N 
 
IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 ^ 
 
 A 
 
 A 
 
 
 
 f/. 
 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 l^|2^ |2.5 
 
 12.2 
 
 1.8 
 
 L25 11.4 111.6 
 
 P 
 
 /i 
 
 <^ 
 
 /i 
 
 v: 
 
 
 y 
 
 Photographic 
 
 ScieDces 
 
 Corporation 
 
 23 WEST MAIN STREET 
 WEBSTER, NY. 14580 
 . (716)873-4503 
 

 % 
 
 :s 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 V 
 
 1^ 
 
 h 
 
. 
 
40 
 
 In any event the Report of t)io Committee, 
 referred to in the United States' Case, proves 
 that, whatever do I b!..-. might he raised toucliing 
 the extent of the Convention, it was not to be 
 denounced. 
 
 Subsequent expressions of opinion from tlie 
 Russian Government, referred to already, prove 
 conclusively the complete failure to qualify the 
 interpretation of the language of the Treaties, or 
 the conclusion that they included the waters of 
 Rehring Sea. 
 
 It lias been seen tliat after the remon- 
 straiic<!S of the Com])auy and the attempt of 
 Russia to secure a qualification of the Con- 
 vention of 1821, the language in question was 
 repeated in the Treaty with Great Rritaiii the 
 following J ear. 
 
 On the 25th January, 1825, a fortnight after Mr. Blaine to Sir 
 the ratifications had been exchanged, RaronTuyl, DeceTbeH 7!*! 890, 
 at Washington, presented an explanatory note to -Appendix, vol. iii, 
 Mr. Adams. No action appears to have been **' 
 taken on either side. This evidently was the com- British Case, p. 545. 
 munication referred to in Bancroft's " Alaska," 
 which is said to have been communicated to all 
 the Representatives of that nation abroad, but 
 which searjh made in the Foreign Office in 
 London shows was never received by Great Britain. 
 Mr. S. Canning wrote Mr. G. Canning, 3rd 
 (15tli) April, 1825 :— 
 
 ". . . . Eeferring to the Ainoiicau Treaty, I am assured, British Case, 
 
 as well by Count Keasclroilc as by Mr. JliJdlcton, tliat the Appendix, vol. ii, 
 
 p. 81. 
 ratilicatiou of tliat instniiiient was not acconipanieil with 
 
 any explaiiatinns calculated to motlify or afToct in any way 
 the force and meaning of its Articles. l?ut I understand 
 that, nt tlie close of the negotiation of that Treaty, a 
 Protocol, intended by the Russians to fix more specilically 
 the limitations of the right of trading with their posses- 
 sions, and undeiutood by the American Envoy as having 
 no such effect, was drawn up and signed by both parties. 
 No reference whatever was made to this paper by the 
 Russian I'leiiipotontiaries in the coursi; of my negotiation 
 with them, and you are aware, Sir, that the Articles of the 
 Convention which I concluded depend for their force 
 entirely on the general acceptation of tlie terms in which 
 they arc expressed." 
 
 In 1829, when the Charter of the Russian- United State* 
 American Company was contirmed, it is clear ^''"'' P" ®'" 
 the Russian Government felt unable to assume 
 the position taken by the Committee on the 4th 
 September, 1824, since no precise limits of 
 Behriug Sea were referred to — while the Treaties 
 
. 
 
 47 
 
 of 1824. and 1825 are mentioned as limiting 'the 
 operation of tlio Ukase of 1821. 
 United States' So in the Charter of [1842 (or 1841) no 
 
 ^oTCp^s!"^'*' reference is found to Behring Sea, nor any sheet 
 of water corresponding to it, as a closed sea. 
 
 The eastern boundary for the application of 
 the Charter alone is defined. 
 
 Section 3 of this Charter establishes that the 
 rights of the Company were " to the exclusion of 
 all Russiun subjects." 
 
 If Behring Sea is included in the Treaty 
 between Great Britain and Russia, the question 
 is admittedly at an end. And if the Treaties left 
 the question of jurisdiction over that sea where 
 they found it, the Case of Great Britain is 
 unanswered. 
 
 Russia had no ^exclusive jurisdiction over 
 Behring Sea, which was free to the world, and 
 it is unnecessary, therefore, to show that she 
 has conceded or abandoned any rights in it 
 under the words of the Treaty. Even assuming 
 that she has not done so, it is impossible to 
 maintain that by not obtaining such concession 
 Great Britain abandoned and confeiTed upon 
 Russia these rights to which in common with all 
 other nations she is entitled by the general law, 
 and which Russia had unwarrantably claimed. 
 
48 
 
 (B.) 
 
 It is contended in the Case of the United 
 States : — 
 
 "«(!). That tliu l«3t geof,T:iphers have at all times 
 distiiiguislied this body of writer from the ocean lying of 
 it (by conferring upon it sonie separate name). 
 
 " c (2). That the body of water known as liehritig Sea 
 was not included in the phrase ' Pacific Ocean ' as used in 
 the Treaty of 1825." 
 
 These contentions are, it is alleged, home out 
 hy (a) Maps, Charts, and the writings of navi- 
 gators at the time of and prior to tlie nego- 
 tiations; (6) hy Treaties ahove named resulting 
 therefrom; also hy the negotiations themselves 
 and the text of the Treaties, and further hy 
 express declarations of the llussian Government 
 during the negotiations and after the conclusion 
 of the Treaties. 
 
 In the British Case it is on the other hand British Case, p. 72 
 8hoA>Ti, chiefly hy citations from standard autho- '' '^y- 
 rities, that Behi-ing Sea was generally, and 
 indeed almost universally, recognized as part of 
 the Pacific Ocean, hoth bc^fore and at ahout the 
 time of the Ukase of 1821, and tlie Treaties of 
 1821 and 1825, a circumstanco which, if it had 
 been intended to exclude Behriug Sea from the 
 operation of the Treaties in question, would 
 have rendered it absolutely necessary to do so 
 specifically and in terms. 
 
 Evidence is also adduced in the British Case ibid., p. 66 ei srg. 
 of the continued usage of the term " Pacific 
 Ocean " as including Bchring Sea in years 
 following the conclusion of the Treaties and 
 down to the present day. « 
 
 The geographical sketch of liehring Sea, as 
 contained in the " Case " of the United States, 
 commences as follows : — 
 
 " Bering Sea is the body of water lying between the 
 
 Arctic Ocean and the North Pacific Ocean It is 
 
 sometimes referred to and treated as a great landlocked 
 sea." 
 
 In the margin is a reference to Findlay's 
 " North Pacific Directory " (2nd edition). 
 
 The second edition of Findlay's Directory was 
 not available ; the third edition, however, does 
 not describe Bchring Sea as " the body of water 
 lying between the Arctic Ocean and the North 
 
49 
 
 Pacific Ocean," although it refers to it on 
 |). dHdi as an "(ixtcnsivc landlocked stw." This 
 dcsuiiiitiou is not in accordance with the views 
 of gcograiiliers generally as shown elscwliero. 
 'I'hc P('ninsula of Alaska, the sketch states — 
 
 ' con.sista ui a luorc or less level tract intiMTiipted by 
 single nimiiilaiii peaks or eluster of peaks. IJetweeii tlicse 
 Ijeaks, especially toward the western extremity, are low- 
 ly! tif; miirshy gaps which form jiortages, used by the 
 natives for carrying their boats across from the Pacific 
 Ocean to I'liisldl l!ay." 
 
 In the mai'i^in is a reference to lldclus' 
 "fr/'ograj)hic," vol. xv, p. 201. 
 
 The last sentence quoted conveys the im- 
 pression that Bristol Bay is not iu the Pacific 
 Ocean, and, therefore, that Behring Sea is not 
 a part of the ocean. 
 
 Turning to ]>. 201 of vol. xv, Beclus' " Geo- 
 graphic," the exact words are found to bo : — 
 
 "... The peninsula mountains of Alaska .... are 
 cut from jilace to place liy very low siUs, portages — 
 'pereno.ssi' in Eussinn — which boatmen, indeed, use for 
 the transportation of tlieir boats from one slope to the 
 other." 
 
 There is no mention in Reclus of the Pacific 
 Ocean or of Bristol Bay. The quotation in the 
 sketch is again incorrect. 
 
 Wlien describing the Aleutian Islands, it 
 should bo stated that they consist of four groups 
 separat(id by wide intervals. Their names are 
 Fox, Andreanow, Rats, and Near Islands 
 (lleclus). 
 
 It is further stated in tlie sketch : — 
 
 " The straits or passes separating the islands are of 
 various widths, those in the easterly half being generally 
 narrow and but few of them available for navigation. 
 The most important ore Uniuiak Pass, 11 miles wide, and 
 Auiukta or 'Seventy-two ' Pass, 42 miles wide." 
 
 Like other portions of the sketch, tliis one, 
 although not inaccurate, is misleading, unless 
 elucidated by further explanations. The two 
 passes mentioned may bo the most important in 
 the sense that, being the most easterly, they are 
 tliose generally used by ships hailing from the 
 United States or British Columbia, but there are 
 many wider openings between the islands. The 
 name of " pass," conveying as it does a notion 
 of a narrow passage, can hardly be applie<l to all 
 [843] O 
 
50 
 
 I he oponin^^s in question, many of which art 
 vory \v [(](!. 
 
 The |)()rtiou of tlio (h'si-riptioii last quoted 
 shodhl bo amciulcil i\s follows: — 
 
 The l!iri;'(sl of thi' Aleutian Islands arc near 
 tliL' coast of Anici'ica. In |)roc'(!edin'^ westward; 
 they h(3Coine sniallcr, and the openings between 
 tlicin wiilei', until lliey end at Attn Island, 
 37*> miles IVom the coast of Kandeliatka. in tin; 
 Fox Islands th(!ro tu'e only a few straits, tlic most 
 important being the Uniniak, 11 miles wide. 
 
 From till! end of the Fox Islands to the coast 
 of Asia the openings 20 miles wide or over 
 are : — 
 
 Unimak to Kngnmil . . 
 
 Cluigiimdak to Yuniiska 
 
 Amiikta to Scpia-.n 
 
 Amiin to Scguain . . • . 
 
 Andrt-nnow to Uuts . . . . • . 
 
 Kast of Scinisopochnoi . . 
 
 Kyaka to A'jaUu (n small islai.il 4 iiiilus 
 
 long in the miilillo),. 
 Attu to Copper 
 
 Cop|)cr to Hehring . > . . . . 
 
 Bchring to ICantcliatka 
 
 Total 
 
 Mile? 
 21 
 20 
 •12 
 20 
 55 
 35 
 
 160 
 
 205 
 
 44 
 
 110 
 
 7!.) 
 
 It is thus seen that, on the southerly limit of 
 Behring Sea from the end of the Fox Islands to 
 the coast of Asia, a distance of 1,220 miles, or 
 about the distance from Paris to the ISlaek 8ca, 
 there arc 715 miles of open sea, or a little more 
 than the distance from Paris to Vienna, the 
 remaining portion consisting of a mimher of 
 Islands separated by about twenty openings, each 
 less than 20 miles in width. 
 
 Referring to the easterly part of Behring Sea, 
 the sketch states : — 
 
 " A peculiar feature of Bering Sea is i\u\ extensive bank 
 of soundings which stretches off for 250 or more niili'S 
 from tlie American coast, rendering the easterly iiortion of 
 the sea very shallow." 
 
 The existence of such banks in the oceans is 
 not unusual in the vicinity of the coasts ; as an 
 instance may be given the banks of New- 
 foundland. 
 
 Of the depth of Behring Sea it is said : — 
 
 "The Charts sliow that throughout one-tliird of the 
 sea the depth of tli(! water does not generally exceed 
 ; fathoms, and they also show that the average depth of 
 
CI 
 
 tlie whiili' soa is v«ry cnnsultTiilily loss tliiii\ tliiU ul' the 
 luliiiiiiiii;,' sea." 
 
 llciT aj^.iin tliP stalfmoiit, althoii;?li cnrrpct, 
 is inislwiUing. It so liappeiis lliat tlic adjoiiiiiig 
 s(ia is till.' deO|K;s(, spot on tlii; earth: it is known 
 as the " 'J'liscarora Ducp," from Hk; I 'iiitcd States' 
 ship " 'I'liscaroRi,'' which ohtaiaoil xhcro tlu* 
 enormous soiimling ol' .l.,(55.') fathoms, over 
 5{ miles. The remark that the avorai,'e depth 
 of Itehring Sea is considerahly h'ss than tlie 
 depth ol' this depression eoukl l)c applied with 
 equal strcni^th to any other part of the oceans. 
 
 The bottom of the I'aeilie Ocean is somewhat 
 uneven, varying from about 1,500 fathoms 
 betwei-n the southern end of America and Tahiti 
 to about 3,000 fathoms, with a few depressions 
 of 1,000 fathoms and over in the westerly half 
 if the ocean. South of GO' of south latitude 
 no depths e\ ■ceding 2,000 fathoms have yet been 
 found. 
 
 The soundings are not yet sufTieiently numerous 
 to give a proper idea of the average depth of 
 the main body of tin; ocean, but this can be 
 obtained indirectly from the rate of i)ropagatioii 
 of waves. It was thus found that the mean 
 depth from Iquiquc in Chile to the Sandwich 
 Islands was 2,3:50 fathoms, and everything in- 
 di(!ates that this is about the avenigo depth of 
 the ocean at a distance from the continents. 
 
 The (lencral Chart of Alaska published by the 
 United States' Coast Survey, wh'ch has l)cen 
 used throughout in preparing tliis Jleport, gives 
 only .'i f'jw soundings in the extreme easterly 
 coruer of ;!if. deop portion of liehring Sea, the 
 grc;.test being 2,117 fathoms ; the remaining 
 deep portion is u, blank on the Map. Vivien 
 do St. Slartni, on p. 198 of vol. iv of his " Dic- 
 tionary," states that a sounding of lydiO metres 
 (2,700 fathoms) was obtained north of tlie Com- 
 mander Ishuuls; it is not shown on the Coast 
 Survey Map. Tlie.se few soimdings and the shape 
 of the Tuscarora depression wouLl seem to 
 indicate that the latter extends iuto Hchring 
 Scs, which may, after all, bo one of the deepest 
 portions of the ocean. Of course, this is onlv 
 a matter of conjecture ; all that can be said 
 at present with the few soundings yet oljtained 
 is that a considerable portion of Behriug Sea, 
 nearly one-half, is not inferior in depth to the 
 main body of the ocean. 
 
52 
 
 In support of the special assertion tbat the United States' 
 Pacific Ocean did not include Bdiring Sea as ^»'«' PP- ". «3. 
 shown by " a study of thc^ Maps, Charts, and 
 writings of navigators at the time of and prior 
 to the celebration of these Treaties," it is stated 
 that '• a list of tliese Maps and Charts is 
 appended," from which it will bo seen that 
 geographers conferred upon Behriug Sea " some 
 separate name in most cases, either that of Sea 
 of Kamtcbai Ua, Bchring Sen, North-Eastern Sea, 
 or Eastern Ocean." 
 
 It is submitted, however, that the list cannot ibh!., Appendix I, 
 properly be regarded as representing the usage P ^*' 
 of geograpl'.crs, even on the narrow ground of 
 the nomenclature of oceans, seas, &c., as printed 
 on the Maps in question ; for tliis list is, in 
 reality, merely a selected series of such Maps 
 as in respect to their marking correspond, in a 
 negative sense (or injother words do not disagree), 
 with the contention which it is wislied by the 
 United States to uphold. 
 
 AVithout entering into any great detail re- Historical note on 
 specting the numerous voyages of discovery in un'der'^^'j"i|*"'"'' 
 this region, whicb, in the first instances, wore Behnng fioa ha> 
 principally due to Russian efforts from the ^^^^^ 
 Asiatic coast, it is comparatively easy to place 
 on record the salient features of this branch of 
 the subject ; and to trace its progress, more 
 particularly by means of the Maps published 
 from time to time in illustration of the results 
 of the various explorers. 
 
 The first published Map in :vhich that part 
 of the Asiatic coast, including Kamtchatka, and 
 extending to and beyond Behring Straits, was 
 represented, was that in illustration of Behring's 
 first voyage, in 1737, in D'Anville's " Atlas." It is 
 reproduced by Mr. W. 11. Dall, in the " National 
 Geographical ^Fagazine," Washington, 1890. At 
 this time neither the Commander Islands nor 
 the Aleutian Islands were known, but the ocean 
 to the cast of the Asiatic coast is named Pnrtie 
 de la Mer Dormaiite, the name, as engraved on 
 the IMap, extending from a point to the west 
 of the extremity of the Peninsula of Kamtchatka, 
 in a north-easterly direction, to about the position 
 which St. Matthew Island is now known to 
 occupy, or to the centre of Behring Sea. 
 
 After Behring's second expedition, in which 
 the Commander himself miserably jjcrisbed, but 
 in the course of which tlie American coast was 
 reached, and the Commander and Aleutian 
 
5S 
 
 Islands in part discovered, we find a Map pub- 
 lished by Miiller, the historian and geographer of 
 the expedition. This is entitled, in the English 
 translation of MuUer's work, published in London 
 in 1761, "A Map of the Discoveries made by the 
 Russians on the North-west Coast of America," 
 published by the Royal Academy of Sciences at 
 St. Petersburgh, and republished in London by 
 Thomas Jeffreys. 
 
 In this Map the islands now known as the 
 Aleutian Islands and the Commander Islands 
 are indicated very inaccurately, and the greater 
 part of what is now known as Behring Sea is 
 occupied by a great conjectural promontory of 
 the American continent, leaving a comparatively 
 narrow and sinuous body of water or strait 
 running in a direction proximately parallel to 
 the Asiatic coast, and separating the two con- 
 tinents. The southern portion of this is named 
 on the Map ISea of Kamtchatka, the northern Sea 
 of Anadir, in equivalent characters. Behring 
 Strait, as now known, appears without name, 
 while the wider ocean to the south is named 
 Crreat South Sea or Pacific Ocean. 
 
 A reproduction on a smaller scale of the same 
 Map appeals in the " London ilagazine " for 
 1761. This is entitled, "A New Map of the 
 North-east Coast of Asia and North-west Coast 
 of America, with the late Russian Discoveries." 
 It repeats the nomeuclaturo and all the errors of 
 the original Map, but employs the term Great 
 South Sea only, the addition " or I'acific Ocean " 
 being omitted. 
 
 After the date of the publication of Cook's third 
 voyage, in 1781', what is now known as Behring 
 Sea began to appear on Maps in something like 
 its true form and proportions, and in the Map 
 accompanying the official record of his voyages, 
 of the date mentioned, we find that sea without 
 special distinctive name, and simply regarded as 
 a part of the Pacific Ocean, though the names 
 Olntomki Sea, Beaver Sea, and Gulf of Anadir are 
 engraved in parts of it close to the Siberian 
 shores, and Shoal Water and Bristol Bay appear 
 as local names of equivalent rank on the opposite 
 American c last. 
 
 From tills date imward the usage became very 
 varieil. Many Maps continued to appear, till 
 1840 or later, upon which no name of a dis- 
 tinctive kind was given to Behring Sea, while 
 upon oliiers it became customary to extend the 
 
L 
 
5i 
 
 originally local name Sea of Kamichalka to the 
 whole of this body of water. Doubtless because 
 of the ambiguity attaching to this particular 
 name, from its originally strictly local use, at 
 later dates it began to be customary to employ 
 Behring's name for the sea now so called, till at 
 the present time that name may be said to have 
 entirely superseded the older one, aud to have 
 passed into common use. 
 
 Following on this change, the name Sen of 
 Kamtchalka was ciianged to Gulf of Kamtchatka, 
 and relegated to its original place on the shore of 
 the peninsula of the same name, while the names 
 Olutornki and Anadir likewise became confined to 
 the respective gulfs on the Siberian coast. For 
 the most modem usage in this respect, see United 
 States' Ilydrographic Oflice Chart No. fiS, 1890, 
 and British Admiralty Chart No. 2400, 1889. 
 
 It is very noteworthy, however, in studying 
 any series of Maps chronologically arranged, that 
 up to the middle of the present century Bohring 
 Sea is frequently without any general name, 
 while the adjoining Sea of Okhotsk is in almost 
 every instance clearly designated. 
 
 Had the circumstances with respect to the 
 nomenclature of Behring Sea been different, and 
 had that body of water been consistently supplied 
 with a distinctive name on all Maps, it would, 
 however, by no means necessarily follow that this 
 was intended to show that it Avas not a part of 
 the Pacific Ocean. An ocean may, and in all 
 cases actually does, include numerous seas and 
 gulfs as subordinate divisions. The mere fact 
 that the name of the North Pacific Ocean, or 
 equivalent name in use at different periods, is not 
 usually engraved partly upon the area of Behring 
 Sea in the Maps, affords no valid argument for 
 such separation. The name of this ocean is gene- 
 rally found to be engraved, in large characters, 
 upon its widest and most open part somewhere 
 to the south of the 50tli parallel, and between 
 that parallel and the Equator. This usage 
 follows as a result of the actual form of the 
 ocean, and the necessity of giving due promi- 
 nence to its name. 
 The United States' Government has, in this RUps specially 
 
 controversy, attached importance to the very refeffed to by 
 
 , , , o ,.,.,. . Mr. Blaine in his 
 
 early employment of som. distmctive name for letter of Decem- 
 
 Behrin'^ Sea, and reference has been made to '*'' ''• '*'"• 
 
 several of the older Maps. 
 
 It is, however, submitted that even in 
 
66 
 
 restricting the argument to Maps, the important 
 question is that relating to the Maps and Charts 
 of the yearn immediately antecedent to 1824 and 
 1825, in which the Conventions dealing with the 
 Ukase of 1821 were concluded. 
 
 To such Maps the negotiators doubtless 
 referred. 
 
 Reverting, however, to the earlier Maps 
 specially instanced by the United States' 
 Government, it will be found that even these 
 do not bear out the assertions based by 
 Mr. Blaine upon them. 
 
 A Map showing Cook's voyages, and published 
 in 1781, is first referred to as showing the " Sea 
 of Kamtchatka" in "absolute contradistinction to 
 the Great Soutk Sea or Pacific Ocean." 
 
 This is doubtless the Map included in the list 
 attached to the despatch, and said to have been 
 published by William Fadon in 1784, a Map 
 which has so far eluded our search. 
 
 Turning, however, to the Maps in the ofTicially 
 published account of Cook's third voyage, of the 
 same date, both those in the quarto and octavo 
 editions, and those also in French and German 
 translations of somewliat later date, it is found 
 that Behring Sea appears absolutely and 
 markedly without any dinlinctive name. 
 
 The Map published in the " London Magazine " 
 in 1764, M hich is next referred to, is a reduction 
 of Miiller's Map, which is also particularly cited. 
 
 The circumstances under which the names 
 Sea of Kamtchatka and Sea of Anadir appear on 
 these Maps have been noted on a previous page, 
 and are such as lo show that these names, nor 
 either one of them, can be justly referred to as 
 applying to the area of Behring Sea as now 
 known. 
 
 In further endeavouring to maintain his 
 position as to the essential separateness of 
 Behring Sea from the Pacific Ocean, as under- 
 stood by geographers of the time, Mr. Blaine 
 adds an enumeration of a number of Maps as 
 " Inclosure B " to his letter above referred to. 
 
 This list of 105 Maps, though apparently for- 
 midable from its very length, is found to extend 
 from the year 1743 to the year 1829, both 
 December 17, 1890. inclusive, and consists solely of those Maps upon 
 which a special designation of some kind is 
 supposed to be found for Behring Sea. 
 
 As already stated, this proves nothing with 
 regard to the relation of Behring Sea to the 
 
 Maps catalogued in 
 " Iiiclosuro IB)," 
 Mr. Blaine to Sir 
 J. Pauiicefote, 
 
56 
 
 Pacific as a whole ; while it is further ohscrvable 
 that, in compiling the list, many Maps of very 
 doubtful or imperfect character have been 
 heterogencously brouj^ht together. 
 
 Thus, in respect to Cook's explorations, but a 
 single obscure Slap is cited, while the olllcial and 
 original Maps are ignored, as has already been 
 explained. 
 
 Again, from Thompson's large Atlas of date 
 1817 but a single Map is cited, and this without 
 such refercneo as can enable it to be i(l(>ntiliod; 
 while, as a matter of fact, in this Atlas, liohring 
 Sea appears upon three Maps as the; Sra of 
 Kamichnlka. On three other Maps tliis name is 
 evidently confined to the waters immediately 
 adjacent to the peninsula of the same name, and 
 on two, tlie greater part of Behring Sea ii 
 included without any name. 
 
 Under date ISli), a ilap by Burney is quotfd 
 as showing the name Srj of Kamtchatka applied 
 to Behring Sea, but tlie oaly Map by that author 
 and of that date which wc have been able to lind 
 is a " Chart of the north coast ot Asia and of .he 
 sea to the north of liehring Strait," in which the 
 greater part of Behring Sea is included, out 
 without name, though the northern portioi of 
 the Sea of Okhotsk, also included, is prominently 
 named. 
 
 Still, again, under 1825 a Map in Butlar's 
 Atlas (doubtless No. IG) is quoted as showiug 
 the name Sea of Kamtchatka, while the first Map 
 in that Atlas upon which Behring Sea appears 
 without name (though the Sea of Okhotsk and 
 other similar seas arc named) is ignored. 
 
 This particular criticism applies, however, to 
 but a small portion of the entire list, since the 
 whole of the Maps in the list have not been 
 examined. 
 
 Touching the Maps alluded to in the course of 
 the correspondence, and which may, therefore, be 
 supposed to have been those referred to by the 
 negotiators, it may he mentioned that a Map was 
 inclosed by Sir C. Bagot in despatch from 
 St. Petersburgh, dated the 17th November, 1821. 
 Sir C, Bagot writes : — 
 
 " I have the honour to transmit to your Lordship, under Britiih Cue, 
 separate cover, an English translation of the Ukase, and I, Appendix, toI. li, 
 at the same time, inclose a Map of the north-west coast of 
 America and the Aleutian and Kurile Islands, which has 
 been published in the Quartermaster-General's Department 
 
r.7 
 
 licro, iiiid MiKiii wliii.h 1 liavf luarkcil all tlio iJiiiuiiiml 
 Kubsiiui Seltlcmeiita," 
 
 Hriliall (,':.sc 
 A|ipenili>, vol. ii, 
 11.40 
 
 Of this Map, dated 1S02, tUo original copy 
 exists in tlu! l"'()roii,'n OHice, in London. 
 
 Sir C. liaj,'ol to .\[r. G. Cai.niiit,', writes from 
 St. Petorsl)uri;li nndcr date the lUtli Augusf, 
 1823, referrini,' partii'ularly to tlie jrasition of 
 8itl<a :— 
 
 " Sitk.i is ikj! liiiil cliiWM Vfiy inui'lsclv in llii' Map 
 imlilisliod ill IKUii Ijy tla' (^iinrtcniiaslLT-nciKtial's Ui^part- 
 munt hull', "t laid ilowii at all in thai (jI' Arruvvsiiiilli, 
 wliicli Ims Imuii fuviiislied to me frnm tlit; Fcjroi^,'!! Oflice." 
 
 The first iliq) is tlial al)ovo noted. 
 
 Tlic second must either liave heen Arrowsmith's 
 Miij) of America, lS'y2, or Arrowsmitli's Chart of 
 the Pacific Orenii. The latter is a large Map in 
 nine sheets, wliieli ran tiirougli various editions 
 from 17!)8 to ISll. On the edition of 1832 (in 
 British .Museum Jiihiary), the years antecedent in 
 which corrected editions were puMished are noted, 
 and one of tliese years is 18:i2. 
 
 This particular edition has not l)een found, but 
 for all purposes connectt;d with the present dis- 
 cussicm, the editions of 1810 and 1832 (both in 
 Britisli ^tnscuni) are identical. 
 
 It ajjpears, therefore, tliat the two Maps princi- 
 pally referred to in the course of the negotiations 
 wer(! the Russian IMap of ]802 and "Arrow- 
 smith's Map," the latter being either tliat of the 
 Pacific Ocean or that of America. These two 
 Maps, English and Uussian respectively, are, in 
 fact, the only on(!S mentioned in connection with 
 the general fjuestious raised by the Ukase of 1821. 
 On neither of them did the name of IJehring Sea 
 app(!ar, though the sea itself is there. 
 „,. .. , .1 J.- I.. . „ ,1.. „„„ The following are further definitions to those 
 
 CiUtioM from rtriou luthorltiei btaring oa tbe goo- ^"^ jui.v... q 
 
 graphical uu of th« tcnsi "Pacific Ocean," "Behiing fj|j.pj,[|y quoted in the British CasC fouud ill the 
 Sea," &c. '' * 
 
 gazetteers, dictionaries, and geographers of the 
 world, both of the j)resent and old dates, touch- 
 ing the Pacific Ocean, Beliring Sea, Kamt- 
 chatka, &c. : — 
 
 McCullooh'a "Geographical Uictionary." Ljodon, \fM. 
 Vol. iii, p. 497. Euglisb work. 
 
 BlacUe'i " Impdrial Gazetteer." London, 1874. 
 p. 6f 8. Engllub work. 
 
 Vol. 
 
 * " Piicijic Oiriin. — Slrotclii'.s iKntliwaid tlnuajili 13J 
 diiijroos of latitiidf to Bi'liriiin's .Strait, whicli .seiiarate [sic] 
 it from the Arctic Octaii." 
 
 'Tiorcal or N.. oxtfiuliMir I'roiu lioliring's .Strait or 
 
 till' Arctic, (-'ivc'lo to thu Tropic nf Cancer. ... In the 
 
 N. the I'acific- Liradiially contracts in width ; the rniitiaents 
 
 of America and A.sia stretching' out and appro.xiiiiatiii;^, so 
 
 • Firit twclfo references should bo Tcrifiod. 
 
 [843] 
 
 Q 
 
58 
 
 ns Ui leave the com]irtralivfly iiiivnnv cliaiiiiul cil' Heliriny's 
 Strait as tlio only onminuiiii.'ation liclweoii lliu I'acilic and 
 the Arctie Oceans. ISelween the slr.iit on 'lie \., the 
 Aleutian Islands cm llio S., and the roinarkaljle penin.suh'.s 
 of Aliasliu on tin; i:. ami Kaialschatka on the V.'., one of 
 the lari,'est and liest deliiied branches ol' the Paeilic is the 
 Sea of liehiin''" 
 
 "KxlendiiiL! IVoni tlie Arctie u 
 throuuli l2i;°ot'l;niinde." 
 
 \]\f Antarelii- (lirele 
 
 ,tolm«l id's "Dictionary of (j«ograpliy." Lomlon, 18"T 
 
 En'-lls'i work. 
 
 ". . . . It narrows e.9iie<'ially t iv.ards llie nnilli, wlien^ n,;,] 
 it conniniincates witli the ArctU' (li-raii liv ^lehrill,^' 
 Strait." 
 
 " Encfclopicilit Drilannic*." Kinlii cJaion. E'lmburgb, 
 1S75 BX Vol. iii, p. (la'i. 
 
 " r>ehrin;,''s Maml, Ihe incjst wi'sivrly of tlie Ab iiliaii 
 group in the Xurlii I'aeil'ie. in 'I'l 2-' X. latitude, ICl'. i;. 
 longitude. It is roeky and desolat ', r.nd is oidy lanark- 
 able as beinj; t!ie |ilare where the' navii;r.tiu' lirhriu'.; wr,"* 
 wrecked and died in 1711. r.i]iul;:tinn l'."^oii." 
 
 "K.ihrinj; Strait, tlie narniv,- sea belv.-eon the uorth-ea.st ]i,ij, 
 part of Asia and the north-west part of Xorth Amc-tica, 
 coniiectmg the Xorth Taeilie with tin' Arctie Oeoan." 
 
 "l!ehriuj^ Strait .... which eonuects the N. raoillc uuckie'i "Iraper.il Catetiecr." London. 1874. Vol. i, 
 with the Arctic ( tcean. . . ." '• '"' 
 
 "Eehring Island is siniated in thi' Xorth Pacific." "Fnglith CyclopiBdia." London, 1854-nj. Geography. 
 
 Vol. i, p. 967. 
 " Kanitchatka, a peninsula jirojectin.L; from the north- im. Vol. ii, p. 514. 
 eastern part of Asia into the Paeilic Ocean." 
 
 " £j-knt.—Tho Pacilh; Oiean (*foriaerly called the South Entydoriedin Britannic*." Kinlli edition. Edinburgh, 
 
 ,,,,,., 1875-90. \ ol. iviii, p. 116. 
 Sea, and soinetmies still so ii;iined ny llie rrenci and 
 
 Germans (la Jler Sud ; Sudsee, Atistralocoan), with whom, 
 
 however, la Jler (rOeean) Pacifapte, and Grosser Ocean, 
 
 or Sillies Jleor, are the more usual designations) is hounded 
 
 on the north by liehring Strai' and the eoa-'s of Knssia 
 
 and Alaska; on the east by the west coasts of N'orth and 
 
 South A'lierica; nn the south the imaginaiy liia' of the 
 
 Aiitavctio Circle divides it from the Antarctic Ocean, 
 
 while its westerly boundary is the eu.st coast of A\istralia, 
 
 the Malay Archijielago scparatiu',' it fioni the Iniliau 
 
 Ocean, and the eastern coasts of the t'hine.se ein|iire. 
 
 Soiiie modern geograiiber.s place the .siuithern liinil of the 
 
 Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian Oceans at the 4l)th parallel, 
 
 and iianie the body (jf water which surrounds the earth 
 
 between that latitude and the .\ntarctic Cinle the 
 
 Southern Ocean. 
 
 "Although diHi'rin,^' from the Allimtic in its j^eiieral 
 form, being more nearly land-locked to the north, the 
 Paeilic Ocean resembles it in hcin.i,' oiieii to the south, 
 forming, in fact, a great iirojeclion northwards nf that vast 
 ?outbern Ocean of which the Atlantic is another arm. 
 
 "The Paeilic is the lai;.;est expanse c,( w.:ler in the 
 world, covering moie than it (piarter of its snireilicie.s, and 
 comprising fully one-half of its water stirfacc. 
 
 " It extends through 132 degrees of latitude, in other 
 words, it measures 00(10 miles from north to south. From 
 • In tho Eaglish edition this fonai a foot nou. 
 
59 
 
 187T 
 
 burgli, 
 
 Vol. i. 
 
 jraphy. 
 
 iburgh, 
 
 Worcester'i " Dictioniry of the Engliah Lmguige." 
 Philadelphia, 1 Bil". Pago 19«0. 
 
 "Gazetteer of the World." London, 1885. Vol, i, p. 199. 
 
 Malham'a ■ N»»al Guettoer." Londou, 1796. Vol. il, 
 p. 4. 
 
 Ibid. Vol. ,p.42, 
 
 Brookea. B. "Qaneral GazotUer." 1802. 
 
 MontoSore. "Commarcial Di^tionarj." 1803. 
 
 "Geographical Dictionary." London, 1804. 
 CrutliroU, 0. "Now Unireraal Gatelioer.'' 1808, 
 
 Maognall. R. "Comptndlnm of Oaography " 1816. 
 '■ Edinburgh Gaietteor." Edition 1822. Vol i, p. «2. 
 
 0!i9t t(i west its lireniUli viirii's iVoiii nlmiit 40 iiiilo-* at 
 liuliriii},' Strait, wlierc Asia mid America come witlun 
 sight ijf eai'li otliur, to S'lW inili'S iVoiii California and 
 Cliiiia on tin; Troiiii; of Cancer, and to niorr lliaii Ht.OOO 
 mill's on the Ivjiiator, lictwcen Qnito and the .Molnccas, 
 wIkmc tlio owan is the widust. Tlio area li.is ln;eu 
 variously uslimatcd at from ,-0,(llill,nilii to KlO.tlOH.llOO 
 siiuaru iiiik-s ; but, defmiiii; its lioundaries as aliove, Keith 
 .lolinston, from oarrful nifasorcmi'iits, estimated il, witii 
 ]irolial)ly a iioar aiipmacli to llie truth, al ti7,«l(l,0iMl squaro 
 
 milus." 
 
 ■< Jlrlirlii;/ .■^eri.—A part of the I'acilic OcQ.r,: \. of the 
 
 AhnUian Islands." 
 
 "la thai pari of llin North I'acilic Dcean b<;tweon the 
 
 .VhiUtian Islands .... and nehrin,^ Strait." 
 
 " Kamschatk:; Soa is a hii-e braiioli of llu' Oriental or 
 North I'acific tlcean." 
 
 " r.eiTin^'s Straits, which is the iia.s3agu from the North 
 Pacilic Ocean to the Arctic Sea." 
 
 " Bciainii's Lsland. An island in the Pacific Ocean 
 (Behring's Island is in Beliring's Sea.) 
 
 " Kani.s(^halka. Hounded east and .south by rucitic." 
 
 " Kamtschatkn. Uoundcil on the iiortli by the ex mtry 
 of the Koriacs, on the east and south by the North Pacific 
 Ocean, and on the west by the Sea of Okotsk." 
 
 ■' Beering's Island. In the North Pacific ( Icean." 
 
 " Beering's Lsland. An island in the Isorth Pacific 
 Ocean. 
 
 " Kamtchatku. River, which runs into the North Pacific 
 ( )conn. 
 
 " Kamtchatka. Peninsula, bounded on the east and 
 south by the North Pacific Ocean." 
 
 " Islands in the Eastern or Great Pacific Ocean j 
 Bhering's Isle." 
 
 " Behring's Island. An island in the North Pacific 
 Ocean." 
 
 " Gencn.1 Gazatteer." London, 1823. 
 
 '■ New liondon UniTerul Oaictteer." 1828. 
 
 " Penny National Ubraiy Geography and Gaiettaer." IBJO. 
 
 " Tho OaiettMr of the World." Thomu Jock. London, 
 IBHe. 
 
 rnllarton'a " Oaiotteer of tho World." 18i<. 
 
 ' Cyclopadi* of Goognpby," by Chui. Knight. 18(6. 
 
 " Beering's Island. In the North Pacific Ocean." 
 
 " Beering's Island. In the Pacific." 
 
 " Beering's Islaml. In the North Pacific Ocean." 
 
 " Biihring Sea, or Sea of Kamtchatka, is that part of the 
 North Pacific Ocean between the Aleutian Islands, in 
 latittule 50° north, and Behring Strait, in latitude 66° 
 north, by which latter it communicates with the Arctic 
 Ocean." 
 
 " Behring's Island. An island in the North Pacific 
 Ocean." 
 
 " Behring's Strait, which connects the Pacific with the 
 Arctic Ocean, is formed by the approach of the continents 
 of America and Asia." 
 
Chamb«re' " EnejclopBdit." 1888. 
 
 60 
 
 " Behring's Strait. The narrow sea l)etwocii the nortli- <■ Encjcloprdii Britinnica." 1675. SI. MarUn. 
 east imit of Asia and the north-west part of North 
 America, connecting tlie Nortli Pacific witli the Arctic 
 Ocean." 
 
 "Bohring, or Bhering. A saait, sea, island, and bay, Bryce and Johnston. ■• CjcIop»di» of Geography." Lon- 
 North Pncific Ocean." '•'>■' »■"! Gl««eo». 1880. 
 
 "Bering's Jleer. Der nordostUchste TeU des StiUen Brockhaa,' " ConTenaUon. Lexicon." Leipzig, 1882. 
 
 Ocean's." 
 
 '■ Behring's Sea. North-east part of the Pacific between „ p^^^^ j,^^y^,^p^ji,., s^^^^i^. isss. 
 Asia and America." 
 
 "Behring Strait connects the Pacific with the Arctic 
 Ocean." 
 
 " Behring Sea. A part of the Pacific Ocean, commonly 
 known as tlie Sea of Kamchatka." 
 
 " E\i8sian America compri.ses tlie whole of the continent 
 of North-west America west of longitude 141° west and a 
 strip on the coast extending south to latitude 5,")° north, 
 bounded on the east by British America, south and west 
 by the Pacific Ocean, and north by the Arctic Ocean and 
 the following island groups," &c. 
 
 The following letter, addressed to Jlr. llobert 
 Eayner by Professor Alexander Supan, and 
 published by Mr. llayiier in an article by him on 
 the Behring Sea question in the New York 
 " Evening Post " of the 11th March, 1891, is of 
 particular interest, as embodying the opinion of 
 one of the most eminent geographical authorities 
 of the day on the subject of the relations of 
 Behring Sea to the Pacific : — 
 
 " (Translation.) 
 
 " Justus Perthes' Geo>)raphica,l Institute, 
 " Editorial Jiooms, 
 " Office of Pricrmann's Communicatiotis. 
 " Honoured Sir, " Gotlm, November 10, 1887. 
 
 " In answer to your honoured letter of the 2-ltli October, 
 I beg to make the following remarks ;— 
 
 " Behring's Sea is considered by all geographers as a 
 part of the Pacific Ocean, and there cannul be [the] least 
 doubt with regard to this, [from] however ilifferent prin- 
 ciples of division one may start. 
 
 " Behring's Strait is the natural topographical boundary 
 of two great sea basins, the Pacific and the Arctic, and 
 this all the more, as it nearly coincides with the northern 
 Polar Circle, lu addition, there is the consideration that 
 sea arms shut oil' by chains of islands are just one of the 
 characteristic marks of the wesleni part of the Pacific 
 Ocean. As little as one can detach the Sea of Okhotsk or 
 the Sea of .lapaii from t!ie Pacific Ocean, just so little can 
 one consider Behring's Sea as independent. A comparison 
 with such inland waters as Delaware Bay or the Sea of 
 Azov a))pears entirely inadmissible. 
 
di 
 
 Lon- 
 
 " It is, however, [certainly] n diflereiit question liow 
 [wliat] the Treaty Powers tlioii;_'lit on tliis point in 1824 
 UiJ to tlu; year 1845 there was great [nimOi] ciiiirice and 
 divergence in the division and ai)pidlation of the great 
 sea». However, tlie wording of tlie Tnialy of 1824 shows 
 that one was already accjuaiuted willi the division of 
 lUiacho (1752), for he was the first one to introdnoo the 
 name Great Ocean. In tliis divisicju I'ehriijg Sea bclanged 
 to tlie ' Mer Septentrionale (hi Grand Ocean.' Forster, 
 tlie celebrated companion (if Cook, also is lieyonj doubt 
 in this regard (sec [his] collected writings, vol. iv, p, 9,ff). 
 
 " It must bo noted that in Fleuricn's time (year eight of 
 t'-. first French llepublic) the two ice seas (.\rotic and 
 Antarctic) were not yet separated [were not yet looked 
 upon as separated] from the other three oceans. When 
 Flenrieu introduced this separation he lonk the Polar 
 Circles as boundaries, and to this the British Commission of 
 184D also acceded, as is well known. Conscipiently, here 
 also Behring's .Sea appears a.s part of the Pacific Ocean. 
 
 "Hoping that these remarks will be sufficient for you, I 
 remain, &q, 
 
 (Signed) " Peof. Dk. Alex. SfPAN, 
 
 "Editor of Pctennann's Communications. 
 
 " Mr. Robert Ilayner, 
 
 " Salem, JIaasachusetts." 
 
 In reply to .1 request sent by Dr. George 
 M. Dawson to Professor Supan for a copy of the 
 above letter, as originally written in German, 
 that gentleman has been so kind as to write 
 further as follows : — 
 
 " (Translation.) 
 
 "Justus Perthes' Geographical Institute, 
 
 " Gotha, Jtdi/ 1 0, 1892. 
 " Most honoured Sir, 
 
 •' Unfoitunalely, I do not possess a copy of iry letter to 
 Mr. IJayncr, but the translation appears to me to ho, on the 
 whole, correct, Eayn(.r asked me what was my opinion 
 on the qu(.'Btinn from a gcographi(;al point of view, and 
 my reply falls under two heads : — 
 
 " 1. The present geographers collectively, so far as I 
 know, consider liehring Sea as part of the Pacific Ocean, 
 and from whatever point of view the question is considered 
 the Cducliision always arrived at is that Piehring Sea is an 
 annex of the Pacific. 
 
 "2. This view, moreover, also generally prevailed as 
 early as 1824, as the two earliest attempts at cla.ssification 
 agree in it. What view was held by the Guvcrnments oi 
 the dav is, however, questionable, as there are encitigh 
 instftui es to show that (lovernmcuis trouble l,hems(dvea 
 but li e with scienc(.'. 
 
 "\> i.!i the higliest consideration, I remain, (tc. 
 
 (Signed) " Alex. Supan." 
 
 f t3j B 
 
63 
 
 An examination of all the Maps ii])on which Notes on vanom 
 the sea now called Behrin^ Sea appears pm- f^r^rt:' 1 
 luinently, between aliout 1K15 and 182.") (both question of uaagM ni 
 inclusive), which could be found in the Map Ocean,' " Hph. .nj; 
 Depart: • nt of the JJrilish Museum Lil)raiT, has Sea, " &i. 
 been niado; also of some which appear in books 
 of travel, &c., in the Printed Book Department. 
 
 Touching years previous to 1815, and subse- 
 quent to 1S25, a selection only nf the more 
 important ^^faps has been consulted. Such 
 selection was made by reference to the Ca<alo!^ue 
 titles of the Maps, and the results of the exami- 
 nation of each such Map are hero noted, irre- 
 spective of the bearing which th.ose may be 
 supposed to have on the main question. The 
 list as a whole tiierefore dill'ers from that given 
 as an Appendix to Mr. Blaine's despatch of the 
 17th December, 1800 (which was compiled for 
 the purpose of making out a specified contention), 
 and, so far as it goes, may be accepted as a 
 general indication of the b(>st usage in vogue at 
 and about the time of the Convention of 1824 
 and 182.''. The names printed in italicx are in 
 each case exact transcripts of those appearing on 
 the Map. 
 
 To facilitate further reference, the Catalogue 
 numbers of all the Maps obtained in tiie ]\fap 
 Department are given. Those contained in books 
 may be referred to l)y the titles of the books. 
 
 No Maps of a date earlier than that of the 
 publication of Cook's third voyage, in 1781, have 
 been included in the list ; but all Maps relating 
 to Cook's voyage, and Avhich include the area of 
 Behring Sea, have been sought for, as Mr. Blaine, 
 in his despatch above cited, appears to place 
 special importance on one of them. This par- 
 ticular Map, published by William Faden, has 
 not been found ; but none of the original or 
 official Maps relating to Cook's expedition agree 
 with Mr. Blaine's description of this Map in 
 naming Behring Sea (as Sea of Kamichatka or 
 otherwise) as separate from the North Pacific. 
 On the contrary, in none of these Maps, whether 
 in the English editions or in the Prench or 
 German editions, of Cook's voyages, give any 
 distinctive name to Behring Sea as a whole. The 
 only Map relating to Cook's expiidition upon 
 which such separate name has so far been found 
 is one taken from " Guthrie's Atlas " (No. 1)73 (5) ), 
 in which Behring Sea is named Sea of Kamtchatka. 
 This is without date, but the " assigned date " in 
 
68 
 
 the Catalogiu! of the British Museum Library is 
 ISU. 
 
 "• A Oenoriil Chart, oxhiliilinj; lli(! Disci iV(ri(!S made liy 
 Captain .lumcs Couk, &c. Hy Licutciiiml lli'iiry Knl.crts, 
 of Uh Majcmy's Koyal Navy.' In C.ok's 'Tliinl Voyage,' 
 4to. iililion. Loudon, 178-i. Folio volume of Maps and 
 I'lalt'S accompiinyiui; text. 
 
 " This k the orii^iuiil of tlie Cliart in the 8vo. edition. 
 ISeliring Sea appears wilhoul nanu .3, Ihonyh Olularskoi 
 Sea, Vciiver Sea, Gulf oj Anidir, Shoal Watrr, Brishl Bnij, 
 appear ».» local uame.s of ecpial rank. Th(! three firai close 
 in to till! Asiatic coast. 
 
 " Bechriwfs Strait. North I'adjic Ocean. 
 
 " ' Chan of llie N. W. Coast of Ameiiia and the N. E. 
 Coast of Asia.' In same original 4to. udition. 
 
 " lirliriu^' Sea without name, though occupying a central 
 position, and .shown iu detail. 
 
 " Bri.itid Bai/ i.s the, most prominent name ou the whoh' 
 of this part of the Chan. 
 
 " Anadimk Gvhn npjiears in small letters in the gulf 
 itself. Other names appearing in the General Map are 
 here wanting. 
 
 " Bheringn Strait. No name included on part of North 
 I'acilic included. 
 
 S i_ Box 12. '"A General Chart, eihiliiting Discoveries made by 
 
 Cook,' liy I.i(Mitenant Koherts, 1784., 
 
 " Behring Sea witliout general names. Beaver Sea and 
 Oluturskoi Sea, engraved chise in to shore of Kanitchatka, 
 Gul/of Anadir and Bri.4ul Bay prominently named. 
 
 " Bclirimfs Straits. North Bacific Ocean. 
 
 " ' A General Chart, exhibiting the Discoveries made by 
 Captain James Cook,' &c. In 'A Voyage to the Pacific 
 Ocean, &o. ; Cook." '.27 vols. 8vo. London, 1784. 
 
 " The Chart included in the British Museum copy of this 
 work ajnioars to have been inserted, and bears date on 
 margin as engraved for 8vo. edition in 1780. Roberts' 
 name is noi here given as authority. 
 
 "Behring Sea without name. 
 
 " Bihmg's Str. North Pacific Ocean. 
 
 " (On lliis edition of Map, ()ln!<n-xkoi Sea, Gulf of Anidir, 
 Shoal Water, Bri4vl Bay, appear as local names of equal 
 rank, but ' Beaver Sea,' shown on some other Maps of 
 Cook's Voyages, is omitted). 
 
 '"A Uenenil Chart, e.xUiluting the Discoveries made by 
 Captain James Cook,' &e. In Cook's ' Third Voyage,' 2nd 
 edition. London, 1785. -itu. 
 
 "This seems to be identical with tha», in the 1st 
 edition. B.ehring Sea appears without name. Subsidiary 
 names in Behring Sea, &c., same as iu 1st edition. 
 
 '"Chart of the N. W. Coast of A' leriea and N. E. Coast 
 of Asia.' In 'Cook's Voyage,' 2nd edition. Identical 
 with corresponding Map in Ist edition. 
 
 . 
 
64 
 
 "•Cii'lo (iciit-nih' oflViiMt Ic^ DrL'iiuvcrtfs, iti'., pur A. 
 Iiobcrts,' &(:. Ill 'TroisKiiu' Vnyii^u du Couk.' I'liris, 
 1785. 4U.. 
 
 "Boliriii;; Scii iipiiciU-H, lull wiiliipul iiaiiu', lli(iii^;li 
 viiriims |iiii'lM imnicil as fullou-i: M. Ucnccr, M. Ohilm'ski, 
 Ool/e d'Aiiiiilir, Hn.i Fun-lf, /!'ii/f I'.rUtol. 'I'licsc am all 
 eujjravfil in cliavacU'i-i nl' ciiiiivaltnt si/.o aliil .stylt^ 
 
 " Dd. tie llilirinij:. d ''in, /'I'l'lji'im tin. Kurtl. 
 
 "'A tifiieral Chart I'NliiliiUn.^! Discuvcrii.'s iiia^lc li.v S. 1, I'.ox 12 
 Cftptaiii Ciiuk,' i^c. Same Map a.-, lant. Aiii)t!n;r fditian. 
 From the 'I'nlilii'al Maj^aziiiL',' ])cceiiiber 1784 uiiil 
 January 1785. Niiniciiclalmu .tiiuu' as almvu. 
 
 '"Caitu <lt; la CViti' X. O. ilc rAiuuriipic, et lU' la CVito 
 N. K. du I'Aaii;.' In ' Trui^,ii'inc \'ciy"n« '''■ ^''^'"^' I'in'is, 
 1875. 4t(.. 
 
 "Behrinj; Sea occuiiics a central iKisition, but willidut 
 nftuu'. 
 
 •" DC I mil ih- Ildtrin;/.' No name lai that part of Piicific 
 to 8caiih (if Aleutian hil.'iiiil-i. winch is indndcd. 
 
 " Goncrid Cliarls, &.C., in Cunk's ' Urillu Heisu.' 2 vols. 
 4lo. IJcrlin, 17a8. 
 
 " Bclirinj^ Sea without name. 
 
 "Baiirr /Sir, Olulartkkchc Sec, Mecfhuacn ron AnuiUr, 
 appear a.s subsidiary names rlusu to A.sialic coast. 
 
 "Siiclti Wiissi-i; Bridi'l Ba:j, sinularly on American 
 coast. 
 
 "Bchriii'jf: Slfansc. Iht^ XoftUlchc filillc U'dt Mot. 
 
 "CliartB von de No'd-Westliehen Klisle von AniericA 
 und der Nord-Ustlichcn Kiistu vun Asien,' in Cook's 
 ■ Dvittu Reise.' 
 
 " Bchrini,' Sc.i all included, but without name. 
 
 " L'irin;/i ,S7/-((,«, . lilccr ivn (khutik, partly shown and 
 jirominently named. 
 
 "No name on part of PacMfic included south of 
 Aleutian l.slaiids. 
 
 "' Cliarl of the Pacific On-an north of th . I.iiu.' Laurie 7195, 3 (I). 
 and Whittle. London, 17!)!). 
 
 " Bi-hring .Sea named &it of KaviUclmthi. 
 " Nofth Pacific Ocean appears. 
 
 "' nijihoijrapliit: Fmnraisc. Moppemonde ov Carte g. 13 (u), i. 
 Biiuiic t!cs Po.tli'-s Cunnttes du Glule, pour servir au 
 Voyarje dc La Ptu-ouse, 1785-88.' No date. Probably S. 1S{I0), 1. 
 about 1798 (a' before, as Vancouver's surveys not included. 
 From ' Atlas du Voyage.' La Pt^rouse. No. 1. 
 
 " Behriug Sea not named, though Afcr d'Ochotsk, cScc, 
 named. 
 
 " Behring Strait named Pel. de Behriug. 
 
 " I'aeific Ocean named Grand Ocean. 
 
 •• ' Hytlrtigraphie Francaise. Carle des Cdtcs dc ['Ami!- S. 13(11), 3. 
 riqiie et de I'A.iic.' (From discoveries by French frigates 
 ' Bonssole ' and ' Astrolabe.' No date. Proljably aliout 
 1798 or before, as \'anco\iver'!: siuveys not included- 
 From ' Atlas du Voyage.' La H'tousc. No. 15.) 
 
 " Beliriujj Sea not named on thi.s large-scale Chart. 
 
 S. 13 (10), 3. 
 
66 
 
 " Uehring Strnit iiiinii'd Del. dr. Hehnnij. 
 
 "North Pncilic uaiiiuil Grand Ocean fleptcnirional. 
 
 "Mnp showing 'The Itussian Empiro ' in view of the 
 Kussiaii Krapire. T<''>k. Luiulon, 18(10. 'i vols. Svo 
 
 "Whole of Bdninf? Sen iiicliiiled, Inil, withoiil aeparate 
 iiumo; on Un contrary, the N(jitli Pacific in named as a 
 whoh) Kn:tfm Ocean, the firal word lyini; to tlic nortli, the 
 second to the south of the Aleutian Islands (Eastern 
 Ocmn is 'iHe<l in the same f,'eiipral sense in the lext.^ 
 
 " Sea of Okliiilsk distinctly named. 
 
 " Bekring'a Straits. 
 
 " ' Map published by the Quartermaster-General's 
 Department' Ru.'jsia. 1802. 
 
 "This is really a Chart showing the Asiatic and 
 American coasts and the whole of Hehrinn Sea. 
 
 "The copy in Foreign Olhce is tlio identical one sent by 
 Sir C. BuHot, 17th November, 1821, in his despatch of that 
 date, and with his MS. notes upon it. 
 
 " Behring Sea is named, in large letters running from 
 west to east, Beaver Sea. 
 
 " Kamtschotka Sea, in smaller letters, nuis parallel to 
 coast of ])eninsula of same name, and inside the Com- 
 mander Islands. 
 
 " North Pacific is named Southern Ocean or SHU Sea. 
 
 " Bchring Strait is so named. 
 
 " ' Chart of the Strait between Asia and iVuierica with 
 the Coast of the Tschut.ski.' Drawn by A. Arrowsmith. 
 
 " This Map appears in an account of a geographical and 
 astronomical expedition to the noithem part of Russia 
 (expedition of Billings fur the liussian Government), by 
 bauer. Loudon, 1802. 
 
 •' This is practically a t'hart of Behring Sea, but that sea 
 is not separately nanuHl in any way. 
 
 " Sea of Ochotsh appears prominently. Sea of Anadyr 
 in bay of t'mt name. 
 
 69810 ns). " ' General Map of North and South America.' A. Arrow- 
 
 smith. London, 1804. 
 
 " All eastern part of Behring Sea included as far west 
 as Behring Lsland, but without name. 
 
 " North Pacific Ocean. 
 
 69815(15). "' Map of America.' A. Arrowsmith. 1804 
 
 " Behring Sea without name. 
 " Bhering'n Slrnt. North Pacific Ocean. 
 
 S.32(6). "'A General and Classical Atlas.' By E. Pattison. 
 
 1804 
 
 '■ Afaj) 3. The AVorld. 
 
 " Rather small Map in hemispheres. No names on 
 Behring Sea, Olcoti'k Sea, Japan Sea, &c., tliough Hudson's 
 Bay, Baffin's Bay, China Sea, &c., shown. 
 
 " North Pacific Ocean ajipeiirs alone. 
 
 " Afap 5. Asia. 
 
 " Western part of Behring Sea shown, but without name, 
 though Sea of Okotsk, &c., named. 
 
 " Pacific Ocean. 
 
 [843] S 
 
" Map 7. Xorth America. 
 
 " Eastern part of Bebring Sea sliown, but without 
 uami!. 
 " North Pacific Ocean. 
 
 " ' Voyages along tlie Xorth-east Coast of Siberia, and 
 Arctic, and Pacific Oceans during Eight Years,' &c. 
 (Billings' Expedition.) By Captain Sarychef. St. Peters- 
 burg, 1802. [Title in IJussian.] 
 
 " Behring Sea without any general name. 
 
 "Sea of Kamt.scliatk.. &c., apjiear precisely as in the 
 next Map, which is a (iermu-' edition of tlie same. 
 
 "'Chartc dos Nordbstlichen liieils von Sibirien, des 
 Eismeers, des Ostoceans und der Nordwestliclion Kiiste 
 von America.' Entworfen von Sariitschew. 
 
 " From Sarychefs account of Billings' voyages. Oermau 
 translation. Ijcipzig, 1805. 
 
 " Behring Sea without any general name. 
 
 " Das 'Jeer von Kamlchatla appeal's in the western part 
 of the sea, to north of Commander and the western 
 Aleutian I.slands, but is di.stinutly intended to apply only 
 there. Lettering used in this case same with that of Das 
 Ochotshische Mecr. 
 
 " Berings Strasse. Ost-Ocean oder da,i Stillc Mccr. 
 
 '"lieduced Chart of Pacific Ocean by Arrowsmith.' 980(11). 
 Additions to 1809. One sheet. 
 
 "This is a reduction of 980 (12), but evidently from an 
 earlier edition than that elsewhere tpioted, extending 
 equally far north, and likewi.se showing Behring Sea with- 
 out name. 
 
 " ' Smith's New General Atlas.' T.x)ndon, 1809. g. jj (7). 
 
 " Ma/) 1. Western Hemisphere, liehring Sea named 
 Sea of Kamtuchatka. 
 
 " Bering's Sir. North Pacific Ocean. 
 
 " Map 3. The World. Mercator's Projection. 
 
 " Same ns last. 
 
 " Map 28. Russian Empire. 
 
 " Behring Sea named Sea of Karnichaika. 
 
 " Map 31. Asia, (heater part of Behring Sea shown, 
 and jKirtion of America, but without name on sen. 
 
 " Bering Sir. North Pacific Ocean. Part of the latter 
 name runs over into Behring Sea. 
 
 "Map 41. America. 
 
 " Behring Sea named Sea of Kamtchatka. 
 
 "Map 42. North America, (ireater part of Behring 
 Sea included in detail, but without name. 
 
 " Bhering's St. North P<udfic Ocean. 
 
 "' Arrowsmilh's Chart of Ihr, Pacific Ocean.' This in a 980(13). 
 largo and important Ma]) in nine sheets, specially devoU^d 
 to the Pacific Ocean. Originally publi.shed 1798. This 
 edition with con-ections to 1810. The northern edge of 
 the Map runs about latitude 62° north, and it includes the 
 greater part of Behring Sea, but shows it as a largo blank 
 unnamed space. Jlristol Bay alont^ is rather prominentl" 
 named. By contrast, the Sea of Ochotsk, Sea of Japan, and 
 other inclosed seas are named. 
 
67 
 
 K. 116, 66, 2. "'Karte ili' (irossen Ocean.' Soltzmann. Perthes. 
 
 1810. 
 
 " Beliring Sea named Kainschatkiaches Meer. 
 
 S. 145 (83). " ' Ostetl's New General Atlas' London, 1810. 
 
 •'Map 1. The Workl Behring Sea without name, 
 though Sea of Okhotsk, &c., all clearly named. 
 
 " Bhering's Strait. North Paeijie. 
 
 "Map 19. Asia. Includes all the western part of 
 Behring Sea, but without nane. 
 
 " Paeijic Ocean. 
 
 " Map 24. North America. Includes all eastern part 
 of Behring Sea, but without name. 
 
 " Bhering's Straits. Pacific. Ocean. 
 
 gyg ,g, " ' Chart of tlie World.' Mercator's Projection. Showing 
 
 Captain Cook's discoveries. Date assigned in catalogues, 
 1811. (From Guthrie's ' Atlas.') 
 
 " Behring Sea named Sea of Kamtschaika. 
 
 " Bhering's Straits. North Pacific Ocean. 
 
 S. T. W. (4). "• Hydrographieal Chart of the World: A. Arrowsmith, 
 
 1811. 
 " Behring Sea named Sea of Kamtchatka. 
 S. 1 (2). " Bering's Strait. North Pacific Ocean. 
 
 " ' New Atlas: Fielding Lucas. Baltimore. Assigned 
 date in catalogue, 1812. 
 
 " Map 2. Western Hemisphere. 
 
 " Behring Sea named Kamtschaika Sea. 
 
 "North Pacific Ocean. 
 
 "Map','). The World. Mercator's Projection. 
 
 " Behring Sea sliown, but without name. 
 
 "Bcering's Str. North Pacific Ocean. 
 
 "Map 29. Nortli America. 
 
 " Behring Sen named Sea of Kamtschaika. 
 
 "Behring's Str. North Pacific Ocean. 
 
 " • Gohivnith's Atlas: Iwondon, 1813. 
 "Map 1. Tlie World. Storeographic Projection. 
 " liehring Sea not named, though Sea of Okhotsk, Sea of 
 Japan, &c., named. 
 "North Pacific Ocean. 
 
 "Map 2. World on Mercator's Projection. 
 " Names same as above. 
 "Slop 4. Asia. Same ivs above. 
 
 S. 144 (S). "'Nem Elementary Atlas: Cary. London, 1813. 
 
 "Map 1. The World. Sta of Kamttehatka placed in 
 western part of Behring Sea adjacent to the peninsula of 
 same name. No general name f(jr Bi'hring Sea. 
 
 "North Pacific Ocean. 
 
 "Map 2. The World. Same as above. 
 
 "Map 10. Asia. 
 
 "Sm of Kamtschaika, the name being placed quite close 
 to the land nl the |ieninsuhi. 
 
 'Map 2."). North Ameriiai. Whole ea^vern part of 
 Behring Sea sliown, but without name, 
 
 . - .... " ' New Map of America.' Smith. I/mdon, 1814. 
 
 " Behring Sea called Sea of Kamschatka. 
 
 8.76. 
 
1 
 

 1 
 
68 
 
 Library number: 
 8. 67, 4. 
 
 " ' Map of the World.' Illustrating the voyages and 
 travels of G. H. von Langsdorff. In Langsdorff, ' Voyages 
 and Travels, 1803-7.' London, 1814. 4to. 2 vols. 
 
 " This Map is separately marked on margin as engraved 
 in 1814. 
 
 " Behring Sea without name, though the author's route 69810 (64), 
 passes twice across it. 
 
 "Berings Strait. North Pacific Ocean. 
 
 " ' Pinkerton's Atlas.' London, 1815. 
 
 "No. 1. The World, Western Hemisphere. Behring 
 Sea named Sea of KanUchatka. 
 
 "No. 3. Northern Femisphere (Polar Projection). 
 Behring Sea named Sea of Kamtchatka. This name, and 
 those of Sea of Okhotsk, Sea of Jeaso, Yellow Sea, &c., all in 
 one size and style of lettering, and apparently similarly 
 subordinate to Grand Northern Ocean, which is written 
 across the Pacific. 
 
 "No. 40. About half of the eastern part of Behring Sea 
 is shown on tlii.s Jlap, but without any name, though there 
 is plenty of room for its introduction. Grand Northern 
 Ocean wi-itten across Pacific. 
 
 "Nos. 60 & 01. The World, on Mercator's Projection. 
 Bcliring Sea named Sea of Kamtschatka. In one Map is 
 in same, .size and .style of lettering as Sea of Okhotsk, in the 
 other in same form as Dans's Strait. Part of the name 
 Grand Northern Ocean extends to the west of the Kurile 
 Islands chain. 
 
 '"Carlo Encyprotyjie de I'Araerique.' H. Burd 1815. 69915(36). 
 " Behring Sea named Bassin du Nord. 
 " Behring Strait named Det. de Behring. 
 " Pacific named Grand OrAan. 
 
 "'Chartu von der Behrings Stras.se.' August, 1816. 
 
 " In Kotzebue, ' Entdeckungs-Reise in die Sud-See,' &c. 
 Weimar, 1821. Tliis Ciiart is the original of tliat in the 
 English translation. Lirge )iart of Behring Sea shown, but 
 without name. 
 
 " Behrings-Strasse. 
 
 "'Conpendenser All gemeiner Atlas' Geog. Inst., Weimar, S. 48 (9). 
 1816. 
 
 "Map 2. Western Hemisi>here. Behring Sea without 
 name. 
 
 " Behring Strait named Cook's Slra. 
 
 " North Pacific named Das Nordlichc Stille Weltmeer. 
 
 "Map 20. Asia. Beliring Sea named here Kamtsc/tat- 
 kaschte Meer. 
 
 "Cook, od. Behring'.'! Strasse. 9. 
 
 "Map 29. America. Part of Beliring Sea shown, but 
 without names. 
 
 "' Thompson t Nevi Gcnrral Atlas' Edinburgh, 1817. S. 110, S. 
 Foho. 
 
 "Map 1. Hydrographical Chart of the World, Mer- 
 cator's Projection. 
 
 "Sea of KanUchatka engraved parallel to the peninsula, 
 aud near it. No general names for Behring Sea. 
 
 "Bthring Str. North Pacific Ocean. 
 
69 
 
 69810 (SJ). 
 
 46820 (5i). 
 
 69810 (S5). 
 
 982 (30). 
 
 983 (36). 
 
 983 (33). 
 
 ' Map 2. Northum Hemispliere, Polar Projection. 
 " Behring Sea named Sea of Kamtclmtka. 
 " N. Pacific named Grand Norlliern Ocean. 
 " Map 5. Western Ilomisphere. 
 
 " &a of Kamiclintka, but evidently applied to western 
 part only of Behring Sea 
 
 " <S'. of Anadir also appears, though in smaller letters, in 
 north-western part of Behring Sea. 
 
 " Map 6. Northern Hemisphere, projected on plane of 
 horizon of London. 
 
 " Behring Sea named Sea of Kamtschatka, Bheriwj Str. 
 
 " Map 35. Asia. Whole of Behring Sea shown. 
 
 " Sea of Kamtschatka engraved between Bhering's I. and 
 the peninsula, and evidently confined to western part of 
 Behring Sea. Manifestly equivalent in rank to S-- of 
 Anadir, which is engraved in gulf of that name (urtl.er 
 north. 
 
 " North Pacific Ocean. 
 
 " Map 36. Russian Empire. Sea of Kamtehatha on 
 western part of Behring Sea, wliich alone included. 
 
 "Bhering's Strait, Pacific Ocean. 
 
 "Map 52. America. Greater part of Behring Sea 
 shown, but without name. 
 
 " Bluriii/'s St. North Pacific Ocean. 
 
 " Map :':;. North America. About half of Behring Sea 
 shown, but without name. 
 
 " Bhering's Straitn. North Pacific Ocean. 
 
 " Map 74. Chart of northern pa-ssage between Asia and 
 America. 
 
 " Behring Sea named Sea uf Kamtcluitka as a whole. 
 
 •' Behrinfs Strait. Northern Part of Pacific Ocean. 
 
 " ' Charte ron America.' F. W. Streit. Nurnberg, 1817. 
 " Behring Sea named Meer von Kamtchatka. 
 " Pacific Ocean named Der Stille Ocean. 
 
 "'Jtussian War Topographical Depot Map.' General 
 Map of Asia. St. Pctcrsljurg, 1817. 
 
 " I'elning Sea so named, in same style of lettering as 
 Okhotsk Sea, &c. 
 
 " Pacific Ocean so named. 
 
 " ' Charte von America.' Stroit. F. Campe, Nurnberg, 
 1817. 
 " Behring Sea named Meer von Kamtchatka. 
 "Behring Strait uiuned Behring oder Cooks Strasu. 
 " Pacific iianK'd Der Still Ocean. 
 
 " ■ Jlap of Countries round the North Pole.' A. Arrow- 
 smitli. London, 1818, 
 
 " Bi'liring Sea named Sea of Kam,iehatka. 
 " North Pacific Octan. 
 
 '■ ' Map of North Polar Regions.' IL M. Leake. 1818. 
 
 " Behring Sea named Sea of Kaaichalka. 
 " North Pacific Ocean. 
 
 " • INIap of Countries round the Arctic Ocean.' J. Wyld. 
 I^ndon, \H\H. 
 
 " liehiing Sea named Sea of Kaii.schatka. 
 
 f843] T 
 
70 
 
 '"Map of Oountriea round Arctic Ocean.' 
 London, 1818. 
 " Bohring Sea named Sea of Kamschatka. 
 
 C. Smith 8SS(3I). 
 
 "'Asia.' By Arruw.smith. London, 1818. 
 
 " Behring Sea not named, tliough a large part of the a Tel. (end.) 
 western side included. 
 
 " ' Chart of the North Coast of Asia, and of th(^ Sea to 
 the north of Bering'.s Strait.' In Burney's ' Clironological 
 History of North-Eastern Voyages of Discovery.' London, 
 1819. 
 
 " Greater part of Behring Sea included, but without 
 name, though the northern part of the Sea uf Ochotzk, 
 which alone included, is jjrominently named. 
 
 '•• £radletjs Universal Atlas: London, 1819. S. at (23). 
 
 " Map 1. The Globe. 
 
 " Behring Sea without name. 
 
 " Bell rini/'s Str. Pacijlc Ocean. 
 
 " Map 3. Asia. Shows the whole of Behring Sea, but 
 without name, in manifest contrast to Sea of Ochotsk, «S:c. 
 
 " Bherinifs Str. Pacific Ocean. 
 
 " Map 5. North America. Includes gieater part of 
 Behring S(!a, but without nana'. 
 
 " Bliering'a Strait. 
 
 '" Carte de I'Asie.' Brui'. Paris, 182(1. 46870(49). 
 
 " Behring Sea named Mcr dc Hrhring. 
 " Behring Strait named Dct. de Behring. 
 " Pacific nauied Grand Ocean. 
 
 "• Rossi Atlas.' Milan, 1820. 
 
 " Map G. AVorld in Hemis])heres. 
 
 " Behring Sea named Bacine del Nord. 
 
 " Behring Strait named Str. di Bering. 
 
 "North Pacilic named Grande Ocruno Borenlr. 
 
 " Map 7. The World. Mercator's Projection. 
 
 " Behring Sea appeara without name. 
 
 " Behring Strait named Stretto di Bhering. 
 
 " Pacific named Marc Pacifixo. 
 
 " Map 25. Asia. 
 
 " Behring Sea appears without distinctive name^ 
 G. d' Anadir and Baija di Bristol occupying most of 
 available area for name. 
 
 " Map 31. Grande Oceano. 
 
 " Belu'ing Sea appears without name. Marc d'Oclwlsk, 
 &c., named, and Baia di Bristol in letters of same size 
 and style with these. 
 
 " Map 31. L' America Settenti ionale. 
 
 " Shows the whole of Bohring Sea, but without name. 
 
 " Behring Strait named Stretto di Bhering. 
 
 " North Pacific named Oceano Boreale. 
 
 " (Notable that on tliis rather largo Map Bohring Sea has 
 no name, though Sea of Ohol.sk, though only partially 
 included, is named in prominent characters.) 
 
 " This Map bears below border, " Incisero I'anno 1821." 
 
 " ' Chart of Beerings Straits on Mercator's Projection, 
 August 1816.' In Kotzebue, 'Voyage of Discovery into 
 the South Sea,' &a English Translation. London, 1821. 
 
 1396, i, 4. 
 
71 
 
 F O., No. 16. 
 
 S. 100 (IS). 
 
 69810(16). 
 S. 145 (4). 
 
 S. .32 (37). 
 
 S. 49 (8). 
 
 S. 1S6(21). 
 
 "This Chart bears on margin date of production, 1821, 
 " Largo part of Behring Sea shown, but witliout dis- 
 tinctive name 
 
 " ' Map of Amerua.' Hy A. Arrowstnith, Hydrographer 
 to His Majesty. London, 1822. (Additions to 1823.) 
 
 "Greater port of Behring Soa included, but without 
 name. 
 
 " Uetriwfs Strait. North Pacifie. 
 
 Carey and Son. Philadelphia, 
 Eastern part of Behring Sea shown, but with- 
 
 " ' American Atlas. 
 1823. 
 
 " Miip 3 
 out name. 
 
 " Str. of Bheriwj. Pacific Ocean. 
 
 " ' America.' E. Wilkinson. London, 1824. 
 '■ BeliriuK Sell nuiiiisd <S«i of Kamschatkn 
 
 "' Wellcharte in Mircator's Projection.' Von Christian 
 Gottlcib Kuichurd. Xurcmbci'g, 1825. 
 
 " Behring Sea nnined Mccr ron Kamtschatka. 
 " L'chnngs Strasse. Nordlicher 0-rosser Ocean. 
 
 " ' Butler's At his.' London, 1825. 
 " Map 1. The World, in Houiispheres. 
 " Behring Sea .shown without name, though Sea of Ochotsk, 
 &c., named. 
 
 " Bhcring's Strait. North Pacific Ocean. 
 
 "Map IG. Asia. 
 
 " Behring Sea named Sea of Kamtschatka. 
 
 "'A New General Atlas' A. Finley. Philadelphia, 
 1825. 
 
 " Map 1. Wcptorn Hemisphere. 
 
 '' Behring Sea named Sea of Kamtschatka. 
 
 " Plicriiu/s Si rails. North Pacific Ocean. 
 
 " Map 3. The Wi>rld. Jlcrcator's Projection. 
 
 " Behring Sea shown without name. 
 
 " Bhcri7ig's Straits. North Pacific Ocean. 
 
 "{Sea of Ochotsk, IJaffin'.i P>ay, &c., all named.) 
 
 " Map i. North America. Behriag Sea included in part, 
 but without name. 
 
 " Map 51. Asia. Greater part of Be'.iriu,^ Sea included, 
 but without name. 
 
 "'Sinilli^ G -I . Ulas.' Loudon, 1820. 
 
 " Map 1. Tilt \\'.iild, in Hemi.-iphere.s. 
 
 " ]>ehring Sea luuiied Sea of Knmisiiliatha. 
 
 " llhcrin'js St. Nortli Piuific Ocean. 
 
 "Map 31. Asia. The greater part of Behring Sea 
 shown, but without niinie. 
 
 "Sea of Anadir, in north-west part of Behring Sea, very 
 promiriently named. 
 
 " Bcriny'.H Str. North I'acijic Onrin. 
 
 " (The latter name, as in previous edition of this Jlap, 
 extending over part of Behring Sea.) 
 
 "Map 33. Iiussian Empire. 
 
 "Behring Sea named Sea of Kamtschatka. 
 
 " Map 47. Behring Sea named Sea of Kamtchntka. 
 
72 
 
 " Map 48. North America. Western part of Behriug 
 Sea shown, Init without niiuic. 
 
 " Bhcrituj's St. North Pacific Ocean. 
 
 " ' Nordamerilia uiul Westiiidien.' Versen. Assigned 69915(37). 
 date in Catalogue, 1827. 
 
 " Behriug Soa named Mcer von Kamarhatka. 
 " Bchring Strait named Cuol'-i Strait. 
 
 " ' Carte Ginirale de. I'Ocdan Pacifique.' By Krusensteru. 14001, K. 2. 
 St. Petersburg, 1827. 
 
 " Beliring Sea named Mcr tic UJirinj. 
 
 " ' Cliart of the. World,' upon Mercalor's Projection. 973 (gy 
 Cary. London, 1827. 
 
 " Behring Sea without name, though Si-a of Okhotsk, &c., 
 prominently named. 
 
 " Behring Strait. North Pacific Ocean. 
 
 "'The Eaton Compnrntire Atlas' By A. Arrowsmilh. S. 12(2). 
 London, 1828. 
 
 " Map J. Asia. 
 
 " Western part of Beliring Sea .shown, but without 
 names. 
 
 " Bhcrinr/'s Strait, Sen of Okotsk, &c., named. 
 
 " North Pacific Ocean. 
 
 " Map 27. Western Hemisphere. 
 
 "Wliolc of Bchring Sea .sluiwu, but without name. 
 
 " Bcering's Str. named. 
 
 "North Pacific Ocean . 
 
 "'A New General Allan.' John Grigg Philadelphia, S. 49 (9). 
 1828. 
 " Map 1. Western llemi.^plieie. 
 " Behring Soa without name. 
 " Bhtrinij Str. North Pacific Ocean 
 " Map 14. Asia. 
 " Bchring Sea witliout name. 
 
 •"A.sia.' A. li. Freiuin. Pari.s, 1829. 
 " Behring Sea mimed /)Uw(/t die Nord, ott dc Bchring. 
 " Pacific named Grand Ocean, Mcr de Sud, ou Ocean 
 Pacifqiie. 
 
 " ' Asien.' .Schmidt. Berlin, 1829. 
 " Behring Sea named Kamttchatkischcs Mccr. 
 " Beluing Stiiiit named Behrinj Stras-tt. 
 " Pdcifi(! nanuid Das Grosse JVcltmecr. 
 
 "'Atlai i^nicersd de Ge!ographie.' lji]iio. Paris, 1829. 
 
 " No. IG. A Map of the World nn Jlercator's Projection. 
 Sopanitily dated on engraving, 1832. 
 
 " Behriug Sea is marked Mcr de Bering in letters same 
 size and stylo as those f!mploye<l for Baic de Baffin, and 
 larger than those used for Mer d'Okhold; M. de Saylmlicn, 
 &c. 
 
 " Tlie Pacific is named Grand Ocean Bijiiinoiial, this 
 name running along tlie Equator. 
 
 " No. 17. Ma|) of ilie \\'orld in Hemispheres. Separately 
 dated on engraving, 1831. 
 
 46620 (53). 
 
 46820 (52). 
 
73 
 
 S. 7(i (2-.') 
 
 S. 2a(ll). 
 
 ei'sio (5ijj. 
 
 S. T. W. (4). 
 
 980(13). 
 
 S. 63, ; 
 
 920 (IOC) 
 
 " Ik'liriiig Soa iiiiuu'd us aljovf, but tlu; Nuith Pacific 
 uauii'il Grand Oct'aii, Uocfal. 
 
 " (Till' spelling of lit'rini^ on tliese 'M\i\yn, iiml the uanns 
 iiscil Uiv the IVoilic, sccni to show that Ihcy, or ]irevioiis 
 cditiipMs (if Uii' sauir, wvic not emiikiyt'd liy llii^ nugu- 
 lialiii'.-.) 
 
 "'//;( At/"s ../■ Mirh-i-)i Oaigruiihij.' A. Anowsniith. 
 
 is:;m. 
 
 " M"p I. I'lchiini; Sim shown withmil uaiiio. 
 
 " Nudh I'dcijii: 
 
 '' iliip 28. Similar to la.it. 
 
 ■- A Ci)riiiif'.ralivc Atlai' liy A. .Vir.AV-mil'i. l.'ind'iM, 
 
 "M'li'l'i. Wc~l' ni lli!nii-|ihi'ri'. 
 
 "Till' wholo oi I'li'liriiii; Si'a ^!M.\vll, lail wiihoul naiiir. 
 
 " ISrfringa SlraU. Xorlli J'm-ifu (hrin. 
 
 " Mail 2S. \ortli Anu'Wca. 
 
 '• Greater j)art of liuliring Sea sln.wii, Imt '.vitliout name. 
 
 " flienni/'n ftif- Xnii/i I'm ijo (kyiiii. 
 
 "'America.' I'mf. .1. M. F. Sehmiilt. Uerlin. lS3ii. 
 
 "Ilehriiif; Si'a named Murr run KaiiUsnliuJhn. 
 
 "North I'aeilie nanied Die Kurd Sec. 
 
 ■' C.'iiart shdwini; the Track of Il.M.S. ' Blossom ' iiL Narra- 
 tive of a Vnyui^e to the I'aeilie and l!eurin^'~ Strait, 
 ISli.VL'S; London, 18:!1. 
 
 " liehrini; Sea shown, out wiliinui name. 
 
 " Berriiiij'i Strait, Adrl/i I'licijir drain. 
 
 '" Ilyilro^jrapliical Cliartot the World.' A, Arrowsmith. 
 London. New edition. 18o-. 
 " llehrin;; .Sea named An of KaviUhallu. 
 " Ik riitij's Strati. Xarl/i /'arl/ir Ortaii. 
 
 "' Arriiir.iiiiit/i.'i Churl u) the I'acijic (Jrcaii.' Auothu 
 edition, eorrectod lo IS'.'rd, and with note helow title, 
 .slatinj; that eorreclion- made in ISUl, 1814, 1S17, 1S1«, 
 IHL'2, 1821), and 18:'.2. 
 
 " In ihi' 1832 edition tlie size and general laitlini-s are 
 as licl'ore, and Behrin;,' Se,a is .still without name, i )llier 
 inchiseil seas named ,is hi fore. 
 
 "(It may be su|i|"i.5ed that the. negotiators for Treaty ol 
 lS2o were siipiilled with coneeled copy to i;-(22, and it is 
 clear that on thi.i eopy the luimenelature must have beeii 
 the same .i3 on those of earlier ami later date^^.) 
 
 ■ Map oi the I'aeilh- tleeaii in Arrowsniith's .Atlas.' " 
 London, 18:i,V 
 
 Driiri'i'i Sen. or Sen uj Knnilacluill':. 
 
 " Weltcliaiti.' ill Meicator's rrojection." Keieluir.i. 
 Nnrnhorg, Xeiie .Viei tiate, 18.')',t 
 
 llehring Sea nanieil .)/'•( r rou Ktiml.ir/irtll.n. 
 
 Jlrhriiifi'.t Sira.iiir. Stirdtirlirr Urv>i.srr Ucavi. 
 
 "t\. , de L'dci'aii i',icill<|ue." In .Vtlas .iccoinpaiiying 
 D'.illot de Morlas work Paris, 1844. 
 
 lii'lirinu ."^ea without name, tliniigli Mrr d'OkhotsI-, &<:., 
 pionniiently named. 
 
 J)it. dr Il.'riiiij. Grand tJccuii Sciitoilnnnm. 
 [84.'3] U 
 
74 
 
 Tho particulars above given slio'\v in what 
 manner and to what extent the terms Sea of 
 Kamtchntha and Behrimj Sen liad been and were 
 at about tlie time of the Ukase of 1821 and the 
 consequent negotiations employed in !^^aps, upon 
 which tho United States appcacs to rely rather 
 than upon distinct geographical definitions. 
 
 Tn regard to the ierm Nort!i-Ea.\-lcn> Sihi or Unitp^ States' 
 Eastern Ocean, which, it is claimed, was also used ^''"'' ''■ '^^' 
 as a distinctive name for what is now generally 
 known as Behring Sea, it is to be remarked tliat 
 neither of these terms is used upon any of the 
 Maps contained in tlie selected list I)rought 
 forward by the United States. 
 
 1. Nortli-Eastcrn Sea. — Tho only instances 
 cited for the use of North- East em Sea, as another 
 name for Behring Sea, are the first and third 
 Charters of the llussian-American Company. 
 
 In tho first— the Ukase of 1799— the expres- 
 sion used is Xorth-Eastern Ocean — not Xorth- 
 Eastorn Sea — whicli applies to the waters from 
 Behring Strait down to .").''^ north latitude, and 
 therefore includes waters outside Behring Sea. 
 
 In tho third Charter— of IStl — Xnrfh-Enstern 
 .SVwisused; tlu^ southern limit is 50 lo' north 
 latitude, and the term therefore obviously includes 
 the waters south of Behring Sea. 
 
 Norlli-Eastern Sea is also used in the I'kase of 
 Nicholas of the 29th March (10th April), 1829 
 (conlirming the Chnrtor of T^21), and evidently 
 a;!plies to all the waters down to ."li 40' north 
 Ifititude. This passage is not cited by the United 
 States. 
 
 The United States are apparently unable to 
 find any instances of the use of Xnrlli-Easiern 
 Sen, meaning "chriiig Sea, as distinct from the 
 Paeifie Ocean, and, bein^r obliged to explain the 
 iiic'uiing of the term in the passages above 
 (] noted, they assume the interpretation whicii 
 tliey desire. 
 
 2. Eauterv d-can. — '•'he authorities i|Uoted by 
 tlie Unitci States for tiie use of this term as 
 niijdied t ) Behring Sea only are two in number : 
 [a) A ]>lap wiiich forms the frontispiece of 
 "Coxc's llussian Discoveries;" (h) Globe, by 
 D. AdaTns, London, 1797. This is quoted in a 
 foot-note to the list of Mai)s, p. 290, vol. i. it 
 did not appeal' in the list appended to Jlr. Elaine's 
 note of tlie 17th December, 1890. 
 
 With regard to («). it may be observed that, 
 ••dthougli in the Map on the frontispiece of Coxc, 
 
75 
 
 Eastern Orenn iswrifton on the ocean to tlio north 
 of the Aleutian Islands, while no name is actually 
 written across the cornjjaratively small portion of 
 the oeoan to tlie south of these isiaiuls, whieli is 
 included hy the 'Mnyt, in a fin-thcr ]\Ia]) (lacing 
 p. 248 of Coxe's book, ed. 1S03) of Kvenitziu's 
 and Levasheif's Voyasje to the Pox Islands in 
 1703 and 17(50, Enntern Ocean is written so as to 
 include the waters south of the Aleulian Islands 
 as well as those to the north. 
 
 Also, that the first sentenro of Cliaptcr I, 
 Part I (p. 21, cd. 1 SOI), is :— 
 
 "Till' posses-ion of K;'intol!:it!;a was .-uuii lollow.-il liy 
 voyaue-i 'ilMi-civciy to iIm' -\V'/'^' Pneijv iMiau." 
 
 Then follows Peter ti'.e Great's plan of a 
 Toya!,'e to ascertain the separation, continuity, or 
 comn'ction of Asia and America, witli his instruc- 
 tions to Vitus Becrin!:^. 
 
 Further, at p. UO (ed. 1^0:5), Coxe says :— 
 
 "A full and judicious account cif all the discoveries 
 hitlieito made in ibe Iui.<'' rn (I •(n: may lie cxpecled I'.oiu 
 Miillcr. Aleanwliilc, the lollnwing nanativi', cxtvacted Ironi 
 tiri;_'inal piipci's. -md [irocuri d from the liest ir.leIli,Lienee, 
 may lie acee]ii:i!ilc to the piddie." 
 
 The narrative thai follows is one of voyai?es to 
 the Aleutian Islands :'.nd Kadynk, and it is 
 mentioned that the exiilorcrs in so)ne instancies 
 first sailed south from Bclirin^' Island r.nd 
 Katntcliatka in search of land (jip. 112, l.")0, 
 ed. 180.") ; hut being disappointed, bore nortli 
 for (he Aleutian Islands. 
 
 It is thus quit'' clear that tlie term Easter;} Ocriiii, 
 as here employed, is not a sperial designation of 
 Hchring Sea, but a synonym of Pacijir Ocean, 
 ]n'eci'iely analou'ous lo th(! term JVcvteni Ocnni, 
 which is often (Mnployed in Ivurope for the 
 Allanlk Ocenn. Behring Sea was, in fact, a part 
 of the lia.-'tcni Ocean of Coxe, who thus uses it in 
 the same sense as that in which it was cni|)loyed 
 in the llussian Charters abov<! alluded to. 
 
 (/>.) The (ilobe by U. Adams, London, 1707, 
 which is the only ofhcr ;mtliorify rpioted for the 
 limited application ol' l!i(< term Enslern Ocean, 
 has not been found, llinigb two I'arlier Clobes 
 by the same author. il.-Jed 17liO [r] and 1772 [?], 
 Kiii(r'« Libr.irj. are in ihe King's Iiil)rary at the British ilusoum. 
 
 These (llobes show a very imperfeet know- 
 ledge of the regions in ([uestiou. 
 
 The names, which are in Latin, and th" eon- 
 
 cuai ;iiiil west 
 gallf'ript 
 
70 
 
 III K»V.ll (iio- 
 
 {(raphical Sotirty'.- 
 po8»Pssion. 
 
 figuration aiv llio same as hi Miillcr's Map, and 
 publislicd 1701, above rcfeiTcd to, p. 
 
 But grantiui? tbat " Eastern Oeeau " is con- 
 bnod to Bcliring Sea on tbc Glol)i! in question, 
 this autliority cannot be set against tbat of otlier 
 llaps, wliieb clearly show that the term, whieb 
 Avas rarely used, was not confined to the \vat(>rs 
 north of the Aleutian Islands, and was in most 
 cases a synonym for the "I'aeific Oeean." The 
 following may be quoted: — 
 
 Sayer and Hennett's East India Pilot Chart, 
 Ko. 23, 17^0. "Eastern Oeean" extends along 
 tlie parallel of 18 north latitude and from 12o° 
 er.st to 156° east longitude, or from near Lazon 
 [skind beyond (he Ladrone Islands. 
 
 ^laj) of Asia, aeeording to Sicur d'Anville, I'li'l 
 published by 11. Sayer, Loudon, 1772. " Eastern 
 Ocean " is placed in about the same position as 
 in preceding lla]) quoted. 
 
 iloll's Atlas, 3Iap of tiio World on Mercator's li,i,l. 
 projection [? date]. "The Eastern Oeean or 
 I'arts unknown" is written off the north-oast 
 shore ol' Asia, north of Japan. 
 
 ilap showing " the Russian Empire " in view In Uritisli Mu.-ium 
 ol' the Russian Emj)ire, -'J vols., 8vo. Took, 
 London, 1800 (ciuoled above, p. ). The 
 
 "North Pattilie is named as a whole "Eastern 
 Oeean," the first word lying to the north, thi- 
 second to the south of the Aleutian Islands. 
 (Eusterii Occiin is used in the same general sense 
 in the text.) 
 
 " Chartc de.s ^'ordostlielleu Thcils von Sibirien Ibid, 
 (les Eismeers, des (Jst-Oeeaus und dcr Nord- 
 westlichcn Kiiste von America — Entworfen vou 
 8amtsclien,'' from Sarwhcl's account of 
 "Eilling's A'fiyages,'' Ceiraan tran^dation, Leipzig, 
 ISO") (quoted ai)o\'c, p. ). 
 
 Osl-Ocdiu (idcr das S/illc Mcer. 
 
 A I'lUssian Map, published at St. Petersburg! i, i„ i-. o. 
 and entitled " .A[ap on Mercators projection of a 
 part of the Ji'islern Ocean adjacent to North- West 
 America between Uie Straits ol Euca and the 
 Oull' of Iterai,-' edition of 1820. Tlie words 
 "Part of the Eastern Oeean" are written in 
 til "c horizontal lines oiV the portion ol the coast 
 gi\en. 
 
 A Russian ila]), i)ublished at St. Petersburgh Ibid. 
 1820, with same title as abovt', but gi\ing the 
 coast from the (iulC of Panama to the Straits of 
 i'uen . Part of the Eastern Oeean is written in like 
 
76a 
 
 manner in three horizontal lines opposite the 
 coast ^ivcn. 
 
 In F. O. A Russian Map, puhlished at St. Pctcrshurgh, 
 
 entitled " l»Iap of the entrances to Port of New 
 Arcliangcl tlirough the Sounds of Sitka and 
 Klokatchcff, drawn up from descriptions of 
 Sturman Vasileff I in 1809 and Vasileff II in 
 1833, and engraved in Ilydrographic Department 
 of Ministry of :Marine, 1818." " Eastern Ocean " 
 is written off the jjortion of the coast given in 
 three horizontal lines. 
 
 Ibid. A Russian Map, puhlished at St. Petersburgh, 
 
 entitled " Map on ilcrcator's projection of the 
 southern portion of tlie Koloschensky archi- 
 pelago, drawn up from various journals and Maps, 
 and engraved in the llydrographieal Department 
 of the Ministry of Marine, 1853." "Eastern 
 Ocean " is written in a perpendicular lino along 
 the coast given. 
 
 Ibid. A Ilussian Map, published at St. Petersburgh 
 
 in 1859, entitled " General ^lap of Asiatic Russia 
 or Sil)ci'ia, and tlie llussiau North-American 
 Possessions. St. l'etersl)urgh, 1851) " The ocean 
 south of the Aleutian Islands is marked " Eastern, 
 Great, or Pacific Ocean." 
 
 (E. 2.) 
 
 Respecting the meaning of the phrase Pacific 
 Ocean in the T'-eaty of 1825, it is shown in the 
 British Case tiiat tlie Ukase of 1821, the con- 
 sequent protests and negotiations, with the 
 Treaties of 1821! and 1825, referred to one and 
 the same area of ocean, namely, the "Ocean, 
 commonly called the Pacific Ocean," including 
 that portion of the ocean now generally known 
 as Behring Sea, but which was in earlier times 
 often named the Sea of Kamstehatka. 
 
 The Ukase of 1821 did not specifically mention 
 Behring Sea under any name, and tho nego- 
 tiations show that this sea was throughout 
 included in the discussions. Therefore, the 
 absence of specific mention of this particular 
 part of tlic ocean in the Treaties can in no sense 
 be referred to as an " implied recognition " of 
 tjniied Slates' a Special Russian control over Behring Sea by 
 Case, p. SI. « j.^yQ great nations," as is further claimed in the 
 
 Case of the United States. 
 Ibid., pp. 53, 54. Two documents in particular are quoted from 
 in tho Case of the United States in support of 
 [813] U* 
 
. 
 
78a 
 
 its contention as to the understanding of Russia 
 on this subject. 
 
 The second is th<! Report of a " Special Com- 
 mittee consisting of '■mcof tlic Iiiglicst dignitaries 
 of the Empire," dated the 21st July, 1821. 
 
 These documents arc dealt with elsewhere in 
 this Counter-Case. 
 
 (6.) The Treaties, negotiations, and declarations 
 of Russia touching the rcfcninco to Ik'hring 
 Sea are referred to in another part of the Counter- 
 Case. 
 
« 
 
 1 1 
 
 77 
 
 United Sutea' 
 (!aw, |i. S7. 
 
 Ibid,, p. S9. 
 
 Ibid., |>. 41. 
 
 Ukaaaof 1821. 
 Brjtiiii Catr, p. 
 
 United Statri' 
 Case, pp. 38, 3'J. 
 
 38. 
 
 Ibid., pp 36-33. 
 
 Ibid., p. 89. 
 
 (F.) 
 
 / (1). So far as tlio fur-soals are concerned, it 
 will bo mudo to appear in what follows that the 
 jurisdiction in question {i.e., of Russia over 
 Bcliring Sea) was always exercised for their 
 protection. 
 
 /(2). The great object had in view by the 
 Russian Government in excluding Bohring Sea 
 from the cllect of tlie Treaties of 1821 and 1826, 
 and al.so in limiting tlio privilege of access and 
 trade for oven ten years to the coast south and 
 east of Yakutat Bay, was obviously the pro- 
 tection of tiio valuable fur industry. 
 
 /(3.) That the limit of 100 miles enabled 
 Russia to protect the Pribyloff herd. 
 
 It is to bo noted that the object of the Ukase 
 of 1821 as explained in the British Case is 
 similarly put in tlie United States' Case. While 
 the United States' Case states that the provisions 
 of tlio Ukase " were sufTicient to enable " Russia 
 to protect what is termed, for the first time in 
 history, the "seal-lierd " of the Pribyloff Isknds, 
 neither in the documents of the period nor in 
 the Ukaso itself is there any reference to the 
 special property upon which it will be seen that 
 the United States now chiefly rely for the right 
 claimed to protect the fur-seal. 
 
 So far as the then exclusive privileges were 
 desired by Russia, it is claimed, even in the 
 United States' Case, that the chief object of the 
 exclusion related to the waters outside of what is 
 now called Behring Sea. It was in the waters 
 below this sea that the fur-seal industry was 
 prosecuted and the competition in trade was 
 waged, the waters above being resorted to at that 
 time more by explorers than by hunters or 
 traders. 
 
 The Ukaso pretended only to grant exclusive 
 rights of "commerce, whaling, and fishery" 
 upon the certain territory defined in paragraph 1 
 of the Rules established for the Limits of 
 Navigation set out in the United States' Case. 
 
 It cannot bo contended with success that the 
 object of the Ukaso was the protection of the 
 fur-seal, since the United States now insist that 
 tho fur-seal is not a fish but a domesticated 
 animal. 
 
 The United States' Case, under the heading 
 [843] X 
 
"f"W:"~"'"^T^.'';7 '*^; "■■'^1 i^i^if^ia 
 
78 -V 
 
 of "Reasoa why Limit of 100 miles chosen," 
 supports tlie British Case. 
 
 The GoTcrnor-Geiieral of Siberia said it was united States' 
 sought to establish these limits to marine juris- *^'»""' PP- '^^' *'*■ 
 diction in order to secure to the Russian-American 
 Company a monopoly of trade. 
 
 The claim for exclusive jurisdiction was based 
 not upon a desire to protect the fur-seal, but 
 upon an agreement reached after negotiations 
 between otlier nations which had executed the 
 Treaty of Utrecht, wherein the 100 miles limit 
 was adopted for purposes wholly foreign to the 
 fur-seal or other fisheries. 
 
 The language of Mr. G. Canning to the Duke 
 of Wellington is in point under this head : — 
 
 " I have, iudecJ, llie satisfaction to believe, fiojn a British Case, 
 cotifeieiice whicli I have had witli Count Lievcn on this '*PP|°J*; l°[' '" 
 matter, tliat upon these two points— tlie attempt to shut 
 up the pa,ssa:^e ullo^'ethcr, and the claim of exclusive 
 dominion to so enormous a distiinee from the coast — tln! 
 Russian Government are prepared entirely to waive th.ir 
 pretensions. The only eflort tliat has been made to ju-ufy 
 the latter claim was by reference to an Article in the 
 Treaty of Utrecht, which a,ssi-nb .'in lca^;ups from tlie coast 
 as the distance of proliibition. l!ut to this argument it is 
 sufficient answer that the assumption of such a space was, 
 in the instance (luoted, by stijiulation in a Treaty, and one 
 to which, Ihereture, the party to be affected by it had 
 (whether wisely or not) given its di>lil>erate ronscnt. No 
 inference could be drawn from that transaction in favour 
 of a claim by unthority against all the world. 
 
 " I have little dcaibt, therefore, but thai the public noti- 
 tication of th(' claim to e(in3id(;r tlie portiuiis of the ocean 
 included between the adjoining coasts of America and the 
 Russian Kmpire aa a mare, elausiim, and to e.xtcnd the 
 exclusive territorial jurisdiction of Russia to 100 lulian 
 miles from the coast, will be publicly recalled.". 
 
 The Agent for the United States now claims United StitM' 
 that a more recent precedent for this claim ^"'' P" 
 might have been cited by referring to the 
 IVth Article of the Nootka Sound Convention 
 between Great Britaui and Spain, "whereby," 
 the Agent adds, "the former conceded to the 
 latter exclusive jurisdiction of tlie sea for 10 
 leagues from any imrt of the coasts already 
 occupied by Spain." 
 
 No Treaty, however, exists upon which the 
 claim in this case can be based. 
 
 In the two Treaties just mentioned no general 
 principle prevails. In the ouo case 30 leagues 
 were agreed to as the extent of jurisdiction; in 
 the other 10 leagues; and wliilc in the latter 
 
79 
 
 Usited Statei' 
 
 case the 10 leagues wore agreed to on part of the 
 very coast in question and below Behring Sea, 
 this exclusive jurisdiction enjoyed by Spain 
 disappeared before the Conventions of 1821 and 
 1825. 
 
 It found no place in either of these Treat ^s. 
 ijBiwo duiei Further on the United States makes rju 
 
 Ca.e,pp.4lBnd49. g imjssion that "the Ukase of 1821 was merely 
 Britiih Cue, p. 38. declaratory of pre-existing claims to exclusive 
 jurisdiction as to trade." 
 
 The United States' Case is in fact based on no 
 previous claim and upon no Treaty. 
 
 The despatch from Mr. Middleton to Mr. Adams 
 shows that in 1822 Mr. Middleton treated the 
 claim of the alleged precedent in the Treaty of 
 Utrecht as a farce, stating that ho had pointed 
 out, when this argument was used, that " a stUl 
 better precedent might have been pointed out to 
 them in tlio I'apal Bull of 1 193, which established 
 as a line ul demarcation between the Spaniards 
 and tlie I'ortuguose a iiuTiuian to be drawn at a 
 distance of 100 miles west of the Azores." 
 Again, he writes in the same despatch : — 
 
 United Sutet' 
 Ca<e, Appendix, 
 vol. i, p. 139. 
 
 Ibid., p. 136. 
 
 " For some time past I be^'ivn to perceiv*> thnt the pro- 
 visions of the Ukiiso wo\ilil not Iw jicrsisti'il rn. It uppoars 
 to Imvc bueii si^^nwd by iho KuifK'ior without sutTicient 
 examination, ami may be fairly conaidered as having been 
 aurrcptitiourtly obtained." 
 
 British Case, 
 pp. 79-82. 
 
 Ibid. 
 
 The efforts which arc said to have been made 
 by the United States and England to obtain a 
 renewal of tlie provisions of the ten years' clause 
 in the Convention refer to the Agreement which 
 perniitted trading contrary to the policy of 
 colonial exclusion recognized at the lime. 
 
 That the United States mnde such clTorts, it is 
 true ; but as shown in the British Case, upon a 
 refusal to retu-w the clause, tiie United States 
 insisted that, invspcetive of it, their material 
 rights in the sui)j(H't were sustained by the law 
 of nations, rcjiardless of Treaty provisions. 
 
 No authority is given for the statement that 
 England press(>d tliis sui)ject upon liie att'>ntion 
 of the llussian Government at any time, and it 
 is not now deemed necessary to discuss tho right 
 of Russia to prohibit foreign Intdr on the coast 
 referred to in this Article, whctiicr below or 
 above the Aleutian archipelago. 
 
 Tiie case of the "l^riol" and thi" action of 
 the President of l\u- United Sttitcs at the time 
 liavc been dealt with in the British Ca.se, 
 
80 
 
 Tlie notice mentioned as published by the United Staiet' 
 United States' Government in 1S45 speaks only *"' '"" 
 of interior harbours, bays, &c., and was at most 
 an intimation of the claim of Russia that these 
 and other places where Russian establishments 
 were situated should not be visited. The notice 
 did in no way apply to Behring Sea outside of its 
 harbours, bays, &c. 
 
 Referring to a similar notice, the United Briiiih Cjse, 
 States' Minister at St. Petersbij rgh thus wrote part'°i,'p' ^s.' "* 
 to the Russian Government whe.i discussing the 
 case of the " Loriot ": — 
 
 " Nor is the ' informal notice ' (lying before the Under- 
 signed) published, at the repeated request of Baron de 
 Krudoiier in the ' \Vashin;;t<)ii Globe,' on the 22nd 
 August, 1835, to which his Excellosicy has referred, sus- 
 ceptible, in the estimatiun of the Undersii;ned of a con- 
 stniction which can ascribe to the American Goveriunent, 
 or any of its citizens, the knowledge tliat a voyage like 
 the one contemplated by Captain Blinn was inconsistent 
 with any colonial interdict or general jireteusion of the 
 Imperial authorities. Far from it. That publication, 
 while characteristic of the frank and confiding readiness 
 with which the American Executive proceeded to execute 
 a wish e.\])ressed by a Power wliose intercourse and rela- 
 tions ins])ire no distrust, com])el3, as is conceived, with 
 unfeigned deference, the opposite construction, and imports 
 a recognition of the entire lawfidness of such a voyage. In 
 this s|urit, and in this only, was it originally framed, and 
 has ever since, without a question, been understood by 
 the Uovernment and i)eople of the United Stales. True, 
 it adverts to a Notice issued by the Governor of the 
 Itusaiun Colonies alter the expiration of the IVtli Article 
 of the Convention, to the ellect that the masters of 
 American ves.sels could no lunger claim the right they 
 enjoyed under that IVth Article r.f landing ot all the 
 landing-places, without distinction, belonging to Kussia on 
 the north-west loast ; and it further proceeds to observe, 
 to all interested in the trade, that under tlie Ilnd Article 
 of the same Convention it is necessary for all American 
 vessels resorting U> any point where there is a Russian 
 establishnient to obtain the permission of the Governor 
 or Commander. To the scope of phraseology of this 
 ' infonnal notice ' it is believed Baron Ui Krudencr never, 
 orally or in writing, took the slightest ex<:ei>tion. It will 
 surely be iierceived by Ids E-xcellcncy Count Ne.sselrode 
 to contain no inhibition of training voyages generidly to 
 the north-west coast of America, but, on the contrary, to 
 confine its admonition expref.slyand precisely to ' landing- 
 places belonging to Itussia' and to 'any point on the 
 coast where there is a liussiau establishment.'" 
 
 'i'hc letters addressed to the Russian Com- United 8ut»i' 
 pany anterior to the Ti-caty were clearly for the *'*' '"' 
 
81 
 
 purpose of endeavouring to assuage the anxiety 
 
 of that hody. 
 United States' The letter of the 18th July, 1822, is referred 
 
 Caie, p. 60. ^Q jj^ jjj,jj,.j. (^ gjjQ^ Russia's alleged ol)ject in 
 
 excluding Bchring Sea from the Treaties was 
 the protection of the fui iii(lu>try. The extract 
 from the letter in the United States' Case is as 
 follows : — 
 
 " At the sumo timi' 1 am authorized to assure you that 
 every ell'ort will lie iiiiule to secure the ailoiition of sueh 
 rules tts will cllectiuiUy protect the JJiissian- American 
 Company from inroads on the part of foreigners upon their 
 vcst(^d priviletjes, in strict conformity not only with the 
 privileges f^ranti^d by highest act, hut also with the Edict 
 of the 4th Sejitcndjer, ISl'l." 
 
 The British translation of this document 
 differs from that of the Unilal States. 
 
 The two ])aragrai)hs in the original are trans- 
 lated as follows : — 
 
 [See Mr. Fairholrae's Translation, p. 17.] 
 
 Another extract from the Russian corre- 
 spordonee relied on hy the United States is as 
 follows, from a letter of the 18th August, 1824, 
 where Count Ncsselrode is said to have written 
 to the Minister of Finance :- - 
 
 " I (latter myself with the thought that these docu- 
 ments will convince you, most gracious Sir, as well as the 
 Board of Administration of the Russian-American Com- 
 pany, that it is His Majesty's firm determination to pro- 
 tect the Company's interests in the catch and preservation 
 of all marine animals, and to secure to it all the advantage 
 to which it is entitled under the Charter and privileges." 
 
 Tlero again a serious difference in the trans- 
 lations exists : — 
 
 [See Mr. Fairholme's Translation, p. 19.] 
 
 British Case, p. 48. The claim that the Ukase cnahled Russia to 
 protect the fur-seal of the I'rihylolf Islands, as 
 United Sutes' mentioned in the United States' Case, is in 
 
 Case, p. 40 contrast to the cliicF point now urged hy th > 
 
 United States, that no regulations short of a 
 general prohihition against pe'agic sealing, both 
 in Behring Sea aiul tiie Nortli raeitia Ocean, will 
 save that animal from extermination. 
 
 There is not di.sclosed in the eorrcspondenoe 
 
 between Russia and the United States, or between 
 
 Russia and Great Britain, any suggestion of a 
 
 desire on the part of Russia to afford extra- 
 
 [843] Y 
 
" V'ovoges rouni'. 
 the World," 
 pp. 370, 371. 
 
 88 
 
 ordinary protection to any fur-boariiig animal or 
 to the fisheries in these waters. 
 
 An attempt is made by th(! I'liitecl States' United States 
 Case to make it appear tiiat fur-seals \veri> the L'»'e> P- 2* 
 great object of the hunters who foHowed iti t!ie 
 wake of the early discoverers. 
 
 Cook, however, shows tliat in 179!), in the 
 fur trade with islands between Kamtehatka and 
 America, the sea-olU'is mnv the object of the 
 search of Russian merchants. They, ratlier than 
 the fur-seal, were, and for a long time remained, 
 the indueemcnts to the Russian Settlements 
 mode on the islands — Unalaska and Kadiak. 
 
 Bancroft says : — 
 
 " Tho sea-otter wius iilieady kninvii lo tli(! ItiiasiiUis fripin Dancroft's 
 a few speciuK'iis (•iii)tiiif(l (Hi llie I'lmst iif Kiiriiti'lmlka ami " ■^li»l"'> P- *•"• 
 among the Kurile Islniuln. .Smui llu- caslaways ili.scovfnMl 
 tiie presence of tliese animals iji Uic summmlin;,' waters. 
 The tlesh seemed to tlieni most palatable, ami Stellcr even 
 considered it an anti-seorlmtic The skins were preserved 
 l)y the survivors, and subseiini'iilly Ird In llic discovery of 
 H wealth that Herin^' and Cliiiikoli' had failed to see in 
 their voyages of observatioa" 
 
 And again :— 
 
 "One would think that, with lull kimwled^'O of the Ibid., p. 99. 
 sufferings and dangers eiicounteri'd by lieriiig's and 
 Chirikof's expeditions, men would lusitate liefore risking 
 their lives for otter-skins. Hut smli was not the ease. 
 When a small vessel was made ready to follow tho course 
 of 'Sv Pelr' and the ' .Sv Pavel,' there was no lack of men 
 to join it, though .sonu' of llicni were still .scarcely able to 
 erawl, from the etl'ects of former disaster. As the little 
 sable had enticed the Cossack from the V.laek Sea and the 
 Volga, across the Ural Mountains and the vast plains of 
 Siberia to the shores of the Okhotsk .Sea and the Pacific, 
 so now the sea-otter lures the same vcnturesouie nice out 
 among the ishinds and ice and fog-banks of ocean." 
 
 The record in the British Case of discoveries British Case, 
 and of commerce, compiled mainly from United 7717383^88. 
 States' authorities, satisfactorily establishes that 
 in these eiiterpris(!S on the north-west coast Great 
 Britain and the United States led tho way, and 
 in the end secured tho chief prizes of the trade 
 of the region. The protection of tiie fur-seal 
 was of no more importance to Russm than to all 
 others depending on the fur trade. 
 
 Referring to the Spanish claim and the Nootka United State*' 
 Sound Convention of 1790, Article ITI is quoted. ^'"' ''' ^'' 
 
 It is said to be the basis of the adjustment 
 between Russia, the United States, and Great 
 
Britain, in 1821 and I825,rcs|)ectinff tho naviga- 
 tion of tho l'(iciti(! OcL'iin and tlic conllictinR 
 claiins t') the territory of tho north-west coast. 
 
 Tiiis Articli' or Treaty made no refcrcneo to 
 the fur trade or to tiie protection of seal life. 
 
 Tho 'i'reaty Ix'tweon (Jroat Hrit^iin and Spain 
 did not recognize for titlicr nation exclusive 
 navif,':ition over the Pacific Ocean for a distance 
 of over 100 miles from slior(>, nor did it recognize 
 special jiropcrty in the animals wliicli might 
 breed on the coasts. 
 
 I'or " colonial " ))urposes only it established a 
 dist.-mee of 10 miles from tlie coast as a limit for 
 exe'u.-'ve jurisdiction. 
 
 Tiie principles stated by the Noofka Soimd 
 Convention are summed up in tho letter of 
 Mr. Adams to Mr. Rush, 22ad July, 1823, as 
 follows : — 
 
 " Amsricfli. Stale „ , .j.| ^,^^, -^^^^ ,,f (,,,, j„ ,|,p f(,„ni, <^a.,, of 
 
 laiKTu, rornjin ■ >> j 
 
 Itelaiioiu," v.,1, V, tradiiiv A-iih the iiiitivcs i>{ till' nortli-wrst roiwt of 
 
 P' •*••'• Amen- ', imd of iiiiikiii},' Settlmiumts on the toast itself for 
 
 llic I iiHiaes of that Inulc, north ol' ttie ncliidt Settlcniimts 
 (if Spain, wn- cdmiiiiui tn all the Kiiroin'an nations, and, of 
 courne, t« I ill- I'niti-il States." 
 
 " :;. That SI) far as ihc aitiial Seltli'iuunts of Spain 
 extended, slic jinssessiid the exclusive rights, territorial, 
 and <if navii;atiiin and tishiTV, < \teiidiiif; to the distance of 
 10 miles liiini the coasts so Mtunlly occupied. 
 
 " ;5. That on the coa.st of South America and the 
 aiJja( enl Islands south of the parts already occupied by 
 Spain, no .Settlement sliould tliereafter be made either by 
 Brilisli iiv Spanisli siihjeits, liut on Imtli sides sho\dd be 
 retained the liberty el laiidiiij;, and of ereetini; temiMrary 
 buiUliiiKs l'(ir the purposes of the fishery. Tliese rights 
 wen^ al.sii, of course, enjoyed by the people of the United 
 StaU^s." 
 
 It is to be observed that Mr. Adams proceeds 
 to refer to these exclusive riijfhts, and to the 
 application of the law of nations, subsequently 
 to the Treaty, to every portion of the American 
 continents ; and, wholly regardless of the .incient 
 principle of colonial exclusivencss, ho says : — 
 
 "The ttxeliisive ri;;bts of Sjiain to any part of the 
 American contiuiMits have ceased. That portion of the 
 Convention, tlierefore. which recognizes the exclusive 
 colonial rit,'hts of Spain on these contineias, though con- 
 firmed as between tircat Britain and Spain liy the first 
 Additional Article of tlie Treaty of the ."Jth July, 1814, 
 has hreti fjiim/iiishai by the fact of thi> inde|«>ndenc'e of 
 the South American nation and of Mexico. Thosi- inde- 
 pendent nations will possess the rights incident to that 
 condition, ami their territories will, of touiw, be subject to 
 
 Ibid. 
 
84 
 
 no exclitiive right of navigation in that vicinity, or of access 
 to tliem by any foivigii nation. 
 
 " A necessary coiiscciuence of this state "f things will 
 1)6 that the Anierieim continents heneofnrtli will no longer 
 hf sulijects of toluniziilion. Ocruiiiud liy eivili/.iil, inilc- 
 penilent nations, they will l>i^ aecssiblo to Kur(i|K'ans and 
 to each other <m that fooling alone, ami the I'aiifie Oiean 
 in every part m it will renmiii open to the navigalioii of 
 all nations, in liki^ manner witli the Atlantic." 
 
 It may be added that, a!?n!eal)ly to the views 
 of Mr. Adams, the Conveutioiis of ISil aad 1825 
 wholly exclude the ratification of tlie policy of 
 colonial exclusion on any part of the American 
 coast, with the cxeei)tion of a provision by which 
 the right of exclusion in colonial possessions was 
 said to have been recoi^nized so far as concerns 
 trading within the ordinary t(>rritoriiil limits. 
 
 It is shown elsewhere in the British Counier- 
 Caso that the statement above (/2), to the elTect 
 that the privilege of trade wa.s limited to the 
 coast south and east of Yakutat J$ay it ineorrec^t. 
 The privilege covers the whole of the Russian 
 coast— in the case of the Treaty of 1825. 
 
 In the explanation of Russia to the United 
 States as to the n^ason for the claim of KK) miles 
 of exclusive coastal jurisdiction no reference to 
 sealu or lo fisheries was made. On the contrary, 
 M. Poletlca wrote to Mr. Adams :— 
 
 ■ I sliall 1h' more siiceinot 
 
 1 niiiiu .«- ...v">^ •■■■— ■'■'• '" ''"' "''^I'lisition of the llrilj.h Case, 
 
 Miulivea whieh .leLTinine,! the liupe.ial Ciovrrnni.Mit t,. ^]','"",','|''; j"' 
 
 prohibit foreign ve.s.sels from appioaeliiug llie norlli-west 
 
 coast of Anienea belonging to Itussia, within the di.stjince 
 
 of at least KH) Italian miles. This measure, however 
 
 Mt'veri' it may at lirst view api>ear, is after all Imt .i 
 
 measure of prevention. It is e.velusively ilireeted against 
 
 the culpable enterprises of foreign a.lventuiers, who, not 
 
 conU'ul with e.xercising n))on the coaaU above mentioned 
 
 un illieil trade, very prejudicial to the ri;^lits nvserved 
 
 eiitiri'ly to the liuH.siun-Ameri(an Comiiany. take upon 
 
 them besides U) furnish anus and ammunition to the 
 
 natives of the Uussian posse.s.sions in America, exciting 
 
 them likewise' ill every manner to resi.Mtance and revolt 
 
 against llie authorities there estjiblialu'd." 
 
 It is said the lOO-mile limit enabled the init..,i stat.s' 
 Russians to protect the " herd " while on the ^'*""' P- *'• 
 islands. 
 
 Mr. II. W. Elliott, a special officer of the 
 United States' Govei';.ment, was of a contrary 
 opinion in 1B71. Reporting to the United 
 suites' Government, \w said :— 
 
 ■' III regard to tlie iiuiiilx'rs of the fur-sed when the 
 Uussiaus first took pos.session of the ground in 17S7, the 
 
85 
 
 Report o; H. W. 
 Elliott, SpecinI 
 Agont, Tri'aaurjr 
 Defirtmcnt, 
 •vx. Dor. No. 83, 
 4'llh Cong., 
 Itit Seas., pp. 119, 
 120. 
 
 jirpsciit gciKTiitiiiii, (l(^-cciiilwiit.s ' ' J103P jiioiipers, Imvi' 
 only 11 gi>ii(!ral vague iiiii)ivs.sii]ii llml the si'ftl.s were some- 
 what iiioro numerous in the tivat days of Ilusaiau o<ituiia- 
 linn tlian they are now. 
 
 ■' VVitli regard to the probable tiiuli of tin' f()rej;oin>; 
 statement <jf the natives to us, I can only cull attention to 
 the fact that the entire sum of seal lite, as given liy them, 
 is 4,100 of all cla8.s('»; now, Hishop Veniuminov ))ublislies 
 an authentic, rwonl of the killintr on tliese islands from 
 1817 to lli?7 (the time in which he linished his work), by 
 which it will lie sihmi tluit in tliLs year "f XKMt, 4,ll.V.' .seals 
 wore killed and taken ; and if the account of the natives 
 wiw true, that would leave on the island only 50 for 1836, 
 in which year, however, 4,040 were killed, and in 1837 
 4.220, ami there was a steady increase in the killing' by 
 the Itussians up to 1850, when they j,'ovi>rned their catch 
 by the market <\Vnv. 
 
 "This great diminution of tiie seal life, aetting in at 
 1817 and runni:i},' i>n .steadily in iledine until 1834, when 
 it began bi n.end, is well accounted for liy Venianiinov's 
 account \'\><n\ tliia il will l>o seen that after iri-i-edy 
 l!\issian Companies nn tlicso i.slands had killed sials for 
 over lifteen years in unknown n\nnbers without causing 
 any threat change in tlie mtio of nuiidiers. a diminution 
 U'gan gradually to set in, whic)i becanu^ ulivioua in 1817, 
 and attained its ma.ximnni m 1H:'.-1-.".."., when han.ly a 
 lithe ..f (he lornier iiuml» is appeal. vl nn tlie ground. ' 
 
 Lcttrr of S«crptary 
 of Trrmury, 
 44lli Conjf , 
 Ux »•»«., H. K., 
 Ki. Doc No. HH. 
 So alio at pp. 'j'i 
 and 70, ditto. 
 
 I 'niled Stiten' 
 Sl.initr< at largr, 
 DoccmlHT 1687 to 
 March 18K1), 
 »ol x«T, p. 997. 
 SOtli L'ouk . 
 2nd Sen. 
 
 The United States' Case refers coutinually to 
 the " rriliyiotr luTil," as tliouirh the seals 
 resortiii!.: to these i.slamls were so known and 
 distin'jfiiishod. 
 
 This, however, is a novel term, and is intro- 
 dueed for tlie purposes of tliis Case. 
 
 It does not oecitrin the llussian eorrespoudeiice 
 nor in the United States' lei,'islatioii. 
 
 In tlie l.'nited States' doetiment'4 the seals are 
 referred io as " seal lisheries in Alaska." 
 
 The legislation of the United States on this 
 suhjeet is in point. Witness the foUowinsj:— 
 
 '■ .Miid-iiii Sfiil J-'i.ilKitti. 
 
 ■• Kor .salaries ami Imvclling expenses nf agenia at »j,A 
 lisheries m Ahwka, as billows; -For one agent, 3,050 d..l- 
 hirs. .me .u^sislant agent, 2,1»:'0 dollars; tw., assisUim 
 iigenU at -.M'-Ml dollai-s each ; necessary tni-.tlling oxiHiiises 
 ,)f .igenta actually incurred in i;.aug Io ami ri'^uriiing from 
 AlMka, not t.. excee.l 000 .b.llats each \>i'r annum ; in all, 
 13,3.">0diillar8 " 
 
 Bldt Cofiff, 
 
 lit Sen«., H. It., 
 
 N... 7903. 
 
 So in tlie 
 
 Hill .)f tiie 7tli Mareh, l^«Ut), and llie 
 
 Act founded upon 
 [84:1] 
 
 it, wherohy Mr. Elliott was 
 
iivvv«p«inpi.li|il^«|ppv^"!79w^'^n*«*«'|jwpi I'Jii O'l ,. 
 
 ■..^■■■■V*i l( ;! "^ ■ "J-" I'.l*^-,! I 
 
86 
 
 nppdiufcd a Special Agent to inquirn into the 
 subject. 
 
 So :ilso in the letter of the Secretary of the 52n(l Cong,, 
 Trensi:iv in reference to Senate llesolution of the i"' ^S'^" ^'^' ^'^• 
 
 No. 73. 
 
 28tli :.l:nvh, 1802. 
 
87 
 
 Britiih Ca?t', 
 Chap. IV, p. 77 
 
 Ibid., p. 77 
 Ibid., p. 1H. 
 
 Ibid , p. SS. 
 
 Iliid., pp. 83, 84. 
 
 Ibid., p 8S. 
 
 The British Case supplies the evidence of 
 continuous usci' of the very waters to which the 
 hinRuai^e of Ukoje of 1821 applied during the 
 period hetween the Treaties and the Cession of 
 Alaska. 
 
 Notwithstanding the general ignorance pre- 
 vailing at this time among the nations touching 
 the waters and coasts of Uehriiig .Sea, notwith- 
 standing (hat discoverers and explorers chiefly 
 were traversing those waters, the record in the 
 Britisii Case shows that from Hcliring Stmit to 
 the southernmost limits covered hy the Ukase 
 were used hetween 1 824 and 1867 by the ships 
 of various nations without molestation. 
 
 The Hritisli vessel " Blossom " iu 1820 sailed 
 thmugh Ui'hring Sea and Strait. 
 
 In lf^M> fon'ii^n wh.ilirs were followed to 
 Behring Sea, and their appearance was reported 
 to the Itussian Uovernment, who, in turn, 
 reported their presence to the number (jf lifty in 
 1841. 
 
 In 1842 he asked authority to drive them out 
 and to preserve the sea as ex'clusively Russian ; 
 but he was informed hy the .Minister of I'oreign 
 AlTairs for Russia that the Treaty of 1H21 pre- 
 vented this. 
 
 Tt is showi in the British Case that the elTorts 
 of the Russian Company to free themselves of 
 this foreign competition failed because t!i<' I'oreign 
 Oflice concluded that Russia had no riu'iit — 
 
 "to Piiliulo fnn'i|.;ii Hliipa from llmL pert of tlic r.n'nl 
 OcL'im which sitpurate-- (he eastern .shun' oi Sibi'iiu rniiu 
 Uiu nnrtli-wegtom nhoru of .\nicrica, ot lo maku tlie ptijr- 
 MU'iil of a sum iif motiL'v u lumlition ■' ailmviug ilieiii to 
 take whalex 
 
 Tu 1«S8 Mr. C. A.Williams testified as follows 
 ()efiire the Committee of Merchant >rarine and 
 Fishi'ries at Washington : — 
 
 Ful>«««l'W»heti*« " 'i'- ^''•'' ''"'^'•'"i ^' >'"'"' kTinwloil;,'e, ill the hillilt ol 
 t Almiktt," (;rniliti|.{ [MTiuii'rtieu to vesaels to visit wrlain points on tho 
 
 . nusi of llcliriiiK Sea, or weh' lliov allowiHl to Inml xvillioiil 
 |«riiiii<si')ii '— .( They wem iillowi'd to land on the 
 northiTM coasl witlioiit iiny pcnniHsion. Above Norton 
 Soiinil the ahort« ,in either aide nre toueheil at by wIiuIoin 
 and tnidorti wiihonl iicnuissiou." 
 
 Wuhiuirton, !6H9 
 pp. 93. W 
 
88 
 
 On the freedom of tlio soas and the uninter- 
 rupted enjoyment of these waters by wlialers, 
 Tikhmenieff says : — 
 
 " M. Ktoliii iiccoriUiifily rcsulvcd onco more ti> ask the Britinh Cue, 
 Company to furnisli liiiii with nioro tlilinite iiislniclioua in ''''J','| 4.; '" 
 regard to tlie wliiilers, i.e., to dofinu tho rigliti of the 
 Oovernor of tlie Cdloiiv willi refcn^nw lo tlmac ciiptalns 
 wlio, in sjiiti' of till' pniliiliiliDii, slimild I'litcr tlif liays, 
 linrboiiri, and K"lfs "' l'"' Itus'tian |)o»si'.ssiunM, or land on 
 llie islaiuU. Whili^ awiiitini; a <lcoisioii in tlic niatlor, lio 
 resolved lo arm one of tlie sliips of the colonial llotilhi to act 
 as a cniiziT in tlie waters most infested by tli' foreign 
 vessels. The eruizer wax ordered to avoid nioit laieftilly 
 anytliinj,' which mif^ht give rise to a coiillict, and to confine 
 herself strietly to wairliiie,' the whalers. She wa.s on no ac- 
 count to resiirt to foree unless it U'e/iine necessary to resist an 
 attack. Apart from this measure, M. Etolin sie^j^esteil the 
 expediency of obtaiuinj; tlu' iiermissiou of the liovernnenl 
 (or the colonial cmi/.er to lly the Han of tho Imperial navy, 
 ivs that fla'.,' would, in certain eventualities, inspire more 
 respect. Finally, he consideri><i that li.e claim of fureignors 
 to take whales ouj!hl o rtainly to bo limited to a line 
 (dawn at a dislanceof at lea.st 31ea}jnes, or '.• Italian miles, 
 U>'M the shore of tho Colony As an example of the 
 jo. tue of fixiii;; such a limit, and of the advanla;,'es to be 
 cilitaiiied tlierefriim, he adduced New lliill.iiid and dllior 
 Hritish po.s.se.ssions, where no whaler would dare to take 
 whaU'S within the iMeasuo limit. 
 
 " rufnrlunalely tlie.^^.! effiirt.s lo deleiid the rights of the 
 Company weie not atteiel'd with more .success than those 
 previou.sly made. Althnugh the Furcign Otlice, at the 
 request of tho Company, informecl the (!oV(^rniiient nf the 
 United Slates of the establisliment ipf crui/ers in the 
 Kiwsian Oilonies, for the luirjiose of insiirin;^ the nhser- 
 vatiim of the Convention of I.S24 by fori'ign .ships, no 
 decisiiin wiis arrived at in regard to the lixing of a limit for 
 whaling, or with referenda to the proposal tliat the Com- 
 pany's cruizer should lly the Hag of tin- Imperial navy 
 On the other hand, the (loveinmenl took (nca.^iun to 
 impi-ess upim the Company the importance of great caution 
 iK'ing observed by the colonial cruizers in all that con- 
 cerned foreign ships. 
 
 "The exuil wonls of the letter from the Fcmigii Ollieo 
 are as fnUows : ' The lixing of a line at sea, within wliicji 
 foreign vessids should be prohibiled from whaling otV our 
 .shores, would nut lie in acconlanct^ with (be spirit of the 
 Convention of 18Jt, and would be ifjutraiy to the jirn- 
 visions of our Convention of IH^.'J with (ireat IJritain 
 Moreover, the iwloption of such a measure, without preli- 
 minary negol iatiou and arrangement with tho other Towers, 
 might lead to proiests, since no dear and niiilonn iignie- 
 ment ha.-, yet been arrived at among nalions in regard to 
 the limit of jurisdiction at sea.' 
 
 ■' In 1847 a lepresentation fwm Covernor Tebenkolf, in 
 regard to new aggressions on tlie part of the whalers, gave 
 rise to furthei coi resiwndence. iSonie lime beforo, in 
 
80 
 
 June 1840, the Qovemor-Picneral of lyistcm SilxTia lirid 
 expressed liis opinion that, in order to limit tiio whalin); 
 Dporntions of foiiif,'nLT», it would hu fair In forhid tiiom to 
 coiim within H) Italian niilus nf uiir short:>, the porl8 of 
 I'etropavlovsk and Okhotsk to hi! <;x(;IiidLd, and a payment 
 of 100 silver rouhle.H to he deniandud at those ports from 
 every vessel for the ri(,dit of wlmlinK. He reeominended 
 that a sliipof War .should 1h' employed as a eruizer to watch 
 foreijrn vesscds. The Koreij^n Olhce expressly stated as 
 follows ill reply: 'Wo have; no riyht to exclude foreign 
 ships from that part of the (Ireat Ocean which separates 
 the eastern shore of Silierin from the north-western shore 
 of Ameriui, or to niiiko the paymiiii. of a sum of money ii 
 condition to allowing! them to lake whahis.' The ForeiL'U 
 < Xliii' were of opinion that the lixiiw; of the line referrtid to 
 nliovo would reopen the disenssions formerly carried on 
 hetweeii England and Fiance on th.' suhjeit. The limit of a 
 cii'iiKm-shol, that is, alioiil .'i Itali.iii miles, would alone fjive 
 rise to no dispiit.-. The Korci;;ii Ofhce ohserved, in con- 
 clusi'in, that no Tower had yut succeeded iu limiting the 
 frecilom cif lishiiii,' in open seas, and that such iirctinsions 
 had niver been rci!ot,'ni/(i| hy the other Towits. They 
 weiv roufiiieiit that th.' littiii;,' on I of cohaiial eriiizers would 
 put an end to all dilliiiiltios ; there had not yet been time 
 to test the etiicacy of this measure. 
 
 " (Soon after this the whalers liej,'an to turn their chief 
 att<'ntion to the Sea of Okhotsk.) 
 
 "In iH.'iKIhe corvette ' Oliviista, (if the liiLisian navy, 
 was sent by the Ooviruinent to cruize in the Northern 
 Paeifie. The Company were invited •') ofler «Uf,'gestions 
 with •ci.Mrd to the instructions to be j,'ivc.i to criiizers. 
 "The lollowiiii; is an extract fri ;ii tlii'ir su;4j,-htions: — 
 *" In orih'r to prevent the complete extermination of 
 the whales in the Sea of Okhot.sk it is most ch'sirahle that 
 an armed cniizer shouhl always be stationed at the Sliaiilar 
 Islands to keep away forei;-!! whalers, at all even! i imtil it 
 is foii:i,l possible alto^'elher to prohibit whaling by foreign 
 ahiim in that sea.' (ICtli November, 1S.")3, No. 970. Diehi 
 Arkii. Koni. IHIL', goda, No. 14, sir. 181.) 
 
 "Some time before the Company had written to the 
 Foreign Olli.c (L>L'nd March, 1,'<.'.3, No. ,i(iS, the .same 
 Diilo, p. li;:i): 'If it is found inipracticuhle eiitia-ly to 
 prohibit for a lime fishing by foit'igiM'rs in the Sea of 
 Okhotsk, as an inlaiul sea, would ii not, »t any mte, be 
 possibly ollicially to proliibit whalers t'lom coming I'lose to 
 our fdioivs .111(1 whaling in the hays and niiiong the islands, 
 detaching one of tlii! criiizcrs of the Kamt.hat'Ka llotilhi 
 for this service ?' 
 
 "The iiistriii tioiis to cruizers wiic approvrd (Ui the 
 ilth llfccniber, ISM!. Tlii! cruizers were to .see that no 
 whalers entered the buys or gnlfs or i ame within .". Italian 
 miles of our shores, that is, the shores of 1,'iissiaii America 
 (north of r..l''4r), the Peninsula of Kamtcliatka. Siberia, 
 the Kii.ljak Archipelago, the Aleutian l.-ihiiids, the I'ribylcIV 
 and Conimiiii.ji'i Islands, and the ollieis in Hehiiiig Sm, 
 the Kuriles, Sakhalin, the Shaiilar Islands, and tin. others 
 in the Sea of Okhotsk to the north i f 4(i' .iu' ncrth. The 
 
 [«"] 
 
 A 
 
e> 
 
 
 IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 
 A 
 
 ' //^ ids 
 
 
 V] 
 
 (^ 
 
 % 
 
 /y 
 
 7: 
 
 
 y 
 
 /^ 
 
 I.I 
 
 l^|28 |2.5 
 
 ■ 50 *^" MSH 
 •duu 
 
 1.8 
 
 1:25 III 1.4 III 1.6 
 
 Photographic 
 
 Sciences 
 Corporation 
 
 33 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WEBSTER, NY. 14580 
 
 (716) 872-4503 
 

90 
 
 cniizers were instructed constantly to keep in view that 
 ' our Government not only does not wisli to prohibit or 
 put obstacles in the way of wlialinj by foreigners in the 
 northern part of the Pacific Ocean, but allows foreigners 
 to take whales in the Sen of Okliotsk, which, as stated in 
 these instructions, is from its f/eoijmphical po.filion a 
 "•'.« ian inland sea." 
 
 Whalers by no means confined their opciatious 
 to whaling. Tiklimenielf recounts that — 
 
 " . . . . Traffic in fura was openly carried on between IJritish Caae, 
 the natives and the American captains, and when the P^q" "' *° ' '' 
 OoloniiJ authorities made some whalers leave Novo 
 Archangelsk on that account, they quietly continued the 
 tratlic in the Bay of Sitka and disregarded all protests. 
 The following case also deserves to be noticed : In 1847 
 one of the whalers came to Behring Island, arid on the 
 captain being told that he nuist not tratiic in seal-skins on 
 a neighbouring small islaiul, ho ordered the overseer of the 
 island to be turned off his ship, and immediately went on 
 shore with liis men, with the evident intention of dis- 
 regarding the pruhibtion " 
 
 The United States' Case, notwithstanding this 
 record, insists : — 
 
 g(l). That after the date of the Tv aties of United State.' 
 1824 and 1825, Russia, in fact, excn ised the """'''' 
 same control over the waters of Behring Sea as 
 before. 
 
 g{2). That after said Treaty of 1825 the Ibid., p. 89. 
 Russian Government continued to exercise 
 exclusive jurisdiction over the whole of Behring 
 Sea up to the time of the cession of Alaska to the 
 United States, in so far as was necessary to 
 preserve to the Russian- American Company the 
 monopoly of the fur-seal industry, and to prohibit 
 the taking on the land or in the water, by any 
 other persons or Companies, of the fur-seals 
 resorting to the Pribyloll Islands. 
 
 g (3). That before and after the Treaty of 1825, ibid, 
 and up to the date of the cession of Alaska to the 
 United States, British subjects and British vessels 
 were prohibited from entering Behring Sea to 
 hunt for seals, and that it does not appear that 
 the British Government ever protested against 
 the enforcement of this prohibition. 
 
 g (4) By the orders and authority of the ibid., p. 73. 
 Imperial Government, foreign v. .5scls were 
 prohibited from hunting seals in any part of 
 Behring Sea, or in the passes of the Aleutian 
 Islands, and that, for the enforcement of this 
 prohibition, cruizcrs wore employed in patrolling 
 that s-ea .so long as it remained Russian territory. 
 'J'o establish the fact of Russian control, 
 
91 
 
 United Sutei' 
 Case, p. 61. 
 
 Ibid., p. 62. 
 
 Ibid., pp. 62, 63. 
 
 Ibid., Appendix, 
 vol. i, p. 73. 
 
 (locuraents containing instructions only are 
 referred to. 
 
 No action or assertion of extraordinary 
 authority is mentioned. 
 
 It is proposed now to examine the various 
 documents upon which the above assertions are 
 based. 
 
 The confirmation of the Charter of the Russian- 
 American Company in 1821, and a letter of the 
 Company's Board, dated the 31st March, 1840, 
 are cited. 
 
 The confirmation of the Charter in no way 
 supports the statement which is based upon this 
 fact. 
 
 Neither the Charter nor any act under it 
 indicated the existence of a claim to exclusive 
 control over Behring Sea or over the fur-seal or 
 other industry in the deep waters. 
 
 The letter of the 31st March, 184,0, set out in 
 the United States' Case, was in reply to a special 
 question touching the fur-seal management. 
 
 It referred solely to the relative importance of 
 the industries. 
 
 The United States' translation differs from that 
 of the British. 
 
 The two are as follows : — 
 [See Mr. Fairholme's Translation, p. 20.] 
 
 A letter of the 20th March, 1853, is mentioned. 
 A further examination of it, even as translated in 
 the United States' Case, discloses a positive 
 admission of the right of whalers in Behring 
 Sea. 
 
 It, in fact, instructs the ofiBcers to watch and 
 warn them when in " districts surrounding the 
 Pribyloff and Commander Islands." 
 
 It wholly omits to refer to " Behring Sea " in 
 the sense suggested in the alleged Report of the 
 4th September, 1821. 
 
 In paragraph 2 of the letter from the Board of 
 Administration the instructions state : — 
 
 " On the outward voyngc tlio courso ol' this vessel should 
 bo laiil to the northward of tiie chain of the Aleutian 
 Islands, in order to meet foreign ships entering Ikhring 
 Sea, and to warn them against cruizing in pursuit of 
 whales in the vicinity of the seal islands of the I'ribyloH' 
 and Commander groups." 
 
 In paragraph 3 of this communication it is 
 said : — 
 
 " The conolusion of this cruizing voya;Te depends iqwn 
 the time at iMch the foreign whale sliijis leave Behring Sen, 
 
A. 
 
 ■i' ...'I 
 
 'jxfi^' 
 
 ;.X 
 
 / 
 
92 
 
 which is probably at the end of August or the beginning 
 of September." 
 
 The United States' translation of extracts 
 given in the Case, and the Britisli translation, are 
 here compared : — 
 
 [See Mr. Fairholme's Translation, p. 23.J 
 
 Again, a further extract is relied on. 
 It is not found in the British translation 
 The two paragraphs are as follows : — 
 
 [See Mr. Fairholme's Translation, p. 21.] 
 
 And the United States' Case pretends to quote 
 further touching a protective scheme, and the 
 translations arc again at variance : — 
 
 [See Mr. Fairholme's Translation, pp. 21-23.] 
 
 United States' 
 Case, p. 63. 
 
 It is evident from the United States' Case that Ibid., p. 63. 
 the Russian- American Company were engaged at 
 this time in whaling. If the foreign whalers 
 were there without molestation and competing 
 with the Russian Company, it may he asked 
 what language of the Ukase, Charter, or Treaties 
 excepts whaling, Avhile prohibiting scaling or 
 other hunting. 
 
 Whaling was admittedly free outside of the ibid, 
 ordinary territorial waters in or out of Behring 
 Sea, All other hunting and fishing wa.s certainly 
 as free in the absence of special stipulation;- to 
 the contrary. 
 
 While a prohibitory service was clearly out- ibid., pp. 63, 64. 
 lined in the instructions as translated in the 
 United States' Case, it is remarkable that no 
 instance is given of a warning to whalers or 
 hunters. 
 
 It is to be presumed that the Russian archives 
 (only partly produced in the United States' Case) 
 contain no record of an actual warning in the 
 sense suggested. 
 
 The letter of instructions to the Chief Manager ji^jj ^^ ^jj^ 
 of the 20th June, 1801, is plainly an indication "o'- '. P- 74- 
 of the care on tbo part of the authorities not to 
 countenance any interference with hunters or 
 traders, if out of the vicinity of the Russian 
 territories. Paragraph 9 of this document is as 
 follows > - 
 
 " 9. It hi\.s come to my knowledge that in tlie prosent it •* .i c. . ■ 
 
 ., , „ United Slates 
 
 year two whahng vessels have sailed from San Francisco Ca«e, p. 67. 
 
98 
 
 United Statra' 
 Case, Appendix, 
 vol. i, p. 7S. 
 
 for the purpose of trading on the Mbyloff Islands or of 
 hunting in their vicinity. Conseciuently, I would suggest 
 that, during your presence in tliose waters, you will 
 exercise the duties of an armed cruizer to prevent any 
 unlawful acts on the part not oidy of these two vessels, 
 but of any others which you may lind iu liuhring Sea." 
 
 The British translation again shows a material 
 difFerencc from that in the United States' Case. 
 
 Take paragraphs 5 and 9, and it is seen that 
 no reference is made to Behring Sea in the 
 British translation : — 
 
 [See Mr. Fairholme's Translation, p. 23.] 
 
 United Sutes' 
 Case, pp. 67, 68. 
 
 Ibid., p. 67. 
 
 Ibid., \>. S8. 
 
 Ibid., Appendix, 
 vol. i, p, 77. 
 
 Tlie prohibition of whaling in waters where 
 other marine animals might be disturbed, wliioh 
 is referred to later on in the United States' Case, 
 should be read in connection with and in the 
 light of these instructions and documents. They 
 make it more clear that the prohibition applied 
 only to Russian ships when in the vicinity of 
 the islands or Russian coasts. 
 
 It is, moreover, of importance to observe that 
 the specific instructions do not refer to foreign 
 whalers under this head. 
 
 The Proclamation in 1864, u to trade in 
 Russian tetsl^ry and waters, which is referred 
 to, is very vague and ambiguous. It appears 
 in the Appendix without signature, and may 
 possibly have been never more than a project. 
 No etidence is given that it was issued or 
 published. 
 
 The translation of this document also is chal- 
 lenged : — 
 
 [See Mi . Fairholme's Translation, p. 24.] 
 
 The opinion of the Council of State in 1865, 
 that exclusive rights should be given the Com- 
 pany to engage in the fur trade throughout the 
 " whole colonial territory," deals with some 
 suggestion which apparently had been made, 
 that the eaatorn shores of Behring Sea should be 
 opened up to the Russian fur trade generally. 
 The full facts are not recounted. 
 
 The Council were of opinion that the " ex- 
 clusive " privileges should be continued — as 
 against Russians. 
 
 The limits defined in this opinion carefully 
 exclude the waters of Behring Sea when referring 
 to the privileges of the Company as against 
 [843] 2 B 
 
^••»—'-' ' 
 
94 
 
 other rUissian subjects. The language used and 
 that 1)1 the Ukase of 1821 and Charter under it 
 on coiiiparison aw remarkable. 
 
 Tnc ('Dutcxt shows the suggested correction United Btatpi 
 inailc ill the foot-note to bo erroneous, 
 wliolt' iiassag(i is uusati^actory. 
 
 The '''"*' '*PP«""''«> 
 »ol. i, p. 77. 
 
96 
 
 United States' 
 Cue, p. 70. 
 
 Ibid., )>. M. 
 
 See British Cdse, 
 p. 94. 
 
 (H.) 
 
 h (1). The Treaty (of 1807) which, prior to 
 its consummation, had been discussed in tho 
 Senate of tho United States and by tho press, 
 was an assertion by two great nations that Russia 
 had herotoforo claimed tho ownership of Behring 
 Sea, and that she had now ceded a portion of it 
 to the United States ; and to this assertion no 
 ol)jection is over known to have been made. 
 
 A (2). That there was— 
 
 " an understanding which existed in the United States at 
 tlie time of tho imnhaso and cession of Alaska as to the 
 scope and cflect of the jurisdiction e.xerciacd by Russia 
 over the waters of liubrinH •''ca, and the enhanced value 
 which was thercljy placed upon the fur-seal herd of the 
 Pribylotf Islands." 
 
 It is denied in the British Case that Russia 
 pretended to convey a title to that part of Behring 
 Sea contained between what is called the line 
 of demarcation (separating certain of the Aleutian 
 chain of islands) and the mainland. 
 
 Neither did the Congress of the United States 
 act on this assumption. 
 
 The line of demarcation mentioned in this Treaty 
 could not be used for the purposes mentioned in 
 the United States' Case. 
 
 Her Britannic Majesty does not admit that 
 Russian rights as to jurisdiction or the " seal- 
 eries " (so called in tlie United States' Case) in 
 Behring Sea east of this boundary passed un- 
 impaired to the United States by the Treaty of 
 the 30th March, 18G7. 
 
 Lord Salisbury, it is true, when discussing 
 the points for reference, expressed his willing- 
 ness to make this admission. When, however, 
 the terms were finally agreed upon, it appears 
 from the Convention as is the fact that the 
 United States did not accept that admission and 
 tlic terms which accompanied it. This subject 
 was finally made a distinct question for the 
 consideration of the Tribunal. 
 
 It is contended upon this in the British 
 Case : — 
 
 1. That Russia had in 1867 no title cast of 
 this boimdary outside of the continent and 
 island with their ordinary territorial waters. 
 
 2. If a claim existed on the part of Russia 
 in 1807 to extraordinary jurisdiction over the 
 
90 
 
 sea, the language of the Treaty oi Cession in- 
 dicates the great care taken to avoid the sug- 
 gestion of a transfer of such a claim. 
 
 3. That the claim originally depended for its 
 support upon Russia owning both sides of 
 Behring Sea. It could not be transferred with- 
 out a transfer of the surrounding coasts, if at all. 
 
 The debates in Congress in 1867 and 1868 United States' 
 have not been examined in the United States' *' ''' 
 Case, though the United States cited legislation 
 of an ambiguous character. 
 
 The British Case reproduces certain extracts British Case, p. 9 
 from speeches of leading members of Congress 
 when the acquisition of Alaska was under con- 
 sideration. 
 
 They show that — so far from the Treaty con- 
 stituting an assertion by two great nations of 
 the ownership of Behring Sea — no one enter- 
 tained the idea of the extent of this transfer 
 now put forward. 
 
 further references to these debates may be 
 made under this head. 
 
 In the T'nited States' House of Representa- 
 tives, on ;.he 11th December, 1867, on the sub- 
 ject of the purchase of Russian America, Mr. 
 Washburn, of Wisconsin, said : — 
 
 " .... I now desire to occupy the attention of the "Congressional 
 Committee upon a proposition that must soon come before Olobc," Part I, 
 the Housp for its action. I mean an appropriation to pay iinth'coiiff 
 for Russian America. Immediately after tlie adjournment 1867-6S, p. 13S. 
 of Congress at the March Session, the President convened 
 the Senate in Executive Session, and submitted a Treaty 
 for the purchase of tlmt counLry. With such secrecy had 
 the Treaty been negotiated, tliat the whole country was 
 taken by surprise when the announcement was made 
 public. No man in the United States had asked for the 
 negotiation of this Treaty, or that that country should be 
 acquired. There was no public sentiment in fiivour of it, 
 and not a single newspaper in the whole length and 
 breadth of the land had ever advocated it. Yet, Sir, in the 
 absence of all this and upon his own motion, tlie Secretary 
 of State enters into a compact to pay the Government of 
 Russia the sum of 7,200,001) dollars in gold for a tract of 
 country — in regard to which he knew little or nothing — 
 that wo did not need, that nobody wanted, and, as far as 
 known, was utterly worthless. 
 
 " When the Treaty came up for ratittcation in the other 
 end of the Capitol, the strongest argument made in its 
 favour was that as the Treaty had been negotiated, not to 
 ratify it would subject us to the imputation of bad faith 
 and trifling with the Czar of Russia, and justly give him 
 oiTence. This will be the argument that will carry the 
 appropriation tiirough this House, if any shall do so. . . ." 
 
 J 
 
 . 
 
07 
 
 In the United States' House of Representa- 
 tives, on the Ist July, 1868, on the subject of 
 the purchase of Alaska, the Honourable C. C. 
 Washburn, of Wisconsin, said . — 
 
 " Congreuional " .... I shall attempt to demonstrate five proposi- 
 
 2nd'se" ^"^ ^' ''°°^' *"'' '^ ^ ^^"^^ succeed in doing so, I think I may 
 
 40th Cong., claim the judgment of this Committee and of the House. 
 
 1867-68, p. S92. Those propositions are : — 
 
 " 1. That the time this Treaty was negotiated not a soul 
 in the whole United States asked for it. 
 
 " 2. That it was secretly negotiated, and in a manner to 
 prevent the representativei; of the people from being 
 heard. 
 
 " 3. That by existing Treaties we possessed every right 
 that is of any value to us without the responsibility 
 and never ending expense of governing a nation of 
 savages. . . ." 
 
 Ibid., p 39-J. "... Now I assert that, in 1859, Russia entered into 
 
 a Treaty with Great Britain, and that we are entitled to 
 the benefit of it under this compact between us and 
 Russia. That there may be no mistake about it, I will 
 will read from the Treaty between Russia and Great 
 Britain : — 
 
 "VI. It is understood that the subjects of Ilis 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 navigating freely and without 
 any hindrance whatever all the rivers and streams which, 
 in their course toward the Pacific Ocean, may cross the 
 line of demarcation upon the line of coast described in 
 Article III of this jiresent Convention. 
 
 " VII. It is also understood that for the space of ten 
 years from the signature of the present Convention the 
 vessels of the two Powers, or those belonging to their 
 respective subjects, shall mutually be at liberty to frequent, 
 without any hindrance whatever, all the inland seas, the 
 gulfs, havens, and creeks on the coast mentioned in 
 Article 111 for the purpose of fishing an<l trading with 
 the natives. 
 
 "VIII. The port of Sitka or Novo-Archangclsk .shall be 
 open to the commerce and vessels of British subjects from 
 the space of ten years from the date of the exchange of the 
 ratifications of the jiresent Convention. In the event of 
 an extension of this term of ten yours being gi'aiited to any 
 other Power, the like extension shall bo granted al-o to 
 Groat Britain." 
 
 Ibid,, p. 393. "That Treaty was negotiat-'d with Croat Britain in 
 
 18.59, and by our Treaty with Russia the samo privileges 
 inu^-o to us. Tlu^n wo aliondy had this privilege without 
 any expense whatever, ami our tislionnon have boon in the 
 habit of going there to fish every year. My friend from 
 Massachusetts shows in his Riqiort that in ISGO, before 
 this Treaty was made, there were nut loss than twenty- 
 three vessels, ' ships, barks, brigs, and schooners,' up there 
 
 engaged in fishing 
 
 [843] 2 C 
 
"The sailors, traders, ami fishermen of Great Britain « Congreisional 
 have the right to-day to go into all the interior waters of p'"''|'" ^'"* ^' 
 Alaska under this Treaty ; just the same right that our ^Q^^^ q"^^ ^ 
 people have. Great Britain to-day has tlie same right on 1867-68, p. 395. 
 the coast of Alaska that we have, except the miserable 
 privilege of governing the 50,000, 60,000, or 70,000 
 wretched savages there. And yet the gentleman comes in 
 here and coolly asks us to vote 7,-i00,000 dollars in gold for 
 this territory 
 
 " He (Captain Howard) afterwards found one fishing Ibid., p. 899. 
 bank, and its position was iiscertained by Mr. Davidson ; 
 but I assort here that that (isliing bank is not within the 
 limits of the jurisdiction of Eussiau America. The 
 gentleman from Massachusetts cannot point to a fishing 
 bank on the coast of Russian America within the limits of 
 the jurisdiction of Russia. I defy him to do it by any 
 testimony " 
 
 lu the United States' Ilouse of Eepresentatives 
 on the 14th March, 1868, speaking upon the 
 subject of the purcliase of Alaska, Mr. Washburn, 
 of Wisconsin, said : — 
 
 " . ... But the climate of Walrussia is such that fish « Confcressioniil 
 
 cannot be cured there. Hence it is of no consequence p'"''^" ^"^ ^'" 
 
 whether we have the right to land there or not. Without ^qjj, cong,, 
 
 owning Walrussia we have the privilege of catching fish 1867-68, p. 1875. 
 there, and going with tlie cargo wherever we please. . . ." 
 
 The following extract from the Report of the 
 Congressional Committee ten years previous to 
 the seizures in Behring Sea illustrates an absence 
 of any intention to claim exceptional jurisdiction 
 under the Treaty of Cession : — 
 
 ". ... By the Convention between the United States 44th Cong., 
 
 and Russia, couchuled the 30th March, 18G7, ratifications UtSe9».,H. Report, 
 
 _ , , ■ , 1 Wo. 623, p. b. 
 
 exchanged the 20tli .Tune, I.'- 07, and proclaimed same day, 
 
 the Governniont of Russia ceded to the United States all 
 her posses.sions on the continent of America, and the 
 islands adjiiccnt thereto, for the eciuivalent of 7,200,000 dol- 
 lars. The United States entered into immediate possession 
 by military occupancy. This addition to our territory is 
 known as Aliuska. The two Islands of St. George and 
 St. Paul, suljscquently leased to the Alaska Conmiercial 
 Company for seal catching, were a part of this possession. 
 For many years preceding the cession of this territory to 
 the United States, the Government of Russia had leased 
 these to a Russian Company, called the Russian-American 
 Company " 
 
 The leading organs of public opinion in 
 Washington, New York, and San Francisco, in 
 the United States, have been examined from 
 1867 down to 1886 without an indication being 
 found in any of them that it was supposed that 
 
99 
 
 United States' 
 Case, p. 78. 
 
 Hriiish Case, 
 lip. V2-t. 125. 
 
 United State»' 
 Case p, 78. 
 British Case, 
 pp. 104, 105. 
 
 United States' 
 Case p. 60. 
 
 Ibid. 
 
 the Treaty of 1867 covered the deep waters of 
 Behring Sea, while frequent references are made 
 to the Treaty of Cession, the Alaska CommeTcial 
 Company, and the fur-seal fisheries. 
 
 To establish the understanding on the part of 
 the United States at the time of the purchase of 
 Alaska, the jurisdiction of Russia over the 
 waters of Behring Sea, and the exorcise on the 
 part of the United States since the purchase to 
 protect the seals, the Case contains an examina- 
 tion of the " action of the United States relative 
 to Alaska since the Cession." 
 
 To prove the contrary, the record for this period 
 is examined in the British Case. 
 
 The Act of the 27th July, 1868, is mentioned, 
 but it is not stated, as is the case, that this Act, 
 when dealing with the Seal Islands and Regu- 
 lations for hunting there, refers to them as " to 
 the waters adjacent thereto," a phrase hardly 
 consistent with the theory now advanced as to 
 ownership of the vast sea surrounding them. 
 
 Mr. Sumner's speech, however, is brought 
 forward, to prove that the eastern half of 
 Behring Sea was intended by the language of the 
 Statute here referred to. 
 
 The passing reference to Mr. Sumner's speech, 
 where he speaks of the delimitation of the Treaty 
 of Cession and refers to " our part " of Behring 
 Sea, is qualified subsequently by his statement 
 based on the Treaties and history, that none of 
 these seas were now mare clausum. 
 
 The argument, founded on the language of the 
 Acts of the 3rd March, 1869, and 1st July, 1870, 
 that the use of the t«rm " in Alaska " signified 
 that Behring Sea was considered by Congress as 
 part of the territory of Alaska, is not sustained. 
 
 It might with equal force be said that a 
 reference to the Magdalen Islands, in the Gulf of 
 St. Lawrence, would not bo covered by legislation 
 referring to Canada, unless it were shown that 
 the whole of the waters of the gulf were the 
 territorial waters of Canada. 
 
 Ihc action of the Executive branch of the 
 United States' Government is alleged to have 
 been uniformly to protect the scaling interests of 
 the United States tin-oughout that portion of the 
 Behiiiig Sea contained witliin the western 
 bouiiilavy referred to in the Treaty of 1867. In 
 support of this the letter from the Treasury 
 Departra(>nt, in March 1881, to Mr. Ancona, 
 Collector of Customs at San Francisco, is cited, 
 
100 
 
 together with a fui-ther letter of the 4th April, 
 1881. 
 
 Under this head, reference to the action of 
 Congress in 1889, the President's Proclamation, 
 the seizures of vessels, the modus vivendi, the 
 action of the United States Courts, is also made. 
 
 These subjects are dealt with in the British 
 Case. 
 
 The doctrine of mare clausum, or exclusive 
 control over the sea, was repudiated by the 
 United States previous to the execution of this 
 Treaty. 
 
 Notwithstanding that this oft - repudiated 
 doctrine is again set up in Part I of the United 
 States' Case, it is not even now relied upon, 
 since in Part II a theory is, for tiic first time in 
 the history of nations, developed, which is in no 
 way connected with the exclusive rights claimed 
 in Part I. 
 
 The British Case reviews the various conten- 
 tions of the United States since 1886 touching 
 the subject of jurisdiction in this sea. 
 
 It is clear that, in the time of Russia, the only 
 reason upon which special jurisdiction was set up 
 over any of the waters of this sea was that of 
 mare clausum. 
 
 The line of action adopted by the United 
 States has been most vague and inconsistent. 
 '~ When the seizures on the part of the United 
 States in 1886 were made, the United States' 
 Government was called upon for an explanation 
 in September of that year. No information as to 
 the grounds for the seizure was given until the 
 19th November following, when Mr. Bayard 
 informed Sir L. Sackville-West, the British 
 Minister at Wasliington, as follows : — 
 
 "It would be a complicated question of jurisdiction, for 
 he had been informed that many of the seal-skins found 
 on board British vessels were skins of seals which had 
 been clubbed — not been shot — which icould prove that a 
 landing liad been effected." 
 
 United Slatea' 
 Case, Appendii, 
 vol. i, p. 102. 
 United States' 
 Case, p. 61. 
 
 nritisli C.ise : 
 Action of Congress, 
 pp. l-':5-fJ5; 
 President's Procla- 
 mation, p. 125 ; 
 seizures, pp. I'Jl- 
 123; modus Vivendi, 
 p. 122 ; action of 
 Courts, pp. 127-129. 
 
 British Case, 
 cap. vii, 
 pp. 121-134 
 
 United States' 
 Case. Appendix, 
 vol. iii, p. 26. 
 
 And on the 10th December Mr. Bayard stated 
 to Sir L. West :— 
 
 " As to the nature of the jurisdiction over Behrinpr Sea Sir L. West to 
 ceded by Russia to the United States in 1867," it " was a D^gJ^b^*' ol^'sse. 
 complicated question, but one that would be met in all 
 fairness by the United States' Government." 
 
 On the 26th January, 1887, the vessels seized United States' 
 were released. SJ'ua'^' 
 
British Caie, 
 pp. Ill, 112. 
 
 Ibid^p. 108. 
 
 101 
 
 On tho 12th April, 1887, when inquiry had 
 heen made of the United States' Government as 
 to the nature of their claim and of the instruc- 
 tions to their cruizers, Sir L. Sackville-West was 
 informed by Mr. Bayard that— 
 
 "the question of instructioii.s to Ciovernnient vessels, in 
 regard to preventing the indiscriuiiniite killing of fur-senls, 
 is now hciv;/ considcnd, iind I will infr.rm you at the 
 curliest day possible what has been decided ; so British 
 and other vessels visiting the waters in question can govern 
 themselves accordingly." 
 
 No information of this decision has yet been 
 given. 
 
 Respecting tho "An' jna" letter, the British 
 Case shows that the ruling in this letter remained 
 a dead letter. Pelagic sealing went on steadily 
 and uninterruptedly from that time until ] 886. 
 
 It may also be remarked that in Mr. French's 
 letter it does not definitely appear whether lie 
 referred to foreign vessels. 
 
 No allusion is made to the " Boutwell " 
 correspondence of 1872, which is inconsistent 
 with tho present contention of the United States. 
 
 It may be repeated that on the appearenee of 
 a statement in tho San Francisco "Daily 
 Chronicle" on the 21st March. 1872, to the 
 effect that parties were preparmg to hunt the 
 fur-seal in Behring Sea, Mr. I'helps, the 
 Collector of Customs at San Francisco, wrote to 
 Mr. Boutwell, the Secretary of the United States' 
 Treasury, that the object of these several 
 expeditions was unquestionably to intercept the 
 fur-seals at the narrow passages between the 
 Aleutian Islands, and he recommended the 
 sending of a steam revenue-cutter to those 
 waters to prevent these parties from carrying out 
 their intentions. 
 
 On the 19th April, 1872, Mr. Boutwell replied 
 to the Collector's request that he did not think it 
 expedient to carry out the suggestion, giving as a 
 reason, among others, that he did not see — 
 
 Ibid. DP 1C8 109. "'tat tho United States would have tho jurisdiction or 
 power to drive ofl' parties going up there for that purpose, 
 unless they made r xq\\ attempt within a marine le;igue of 
 the shore." 
 
 Ibid., p. 107. 
 
 Ibid., p. 109, 
 foot-note. 
 
 It is true that in 1888, and after the 
 
 occurrence of the seizures of the British sliips in 
 
 188C and 1887, Mr. Boitwell explained, by 
 
 request, that his letter had -eferencc solely to the 
 
 [843] 2 D 
 
lot 
 
 waters of the Pacific Ocean south of tlio Aleutian 
 
 Islands. 
 This does not otherwise appear. Britiih Cut, 
 
 The British Case contains instructions sent to PP' 'O^-lOB- 
 
 United States' officials in 1870. 
 They do not support the statement now made 
 
 in the United States' Case that^ 
 
 " Since the yciir 1867 tlie Treasury Department liiis. llnited Siitei' 
 every yeiir, with n .single exception, sent one or more **'• P 
 revenue-cutters to Hehriiiy Sea for tlio purpose of guiudiny 
 the intorests of the United States coiiUirecl there, inchulinj,' 
 th(^ ])rotection of fur-seals, against tlie infractions of the 
 law relating to them." 
 
 the 
 
 No instructions to this effect have heen 
 produced, 
 
 Tlicre is, on the contrary, evidence of 
 absence of such instructions. 
 
 Captiiin Shopard, of tlio United States' soth Cong, 
 revenue-cutter "Richard Rush," stated before 
 the Congressional Committcu of 1889 that thougl 
 vessels were scaling in Behring Sea in 1888, 
 under his instructions he could not seize them. 
 
 During his evidence the following statements 
 were made : — 
 
 n I Seta., H. R., 
 S3, pp. 3S8, 339. 
 
 '• Captain Slupard's Testimony. 
 
 '• Mr. i)« /IT!.— There is no discriminating between an ii,ij_^ p, 240. 
 American and a British vessel. One would have been 
 seized under precisely the same circum.stances as the other ? 
 —A. The law makes a little distinction between an 
 American and a Briti.sh vessel in regard to the killing of 
 female seals ar.d seals under one year of age. 
 
 "Mr. Din<jlaj.—X\\c law makes a distinction or the 
 Treasury Department : which ?— T/ie Witness.— I under- 
 stand the construction the Treasury Department puts on 
 the law is that they can prohibit the killing of female 
 seals or seals under one year old by an American vessel 
 anywhere, but they could not enforce that Eegulatiou on a 
 foreign vessel. 
 
 " Mr. Dunn. — ^You understand the Treasury Department 
 puts that construction upon the law. Is there a different 
 construction embodied in the orujrs given oflicers of 
 revenue-vessels I— A. Yes, Sir ; they prohibit the killing 
 of female seals and seals less than one year old by 
 American vessels anywhere. 
 
 ■' Mr. Dinghy.— li I understand you correctly, British 
 vessels were allowed to do certain things that American 
 vessels were not allowed to do. 
 
 " Mr. Duren.— Ho states the Treasury Department places 
 a construction upon the Statute which does discriminate 
 hetween an American and British vessel." 
 
103 
 
 " Congreiilonal 
 Record," vol. lix, 
 I'art I, p. 9H4, 
 Home, Februnry f, 
 
 Upon this subject it is interesting to noto the 
 following Resolution. 
 
 Mr. llcrmann, in Congress in 1888, submitted 
 the following Resolution, which was read :— 
 
 " JUmI nd, —I'Uiit tho Secretary of Stat(! l.e and he i 
 hereby reciueHtcd to inform this HoUHe, if not incomimtiblo 
 Willi the pul.lie interest, whiit hns been done by the 
 Defiiirtnient of State in asserting tlw uuthority and 
 ,l„niinion of this (iovernm.'nt over the wiiters of Aluakft 
 nnd Bering Sea, embraced in the Treaty of 18U7 b.dween 
 the United Slates and Itnasia; and whellier any legislation 
 is neecssury on behalf of tho United States to aswrt and 
 maintain such authority and dominion, or for the protection 
 of our fur-seal nnd other fisheries in said waters, and 
 whether vessels, both fondgn and domestis, a.lju.lged by 
 the Courts of tho United States to be eoniiscated as well 
 as their cargoes, for fishing unlawfully in said waters, have 
 been released, and, if so, by what authority !" 
 
 Mr. Dingley, in 1889, submitted the following 
 Rcsolutiou?wbich was referred to tho Committee 
 on Merchant Uprine and Fisheries, and ordered 
 to bo printed : — 
 
 " J!est,lred.-l'hixt the Secretary of the Treasury be nnd 
 vlti'u^ '"so, is hereby requested to infornx the House what orders were 
 Ilo.iae,'janunry21, givg,, to the Commander of the United Stales revenue- 
 cutter " lUcbard Rush" in reference to the protection of 
 the seal fisheries in Bering Sea in tho spring and summer 
 of 1888, nnd whether such instructions dilfered from those 
 given the same Commander in tho season of 1877 ; and, if 
 80, what reasons existed fur any material change in such 
 instructions; and the Secretary of the Treasury is further 
 requested to transmit to the House copies of aU orders 
 given lo Iho Commanders of the United States' vessels 
 charged with the protection of tho seal fisheries in the 
 seasons of 1886, 1887, and 1888." 
 
 No action has as yet been taken by the Execu- 
 tive upon these Resolutions, and the information 
 is not, therefore, now available. 
 
 It is asserted in the British Case that, not 
 until 1886, the year in which the seizures took 
 place, did the United States' authorities instruct 
 the revenue-cutters, or other vessels, to interfere 
 with foreign ships upon waters outside of the 
 a-mile limit in Behring Sea. 
 
 Evidence is albo given in the British Case that 
 raids upon the islands were almost incessant 
 from the day of Cession, and that pelagic sealing 
 was well known to bo in progress since 1881. 
 If, however, it be admitted, as it is contended, 
 that the United States' Government took action 
 as soon as they knew of the infraction of the 
 
 1889 
 
 BritlthCa«e,p. 112. 
 
 Ibid , pp. 103, 104, 
 110-112. 
 
104 
 
 British Case, 
 Appendix, \o\. 
 
 law contained in the Revised Statutes of the 
 United States, in Behring Sea, this would indi- 
 cate that no property right was even in 1886 
 supposed to exist in seals as such. 
 
 The unofficial assurance— " that no seizures 
 would he made; for at that time negotiations 
 were heing carried on looking to an ariicuble united States 
 adjustment of the points at issue with regard to ^»»«- f- ^^■ 
 Behring Sea "—given to the British Government 
 in 1888 was given after the protests of the 
 British Government. The modus viveadi of 1892 
 was not a renewal of the modus vivendi of 1891, 
 as stated in the United States' Case. It was 
 entirely a new arrangement, including the sealing 
 season of 1893 as well as that of 1892 
 
 The decision of the Alaska Court was based 
 expressly on the ground that the exclusive juris- 
 diction was vested in the United States over that 
 part of Behring Sea within the line of demarca- 
 tion of the Treaty of 1867, because the whole of 
 the sea was an inknd sea when possessed hy 
 Russia. It was said to be a closed sea, (>vcn 
 though one side was in Russia and the other in 
 the United States. 
 
 So in the District Court of Washington 
 Territory. 
 
 Upon an appeal from the decision of the 
 Alaskan Court to the Supreme Court of the 
 United States, the Government of that rrouiitry 
 successfully resisted the consideration of the 
 merits of the case. 
 
 Until 1886 no "understanding" could have 
 existed that justified the active assertion of such 
 a claim. 
 
 Indeed, it further appears from the evidence 
 given hy United States' Government officials, 
 and by the questions of the Chairman in the 
 Committee of Congress m 1889, that the question 
 was then under consideration as to whether there 
 should bo an active assertion of authority in tht; 
 deep waters of Behring Sea, and, if so, upon 
 what grounds it should he based. 
 
 Even raiding on the rookeries has gone un- 
 punished. 
 
 One of the United States' officers, Mr. W. B. 
 Taylor, said : — 
 
 ■' Out of twenty y"!ar.s 1 do not think tliero lias been soth Cong., 
 more Hum three or four owners of vessels that liave been ^^gg^^'j "' "'' 
 punished ; when perliups there huve been a hundred or so ' 
 
 prowling round in these waters," 
 
106 
 
 50th Cong., 
 2nd Sess.. H. R^ 
 3883, p. 56. 
 
 The evidence of ofiBcials who were on the Seal 
 Islands, given before the Congressional Com- 
 mittee of 1889, shows that they regarded the 
 doctrine of mare clausum as a theory which should 
 be set up for the future, and not as a settled 
 policy or a previous understanding. 
 
 Accordingly the Chairman of the Congressional 
 Committee proceeded to examine a witness in 
 the following manner : — 
 
 " Q' JJ *^ teas finally to he determined hy the Government, 
 after an adjudication and full consideration, that tJte 
 Berinij Sea is a closed sea, and that unc]»:i' the Treaty of 
 Cession, by which we acquired it from Russia, and under 
 the law of nations, the Government of the United States is 
 entitled to exercise absolute and complete dominion and 
 jurisdiction over the Bering Soa in Alaska as a closed sea 
 and as inland water, would you tliink it a wise policy to 
 abandon and surrender any portion of that jurisdiction, 
 and open that sea as a high sea to all nations ?" 
 
 Mr. Taylor's examination was continued : — 
 
 Ibid., p. 53. " Q< Now, there has been a good deal of seal killed in 
 
 the waters of Boring Sea by unauthorized persons. I 
 want to ask your judgment as to the effect of that upon 
 the seal business if it is kept up — what it will be upon 
 the rookeries ? — A. That is something about which I think 
 the Government ought to be more stringent, even, than 
 t'.iey have been. I think that tlie Government oii//ht to 
 take it tl.nl Bering &a is an inland sea, and so ought to 
 have ab.solute control, regardless of any Treaties or Fishery 
 Laws, over Bering waters from a line drawn west of 
 Attoo through the centre of the Bering Sea. These 
 waters are just as much in the territory of the United 
 States as any part of tlieir lands. They are inland waters 
 running out to Attoo. There are only a very few vessels 
 that go through the peninsula in all that 800 miles 
 distance, and it is to all intents and [lurposcs an inland 
 sea, anil sIiduUI be so regarded ; and I think the Govern- 
 ment ought to take that position. And after we take that 
 position I believe there ought to be more stringent laws 
 onactr 1 which will make it a penitentiary oti'enco for any 
 uiiin t'. go into these waters and kill these sen Is, going 
 and coming from the islands for this reason." 
 
 • • • • 
 
 BritithCase.p. US. 
 
 On ]>. 75 of the United States' Case it is im. 
 imp!i' i' that the Eeport of the Congressional 
 Con: '■(to(! of 1889 showed that the opinion of 
 the f ' I'littee was to the ciToct that Alaska was 
 pure: i-^i'd lor the acquisition by the United 
 Staf<' ' f it< fui-ucjring animals and fisheries. 
 
 T) '- Milimittod that the conclusion of this 
 Con ' iltcc in 1889 is no evidence for the United 
 
 2 E 
 
1 
 
 106 
 
 States touching a dispute which arose with 
 
 Great Britain ir 1886. Since, however, it is 
 
 referred to in the United States' Case, and in the 
 
 British Case, it may be pointed out that it has 
 
 been shown that upon a reference to the Com- 
 mittee on Marine and Fisheries of the House of 
 
 B«presentatives in 1889, an investigation took 
 
 place into the nature and extent of the rights 
 
 and interests of the United States in the " fur- 
 
 seak and other fisheries." 
 
 The Committee was asked whether any legisla- 
 tion was necessary for the better protection of ' ■ 
 
 these fisheries. The opinion of the Committee 
 
 was that the sea within the limit of demarca- 
 tion of the American coast was transferred to 
 to the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States. 
 It was upon this ground only that it was con- 
 tended that the United States had a right to 
 legislate for the protection of the seals. 
 
 The Committee was of opinion 'hat the 
 "limits" of the Alaska Territory was defined by 
 the Treaty so as to include the western portion of 
 Behring Sea, and the sea was transferred as well 
 as the land. 
 
 The Statute relating to Alaska was dealt with, 
 and the Committee reported, among other things, 
 as follows : — 
 
 " Fifth. That at the date of the cession of Alaska to the " The Fur-wal and 
 United States, Russia's title to Bering Sea was perfect and ^{""^J-'soth* ° 
 undisputed. Cong., 2nd Sess., 
 
 "Sixth. That by virtue of the Treaty of Cession the "• "- ^go'-.aoQ 
 United States acquired complete title to all that portion ot p_ 23. 
 Bering Sea situate within the limits prescribed by the 
 Treaty. 
 
 " The Committee herewith report a. Bill making neces- 
 sary amendments of the existing Law relating to these 
 subjects, and recommend its passage." 
 
 In the opinion of the Committee the existing See^B^"''*'' ^"•■ 
 legislation did not sufficiently indicate the real 
 extent of the jurisdiction of the United States For d.scuBsion in 
 
 •• . J i. Congress of this 
 
 over the waters in question, and an amendment imendment, sec 
 
 declaratory to that intent was reported. 
 
 The various discussions on this Bill are given 
 in an Appendix to this Counter-Case. 
 
 It will be seen that leoding members of Con- 
 gress hesitated in 1889 to define the exact natiure 
 and extent of the jurisdiction of the United 
 States. 
 
 Senator Edmunds regarded it as a " diflBcult" 
 and a " delicate " question. 
 
 Appendix to British 
 Counter-Case. 
 
 See Appenaix. 
 
107 
 
 Senator Hoar considered the amendment to 
 the existing legislation as presenting the great 
 question whether the United States " propose to 
 assert the doctrine of mare clausum in regard 
 to a sea larger than the Mediterranean, and the 
 gateway to which is 450 miles wide." 
 
 Senator Morgan — now one of the memhers of 
 this Trihunal of Arhitration— spoke as follows :— 
 
 " Before the Bill is referred, I desire to say a word 
 about the amendment. I do not understand that section 3 
 proposed to tlie Bill does present llie question of mare 
 clamiim. It presents simply the question whetlicr the 
 United States, having on the Aleutian Islands very valu- 
 able fur-seal fisheries, have the right to protect those 
 animals in seas that do not belong strictly to the 
 ntare ctaumm principle, and which are very valuable to 
 commerce, against that kind of fishing and hunting that is 
 utterly destructive of the whole of the generation of fur- 
 seals, 
 
 " The principle upon whioh I understand the amend- 
 ment to be based is entirely independent of any Treaty 
 stipulation between the United States and any foreign 
 countrj-, although, in view of our Treaty relations with 
 Russia upon the subject of the Alaskan purchase and 
 Russia's former assertion of the right to control the waters 
 of the Bohring Sea, I could not permit myself to admit, on 
 the floor of the Senate, that that pretension of Russia was 
 entirely unjust, and that in purchasing Alaska we did 
 not succeed to h r rights in that partiodar 
 
 " But I desired only to say that I do not consider that the 
 question of marc clausmn is involved in the third section 
 proposed to the Bill by the House of Representatives." 
 
 Speaking again upon the subject, Senator 
 Morgan, in advocating the rejection of the 
 amendment, spoke as follows : — 
 
 Appendix to BritUh " We only arrive at the conclusion that the question 
 
 CounUr-Ctse. presented in the amendment of the House is of such a 
 
 serious and important character that the Committee on 
 Foreign Relations woidd not undertake at this time to 
 pronounce that kind of judgment upon it which is due to 
 the magnitude of such a (juestion. 
 
 " I desire that the Bill, as it passed the Senate originally, 
 should pass, because it protects the salmon and other 
 fisheries in Alaska, a) lOut which there is no dispute; but 
 this particidar question is one of very great gravity and 
 seriousness, ami the Committee on Foreign Relations, or at 
 least a majority of the entire Committee, did not feel war- 
 ranted in undertaking to consider it at this time." 
 
 Senator Sherman stated that the amendment 
 was a grave one, and involved serious matters of 
 international lair. 
 
•::•.! 
 
108 
 
 As stated in the British Case, the amendment 
 was ultimately rejected. 
 
 In 1888 Senator Morgan foimd the majority 
 of the Senate objecting to a Treaty which con- 
 ceded to Canada jurisdiction over inland seas 
 or bays whore the width at the mouth was 
 10 miles or under. 
 
 It is clear from his speech on that occasion 
 that Mr. Morgan perceived that the doctrine 
 of "closed sea" or "purchase" of half of 
 Bchring Sea could no longer be maintained if 
 such an attitude were assumed by his country on 
 the Atlantic coast as the majority of the Senate 
 were advocating. 
 
 Senator Morgan said : — 
 
 r " When wo go to thu other side of the continent and " Congressional 
 discuss the question of the right of the fishermen of pi,f°vjii_ 
 British Columbia in our Alaskan waters and upon our pp. 7720, 7721, 
 Alaskan coast and in the Behring's Sea, we shall liave a f™|'*'g^"f,""' ^"' 
 new puzzle to get along with. Morgan's speech on 
 
 " We have come, by purchase from the Russian Uovern- the Fisheries 
 ment, to the control of one-half of what might be termed "*'y' 
 an unclosed sea. This brings us in contact with a ques- 
 tion — perhaps you might call it a headland question — 
 affecting the richest fisheries of this world, fisheries that 
 are four or five times as extensive as those on the north- 
 eastern coast, and far more abundantly stocked with food 
 fishes. We shall come in practical contact with these 
 questions in a very brief time, if we are not already in con- 
 tact with them, and we shall find that they will come 
 upon us in possibly a very unexpected way. 
 
 " In view of what we acquired in the purchase of 
 Alaska, and in view of what are the necessities of the 
 situation upon that broken and nigged coast, I am not 
 willing fo admit that a 3-mile fringe of jurisdiction, 
 including the right of exclusive fishery within the line, 
 and excluding the right outside of it, is the boundary of 
 our rights upon a question of this kind. I cannot do it 
 without surrendering in advance those advantages which 
 belong to us by nature, as well as by compact with Russia 
 in favour of our iislieries upon the Alaskan coast and in 
 the Behring's Sea and Straits. The American statesman 
 who makes a surrender of these questions now in dealing 
 with this Treaty with Great Britain will find himself con- 
 fronted with a difficulty the magnitude of which he does 
 not now probably comprehend, which it seems to me will 
 crush him as corn is crushed between the upper and nether 
 millstone. The statesmanship that we are observing in 
 tliis partizan higgling about the Treaty of 1888 is of a 
 character to betray us in respect to some of the most 
 important rights that we possess on the north-western 
 coast. It will affect the food supply to the poorer classes 
 of this country for generation after generation. 
 
 /LUh, , 
 
109 
 
 ** Congreiiional 
 Record," vol. lit, 
 Tart Vni, p. 7736, 
 Senate, August 30, 
 1888. Senator 
 Morj^an'aapcecb on 
 the Fisherici 
 Treaty, 1888. 
 See also Report of 
 minority of 
 Committee, Senate, 
 SOtli Cong., 
 lit Seal., Mii9. 
 Doe., No. 109, 
 pp. 64-66. 
 
 " But, Sir, the ri^'lit of fishiii;,' in tlioso bays was a trifling 
 matter, ftnd it Iins boon so asncrtcil by your Coiiiniittee on 
 Foreign Relations nml by the .Senators wlio opjMJso this 
 Treaty. And that surely I'aiuiot be a substiintir.l arj;ii- 
 mciit apainst a lieliniitation whiili inelu'les bay.s that are 
 less than 10 miles wide. The. example for that, as I have 
 had occasion to mention in some remarks made Iiy mo 
 heretofore, i.s found in the arran<;enients between maritime 
 countries in their modern Treaties rclatinj; lo fishing. 
 They have chanf,'i:d the rule so as to shut out foreign 
 fishernien from access to the coasts of their bays tliat are 
 less than 10 miles wide, and they will not permit any 
 fishing-ship to come within 3 miles of a line drawn across 
 the mouth of a bay which measures loss than 10 miles in 
 width. Tliort! is no reason that I know of why the 
 American Government should not adopt that particular 
 arrangement, especiallv as we have to make sonu' arrange- 
 ment before a great while, I suppose, witli reference to our 
 Alaska fisheries— liaheries tliat are of very great value, and 
 to which 1 Iiave often adverted. If we have to go over to 
 the rncific with a line 3 miles from our shore, established 
 upon a principle of acknow ledged internation.il law, we are 
 to admit tiio people of all nations to come and fish in our 
 water.?, and sliall give that up to foreign couniries witliout 
 any reciprocal advantage at alL We will do this reck- 
 lessly upon a conceded principle of international law that 
 this Senate is al)out to decree ; we shall give up suuiu of 
 the most important rights and advantages that this nation 
 can have in the future." 
 
 Tbo Senate rejected the Treaty. 
 
 Since Reclus is cited as an authority by tbe 
 United States it may, perhaps, not be out of 
 place to give tlie following extracts from his 
 " Nouvelle Geographic Uuiversello " : — 
 
 " .... In reality, Alaska was not considered wortliy of 
 the attention of the Wiisliington legislator.*, when the 
 Government saw fit to interfere fo.- defending the interests 
 of the Company, to which liad been granted tlie I'ribilov 
 Islands, by declaring Bering Sea to l)e a ' closed sea,' and 
 forbidding all foreign ships to hunt there seals and morses 
 even outside of the line of 3 nautical miles along the 
 shores. It is not yet known whether these claims, 
 inconsistent with the pi-ecedents of international law, will 
 be udmitted by Great Britain, the State nio.st interested in 
 the question of fisheries in noithern watere. In KSiil 
 Russia had also claiuied the right to close in her u«a 
 interest Bering Sea, of wliich she then owned Imth 
 shores; but tliis duim, more ju-stified in appe.uanee tlian 
 the claim of tlie Unitel States, wa.s not admitted by the 
 other Maritime Powers.* 
 
 ". . . . As to the con3ciou,sne.vS of its strength, the . 
 Anieiican nation feels it to sueli a degree that it is p(i,>-.si!ilo 
 for its Govornment to indulge in it to e.'ieiss, as it did 
 
 • .1. I. K»ii>. '' GfSihii i:!*- tii-r t.itl-:i'. KUn^ .Viim i ik:i'*, '— 
 (n^ lu» *' .\. u\i-iie * leu^i.'iii.ii' L'liivirse If," \.'l \\. |t. ■.*, 1 ; 
 
 '-A3J :; F 
 
no 
 
 towards England, by contending, against all diplomatic 
 precedents, even against coimiicn sense, that Ben S a 
 is a 'closed sea.'" — (El'cIus, "Nouvelle Gi!ogTaphie Uni- 
 veraeUe," vol. xvi, p. 105.) 
 
 Touching the introduction of the words " seal- 
 herds " and " sealeries," it may again be observed 
 that in no part of the correspondence of Russia 
 with Great Britain or with the United States, 
 relating either to 1821, 1825, or to 1867, are 
 these words used. No reference was made to 
 " rookeries " or to seals. 
 
 The fur-seals are referred to in the United United States' 
 States' Case as " the great source of wealth " of *'*' *"' ' 
 the Company, whereas, in fact, the sea-otter was i^eael^uet^ ***° 
 originally the chief source of wealth. It was 
 only in later years that the value of seal-skins 
 became important. 
 
 The United States claim that the value of the See Appendix as to 
 seal-skins was the chief inducement for the skins a" various 
 purchase of Alaska in 1867. 'i™'^''- 
 
 To prove this, a Report of the Congressional 
 Committee of 188S is produced. This Report, 
 however, was made two years after the United 
 States had asserted, for the first time, a claim to 
 jurisdiction over the waters in Behring Sea, east 
 of the line of dcmarkation mentioned in the 
 Treaty of Cession. 
 
 Evidence to the contrary of this statement is British Case, 
 found in the British Case. '*''■ 
 
 The Report of a much earUer Congressional 
 Committee shows how little the fur-seal was 
 thought of in this connection in 1807. 
 
 In this Report it is sail : — 
 
 "When the proposition to purchase the Alaska Territory 
 from K\i3sia was before Congress, the opposition to it was 
 very niui;li based on tho alleged barrenness and worth- 
 lessness of tlie territory to be acquired. It was supposed 
 that, though there iniglit be many political reasons for this 
 addition to tho American Pacific jjossessions, there were 
 not commercial or revenue advantages. The value of 
 those Seal Islands was not considered at all. Russia had 
 derived but little rovcime from them ; indeed, a sum not 
 sufficient to pay the contingent expenses of maintaining 
 tho official authority. Under our .system, however, we 
 have a very different result" 
 
 Report of Com- 
 mittee on lease t« 
 Alaska Commercial 
 Company, H. B., 
 44th Cong., 
 Ist Sess., Report 
 No. 633. 
 
 In addition to tliis, the authority in the United 
 States, and on whose statements the Government 
 of that country largely relied until this Conven- 
 tion was signed— H. W. Ulliott, of tho Smith- 
 
Ill 
 
 Page 2S. 
 
 sonian Institute— in -writing upon "The Seal 
 Islands of Alaska," 1881, said :— 
 
 "It will be reniiinibered by iimny pcoplu that when we 
 wore ratifying tliu negotiation between our Governiuent, 
 and that of riussia, it was made painfully apparent that 
 nobody in this country knew anything about the subject 
 of Eussian America. Every schoollioy knew where it was 
 located, but no professor or merchant, however wise or 
 shrewd, knew what was in it. Accordingly, immediately 
 after the purchase was made, and the formal transfer 
 eflected, a large lunuber u{ energetic and speculative men, 
 some coming In mi Xew Kngland even, but most of them 
 residents of the Pacific coast, turned their attention to 
 Alaska. They went up to Sitka in a little fleet of sail- 
 and steam-vessels, Iiut among their number it appears 
 there were only two cjf our ''ilizens who knew of or had 
 the faintest appreriiitinn as to llic value of the Seal Islands. 
 One of these, Mr. H. M. llutchiiisnn, a native cjf New 
 Hamp.shire, and the other, a Ccpt.iin Kbenezer Morgan, a 
 native of C'Dunecticut, turned their faces i;: 1S<)8 toward 
 tiii'ni. Jlr. Hutchinson gathered his information at Sitka; 
 Captain Morgan had gained his years before by experience 
 on the South Sea .sealing-grounds." 
 
 *' The Seal Isl.inda 
 of Alnsk.T," 1)V 
 Hoi.ry W. i:ilioit, 
 1681, pp. C8, CO. 
 
 Foot-note in 
 orlgin.ll. 
 
 Brit'sh Cose, 
 Appmdix, vol. i, 
 p. 43. 
 
 Ibid., p. 45. 
 
 And again : — 
 
 " Strange iguoranc their v.ilue in 1S07. 
 
 '■ Considering that iiiis return is the (mly one made to 
 the Ciovernment liy Alaska since its transfer, and that it 
 was never taken into account at first by the most ardent 
 advocates of the purchase of Itussian America, it is in 
 itself hi^^hlycreililable and interesting; to Senator SL'":ner 
 tiio friends of the ac(iuisition of this territory in 1867 
 delegated the task of making the principal argument in its 
 favour. Everything that was written in strange tongues 
 was carefully translated for the choice bits of mention 
 which could be f(uuid of Alaska's value. Hence his 
 speech on the subject possesses this interest : (Speech on 
 Cession of Iliissian America, United States' .Sen.ate, 1867, 
 ' Sumuiary,' p. 48.) It is the embodiment of everything 
 that could be scrajied to;.;ether having the faintest shadow 
 of authenticity by all of the eager friends of the juirchase 
 which gave the least idea of eiiy valuable natural resources 
 in Alaska ; therefore, when in summing up all this he 
 makes no reference whatever to tlie Seal Islands, or the 
 fur-seal itself, the extraordin :y ignorance at home and 
 abroad relative to the I'ribylolf Islands can be well 
 appreciated." 
 
 Under tliis head, a short, isolated, and ambi- 
 guous sentence is taken in the United States' 
 Case from a long speech of ilr. Sumner— in the 
 Case of Her Britannic Majesty this speech is 
 given in full. 
 
 In an examination of that speech, it will he 
 found that sea-otters were again proved to have 
 
112 
 
 been the great object of Russian enterprise in 
 the exploits, notwithstanding the United States' 
 Case now insists the fur-seal played the important 
 part. 
 
 Mr. Sumner gives also the motives which British Ca»e, 
 moved the United States to purchase this ''^g|' '"' " 
 country, as they have been stated in the British n^j^^ ^3 
 Case. 
 
 The Petition which led to the acquisition did Ibid , p. is. 
 not refer to furs or fur-seals. 
 
 Mr. Sumner alluded, it is true, to " another Ibid., p. 49. 
 influence " which " was felt." It was a desire to 
 organize a " fur company." No reference to seals 
 is made in this connection. 
 
 lie refers again to the " Russian peltries and Ibid., p. 52. 
 fisheries," and to "ginseng" and "sea-otter 
 skins." 
 
 Again, in dwelling upon the " advantages to 
 the Pacific coast," he doi-s not specifically refer 
 to "seals " nor to "rookeries." 
 
 lie gives the extension of dominion as " another Ib'd-. v- si. 
 consideration." 
 
 He says : — 
 
 " Another motive to this ac'iuisition may be founil in a Ibid., p. 54. 
 desire to anticiimte the imagined suhemes or necessities of 
 Great Britain." 
 
 The extract from this speech, which appears 
 in the United States' Ca^e, comes after the above, 
 and is preceded by the following introduction : — 
 
 " Here I am obliged to confess a dearth of information ibid., p. 67. 
 easily ucces.sible." 
 
 He deals with the Russian Government of this 
 territory, the population, its climate, vegetable 
 products, marine products, in their order, and 
 then comes to the subject of " furs." Contrary 
 to the present contention of the United States, 
 Mr. Sumner begins by saying ; — 
 
 " I pass now to furs, which at times have vied with Ibid., p. 77. 
 minerids in vahie, although the supply 13 now limited 
 and less permanent." The trade is " essentially 
 diminished." 
 
 In treating of the furs he begins with " foxes ;" 
 then reference is made to " wolverine," the 
 "black hear," the "beaver," the "marten," 
 which latter is, he states, "perhaps the most 
 popular of all the furobearing animals that 
 belong to our new possessions." The "seal " is 
 
113 
 
 touched upon, the extract in the text being the 
 
 first sentence of Mr. Sumner upon the subject. 
 Brituh Cue, The " sca-otter " is last mentioned, and 
 
 f^su "' '° ' Mr- Sumner states, " but in beauty and value 
 
 it is first." 
 This was the animal, and not the seal, as stated 
 
 in the United States* Case, " which tempted the 
 
 navigator;" and "subsequent discovery," Mr. 
 
 Sumner adds, "was under the incentive of 
 
 obtaining the precious fur." 
 
 Mr. Sumner then took up the " fisheries," 
 
 which he termed " perhaps the most important of 
 
 aU " :— 
 
 " What eveu," lie askcJ, " are sca-otter skins by the 
 side of that produced by the sea, incalcuhible iu amount, 
 which contributes to the sustenance of the human 
 family ? " 
 
 The following from the Report of the Governor 
 of Alaska, 1887, supports Mr. Sumner in his 
 opinion that the fisheries of Alaska were the 
 most important acquisition under the Treaty of 
 1867 :— 
 
 Report, Governor " Wlieu the United States' Government purchased 
 
 of Alaska, for fiscal Alaska for 7,200,000 dollars, it did not, in my opinion, pay 
 
 '• United Stales' * ^"^^ "'''" "^ 'action of wliat the territory would actually 
 
 Congressional be worth were every other natural resource or element of 
 
 Reports relating to ^g„,^,j j,,^,j jj, ^^^ ^^^^^^ ,,.,- j completely out of exia- 
 Alaska, Washing- '^ ' •' 
 
 ton, 1889. tence. I make this assertion with the full knowledge that 
 
 it is mfire than likely to subject me to the ridicule of those 
 who cannot undei'Stand why this, together with the other 
 great natural resources of the territory, after the lapse of 
 twenty years, is still in the infancy of its development. 
 Ever since the transfer a studied and determined effort has 
 been made to imbue the general public, as well as the 
 Government, with the belief that there is nothing of value 
 in Alaska save its fur-bearing animals. Agents of the 
 Government, sent out to examine and report upon its 
 resources, instead of honestly performing the service for 
 which they were paid, have, in the interest of a Corpora- 
 tion into wliose service they drifted from that of the 
 Government, spread broadcast statements concerning the 
 climate and undeveloped resources of Alaska which they 
 knew were utterly false, but wliich, according with a 
 preconceived public opinion born of ignorance, were 
 generally nccejited a.s tnie. It has taken long ycf.rs of 
 patient and persistent endeavour on the part of the true 
 friends of Alaska to even partially dispel the erroneous 
 idea thus imposed upon the public mind, but, des])ite the 
 elTorts of her detractors to prevent it, she is gradually but 
 surely emerging from the long night of misrepresentation 
 into the dawn of ;' 'Permanent and glorious prosiierity. 
 [813] 2 Q 
 

 114 
 
 "Vommeree. 
 
 "The commerce of Alaska is at present such only as 
 grows out of and is intimately connected with its fisheries, 
 fur trade, and mining interests. Its extent mny be 
 inferred from the following carefully estimated statement 
 of the market value of the products of her several 
 industries the present year : — 
 
 Dollars. 
 
 Fur trade 2,500,000 
 
 Gold (bullion and duit) .. .. 1, 550,000 
 
 FUherie 3,000,000 
 
 Lumber »nd Wory 100,000 
 
 Beport, Govcrncr 
 of Alaaka, for 6acal 
 year 1887. p. 25. 
 " United Sutes' 
 Congressional 
 Reports rclatinif to 
 Alaska," Washing- 
 ton, 18i!9. 
 
 Total 
 
 0,950,000 
 
 "The indications are that the output of gold will be 
 trebled, if not quadrupled, the coming year, while 
 there is every prospect that a largo amount of capital 
 will be added to that already employed in the fisheries. 
 The fur trade is at its maximum, and aside from 
 the fur-seal industry may be expected to diminish in 
 volume just in proportion to the development of the other 
 natural resources of the territory. 
 
 " Undeveloped Resources. 
 
 " Practically, the natural resources of Alaska are in the Ibid ,Jp. 26. 
 infancy of their development ; in fact, all her elements of 
 wealth, aside from the fur trade, can more properly be 
 written of under this caption than any other. At least 
 nine-tenths of her gold bidlion this year came from her 
 one developed mine of mineral-hearing quartz, which is 
 now being supplied with mill facilities that will enable it 
 to more than double its annual product of precious metal 
 The mineral-bearing belt or ledge in which tliis mine is 
 located gives certiiin promise of the speedy development of 
 a number of others equally as large and productive, while 
 from all parts of the territory coinc reports of valuable 
 discoveries, both of gold and of silver. The prospective 
 wealth of Alaska's almost interminable forests of spruce- 
 pine, cedar, hemlock, &c., can scarcely be o 'er-esti mated; 
 in time there will come an agricultural and horticultural 
 development that will put to shame the oft-repeated 
 assertion of her detractors that ' no crops can be grown in 
 Alaska ;' her grazing lands will bo utilized to the extent 
 at least of supplying a home market, no matter what pro- 
 portions it may assume, with the choicest beef; her 
 fisheries are practically inexhaustible, while in her shaggy- 
 breasted mountains will be found nearly every variety of 
 mineral adapted to the wants of commerce or the uses of 
 mankind. With at least the colour of gold in the bars of 
 her every creek and river, and in the sands on the shores 
 of her extensive coast-line, washed down from the ' mother 
 lodes ' located in her towering mountain ranges, with her 
 coast and inland waters, from the southern boundary of 
 the P"'ar Sea, swarming with numerous species of the best 
 food fishes, her illimitable forests of valuable timber, her 
 

 IgDonnce of valuo 
 of fur-aeal at the 
 time of the Aliaka 
 purchase. 
 
 " Forest and 
 Stfeani," NoTem- 
 ber 6, 1891. 
 
 116 
 
 great seams of coal, mountains of iron, and wide area of 
 grazing lands, who shall unJortake to definitely estimate 
 01- limit the valuo of Alaska's undeveloped resources ?" 
 
 In a letter written by Dr. W. H. Dall, to 
 correct some statements attributed to liim in the 
 discussion arising from the paper by Mr. W. 
 Palmer, read before the Biological Society at 
 Washington, and elsewhere referred to, he 
 88/8 : — 
 
 " I said that, ' in 186G ' (not ' in the early days of the 
 industry'), I purc.lmsed first class fur seal-skins at 
 12J cents a-piecc, tliut being the price at which they were 
 sold by the Itussians. The point of this observation lies 
 in ita application to the oft-repeated statement tliat, as 
 Mr. Palmer says, ' little stress was hiid upon the fact that 
 fur-seals were found in abundance ' at the time of tlie 
 purchase of the territory by the United States. No stress 
 could reasonably have been laid upon it, since 100,000 
 seals would at that time have been worth only some 12,500 
 dollars, which would have hardly paid for the trouble of 
 taking them. Of course, almost immediately afterwards, 
 this was no longer true." 
 
( no ) 
 
 •1 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 An Examination of Russia's Claim to Title in 
 America. 
 
 The United States' Case advances the following pro- 
 poailious : — 
 
 1. That by first discovery and occupation, the shores United Sutea' 
 and islands of Behriiif; Sea, tlie Aleutian ihain, and tlio Case, p. 20. 
 Teninsuln ot Alaska became, jjrolialily as early as IHDO, 
 an undisputed part of Iho territory of tiie Russian 
 Empire, but that the siiores and adjiicont islands of tlio 
 American continent south of latitude CO", ns far as Cali- 
 fornia, were, during tlie latter part of the eighteenth and 
 the first iiuarler of the nineteenth century, tlie subject of 
 conflicting claims on tlie part of Russia, Great liritiiin, 
 Spiun, and tlie United Slates. 
 
 It is assorted, or implied, on the part of the United Ibid., p. 25. ' ' 
 States, tliat, during the latter part o' the eighteenth and 
 early years ot the nineteenth centuries, there were perma- 
 tient Settlements, forts, or trading posts on the eastern 
 mainland of Bcluing Sea ; but, as a fact, there was only 
 one Settlement tliere — on Dristol Bay — np to 1879, as 
 Mr. Blaine states in his letter of the 17tli December, 
 181)0. 
 
 It is said also that "the shores nM islands of Behring 
 Sea .... became probably as early as 1800 an undisputed 
 part of the territory of the Russian Umpire." 
 
 But it will be seen that in another part of the United 
 States' Case it is admitted that at the present time — 
 
 "The shores of Behring Sea are but thinly populated. Ibid., p. is; 
 the native inhabitants of those now belonging to the 
 United States being ICsipiiraos and Aleuts." 
 
 In the abservations inclosed in Mr. Adams' letter to 
 Mr. Middleton of the 22nd July, 1823, it is stated :— 
 
 " It is assumed as an indisputable fact that before 'he "American Stale 
 
 third and last voyage of Captain Cook no Europein •'"pers, Foreign 
 
 , , , „ , , , ,. Relations," vol. t, 
 
 Settlement liad been formed on tlie north-west coast il „ 4^3 
 
 the American continent north of Cape Mendicino, or c.f 
 
 the 40th degree of north latitude." 
 
 To establish that the sbori^s and islands of Behring ^'ea Ruisia'a cUim to 
 became R"ssian as early as 1800, the voyages of discover;/ "'^' 
 of Behring and Cook and others au 'nentioned. q^^^ jq ^i 
 
 24, 27, 29. ' 
 
 The authorities show mertdy the result of Behring's first Ibid., pp. 30-23. 
 voyage was to outline rather vaguely the extreme eastern 
 coast of Asia. 
 
 That of 1740 got no furtlier than Kamtchatka. 
 
 The result of the voyage of 1741 was the discovery, and 
 notliing more, of the American coast 
 

 117 
 
 nancroft,''Alaiki," 
 I>. 174. 
 
 tliiiteil States' 
 Ca«o, p. 24. 
 
 IbM. 
 
 No imthority siiggi'sts tliu estnblithmcnt of niij' prrma- 
 nent ScttKiiuunt rvi'ii on llu' Alriiliim iHlamls, wMtlier 
 huiitiTs unci IriuliTs foUnwi'il tin; (lisciivfri-rs in sciinli of 
 tlie si'ii-utt(;r. 
 
 It i.t, however, Hn),'ye.st(.'(l liy lliu I'niteil States llmt 
 Cook'H (liscoveriea were in tlio interest nnJ ou behiilf of 
 tlie I'lissiiins. 
 
 In ft foot-note tli<' rniled States' Case contiiins the 
 following sentence from tiiis work, when toueliin;,' on 
 Cook's (liscovc L'ies. Ileferring to lh(! Uiissians, it is 
 sniil : — 
 
 "They will umlijuhtedly inuke a proper use of the 
 ndvuiita^fes we huve opi/iiuJ t.) them Ky the (liseovery of 
 Cook's Uiver (Inlet)." 
 
 Conk'a " Voyn([cs 
 round the World," 
 gI. iii, p. 371. 
 
 This, it is .said in ed'ee.t, eonleiniihiti'd Ihe oeenpution 
 and settlenii'iit of the isliuuls and coast hy the I!us.«ians. 
 
 Cook, as will he seen in the piii;e from whieh this note 
 is taken, had reference to lliissian i^xinMlitioirs for the 
 purpose of discovery only. 
 
 Alluding to one of these and its faihire, Cook says: — 
 
 "Tliis was the Inst expedition undertaken by the 
 Russians for prosecutiii.i; di.scoveries to the eastward ; but 
 they will undoubtedly make a proi>er use of the advan- 
 tages we iiuve opened to them by the discovery of Cook'3 
 Itivcr." 
 
 Ibid., p. no. 
 
 Captain King, who continued the journal of ('(jok, from 
 which the (luotation is maih', .says of (.'ook's work : — 
 
 "He afterward.^ explored what had hitlierto remained 
 unknown of the western coast of Ana'riea, from the 
 latitude of 43' to 70° north, containing an extent of 3,o00 
 miles ; ascertained the proximity of the two great con- 
 tinents of A.sia and America ; jia-ssed the straits between 
 them, and surveyed the coast on each tide to .such a 
 height of ncntheni latitude as to demonstrate the imprac- 
 tic.iliilily of a i>assagi' in that hemisiihcre, from the 
 Atlantic into the Pacific Ocean, either by an ea.stern or 
 a western course. In short, if we except the Sea of Amur 
 anil the .lapanose Archipelago, which still remain imper- 
 fectly kiu)wn to Euro[ieans, he has completed the hydro- 
 graphy of the habitable globe." 
 
 British Case, p. 15. 
 
 Cook's " Voyages 
 to the Pacific 
 Ocean," 1776-80. 
 LoodoD, 1874. 
 
 In the Hriti.sh Ca.se, it is made clear that Cook's mission 
 was not in the interest of .I'us.sian authority or jurisdiction. 
 
 He iiad been despatched by the English Coverninent 
 with instructions to make a thorough search for any 
 navigable passage "from the Pacific to the North Atlantic" 
 OS far as latitude C5° north, and further if i-ecjuired. 
 
 His instructions added : — 
 
 " You are also, with the consent of the natives, to take 
 possession, in the name of the King of Great Pritain, of 
 conveident situations in such countries as you may dis- 
 cover that have not already been discovered or visited by 
 [813] 2 H 
 
 i 
 
118 
 
 any European Power . . . , but if you find Mio countries 
 80 discovered nre uniuhabitcd, you are to take possession 
 of them for Ills Majesty by setting up projier marks and 
 inscriptions as fir. . discoverers and possessors." 
 
 It was in 1778 (not 1779, as stated in the Uniteil States' 
 Case) tliat Cook reached th(! American coast of tlie North 
 Pacific, 
 
 Tlie United States' Case asserts that no claim of territory United Stiites' 
 was made by tlie Government of Great Britain on this *^"*' P- *''■ 
 voyage ; but it is shown in the British Case that posses- 
 sion of the coast was taken by (!ook for his country, and British Case, p. Ifi. 
 under the aViove instructions. 
 
 Till' Map hliiiwing liritish territory as discovered by For Map, see 
 
 Cook is in the liljrary of the British Museum. Appendix to lirilish 
 
 ■' Counter-tase. 
 
 In the observations upon the claim of Itussia to terri- 
 torial possessions on the euntinent of Xorth America, and 
 in earnest refutation of such a pretension, communicated 
 with Mr. Adam.s' letter to Mr. Middlelon of the 21^nil duly, 
 1823, referring to Cook'.s last voyage, it is said : — 
 
 
 ,^ 
 
 " The aeeount of that voyage was published under the ''American State 
 
 direction of the British (iovernnient in 1784. In the ^'P*"' '^°'"«''-;" 
 
 Halations, tuI. v, 
 
 introduction to it, written by Dr. Douglass, Bishop of p, 443. 
 Salisbury, among the advantages enumerated as d(>rivahle 
 to all mankind from the discoveries \vhi<'h had been made 
 in the progress of that undertaking, was the opening of a 
 valuable trade in furs from the north-west coast of America, 
 and particularly from King Geoige's or Xootka Sound to 
 China." 
 
 The references in the United States' Ca.se do not sustain 
 the claim of Uussia's early title. 
 
 On the contrary, Vivien de St. Martin, referring to the " Nouveau Diction- 
 subjc't of Ku.ssiaii establishnu'nts generally, shows they nairedoG^ographie 
 ,„ 1 ,• .1 f 1 ,• Universelle," vol. i, 
 
 were teinpiraiy and "expressly lor the purpo.se of liunting jg 
 
 the sea-otter, blue fax, fur-seal, beaver, seal pup, and other 
 animals bearing precious furs." 
 
 St. il.artiii mentions no case of any establishment outside 
 of the i.-:!auds in the case of Behring Sea. 
 
 Tikhnienielf, the liussian historian, and Sir C. Bagot's 
 JTap show the complete absence of trading posts in 
 Behring Sea, and thi'ir temporary character elsewhere. 
 
 Referring to the object of Russian occupation of tlio 
 islands on the Aiaeiican coast, Elliott, in his Eepoil on 
 ■• Ala.3ka" (1874, p. 'J), said:— 
 
 " I'lio Russians did not live here ft.s a people, but as 11 
 Com|)auy of fur traders only, with a single eye to the 
 getting of skiiia" 
 
 ' .... In 1811, Humboldt, in giving the position of "Congressional 
 
 the RiLssian factories on the const, said that they were ' .-J ^qji, f^^nv 
 
 nothing Viut sheds or cabins employed as magazines 2nd Sess., 1867-C8. 
 
 of furs, and that the term " Russian jjossession " should Wasilibutn of 
 
 not make us think that '.he co. itry was reuUy a Russian Wisconsin. 
 province.' ..." 
 
119 
 
 T1>B chpjacter of the Settlements or establishments 
 referred to by Coxe, wlio is cited in the United States' 
 Case, may bo judged by the fcJlowing information from 
 Vancouver : — 
 
 " Account of the 
 Kuaiitn DiscoTPrius 
 between Asia and 
 America," by 
 William Coxn, 
 London, 1803, 
 p. 34S et teq- 
 
 See alio Brittah 
 Caie, pp. 20, 21. 
 
 Tlie Russian Settlement in Kadiak. 
 
 This Settlement occupied a space of about 120 square 
 yards, fenced in by a paling of small spars of pine and 
 birch about 12 feet liigh, a very defenceless barricade even 
 against Indians, as tlie wlmle could be burnt down from 
 the outside, aa could also tlie bouses within the fence, the 
 whole being built with wood and covered with thatch. 
 The largest house, in shape of a barn, was about 3ij yards 
 sijuare, and 10 or 12 feet high, accommodating thirty-six 
 Russians, who, witli their Coumiamier, comprelicnded the 
 total number of Kussians at the station. Two platforms 
 8 feet wide, 8 or 9 inches from the ground, from end to 
 end each side of tlie room, served a.s sleeping places. 
 These were divided into stalls, lilie those in the stables of 
 inns, by posts only, on which posts hung the spare clothes 
 and anns and accoutrements of the Russians. 
 
 The Settlement had thus been establislied twelve years, 
 but the land was no!, cultivated, and tliey had no domestic 
 animals. All they bad to (ifl'er us was cold lioiled halibut, 
 and r.'>w dried .salmon intended to be eaten with it in 
 place of bread. 
 
 Tliere were also about twenty-three other houses or 
 huts, in one of which the Commander resided. Tlie others 
 were the residences of natives who were the companions 
 or attendants of the Russians, and stores and a school for 
 educating the Russian cliildren hi the Russian language 
 and religion. 
 
 A vessel of CO (.r 70 ton,s, belonging to the establish- 
 ment, was liauled up on the beach above waU'r-mavk, and 
 was much >ut of re]iair. She had been in that position 
 two years, and was to be there two yeai'S iiKire, when the 
 Sctth'mciit would Ipc relieved by another party. The 
 whole of the arniiriir of the Settlement consisted of two 
 small brass swivel-guns, each can-ying alnnit 1 lb. of shot, 
 moini!4'd on a balcony of a l.irgc house, a similar piece of 
 ordn.ioce at the dnor of the entrance, a dozen muskets, 
 hanging apparently in constant readiness in the great 
 room, two or tliree jiistols, and a few .ihort daggers. 
 
 The Riiv-iiiii Settlouieiits seem to have been mostly on 
 islatiil-- ill, whether on islands or the mainland, to have 
 been very Itim^y. 
 
 Referring to Itussian establishments, tlio most eastern 
 part being at I'ort Etches, on Prince William Sound, 
 Vancouver wrote : — 
 
 "lie clearly undei-stood that the Russian Government 
 had little to do with these Settleiiieiils ; ihat they were 
 .solely under the ilirectioii and snp)iort of iiuieiiendent 
 
 mercantile Conipanics Not the least attention 
 
 whatever i.s paid to tlie cultivation (jf the land or to any 
 other object but that of collecting furs, which is principally 
 done by the Indians." 
 
120 
 
 " Americau State 
 Papers, Foreign 
 Kelationa," vol. t, 
 p. 443. 
 
 Mr. Adams, writing to Mr. Smith, Secretary of State, 
 gives nn account of a coiifercncc with Count RonianzoEf 
 resjiccting Itussian claims on tlie North-West Coast of 
 America • — 
 
 "If such is the experience of this Government, the 
 difficulties must be obviously much greater in preventiu;; 
 a trade so distant willi wandering savages, scattered alou;. 
 a coast over several degrees of latitude, having no ports o'- 
 Custom-houses, not even permanent dwelling-places fron 
 which it would be possible to collect evidence of any 
 transgression of tlie law." 
 
 It may bo added that in the observations communicated 
 with Mr. Adams' letter to Mr.Middleton of the 22nd July, 
 1823, it is said :— 
 
 "The only place on the north-western American coast Ibid, 
 where Captain Cook found a llussian Settlement wivs at 
 Onalashka, one of the Aleutian Islands; the principal 
 person of which Settlement, Ismaeloff, and the other 
 Russians whom he met there, 'aflirmed that they knew 
 nothing of the continent of iVmerica to the northward.' " 
 
 In an extract from tlie letter of Count Fernan Nunez to 
 M. Montmorin, Secretary of the Foreign Department 
 of France, Paris, 16th June, 1700, the following 
 appears ; — 
 
 " I have the honour to address you with this a faitiifiU Ibid., p. 444. 
 extract of all the transactions wliicli have hitherto passed Arnual Register, 
 between my Court and that of London on the subject of p. 30 1 , State Papers, 
 the detention of two English vessels which were seized in 
 the Bay of St. Lawrence or Nootka, situated in the 
 50th degree to the nortli of California, and which were 
 afterwards taken to the port of St. Plas. 
 " Yim will observe by this relation : 
 " 1. That by tlie Treaties, demarcations, takings of 
 possession, and tlie most decided acts of sovereignty 
 exercised by tlie Siianiards in these stations from the reign 
 of Charles II, and autliorized by that Monarch in 1692, 
 the original voucliers for which shall be brought forward 
 in the course of the negotiation, all the coast to the north of 
 the Western America on the side of the South Sea, as far as 
 btyonil what is called Prince Williaiu'i, Sound, which is in 
 the 61st degree, is acknowledged to belong exclusivelg to 
 Spain. 
 
 " 2. That the Court of Russia, having been informed of 
 this extent of our boundary, assured the King, m/ master, 
 without the least delay, of tlie purity of its intentions iu 
 thi.s respect, and added ' that it was extremely sorry that 
 the repeated orJeu; issued to prevent the subjects of 
 Russia from violatii.g, in the smallest degree, the 
 torritoiy belor.t'in^ to anotlier Po'ver, should have been 
 disobeyed.' 
 
 " 15y these papers it is deracnstrated : 
 " That, at that time, the oh im of Spain to exclusive 
 possession of tlie north-west Moat extended beyond Prince 
 Wdliain's Sound, in latitude 61". 
 
121 
 
 " Tliat the Court of Eussin Imd been informed of this 
 extent of tlie Sjianish liouiiilary; had disclaimed any 
 intention of interfering; with it, nnd added expressions of 
 its sorrow that its repeated orders to prevent the suljjeuta 
 of Uussia from violating tlie territory Iwlouging to another 
 Power had been disobeyed. 
 
 "So far was Knssia, in 1"',)0, from asserting any 
 chiim wliatsoever lo territory on tlie continent of North 
 America." 
 
 American State 
 I'apcrs, Foreign 
 Relations, vol. v, 
 p 449. 
 
 In the Confidential Memorial on the North-western 
 question, prepared in 1823 by Mr Middleton, it i.s 
 observed : — 
 
 "It appears, then, that the position of Itussia relative 
 to her rights ujmn the north-west coast of America had 
 nut at all changed since 1700. The Kussian- American 
 Colony had enjoyed its exclusive rights granted by the 
 Emjieror I'aul. It had prospered and formed an establish- 
 ment in the limits marked out by the Ukase of 1799. It 
 had, however, never pretended to exclude other nations 
 from a commerce shared with them for so long a time ; 
 but it saw with jealousy its profits diminished by this 
 rivalship. In line, it tonk a violent part, and at length 
 obtained by its solicitations the l.'kase of the 4th (lOth) 
 September, 1821," 
 
 Kritiah Ooae, 
 Appendix, vol. i, 
 p. 88. 
 
 B. 442, Foreigi 
 Kclationn, vol -^ . 
 A. 444, 445. 
 A. 452. 
 
 Bancioft, "Alaska," 
 pp. 190, 191. 
 
 In 18C7 Mr. Sumner, in the United States' Senate, 
 refc^rred to the Russian Government in America as 
 "nothing but a I'ur CDnijiany whose only object is trade." 
 
 To ferther siippo't Mr Adams in ISi'o, and Mr. Sunmer 
 in lSt>7, in their ciinclusion that there U'-ver was a perma- 
 nent Itussian Settlement on the American eontini nt, and 
 that the Settlements which occurred at various times, 
 either on any part of that coast or on islands near it. 
 down to 18G7, were mere "villages" or "factories," 
 Bancroft may be cited. 
 
 Dealing with the Rus.sian attempt in 178.3 to utilize the 
 knowledge obtained through Cook to extend their opera- 
 tions to the mainland coast of America, and to the failure 
 of this attempt, Uancnjfl says: — 
 
 "Thus unfortunately enued the attempt of the Russians 
 
 to gain a I'nothdld iipun the continental coast of America 
 
 This failure to e.\tend their Held of operations seriously 
 checked the spirit of enterprise which had hitherto 
 manifested it.self among the Siberian merchants, and for 
 some time oidy one small vessel was dispatched from 
 Siberia for the Aleutian Islands." 
 
 Br'tlsh Caiei 
 A|ipendiz, vol. i. 
 pp. 47, 48. 
 
 Sumner, when rei'i iring i) Russian America in 1867, 
 spoke as fdllows: — 
 
 "... These g(Mieral cons'derations are reinforced when 
 we call to mind thi^ little infiuence which Russia ha.s thus 
 far been able to exercise in this region. Though pos- 
 sessiu',' dominion over it fur more than a century, this 
 gigantic I'ower has not been more genial or productive 
 [843] 2 I 
 
122 
 
 there than thp soil itself. Her Government there is little 
 more than a name or a shadow. It is not even a skeleton. 
 It is hardly visible. Its only representative is a Fur 
 Company, to whicli hnn been adtleil latterly an IcH 
 Company. The immense eountry is withuut form and 
 without light ; without activity, and without prosrcsa. 
 Distant from the Imperial > apitul, and separated from the 
 huge bulk of tlie Russian Empire, it docs not share tlie 
 vitality of a eonmum country. Its lite is solitary and 
 feeble. Its Settlements are only eneauipments or lodges. 
 
 lu fisheries are only a petty peniuisite, belonging to local 
 or personal adventurers rather tlian to the commerce of 
 
 nations Alexander Humboldt, whose insight into 
 
 geography was <inerring,in his great work on ' Kew Spain,' 
 
 published in 1 811, after stating that he i.n able fr..ni oilieial 
 
 documents to give the position of the Ilussian factories on 
 
 the American continent, says that they are ' millung but 
 
 sheds and cabins employed as magazines of furs.' He 
 
 remarks further tluit ' the larger part of these small 
 
 Russian Colonies do not comnuniicale with each other 
 
 except by sea,' and tiien putting us on our guard not to 
 
 expect too much from n name, he proceeds to say that the 
 
 new denomination of Hiissvin Awa-Ua or Hiihwu jios- 
 
 Kssions on tlie new continent mu.st not make us think lliat 
 
 the coasts of Rchring's liasin, the Peninsula of Ala.ska, or 
 
 the country of Tehuktchi have become a Eimian province, 
 
 in tlio souse given to this word when we sjieak of tho 
 
 Spanish provinces of Sonoro or New Wscay. (Humboldt, 
 
 ■Essai I'ohti.iue sur la Nouvelle-Espagne,' Tom. I, 
 
 pp. 344, 34.5.) Here is a distinction between tho footliold 
 
 of Spain in California and tlio footlu.ld of liussia in North 
 
 America, which will at lea.st illustrate the slender power of 
 
 the latter in this region. 
 
 " In ceding possessions so little within the sphere of 
 her Empire, embracing more than lUO nations or tribes, 
 Russia gives up no part '.f herself, and even if she did, 
 the considerable price paid, the alarm of war which 
 begins to fill our ears, and the sentiments of friend- 
 ship declared for the United States, would explain the 
 transaction." 
 
 The British Case deals with the extent of Russian Britiih Ca.e. 
 Settlements and the nature of the occupation in this PP- 20, 23, 38-35 
 region down to as late a period as 1867. 
 
 The establishments of Shelikoff, " on various parts of the See^.8«;»J»|^y ^ ,3^ 
 Americon continent," were of a temporary and evanescent ^^^ ,^ ^^ 32, 23.' 
 
 character. ^ 
 
 In 1791, when Bai-anofT was said to have been in Bancroft, "Alaska, 
 command ''of aU the establishments of tlie Hhelikolf- P-^*'- 
 Golikoff Company," Kadiak and a few of tlie smaller 
 adjacent isles only were claimed to be in the possession of 
 the Company. 
 
 The people of the Alaska Peninsula would not permit ibid. 
 
 Russians to settle among them. 
 
 The visit to Yakutat, in 1788, is referred to in the 
 United States' Case as an instance of Russian " occupa- 
 tion." 
 
123 
 
 British Oaie, p. 18. 
 
 llnit«d States' 
 Cme, p. 38. 
 
 British Case, p. 20. 
 
 United Stales' 
 Casr, p. Sb. 
 
 See British Case, 
 p. 33. 
 
 United States' 
 Caic, p. S3. 
 
 " Alaska," pp. 404' 
 40». 
 
 Ibid., p. 446. 
 
 Bancroft, however, refers to thU ns a visit of pxplorerg 
 mailu .subseiiuent to similar work under Eiij^lish or French 
 voyagers. 
 
 To prove liie occupation of the coast from " I'rince 
 William Sotmd to t\w north of the Coliiiiiljia Ilivor," it i.s 
 asserted that a vessel wu.h launched, in t7'J4, fruin the 
 shores of Princo William Sound. 
 
 But Vancouver was then actually surveying this coast 
 and Sound. 
 
 While no evidence of any permanent niissiai- settle- 
 ment up to thi.s time on the mainland of tlio continent is 
 given, it is, however, stated tliat " the most important step 
 taken by Russia to perniunently establish Iht authority 
 over the island and adjoining sltores of the north-west 
 coast of the continent was tlie founding .... of New 
 Archangel (afterwards Sitka)." 
 
 It has been and is insisted on behalf of Great Britain 
 that no occupation of the Amcric'in shores of Behring .Sea 
 occurred previous to 1824 and 182.">, even if since. 
 
 Tilt' United States' Case endeavours to controvert the 
 position and argument of XL. Adams on behalf of the 
 United St.itos in 1822 .ind 1824. It is argued, in effect 
 and seriously, tliat the occupation <ui the part of llussia 
 from lieliriii!; Sea (67' north Latitude) down to the mouth 
 of the Columbia River (47°), a distance of aliout 2,800 miles, 
 took place I'V reason of the founding of a " trading post," a 
 "fortress," and "seat of goveriiiiient '' .it the Island of 
 Sitka, 57° north. 
 
 Sitka was not founded in 1802. as stated. 
 
 In tliat year the Russian " establishment " there was 
 destroyed by lire, and the Russians were massacred by the 
 natives, assisted by deserters from a United States' vessel, 
 the " Jenny." 
 
 The authority on the mainland said to have been 
 exerted by virtue of the Goveninient at Sitka was 
 extremely limited, since Rescnoff, writing in 180G, said, 
 after visiting Sitka : — 
 
 "Tliese islands would be an inexhaustible source of 
 wealth wore it not for the Bostonians, who undennino our 
 trade with China in furs, of whicli tiny olitain large 
 
 numliers on our Americin coast I take the liberty, 
 
 as a faithful serwint of your Imperial Xliiji-sty, of declaring 
 my opinion that it is very necessary to take a stronger 
 hold of this country. It is certiin that we shall leave it 
 empty-handed, since from fifteen to twenty ships come 
 here annu.ally from lioston to trade." 
 
 At as late a period as 1819 Golovnin, reporting on the 
 nature of the operate :is of the Russian-American Com- 
 pany and its organization, said : — 
 
 Ibiil., p. 531. "Three things are wanting in the organization of the 
 
 Company's Colonies : a clearer •J'^iiiiitiou of the various 
 officers, a distinction of rank and a regular uiiit'orm, so 
 that foreigners visiting these parts may see .sonietliing 
 indicating the existence of forts and troops belonging to the 
 Russia sceptre— something resembling a regular garrison. 
 
124 
 
 At present they can come to no < : her conclusion than that 
 these station.") are hit tfiiijmrari/ fortijlcations trccUd hy 
 hunters as a defcnre ajainst savaijrs. 
 
 " Fort Ro3s " (icferrt'd to in the United States' Case), a ;jnited Stat«>' 
 few miles north of the Iky of San Francisco, was simply Ci»e, p. 38. 
 the name of the IJoss t'ciloiiy at tliat tim'.. 
 
 The references in the I'liiti'd States' Ciise do not show 
 this Colony had anything in i omiuon with the hunters or 
 traders to the north. 
 
 Vivien de St. Martin, to whom fre(|uent reference is Virien de Si. 
 made in the United States' Case, says, when referring to M«nin, p. 8S. 
 all of these Russian Company estiiblishmcuts, that their 
 sole object was tlio " rich commerce in furs." 
 
 Toucliini; the claim maile by Russia in 1810 to the 
 coast as far ns the Columbia Uiver and the Colony at Fort 
 lioss, he says : — 
 
 "In 1807 the Comjiany attemjited to cstablisli itself at Ibid, 
 the mo\ith of the River Columbia, and in 1812 at tlie port 
 >f Bodega, a few leagues from the celcbnited IJiiy of Sau 
 Francisco on Spanish territor,, after liaving, however, 
 informed tb(^ autliorilies that in so far as they themselves 
 (the Ru.ssians) and the Kadiak Indians were concerned 
 the establishments were solely for the ]iuq>ose of fishing." 
 
 Tlie statement in the text of the Unitetl States Ca.se i.i United Sutei' 
 based upon a passing n mark in a letter fi-om Sir. Adams *"' P" '*• 
 to Mr. Smith, Secrelaiy of Slate : but so un.Mibstantial di<l 
 he deem the pretension that on the 5th Se|)tembiT. 18l(t, 
 lio thu.s refers to it :• - 
 
 " I do not imagine that it is tlie Count's serious intc.'i- Adams to Smith, 
 
 tion to claim to the mouth of the Columbia River, but S<pi«MnlHr 5, I8I0, 
 
 , ,, - . , , . ,.._ , "American Stat* 
 
 perliaps the fi.xMig upon a boundary may pn-sent ditlii ul- |>jpeni"',oi v 
 
 ties to the proposed Convention which hud not been p- 442. 
 
 anticipated." 
 
 In tliis ilespatch Mr. Adams shows that the claim was 
 based .solely u[)ipn a Map wliidi im huled the whole of 
 Nootka Sound, and down tn the mouth of tlie Cedumbia 
 River, as part of the Russian possession."!. 
 
 There is no evidence that itueh a claim waa ever 
 pressed. 
 
 Alter dealing with the evideiu;e of Russian discoveries I'nilod Glatei' 
 and Ru.s^i.ui eonuuerce in the regi(m under cousidenition, Caae, p. 39. 
 the United States' Cose is led to admit that Rritish, 
 Spanisli, and American competition existed in Uith 
 re.spntls. 
 
 !(• li'iriog genemlly to Russia's share in America and 
 the idiillii'ling eliiiiiis of the ditfenmt nations, lUncrofl 
 say.s:— 
 
 "In the great, seizure an.l partition of America by Bancroft, "Aluka," 
 Kui'ipinii I'owi rs IbiTe w.i.s no ri'H.,.)!! why Russia should ?• '• 
 not luae a share. Slic was mistres.s in the i-ast and north, 
 iu) Were. France and Spain in the >vest and .south ; .ilu: waa 
 US grasping us I'ortitg.d, and as old and cruel as F.ngland ; 
 and liecuuse slieuwne.d so much of Europe- and Asia in the 
 
125 
 
 Arctic, the desire was only increased tlieieby to extend 
 her broiul Ijek quite around the worUl. It Wiis hut a step 
 across from one continent to the other, and intercourse 
 betwi.cni the [irimitive iiedples of the two liad been 
 common from time ininrcmoriid. It was liut natural, I 
 say, ill the gigantic robbery of lialf a worhl, tliat I!nssia 
 shoidd iiave a share; and liad she lu'en quicker about, it, 
 the belt might as well have been continued to Greenland 
 and Iceland." 
 
 ^ litetl States' 
 \iK, p. S4. 
 
 Bancroft, ".Ma-ka,' 
 p. 317. 
 
 Ibid., p. 391. 
 
 Ibid , p. 391. 
 
 Uoitad Sutn' 
 Case, p. 17. 
 
 The United States' Case, under the heading of the 
 " I{ussian-Am( rii:au Company," relate." a history of this 
 body. 
 
 It can haiilly lie said with acruracy that the history of 
 this Company is "the hi tory of that portion of the globe 
 to which "the attention of the Tiiliunal of Arbitration is 
 directed," since its proefi-dini,'s were bidiien from other 
 nations, except in so far as tluy have been revealed by the 
 publislied accouiiLs of navigators, and the archives trans- 
 ferred by Russia to the United ."^tates, and j)artially pub- 
 lished for the first time in the Case under consideration. 
 
 Haniroft say^ that Baninufi' " wa.s any day, drunk or 
 sober, a niati h for the navigator who came to .-^py out Am 
 srcrelx" 
 
 Tom hing, moreover, the .statement that oHi( ers of the 
 Imperial Xavy were in the emphiy of tile Company and 
 enjnini'd to ib. y the orders of the Chief Manager, Paneroft 
 says of Talin, a naval ollicer in the service of the Com- 
 pany, that he was " one who, like all of his profession, wag 
 little disposed to lieed the Chief Manager's iiLstructions, 
 and when his vessel was lying in Norfolk Sound had 
 threatened to hang I'laranoll from the masthead if he daa'd 
 to show himself on board." 
 
 It may 1k' added that Bancroft, in a foot-note, recites a 
 letter fruni Itavanoff showing that he only claimed to 
 direct naval onieers in Vuvages of discovery and e.\[ilora- 
 tion. 
 
 The United States" Case further st.ites that, at an early 
 date, the Mann>ifer of the Company was required to be an 
 officer of the navy of high rank. In this litter llaranotf 
 de"crilies himself as a "common trader," and theri fore 
 unable to give Talin " the satisfaction of a gentleman."" 
 
 Till' state nent that the Company administered liotli 
 government ind tnide upon the whole of the lenitury over 
 which it bai. control requires considerabli' q\mlilication. 
 OS the points at whiili tlu' Company appeared over that 
 vast coast, from Itehring Si-a to the southern limit of its 
 tenitorv, wer fiw and far between. 
 
 TllK Sfv-Ottek. 
 
 The .w(t-(//^;■ was, in the tint in.stnnre, and eontii led for 
 many yeais to be, the princiiml objei t of all the 11 issian 
 expeditions to the region i>f Hehiing Se;i. The history 
 of the ihseovery and appiopriation of territory was in elli'el 
 that of the exti'usiiHi of sea-otter breeding and trading, and 
 the saleguarding ofihe.se inteiv-sls. 
 
 L.MaJ 2 K 
 

126 
 
 " History of the 
 North-west Coast. 
 vol. i, |ip. 343, 34S 
 
 Bancroft writes: — 
 
 " We have seen how the ("o?:sncks were ontici-d Trom the " History of 
 Ca.spiiiu imd T^lack Seas, ilrawn over tlic Uriil Moiiiitaiiw, ' "* *' P' " 
 and lured onward in tlieir oeiitiny-niarch throuj,di Siberia 
 to Kanitiliatka, and all fur the skin of iho liltle sable. 
 And when they reached the I'acilic they were ready as 
 ever to bravo new dangers on the treaelierous northern 
 waters, for the, coveled Siberian qnadruped was here sup- 
 planleil by the still more valuable amphibious otter." 
 
 Again, in unother phiee, the sanie antlKJr sums up the 
 result of bi.s investi,i,'alions on this subjeet its follows :— 
 
 "The fur cf this amphibious animal, the mo.st preciotis 
 of all peltries, was the attraction that brought to these 
 shores all tlie advent uro\i3 navigators whose exploits have 
 been briel'y reeorded in the preceding chapters. A few 
 did not engage directly in tlie fur trade, but all such, with 
 the possible exception of Captain (.'ook, came becaiLSO of 
 the operation.sof the fur-seekers. 
 
 » • • • 
 
 " There were other valuable furs in the country besides 
 that of tlie sca-ottcr, which were jirolltably expnited in 
 connection with tlie latter, but there were nmu which of 
 thcm.selves would in the early years have brought the 
 world's adventurou.« tradci-s on their long and perilous 
 voyages to the coast. The fur-seal, however, was taken in 
 large number.s.and in later years yieldeil greater jirolits, on 
 account of its greater abundance, than the sea-otter." 
 
 " During the Husaian oc upation of Alaska Territory the [{pport of 
 
 traih' of sea-otter skins was of gre;.ter value and nupor- Kieutenant W. 
 
 ,,,,,.,,., f M.iviiard, United 
 
 t,auce than any oi her oranch ot the lur trade, l«,tli Ironi y;,,,,^,' Saw, :474 
 
 the high prices obtained for them, and also from the II, ICx. Dor. 13, 
 
 numbcis vhich were taken. They were sent to China, where [■ '^' '''"'' ^''''^•' 
 
 lat Sess, 
 they were, advantageou,sly I'Xchanged for tea and cloth. 
 
 One .si;a-otter si;ln bnnight as much as ten seal-skins, and 
 
 from ten to twenty times as much lusany other skins found 
 
 in Ala.ska. 
 
 " When the Eus'-ians first came into the country, in Elliott's " Report 
 17(i0-tij, the abundance of iiea-otter ^kini and thi'ir ™|ttikr'''l'874' 
 imn\ensely greater value than that of any others found p. 63. 
 cau.sed very little attention to be paid to the .-ikins of fur- 
 Bcal.s or thiise of other animals . . . ," 
 
 " C. A, Williams. — Q. Under what process were they H. u. 3«8;), 
 
 worked '- /I, At first, when the Ibissians came to know SO'h Cong„ 
 
 , ,, , _ , ■ I ., . '■'nJ Sess , p. 77 
 
 this country of Uering Sea tlieir liuntmg expeditions were 
 
 confined mostly to the taking and killing of the soa-ottcr 
 
 which abcainded about the Aleutian chain. That wu.s then 
 
 the fur of most value in China, and the fur-seal was not 
 
 anywhere near as profitaidu in trade as the otter, and were 
 
 rather paised liy." 
 
 "Allured by the beautiful furs of these new-found Pamphlet, 1 830, 
 reuions, they repealed 'Jieir t.'xeursions from year to year, l-on Ion, printed bjr 
 
 ■ .u I » .1 11 .1 ,1, 1 F. SiM.berl, junr., 
 
 and though many of them pensheil with their ve88(ds, or y^ j^^^^ ,. Qn 
 
 wen; surprised and murdered by the savages, yet such whs the Anibilioiis 
 
 the profit obtained, chiefly from the skins of the sca-oltei», ■'''"^'"i,',Vio'N'<wth- 
 
 Ihat increasing numbers were ready to embark in the west Americs," by 
 
 jHihlous pursuit " (p. 12). . •» E»glUhm»u. 
 
127 
 
 English pamphleti 
 1830-63 (P.O. 
 Library, 4157). 
 
 " The coasts of Kamtschatlca formerly abounded in sea- 
 otters, but the unrestricted destruction of these animals 
 soon diminished their numbers to such a degree that the 
 Company were obliged to go further in quest of them ; for 
 this reason they pushed on beyond the Aleutian Islands to 
 tlie Island of Kadiac, situated near the American coast, 
 and there fixed their principal establishment" (p. 13). 
 
 " The sea-otters taken by the Company's sen-ants at this 
 Settlement were at first a source of great profit, but those 
 animals are becoming more and more scarce " (p. 15). 
 
 " The most valuable of tlie animals found here (Sitka) is 
 the dta-otter, which inhabits only the north-west coast of 
 America, between the latitude of 30' and CO", is met with 
 in smaller numbers on the shores of the Aleutian Islands, 
 and formerly frequented the coast of Kamtac'-.tka and the 
 Kurile Islands. Its skin furnishes the fine it fur in the 
 world, which is highly prized both by Europeans and by 
 the Chinese, and which rises in value from year to year 
 with the decrea.su of the animal, that will probably soon 
 disappear from the face of tlie earth, and merelv figure as 
 an embellishment in our zoological works. In Cliina the 
 skin of the sea-otter usually sells for 2 Spanish dollars " 
 (P- 17). 
 
 • Hiatorj of the 
 North. west Coast," 
 toL i, pp. 375-377. 
 
 Ibid., p 361 (lee 
 also Fraiichcr«'« 
 Narralivu, p. 17). 
 
 The market for these skins was in the beginning found 
 by the Russians in their own country, but before many 
 years China also became a favourite market, tlie centre of 
 the trade being at first in Irkutsk, and afterwards at 
 Kiatcha. In 1785, and after Cook's third voyage, which 
 is regarded as having opened the trade between the 
 American coast and China by sea, this trade sprang into 
 existence, and was for some years alnuist exclusively 
 enjoyed by English vessels. Hanna, Porllock and Dixon, 
 Meares, and many others visited the coast in conuectiou 
 with this particular trade. At a later date, and nearly 
 contempora;ieous with the first years of the present century 
 (beginning about 1788), vessels from the eastern part of 
 the United States began to engage in this trade, and 
 eventually succeeded in securing the greater part of it, and 
 continued their operations till tlie increasing scarcity of 
 the sea-otter itself naturally brought them to a close, or 
 reduced the trade to very suiall dimensions. 
 
 This great diuiintitidn in the volume of the trade in 
 sea-otters occurred about the year 1846, according to 
 Sturgis and Grcenhow, who are quoted by Baniroft, and 
 thereafter, and as a direct consequence of the scarcity of 
 the sea-otter, the enMiuierce of the entire coast hecanii! 
 practically monopolized by two great Cori)orations, the 
 Russian- American and Hudson's Bay Com])anies. 
 
 That mon! details are not actually on record h.s to the 
 places visited, and the .scoih' of Ih ■ tnuliiiij voyages of the 
 numerous vessels engaged ia such trade when it .vus at its 
 best, is largely aceountod for by thn fact that the adven- 
 turers generally (cuicealed such details, with the object of 
 reaping further individual benefit from their respective 
 discoveries. 
 
 Meanwhile, and with the increasing rarity of the sea- 
 
J^.. 
 
 \. '\1l 
 
 otter, the trade in fur-seal skins became relatively more 
 important It cannot, liowover, be regarded as having 
 originated at this time, for its prosecution had been con- 
 tinuous, to a vnryinf! extent, from the date of Bchrinf»'« 
 voyage in 1741, and a much larger number of skins were 
 obtained in years subsequent to 1786, in which year the 
 Pribyloff Islands had been discovered. This particular 
 trade, however, fell very largely into the hands of the 
 Russians, who had established posts of one kind or onother 
 upon the principal breeding islands of the seal, and at 
 other points of vantage on the northern coasts. 
 
 .1 ■ /O 
 
 f : 
 
^-|!- 
 
 ^^f" / yf. 
 
 ^ji" 
 
 CONTEDENTIAL. 
 
 ^^iyiunj^ 
 
 The Diminution of Seal Life on Pribyloff 
 Islands. 
 
 UNITED STATES' MISMANAGEMENT. 
 
 Reiiiltii of protecttoK 
 
 •cal herd. 
 
 I'nitod Stales' Cmc. 
 p. ZBS. 
 
 The proposal to prohibit Pelagic Sealing. 
 
 THE United States' Case refers to— 
 
 '■ the iiisignificftiit investment of Canada," " the advi- 
 sability of iirotccting and preservinj,' tiie world's chief 
 supply of fur seal-skins," " the employment of thousands 
 of iieoplu in Kngland and tlie United States for genera- 
 tions, and the investment of millions of capital." 
 
 Ai trustee, rii;ht and 
 iatj to protect. 
 
 United States Cue. 
 n> 300, 301, 
 
 It alleges — 
 
 ' Tliat the I'nitod States, possessing, a>: tiioy alone 
 jiosscss, tlie power (if preserving and cherishing this valu- 
 alile interest, are in a most just sense tho trustee thereof 
 for tho benefit of mankind, and should be permitted to 
 discharge tlieir trust witlumt hindrance," 
 
 And insists — j 
 
 Pelagic sealing must " that the extermination of this seal herd can only be iire- 
 bc prohibited. » i i .1 .1 , •, ■ • .. , . " ,. 
 
 vented by the practical [iiohdntioii ol pelagic seaLiig in 
 
 all the waters to which it re-sorts.' 
 
 Game Lavs. 
 
 United State*' Caac, 
 pp. 280, III, 
 
 Tlie Case ^oes on to say — 
 
 '■ All nations and races in all ages have rocogni/ed thi- 
 necessity <if ad'urding suliicieni protection for the repro- 
 ductiim and ctjiitinued e.\istence of all animal life useful 
 lu the Immait race, l^veii the savage recognizes and 
 enforces this humanitarian and economic principle, but it 
 is most fully lecoguized and enforced among civilized 
 nations. An examination cif the legislation of the 
 countries of luirope and America shows that the protec- 
 tion of the liovernmenl is everywhere exteiuled to animals 
 /era- natvrct during tlie breeding season, and that especially 
 the mother, whon heavy with young or while her ofl'spriii" 
 is dependent upon her, is under the guardiimshi|i d the 
 l»w. The wihi animal on the land and ilie lisji in tin- sea 
 aa' both preserved by a close season and stringent rules, 
 having paiticular refeietue lo the reproduction and un- 
 dimiuished existence of the species," 
 
 [862] B 
 
2 
 
 " NautictI Uagtiine,'* 
 Tol. Hi, Nn. II, 
 Novomher IH9i(. 
 
 Upon statements such as the iihove, tho Tribunal 
 of Arbitration is asked to prescribe llegulations 
 more drastic in character tlian were over sub- 
 raitteil to the kigislativo body of any country in 
 the world. 
 
 While Great Britain has agreed to Join in 
 racasiires for the j)revention of the cxtcrraination 
 of the fur-seal, and is directly intcn'sted in this 
 respect only in pelagic sealing, the following facts 
 should be remembered : — 
 
 In Denmark, the hair-seal is now being exter- 
 minated for the express purpose of pri'scrving 
 the fish which it devours, llcwards an; offered 
 for ils destrui'tion in IJanisb waters. 
 
 Professor Elliott is of oj)inion, and reported to Ctmui Report, 1880, 
 the I'nited States oflieially, that the fur-seals in ""'"' 
 the Pacific consume G,(l()0,000 tons of fish evei-y 
 year at least. 
 
 Under these circumstances, considering the 
 long eoast-Iiiie of British territory on the Pacific, 
 it is within the right of Great Britain to adopt 
 the policy of Denmark respecting seals, in order 
 to prcserv(! the valuable cod, halibut, and other 
 fisheries of these waters. 
 
 These iishcries arc important to the citizens 
 of the United States and to British subjects 
 alike. It has been olTicially reported to the 
 Senate of the United States — 
 
 " No wimIiIi, M:ilion;il (Ji- piTsoniil, i ail lie Justly ciinicd S«n»t«, 50ih Cong., 
 wlii'ii it Clinics fidiii iJiiniiiishiiif; the supply of Inniiiui f<o. loS'p 88. '"'' 
 IV), id. 
 
 " With .ill our VM'.t succc.-is of ccivala iind of uiiiiiinl food 
 wc still need all the lifh we cm j;"l'"-'' ''"'" •''•' oceiins 
 and SOILS for the eouifmt and economy of liviiij,', especially 
 uiiioii;^ the industrial cln.sses of our rapidly iucrca.siug 
 \> .pulatiiin. The Atlantic and Tacidc li.-heiies rank in 
 iiiijiiiitance alon;,' with the production of liecl', mutton, and 
 pork us a source of food supjily, and a.s n competitive 
 ilenicnt in the fooil markets even of this almndant 
 countrv." 
 
 The United States' Case cites instances where 
 nations, for joint b(>nellt and common enjoyment 
 of maritime pursuits, have adopted regulations 
 applicable to ton-itoriiil and non-territorial waters. 
 
 No ease is found where, by Treaty or otherwise, 
 one nation has even suggested that the sole 
 control, regulation, and use of the fn'c-swimming 
 animals or other (Isberies should be monopolized 
 by one Powr 
 
 Tiie Uniti f^tates' Case docs not cvon arguo 
 
3 
 
 fnilod StotCH' CMC, 
 p ll!4. 
 
 III!.!,, p. 1(55. 
 
 Ibid., pp. 170, 177, 
 Slfl. 
 
 lUd., pp. 105. 166, 
 212. 213. 
 
 Briti-h Commis- 
 sioncrs' Itoport, 
 pp. 117-11». 
 
 Urili<h Cue, 
 Appendix, Tol. iii, 
 
 p. HZ. 
 
 tliai it i.'j witliiii tlio power of lpj,'isl;ilion U> se.nirn 
 a pcrniancnt onjoyinout liy man oT any .^jji'des of 
 niariau lif(>. Tt can perhaps, on tlio otlici' hand, 
 ])n said (liat there is no country in llie world 
 wliero the preservation of llslicries and < 1' wild 
 animals generally hns lieen so inadequutely 
 sr'eiin;d, or where mcasiii'es for their protection 
 liave l)e(!n so iiu'lfi''!. ritly enforced, ,'is in the 
 United States of America. 
 
 'I'Ui' Tniird Slates' t'ase siiL,'i,'es|s Ih ,1, i^iveii 
 the solo control of seal life, that eoiinti'v is lilted 
 for the position of Inistce of this interest for the 
 benefit of th(! wlioh; world. 
 
 It has bei'ii shown in this Coniiter-Case tliat, 
 the destruction of seal life on the rookeries 
 referred to in the United States' Case was in 
 gn.'at measure the result of the operations of 
 United States' liunters upon the hrcedinij hannts 
 of those animals — in certain ca>-es with the diivet 
 and active encouragement of their own Govern- 
 ment. 
 
 There is, therefore, an ah.sence of any guarantee, 
 or reason, for sniipo-iiiii,' that if the control and 
 inaiiagcniont of the fur-seal industry he placed 
 entirely within the hands of the Government of 
 that countiy, the permanency of seal life will ho 
 promoted or secured. 
 
 It is alleged hy the United States that there 
 lias heen careful management on the part ol' that 
 country of seals upuii the I'rihylolV Islanils, and 
 that the decrease became marked in ISSt. 
 
 Tt is insisted that the decrease was (ioincident 
 with pelagic sealing. 
 
 It is therefore insisted that pidagic sealing is 
 the cause of the decrease. 
 
 Pelagic sealing is alleged to have begun in 
 18S'l, and it is said seal life showed a decrease on 
 the islands in that year. 
 
 If this is the case, it is impossible thai pelagic 
 sealing was the cause of the decrease. 
 
 The evidence as to the beginning of the 
 decrease of seal life on the islands is most 
 unsatisfactory and contradictory. 
 
 The British Commissioners who visited the 
 islands in 1891 state that the decrease began in 
 1882-83. 
 
 While the United States' Case now dates it 
 from 188 1, 'Mr. I51aine said it liegan in iss.'i, 
 "when Canadian sealers made their way into 
 Behring Sea;" and yet in another despatch ! i- 
 stated that the seals wcu'c increasing", a::(l 
 
"•unpen 
 
4 
 
 100,000 rould safely l)i- killed on the islands 
 until 1880. 
 
 TIk- oflifial Reports of the L'nited States ave 
 not all reliable. 
 
 In 18Sl,Mr. 'laylor, a Special Agent at llie 
 islands from April to Anu'iist of that year, says 
 (here was in liis timo no dinunution. 
 
 fn IS^-I, Mr. Wardinan, an Assistant Af;enl 
 at the Seal Islands from l^'^^l to IK^5, ri'i)or(s 
 seals as increasing. 
 
 In iHs,"), .Afr. (iliddcn, A^ent in charge of the 
 Sial Islands from ]88:i to lss.j, reports no 
 change t(K>k plai'c in the numbers of seals from 
 the lime of his arrival in 18S2 to his departure 
 ill I'-'^u. 
 
 in IS'sd, ^[r. Tingle, Agent in charge from 
 l^'So to IS^O, reported the seals as still on (he 
 im rcasc. In 1*>87 and 1888, this ofllcer reports 
 an increase, and denies that seal life is biMug 
 drpielod. 
 
 It may be mentioned that on the i:Uh Decem- 
 ber, 1SS(), the Secretary of (ho Treasury was 
 rcijuested by a unanimous Hesolutiui! of the 
 Senate to furnish that body with a <-opy of 
 Mr. Tingle's I'.epoH of (he Jtlsl .Inly, issd. 
 
 lu I'^'iO, Mr. \Vilco.\, the Statisdcal Agent ..f 
 the I'nilcd Slates' I'ish Commissioners, l"s(ified 
 l).'l' /re a Committee of the United Statt-s' Senate 
 that seals have beeii seen in a.s many numbers 
 that year as ever before. 
 
 Capt:>in ll«'aly, Commander of the rni(ed 
 S(at(s' r"\eniir-cntter " Bear," «f(-er his erui/e in 
 Hebring Sc;i, reported as follows : — 
 
 BriUtli (.UK, 
 
 ABSMdll, TC'i. iii. 
 
 p. 3<7. 
 
 ibid, I' {M 
 
 liiil . p. 446; Mil 
 "A Trip In AIbhIcq ' 
 ,.. VS. 
 
 n. U 3881, 
 
 .tdlh Coog., Jnil ScM., 
 
 p. 27 
 
 Hniiitli CtMV. 
 AppendiT, vol. iii, 
 p 146. 
 
 II It. S8!*3. 
 
 iOth Cong., 'jDil Sim., 
 
 p. IliJ. 
 
 Itrltiiiti Ciw, 
 .^l<I>«iMlii, fol. iii, 
 p 148 
 
 4''tli Conn , 2nil »<-■•«., 
 Senate, l)oc«mbcr 13. 
 I8)<«. 
 
 KvU'i 11.. with CKn.tda, 
 
 P n:.. 
 
 DtUMi Vti~u 
 
 •■ Uiiilcd S(«l«« No I 
 
 (IH»I " 
 
 Canadian Print 
 Coa|(jt>ntial Curro 
 ipradenci', ' llfliriuff 
 
 fM •• p 55.' 
 
 I tliilik tlirii' III.' |.iiiim1)1\ ii~ lii.iliy Sim! 
 III.' Ii.ul «iiiiliit tlii^ .«c.isi)H iriay have caiisod llie >iiiiill 
 « ildi. :ilid 1 'Piirpiii'.l (111 iiir:;cr f!llr!ic« Im ..Tdv :i i.w 
 Iniiilrn. . 
 
 •■ It slionUl iHil Ih- ii iii;ili''i of -iniiri c- ii the .stMl ivli'-c 
 t • Im 111 .IS ilii kly 11- 111 I'liniiir youi.^. Soiui' luplniiw tulil 
 iiM- lliiy liu'l Mill fiii--iiiU IuiIImi- iiortli tliiiii IkjI'uiv. 
 Tlii" iniiy liavi' li.un cuiisimI \,y can itv t>\ liMid m -liiriny 
 wiallur ' 
 
 I'ViT, 1 lit f***!* Fr«ni-uco new*. 
 puptr, .November .'(", 
 'son. 
 
 Mr. (iofl, S|H'cial Agint in IW)0, reporled, on 
 the :!ls( .liilv of that vcar :— 
 
 " .Niitwitlmtundiii}; tlic I'lit I tliiit lli«' si.|i1h w.>rc luokcil 
 u|«>ii as iiii-.\liaiisii)i|i>, niiii u<'r>' uHiciiiUy rtportud I'l Ih- 
 ill) ii .■'•llii; II.') lute lis ].StJ8, till' tillli' lia- .sililikllly lOliic 
 vliiii i'X|H>niiiuiil ami iiiiiigiiiiitliiii iii.isl it'.i-<i', iipl lliu 
 (mill I'l- io|i|." 
 
His Assistant, Mr. Murray, reports in llus same 
 year :— 
 
 "Tlist tlio seal., hlidiilil haw (liaiippciinjil mi lajiidly 
 siiico tlie Ko]iiirl c.( vdiii' ]rriMlocoss'ir in 18«.S is hu 
 asloundiii.^ that tliose wIki cauiiil M:f tin; iwjki'vii'.s niid 
 
 Iwiiliii^,-.,'! ids h.i llicuisi'lves iiiav wtll be jiardoiied (or 
 
 doubtiii.L! whal is, I am sorry to sny. only too trui', painful 
 thougli it be to all wiio arr intorcRlwl ; Die wlioli- truth 
 must, iievcrtholess. br luld, ami that is tliut tbo seals liav< 
 been steadily dccreasin',' since 1SH0." 
 
 Nevertheless, Mr. Tin;?lc, Superintendent of 
 the Seal Conipimy, and Ibriuerly Agent of the 
 Treasury, insists on the lS|h July, 1890 :— 
 
 "Wf havi.' i\('r> n.i on lo beliuvc, Ironi tlir marked 
 
 ineifjiiSf ..I W!W urriviils of line .scal«, that ii' we v.\t>' 
 
 allowed l.y y 111 to conliuue uiir killin;; iiuilei tbe law, we 
 coidd till our i|iiola <.f 00,000 .senLs," 
 
 n\iaa 
 
 Cniud SUtM' Can 
 p. VI t. 
 
 Ibid., p. 17C. 
 
 I)riii/.li Cue, 
 fl' 110. III. 
 
 Mri'iHlt eommi»- 
 aiunoid Rrp«rt, 
 ri' lis 12(1. 
 
 It is remaikahle tliat, while the United States" 
 Case now dates ihr dceivase in .seal life on the 
 I'ribylolV Islands from lS8t, the (iovernniciit ol' 
 that country peiinitted the lesscca to kill 
 aniuially until IsitO no less than 10(1,000 seals 
 iijion the hreedin^'-island.s, iiotwithhtan(iinf,'a pro- 
 visidij in the lease in the interest of peal life 
 which authorizes the Gnveriiment to reduce the 
 iiiiinlier to 1)(> killed in laidi ^(iiiv. 
 
 In t;ic endeavour (o show that pela^jie .sealiiii,' 
 is the solo cause (d" a deeieasr in .seal life, the 
 United States' Case and United States' Cominis- 
 sionei-s insist that raids uj)cui the rookeries or the 
 imlawl'iil killing ol' seals on the islands "have 
 played no iinportiint part in the history of I lie 
 rookeries," that the destnieti<jii hy raiders has 
 been "very iiiconsiderahle," and that raiding would 
 he dillleult without Ihe knowledge of the ofllcci 
 in charge. 
 
 It is denied that r.iids were ever " frequent or 
 elfeetive." It is .hercfore finally claimed that 
 pelagic sealing is the sole cause of a "great 
 decrease." 
 
 This posit iein is entindy iinsiipportalilc. 
 
 TIk' raids cited in I lie British Case and in the 
 l{e|iortof the Jhitish Coniinissionors refute this 
 slalcnieiit ciiin|ilclclN . 
 
 'I'liese auMiorilics show — 
 
 The raids lo liavc Irvii numerous aiul <\ ii- 
 tiniioiis. 
 
 ^Vhoh'saic and destructive raids occurred. 
 
 On INdjhen Island and otlur islands in the 
 [802] c 
 
«■««■■ 
 
Okhotsk and Japanese Seas raids wore reported 
 ofTicially to the United States hetween 1871 and 
 18B0, and subsequently. 
 
 It may be added that II. A. Gli(Ulcn, a Spooial 
 Agent of the Treasury Department at tlic 
 Prihyloir Islands from the .'Ust A[ay, 18^2, to 
 till? Htli .Tune, 18H5, testiliiul before the C'oni^res- 
 sional Committee in 1«S<> that the groat trou))le 
 tlw'V had was to watch niaraiiilcrs. "That was ii. R. 3888, 
 more trouble than an\ thing else." 
 
 T. !•'. l{yan, a Spt>eial Agent of the Treasury, 
 tcstilied as follows : — 
 
 ■•A 1 lii\d a •,'ival (loiil "f Irniilili- in lnukiii^ ifloi n K. 3883, 
 
 .iiul prcitooting thf ri'dkonos Iihim wlial «(i inU llinc "The Kur tf»UnJ 
 
 pinues. Schooners go .,,, Uuio an,l go on lan,l ,„ cl lak. ''^::^^j')^^^^;^[^,„_ 
 seals. 
 
 SOili (.011^., 2nd ScM., 
 p. if>. 
 
 • • • 
 
 wi' ','iit, I lii.'lii'vc, 112 sealskins, knivc-i Ibid 
 
 " I )iie moniii 
 
 and jiaU'lii'ts, ami tilings ol' llial kiiul, uilli v.liicli the 
 seal-linntcis liad lonio In ImnI and slaugliler seals, 
 especially the inus, leaving thi'ir pM|w to ho deslinyed. 
 There were inslaneos of thai kind, and I wrote n very 
 strong letter tn the Uep^ .tnn'nt. staling that snmelMidy 
 slionhl he hild respcjnsihle fin- this, and 1 thdnght the 
 Deiiarlnicnt in Wa.sliington, \vhosc> dnty it was In look 
 alter the < lovernincnl interests, shoidd have a nvenue- 
 intter come there and crni/e ahoni, for henlnfipre the 
 r.ven\ie-( utter eanie ii)! there ami jiassed up and beyond, 
 •uid it was not sidlieieut protection of lloverninent 
 interests," 
 
 IHBB, p. 211 
 p. 213. 
 
 T. F. Morgan, a Speeial Agent, testified: — 
 
 •• We have had raids nn I hi- nuikeries sover.il seasons." u. r J5g3_ 
 
 SOtti Cung.. 2nd Sm., 
 p 04. 
 
 The lesse(!s of the United Stales' (loverninent uriii«ii c»m, 
 
 ... . 1 -A i i t t I i> 1 1 Aiipciidix, vol. ill, 
 
 ilul not hesitate to desti-oy a rookery on Iiol)Iii'n ,/8jj. 
 Island in 1883. 
 
 'I'ho exposed eoiulilioii of (he rookeries and 
 (heir inelVeetual pndectioii from r.'iids — most of 
 I lie raiders being on Unitetl .Stn.tes' vessels — was 
 dealt with by .Mr. V. \. Williams, who, before 
 th(> Congirssional Commiltoi', said : — 
 
 " I'or the last three or lour years theh> have hnii h. n. Ji^xj. 
 irereiised d.pre.l.ai..ns annually upon the rookeries," ""to?.""*' '^"'' ^"'" 
 
 Air. Wardmtin said : — 
 
 "The liduhli- has ' ii-n in tin Itevi'iiue .Maiiiic .Scrvic'e. Ibiil,, pp. J», 3!». 
 The aiipropriatioMs weie all right, ami a loBuw wouhl he 
 s^nt up to noniiiially proliTt the S^d Islands, hut he 
 Would also Ix! oitlereil to look lor the Ni^rth I'ole, aswell 
 as wateli the Seal Ulandn, 
 

 "The first miil llmt occurrcil mi St. (icor^'c \, l.ili> I ivin 
 tliorc occiirreil ipii tlie 211(1 Si^ijIi'iiiIht, when tlicy milled ;i 
 Mnkiiy and killed sdini^ s.aN. 'i'liiy citatcd a j;a|] in tlio 
 lui.kcrv. and lliat j;a]i iiivcr tlnMil ii]) llint jc.ir. Tln! 
 -oals ni'vcr wuiit liack thai year. Wliuii I mw it, I 
 tlioiij,dit it had hicn crtatnl h} a soa-linn ciisliirhaiK i'. 
 A few days alli'iwards a na(iv<^ wciil to the iimkcrv wli.i 
 had niiiiv cqiciii'iiPc, c.s that was tim lirst year I \\i\~i 
 lliru'. II'' I'lMinl sMnif \ i.iin;,' "I'al-i di'iid niid i>n\iu' ilyin". 
 ThiMc was a line whcTf the ki'il nf t\w huat li:il Imcm 
 haiih .1 n\<. Il was nn the nioiniiiii ■■(' the Jml Sijjimd.er 
 lint ihfi natives had reported n s •hu.iner standin;,' Sdiilh, 
 away dnwn the huriznn. On the 3vil Se])telnhor tlm 
 itv( ime-eulter ' I'nsli ' airivid a! M. I e uisje, and I asked 
 ('a)itain llealy if he had nul a .sulnMiiier, and he said no, 
 he lind not seen unylhin<; nl' it. Yet, the seliumier. 
 tweiily-l'iinr hmiry Im'I'i.iv, hail in ide a raid on tlie roukcry.' 
 
 ^\'. 15. 'ravior (("itilicd as follows: 
 
 II. It.SBbS, 
 
 6. ih C.i.g Jnil a<sa. 
 
 ■ The 
 i-^lands 
 piiikeries. Very iiltfii. When I was thero (hey hit 
 
 I' ve.ssels will I. ike iio nsiMH t<i liaiej ai'Miind thu 
 and when there is a ln.avy fn^' tu j;ii on tlm 
 
 i.My 
 
 dinennl eareass'.'s on the island. 1 went uxor In Lmk at 
 tlieni. The (iovoriiirient A^'enls there aru utterly |"iwer- 
 k'ss 111 [iipvenl the killing nf .sual, or to |iriitcet them in 
 rniy way. There is no vessel there, ami lliei-e is iin 
 Imrlviur tor a ve3.sel, and I would like to make a rccom- 
 niendalion in tliis eonneetion. I lulieve, with the expen- 
 diture ot a very few thuiisand dellars, that the ( liAernnniil, 
 Clin linilt or lunstrnel a harli.mr iluit will he suliiiiently 
 lar^'e for .i i..;Mod stroll;^ sleaiM-Ianni.h, and with that steain- 
 launoh the (loveninient Ai,'enl ran proteel the island^ very 
 Will, hi'cnn.so the vcs-.'li lh:it prowl arnnnd are .saiHn;^- 
 vessels, and they eannot always p-: ont la^l and a ^li'ani- 
 hiuneli can entih them ; and that is soniethiiij,' thai 1 think 
 oai^'lil ;o lie done." 
 
 Anil ay;aiii : — 
 
 IhUl. ,1. C8. "Tlie dilheidty lientoforp has lieeii that one revenue- 
 
 euUer has l.eeii ohlij,'eil to covi r a territory of Son niih» 
 long and TcO or H(MI miles wide leiith and -outh, and they 
 Would yet mound to the Seal Islands about twice diiriny 
 the sciwoii. They never liaii)H.>n t" he there when ncedoJ, 
 nnd a.s far as tin ir rendering' any -'rvice \vhato\er is 
 eoneerni'd, they were piactii ally usi Ics.s so far a.s the Seal 
 Islanils Were eoiieerned. Tli.il has hi eii the e.vpericnci', I 
 helieve, I'f all who li.ive lieeii there." 
 
 ^If. T. r. l!,\aii was riiillier cxaminetl : — 
 
 lliiJ., 1'. ai'j. ' Q 'V'U ill, It herd of sial.s li" pre-erved in a better 
 
 maiiinr th.in the policy now jmisueii theix' ! — A. It ciiii 
 he improved by pu'ling ii revenne-enttor there. Thero 
 wa.s none tlure this smson, I iiiiilersland. It' you keeii lu 
 revenue c nlli I to p> then ftw th''l husiiiis<, I think tlm 
 interfbt can \ni jnolected. 
 
8 
 
 " Q. Stiicllv, Ml lis to prohibit ilcprmUticiiis ? — A. Yen, 
 •Sir. 
 
 " Q, Ih il yinii- diiiiiiim lliiit llic ii'vomu', \>y kwpiiiR up 
 II '-liiit piiiloclio.i I'Vi^v llu- scalu iiiiJ mcikciifs, may 1"' 
 in riiuii'cl iiriilcr lliiil puliry ' — .(. Yl^'', Sir ; I (liiiiii ml I 
 lli;iik tiiis pii'Hiiil Cuinpaiiy will lii.l iiinic f"i il ihxI 
 
 tillll!." 
 
 -Mr. "Wardiiian, wlio wns n witness Ijcforo tlu) 
 Coni,'rL's<i(m;il Commiltoi- in IS8S), says, in an 
 a •ei)nnt of a trip to Aluska : — 
 
 " S.'ii-iiUrr Ulunil, lyiiiK uliunl ."i mill's sniilliwaiilly Wardmiu'e 'Trip ii. 
 
 Ill' I I' .1 I' I AlMk»." iiii. MB, 117, 
 
 llMlii .^l. raill s, IS auiilli"!' lamliii;,'-pla(r Im- llic liir-scul, llo«U)n iml .Now ^ ork. 
 
 lull iiiily til a limitLMl ixlciil. Owinj; to llic liiut tliiil il i-i j,*?*,^, (.,^ 
 
 hot pi'iiimiii'iilly inliubilL'il, smnc iiiurauilcnt i"Cir in the Appcndii, vol. iii, 
 
 liiib'il o/ III ml ill!/ oil llic o/)jiosite .iiVr, idierc Ihr;/ eoulil not bi 
 
 .v(,i from iSI, I'niil'n, ami l.illimj ulialnrr n-iiU llic;/ <uuld 
 
 Jiii'l, ii-itlmiil Tn/iiril I', si.y, a ii\ iiT lonililioii. Tli ; (,'oiiiiiaiiy 
 
 i\'p(.il.'il Ilii'M' I'm Is) to tlir Si'iietary ol llio Tirasmy, wlm 
 
 ili'i iilfil that 111'' iiiliiitioii III' till' Aft iiiiik'i wliii li lln' 
 
 lias • was aiithoiizeil appi'iirud to i;ivr all tlic islamla ol 
 
 tlio oioiip to till' lissc'cs for till' ri'^ulatioii ol' the Iraflii' 
 
 mill pii'st'rv.itiiiii of till' I'ui-.SL'iil." 
 
 At,'i'nt Lavender, 2.jtli August, 1890, reporkHl Uruniiwri Kopon. 
 a r:ii(l on St. Geor-'e Island. Tliov found iihti^u Cmc, 
 
 . ApjcnUii. vol. iU, 
 
 four dead eows and lour dead pups. llus |i|.. 48, mmjoJ p«rt 
 raid lie attribiilcs to Ui(> United Slates' .seliooncr •''P""'" • 
 "Nellie Martin." 
 
 And on the 2H!i Oelol)er, ISUII, lie asks for 
 sirins and aniiuuiiition, witlumt wliieh, lie says — 
 
 ' ill' riiiiki'i'irs ca.iii'il lie in'otii'tcil in a pl'opiT maiinrr." 
 
 Ill IbM, Mr. riliiott, who liad a"tcl as a 
 Hpeeial A-enl of tlic United Slates' Government, 
 i'.Kposed the lailure of that Go\-ernnient to sustain 
 llie Aijents of the 'rre.isury in the methods to 
 pioteet tlie seals when in their breedino'-liaiints 
 on the rookeries, and siii;^''^''''! *lie danger of 
 neglect to do I his. 
 
 II (> wrote as follow.s : — 
 
 " C'liisis U'ht'li ikimiml the prcsena uf a I!' nuii' Mariii' E«lr»ct Irom "Tlic 
 Cii/la- ill AUvil.iiii Waters.— T\\cw ii'iiiaiiia an uiiwrilton i'JuJiJ*"','/ i'Lrj W. 
 
 i)a"i' in llin hiatoiv of tlif iittion of tlio (ioveriimcm Kllioit, 18bi, 
 I '"» ■^ pp. i(j7, 188. 
 
 t nvaids tlie protoition of seal life on the riibylolV Island-, 
 
 iinil il i.s ciuiiiinlly |irii|iei' thai il .slioiiM lie iiiserilieil now, 
 
 cspeiially .sii since the author ol this memoir wa.s an eye- 
 
 vilness ami an aelor in tlie scene. When he Hist visited 
 
 the >-eid I.slaiiiU, in 1872-73, he \va.s compelled to take 
 
 l)assa:,'e oil the vessels ol' the Company leasing the islands ; 
 
 coMipelli'd, liecause the fioverniiienl at thai time hml im 
 
 means oi' reachinu th'' lield of action i^xi ept liy the favour 
 
 and the cnurtes) of the .\laska Coiiimercial C'oin]mny. 
 
9 
 
 This fiiVDiir and tlii» courluiy, us mij^lii U- i-x|p(:cti'd, wm 
 nlwavH |iri.iiiiitly nml ytm.-rf.mly prolloti-il, and Iiuh uevur 
 Ih'im iillii(l-i| t.) as even iin oMiKntinn or •civiw; renilvrid 
 tlif Ticiwury I><|<irtnifnl. I!ut, ncvirtliclt-ui, tin ili(,iij!l,i 
 (wciiriol t.i u)>- ut thr timi', aii'l wn, itren^jtlicincil into 
 i.on\icli(.M l,y I.S7I, tlml tlii- indidiitjiia' In it- nun self- 
 ris|)».(i an<l lailura to !tn|>|iort |iM|H.Tly thu iiiniH <)f iu 
 Agrnt- ii|, tli.ri- -hoiild end. ami tlml Uic Tii.isnry 
 Uupaitniunt ^lioul.l .Iciail one of ii.i own vcswls to vitii, 
 lrun.-.i«irl, an-l aM it. i.ltn.rs on lli'' I'ril.ylnll' Islands, uud 
 ul-.i 111- an actual livin;^ i-vidfucc el puwci l.i i-xiruli,' llic 
 In" |>rut«.'i'tin}; anil cou'w-nin;- the siiuii'. 
 
 • • • . 
 
 " Karly in lsT3 it Uvnnn' wi'll kiinwn mi ihc I'arilii- 
 toast llial till- olli.fi ■< of tin- lnv\ on .liu .Seal lnlancMiad 
 no niraiH of unlnri'in',: tliv Iti^j^ulutiunn |iiotf(liny tlif snU 
 lifr nn till' taiiK 1.1 ill |||<. waters mljacunt ; hunn'. a 
 niiiiilK!!- of small .raft. fiite<l mit at .Snn Francisco and 
 lontiHUmi- jiorts, whitli cK-un-d foi thi. nortli-wcst cast 
 and till' Aleutian lilaiiiU i.ii ■ li-liiiij,' ventures.' Iml, in 
 reality, tlie--.' ve.ssid- |injce«!de<l din i tly to the waters and 
 riKks adjacent U> llie .Seal I.shmd-, when , in )dnin sijjht of 
 the village on either i^let, they shot ih.. ^wimniin^' seaU 
 with assumed inditn rente and '.nvat iiflertion of le(,'ality.' 
 
 Briiuii tommu- It is showii liy till' IJriti.sli C'oinmissioiiprs thai 
 
 iioaeri' RtMrt, p. it. i -i ii ■ ' , ,. . 
 
 whilo till' (lani,'ci' to seal lile on llip bix'oilin!?- 
 islands is jiai^icularly i,'n'al, there has occurred 
 tliiTc cxcossivf slaii!<iit<r. If is also shown tliat 
 while the l.'nited States' authorities had jiower 
 to rediioc the annual numlicr to be killed hj the 
 lessees, the leasees were practically jK-rniitted for 
 years to kill at tiie rate of lOO.Ofto annually, 
 notwithstandin!,' reeoniniendations on the part of 
 I'nifed States' nffieials for a reduction in the 
 nntnlicr. In some years that number was even 
 threat ly exepedi>d. 
 
 It is shown also that i,'rcat jdaniage has hecn 
 done liy the ureal number of male seals destroyed 
 from time to time by the lessees on the brcediiii;- 
 islands. 
 
 The following' is from the Report of the exanii- 
 nation, before a I'ougn'ssion.'il Committee, of 
 Mr. Charles Bryant, an oflic'T ou whom the 
 United States now n-ly : — 
 
 (J. Yi.ur o|iiiiii)n, then, is th.u tin miuuIk i of liiti.OOO on 
 the two islunds, nnthorizetl hy law. can l«' n!({uiar!y tukiii 
 willmut diniiiiishin',' the enij. or nuiiilerof seals inniiiig 
 to the island '— ,(. I don't feel cpiilc suiv of that, as will 
 Ijc scon in my iletuiltsi l!e|iurt to llie Socretary of the 
 Tn'a.sury. included in the evnlcnri' which has U'cn laid 
 U'fim; the <'oniiiiiltet'. Tlu-n' »<n- indications of iliniiiiu- 
 tion ill I lie imiiilier of male st-al- 
 
 " 1 ji^vo that, and another reason whii h i cxiilaiind al 
 
 Si-« |>. to. Brillab 
 Camaii<4ionrri4' 
 Bi.'I>.in, >liu |>. 114 
 H Iff 
 
 Utii COUK; Ut Sm. 
 
 tl, 1! No. 023, p '.19. 
 
 [862] 
 
 D 
 
•i^. ^> 
 
 
 IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 I^IM 
 
 |2.5 
 
 1^ 
 
 ^ us, 
 
 20 
 
 1.8 
 
 11.25 11.4 IIIIII.6 
 
 <^ 
 
 /2 
 
 7 
 
 ^^/ :^^ 
 
 
 7 
 
 /A 
 
 Sciences 
 Corporation 
 
 33 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WEBSTER, N.Y. US80 
 
 (716) 872-4503 
 
 
 
4. 
 
 €s, 
 
 ^;% 
 
 s 
 
 w 
 
 
 
 
 \ 
 
 h 
 
■ 
 
 mm 
 
10 
 
 lavgo in thai Report. In tlie sensou of 18G8, before the 
 Prohibitory Law was passed and enforced, nnmerous 
 parties sealed on the islands at will, and took about 
 240,000 or 250,000 seals. They Idlled nin.3tly all the 
 prodnct of 1866 and 1867. 
 
 " In making our calculation for breeding seals wo did 
 not take that loss into consideration, so that in 1872 and 
 1873, when llie crop of 1866 and 1SG7 would have 
 matureil, we were a little short. Tliose seals had been 
 killed. For that reason, to render the matter doubly sure, 
 T recommended in my lieport to the Secretary a diminu- 
 tion of 15,000 for the two years ensuing 
 
 " Q. It looks, then, as if the males ought also to increase ? 44th Cong., lit Seea., 
 —A. 1 tliink that number of 100,000 was a little more H. H. No. 623, p. »9. 
 than ought to have been begun with. I think if we had 
 begun at 85,000 there would have been no necessity for 
 diminishing. On the other hand, I think that within two 
 years from now it could be increased " 
 
 This advico, given years ago, was never 
 adopted. 
 
 Mr. Lavender, Assistant Treasury Agent, also jbia., ,,,,. 20, 21. 
 in 1890 reported that the constant driving and 
 killing of young males was depriving the islands 
 of males. 
 
 Mr. Nettleton, Assistant Treasury Agent, iwd., |.p. 47, *8. 
 
 aionera' Report, i). 121 
 
 agrees in this. 
 
 Agent Murray shows that the seals have 
 diminished — 
 
 " because all 1 he male seals had been slaughtered without Senate Ei. Doc. 49, 
 allowing any lo grow to maturity for use on the breeding- »!»' Cong., 2nd Stss. 
 ground." 
 
 Professor Elliott has condemned the killing of 
 bull seals on the islands by the lessees as " most 
 ruinous to seal life." 
 
 In the driving of seals serious damage has been British Commia 
 dijiic by the lessees. 
 
 The British Commissioners lay stress on the Appendix, 
 subject of the injurious effect from the practice 
 of driving and other practices on the island. 
 
 Trofcssor Elliott, who visited the islands under 
 authority of a Resolution of Congress as a Special 
 Commissioner during the year 1891, sustains the 
 views of the British Commissioners under this 
 head. 
 
 Mr. Goff , Special United States' Agent in 1890, 
 refers to the torture of the seals in driving and 
 re-driving : — 
 
 "The drivers were merely torturing the young seals, Senat* Ex. Doc. 49, 
 injuring the future life and vitality of the breeding »'" Cong- and Beas. 
 rookeries, to the detriment of the lessees, natives, and the 
 Government." 
 
11 
 
 Senate Ei, Doc. 49, 
 filrt Cong., 2nil Ses*. 
 
 Agent Lavender records liow it oecuiTcd to 
 him that — 
 
 " tlic coiislnnt driving of yninvj; iiiali- w.'ul.s ami tin- killing 
 uf i\ll till; 2-, 3-, 4-, and n.yL'dv-olil.s, tliat llu'ic! wfic no 
 vonui' bulls left to <'0 on llie vuokerics." 
 
 Ibid. 
 
 He adds that the Government .sliould control 
 the islands for the next six or seven years — 
 
 "ami llit'i) all llio mail"* iliivfu ^ln^uKl lie killed." 
 
 0. Wardman, 
 H. R. 3888, 
 
 Cong., Beif. 
 y. S3. 
 
 Another writer says : — 
 
 "Some of the fellows (naiivcs) were lazy and wnuM not 
 {j;cl out at once, and the result would lie the ' drive ' would 
 be late, the day wotdd be warm, an'l some of the .-cals 
 would die while on the ' drive.' ' 
 
 Britiih Case, 
 Appendix, vol. iii, 
 p. 28r,. Pamphlet of 
 C. D. Ladil. 
 
 In a pamplilct puhlished by tlie sealers on tlio 
 Pacific coast in 1889 [?] for distribution in 
 Congress, it was well said — 
 
 " In all easp.s where rookeries have been broken U)) it 
 has been done by hunters directly on the beacli where tha 
 seal land, and by hunting and killing them indiscrinn- 
 nately, so tliat tliey could not land and have their youn;; 
 and care foi' the same." 
 
 And it asked : — 
 
 Ibid., p. 287. "Was there ever a more crtiel ami brutal method 
 
 inventeil for killing dumb animals than is now practised 
 in killing seals on the Islands of St. George and St. Paul ? 
 Imagine how these h'ghly intclligenl, animals are gradu- 
 ally forced and driven away from tlie .sea, their native 
 element — driven inland as far as deemed practical. 
 ' The slaughter then commences. Imagine a gang of men 
 
 with clubs imd bludgeons knocking out their brains, ri<'ht 
 and left, and if the seal is not hit right at the fir.st blow, it 
 is followed up and slaughtered, its brains being knocked 
 out by a club. Wlm can imagine a more cruel method 
 than tliis for killing dtimb animals > Certainly, the 
 private sealers' method is the niore humane of the two." 
 
 n. u. Kx. Doc. I'ctroll rcnorted to tlio United States' Govern- 
 
 No. 4o, 4«tii Cong., 
 3rd Scss., vol. iviii, nicnt lu 1880 that losses occurred on the islands 
 
 when seals were driven to b(! killed, and from 
 
 over-cutting of the skins, and for these the 
 
 lessees were permitted to excec- .ho limit of 
 
 100,000 per year. 
 
 The following practices have gone on within 
 territory admittedly under the jurisdiction of tho 
 United States : — 
 
 Wardman relates how — 
 
 Wardman's " Trip to "Young seals, before reaching a valuid.ile a"e, aro 
 Alaska," pp. 116, 117, n i -n , ,. ,. , , '. . , . , . ^ ' 
 
 Boston and New York, annually lulled lor food on the islamls with the peimi.s- 
 
 "'*• sioii of thi- I'nited .States' Government." 
 
12 
 
 The Aleuts have been in the habit of killinL' f^HyB". Ropori, 
 
 ° H. R. Ex. Doc. 
 
 many seals as tlioy iourncycd through the No. 40, 46ih cong., 
 
 Ai .• T 1 1 i 1 ii • e. T> 1 3rd Se..., p. 81. 
 
 Aleutian Islands to drop their young on St, Paul 
 
 and St. George 
 
 The same person, in testifying before the Con- 
 s^ressional Committee, says : — 
 
 "Wu cimlcl not "el ihu ualive.s to try to in-e.servi; tlii' H. B. No. 3888, 
 
 J i 5Q(i, Cong., 2nd Sow., 
 
 .si'al lift', lioys of lli ami 14 yt'ar.s old wuiilil kill tlu' siMil p. S2. 
 
 [lups. Tliey say Llioy arc a niikl .sort of puoplc, but they 
 
 ii(\er havf a chance to abuse a iluinb creature but they do 
 
 it. . . . " 
 
 Agent S. II. Xettleton records his opinion that 
 it would be to the — 
 
 "lie=:| interest of the natives and the best interest of the IbiJ. 
 (ifiVernnienl " 
 
 if some more economical substitute for seal pups 
 as food for the natives were adopted. 
 Again, Agent Gliddcn says : — 
 
 " Sometimes they cut a skin su it is not good for any- Ibid,, p. 23. 
 Iliinu much, and that is rejected. That, of course, they 
 (the natives) do not get pay for. The skin is cut in pieces 
 iind then burned." 
 
 W. B. Taylor testified:— 
 
 " .Alter the cotmt, tlie badly cut skins which were of no Ibid. p. 45. 
 use were thrown over the cliff." 
 
 One of the witnesses before the Congressional British Case, 
 Committee (William Gavitt) also showed that ,,.'44°". 
 the lessees of the islands were not so particular 
 as other Agents pretend, when he swears that 
 they bought from the natives at Oimalaska 5,000 
 seals killed by them there. 
 
 (Yet it was illegal to kill except at the PribylofF 
 Islands.) 
 
 Under the Russian regime in 1803, after a 11. k. Ei. dou. 
 slaughter was conducted for some years without andScL; and 
 regard to the market, an accumulation of 800,000 «p°ou"ence, Canadian 
 skins were found in the store-houses in the "° ' '' 
 islands, 700,000 of which were thrown into the 
 sea as worthless. 
 
 And in the time of the lessees of the United 
 States wasteful practices prevailed. 
 
 The mate of the schooner "Leon," a watch- 
 Tcsscl of the Alaska Commercial Company, was 
 found at Robben Bank, or Island, in September 
 188;5. He had fifteen Aleuts with him. On the Briti.ucaBc, 
 shore were discovered a great heap of dead and p. sas. 
 rotten seals The seals had been driven 
 
18 
 
 into a Leap, cluLhctl, and afterwards a great 
 number of them were cut and mutilated so as 
 to destroy tlic skins and hasten decay. AVhcii 
 asked why ho had killed these thousands fif vows 
 and pups, the mate replied, "That is to keep 
 any of these Yokohama fellows from getting 
 anythini? this year." 
 
 The mate was asked for his authority for 
 being there and for his act'.. A document was 
 shown, signed by the Alaska Coinmereial Com- 
 pany, directing liim not to allow any one to land 
 on tlie island, except the servants of the Com- 
 pany. 
 
 By actual count the dead seals numbered 
 between 9,000 and 10,000, nearly all being cows 
 and pups. 
 
 So far from quiet and seclusion being presoi-ved 
 for the seals on the Pribyloft' Islands, there is a 
 record of continuous disturbance and of ruinous 
 practices. 
 
 Where United States' authorities agree 
 certain measures are indispensable upon 
 breeding-islands in order to preserve seal life, 
 to induce the seals to continue their resort thither, 
 there has been extraordinary neglect on the part 
 of the United States. 
 
 Mr. Boutwcll, wheu Secretary of State of the 
 United States years ago, reported that — 
 
 No"i29'','2"'' "Oreal earo was neccs.sary for tlio ]ircseivation of the. 
 
 41st Coig.', 2iid Sess.; ^'^^^ fisheries 11^1011 th: Is/uiuls of Si. Ocoruc anil St. I'aii]." 
 also liritish Case, 
 Appendix, col. iii, 
 
 p. w. And that— 
 
 that 
 tho 
 and 
 
 8«o aliso cvidenca 
 hefore Congresiioniil 
 Conimittcc or 1889 aa 
 to insufficient protec- 
 tion of tglanda. 
 liritish Case, 
 Appcndii, vol. iii, 
 p. tiS. 
 
 II. U. 3883, 
 50th Cong., iBt Best, 
 also British Ccsc, 
 Appendix, rol. iii, 
 p. 449. 
 
 British Casd, 
 Appendix, vol. iii, 
 Port II, p. 10. 
 
 " Ii ^^''i' iiectMsary in any cvrnt to niaiuiain iu 
 
 and around the islands an enlarged naval force for tlio 
 protection of ilie same." 
 
 This has never been attempted by the Govern- 
 ment of the United States. 
 
 It was stated iu 1880 before the Congressional 
 Committee that — 
 
 " tl'e Ciovomnient now, a-ithonl .'wi/ care or rid; 
 
 gets 317,000 dollars out of the lease." 
 
 Mr. Golf, a Treasury Agent in charge of tho 
 Seal Islands in 1890, insists that among the evils 
 which have been preying upon seal life is— 
 
 "the indiscriniinale slaughter upon ihe islands, regardless 
 of tho future life of tho l>reedin.' rookeries." 
 
 Another Sjjecial Agent, Joseph Murray, in 1800 
 points out that after twenty years of GoVcrnmcnt 
 [862] E 
 
14 
 
 Mipci'vislon, shcltcu's for watclimeii on the 
 rookeries nro rc(|uired, the plain iufcrence lioiiig 
 that constant wateliing (luring the brccdin;^ 
 M-ason has lioen impossible. 
 
 The diminution of seal lifo is ascribed to the 
 .slaughter of the male seals. 
 
 III'. Tingle was United States' Treasury Agent n. k. nans, 
 
 1 l- il • 1 1 r- il or.ll ir ion- 80th Cong., Jnd 8c« , 
 
 ni charge ot tlic islaTids fi'om the 29th May, lS8u, f. im. 
 until August 18S(), and from May 1887 to August 
 1887, and again from May 1888 until 18!)0. 
 
 Since (hen, and now, he is Superinton<lent for 
 tlie present lessees — tlio North American Com- 
 mercial Company. In his examination in 188!) 
 he said : — 
 
 '■ U'lioii 1 tnoU clmi'gu of the ishiiids llioy \\\i\' priicti- 
 tiilly witliuut piotc'cliou. The Oovt'inmeat Inul one inittur 
 to cniizo ill i'uliriiw .Sou auil tln^ Arctic Ocean." 
 
 i'our years after llegulations had been enforced " congrciaionai 
 upon the United States' Seal Islands, the United Pan ii'i, 43rciCong., 
 States' Administration admitted to the Senate p"22M.' *' 
 that by an ill-conccivod Regulation the seals on 
 the Is'aud of St. Paul (one of the Pribyloff 
 gro>;p) were being exterminated. 
 
 A reference to the records shows that other 
 Talnable forms of marine life have been almost 
 exterminated on the Atlantic coasts of that 
 country, wherever their preservation depended 
 upon the jurisdiction and management of the 
 United States or of any one State. 
 
 "Within the last two years it has been officially 
 reported that, through the absence of any effort 
 on the part of the United States to protect the 
 whale, the A\alrus, the cai'il)oo, or the buffalo, 
 those valuable articles of commerce and of food 
 have almost disappeared. 
 
 The United States' General Agent of Educa- siBtCong. 2rniStM. 
 tion for Alaska reported in 1890 that, owing to ,. u. 
 relentless hunting, tlie supply of food upon 
 Avhich the natives in that part of the United 
 States depended was cut off, and that the process 
 of— 
 
 " slow st.irviition and extermination lias commenced along 
 the wliole of tlie Arctic coast of Alaska." 
 
 
 The destruction of the sea-otter has gone on 
 within a short distance of the coasts of the 
 United States. It is said : — 
 
 "Tlicre will be great destitution among the people of 
 -Alaska because of its disappearance." 
 
IS 
 
 ElllottV " Hepnri on 
 ConilltloB of Aluka,' 
 1874, p. B7, 
 
 Ibid., |ip. s;, SO 
 
 Ibid., 
 
 Dr. II. II. Mclnljre, 
 II. n. 3883, 
 COtli Cong., iui Sean. 
 |.p 123, 124. 
 
 The soa-nttcr, whiuli Jlr. Jacksou reports as 
 now near extermination, was the subject of 
 oflicial report. 
 
 In 187 li Ml'. Elliott proposed protective 
 measures. 
 
 On this subject Mr. Elliott further remarked : — 
 
 " Wlioii til'' It'rritDiy ciiiiie into our possession, tlio 
 liu.Hsians wuro inking lietween 400 and ,"00 aeii-otlers 
 from the Aloutinn I.slunds and south of tliu Puuinsulii of 
 Alaska, witl) pwImiiM l.'n nioin from Konai, Yiilikntiit, nnd 
 thi! Kilkan ilisiiiut; the IIiiil.son'.s I'my Company and 
 othi'i- traders gettin;^ about liOO more from the coast of 
 Quei'n C'hailutle'.s and Vanconvei' Lslauds, and off (iray'.s 
 Harbour, Wusliin{;ton Territoiy. 
 
 "Now, during the last senBun (1873), instead of Icsa 
 than 700 .skins, as obtained by the liussians, our traders 
 secured not nnicii less than -ffioo skins. Tliis immense 
 diRerenec is not due to the fact of there being a propor- 
 tionate incienso of sea-otters, but to the organization of 
 hun :ug parties in the same spirit and fasliiou as in the 
 early days idiove nuMitioned. The keen competition of 
 • air traders will ruin the business in a comparatively short 
 lime if some action is not taken by the Government. 
 
 " As matters are :i. "• conducted l<y the hunting parties, 
 the sea-otters nt Saanach and the Chernobours do not 
 liave a dayV ro'it dining the whole year. Parties relieve 
 each other in aucceision, and continual warfare is niain- 
 taincd." 
 
 During the examination of Dr. 11. H. Mclntyre, 
 Special Agent of the Treasury Department of the 
 United States, before the Congressional Com- 
 mittee in 1889, the following questions and 
 answers indicate a complete failure on the part of 
 the United States to enforce the Regulations 
 which were adopted for the protection of the sea- 
 otter : — 
 
 " (,'. Are there any laws for the protection of the sea- 
 ottoi-s against the depredations of the hunters ? — A. They 
 were at first fully protected by a Law uhich prohibited tlir 
 killing of any fur-benring animal in Alaska, but the 
 regulations of the Treasury Department under this Law 
 have been gradually relaxed, fiist by allowing white men 
 who were niamed to native women lo engage in Iiuniin" 
 them, and allowing schooners to be fitted out for their 
 inirsuit, until, at the present time, there seems to be almost 
 no restriction upon the business. 
 
 "Q. Formerly, was Ihe hunting limited entirely to the 
 natives >—A. Yes, Sir. 
 
 "Q. Were they allowed to kill all kintls under the 
 Law ? — A. No, Sir ; but they have always killed, almost 
 indiscriminately, old and young." 
 
 Professor Allen, who is referred to in the 
 United States' Case as an authority on these 
 
16 
 
 questions, gives a history of the extiuction of the 
 buffalo, and tells of the failure of the United 
 States' authorities to enforce Laws or Regula- 
 tions which, in his opinion, would have preserved 
 this article of food and commerce. 
 
 After citing numerous instances of tlie wanton 
 and uncalled-for slaughter of the buffalo, Pro- 
 fessor Allen says : — 
 
 "These facts are siifiiciont to sliow that the present 
 decrease of the buffalo is extremely rapid, and indicate 
 most clearly that the period of liis extinction will soon be 
 reached imless some strong arm is interposed in his behalf. 
 As yet no adequate Game Laws for the protection of the 
 buffalo, either by the United States and Territories included 
 within its range, or by the General Government, have been 
 enacted." 
 
 Extract! from 
 *' History of the 
 American Biaon (Biion 
 Americaiiu^) ," by 
 Joel Asaph Alien, 
 9tli Annual Beport, 
 United States' Oeo- 
 logical Surrey, 1875, 
 pp. 558-659. 
 
 Professor Baird is quoted as follows : — 
 
 "As these animals range almost entirely within the 
 territories of the L'nited States, it is within the province 
 of Congress to enact laws prohibiting their destruction, 
 but the difficulties lie in the matter of enforcing them." 
 
 A further quotation from a long letter by 
 Mr. Blackmorc contains tlic following passage : — 
 
 " The necessity, as suggested by Mr. Allen, for protection 
 of the buffalo by legislation is self-apparent. With the 
 groat economy endeavoured to be introduced into each 
 Department of the Government of the United States, it is 
 dillicult to understand how the Executive, while they 
 enforce a Iioavy tax upon each seal which may be killed 
 in Alaska, has neglected to avail themselves of such a 
 fruitful source of revenue as that which might he derived 
 fiiini Imffalo pelts. A tax of 5 dollars on each skin, 
 whicli could have been eniily imposed and collected — 
 under heavy penalties and forfeiture of all skins not 
 having the Government duty staiiij) tluneon — would 
 lealize not less than 1,000,1)00 dollars per annum, oven 
 supposing tliat the number of biiffaloes annually killed 
 fcir their skins were only 200,1)00, in lieu of upwards of 
 1,000,1100. The number slaughtered for their skin.s, with 
 a tax on each skin of ,"i dollars, woi\ld during the three 
 yearn in ipiostion have iiroduced a gross revenue of 
 15,000,000 dollars, or nearly 3,000,000/. sterling 
 
 " I suggested this remedy at the time, but, although 
 referred to by the press, it was not attended to, and it is 
 now almost too late. It is of little use to ' lock the ,<itablc 
 door after the steed has lieen stolen,' 
 
 " The evils to the citizens of the United States arising 
 from this wholesale an<l wanton destruction of buffalo 
 during the three yeai's referred to may Ijc summarized as 
 follows : — 
 
 " 1, Loss of good and nntritious meat of upward of 
 3,000,000 of buffalo. 
 
17 
 
 " 2. Loss of revenue to the United States of 15,000,000 
 dollars, assuming that u reasonable tax of 5 dollars bad 
 been iniposed on cacii pelt. 
 
 " o. Principal Indian tribes on the plains being deprived 
 of their annual supply of food for the winter, and only 
 receiving short rations on their reservations, driven on the 
 war-path. 
 
 " t. Cost of Indiiiu wars in llie lives of the citizens of 
 the I'niled States, and nmney. 
 
 '■ Pioneer settlers deprived of their supply of winter 
 food. Prior to 1370 the western settlers, from ICastorn 
 KanSi\s to (he base of the Rocky Mountains, looked to the 
 biittiib) as their -winter store-house." 
 
 • ♦ * * 
 
 In Lis concludiug remarks on what he calls the 
 "destruction and reckless waste of the huffalo," 
 Professor Allen writes : — 
 
 " The fur-bearing species, even when hunted to excess, 
 are seldom destroyt-d wantonly, though often imprudently, 
 the tmpper blindly considering only Lis immediate protits. 
 In the case of the harmless, herbivorous species, the 
 ungulates especially, self-interest, it would seem, would 
 prompt an economical treatment of the game in newly- 
 settled districts. But the history of America shows that 
 no .such principle lias here been regarded, where other 
 animals than the bulfalo — as the elk, moose, deer, prong- 
 horn, and mountain sheep' — have been slaughtered with 
 the utmost recklessness. 
 
 • » * • 
 
 " The buffaloes, frnm theii' great numbers and the little 
 tact reipiired in tlieir capture, have probably been the 
 victims of indiscriminate, improvident, and wanton 
 slaughter to a greater extent than any other North 
 American animal. As already stated, thousands are still 
 killed annually merely for so-caUed ' sport,' no use wliat- 
 cver being made of them ; thousands of others of which 
 only the tongue or other slight morsel is sa\ed ; hundreds 
 of thousands of others for their hides, which yield the 
 hunter but little more than enough to pay him for the 
 trriible of taking and selling them, while many more, 
 though escaping from their would-be captors, die of tlieir 
 wounds, and yield no return whatever to their murderers. 
 Of the hundreds of thousands that for the last few years 
 have annually been killed, probably less than a I'ourtli 
 have been to any great extent utilized." 
 
 Mr. Jackson has also refc-rrcd to the decrease 
 of the buffalo in his Report. He states: — 
 
 BNt Cong., 2nd ScM., " As the great herds of luffalo lliat once roamed the 
 
 Senile Ei. Doc. w'estern iirairies have been exterminated for tlieir pelts, so 
 
 no, M, pp, 2, 3. ' ' ' 
 
 tlie whales have been sacrificed for the fat that encased 
 
 their bodies, and the bone that hung in theii' mouths. . . ." 
 
 I 
 
 44tb co.ig^, ut Se«8., A Petition was presented as far back as 187-' 
 Bx. Doc.lTo. 83, ^^ certain citizens of the State of Massachusetts, 
 [862] P 
 
18 
 
 praying the enactment of a law for the protection 
 of walrus in the Arctic Seas. 
 
 It was referred to Special Agent Bryant, who 
 reported : — 
 
 "Tlio<:i' nnimnls, being nearly nllicfl tn tlie seals, have 
 similar liabits. They are found occupying the western 
 shore ui the Peninsula of Alaska, thence through British 
 Bay Westward to Hehring Straits, and north as far as 
 Point Barrow, together with the islands of the Diornedo, 
 St. Lawrence, St. Alatthew, and (jne of tlie small islands of 
 the fur-seal gi'oup, all in Alaska waters, and also on portions 
 of the const of Kastern Asia, o])pi)site. During the winter 
 months they are believed to be nearly all south of Bebring 
 ■Straits. As soon as the bridge of ice closing these straits 
 in winter becomes broken by thawing in sining, the loose 
 ice is borne and held by the current along the line of 
 permanent ice extending across from the American to the 
 Asiatic shores, in about the latitude of 7<1 north. The 
 females pass through these straits wliile the males omaiu 
 behind, going mostly westward along the lino of floating 
 ice, where they bring forth their young and nurse them, 
 remaining till late; in auttunn ; when the freezing of the 
 •sea connnences they again return south. At this time the 
 natives secure their supply of winter food and skins for 
 covering their houses and boats. 
 
 " These animals yield about 20 gallons of oil, and from 
 15 to liu lbs. of ivory eath. They are not considered of 
 sufficient value tu pay to cruize for them alone, but when 
 the vessels first arrive in this sea, and are cruizing along 
 this line of ice, waiting for the whales to arrive or show 
 themselves, they come upon large herds of these animals, 
 and take tliem for pastime or the lack of more profitable 
 game. 
 
 " Knowing all the facts as set forth in the inclosed 
 i'(,'tition to be a true statement of the case, I earnestly 
 recommend the prayer of the petitioners be granted, and 
 would respectfully suggest, as a Supplementary Act to the 
 Act entitled ' An Act to prevent the Extermination of the 
 Fur-bearing Animals in Alaska,' that it be made unlawful 
 to kill, maim, or otherwise injure any walrus on the shores, 
 bays, rivers, coasts, or islands in the Territory of Alaska, 
 in- in the waters adjacent thereto, during the mouths of 
 .Tune, .Tuly, and August each year, under pain of incurring 
 all the jicnalties of the 2nd scctioii of said Act, with its 
 provisions for its enforcement. 
 " I have, &c. 
 (Signed) "CHABLES BRYANT, 
 
 " Special Aijent, Treasury Department. 
 
 "Honourable George S. BoutwoU, 
 
 " Secretary of the Treasury." 
 
 The failure of .'ic United States to preseiTe 
 their marine interests is shown in the following 
 official document. 
 
 Mr. Jackson, in a Report which was referred to 
 
19 
 
 the Committee on Appropriations (8tl> Jiuninry, 
 1891), reported :— 
 
 eist Cong., 2ncl Soil,, "Anotlii'V large supply of fond was iluiiv(<l lioiii iliu 
 
 No"39. "' '"'' walnis, wliicli once swiiniiotl in fireat iiiinibcvs in Uii'so 
 
 8eo also United States' nortliem sens. But ('oiiiiii(;rct' wniitcd iiioro ivuiv, ami llio 
 
 Case, Appendix, vol. i, , , , , . , , ', 
 
 p. 370. whalers tunica their attfiitidu to the walrus, ik'stniyiii;.^ 
 
 thoii.siimls annually for llic .siike of tlu'ir tu.sks. AVlicre a 
 
 few years ago they were so numerous that their bellowing.s 
 
 were hcanl above the roar of the wave.s ami grinding anci 
 
 cra.sliing of the ieo-tields, this year 1 cruized for weeks 
 
 without seeing' fir henriii;:; one. The walrus, as a .source of 
 
 food sulkily, is already practically extiiiet." 
 
 Concerning the salmon Avitli wliich the rivers 
 ol' Alaska Iierctofore aboimded, the oflicial lecords 
 of the United States show : — 
 
 51it Cong., 2nd Seas.) " In tlio pa.st the natives, with tireless industry, eauyht 
 Scmiic Ex. Doc. , , ; . , . , . . . ,. 
 
 No. 14, p. 8. and wiretl lor n.se m their long winters great (piantities oi 
 
 fish, but Ainerican canneries have already conic to suiiie of 
 
 their streain.s, and will soon lie found upon all ot iheiu, 
 
 botli carryinj' the food ont ol the eoinitry, .and by their 
 
 wa.steful methods destroying the future supply. Fivu 
 
 million cans of .sahnon annually .sliipjied from Alaska, anil 
 
 the business still iirils iiil'ancy, means starvation to 'liu 
 
 native races in the near future." 
 
 Captain Ilealy, of the United States' .steam- 
 ship " Bear," on the same subject, reports : — 
 
 51st Cong., 2nd Seas., " The white men [are also erecting canneries on their 
 Senate 51i». Doc. , , ,■ i ■ , i .i , i i. ,. i • , . 
 
 No, 39, best lislung streams, and the usual supply of fl.sli is being 
 
 cut off. With the iulvent of improved breech-loading fire- 
 arms, the wild reindeer are both being killed oft' and 
 frightened away to the remote and more inaccossilile 
 regions oi" the interior, and another source of food supply 
 is diniini.shing." 
 
 The various lieports of the Commissioners of 
 Pishcries for the United States repeatedly refer 
 to the decrease, and in many cases to the exauc- 
 tion, of the anadromous fishes once found in great 
 abundance in the rivers which empty into the 
 Atlantic coast of the United States, due in some 
 cases to the absence of proper Regulations for 
 their protection, and, in most cases, to the failure 
 to enforce the Regulations adopted by the Legis- 
 latures of the difl'erent States. 
 
 In the Sixteenth Annual Report of the Com- 
 missioners of Fisheries for the State of New York 
 (for the year 1887) the following appears : — 
 
 AMcmbly Doonmcnts, ". . . . The Law passed at the last Session of tli(! Legis- 
 1888°'rart°V No. 30 l"'-"'"'^ requiring .shnd-nets to be taken up one day in larh 
 Pi IB. week, so as to iiermil a free run to (he spawning-grounds. 
 

20 
 
 is of iio'utility, ns n elnuHu wna iu.seitud, m lh^^ interest of 
 
 tlic lowiT river iifUorn, coufiiiiiig its iiiipliciition to that 
 
 |iarl of tlio rivi'r iiliove the northern line of Westchester 
 
 Comity, where it is not needed, ns the lilockndo is all 
 
 helow. Here, as in most cases where nieasures of p\ibliu 
 
 utility interfere with hical or iirivate interests, the jiower of 
 
 the latter seems to be puraniount in legislation . . . ." 
 
 " . . . . Spearing, netting, and every device declared con- Auembly Documents, 
 , , , , . , r\L T 1. 1 St»to of New York, 
 
 traliand by the law now ran not on Otsego Lake, anil a ugj, p,,, y^ no. 30, 
 
 week had not ehijised liefnre tlie lake was fairly gutted" pp. 24, 25. 
 
 Tlie siltiation is tluis descril)ed by an eye-witness at 
 
 C'oo])erstown ; — 
 
 "'The spawning-lieds have been swepl clean, over 
 
 l.sdOUis. of Iront (not one of them weighing less tlinu 
 
 r> lbs.) being Inggeil off to Oneonta as the result of one 
 
 night's rascality, and bushels of spawn left rotting on the 
 
 shnrc, I\rany of these fish — all of thcni utterly untit to eat 
 
 — buing taken in the very act of parturition, were peddled 
 
 tlriuugh our own streets at 10 cents per jiound, and all 
 
 besmeared at that witli sjiawn " 
 
 111 the Seventeenth Annual Ecport of the Fish 
 Commissionevs for the State of New York, being 
 for the year 1888, it is stated :— 
 
 " .... At this point the Connuissioners desire to again iijid., 1889. P»rt VI, 
 Kugicst the necessity of some ConunissioD, appointed "-^"P- 
 from or outside the lA^gislature, to codify the Game and 
 Fish Laws of the State, and make them clear and delinite, 
 as no proper and systematic gana,' protection is ijossible 
 while the present mass of vague, conflicting, and contra- 
 dictory Statutes remain in force. Tlie law should be clear 
 tuul direct, and free from reservations and exceptions, so 
 that there can be but one construction placed upon its 
 miaiiing. As the law stands at present, conviction is 
 iilmost inipo.ssil)le, and an offender needs but a skilful 
 lawyer to escape punishment " 
 
 111 the Eio'htecnth Annual lleport of the 
 Commissioners of Fisheries for the State of New 
 York it is staled : — 
 
 " . . . . Tlie greatest ditliculty in the way of thorough ibid., 1890, Part III, 
 sind successful protection of gaiue and fish is found in the ' "• ' I"' ' 
 conflicting and misleailing laws now on our Statute-books. 
 
 " The Commissiouer.s again call attention to the necessity 
 cif codifying the tiame Laws of the State. The laws are 
 vamie, conflicting, and contradictory, and tlieir proper 
 t'liforccnient is naturally difReult, and at times impossible. 
 They should be codified, made clear, ami definite " 
 
 In the Sixth Biennial Report of the Com- 
 missioners of Fisheries for the State of Michigan 
 it is stated : — 
 
 " . . . . The great dilliculty with the laws has been that JdntDocumenti, State 
 le.spoiisibility for their cntorceineut was not clearly lodged Jo"i°Nf*9', pf u'. 
 
21 
 
 , lywlicic, ftiid no proviHiou hud liooii made for it. cither 
 l>y Muitablo leginlatioii nr by nppropriatioiis to spcuru the 
 necessary agents, and to defray thoir oxpensi's in enforcing 
 the law.s " 
 
 Joint Doeuinenti.Htalc ". . . . The notiiljle dcdini' in tlio numbers (if black 
 
 Tol. i,' No, 9, p. 1 1. ''''■''■'* along tlie Detroit and St. Chiir Kivors and Tjikc Si. Chdi 
 is dui' principally to tlicir being taken in nets, which i.s 
 prohii)ited by law " 
 
 IMrt , p. u, "... \Vc have lieard from many lishermcn llio con- 
 fe.ssiim thai tlieir unlawful ILshing was ruining I he 
 fisheries, accompanied liy tlie stalenient that tlieir next 
 neighbour was engaged in unlawful ways of fishing, and if 
 they cea.sed it others woidd step into their places tn 
 continue it, and tliey might us well continue and secure 
 tlieir share while the lish lusted, as to leave it all to the 
 others. yuoh u statement, and we have heard it iu 
 sub.stuncc' from many fair-minded and intelligent niep in 
 diflerenl parts of the .State, is a eonlirmation of all that 
 the C'onimissionei s have been trying to enforce upon the 
 attention of the public since the first Report was made, in 
 brief, that the fisheries of the State were gradually binng 
 e.vhausted, and would, within a time capable of being fixeil 
 with some degree of certainty, lie rendered comparatively 
 useless by illegal fishing if unrestrained by fail- statutory 
 regulation " 
 
 Ibid., i<. 40. " . . . . Another impediment to the rapid accomplish- 
 ment of the desired result is the absence of protective 
 legislation of a sulViciently stringent character to prevent 
 unnecessary waste of the fish during the critical period of 
 spawning, and the erection or maintenance of impedi- 
 ments to their movements iu reaching the spawning- 
 grounds " 
 
 Iu the Seventh Bienuial Ecport of the Com- 
 missioiiors of Fisheries for the State of Michigan 
 it is remarked : — 
 
 Joint DocumciiU!,Statc ". . . . Special attention is asked to this department ot 
 of Miohlgan 1888, ^^^^ Commission's work. 
 Tol. 1, No. H, p. 7. 
 
 " in jireseiitiiig this branch of our subject, the industrial 
 
 lisheries of Michigan, we ask all readers to bear in mind 
 tlii.s lirief .suiiiiiiary of the whole matter. 
 •• Tlie iiulustrial li.sheries are of great value. 
 " They are being speedily ruined " 
 
 Ibid., 11. 87. " . . . . The State by its legislation of the past tliiity 
 
 years .stands committed to the regulation of tlie (i.slicries, 
 just as by its legislation and appropriations it does li> 
 artificial propagation of food fishes; why not make both as 
 efficient and profitable as possible by taking this next and 
 most logical step, in practical effect asserting that it is 
 right to make laws, and it is right to enforce them, tliereliy 
 rendering elfective all measures taken by the State to 
 restoi'e and preserve the fi.shcries ? " 
 
 lbi.l.,Appemlii,p.S7. ". . . . From the foregoing it appears that around our 
 
 coa.st of 2,000 miles, at the time Michigan became a St:ite, 
 
 the waters were teeming with fish in quantities dei'ined 
 
 inexhaustible by the people of that generation. Fifty years 
 
 [862] G 
 
S8 
 
 have made as grv at a diaiige in tboso lisheiies as has been 
 maiiifeKteil in aomu other industries, but the change here 
 has bt'cn an vinfortnuate one. As reliable statistics as 
 cnuld be found of fishing {)roduct prior to 1875 are given 
 in IV note to this paper. A comparison of theiu, very 
 briefly, with a valuable Kcport made by Mr. Lyman A. 
 Brant, as Statistical Agent of the State Board of Fish 
 Connnissioners, on the lisliiiig season of ISS'i, will enable 
 lis to gather a lesson worlli learning. For example, take 
 the east sliore of Liike Michigan. It appears that in ISjO 
 tliis coast yielded 17,200 barrels of li.sb ; in 1885, 12,789; 
 in 1859 the fi.shing was done with 5,S50 gill-net.s and 
 58 sail-boats; in 1885 there wore in use 11.074 gill-nets, 
 107 pound-nets, operated by 23 steam-tugs and Ul sail- 
 lioats. While the capacity of the npparatu.s was increased 
 iu efficiency more than 200 per cent., the product fell off 
 more than 35 ptv ceut. The earlier operations were 
 conducted comparatively near the shore; tlio.se '>f the last 
 season, with improved sail-boats and steam-tugs, 25 and 
 30 miles out into the open lake. With a coast-line the 
 sr.me in both cases, the acreage of waters covered is 
 
 probably more than trebled " 
 
 ". . . . What is the .significance of these facts? Ten Joint Dociiiaent«,St»t« 
 times the .space might easily have been filled without «!. L DoB, p. lOl. 
 exhausting the authorities or facts. Such facts ami their 
 meaning, as one charged with a measure of respo; ;sibility 
 in the supervision nf the State lislieries, I deem it my 
 duty to lay before this audience. Even the briefest 
 historical notice of the fisheries leads inevitably to one 
 conclusion, and forces upon us the urgent inquiry. Can our 
 fisheries now bo saved, or is tlieir ruin inevitable > " 
 
 
 In the Annual lleport of the Fish Com- 
 missioners for the State of Ohio for 1888 : — 
 
 •'.... There is also much ditficidty in securing good EMcntire DocuneDU, 
 , , , ... , ... , SUteofOhio, P»rtl, 
 
 observance of the law, as will be seen by relerence to the iggs, |>. 647. 
 
 rei>ort of expenditures for ]>rosecniions, a Hi tie more than 
 
 one-third of the expense of lliis Hepartnient coming from 
 
 violations by lake fiihermen " 
 
 Tlie lobster, which was Ibiincl within territorial 
 ■waters on the coasts of the New .England States, 
 and formerly a source of great commercial profit, 
 is almost extinct in United States' waters., not- 
 withstanding the adoption of legislation for its 
 l)reservation. 
 
 lite mackerel, which frequented annually the 
 New England coasts in enormotis numbers, is 
 now found cbietly iu the waters along the shores 
 and off the coasts of the Dominion of Canada. 
 Owing to the use by United States' flshermcii of 
 a destnictive engine known as the purse-seine, 
 operating close to the territorial limit of 3 miles, 
 and sometimes within it, this fishery of Canada 
 
23 
 
 shows signs of exhaustion. A short history is 
 ai)pondod to the British Counter-Case Tor the 
 purpose of indicating inability on the jiart of the 
 United States in tlie past to preserve au 
 important fishery when within tlieir jurisdielion. 
 The history of tliis fishery illustrates aho the 
 great diffieulty experienced hy the Cnimdian 
 authorities in preserving that fishery upon the 
 Canadian coast, owing to the ahscnee of . o-opera- 
 tion on the part of tho United Slates for its 
 protection. While it is now proposed that tho 
 United States and Great Britain shall discuss 
 protective measures to be adopted for the protec- 
 tion of this fishery, it may be said without fear 
 of contradiction that the United Stoles would 
 not entertain for a moment a proposition similar 
 to the proposal put forward touching the seal 
 fishery in Behring S<>a, though it could he 
 proved, as the Appendix will show, that total 
 abstention on the part of United States' citizens 
 from all enjoyment of this fishery would enable 
 tho Canadian Govenunent to protect luid preserve 
 the same for the benefit of mankind and as 
 trustee for the world. 
 
 The Fisheries of the Great Lukes. 
 
 The aggre^'ato area of the Canadian portion of 
 those large fresh-water seas, called Lakes 
 Superior, Huron, Erie, and Ontario, divided by 
 the boundary-line between Canada and the 
 United States, may he estimated as follows : — 
 
 
 .'•'(juaro 
 Stiitutory MiUs, 
 
 Lulio Superior . . . . 
 
 ., Huron. vutl'iiUiij ncoijfiuii liay .. 
 
 „ Kiio 
 
 ., l)llt;ilit) 
 
 32,000 
 
 21,000 
 
 10,01.0 
 
 (i.700 
 
 TutMl 
 
 "•-',701) 
 
 All of these waters ibrmerly abounded in 
 whitefish, salmon trout, herring, sturgeon, bass, 
 pickerel, &c. 
 
 The failure on the part of the United States 
 to enforce protective measures for fish life, if 
 not counteracted to some extent by the rigid 
 Kegulations maintained on the Canadian side of 
 contiguous waters, Avould have depleted the'^o 
 valuable fisheries long ago. 
 
21 
 
 Tlic comparative condition of the fisheries on 
 the United States' shores has attracted the 
 attention of tlie State authorities, and a move- 
 ment has hegun in the States bordering on 
 Canada for the protection and improvement of 
 the lake fisheries. 
 
 A Report of the United States' Commissioner 
 of Fish and Fisheries for 1886 contains a review 
 of the iisheries of the Great Lakes in 1885. It 
 is compiled by ilessrs. Hugh M. Smith and 
 M. M. Snell, mth an introduction and descrip- 
 tion of fishing-vessels and boats l)y Captain 
 J. AY. Collins. 
 
 The Tables given in this work show that during 
 the five years from 1880 to 1885 the total 
 quantity of fish caught was tis follows : — 
 
 III Canada . . 
 
 In Uuitod States . . 
 
 1880. 
 
 Lbs. 
 11,473,000 
 
 45,600,125 
 
 1885. 
 
 Lbs. 
 27.378,180 
 
 70,423,728 
 
 Lbs. 
 15,905,180 
 
 30,823,603 
 
 The use of pound-nets prevails to a much 
 greater extent on the United States' side of the 
 lakes : while in 188-5 there Avere 213 pound-nets 
 licenced by the Canadian Government from Port 
 Ai'tliur, on Lake Superior, to Port Maitland, on 
 Lake Erie, the United States' Returns show 
 1,815, one-half of which were on Lake Erie 
 alone. The United States operate the fisheries 
 in these contiguous waters with nine times the 
 number of pound-nets and five times the number 
 of gill- nets .is used by Canadn. 
 
 A Joint Commission was appointed to confer 
 on the subject of fisli protection in the inter- 
 national waters between the Canadian provinces 
 and the State of New York. 
 
 General Richard U. Sherman, of New York, 
 on behalf of the Special Committee representing 
 tliat State for this purpose, at the meeting of the 
 Fish and Game Commissioners at Hamilton, 
 Ontario, the 8th December, 1891, reported, among 
 other things : — 
 
 •■.... Thai the food lish sui.ply ol tho Givat Lakes R,p<,n „f onttrlo Fid, 
 lia-i l)ecu for Ihr ])iisl thirty years sull'eiiiii; ra])id iliniiiiu- 
 lioii is too appart'Ut to need statistical proof. Ou llie New- 
 York side of Lake Ontario, wliere formerly salmon trout, 
 vliiteliah, (ind even tho lordly salt-water salmon were so 
 nlmndant as to furnish all the neor markets M'ith an 
 abundant supply at prices within reach of the means of 
 
 «poti 
 and Game C'ommls- 
 eiOD, 1892, p. 270, 
 
K«pott of Ontario 
 Fish anil Game 
 CommidKion, 1892, 
 p. 271. 
 
 the Jay labournr, the product now scarcely recompenses 
 the uollur, and these fish, once su abundant and clieap, are 
 no lon"er available for food for tlie multitude, but have 
 become table luxuries to be enjoyed only by people of 
 ample (iieaus. On the Ohio side of Lake Erie there has 
 been a nearly equal falliiig-ofV of the higher gi-adcs of 
 
 fisli " 
 
 " . . . . On the Canada side of these waters the supply, 
 though showing caeh year an additional falling-oft", yet 
 holds good for profitable netting, and it is from the 
 fisheries of Canadian waters that the principal market 
 supply fur the Stale of Xew York comes " 
 
 It cannot he denied by tbc United States that, 
 by the unrestricted use of pound-nets, gill-nets, 
 and other fishing engines, together with an 
 absence of enforced close seasons, it is within the 
 power oE either Canada or the United States to 
 exterminate the commercial fisheries in these 
 waters. 
 
 The i'ollowing is from the Report of 1892 
 of the Fish Commissioners of the State of 
 Vermont : — 
 
 " Uniformity of Laws. 
 
 Elerenth Biennial '■ When similar conditions and seasons prevail in neigh- 
 
 Sonel'sufs""' V'ouvuig Stales, the operation of the laws for the protection 
 
 Vermont, 1892, p. 21. (,f ji,g (igi, ,i„(j game which inhabit such States should be 
 
 uniform. Jlany departures from this rule occur iu the 
 
 operation ni the laws as between Vermont and the States 
 
 and pro\iuces contiguous thereto. 
 
 " As an illustration, the close season for black bass in 
 Vermont ends fifteen days earlier than in New Hampshire, 
 and the citizens of the former State can take bass from the 
 Connecticut when it is unlawful to do the same thing 
 froiu the New Hampshire side of the same waters. In 
 fact, it is a (luestion whether it is illegal in Vermont to take 
 bass from the Connecticut at any season, as Section 387u, 
 lte\ised Statutes, relates to the protection of black bass ' in 
 the waters of the State,' liut the west bank of the C(ui- 
 uecticut liiver is the east line of Vermont. 
 
 "While the above-mentioned defects have been the 
 subject of remonstrance from the Fish Commissioners of 
 New Hampshire, they are lost sight of when the condition 
 of affairs in the waters of Lake Chauiplain bordering on 
 the Dominion waters of the s;ime lake is brought to the 
 attention of the Comndssioneis by the lack of uniformity 
 of exi.stiug laws for the protection of fish in these con- 
 tiguous waters, resulting in a serious injustice to the 
 citizens of Yermont. 
 
 " Koference is made to the Canadian custom of licensing 
 fishermen to catch fish by the use of seinea hi the Dominion 
 waters of Lake Champlain, generally known as Mississ(iuoi 
 Bay. While only a small portion of Lnke Champlain is in 
 Canada, the Canadian portion appears to be the spawning- 
 ground for nearly all tlie wall-eyed pike of the .■ntire 
 lake." 
 
 [862] n 
 
38 
 
 While tons of these fish are taken in seines on 
 
 their May to and from the spawning-grounds in 
 
 Dominion waters, it is not lawful to take them in 
 
 ay manner in Vermont waters or to have them 
 
 in possession. 
 
 Witli this condition of things, our laws arc not 
 sustained by public opinion, and consequently it 
 is impossible to enforce the laws against netting 
 in waters contiguous to Canada without great and 
 unwarranted expense. 
 
 The Commissioners do not intimate that the 
 laws of Vermont for the protection of fish in Lake 
 Champlain are defective or perfect, but that the 
 Canadian laws should be in unison with them. 
 Much correspondence on this subject has be<;n 
 carried on between the Commissioners and the 
 Canadian authorities, finally, a full statement 
 of the case was communicated to the Honourable 
 JohnW. Foster, Department of State, Washington, 
 District of Columbia, and the United States' 
 GoTcrnraent is now considering the question 
 with the Government of Canada. The Commis- 
 sioners entertain hopes that this correspondence 
 will result in necessary measures being taken for 
 the protection of fish in the waters contiguous to 
 the two countries. 
 
 A Special Committee, appointed by the State of ncportofOnunoFiah 
 
 ■»- Ar 1 i i. T, 1 i. • i.1 i. oi. i ii »»* ^»'»« Commii- 
 
 jSew York, met at Rochester in that State on the bIod, 1892, 
 10th November, 1891 In a Circular letter of ''i'- =*"• "'•■ 
 the Chairman, General R. U. Sherman, it was 
 stated that the waters of the Great Lakes 
 separating Canada and the United States (the 
 jurisdiction of each country extending to the 
 middle of the lakes) should be " hift to the care 
 of the two Governments (Canada and the 
 United States)." It was proposed that action 
 should he taken to secure " uniform laws with 
 Canada." 
 
 Recognizing the principles of uniformity and 
 mutual interests, it has been agreed between the 
 Administrators of the United States' Government 
 and the Government of Canada to appoint Com- 
 missioners to report upon such measures as may 
 be required for the preservation of these fisheries. 
 In the draft Convention care is taken that neither 
 country shall be committed to Regulations 
 whereby, even in order to preserve the fishery, 
 the interests of one country should be sacrificed to 
 those of the other. The Regulations are to be 
 uniform, and the benefit and enjoyment equal. 
 If pelagic sealing be as free to the world as is 
 
27 
 
 I'liited Slates' t'om- 
 miuion o( P'^ish aud 
 FisberitB, Part XIV, 
 Ruport of the CoiU' 
 niiisioncr for 1886 : 
 Senate Mis. Doc. 
 No. go, p, 166, 
 49lli Cong., 2nil Scia. 
 
 Ibid,, pp. 156, 167. 
 
 fishing on the cod banks off tiu) coast ol' Xew- 
 foundland, it is iiiternstiri!.? to ascoi-tiuii tlio 
 position taken by tin; United States tuiicbiiiLf llio 
 preservation of the latter fishery. 
 
 Tlic position of the United States in the cod 
 fishery, it will b;; observed, is similar to that of 
 other nations toiiehiiu^ tlie fur-seals of J'ehring 
 Sea. 
 
 The late Spencer l?aii<l, Coininissioiicr of 
 Fisheries for the United States, put not un- 
 reasonably the views of the United States touch- 
 ing the efllcacy of measures to regulate a common 
 llshery on the high seas. ^[r. J$aird, in 188G, 
 Avrote : — 
 
 " Tlici'c i.s, jiPili.Tp.s, no iKitinn in llii' world wlieVL' tlicro 
 .ire li.'wcr rogiilalioiis and rfstiiolinu.s in n-yard lo lliu .son 
 lisliuries timn in tlie Unitud State.s ; no response liavin;^ 
 been made cither by the General Cloverninent or by Uio 
 ■Stale to tlie luimeroiis appeals to take the sulijoct under 
 their jurisdiction, and to prevent what lue claimed to bo 
 improper metliod.s, or iniseasonalde times of capturing fish, 
 or nndesirablo modes of im.'.serving them " 
 
 ". . . . The propriety of inteinational afireenient in 
 re.sard lo cei'tain modes of iLshing has not niifrequently 
 been urged, ami more particularly it lias been propo.sed 
 that the United States aud Great Dritain have an Agree- 
 ment to prohibit the use of the trawl or loug-liue on the 
 banks of Newfoundland and in other portions of the high 
 seas. Apart, liowuver, from the (juestionablc propriety of 
 interfering with this mode of li.shing, there would be tho 
 consideration of enforcing such rule.s, as it ould only b^; 
 done by means (jf a licet of Government vessels of both 
 nations stationed in different [lortious of tlie high seas, 
 invidviug, of course, the' danger of irritation at any uttempl, 
 at enforcement, especially ~;y the vessel of the opposite 
 nationality. 
 
 " Again, even it this lould be lill'eeted and enforced by 
 th(^ United Slates and (ileal I'ritaiu in respect to llicir 
 own subjecl.s, there is no ]irobability that other nations 
 would enter the Convention or consider themselves bcnuul 
 by its provisions ; aud without the co-operation of armed 
 vessels of other nationalities, any attempt at regulating 
 the lishermen of the same woidd be resented l.iy their 
 respective Governments, and danger of war ensue. If 
 there were no interference with the subjects of other 
 Governments, the ehect would Iv. simply to give them the 
 monopoly c^f capture by the proliibiled apparatus, or dining 
 the [irohibiled season to other parties, and thus a season's 
 loss would be iuflicteil njion the subjects of the consenting 
 nations. It might also be a question how far any (iovern- 
 menl could pretend to int il'ere with the lishing operatiou.-t 
 of its own subjects on tue high seas, jirovided, of eum'Se, 
 these did not involve any criminal action, or such as i-', 
 by eoninion consent, allowed lo be a matter of juriNdietiou. 
 Gf course, the vessels and their catch might be e.mlrollcd 
 
28 
 
 (,ii tin ir ciitciiiig port, liut thei'O wouM sctm l» Itc notliiiiK 
 to iivcvt'iit the takiiij! ot the fi.sh to a f.nvign ii.itinu. It is 
 l'..i- tliusc luul uther lOQSous, that iuhmI nut lu'iv lie detuik-J, 
 lliiil must ciiroful cunsidemtioii slioulil bo givoii U< nny 
 lnoiiositiMU Inoliiiif! towarils the restriction or reHubliuu in 
 any \v,iy of Hie scii fisheries of the I'nileil StiitoB, what- 
 (■v,T nmy 1* the imicUce mul policy of other nations " 
 
 When the constant worryins,', driving, re- 
 (Irivhig, raidhig, and other praetiees on the 
 hvecding-islands arc considered, it Is surprising 
 that seals are found there in large numbers at 
 tin- present time. 
 
 W(! know, however, that while in time these 
 cau. es work ruin upon a rookery, seal life in the 
 South Slietlands, and elsewhere, withstood for 
 years severe and constant depredations. 
 
 ' The hi-h order of instinct ot the fur-seal is Jii^^'-.^jXp-.M. 
 referred to in :Mr. Elliott's work. 
 
 Mr. Elliott reports that the visit of many ships, Tenth c.n^a-,u„u^^^^^ 
 the rattling of their anchors and chains, and the p,,. 20, 27. 
 scraping of their keels on the beaches of the 
 islands — 
 
 «' wniiM iilone ilriw every seal iiway, and over the liussian 
 -rounils in u reinarliubly short sp;ice ot time." 
 
 Tiie Regulations of the Seal Company re- 
 cogui/.c that seals may be driven away from the 
 islands. 'J'hey consequently provide against:— 
 
 1. Killing on the beaches. 
 
 2. Ivilling by fire-arms, or "by any other 
 means tending to drive seals away from the 
 
 islands." 
 
 3. The use of fire-arms ',Tbilc seals are on the 
 
 islands. 
 
 l. Dogs prohibited h-nm Ihc islands. 
 
 The fur-seals rescrt i<, the islands for the 
 purposes of procreation primarily. 
 
 Under tlu- system ot administration they arc 
 killed while on the islands for these purposes. 
 
 Mr. John F. Miller, President, Alaska Com- 
 mcrcial Company, has testilied that:— 
 
 -un disturbance on the island has a tendency to drive <,«hj,ConK., Ui sc^. 
 away the seals. The fewer people we have there, and the 
 fewer vessels, the better." 
 
 And— 
 
 " If there were many vessels aiichoied about there, or ibid., p. 40. 
 much confusion goin- on-plying of boats and loud noises 
 upon the islands-it would have a tendency to drive the 
 seals away. Tlie more quiet the islands are kept during 
 the time the seals are there the belter." 
 
19 
 
 And— 
 
 44tli Cong., lit ScM., " KxtiannUiuiry (joundH, Midi iis tliu uoiaus uC yuu-sliol", 
 "' • • !'• * • and the smell of tlm niicasscs <>( tlic sluiii seals, mid ilii' 
 blood 111' ihuiu, tend tu fiinhteu those iieatures iiwny." 
 
 They iirc very sensitive to . smell ; tlieir sense uf smell 
 is very keen ; in fact, ihey are vi'iy iieculiiir ftiiimnlM, mid 
 re(|iiiii' enrcl'iil iiianii;,'euii'iit," 
 
 Bcl'oro the Congressional Committee in 1888, 
 Mr. \V. Oavitt, an Agent of the United States' 
 Treasury Department, testified tliat seals were 
 easily frightened, and the discharge of lire-arms 
 has a t(,'ndency to frighten them away. 
 
 Mr. n. A. Gliddcn testified :— 
 
 U. li |No. 8883, 
 
 • The 
 
 IWd , M*5: *"'' '"'"• '" '^'' '"^t'"''^" 
 
 eal i> a vi'iy .sciisilive animal, and it doeM nut liki- 
 uid il must not he dislurhed. It' they are 
 tliev will not ri' there at all." 
 
 Canadiin Print, 
 Britisli Blue Book, 
 Corrcipondence, 
 BehriDg Sea, p. 41E. 
 
 While many seals have douhtless been driven 
 from these islands by causes such as those just 
 mentioned, it is by no means established that 
 these seals have disappeared altogether. 
 
 In the study of the salmon it is found that 
 they frequent the head-waters of certain rivers 
 for the purpose of procreation only. They then 
 descend to the sea, whore they are pursued by the 
 people of all nations. 
 
 In the case of all marine animals, however, it 
 is the object of regulations to prevent as much 
 as possible their disturbance when on the breed- 
 ing-grounds. 
 
 If this wholesome principle were applied to the 
 case of seals, the plan suggested by many of 
 those concerned in the preservation of seal life 
 would nior(> effectually insure the object of the 
 Regulations suggested by the reference in this 
 Case. 
 
 In the evidence taken before the Committee of 
 Congress on the Pacific Coast appointed to 
 inquire into the relations of the United States 
 with Canada, Captain Brown suggested that, in 
 dealing with the preservation of seal life, the 
 following proposition should be considered : — 
 
 " Let tlio Ciovernnii'iit [ilaer piDper peojde on those 
 islands and estahlish ojien and eh' ,e months ; then say tliat 
 no sealer.s shonld go within 3 leagues of these islands, I'm- 
 the females that nurse their young never go further away 
 from the islands than that. There is an abundance of 
 fish tliere for them to eat. The females go hack to the 
 islands two W' three times every day to nur.se their young, 
 r.ut lot no (i.shei'men go in there, and let there be clo.se 
 [862] I 
 
••■ ■ 1 
 
30 
 
 months, and let them liavo u i'aii' and cnual i;]iiiiiol', nnd 
 then 1 don't think they will ever extei'iuin.iti: those seals, 
 because they roproduee themselves every year jnoiierly 
 proteeted. (' Kelations with Canada,' p. o4G.) 
 
 • • ♦ » 
 
 " .ranies C. Swan, Ksq., of i'ort Towuscnd, is descvihed Canadian Print, 
 before the Commitleo as a man wlio lias given iiiueh Corrcspondcnco ' 
 attention to tlie fisheries of Hehriny Sea, l;oih fjr his own Bchring Hca, p.'648. 
 information and for that of the United States' Fish Com- 
 mission. (' Kol. Hons witli Canada,' p. 314 of evidenee.) 
 
 " lie produeed a Peport of (lie Board of Trade of I'ort 
 Towiisend, Washington '''erii toiy, in wliicli (his Chamber 
 of Ctinimerce denounced the elnsing of Bohring Sea as a 
 ' species of class legislation for (he lienetit of the wealthy 
 few.' (' Eolations with Canada,' p. 05.) 
 
 " Mr. Swan advocated free fishing in the ojien sea, and 
 explained at length that a valuable lieport of liis, wherein 
 '■a expressed views opposed to iho.se of Jlr. Elliott, was 
 suppressed, and he adds : — 
 
 "'The arguments and assertions of tlu! .Vlaska Cuniiner- 
 cial Company tliat the fnr-.seals all go the I'riliylov Islands, 
 and would bo cxterniiiiatcd if that Company did not have 
 the care and proteution of them, would easily be disposed 
 of if both sides of the argument could bo lieaixl and the 
 real facts made known.' (' Iiciatioiis witli Canada,' 
 p. 208.) 
 
 " Further on he sny.i : — 
 
 " • Congress and the couiiivy liavc lieen systematiially 
 kept in darkness regarding the fur-seal fisheries in liehiiug 
 Sea, for those wlio have hud the information tn impart 
 iiave hail an interest directly oiiposed to imparting it.' 
 (' Relations with Canada,' p. 209.) 
 
 ■' Mr. Swan denies there is any danger of «xt';rraination 
 of seals, and produces sworn declaiatious touching the 
 existence of .seals at places v.-hich wiiiRss now claims the 
 seals have abandoned. 
 
 "Finally, Mr. Swan is askcil liv Senator I'ngli ; 
 
 "'You do not think it i- of any iniiioitance to prevent 
 tlie destruction of seals ?' 
 
 "Ife answers: 
 
 " • I do, on the islands, but not on the outside, because 
 (lie proportion of seals (hat .ire destroyed is a very small 
 fnuUion of what the whole number is. Tliere are millions 
 of seals in the I'acitic Ocean. Voii have no conception of 
 the vast myriads of thi^ia.' [' ladations with Canada,' 
 p. 289.) 
 
 » 
 
 V 
 
 "Mr. Swan did not believe that for evere .seal taken 
 several were killed. He refers to the shyness and intelli- 
 gence of the seal, and to the I'aei that they are never taken 
 when in motion. 
 
 " He further said : 
 
 "•r.ehring Sea must lie declnrod free and open to all Ibld.p. 61». 
 <iur citizens, except the adjacent waters to tlie Pribyloll' 
 Islands, which sliould not exceed in limit th. distr, i o 
 from (lie sl'ores of tlawe islands of 1 marine league, iie iJo 
 of which limit the seals should be preserved duriu,; the 
 
31 
 
 Canadian Prir.t, 
 lidlish Dluc Book 
 Correspondence, 
 liehring Se», p. 647. 
 
 Kcporl ol British 
 
 inniulis of lireeiliiig, lis bi'lniiLjiii;^ to tlio ivKikeric '• o r. iitil 
 
 by tlie United Statos, but uiusiili' fif lliiil limit tin.' w.itevfi 
 
 sliould be free to all of our 'itizuiis. (' It'litioii-- wiili 
 
 Canada,' p. 26'i.) 
 
 • » » • 
 
 '•• It i.s constantly assertod in AVasliiii,i;ton tliat tlio indis- 
 criminate slanH;litcr of seals will extennin.ile tliem, and 
 rases are cited of the Islan<ls of .Massafuera, Lolios, and 
 others on the I'i.cilic coast, wliere the sliuighter by crews 
 of vessels from Now London, i onuecticut, and other Xew 
 England ports, has entirely exterminated the fnr--:eids at 
 those islands and at Cape Horn. 1 assume that fnr-seals 
 can no more be extenninated than herring or codtish. 
 They may be driven off from a rookery, Ijut tliey ar.^ nob 
 extenninated ; and in proof of my assertion I respectfully 
 ask permission to fde the sworn statements of L'ichard 
 Dupuis, relative to the fnr-seals of Cape Horn, and of 
 Edward Thomas Uiggs, relative to the fur-senls of the 
 Falkland Islands, which 1 have respectively marked. 
 (See Exhibits Xos. 2 and 3.) 
 
 '"'Ihe statements show that tlie I'lir-seals have not been 
 exterminated at those places, but are taken in considerable 
 nundjers every season, and altlioULih at one time were 
 almost driven entirely away, aie now returning' to iheir 
 firrnier haunts.' (' I!elati<ms with Canada,' p. 20!).)" 
 
 This is oiu; of tlie I'l't'omiiicndations of tlio 
 Coramissioncrs, p. 27. ji^n[^]^ Commissioners. 
 
 There are many who have expressed opinions in 
 favour of direct eontrol of the Seal Islands by 
 the United Slates' Ciovernment, tlierehy pro- 
 tcctiiii^ tlie seals wlien breedinsj, and eneoui-igiuj 
 their resort thither. 
 
 During a discussion in Congress {r!(l>' " Con- 
 gressional Gkibe," 30th June, 1S70, Pari {>, 2ml 
 Session, list Congress, p. .jO;32), Mr. Uowe spoke. 
 as follows touching tlie system of leasing tho 
 islands to a Scaling Company : — 
 
 " 1 said it seemed to bo framed oil the idea tli.i; ilia 
 (iovernnieut owned the seals, nie Senator from Oiegon, 
 who must be familiar with the Hill if anybody i.«. says it 
 is framed on no such idea; the lluvernment does not own 
 Ihe .seals ; that idea is not incorporated in it. 1 ask, then, 
 wliv the (lovernmi'iit undertakes lo lease the right to c.itch 
 them — to lease the right to slaughter them i It tl-'cs not 
 lease the right to catch lish anywhere." 
 
 Ill a pamphlet designed to explain to eastern 
 Senators and Congressmen Ihe full value of the 
 fur-seal llsherics, in order to cnahle them to 
 judge of the policy iuvolvcd in leasing the Senl 
 Islands, it is said : — 
 
 . ,,, „ "Aiiol her way, which we think would be loucb better 
 
 Dtitisli Case, ■' 
 
 .\ppendlx. Tol. Ui, for the best interest of tho people of the racilic ec.ist, 
 
 '''■ ' would be as follows : 
 
^ 
 
^ 
 
32 
 
 '■l.t't tlio Clovunimont tiikii cliaigc of this ResLTvatiuii, 
 iuul, iiistoad of killiiig lOO.OUO, laK'e 50,000 seiils ; ami in 
 (I'liii.C! this h't tht' Sfleetion he inoro th(jroiij,'h, su tliat tin; 
 fi: 1,000 skins shall hf strictly choice skins, that wouM 
 average the highest possible in-ice. Then abandon tlu; 
 present iioliey of claiming the Behring Sea as an inland 
 sea, wliich cannot be made to stand in ihe end. Hestricl 
 iho killing of seal within the o-railo or 0-niile limit, 
 whatever is <locided to bo the limit of what a nation can 
 liold anthority over the higli seas, and in this way it 
 wonld promot the indnstiy nf private sealing tu a mnch 
 larger extent than it now is." 
 
 ilr. Boutwcll, the Secretary of the Treasury, 
 reported in 1870 (41st Coii!?rcss, 2n(l Session, 
 Ex. Doc. No. 109):— 
 
 ■'Ordinarily, 1 agree iu the opinion that a Government, 1''"'^'^''^?^'*^;, .jj 
 especially one like that ol' the I 'nited States, is not adapted ,,. 419. 
 to the management of business; but this clearly is a Imsiue.ss 
 •n-hich caiuiot be left open to individual competition, and if 
 it is til be a monopoly, whether prolitahle or other\vi.-,e, the 
 interest of the fioverument is so large, and the expenses 
 incident to the protection of these islands so great, that it 
 cannot afford to substitute to any (iNteiit the monopoly of 
 an individual or of a Company for its own lawful suiier- 
 vision." 
 
 Tlie following is extracted from the lleport of 
 the (rovernor of Alaska for tlic year 1S88 to the 
 Secretary of the Interior at "Washington : — 
 
 'The views 1 enlerlain concerning what I believe to be "fP"' °' ?i"'"'l" °^ 
 
 AlaSKA, 188P, Jl. il'J. 
 
 Ihe bad puliov of leasing the islands dn not blind me in 
 the faci that here is a most vahialile interest which it is 
 the duty 'if the Cnvernment to protect by every legal 
 means in its pnwer; it matters not whether the present 
 system be continued, or whether some other and les.s 
 objectionable |ilau of dealing with it be adopted." 
 
 In a letter to the "Portland Orcgonian" by 
 J. J. Winant, 20th August, 18Sfl, that gentleman 
 wrote : — 
 
 The iinrchase of Ala.ska from Russia was all i-ight. Can»aian Print, 
 ' , , .. o Britiali Blue Book, 
 
 It was a good inveslment, and retlccts credit on becrelary p. 21. 
 
 Seward and the Administration that consuminntcd the 
 
 |v,iichaso. lint the disposition of it afterwards was all 
 
 wrong, and is a gross injustice to the American people, and 
 
 is a piece of .seerel history that may never be written. 
 
 " It would lie a hopidess undertaking lor an obscure Ibid., p. 25. 
 citizen of small means to si'ek redress, either through our 
 Courts or through Congress, for wrongs inflicted upon him 
 hy this souUess and overbearing Company. The immense 
 jivilits accruing to the Company fioni their fianchise 
 
33 
 
 iifVuid them tho menus tu liuml off li'j^al ivdross nnd tu 
 control Cougiessmcii by sulisidiziug them. 
 
 " OiiCf ill n wiiilo, tin; (iovi'iumciit studs out u Com- 
 mis.sioner to cxiimiiic into tlic Coinpiuiy's aflniis, to '"c if 
 they kill tlic convct iiumlicr of seals, &c, Wlu .1 he 
 arrives in Sim Kraiiciseo, a fin,' steamer is ready tu receive 
 him and convey him tu thi' islands, and, lieing so nicely 
 treated and entertained, he eimld liardly fail to lind every- 
 thing nil ri};ht. 
 
 "Tlieii he returns tn Wa.sJiiii^lon, and llie Ciimiiany 
 I'eijuires the serviee of all agent to watch Congress, ami 
 see that lei niifavouialilt- legislation is enacted. Sn he 
 gets paid b\' the (ioveinmeut to watch the Company, and 
 paid liy the Ciinipaiiy to watch the Govriiment, and 
 consei|nciitly his iriii i- ;i veiy plea.sant an 1 pnifitalili- 
 one. 
 
 "By piililisliiiig tlii^, and getting public attention 
 directed to thi.s subji-ct, yiai mry accomplish great good, 
 and contribute largely to pr vent a renewal of this 
 infamou.s lease, and thus break np an overhearing ami 
 oppressive monopoly." 
 
 General Ilowai'd (Report, 30th June, 187">, 
 on a tour in Alaska), in referring to comiilaints 
 against the Alaska Commercial Company, 
 said : — 
 
 Senate Ex. Doc. " Of cour.Sc I have no means of jud''iiisi of the truth nr 
 
 No. 12, 4UU ConK., ,. , .. „ , ,. ^, _ . 1 ? ^ ■ 11., 
 
 1st Ses5. lalsity ot must ol the statements herein contained, but do 
 
 believe it to be a niLstuke, and a dniigenms pivcedent on 
 
 the part of our Government, to give into the hands of any 
 
 Company, howevi'r boiievoleiil in its intentions, su vast a 
 
 monopoly " (p. 11). 
 
 Senate Ex. Uoc. 
 No. 192, 46tU ConcT , 
 Snil Scia., vol v. 
 
 Sir. II. C. Dc Ahna, fomicrly Collector of 
 Customs at Sitka, .says (4tli November, 1877) of 
 tho Alaska Commercial as a Corporation — 
 
 " is a deadly incubus 1111 that country, which is a haj^i'V 
 hunting-ground Uiv that powerful league of sharpers s(. 
 e.vcecdingly well represented iu M'ashington city " 
 
 II. R. MU. Doc. 
 No. 11. 41sl Cong.. 
 2nU SesB.. vol. i. 
 
 Heport of Alfreil 
 Lavooder, Auistant 
 Treasury Afifcii;, 
 July 28, IBfO 
 
 Frank N. Wicker, Special Treasury Agent, 
 1th November, 1869, recomtncuded the passagt; 
 of a Bill authorizing tiie Government to assume 
 sole control of the seal fisheries of St. George and 
 St. Paul Islands; remove all traders except the 
 natives, who should he employed to kill seals ;i1 
 fair remuneration ; appoint Inspectors at liberal 
 salaries to carry out restrictions imposed, &c. 
 
 "Tile (.ioveriimeiit should take abscihuc control of \U>~v 
 islands, ami permit no seal to he killed more than air 
 needed by the natives fui food fei the ne.\t -ix ui seviii 
 
 years. 
 
 [862] 
 
84 
 
 International Eogulations ave jn-oposcd, in L'niicd.sun» 
 
 CiM, 
 
 which it is said the paiticipation of other 
 
 |<. 201). 
 
 Govcrnn)ents may he properly invited, to prevent 
 the extermination of the seal herd, and to preserve 
 it for the United Stales and for the hencfit of the 
 world. 
 
 To do this, the United States eontoiul, pelagic ibUnP. 30i. 
 scaling must he prohihited in all waters where- 
 soever the seal resorts, and it is added that no 
 other regulation will prevent its extermination. 
 
 Tlic Trihunal is asked to preserihe " Regula- 
 tions " or 'an Agreement," "equitahlc," "just," 
 " humane," and " enlightened.'' 
 
 A decree is demanded that it is the duty of ibid., r. 308. 
 Great Britain to concur with the United States 
 in the adoption and enforcement against the 
 citizens of either nations of such Regulations as 
 will prevent the capture anywhere upon the high 
 seas " of any seals helonging to the said herd.'' 
 
 Neither the United States' Case nor the 
 Reports of the Commissioners indicate what 
 "all the waters" arc to which the "seal herd" 
 resorts. 
 
 The Case fails to point out any method 
 whereby a particular "herd" of seals may he 
 known, so as to enforce a Regulation to prevent 
 its capture! anywhere njion the high seas. 
 
 The Regulation proposed is clearly impracti- 
 cahle. 
 
 The Tribunal is not empowered to regulate the 
 pursuit of fur-seals M'hich resort to the Kurile 
 Islands, nor of many others found in the waters 
 of the North Pacific Ocean. 
 
 The proposed Regulation is unreasonable, 
 
 The proposition of the United States in eifect 
 and in fact amounts to this : — 
 
 While Russians, Japanese, South Americans, 
 aiul people of all other nations may freely 
 continue to enjoy the right of pursuing the seal, 
 while; also its marine enemies in the North 
 Pacific may continue to destroy half-a-million 
 a-year, and while Russians, Japanese, and citizens 
 of the United States arc killing seals on their 
 respective rookeries, the subjects of Great Britain, 
 inhabitants of a long coast-line on the Pacific, are 
 to be absolutely prohibited from all enjoyment in 
 this industry. 
 
 "When the Convention was signed the chief 
 difficulty touching Fur-seal Regulations between 
 the two Governments was confined to the eastern 
 half of BehrinK Sea. 
 
88 
 
 Brltkli I'll;, 
 Appemlii, tol, lii, 
 p. 178. 
 
 
 Ibid., p|<, 396 415. 
 
 Iliid., |>. 189. 
 
 IM<1., Part 11, |>. 34 
 
 Tlio most extreme proposal of tlie United 
 States under this head was up to tliat period for 
 the exclusion of sealing-vessels from IJcliring 
 Sea. 
 
 In Eebriuny lS'-8 Mr. Bayard, Seerctaiy of 
 State, proposed an International Agreement for 
 Great Britain, the United States, and other 
 interested Powers, by Avliii-li pelagic- sealing in 
 Bchring Sea only would be prohibited from the 
 15tli April to the ]>t Ts'ovcmbiT in every year. 
 This practically contiiiid all killing of seals in 
 Bchring Sea to the breeding-islands, to be enjoyed 
 by the United Sta'es and by Russia foi' their own 
 exclusive benefit. }\o :(iils are found in that sea 
 in the other months. 
 
 On the 22nd .lanuary and the 1st Mavcb, 
 1890, Mr. Blaine contended that killing seals in 
 the open sea tended certainly and rapidly to the 
 extermination ol' the species. 
 
 In May 1890 Sir Julian Paunccfote reported 
 that Mr. lilaine insisted on tlu; exclusion of 
 sealing-vessels I'rom Behring Sea during the 
 summer months. 
 
 On the 17th December, 1890, Mr. Blaine 
 stated that the United States would be satisfied 
 with an exclusion of sealers from within 20 
 niarine leagues from the islands from the 16th 
 May to tb(! 13th October in eaeb year, and he 
 adds : — 
 
 '• This will prove lui ellVctive mode of iPiesfrviug llie 
 Will lislieries." 
 
 The conclusions of the United States' Commis- 
 sioners and those of tlio British Commissioners 
 appointed to report upon seal life widely differ. 
 
 While it is true that the Report of the United 
 States' < '• ■"'nnissiouers ascribes a serious decrease 
 in ser. !i '< almost entirely to pekgic sealing, the 
 Commissioners pass abruptly over facts of an 
 alarming character, which arc referred to by the 
 British Commissioners and supported by recent 
 official Reports in the United States.' 
 
 Purther reasons for dissatisfaction with the 
 Report of tlie United States' Commissioners have 
 been given. 
 
 The action taken by Dr. Merriam, in his effort 
 to obtain support for the Case of the United 
 States, shows that in biin the Tribunal has not 
 that impartial assistant it was expected when 
 the Commissioners wore appointed. 
 
 [862] L 
 
86 
 
 The conclusions of the United States' Commis- 
 sioners arc contradicted by Professor H. W. 
 Elliott, who was appointed a Special Agent of the 
 'lYeasiiry to examine into and report upon the 
 fur-seal lishory in 1890, under the provisions of 
 a sjjpcial Act of Congress approved on the 5th 
 April, 18:^0. 
 
 Mr. Elliott deuouncos, moreover, in his 
 Report, the [)raetieps of tlic lessees and tho 
 United State*;' niamiueniont of the islands in 
 unmeasured terms. 
 
 The British Commissioners trace the decrease 
 of seal lif J at the 1)recding-islauds ehietly to tho 
 ruinous ])i-actices of the lessees. 
 
 "With these Reports, followed, as they are, by 
 af&davits and statemon(s equally contradictory, 
 '■ is to he regretted that the United States' 
 Case has not suggested llegulatious which would 
 indicate a greater desire for the protection of 
 seal life, and less the wish to secure a great and 
 valuahle monopoly of the fur-seal interest. 
 
 To a])ply any Regulations to pelagic sealing 
 imder (lie circumstances disclosed in the Report 
 of the British Commissioners in this Counter- 
 Case would be as unreasonable as to impose 
 restrictions over a coastal salmon fishery, while 
 the salmon on the spawning-hods and in the 
 river generally were being ruthlessly destroyed. 
 
 In this connection the United States' Case 
 refers to Regulations elsewhere. 
 
 The principle of thom all is uniformity and 
 equal conditions for those iut(M'estcd. 
 
 The Ordinance at the Falkland Islands pre- 
 scribes an uniform close season for the Seal 
 Islands and the sea. 
 
 So in the case of New Zealand. 
 
 The Statutes of Canada are uniform and 
 general. 
 
 The legislation of Newfoundland prescribes a 
 close time applicable to all, and Regulations which 
 are general. 
 
 In the Caspian Sea ■' driving " is not allowed 
 where the seals haul up for breeding, and the 
 Regulations are general. 
 
 In Uruguay the close season is general, and 
 no distinction is made between land and pelagic 
 sealing. 
 
 So also in Japan. 
 
 The Jan Maycn Regulations cover the open 
 
 ;^ 
 
37 
 
 SiiiBie, Uuth CoDfc'., 
 Ut S«Ba.. Mid. Doij. 
 No lO'J, p. 86 
 (Minoritj Keporr). 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 ll,ld. 
 
 / 
 
 /M' 
 
 /J 
 
 sea, wliero alone flu; seals arc ;,'o). Thfl samo 
 Regulations aj)ply to all interested in the 
 sealing. 
 
 [i is said in the r(>coi'ds of the United States' 
 S(>nate : — 
 
 ■ 111 nil th.' Willi' raii;4i' 'if '■ui Tivaty iii.u;;\^'<;iii'iil> witli 
 llii- Tiviily I'owi'i-s of llic world thi'ic i.> su.uvrly miic that 
 llo^'^i not contain siani' intttiinl ailvanla^r ny ic ipi'";al 
 cniiccssioii, and tln-y I'ovi'i "V.'iy subji'Ot thai lia- Iji'cii 
 snggcsUnl in tln' rxiH'rii'iicc iif iiiankiml as I'.-in- til (ir 
 I'cinvc'iiii'nl to ln' s.'ttli'il liy iiitcnialiunal a;,'ii''iii''Ml ralhi'V 
 lliaii t'l hr left mali'i- i!n' coiiliol m s.'i'urily lliat nii^Iit !« 
 allunli'il liy till' laws I'li aclt'd hy llu' lo-ipiotiv' counlii'S, 
 wliirli tlit'y coulil altov or repeal at plcasiiri'. 
 
 "Notliiii};' could iiioic rcrtaiiily U'sson th.' fuml -ii|i].ly 
 
 iif the peojilo, wliioh, alter all, is the lia-is nf all liuinaii 
 
 i progress, tliaii to promote strit'o amongst lisliermcn visiting' 
 
 It III' same waters, A jioliey that leads to s\ii h a lesnlt i.-i 
 
 an iiijustiei' tu the hiiniau family. " 
 
 
/ ' 
 
 United States' 
 Case, p. 124. 
 
 L^(^''^'^ 
 
 The United States' System of Monopoly, the Lessees, 
 and the Natives. 
 
 RecogDizing that no regulations touchiug 
 pelagic sealing will be prescribed if the manage- 
 ment of the United States at the islands has not 
 been satisfactory, the United States' Case refers 
 to the system prevailing at the islands in the 
 fur-seal business, and claims it was adopted in the 
 interest of the Government, the native inhabi- 
 tants, and for the protection of the seal fisheries. 
 It is added that in 1876 and 1888 it was found 
 that the terms of the lease to the Alaska Com- 
 mercial Company were favourable to the Govern- 
 ment, and to the physical and moral condition of 
 tlie natives as well. 
 
 Thrjse statements are made apparently to 
 establish that by a monopoly such as liitherto 
 existed the interests of the natives of Alaska and 
 the protection of the seals will be at onco 
 secured. 
 
 The interests of the Aleuts and of the United 
 States' Government, it is submitted, are irrelevant 
 to any of the issues in this Case. 
 
 Tliere is, however, abundant evidence to justify 
 a severe condemnation of the policy which is thus 
 submitted to the Tribunal for approval. 
 
 The immediate value to the United States of a 
 monopoly need not be disputed. 
 
 So valu'\ble were tlie trauchiscs of the monopoly 
 on tlie S. i' Islands that in 1890, notwithstanding 
 the lleports of United States' officials and of the 
 Secretary of State, that an alarming decrease in 
 seal life had beu'un on the islands in 1885, and 
 was contiuuiii-, the tenders for the privilege of 
 taking fur-seals upon these islands for the term 
 of twenty years were larger in amount and more 
 favourable to the United States than those of 
 1870. 
 lupur. o. specu. The value of the lease and its franchise con- 
 Agent. J. S.Moore, gig^jj j^ the solc control of the islands ou which 
 
 1875, Ex. Doc. 83, „ , . , 
 
 p. 197, 44th Cong , tur-se;vls arc tounu. 
 
 Ist ScM. Professor Elliott, in his work oti Akska, 
 
 Sec Appendix tor 
 terms of otTers in 
 1870 and 1R90. 
 
 Heport of Special 
 
 said :- 
 
 Eiholts ' 
 18V4, p|i 
 
 .Mask! 
 
 WliL'U tliL' tliivcmiiienl toi'k iin-^sossii 
 
 of 111! 
 
 94, 95. inleri'Sts in 18l)8-G9, llu' yross mlue of » sad-skiu then in tin- 
 [864] B 
 
2 
 
 best market (London) was less than the present tax and 
 royaltij paid upon it by the lessees I " 
 
 In 1874, when Mr. Elliott wrote, the price of 
 the raw material had douhlcd. 
 
 The tenders in 1890, referred to in this chapter, 
 show how enormous was the increase then. 
 
 Mr. Moore gives another reason for the 
 advocacy hy the United States of a system of 
 monopoly, which, it is suhmitted, is not concerned 
 with the welfare of the natives or the preservation 
 of seal life. He reported in 1875 : — 
 
 "It seems that tlie 100,000 fur-seals from our own 
 islands, together with the 30,000 olitaiiieil liy them from 
 tho Asiatic islands, besides the scattering fur-seals killed 
 in the south seas, are all the market of the world can con- 
 veniently take. In fact, it is jiretty evident that the very 
 restriction of the numbers killed is about the most valu- 
 able part of the francliise of the Alaska Commercial Com- 
 pany." 
 
 Repori of Special 
 Agent, J. S. Moore, 
 I87S, 441h Cong., 
 1st Cong,, H. Ex. 
 Doc. 83, p. 196. 
 
 See aUo 44th Cong., 
 lat Ses9., H. K., 
 No. 623, p. 28. 
 and p. 63 as to 
 value of monopoly. 
 
 In some years, as will be seen, it paid the 
 Company to take more than the terms of the 
 lease permitted. 
 
 That the sole control and enjoyment of fur- 
 seal hunting would he to the United States and 
 to the lessees of tho islands a source of enormous 
 profit is not denied. The sole control of the 
 cod fishery on the hanks of Newfoundland would 
 be to France, to Great Britain, or to the United 
 States equally beneficial. 
 
 The exclusive right of fishing for mackerel in 
 Atlantic waters would in like manner be bene- 
 ficial to Canada and to the eontiuuanee of that 
 particular fishery. 
 
 It is not, however, believed that any of the 
 nations interested would consent to a surrender 
 of its interest, even to insure the permanency of 
 those fisheries. 
 
 The policy, however, of the United States, in 
 creating a monopoly in the Seal Islands, has 
 been a subject of angry debate in Congress from 
 time to time, and has evoked great hostility on 
 the Pacific coast. 
 
 Mr. Boutwell, when Secretary of State for the 4i,t Cong., 
 United States, reported oi: this subject in 1870, ^^ ^"- ^''• 
 
 , 7 . Doc. 109. 
 
 urgmg grave objections to such a policy. It See Appendix, 
 involved, he pointed out, t. moiionoly- -an absence 
 of inducement on the part of tlvj lessees to 
 secure either the welfare of the latives or the 
 permanency of the fisheries. Ilr. Boutwell 
 strongly advocated Govermaent control. 
 
" Congressional 
 
 Globe," Part II, 
 
 40th Cong., 
 
 3rd Seas., p. 1497, 
 
 Senate, 
 
 February 23, 1869. 
 
 Hee Appendix. 
 
 United States' 
 Case, p. 184. 
 
 H. Mis. Doc. 
 No. 11, 41st Cong, 
 2nd Se»s. 
 
 In Congress the policy was characterized as 
 creating a "bold-faced monopoly," and as an 
 "outrageous" proposition. The conduct of tho 
 lessees upon tho islands has been such as to 
 qualify Mr. Boutwoll's fears. 
 
 To the terms of the lease and the misconduct 
 of tho lessees is duo a great deal of the condition 
 of affairs described in the United States' Case as 
 at present existing. Turning to United States 
 official records under these heads, it is found 
 that the statements in the text oC the United 
 States' Case are not borne out. 
 
 Treasury Agent Frank N. Wickor, on the 4ith 
 November, 18G9, wrote of tho Seal Islands :— 
 
 " Although the pvGsoiit Liiw, wliich iircjliibits tho 
 ' killini,' (Act of C^oiigress approveil 27th July, 18(38), is 
 ostonsiljly in force, it is notoriously silent in rej^'iud to tho 
 disposition of such skins ns mny liiivc been taken from 
 iuiininls in violntiim ot the I-iw. From ii personal inspec- 
 tion of the islands durinj; tho month of September, I 
 am convinced that over lOO.OiM) fur-seals have been killed 
 this season, and the skins sold to traders " 
 
 " Congressional 
 Record," »ol. ii. 
 Part III, 
 43rd Cong., 
 Ist Ses8.,p. 2737, 
 H. U., April 2, 
 J 874. 
 Appendix. 
 
 Report of Special 
 Agent, .1. S. Moore, 
 p. 198. Ex. Doc. 83, 
 44th Cong., 
 Ist Sess. 
 
 A prominent member of the UnitiMi States' 
 Senate charged in 1874, in his place in tho 
 Senate, that the Company took more seals than 
 the terms of the lease permitted. 
 
 V Concerning both the destruction of seals and 
 the I'buse of the natives, IMr. Moore at the outset, 
 in the Report from which a quotation has 
 already been made, advised the United States* 
 Government as follows : — 
 
 " It would nevertheless be in my jmlgmenl advisable if 
 a periodical examination of the fulfdment of the lease by 
 tho Company is made. 
 
 "A competent person, enjoying the contidence of tlio 
 Department, shoidd be sent to San Francisco once, at 
 least, in every three years, wh.,se duty should be to 
 thoroughly examine tlie books, correspondence, account of 
 sales, shipping documents, entries, and tax receipts of tho 
 Company, relating to the mnuher of seals killed, skins 
 shipped anil sold, on whieii tax was coUeeted, Theso 
 documents should be .^aiefull} verilied, and the result 
 reported to the Secretary of tin' Treasury. 
 
 "The regulation, I have no d( ub', will he found whole- 
 some both to the Treasury and the 'essees." 
 
 In another official RcpL'-t tho frauds on tho 
 part of the Company, possible and actual, arc 
 thus alluded to : — 
 
 F.llinU's Report " This is, that it would he vay desirable tliat the oflicers 
 
 on Alaska, 1874, ^f the United SUUes employcid on the I'ribyluff Islands 
 p. 236. 
 
should bo prohibitnl from receiviiif,' pay from, or rcndor- 
 iii" services fnr imy to, tho Comvany, wliow i.rdclically 
 they an', iikced th«e to watch. That this has occurred in 
 f-overal instances I am aware, and i-rohahly in some coses 
 without any improper intent on either side ; but it is evident 
 at onco that it opens a wide door for scandal, if not for 
 fraud." 
 
 The results of tho maladministration of the 
 Seal Islands ou the part oC the United States' 
 (iovernment and the practices of the lessees so 
 injurious to sual life are discussed in another 
 part of this Counter-Case. 
 
 Tho r{!cords of tho United States disclose an 
 equally unfortunate state of affair:, anccting the 
 natives and the interests of Alaska, which it is 
 
 said were made suhservient to the interests of the 
 
 Vm Companies. Respcctiug the natives in 1874, 
 
 Mr. Elliott reported :— 
 
 " Tlio Kussians loft these people willi their self-reliance Elliott's Report on 
 
 enfeebled, but their intelli-enoe and morals elevated to Al^^a, ) . 
 
 some extent above their .iri<;innl condition. We have done 
 
 notliin- to sustain them in this position, nor to cultivate 
 
 their .'self-reliance." 
 
 It is sucgcsted in the United States' Case that 
 the interests of the natives and of the Fur Com- 
 panies are identical. Mr. Elliott, however, was 
 of opinion that — 
 
 ■• the description of men who j^ain their liveliiiood as jbid. 
 fur trader.^ an;, witli rare exception.^ unlit to bo trusteil 
 with absolute power over unresisting natives, notwilli- 
 standin- the possible high character of the distant Heads 
 <if the Company who employ them." 
 
 The extent of tho Company's monopoly cover- ibid., p. 232. 
 iug tho whole fur trade of the Aleutian natives ^''^ Appendix, 
 is described l)y Mr. Elliott. 
 
 Mr. Elliott also reported as follows :— 
 
 " The manufacture of 4'.iasH, whicli they derived from Elliott's Ucport 
 the Kussians, althout,'h prohibited by the Regulations of °" jss!''*' '^"' 
 the Itussian Company, has become a universal ])ractice, 
 ;ind, jnincd to the absence of any elevating intluences, such 
 us seliools or the supei-vision ot agents deriving their 
 autliority from the (tovernment, is rapidly and surely 
 degrading the eharaeter and increasing the mortality of the 
 Aleuts." 
 
 And he added : — 
 
 "Tlierc are no grounds fur staling, nor is it my opinion. Ibid. 
 that tlie present Cumpanybas abu.sed its pipsition more 
 han any other wcjuUI do in the .same ease ; this, however, 
 

 Cioniral 0. O. 
 Howard's Report 
 oil Alaska, 
 44lh Coiio-., 
 Ist Si'ss. Kx. 
 Dor. 83. |). 162 
 Appendix. 
 
 is not tlm quCHtiun nt iasuc, liiil whether it is consiateut/ 
 witli llie liiiiiuiii' <il' till' Oiivoriiiiic'Mt aiiil with its duty 
 tiiwanl u iHMiplo wlio occui>y the iiusitiou of wiinls of tho 
 United Stiitc.i to Iciive them in a condition where tho 
 grosscst tyr.inny is possible, nnd wlierc gradual degradation 
 and iclaiwi' into Ijarlwrisni is ceitain." 
 
 A history ol' the creation and conduct of tho 
 Alaska Pur Company or first lessees of tho island'j 
 from the United States was laid before Congress 
 in 1«75. 
 
 It accompanied nn oirieial Keport of General 
 Howard. 
 
 In this histoiy coiTuption is charged in con- 
 nection with the lease from its inception to the 
 date of the comi)laint. 
 
 It sets out that llutchinson, Kohl, and Co 
 were the promoters of the lessees Company which 
 secured the lease, and (hat it was principally 
 through the assistance of the United States' 
 revenue officers that this was accomplished. 
 
 It is said : — 
 
 "Tlie most zealous revenue oHicials in the interest of 
 Hutcliinson, Kohl, and Co., were W. S. Dodge, Collector at 
 Sitka ; Saniucl Falconer, Acting Collector at Sitka (after- 
 wards in the employ of Hutchinson, Kold, and Co.) ; 
 Mr. II, II. McI)ityTe, Special Agent of the Treasury 
 IJepartment (now (Icncral Agent of Hutcliinson, Kold, and 
 Co., or tho Alaska Commercial Company) ; William Kapus, 
 Collector of Sitka (afterwards general agent of Hutchinson 
 Kohl, and Co., or the Ala.ska Commercial Company) : 
 General Miller, Collector of Sau Francisco (now President 
 of the Ala.ska Conuiiercial Company), and several others." 
 
 It is furthi^r remarked: — 
 
 "... It was natural that, as soon a.s the territory was 
 opened to the Americans, a number of Companies should 
 immediately disiiatcli their ships to these mines of wealth : 
 and in 18(18 we find Taylor and Benelel, Williams ami 
 Havens, Parrot and Co., Captain Morgan. Hutchinson, 
 Kohl, and Co., and others, having stations on these i.slaiuls, 
 and energetically engage.! iu taking skins." 
 
 It is also charged that — 
 
 " Hutchinson, Kohl, and Co. not mdy controlled the 
 revenue officers in Alaska and the Collector of the Port of 
 San Francisco (who is now the President of the Alaska 
 Connnercial (Joiupany), but that they iiaii also gained a 
 iireat iidlucuce at Wa.shington." 
 
 The opinions of the public press are re- 
 ferrcd to. 
 
 [854] c 
 
■ 
 
 Some of the quotations arc as under : — 
 
 " Qiwtatmis taken from the Pre^s ami General Froteits. 
 
 "Ill a long article headed ' Moiioimlizing Alaaki' iii 
 the ' Biillotiii,' 23rd Jaiuiarj-, 1869, wo liiid — 
 
 " ' Hutchinson, Kohl, and Co, Iiaviiig, liuwcvei, sccun-d 
 for tlionisi'lves, under a Keiniblican lioverniueut, all the 
 fjrivilev'cs enjoyed liy a (,'omiiany that was one of the 
 worst representatives of liussiau serfdom,' &e. 
 
 "Th.' 'Daily Herald," I'Oth .Tanuary. ISi'.O, in spakin.!,' 
 of Senator Cole's Jiill, says : — 
 
 " ' The Hill is utterly indet'ensibh'.' 
 
 " The • Daily Morning Call,' ISth Feliruary. 1800, hrins^s 
 an article, .leaded 'C.igantic Scheme to monopolize the 
 Fur-trade of Alaska,' from which we extract the fol- 
 lowing : — 
 
 '■ ' The Bill introduced liy Mi'. Cnle, in the Senate of the 
 United States, to pr<'Vent the extiTiiiination of fur-bearing 
 animals in Alaska, embodies a scheme for the wiiolesalt! 
 appropriation of all the resources of that n'ljion by a 
 liaudful of capitiilists, such as cainiot but excite p\iblic 
 .ndigiiation.' 
 
 " The ■ Bulletin,' 25th Kebrnary, says :— 
 
 "'Now, it is iM'tter that every fiir-lx'aring seal iniUaska 
 should be destroyed within tlie next twelvi' months than 
 that such a monopoly as this, projiosed in Ciuigress, should 
 I'ViT be iierpetuated in ilu> new territory.' 
 
 " Fioiu the- ' Glironicle,' 2'Jth January, 186"J, we fiuote : — 
 
 " ' The merchants of San Francisco, whose inten'sts 
 would suffer severely by the passage of the "Monupoly 
 ISill," have concluded to nienioriali/e Congress ag;iinst its 
 passage, and we l\ave been shown the document, which 
 Invars the signatures of many of our most prominent com- 
 mercial lirms.' 
 
 "Tlie ' Altii California,' .'iOtli .lanuary, 1869, after having 
 eommeiited upon llut(hiuson, Kohl, and Co.'s doings in 
 Alaska, continui's : — 
 
 " ' I!ut a IxiUler step iK'came necessary to protect them 
 against the ri'stless enterpiise of Amerium citizens, ami. 
 accordingly, they have applied to the Congress of tlie 
 United States for such a Charter.' 
 
 " And again, in the same article, we hnd — 
 
 "' A projiosition so nioustious Iuh nevet been mudc to 
 any Congress.' 
 
■ 
 
 " And again : — 
 
 ■"These wrctclietl AlciUs are liantk'il nvor, lioily ami 
 .soul, to the temler iiuTcics o( a single grasiiing linn, to 
 have and to IidU in a woise than itussian soil'dnni, liy the 
 legitimate siicee.ssors of the Imperial nionopi.ly, which has 
 jnst been imiteil out of its slroiigliuld of p<i\ver by the 
 (nonxinal) dawning ^f ll-imbliuanisni in the hitherto 
 benighted regions of the nortli.' " 
 
 The merchants of San Francisco petitioned 
 against the monopoly, and anotlior .Memorial to 
 President Grant set out that tlio lirni of ifntchin- 
 son, Kohl, and Co. Jmd been permitted to 
 control the trade of Alaska, the United States' 
 rcveniK! ofTiccrs, and lliat the Deputy Collector at 
 Sitka was iheir asj;:eat. They prayed that this 
 monopoly of trade he stopped, and recommended 
 itirect Government control of the Scnl Islands. 
 
 The ilcmorial was not heeded. 
 
 Tlic statement continued : — 
 
 '■ h was iiiolly lesolvcil llial tlic prineipnl wealth of 
 Alasica slionld lie liandi'd over to Hutchinson, Kohl, and Co., 
 and tliat tlic uni'orlnnate Ale\its of St. I'aid ami St. ticorge 
 .should be delivered into their hands; but as tins could 
 not be done without < 'ongress having regularly acted ujion 
 it, a plan was devi.'^ed whieh woidd enable Ilnldiin.son,. 
 Kohl, and Co. to enjoy in llu' inrantiuie all the privileges 
 whirh they eoveted." 
 
 "Thus, Hutchinson, Kohl, and C'o.'s ve.sscl wivs com- 
 missioned to do the (!ov(!rnmenl's work, and fleneral 
 stiller, who soon after resigned his collectorship to beiomc 
 President of the Alaska Commi'irial Company, was 
 intrusted with tlie .seleetioi; of two trustworthy inspectoix 
 t1f ( nurse, these orders were only a form ; the real inten- 
 tion was that llutehinson. Kohl, and Co. should take 
 immediate possession of S'.. Paul and >:l. Ooorfje, and when 
 Colonel Krank \V. AVieker, then CnUei tor nf Alaska, and 
 Mr. Vincent Colyer visited the i.slands during ISO'.I as 
 Special Agents of tb • (lovernment, they foinid that insteail 
 of 3,000 seals altoi^'et iier, ( ivi-r (!0,nOO seals liad bi'cn killed un 
 St. Paul alone, and wlun Ciilonel Wicker made a report of 
 the fact to tlie Ooirernmunl, he was imne'diately relieved. 
 The skins were, of cnuisi-, a)ipropriated by Hutchinson, 
 Kolil, and Co. 
 
 " Thf. Lasi: 
 
 "When the chi'iiees of Hutchinson, Kohl, and Co. of 
 getting pos.ses.sion of the fur-seal ishunls became almost ii 
 certainty, not only William> and Haven liad jeined them, 
 bill Colleeiur Miller (who is a special friend and favoni'te 
 of 'ieneiid (Irani, ami who had Ker\('d the Conipany . i 
 well and his country so hiully) resigned his CoUei toivhip o. 
 the Port of San iM-aneisco U> become Piisidenl of this 
 eidaigeil .(aicern. which now i ailed ii >i If 'The Alaska 
 Cohiniercial Ccrniiany' In the mcaiitinie. wl.ile tie 
 
8 
 
 lidibying at Wivsliiugtoii went brnvuly on, it had been 
 <laci(lecl that said islands were to 1)0 leased, but in order to 
 jjreserve at least an appe.iraiice of fairness, not to the 
 Ahi>ka Commercial Coniifany, but to the 1 ighest bidder; 
 but that this was nothing else but a blind to satisfy and 
 uiJiieaso the iJiiblic subsequent events have sudiciently 
 ])ro\en." 
 
 Tenders were invited. 
 
 The Treasury ilcmorandum on the last day 
 for bids is set out in the statement. 
 
 Clause 2 of this Memorandum reads : — 
 
 " It being aiijiarent from the language cniiiloyed in the 
 Act aforesaid that it was the intention of Congress to give 
 a jireference to the Alaska Conime'cial Company in the 
 award of their ecjntraets, I think it projier to state, before 
 the bids are opened, that the contract will bi^ awarded to 
 the said Company if their projiosals shall not. be ueu'e 
 than 10 per cent, below that of the highest bidder." 
 
 The statement adds : — 
 
 "The Secretary then proceeded to ojien the bid.s, of 
 whiih there were fimrteen. 
 
 "The lowest bid was that of tla^ Alaska Coramerctai 
 Company, amounting to O.'.OOK ddllavs rental a-year, and 
 the hi;4hest bid that of Louis (icpldstone. for a condjinaticjii 
 of various San Francisco (Irm-^ aimnniting to a yearly 
 rentd of 227,51)0 iU)llar.s. 
 
 " The ])rincipal jiarties in the cumliinatioii of linos for 
 whom (ioldstone had ma<le the bid.-; were the tiriu .'f 
 Taylor and Bendel, one of the most respectabh: and pro- 
 minent houses in San Francisco that had been engaged in 
 the Alaska trade since its opening, and having the 
 additional advantage over the Alaska CJonanercial Company 
 of prior (tcc-npalion. The imiuiries immediately instituted 
 by the Government in Washington, through the agency of 
 the Custom-house Collector Phelps, of ."^an Krnneisco, as to 
 their standing and responsibility, were of a character in 
 every way .-.ali-'factoiy. 
 
 '■ Xolwilhstanding lhis,;iml the great liisereijancy in the 
 bills, the .Maska Commercial Company entered various 
 protests, which were referred by .Mr. lioulwell to llie 
 Altone'V-Ceneral, then Mr. A. T. Akerman, who beard 
 ar,;un\ents on both sides, and, \in(h'r dale of the 2'.hh .Inly, 
 decided in favour of (loldstone and as.soclates. 
 
 ' .Mler tlie delivery of Mr. Akermans ojiinion, it w.is 
 .vnvulicre taken bu' gnuited til' lea.si' would lie awarded 
 |o ('.(jldstone. Xo'uody hud any (haibt of it, All obstacles 
 bad bieii rciiii.ved, and all protests done away with. 
 
 "(In the ^Otli July, Mr. ( iold.stone coii.swiucntly eaUed 
 at the Treasury (IHice for ihc lease, but to his utter con- 
 stiriiiitioii and asloiiishna'iit he was informed that the 
 lea^" iiad been awanled to the Alaska Commercial Com- 
 piny '111 the ti^rnis of hi.s own ((ioULstom^'sj bid. The 
 communication was mudo by Acting Scirelary William A. 
 
Richardson, whoso face, in giving the infonuatiun, was 
 crinisonud with shame. Mr. Boutwell had secretly h)ft i'or 
 Mas.sacliubutts." 
 
 The statement contained also a Petition from 
 the Aleuts. 
 
 It alleged that— 
 
 " wlien tlif I'lir-seal i.slamls hiul been about a year in 
 pii.s.sessiou of tlie Ahiska Ccmniieriial Coiiiiiaiiy, lliere 
 arrived in San Kranei.'-Cd a native of the Island of 
 St. Georye, by the name of Peter Kupi, who brou;^ht tn 
 Agapiuh Ilonsharenki', editor of the Alaska ' Herald,' a 
 paper jiubli.shed in San Kraniiso, a I'etition, written in 
 the Knssiiui language, whiili liad lieen Irawn up bv die 
 same Aleuts who oneo before appealed to the C'han.bcr of 
 Commerce, and which had lieen .si;.'nc'd by all the Itv'.ing 
 men of the ."^aid ishinds. ' 
 
 The statement continued: — 
 
 "It was now evident beyond all doulit that altlaaigh the 
 General (lovernnient wa.-^ fully aaiuainted with every 
 detail of this di.sgraci'I'ul alfair, nd redre.ss could hi' obtain^'d 
 at WashingliMi ; still, une more elliirt was made by the 
 indignant citizens of San Francisco, and in February 1*^72 
 the Senate of the State of California was memorialized 
 and implored to u.se its influence with the Government of 
 the United States in behalf of this cause. We give Iicre 
 the Memorial :— 
 
 " ' Memorial to the HimoHrchlt tin iknaU and House of 
 lieprrsentnlii-es of Hie Stati of California, 
 "The Memorial of the Tudersigned. citizens of the 
 United States and merchants and traders of the City of 
 San P'rancisco, most respecttnlly represents,' ..." 
 
 Aud after referring to the monopoly of the 
 Company, it goes on to charge : — 
 
 " And whereas thi^ Kxecutive branch of the General 
 Government, through its oflicei's and agent thereto 
 promi>ted by like, undue inlhiences and corrupt practices 
 and means, has la:en led to sustiiin the said monopoly in 
 the illegal ('xerci.se of its uncon.stitutional privileges ami 
 IX)Wers. in that: 
 
 " It has surrendered itself, through its revenue oflicers 
 in Alaska, to the control of this monopoly ; 
 
 '■ It has permitti'd Kedeial otlicers to act as agents of 
 the said monopoly ; 
 
 " It has permitteil Federal olliccrs to become .stock 
 holders in said monopoly." 
 
 Comments of the press, to the same effect, are 
 then given. 
 
 The statement gives the following I'rom a higji 
 authority, a distingui.shed ofUeer of the United 
 States' army, General .lellerson C. iJavis, eom- 
 [854] u 
 
10 
 
 manding the Department of Alaska, who re- 
 ported : — 
 
 "Since the ilocliiration of Congress, at its last session, of 
 St. Paul and St. f Jeorge Islands as spi'cial rosovvations of 
 tho Government, they have been under the control of 
 officers of the revenue service, sent there for the iiuri)Oso 
 of executinj; the laws jirohihiting the landing at or killing 
 of fur-.seals u])on tlieni. During my ollicial visit there, io 
 the beginning nf the jjresent summer, and while engaged 
 in investigating the affairs of tho natives, as well as tho 
 manner in which tlie troops had [lerfurmed their duties, I 
 learned that, under one pretext and anotlicr, |irivileged 
 parties had been permitted to land and remain on tho30 
 reservations, and had been allowed to kill ihc animals at 
 pleasure. During last summer at least 85,000 .seals wei-e 
 killed on the two islands; prcibably nuire tlian that 
 number. The pretext under wldch this was antlujrized 
 was that of enabling tlie natives to subsist theni.selves 
 without (>xpeuse to the Government. In an econcaaical 
 point of view, tliis would seem iiuite right ; but the facts 
 are that the natives are cooped up on these islands, where 
 tliey are eompcdled to work fiu' tho.se iirivate parties or 
 stai"ve ; in other words, //(/// air to-ilay in n complete state 
 nf skircri/. Competitimi in trade has been universally 
 s.stalilished, and it is nnw i>relty well umlerstooil liy the 
 natives and traders throughout the country : wherever the 
 former can paddle his canoe, or the latt(U' penetrate with 
 his goods, such is the ease. These isolated Islands of 
 St. Paul and Si. (leorije, in liehrimj Sin, the riclo.it posses- 
 siuiis ill natural iiraltli,considrTini/ their small area on the 
 continent, form the only exceptions. Tlie natives an; 
 peaceful, honest, and cajjable of tran.sacting orilinarv 
 business ipiito well, and would doubtless improve them- 
 selves if they ha'l a fair chance ; hut their present complete 
 etuihivcment nvd rMierij, hy an laisrriqmloKS rin// of 
 speculators, will ever pn rent such proijre.HS." 
 
 General Howard in his Report, referring to 
 this history, said : — 
 
 ' (If course, I have not the means of jiidging of tho 
 truth or falsity of most of the statements therein con- 
 tained; but do believe it to be a mistake, and a dangerous 
 precedent, im the part of our tioverinnent, to give into the 
 hands of any Company, however benevolent in its inten- 
 tions, so vast a monopoly. The subject conies to me 
 directly in the performance of ray military duty in tho 
 execution of laws and instructions concerning ardent 
 ■spirits, tho sale of arms to Indians, and nther police 
 mea.sures." 
 
 Report of Brevpt 
 Major-General 
 Commanding, 
 Department, 
 Alasltn, to Secre- 
 tary of War, 
 August 20, 1870. 
 
 General Howard's 
 Report on Alaika, 
 Ex. Doc. S3, p. ISO, 
 44th Cong., 
 I St Sesi. 
 
 The following, however, is ironi evidence taken 
 on some of the charges hel'ore a Congressional 
 Committee in 1876. 
 
 The investigation was, it appears, not as 
 thorough and impartial as might have heen 
 
11 
 
 expected, buu many of the material facts were 
 established : — 
 
 " Fiom tcsiivumy of Ocoryc P, Ihrie. 
 
 44th Cong., "Q- I'lease stiito yoxir resWenc ' lunl jioaitiou I — A. I was 
 
 lstSei9.,II. Ilcport, fiirmcrly a raynmster in the Unite 1 States' urmv, and am 
 No. 623, p. 86. ... . ,. „ , .. 
 
 now le.suling m New \cirk city. 
 
 "Q. Duriui; lln' tinie that you wen' in tin' uiilitaiy 
 .service \vere you at any time stationed on the raeific 
 <:oa.st !—A. Ye.s, .Sir ; in the latter part ol' is'GO and ■greater 
 part 1,1' 1870 I was stationed in .Sitka, Ala.ska, a Paymaster 
 for llie jiurpose of payinj; United Slates' troo]is in that 
 domain. . . . 
 
 • • » » • 
 
 Ibid, p. 87. "Tlie lUiVrtm.— Tlio hid of Mr. (!ohlston(! I'or the lease 
 
 of tlie islands is liOli.-'illi) dollars ]ier annuin for tho 
 privilege of killing not to exceu.l lnO.OHl) male pups , 
 5."i,00l) dollars for the rental of the island.s ; that makes a 
 
 Ibid. sum total of ;?17,.'>00 dollars, lie also proposed t<i [lay 
 
 .O.'i I ents |"'r gallon for the seal oil that he may take IVom 
 those fur-seals. Those Aleuts who kill thoso I'lir-scals t(ild 
 me, ihrouiih th.' interpreter, that llicy wcadd yield iVom 
 1 to 3 gallons ]icr seal. That the iiumlx^- of gallons is not 
 tixi'd in this hid of Mr. (loldsliuie; hut it is to he [ as- 
 sumed that when lu^ oilers 5."i eents per galhai for that oil 
 he proposes to take some. nen(?e their hid is ol7,5(lt) 
 dollars per annum, plus oo eents per uallon tor every 
 gallon of fur-seal oil that he takes. They were prepared 
 to enter into that eontracl. Their hid is on record, 
 llenee, so far as the hids are coneenied, it strikes me that 
 that offer of Mr. Goldstone is hetter than the award of 
 the contract to the presiiit Alaska Commercial Com- 
 pany, . . . 
 
 Ibid., p. 88. 
 
 "A. There was not snlllcient time given helween the 
 advertisement for proposals and the opening of the same. 
 The advertisement was the .Sth July, 1S7U. The hids 
 were to he opened on the 2(lth July, 1870, giving hut 
 twelve days to hear froui the citizens of the United States, 
 or any parties interested in that line of business directly 
 or indirectly, tcj make proposals. It was impossihle, i'or 
 instance, to reach Sitka in twelve days; you could not 
 reach San Francisco hy letter and gst an answer by letter 
 in twelve <lays. You cannot do it in less than fourteen 
 to-day. You could only reach San Francisco and Port- 
 land, Oregon, where there are men engaged in this fur 
 husiness, in fourteen or twenty days. 
 
 " Q. Then do we underitand that, in ycair judgment, tho 
 lea.ie wa.se.xe'Uted too soon after the passage of the law? — 
 A. Kntirely too soon, Sir. It was unjust. It was taking 
 snap action on parlies wlm li id a right to make projiosid.s 
 or bids. 
 
 " Q. Do you know of any panics that were prepared to 
 make otl'ers that did not hid ' — A. Yes, Sir. Tlii! same 
 parties that made that |a-oposal -^ix najiiths before the 
 advertisement i'oi those bids were ia\'i'areil to put in a 
 proiK).sal. 
 

 12 
 
 " Q. Of your own knowlodgo, can ynii nay tliat tlicy would 
 luivu mndo li Ir.'ttor ofi'oi' than was made ! — A. I certainly 
 do; ])03itively, Sir: lioiii;,' one of tlic iwirtic:* intrrestwl. 
 We woru ill Sitkii, Aiaslca, antl could not possildy loiii- 
 inunicatc with tho Onvornineiit uluirt of forty or sixty days, 
 and yet liut twolvi- days wury ^'iviMi by tlic Soorotaiy of 
 tlu: Treasury for tliu adviTti^inunt, the rucciiit, and 
 tln^ opening of tlie liid.-i . . ." 
 
 The Governor <if Alaska iu ISST coulirins 
 lari?cly many of tlio jircdictions niid allc^jjations 
 set out iu 1S75 by tlu; mtMiiorialists on tlic 
 I'acilic coast. 
 
 His Kopovt is a vehement clcmiiu'iation of the 
 system maintained by tlie Federal Government, 
 and now soiiijbt to be viudieated in tlie Case of 
 tlie United States submitted to this Tribimal. 
 
 The Governor reports as follows : — 
 
 " . . . . Tliu fur trade of Alaska is ]aiutiially nioiio|Milizeil Ke|iort of ihf 
 
 l.v Ihc Alaska Coinniereial Conii.any, a non-resideiil Governorof Alaska, 
 
 •' 111, ■ , !'• -"i Ui"'''" 
 
 Coi'i re nation Clctlifd by Uw (invernniciil with ;i ,StaleM' Cdiigrca- 
 
 iaono|.uly of tlic fur-seal trade, by wliieli it has prolitcd to sioniU Ui'|)ort* 
 
 ,. .„. .. , . ,., ., relotin" 111 Alinkn, ' 
 
 Ihc c'xtciit III many luillioii?, it lias, octopus-liko, thrown Washinirton I88U. 
 
 lail ils great tcnaclcs and gathered to itself .ibiait all there 
 
 is of value m the fur trade of the whoh' territory. It has 
 
 by tlie power of ils groat wealth driven away all 
 
 eonipctitioii, and reduced the native population wherever 
 
 its operations are not supervised by (iovernnient nfliciuls 
 
 lo a coiiditicaiof helpless dependeme, if not one of absolute 
 
 and abject slavery. Ibid., p. 32 
 
 • «r * « 
 
 "While all this and much laoro is true toiiceriiiiig ils 
 tieatnient ol' the native people, instances are not lacking 
 where it has boycotted and driven away from the islands 
 (iovernnient olVieials who, intent upon the honest and faith- 
 ful discharge of (heir dutic-s, liave incurred tlic displeasuie ' 
 or refused to do the biilding of its agents. In fact, it 
 (lossesses the power to compel compliance with its every 
 eviction, and wherever it has obtained a foothold neither 
 white man nor native can do more than eke out a ini.ser- 
 uble existence, save by ils sufferance. 
 
 • * • * 
 
 '•I have positive information of llagrant viol.itions of 
 the law and executive orders in relation to the importation 
 and sale of breech-loading fire-arms by its ageiit.r ; its 
 
 oppression and rohliery of the natives i~ notorious. 
 
 * « * « 
 
 " If it cannot legally be rescinded, the lease to, and 
 contract with, tiiis Company ought not lo be renewed." 
 
 Entirely opposed to tht? statement now advanced 
 by the Cas(> of tho United States, the Governor 
 of Alaska concludes ' ' 'leport as follows : — 
 
 ". . . . It is not, ay opinion, ucces.saiy to the lyd., p. 33. 
 
 preservation of seal life or the seal-fur industry that the 
 
13 
 
 islands ou which the rcxikerius are located should bu leasuil 
 111 liny ('cirpomtioii nr iiiclividual, hut it' it ho hold that 1 
 am wi.mj; in that runard, tliiii I do nut heaitaU- to avi'i 
 that it would hii huttcr for Aliwkn, hotter for the Ooveni- 
 niMiit, mill, idKivc nil, (m hclt.'r for the rMshwed Aleuts, 
 that eveiy fur-seal in Altiskan waters slioidd he externiiuated 
 ul one fell swoop, than that sueh a blij;litint,' uiuiioi)uly 
 should 1)1' iieriieluiited." 
 
 50th C;»g., This Report, was transmitted by the Secretary 
 
 Ex Doc' No^iW. of ^I'l" Interior t.. the J louse of Representatives, 
 
 and on the tth ^lay, IsyK, was referred to the 
 
 Committee of Mcrehant Marine and Fislieries. 
 This Report is introdueed by the following 
 
 explanation to tlie SpoaktT of tho House of 
 
 Representatives : — 
 
 "Sir, 
 
 "Section 5 of tlie Acl of the ITlh May, 1S84, entitled, 
 • An Act to create n Civil (iovernnient for Alaska,' pro- 
 
 vides : — 
 
 '"The (iiivernor aiilioiiited iiiider the provisions nf this 
 Act shall lioni time to time imiuire inU. the operations of 
 the Alaska Seal ami I-ur Company, and shall annually 
 report to Congress the result of said in<iuirles, and any 
 and all viohitions hy said Company of the ayreement 
 existing between the United States and said Company.' " 
 
 Report of the 
 Governor of 
 Alaska, p. 8. 
 
 Accompanyin!,' the Report is a deposition of 
 Isaac Anderson, Deputy itarshal of the United 
 States at Ounalaska, and formerly in the employ 
 of the Company. 
 
 The following statements are made by 
 Mr. Anderson : — 
 
 ■■.... Atliant turther deposes and says that it is true 
 of his own knowledge that lor years it has been the 
 piiictiee to kill from 10,000 to 15,000 fur-senl imps every 
 season <m their pa.sa.ue from the islands to the hays and 
 waters about Ounalaska Island, with breech-loading tire- 
 arms supplied by the Company's agent who eneourag.^ 
 sueli kdling, and pays SO cents per skin for each seal-skin 
 taken in violation of the law. That said agent also fits 
 out and sends ev.-ry year hunting parties equipped with 
 tlK. breech-loading fire-arms, and the past season a vessel 
 so equipped for the otter hunting grounds during the 
 summer season in violation of the laws of the I'nited 
 States and lleguhitions of the Treasury Department. 
 
 •■ That !»■ has personal knowledge that said Connnissionev 
 Johnston sold a breeeli-loading rille to a native, one Ivan 
 Diakonoff, the ^Ctli April, 1887, in express violation of 
 the orders of the Secretary of the Treasury and of the 
 C.overnor of the territory, which instructions bad been 
 f.hown to said Connnissioner by this alliant ; that said 
 Connnissioner treated said orders of the Governor of 
 t854J " 
 


14 
 
 Gi)»onior of 
 Alatlia, |i. 6. 
 
 Aliiska and tlio Secretary of the Treasury with coiiteni|>t, 
 ami iieriiiittcil saiil Itiakonoll' m take the saiil <;uii on 
 lidaril Ihi- schooner 'Matlie TuniLM',' lielonirm^ to the 
 Ahiska Ciiiiiinercial ('orn|iany, aii.l prniied lo tlie well- 
 knuwii litter hunting; ^Mnuils. 
 
 ■ neponent further si.y.s that when certain Vl■s•lel^ were Report of tli» 
 wizeil in .Inly ami Au;,'ust 18S(1, mil were l>riiu;,'hl 
 DunaliLska liy the Uniled Slates' n u'nue-eutti'r ' t'orwin,' 
 saiti si'l/mivs weru scpamteil, Uh- >i'al-skin» heinj; taken 
 I'rnni the vessels and ileposiled in the waruliouse oi' the 
 Alaska Coniniercial (.'(inipany, le-rninally in tliu custody of 
 this alliani, hut actually in th.i' pussession of the Alaska 
 Coniiiiirei il Conipany; that they weiv sloroil in an 
 inclosed Hjiace in the warehouse of siiid Company, jimporly 
 sealed with tape and wa\ ; that when this nlhant received 
 an order from tie- fniled Slati's' Marshal at Sitka, datwl 
 the l!:;rd April, 1S,><7, to sliip the skins, 2.l»Ki; in Muniher, 
 111 the care nf the I'nili'd States' Marshal al oan 
 ■''raiiciseo, California, tliis altlant a|iplieil l<> ihe said 
 Agenl TS'euiuaii fur periuissinii to sliip the skins mi the 
 Company'' steamer ' Doia.' and reipiestvd to he informeil 
 when lie would Ik' in readine>s to ivn^ive them nu hoanl, 
 l<i wliieh reiinesl said Xcuiiittii imicnled ; and that suhso- 
 i|Uently. ami to itDiant's surprise, on Koin^' to the warehouse, 
 lie fiiinid dial till' .seals, suveiiteen ill nuinher, jn-oteelini; 
 tlie fni-gcal skins, Imd heeii liniken, and alHnil mie-hulf uf 
 the seal-skins packed ill hariels ; and tliat when Im' 
 remonstrated at sm li r(aidiict, and atleiiipled tu |.'ive 
 instructions as tu lln' marking of tlie pacl-,a>;es for their 
 proper ideiililicalinn, he was ;iriis-^ly ilisiilteii ly said. 
 N'euinin's enii)liiyc's, and luld thai alliaut was meddliiig 
 III matters Ilia: ilid mil conci^rn liiiii : llial .said Cmii- 
 iiii-siiiiier .loliiistiiu, will! was actinu' in iiincert with and 
 iimlir the Intliieiice of ^aid .Veiimaii, insuleiitly deiiiaiideil 
 1 epics of tlie instructions fnini llie I'niled States' Marshal 
 which alliaut refused to make, hut ulferi'd In let tlieiii 
 read ihu instriictiona, and to yive wrilleii re<|ue8t, as an 
 Hlllier iif the ruit.sl .Stales, for llie shipment of llii' i-kiiis; 
 th.it u]iiiii this I'efii.sal Cuiiiniissiiim r .lulinstnn vinleiitly 
 assaulted alliaut. .lided liy said Neiiman and oiii' nf lii.s 
 assistaiits. 
 
 • llepmieiit I'm I her .siiy^ ihiil lie lielievi's that liie hre.ik- 
 ine of llie said seals which priitected the iii<|i..surp 
 I iiiitainin^; the Ini -skins, and di'fyin;,' the aiitliorily n{ ilns 
 alliaut, was fm ilie purpose ol heiiii^ eimhleil t" iiiereaso 
 ilie eX)Mi|ise of hallillin.' the pliipeilv umler .seizure and of 
 lani)ieiiii;,' with llie sane' Thai when alllunl receipled lur 
 till' siiid seal-skiiis ill ISIJIi. llieie Were niily lifteeii pup- 
 skins in the wlmli' niimlier of 2.ltHi) skins under seizure 
 and 'hat lie is infornierl and Udieves thul i»'twe(U) sixty 
 .iiid ei;,dil) pup-skins, 111 inleriiir tirade and wurthless. were 
 fiMind umiin;; llie ."i7" fur-seal .skins .sold at San l-'ranci.sco 
 liy the I'liited Slates' Marsh il in llif iiicnlh nf Novemlicr 
 IS87, whicli sulislilulion eilher delnnided the cliiimanis ef 
 the skins or the (loveriinieni nf ihi- rnited .Stnl,os 
 
 ■' DeiKinenl further .say- lliat durinx the pasi lisliing 
 seu.HiUi lifteeii '.tiisels W( n seiiei'd iii lieliriii^ .Sea hhiI 
 
15 
 
 tnki'ii t(i Ouiialaska, hiiviii^' iilw>ut 12,(i0(t riir-v.il skins on 
 lioanl, wliiuli wore tnkcii ci it ami stnrri'i in tlii' ■Haivhousu 
 111 tli(! Aliiskii ('(iiiiiiiiTrial ('liiniiaiiywitliiiiil aiiygonil reason 
 tlicrfl'iir. That ile|«iMcat iirnjinsc! (u liavr tlir saiil skins 
 |)liiiT(l in till' fiovrnuiiiMil warilnnisc. wlicri' tlu'V cuiilil Ijo 
 IMoiicrly Ijamlli'il, lauli rti.i, mul inrnl fur. Init allianl's 
 sujiui'StjiUL^ «i'rr iilijirli'il tu. 
 
 " Alliaiil I'urtliiT rciircsfnts lliat lie v.ns ]iri'Ycnlt'il from 
 I oiintiii;^ till- saiil swil-skins lakrn fnitn saiil vessols, or of 
 Iiavin>^ anytliing to say or lii witli ri'^'anl to ilifir mutmiy, 
 and tliat when lie atteiniiteil to ilo s.i li.' was insulteil, ami 
 on a pri'vioiis oeiasiuu om- of the ciiiiil'iy.-- nf llie .-aid 
 Nounian di'evv a revolver iiiion this aniaiil. 
 
 HejKirt of tlip 
 Governor of 
 .Aliuk.n, |i. 7. 
 
 " Deponent I'mtlier s.iys he vesji.;iieil hi-i oliice .if L'liitud 
 States' l)e]iuly .Marslial in eonse |iienee ol' heiug nbstriictoil 
 in his ollliial iliny hy the ayent nf 'je Alaska < 'uninierrial 
 Company and the I'nited StiUes' Coniniis-iiiiner. and that 
 he LOiiId nut ail liy reason of jiuoli iuterfeiince. 
 
 " Alliaiit further- deelaies anil says that laree ijuantities 
 of vilhiiiiou-. extrai ts, eonipoiinded of ali ohul and vile >ulj- 
 stoni'os, anil marked ' May liuin,' ' ■! ■!. Miak's Kxiraci,' lic, 
 are shipped tu Onnalaska oii v(nsu1s owned oy the Alaska 
 fJomiMiii ial (umpaiiy, and .■*old or niveii to the natives for 
 the pmpiise of inloxieutiiii,' tlnni mI eiitaiii tinii s wliei: the 
 Coiiipaiiy's u'.;ents \\i,-li to iheal and ilel'iand llie Ininlers 
 nut of their >eal- .uid ottei—kiiK and i.iln-t articles of 
 trallie ; ihat said drinks are landed at •hiiiiila.ska by 
 pormiHsion of the iJi'puly ('olleil^u of (iistonn tlierea!, 
 and there dispixed of or sliipprd t.. ulliir .-lations or like 
 pnriHwi.'H. 
 
 "That lieer, | orter, «lii.-Uey. wiius.and nlher linuii- aru 
 phlitifiil at Wiinalaska, wliieli is often i^iven to natives, 
 and ill smne ins'.ann.'s it hius licen suld )iy the liisriol, and 
 thai the most indesrrih.ihle and wivtehed e.vhihilions if 
 human depravity an- pn.dueed by a vile drink ealled 
 'nua-ss,' manidaetured intensively all ii\ei the district, and 
 in some in.stanees it i- made at Oiindask.i at the in-li^'H- 
 tion and I'muiivanee of said Conipany's a;jent. and dealt 
 out to the natives at said agent's olliee. 
 
 " Alliant further says that it is a eonimiui pnwtia- 
 .iiiionn the (iimpany's a;.,'eiits to <ell or loan luenh-loailiiij,' 
 tire-arms to the natives, well kiiiwinj,! thai said arms are 
 tu he u.sed ill violalii'ii uf law, ami intruding, lh,il they 
 shall he >.i ii-ed, .iiid lli.il tlieir ii-f iir value is p,iiil for in 
 seal, ottei. or other .--kins, and that alhant kiiuvvs that 
 ii-arly every native or white hunter in Ahiska lias one or 
 more hneili-loadilif^ lilies ihtained from the Coui|itny's 
 agents, vihnh liny use eiiiiiely for lunitiiii;: that -aid 
 Company has .s,, nianayed its dealings with the naliv.-> a.s 
 to have them all, or nearly all. if the natives imlel led In 
 the Company ; that in -miie ra.ses lUdits of imtivu^ uWeil 
 to olliors all- pun liaseil liy .--.liil Coii.pauy . that ,siiid ilnhfs 
 are transmitted I'liiin I'alher to suii s ' li'tiu as inv uienihei 
 
 of the lainilv remain 
 
 -Msli'lle 
 
 111 .lie hi-ld ov. I- tin ni 
 
 for till" Jiiirpose of I'lillliliii-^ lie C 
 coiitnil and inllueiii i- tliein. 
 
 nil] ail) 
 
 'Uls to helter 
 
16 
 
 "Afliniit rnrtlicr says tlmt it, is within his kn(iwledj,'o 
 that vassalii;!', (Icmoraliziitinn, niid ciiiiie iiiv incrcnsitix 
 iiiuoii^ thi' imtivcs at the CiJiii|iany's staliuiis in tin- 
 Ah'U'ian grou]) of isliimln, wlicri' the Coiiiiiaiiy had iiiiilia- 
 luiU a cnntml ; that the natives are rapidly ilyiii.i; off fnim 
 ihiiukemu'ss and cDiiseiiui'iit ex]Mwur(' ; that all rivalry in 
 Itadi' has hi'i'ii broken up hy forru <iv by purchase, whcru 
 rival iutrrc'sts aic ton yrcat Id be dealt with in snrli 
 iniinirr; tliat said ajjent may, by impoverishing and 
 oppressini; the natives, derive lari,'e profits in pro< nrinj! 
 Ibeir jiellries I'.ir insi^nilieant snms, or in exelian},'!' lor 
 other comnaKlitic^ at i'Xtrava;;aiilly hi;,'li prii es, and that 
 tie' Time of ilisli;;urin^ tlie coin i>f the Unitnl Stales has 
 b en resorted to in their dealiniis witli natives In break u)) 
 <(jni)iitition ill trade." 
 
 ! n ji further Bcport l)y tlio Governor of Aifisku, 
 dated thu lOtli Dewinlun-, 188S it is stated :— 
 
 ' . . . Xotwithstandini.' llie 'h-jpIv' c,f this Cmupuny 50th Conir.,_ 
 
 iivei- (lie siuiiatiuc oj ils I'residelit, in wliieh (he c har'^'s f" ' ^"" ' '*,', ,,, 
 
 Doc 74, p|i- -'-!•) 
 made in my la-l annual Iteporl a<;ainst il are so positively 
 
 dinied. I now and here reiterate every one of those 
 
 eliarjis, tlioiijili I know lull Hell that an invesligatlcui 
 
 mad'' by a I'oinniitlee of ("on;,'n'ss holding' its sessions in 
 
 Wa liiii;;ton, and eallinj; as witnesses only those who have 
 
 been ivcipit'iits of the Company's favours, is not likely to 
 
 arrivi- at any just eonelusion as to their truth or bilsity I 
 
 tan only say that eavb and eveiy stateineiil I have made 
 
 coneernin^' the o]ierati(ins of this Company is suseejitible of 
 
 tie- eh irest and most tonvimin^; proof, but the evidiMiee 
 
 will not be found lying around loosi- in the eilii- of 
 
 VVa-hiiigl'iii and San rianeiseo ; it must lie siaif^ht for 
 
 anion:.; tlir | pie who have siill'ered fnini its oppressions 
 
 rather than in iIm' pfrsiai" of th.j.sr wIk. have leel live 
 
 tinnsptirtulion i>ii its ships, and been wineil and diiiitl at 
 
 the tables of ils ollieers and agcnits, 
 
 r fc • • 
 
 '■ Jt has violated thi- law and r.\iM iitivi' orders in rela- 
 lioii to the iniportaljoii and ale of biceeli-loadillo tiiv- 
 arms. At every Siatleniriil visited by nil' I baind the 
 Ali'Ut.i in possi'sdon of Wim heslii lilbs, anil at most 
 of ilie 'plaees they eandidly admitted having pnreliased 
 lliem from the Company's agi'iils. 
 
 • • • • 
 
 ■ I do not think it «ill be elaimecl that the exernlive 
 oi-.li 1 of Ihe '.lib ScplililU I. 18T<I, aiitlioiiziil the salr of 
 bi '' rli.lo.'diiig lire.iiiiiis to the natives oj' St. I'aul anil 
 St. liroi.;!' Islands, thiaigh ii ilid permit their im|Kirtatioii 
 b\ till' t'ompany. Yet. I imuid that nmny ol those natives 
 liai I'liri ha.sed sin li ^iiiis liooi tin Cuaipa'iy and when il 
 Oonidaska, on my \\\iy homi'. I was wait' d on by a dele- 
 ^utii'ii ti'om tliu.s<' islands, who i iiiiiplaiin d that tlir guns 
 thry b.id lioii;;ht and p.iiil Im liiid Invn taken iii'iii llieln 
 liy ill' (iovenmu'iit A;;iia.s Kilhei I aiu very nnii b luis- 
 tnkeii a> t" till purport and nn'iiiiiii;; of the sevi-nJ 
 cxuculivf oixlurs tli.il lia\e been proiiiul>{iitvd eontcrnnig 
 
17 
 
 the iiuportiitiuii and .siilc of breoch-lomliiin (irc-iinii.-., or elsi; 
 thosu orders hiivf Ijci.'ii pi'isistt'iitly mid wholly ifjiiortsl by 
 tliis ('iiiii|iiiny, soiiii- of wliiiMc iigfiits iiiiikc im aecvil ni ihr 
 \'tuX thai lliuy liiivi' »"ld .smh alius to the im'.ivfs. 
 
 " It lias lioycottfd niul driven away from the i.«huids at 
 h'asl one Goveriinieiit ollioial wlio liad ineurred tlie dis- 
 lileasiiie and refused to (hi the liicldin^r if its ajieiits, and 
 the f;iet WHS linuwii t<i its ['resident when lie ajilieiided his 
 signiitme tti tiie denial nf that and other elial>;e.s. 
 • • • • 
 
 "Till" iiieinlieis c.f till' House C'oiiiiiiittee on the terri- 
 tories in the Kinty-ninth ('i)ii^;n.ss do not reiiniii' any ja-dof 
 <if the tnitli of till- rliarj,'e tlia'. ' its paid nj^ents and 
 lohhyists ail' kejil at the natiiaiid ( apital In uppose any and 
 every elloit tfi proiimti the welfare of Alaska ' throuyli 
 ne<'essRi'y le;.;islntiiir. ; the presence of .siieh a l.jl'hyist 
 hefiiie that ('uininittee. anil his iidiiii.-sion of the dtleTwise 
 Wrll-kiiiiwn I'liel thai he is paid a iv^jular -al.iry I'V the 
 Coniiiaiiy, though he lia^ imt been in Alaska fur a dozen 
 years, the fait tli.it he ap]ieaiisl before that and ]iieviiFiis 
 Coiiiniittees opposite.; niiieh-iieeded h';,'islatiiiii fiii Alaska, 
 is in itself siitliiieiit e\ idem e of the truth of the ehargc. 
 VVIiy else should llir (.'uiiipany need the services of 
 till: man in \Vii.sliinL;tiiii dnrinv; every >essiiin of Cou- 
 
 KTC.ss I 
 
 • • • • 
 
 "Sii far fiiini having been actuated by any personal 
 feelinj;, I wish to say that if tliu syateni of leasing the Seal 
 Nlaiids, withiait lestrieliou as to trade in other iiarts of lln- 
 leiTit<ay, is to be lontiiiued, very lillle in tin- way of reforin 
 is likely to be neeomplishetl by dispossessing the p.'.'sent 
 lussi'os in favour of some other individual or t'orjuiratinn. 
 It i» the system, or prinei]ile, that most inoriUs condem- 
 iiiitiiiii, .Viiy cither ( 'orponiliiai jjianted the same exelusivi- 
 privile:,;e^ wiiuld iialurally stiivi' to make I he most of the 
 I ipportunilies presented, and 1 laii see noprospeetivogix«l to 
 .oenie til the territory thmuui. the dispossession of one 
 mciiiiipoly merely lo make place for aiiotlier, and possibly 
 woiNe one. 
 
 . • • • 
 
 • 111 m\ la-i .\iinual Ijepurt. I submitted very brielly my 
 views as to the poliiy whiih should, in my o|iiiiioii. be 
 .idopted by the ("loveinmeiil in lejjaid to the fnr-sial in- 
 du.stry A visit 111 the lonki-rio lia"; imt seived lo elianjjr 
 111 iiifHlifv those view-. I can sic no ;,'ond iiMsiHi why the 
 present mmioiKily of the business may not K' abolished, not 
 only without loss to the (ioverniiient, but tn its very j,'real 
 ad\anta);e su far as llie atuiainl nf -eveniie In lie derived is 
 eoiieerned. The pnseiil system uf lariiiin;..; mil the 
 loiikiries is nut mily ubiioxiiuis to every sense nf rijjlit and 
 justice, but,. IS 1 think 1 have shciwn, is in a very i;nat 
 di-'ive ininiiral to the best inteivsts of llu' lerriloiy." 
 
 im] 
 
18 
 
 APPENUIX. 
 
 A 3ii''.'ostiiin has l.ci'ii iiiiulc to tliis n.'p;iitmriit in 41it Conif., 
 
 •^^ 1111,1 2nd Sean., Ex. Doc^ 
 
 Viirimis fiums tlint lln' (iuvmimt'iil slmuld K'asr llusi' ^^^ jqj 
 
 isliiiiils lor 11 long period c,r lime to a CoiniMitiy or linn lor 
 iin Miimml sum of money, upon llio idmlition tl'.a provision 
 sliouM !"• niiicic for tlic snlisisli'iicc and I'dnriition ol' llic 
 nativi's, anil that tho fisliorii's thoniii'lvcs sliouhl hv ]ir«- 
 siirvi'd I'roiii injury. This plan is oimn to thu very univu 
 ohjuction ihnl it makes a monopoly ol' a Uramh of 
 industry, iiuiporlaiil not only for the peoiile of the islands, 
 hut to the lieople of the Tiiited States, if tlie preparation 
 uiid raauul'acture of the sUins for use slumlil ho tmnsfoiroil 
 Irom London to this country. Such a !iiiinn]"ily is con- 
 trary to the ideas of the [lenple, and not many years would 
 pass heforu serious clVorts would he made I'or its over- 
 throw. Moreover, the natives of the islands would ho 
 under the colli rol of the Company, and as the ex]iiiation 
 of the lease approached, the inducements to protect 
 them and preserve the li.sheiies w,.uld diminish, e.-peciaily 
 if the Corajiaiiy .saw, as would Jirohuhly he the case, that 
 it had no hope of a renewal of its privile,i;es. Under 
 these oircunistances, th« Ciovernment of the United States 
 would nei;es.sarily he suhjccted to a ^veat e\]ien.se and 
 trouhle. 
 
 Vor these reasons, hridly staled, liut valid, as they 
 appear to me, I cannot eoiiour in the sui,'^'estiou that 
 the islands .should he leased to any Company for a perioil 
 of years. 
 
 Inasmuch as it will I'C necessary for the ( iovernmcnt 
 c.f the United Slates to maintain in and anaiud the 
 i.slMids a military and naval force lor the protection of its 
 interests under any plan that can he devised, 1 am of 
 opinion that it is hetlcr lli.al the (lovernment slioiild 
 iis^iune the entire control of the hnsiness of the islands, 
 mid excludu everyhody hut its own servants and agents ; 
 that it .should estahlish a ri^'id system of jiolice, excludino 
 fiom the islands distilled spirits and lire-arni.s, and suhjeet 
 vessels that touch there to forfeiture, e.xcept when they 
 .ue driven to seek .shelter or tor neees.sary repairs. The 
 , nuilitions of such occupancy and eontrnl hy the Govern- 
 iiicut of the United States seems to me to he these:— 
 I. Tlie e.xchision of other parties. 
 
 Li. The su)iply to the natives of such articles as they 
 are accustomed to u.se. 
 
 :). Compensation to the natives for their la!«aii, and llic 
 payment of a suHieieiil additional sum each year toeiiahle 
 them to live in the maniivr to which they have lieen 
 accustomed. 
 
 1. All eipiitalih' division of lli,; value of the skins over 
 the payments made to the natives, and tho cost to ,he 
 (lovernment of the United States of mainlainine such 
 f.irce as is neces ary hir the in-otection of the hnsiness. 
 
19 
 
 '• Coiiprcssional 
 
 C.lolie " I'nrt II. 
 
 40tli (,'(iiig.. 
 
 Inl Se«s., |). 14U7, 
 
 Senate), 
 
 Frhriiarv 'JS, 186!) 
 
 The imrtinii nf llio smiilus ciiuilalily liclciii'^iii^; i ■ il.u 
 nnlivi'x iiiislit In- nul nsidi- I'm- ilin i/iirpustt nl' ((luiMticm 
 unci i(li«i"iis tciichiii'-', till' cnoliiMi i.f \wia >uilaMi' ilwcl- 
 lili;,'M than Uii-y iHiw p'^fli^-i. iiml ^'iinrially I'm' lla'ii' 
 |)liyi)iral, iiitc'llcrtiiiil, and Mwial ini|a'ciVoinonl. 
 
 If 111.. (!nvcTniiiiiil WIT.' 1.. l.a-.' til.' i^laii.lt, il would 
 not 1«. i.ii-.sil.li. I.I wiili.lraw cnliiily tin- military nn.l 
 naval furci'S, nr t.i nt'Kli'i t a can I'nl siii.i'rvi.-i.iii, and tin' 
 additimial cxpc'isf .'iinM'iiii. lit 11)11.11 r.'taiiiiii',' [...sHi-i-Liii nl 
 thti l.uniiiuMH ..r thr islninU in llh' liaii.N "i llif (l.iv.rii- 
 nii'iil w..ulil n.it Im! lai;.4r. 
 
 Orilinarily, I .'i^iici' in lli.' ..i.ini..n llial a (i..vi riiiiU'iil, 
 
 rsjiruially !ik(^ Unit ..I' lllo I'lliti-.l States, is licit 
 
 adai)::d I., till' nmiia^'.'iii.'nl cif Ihimiii's- -, l.ut tlii> ik'iiily 
 i.s a l.iiMiic-> which .'aiiii.it I..' h'tt cipcn t.i iiidividiml 
 
 riiiiiiM'titii)ii, and if it !■< t.i Lc a iii< imly, wl'ollicr 
 
 piiilltalili' iir iilhi'iwiM'. thc! iiitcii t cf iliu (iciviTiini.'nt is 
 Ml. lai^'c, and the expenses iiuiduiil t.. the pinti'Cli'.ii of 
 these islands s.i ^jreat, tliiit it i-aiinut alV..iil I., sulistitiitu to 
 any e\t(.nl the miiiiop..ly .'f an inili\i.Ui.il or of a ('i.in]iaiiy 
 fur its own lawful siipervi-ion. 
 
 Shiiiild the fliiveniiiulit f,dl in ihe attempt I. > iiiaimue 
 the lasiness through its ..« 11 A^eiit>, there will tli.n he 
 opjioitiiiiity t.. Iciuse the lisheries t.i private parties; luit 
 my ..pinion is that a larger revenue cum heol.tained from 
 them hy iictnal inaiia;;eiiienl than hy a lea-e. 
 
 When the proposition to place an cm Uisiv.- lea.-.' in ihe 
 hands of a Company came liil'me Coiigrc-s, Mi. I-'owler 
 said : — 
 
 "... I wi-h to stale my reasmis I'.'V 1'csi.stiliy the. 
 piissa;.'!' of this r.ill. This is tie' lii>l I'.ill .ii' the kind ever 
 prnpcMil in ihe (.'oii;^lvss of the riiited Slates. It is a 
 Hill 1.1 iilai.' in the hands of a parlicular Cmpaiiy an 
 
 ,.,ilin. trade, "f Ihe most ImM-rared mon..p.ilies e\er 
 
 attempted to he placed ov.'r any people in the w.ahl. 
 (Vilainly iho p.'oplo of the I'niled Slates liine never 
 witnes.sed tho lik.' of such an infamous jiropositioii as this, 
 to ffive into the hiiiids of a ]iariieiilar class of individuals 
 the rii^ht to p..ssess this very valual.le tia.le. Yoii iiii'.;hl 
 HH well authorize them to yo int.. the Treasniy of tin' 
 I'nited State- and take out so many dollars with.nit any 
 consideration whalev.i. It i- a )iroposilion that ne\.v 
 cnhl Imvu met the ai.pioliation of an American (.'oiiKrcss 
 twenty years ai;... 1 think ihc Hill is ]n'il'eclly ...Imgecai.s. 
 'I'lieii' is not a si.lilarv reasmi in its favour " 
 
 • Con|?ri'Si!ioiial 
 
 Ki'rcir.l,' vol. ii 
 
 Pan III, 
 
 43rcl ('i.iig., 
 
 tsl S'ls , |>. 2737, 
 
 II It, April '-', 
 
 1p74 
 
 On this jiil.je.l .Old ..II (he power ..f Ihi' t'..mp 
 Scnaloi lieck .sj.oke ill IS74 when it was proposed lo ; 
 Mr l-'.lli.itt t.. the islands as a Special Ci.miiii.ssi.iii.r :- 
 
 .. , 1 ,,],iH,,-,i'd il fi.i this iva.soli , wliih- I liave 
 lii..;liest ai.prcciation of the tal.nt of the youii;,' i^ciille 
 nami'd (Mr KUioli). whew lepoit 1 have rca.l, an 
 uholii I hav.' li.slened wilh iim. h plca>iiiv lii-l'oiv 
 ('eimmitli'e, ami whih' I am prcpiired to say Ins wmk 
 hi> learning arc evi'rythini,' to satisfy in.' ihat I; 
 V.11111.4 man of iincommini int. ll.rl, y.t 1 d t llunl, 
 
 any, 
 
 ^elld 
 
 III.' 
 man 
 
 ..iid 
 is .1 
 
 ihal 
 
IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 / 
 
 /. 
 
 
 V- 
 
 f/. 
 
 Ma 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 lU 
 
 l^|2£ |2.5 
 
 I4£ ilM 
 
 1.8 
 
 ilKI 
 
 L25 11.4 IIIIII.6 
 
 <^ 
 
 /a 
 
 ^l 
 
 
 7 
 
 >^ 
 
 [1C( 
 
 Corporation 
 
 .^\^ 
 
 ^^ 
 
 A 
 
 <> 
 
 Cv 
 
 
 O^ 
 
 33 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WEBSTER, NY. 14580 
 
 (716) 872-4503 
 
 

 <? 
 
 
 'A 
 
 s\ 
 
 «^ 
 
 ^^ 
 
 ^ 
 
it WHS 11 prii]]ur thing for the purpose I had in view to 
 pass a sijuciiil Bih to give liim this eniployracnl ulone. 1 
 \\ill state iny reasons brieliy. 
 
 ■ "VVe liave a eontrnct now witli a great, rich, anil 
 powerful (.'ompany, wliereby they agree to ]jay ns 2 dollars 
 a skin fur 100,000 seals, and the rent fur the ishmds 
 amounts to some uO,000 or 00,000 more. We thus receixc 
 200,000 dollars for 100,000 seal-skins, and from 50,000 to 
 00,000 dollars for the use of the islands. 
 
 " That Company may or may not he taking more than 
 100,000 seals. 1 believe that nearly 300,000 seals are 
 taken from our islands instead of 100,000 under that 
 Contract. There are houses in England that have a 
 muimpoly uf the liusiness. Not a seal-skin can be brought 
 into tliis cuuntiy- -iheir monopoly is ab.solute. The skins 
 are shipped from tlie islands to San Francisco, and thence 
 to London ; and there they are manufactured. While 
 seal-.skins cost them 2 dol. 50 c a-piece, two good seal- 
 •skins make a full set for a lady, or three inferior ones, not 
 costing the Company for a .set over 5 dol. 50 e. or 
 V dill. 50 c. ; that monupf.ly enables them to sell those .sets 
 <if furs at prices varying from 75 to 125 dollars in guhl in 
 London, or from 200 to 300 dollars a set in New York 
 after they have lieen returned to this country. 
 
 "My opinion from pretty thorough information is, that 
 these men are getting somewhere seal-skins tu ilie amount 
 of at least 300,000 a-year. That number are said to be in 
 the market, and there is no othei- [ilace to get them except 
 what fur can be olitained from one Kussian island. The 
 Comp.iny has a general contract with the Government of 
 Kussia to tiike as many seal-skins as they please from the 
 Eussian possessions, but, as I learn, lliey get very few. 1 
 do not sujjpose they get 10,000 a-y(!ar from all the posses- 
 .sions of liussia. But that unlimited contract with Faissia 
 enables them to claim that all the seal-.skins they liave 
 beyond 100,000 come from the Hussian jiossessions, when 
 
 in fact most of thmn are coming from our islands 
 
 " . . . . Lot US see that those Companies are nul 
 defrauding u.s, that they are not anniially taking from ns 
 in excess of their contracts luuicl U of tliousauils of seal- 
 .skins, as I lii'lieve they are liuw doing. -Vnd if, a~ 
 Jlr. Klliott reports, the muuber of scids that may be killed 
 can be increased, and two or three hundred tliousand can be 
 killed — indeed, he supposes that as many as 400,000 may bi' 
 taken annually without encroaching uu the breeding ground 
 — why, in that ea.se, let contrails lie madi' on the report of 
 a responsible ollicer, after a thorough iuvesligation, which 
 would enable us to get what we ought to from these islands 
 and ].reveiit fraud, if tliere be any, I'roiu Ijcing perpetrated, 
 it il sliould lie developed, as I believe it wuuM lie, tlial we 
 are nuw lieing defrauded. 
 
 " The relations between tliese p.enple and tlie traders, oi, 
 more strictly, with the one Trading Company whidi has 
 at pr.seul an overwhelming pred uuinance Ihruughout the 
 Aleutian region, are peculiar, mid reiiuire ;i word of 
 e.vplanation. 
 
 " The Alcut-i, except on the I'riliilofV Lslanils, gain a 
 
 " Congrcssiunul 
 
 Record," vol. ii^ 
 
 Part Ilf 
 
 43rd Cong., 
 
 Isl Sesa., p. 2737, 
 
 H. R., April 2, 
 
 1874. 
 
 Elliott's Report oa 
 Alaska, 1874, 
 p. 232. 
 
21 
 
 General Howard's 
 Keport on Alaska, 
 June 30, 1875, 
 p. 1G2. 
 
 Schedule of pro- 
 posals for llie 
 taking of Seals on 
 the Seal Islands, 
 1890-1910, United 
 States' Print, 
 Treasury 
 Department. 
 
 livelihood by hunting the sea-otter and by fishing. None 
 of tlic isliiiuls iillonl any subsistence except that drawn 
 from the: si>u. 
 
 " To Imiit or iisli, in fact, to live, the Aleut is totally 
 dependent on his sldn-ciuioe. To make this canoe he 
 must luive tmir-sfid or sea-lion skins. From various 
 causes the sea-lions are not now to be found, as formerly, 
 within reach of the large .Settlements, except on the 
 I'ribilolV Islands. This made no difTerence under the 
 Eussian rule, as the sea-lion skins were taken under the 
 Company's dreclioii at the I'ribilofl" Islands, and were then 
 dislrilmted to the various points wliere they wore needed, 
 and were given to the Aleuts gratis. Now, on the contrary, 
 they are obliged to buy them, and to h\iy them of the 
 Company, who hold the lease of the Pribilofif Islands, 
 e.xecpt in very rare cases. As the Company's agents, in 
 the luitural cfiurse of business, will sell these materials 
 only to those; natives who are known to bring all their fur? 
 to tlie Comjiany's store for sale, it fcjllows lluit the lease 
 of the fur-seul islands carries with it a practical monopoly 
 of all the fur trade of the Aleutian nation, tliat is to say, 
 the sea-otter as well as the seal trade." 
 
 Tlie terms of tin; various offers were as follows : — 
 (1870.) The highest bid, amounthig to a yearly rental 
 of 227,000 diillar-i, was made by Louis Ciohlstone for a 
 syndicate vi San Francisco lirnis wliose respectability and 
 staniling were said to liave been unimpeachable. The bid 
 of the Alaska Commercial Company— the lowest offered— 
 was equivalent to a yearly rental of 0,5,000 dollars. The 
 latter Company entering various protests against tlie bid 
 of Mr. Goldstone, the case was referred by the Secretary 
 of the Treasury (Mr. lioutwell) to the Attorney-General, 
 who, after hearing argument on both sides, decided in 
 favour of (ioldstoae and associates. Nevertheless, the 
 lease w.as idtimr.tely awarded by tlie Government to the 
 Alaska Commercial Company at Mr. dcddstoue's figure. 
 The number of tenderers for the lease at this time was 
 fourteen. 
 
 In 1890 twelve bids were received— two of which were 
 informal and not considered- of which the principal 
 features were as follows : — 
 
 Tender No. 2. — 77ic American Fishinr/ and Tradinij 
 Company oj San Francisco, Calif oniia. 
 
 Annual rental, ;!0.5,000 iloUars, and, in addition thereto, 
 the sum of 4 dol. 12 c. for each seal-skin shii)ped,incl ) 
 of the revwnue tax or duty— also to provide schools and 
 care for the natives as Secretary of Treasury shall 
 prescribe. Also 25 cents per gallon tor seal oil shipped. 
 
 Tender No. i.— North American Trading Company, per 
 Chas. F. Benjamin. 
 
 Annual rental, 55,000 dollars, and, in addition, a royalty 
 of 4 dol 50 0. per skin, as well aa toveuue tax of 2 dollars 
 [.S.4J • 
 
22 
 
 p r skin, In (iddition, schools and necessities for natives 
 ^ Treasury Donartnient shall iircserilie. 30 cents pi-r 
 gallon for seal oil shipped. Establishment and main- 
 tenance of a monthly mail service between San Francisco 
 and Seal Islands, touching at intermediate Alasl;an points. 
 Guarantees to use all reasonable and proper mca.sures for 
 the improvement of the native populiiticin ; for tlu; develop- 
 ment of Alaskan industries and re3(jurces ; for the pre- 
 servation and improvement of the fur-seal industry, and 
 will eo-oiierate witli Goverinnent At;ents in pre.^^erving the 
 unworked rookery at Otter Islanii ; eiuploymeut of skilled 
 and experienced persons in management of its business, 
 and due regard to suggestions of the Uovernment, &o. 
 
 Tender No. 5— The Pacific Steam Whding Company, of 
 San Francisco, California, 
 
 Annual rental, 50,000 dollars, and, in addition, 7 dol. 15 c., 
 inclusive of revenue tax of 2 dollars, upon each and every 
 skin taken. 
 
 Tender No. G.—The Alaska Commercial Company, by 
 Lwiis Sloss, PrcMent. 
 
 Annual rental, 50,000 dollars, with ileposit for equal 
 amount in United States' bonds as security therefor; 
 revenue tax of 2 dollars on each seal-skin taken and 
 shipped, and a further ?.uni of 4 dol 50 c. on tlie same ; 
 also 25 cents for ever/ skin shipped for comfort and main- 
 tenance of iidiabitant of Seal Isliiuds in excess of wages 
 while taking, salting, a.'d shipping skins. Akso to provide 
 sixty comfortable frame dwelling-liouses for inliabitants of 
 St. i'aul Island and forty tor St. George, and keep them 
 in good condition during term of lease. Also certain 
 quantities of fuel and provisions for llie inhabitants free of 
 cost; establishment of canneries for tlie preservation of 
 seal meat for inhabitants; maintenance of physician and 
 turnisiiing of iii.^iuc.d ;ittcnda;!ce nr.il inedlci?ies free ; 
 maintenance of a scliool on each island ; care of all widows 
 and ori)hans ; free transportation of natives to any point 
 in Alaska where Company's vessels toucli ; furnish goods 
 and supplies to natives at an iiclvaneo not to exceed 
 25 per cent, of cost, wholesale price ; improvement and 
 repair of roadways on islands, also water supidy, channels, 
 and landings; transport of United Slates' mails tree of 
 cost to all points touched at l)y ('()mi)any's steamers ; 
 establishment of regular mall service between Sitka, 
 Kodiak, and Ounalaska during llie bair summer months ; 
 establi.ihment and maintenance of pulilic hall and lil)rary 
 on islands ; will provide and maintain twenty frame 
 dwelling-houses and inhabitants of Island of Ounalaska; 
 maintenance of school and school teacher ; medical atten- 
 dance for inhabitants of all \>\awU of Aleutian eliain ; 
 establisliment of hospital at t)i!nalaska, witli proper com- 
 plement of nurses and attendants, medicines, &c. ; estab- 
 lishment and maintenance at Ounalasl;a of school of 
 
23 
 
 instruction in tho useful trndos tor tlio natives; main- 
 tcnaucu of supply of eoal ut Ouuiilaskii, nnd will funiisli 
 Unitfil Stiites' niivyand rcviMiue luariue sucli iiuantilies as 
 may bo required at cost price, in Ouualaska ; wharf 
 privileges, boats, &c., at Ounalaska free of churye to United 
 States' vessels; and establishment and maintenance at 
 Ounalaska a depot of snii|jlies, provisions, clothinj,', &o., 
 for destitute inhabitants of Aleutian Isles, and to dis- 
 tribute same gratuitously at other poiuts than Ounalaska. 
 
 In addition the Company oflered, in lieu of all other 
 proposals ovc-r and above tiie riMital, royalty, revenue tax, 
 nnd 2r> cents per skin, the sum of 1 dol. oO o. on every 
 skin taken and shiiiped, should the Government prefer the 
 arrangement in that way. 
 
 Tender No. 7.— A'. II'. Clnrk, of IVaxhivgton, D.C., 
 rc])ri'!iinli)ig <i Si/udicc-Ue. 
 
 Annual rental, 50,000 dollars, and in addition revenue 
 tax of 2 dollars and bonus of 3 dol, oO c. on each skin 
 shipped; also a bonus of 210,000 dollars, payable in 
 annual instalments of 10,500 dollars; 55 cents per 
 gallon I'or all seal oil shipped ; payment to the inhabitants 
 of the Seal Islands such compensation for their labour as 
 the Treasury Department pIihH prescribe ; also establish- 
 ment of school and cliurch and their maintenance during 
 lease ; and, further, to provide, free of charge, certain 
 quantities of food, fuel, light, and clothing to the natives 
 annually. 
 
 Tender No. %.— Atlantic and Pacific Company, by Charles 
 II. Tenncy, President. 
 
 Dols. c 
 Annual rental .. .. .. 65,000 00 
 
 Revenue Ui 2 00 per .kin. 
 
 Royalty 6 12J „ 
 
 and in addition due caro and treatment of natives, 
 furni-shing certain quantities of food, fuel, medicines, free 
 of chan'o, and all other goods and merchandize at cost 
 value, and will pay natives as they have been paid hereto- 
 fore; maintenance of schools aud teacher free, and 
 employment of skilled and experienced officers. 
 
 Tender No. 9. — The North American Commercial Company. 
 Illinois, by II. L. Turner, President. 
 
 Dols. c. 
 
 Annual rental 56,000 00 
 
 R,.»inuo tax or duty .. .. 2 00 per «kin. 
 
 Royalty.. .. •• •• ^ 1' 
 
 and in addition due care of natives ; establishment and 
 maintenance of schools, medical atleudance and medi- 
 cines; such quantities of food, fuel, salt, &c., and paymcnl 
 to natives for services as Secretary of Treasury shall 
 prescribe, and will furnish other goods and supplies ai 
 
94 
 
 prices not cxcccdins^ 20 per cent, oxi^ess of cost wliolosnle 
 in Sun Francisco or otliei pliicu of purdmso ; rcmuncmlivo 
 iimployment to other nalivcs of Ak'iitian Isliuuls, nnd will 
 lind Miiirket for llicir furs and i)i!lLri('s in curtain contin- 
 gency ; ustalilishnicnt of otlicr scIidoIs as TriMisury Depart- 
 ment may rciiuirc ; will defray cost of sendin),' certain 
 number of native youths to acliools in United States for 
 trninin},' as teachers; will extend all reasonable facilities 
 for hnprovcnieut of condition of natives; will preserve 
 snpidy of surplus seal lav.at for maintenance of destitute 
 natives on Aleutian Islands ; will set a])art each iitlh year 
 u sum of money eipuil to 10 per cent, of the excess over 
 an averft;,'e f^ross l)ric(i of lo dollars (ler skin for the pro- 
 motion of education and f^eneral well-liein;,' of the natives 
 of Alaska; establishment and maintenance of steara- 
 launcli i>atrc)l for use of Government ollicers on Seal 
 [slands ; guarantee that industry of dressing skins, i.e., 
 shall bo opened to American labour and capital. 
 
 Tender No. 10. — The ^'orth J'licnmn Comivcnial Com. 
 pamj, Ncm York and Sen Francisco, hy J. Liclcs, 
 
 President. 
 
 Annual rental 
 Revenue tax 
 Royalty 
 Seal oil 
 
 Dols. c. 
 
 55,200 no 
 
 2 00 per iliii . 
 
 8 75 
 
 50 per guilon. 
 
 The above olfer on the understanding that not less than 
 100,000 seal-skins be permitted to be taken each and every 
 year after the first year of the lease (if awarded). 
 
 If not permitted to take that number, alternate pro- 
 posals were made. 
 
 Tender No. 11. — Thf same Company as No. 10. 
 
 Annual rental 
 Revenue tax 
 Rojult; . . 
 
 Doll. c. 
 60,000 00 
 
 2 00 per akin. 
 7 62i „ 
 
 Seal oil 50 cents per gallon sold, and in addition, 
 free of charge, food for natives, as Secretary of Treasury 
 may direct, &c. ; and encourage dressing, &o., of skins in 
 America. 
 
 Tender No. 12.— Another Tender of the same Company. 
 
 Annual rental 
 Revenue tax 
 Royalty.. 
 
 Doll. c. 
 67,100 00 
 
 2 00 perikin. 
 
 8 25 
 
 The above tender made on the understanding, or with 
 the provision, that the United States shall at all times 
 guarantee and protect the Company in the exclusive enjoy- 
 ment of the fur-seal fisheries in and within the waters of 
 Alaska, known and designated as Bebriag Sea. 
 
S5 
 
 In nddiliiiii, tli(^ ('umiiany leiidcis tn furnish free food 
 for imtives, as Tivusuiy IJc'iuirtniciu iiiiiy <liiwt ; iilsi) 
 find, i<i.t\, uiid to iMicoiinigc' tlii^ diuMniiig, dyiiinn, <^'^; "t 
 sdnl-skinx witliin tin: Uuitiid Stutes. 
 
 General 0. O. 
 Howard's Keporl 
 Oil Al.iska, 
 44lli Coni?., 
 1st Scis., Ei. 
 Doc. 83, p. 15^. 
 
 nf(i(l-i/ii(irkrs MHitarji IJivinon of Ih I'niijir, 
 
 San Fmneixco, Aufiud 23, 187?. 
 Ilfsiicctfiilly IVirwardod to tho Adjutaiit-dunoriil (thiougli 
 lii'iiil-nuarlcM lit' till' army), in lomiwtioii witli (le:ieral 
 Hdwaiil'.s l!i.'licili ol' the MOtli .ruiio, 187.", Tvfcricd to 
 witliiu, l'or\vardi;d from tlusr hcad-iiaailiMS tliv ■-'Ist 
 Au^'ust, 1875. 
 
 (Si^'iicil) •!, M. .'^LilDFiEi.ii, 
 
 Mnjur- Oencivl, I'.S.A. 
 
 " A Hii'ori/ of llic IVrvnys of Ahisk" : An Ai>i'ci'l to tin- 
 Peiiplc ami Prat of America. 
 
 " [Printed liy ordci of tlic Anti-Monopoly Association of 
 tlu' I'acilic- Coiust, Folinmry 187').] 
 
 " All Appeal to the People awl Press of America. 
 
 " San Fruncisco, January 1875. 
 
 "Inabiinicli a.s tlic lifpo of receiving rcdre.s.'i of thr 
 Oovcmnicnl lias liitlierto lio ii dL^ftiipointi'd; ami .ill 
 uppeftls to the same which have been niadu during the Li-^t 
 six years in behalf of the cause, iii \vhi( h we now rai.se our 
 voice ag.Vin, have been left nuheedcd, and a lla^'rant stain 
 on the honour of our free country, which could be wiped 
 out by on,' word oi the Con;;vess of the United States, is 
 Huflerod to e.xi.sl— a monument of the .shame of America, 
 we now address ourselves to the people, in the heart of 
 which love of freedom, patriotism, and justice still live, 
 and to its mighty voice and champion, the press, and 
 appeal to them to take up this eau.se which ought to 
 concern every citizen that loves his country. We speak 
 of the serfdom of the civilized inhabitants of St. George 
 and St. Paid Islamls in Alaska, and of the fur-senl 
 monopoly that has been granted by the Government. 
 
 "The wrong that has been done is so great, the violation, 
 of the principles of I'.epuhlicanism and llie Constitution of 
 the United States so llagrant, and the corruption that has 
 been connected with this disgraceful aflair so glaring, that 
 were • the circumstances as well known throughout 
 America as they arc to people on the I'acilic coast, it would 
 have been struck down long ago, and woidil have shared 
 the fate of the ' Credit Mobiher.' 
 
 " We will therefore give briclly a liistory of the wrongs 
 of Alaska, in which we will strictly adhere to the truth, 
 avoid all exaggeration, and will be just to all ; and in 
 order that this history may be universally known, it will 
 be sent in thousands of copies to all parts of the Union 
 and to every leading paper iu the Ignited States. 
 
 [854] 
 
 u 
 
26 
 
 " jUthough our space is limited, we must go a little into 
 details to make the circumstances fully comprehensible, 
 and to show h(jw the rain of Alaska was v.rought. 
 
 " The Eusso- American Company had at the time of the 
 transfer the following property that had to l)e disposed of : 
 A large number of ware, store, and dwelling-houses at 
 Sitka and Kodiac, and all their forts and stations on tlie 
 islands and on the mainland ; an enormous stock of goods, 
 representing a capital in proportion, und a fleet of steamers 
 and sailing-vessels. Ah this was to be sold, and Trince 
 Maksoutof, former Governor (jf Alaska and President <if the 
 Company, was intrusted with the Inisiness. 
 
 " He had not long to wait for a customer, for a number 
 of capitalists of San Francisco had formed themselves into 
 a Trading Company, and hastened to make overtures to the 
 Russian Prince. 
 
 " The concern that thus sprang into existence was the 
 firm of Hutchinson, Kohl, and Co. 
 
 "This Company proposed to buy the whole property as 
 it stood, ships, stations, and goods, and iheir offer was 
 eagerly accepted by JIakscjutof. Wliat the arrangements 
 were, what price wa.-. paid, ha? never leaked out, but it is 
 known that everything was sold at a ruinous figure ; that 
 Hutchinson, Kohl, and Co. cleared over 50U,0UO dollars ou 
 the transaction, and that Prince Maksoutof returned to 
 Piussia witli a, fortune. This, however, docs not concern 
 us or the public, but there was immediately inaugurated a 
 system of suppression and high-lianded oiitragcs by 
 Hutchinson, Kohl, and Co., with ihe assistance of this 
 Ilussian Prince and Ijv Federal officers, which deserves 
 our closest attention, whUe a inmiber of fraudulent tran- 
 ■sactions showed tliat the new and powerful, but entirely 
 unprincipled, concern was capable of any action, no matter 
 how lawless and contemptible, to approach the object which 
 it was aiming at, wliicli w.is nothing less than the 
 monopolization of the entire tcrritortj of Alasla. 
 
 " Making War upon Enterprise. 
 
 ■'■\Vhilo Hutchinson, Kohl, and Co. were thus ruling 
 the Aleuts by false representations and tyrannical treat- 
 ment, they also found means to severely annoy and often 
 crush the other traders and Fur Companies that were also 
 enga"ed in the territory. As the restless energies of most 
 of these parties at once forbade all hope of driving them 
 liut of the field Viy fair means, unfair and coiTupt ones 
 were immediately resorted to, and it was principally 
 through the assistance of the United Stales' revenue 
 officers that this was accomplished. Of course, it is hard 
 to prove that these officers were hired, but their favouritism 
 was so undisguised, and the rewards which they received 
 for their services so openly distributed, that there can be 
 no doubt in this matter. The most zealous revenue 
 oHicials, in the interest "f Hutchin.son, Kohl, and Co., 
 were. W. S. Dodge, Collector at Sitka ; Samuel Falconer, 
 Acting Collector at Sitka (afterwards in the cmjiloy of 
 
27 
 
 Hutchinson, Kohl, and Co.) ; Mr. II. H. Mclntyre, Sijcuial 
 Agent of the Trea.sury Department (now General Agent 
 ol' Hutchinson, Kohl, and Co., or tlio Ahiska ConinievL-iiil 
 Company) ; William Kapns,Ci>lleetor of Sitka (afterwanls 
 Oeneral Agent of Hutchin.son, Kohl, and Cn., cr the 
 Alaska Connnercial Company) ; Cencral Jliller, Colloctor 
 (if San Francisco (now I're.fident (if the Alaska Cnmmorcinl 
 Company), and several dlher.s. 
 
 " Fai-ouridaiH nkowii la Hutchinson, Kuiil, untl Co. 
 
 " While Hutchinson, Iv(jhl, and f'o.'s ves.sels left San 
 Francisco without dilliculty, came to Sitka, entcn'd, cleared, 
 and departed without hindrance, williont .s>;arcli, and 
 without delay, the other jiarlies liad Im nnder(,'o a perfect 
 (irdcjal of tribidations hcfore they i^ot out (if the clutches of 
 these Federal ollicers. At San Francisco the trouble 
 generally commenced, and, thanks to Collector .Miller's 
 kind efforts, it was Cfinnected with nearly as nnich trouble 
 to clear a vessel for Alaska as if she had been suspected of 
 biung a pirate intending to .start on some fdibustering 
 expedition. 
 
 " This was, however, nothing compared with the annoy- 
 ances that commenced when the ships arrived at Sitka. 
 Hi'i-e they were often detaii»;d for days and weeks, with- 
 out a shadow of a cause ; vessels (if which tlune could not 
 be the slightest doubt, tliat they had, in every respect, 
 complied with the revenue laws, were searched from deck 
 lo keelson; lighters were hauled alongside and every 
 paekage was taken out, and then, if nothing el.se could be 
 found against them, they were reluctantly allowed to reload 
 their cargoes and depart. The more anxious those yiarties 
 seemed to be to reach their trading grounds, the longer 
 were they generally kept at Sitka, the confusing reveiuie 
 regulations serving the ollicers as ample excuse for their 
 
 arbitrary measures. 
 
 • • » (» 
 
 " Till- Fiir-sccil hlmi'h. 
 
 " In the r.ehring Sea lie tlu' two small islands, St. Cieorge 
 and St. I'atd, which are inhabited each by a conununity of 
 Christians and lidly civilized Creoles and Aleuts. Of all 
 the wealth in furs that the whole immense territory of 
 Alaska iiroduces, thc.'^e two islands furnish over half; for 
 liere assemble every spring the precious fur-seals in 
 .;ountless numbers, haul up in innuense rookeri(\s on the 
 shore for Inoeding purposes, and remain till late in autumn. 
 These seals ari^ very easily taken, as it is only necessary to 
 drive a number of them inland, for a nnle or two, and 
 tlieri! kill them with clubs. It was natural that, as soon 
 as the territory wa.s opened U< tlu; Americans, a number of 
 Companies .should immediately dispatch their .ships to 
 these mines (if wealtli, and in IRfiH wo find Taylor and 
 Ueudel, Williams and llaven-^, Parrel and Co., Captain 
 Morgan, Hutchinson, Kulil, and Co., aud others, having 
 
28 
 
 staLiona on those islands, and energetically engaged in 
 taking skins ; and, strange as it may seem, in spite of the 
 olislacles thrown into the way of the other parties, 
 Hutchinson, Kohl, and Co. were among the last that 
 arrived, wliich shows with what energy the former were 
 possessed. 
 
 'Tills year, 13G8, was a golden one for the inhaliitants 
 of .St. George and St. Paul ; the rival Companies strove for 
 their favour; every man, woman, and half-grown child 
 found the most profitable employment ; and the coveti.'d 
 luxuries i:)f the Americans, as clothing and drosses, 
 groceries, imiilements of all kinds, ornaments, mu.sical 
 instruments, &<■,, which these parties furnished them, us 
 well us the treatment which they received and tho liberty 
 which they enjoyed, made their life happy and com- 
 furtablc. 
 
 " Alteinptimj Special Lir/islation. 
 
 " liut this was not to remain so long ; the arcli-eueniics 
 1)1' Ala.ika were plotting to get these islands into their sole 
 possession, and bow well their deeply-laid plan succeeded 
 lias been shown liy subsecpient events. It became soon 
 cvidout, already as early as 1SG8, tliat Ilutcbinson, Kohl, 
 and Co. not only controlled the revenue oflicers in Alaska 
 and llio Collector of the Port of San Francisco (who is now 
 the President of the Alaska Commercial Comjianyl, but 
 that they had also gained a great inlluence at Wasliington ; 
 that deep games were being played in (jur national capital, 
 and that the E.xeeutive and Treasury JX'partmcnts, as well 
 as Congress, were discriminating in favour of said concern. 
 
 "The most shrewd and wily meiuliers of the Conniany 
 came to "Wasliington, liacked by unlimited funds, to gorge 
 the greedy vultures that hover around our seat of Govern- 
 ment, and immediately such .sliameless lobbying and 
 intrigues were set iu operation that even the old war- 
 hordes of the loliby were astounded. As if touched by 
 mngic, we see, suddenly, a number of Senators and members 
 of the Administration assume the championship for 
 Hutchinson, Kohl, and Co., and soon it was reported that 
 the fur-seal i.^Lnuls were to be leased to them, to the 
 exclusion of everybody else. 
 
 " When the first lumonr of the intended lease of said 
 islands and their inhabitants to a mercantile firm got 
 ubroad, it was not Ijclieved that such a violation of the 
 letter of tlie law and the sjiirit of our free country woiUd 
 be iittemjited People knew that they were living in the 
 United States of America and not in Turkey, and that a 
 President stood at the head of the nation and not the Sliali 
 of P<'rsia. P.ut when the infamous scheme assume! more 
 form, and when Senator Cole, of California, actually intro- 
 duiH'd his villainmis liill in Congress, there aro.se an ou'",ry 
 against it so loud and disti.ict tliat any administration but 
 that tlieii at the lielm at Washington would have heard 
 ail ' ii'spected it. 
 
 ■' GciKial Opposition. 
 
 " Xo! only WHS tlie matter daily discussed liy the press 
 and imiversally condemned, not only were the frauds, ilie 
 
29 
 
 corruption, and t!ic misrulu in Alaskan aflatrs again and 
 again exjjosed and denounced in the most severe language, 
 but all classes of citizens, especially on the I'uoitic coast, 
 raised tiieir voice against this gigantic ucherae. The 
 Chambers of Commerce of .Sun Francisco and several 
 eastern cities held special sessions and protested against 
 it, and these, as well as the most inllucntial merchants of 
 San Francisco, repeatedly memorialized President Grant 
 and Congress, and appealed to their sense of justice, their 
 patriotism, and their duty. 
 
 " Quotations taken from the Press and General Protests. 
 
 " We will (juote a few of tlie expressions made in regard 
 to this nuitter by California 'papers. In u long article 
 headed ' Monopolizing Alaska,' in the ' Bulletin,' the 2cird 
 January, 18C'J, we find : — 
 
 " ' Hutchinson, Kohl, and Co. having, however, secured 
 for themselves, under a Republican Cuvernment, all the 
 privileges enjoyed by a Company tliat was one of the 
 worst representatives of Russian serfdom,' &c. 
 
 "Tlie 'Daily Herald ' (29th January, 18G9), in speaking 
 of Senator Cole's Bill, says : — 
 
 " • The Bill is utterly indefensible.' 
 
 "The 'Daily Morning Call' (18th February, 1869), 
 brings an article, headed ' Gigantic .Seherae to monopolize 
 the Fur-trado of Alaska,' from which we extract the 
 following : — 
 
 "'The Bill introduced by Mr. Cole, in the Senate of the 
 United .State.s, to prevent the extermination of fur-bearing 
 animals in Alaska, embodies a scheme for the wholesale 
 appropriation of all the resources of that region by a 
 handful of capitalists, such as cannot but excite public 
 indignation.' 
 
 "The ' Bulletin' (2:3th February) says: — 
 
 " ' Now, it is bettor that every fur-bearing seal in Alaska 
 should he destroyed within the next twelve months than 
 that sucli a monopoly as this, proposed in Congress, should 
 ever be [)erpetuated in the new territory.' 
 
 "From the 'Chronicle' (29th January, 1869), we 
 quote : — 
 
 " ' The merchants of San Francisco, whose interest would 
 suffer .severely by the successful pass.igc of the " Monopoly 
 Bill," have concluded to memorialize Congress against its 
 passage, and we have been shown the document, which 
 bears the signatures of many of our most prominent com- 
 mercial lirnis.' 
 
 "The 'Alta California' (30th January, 1869), after 
 having commented upon llutcliinson. Kohl, and Co.'s doings 
 in Alaska, continues : — 
 
 " ' But a bolder step became necessary to protect them 
 against the restless enterprise of American citizens, and. 
 [854] I 
 
30 
 
 accordingly, they Imve npplicl to tho Congress of the 
 United Status for such a Cliiirtcr.' 
 
 " And again, in tho same orticlo, we find : — 
 
 " ' A propoaitioii so mnnstrons has never been made to 
 any Congress.' 
 
 " And again : — 
 
 " ' Tlieso wretched Aleuts are Imndcd over, body and 
 soul, to the tender mercies of a single, grasping firm, to 
 have and to hoM in a worse than Russian serfdom, by the 
 legitimate sucessors of tlie Imperial moiiopcdy which has 
 just been routed out of its stronghold of power by the 
 (nominal) dawning of Kepulilicanism in tlie hitherto 
 benighted regions of tlie north.' 
 
 " And in a letter to the ' Bulletin,' dated Washington, 
 the 2Gtb March, 18G9, we find :— 
 
 " • For some time tho i-'':,3Suro brought to boar on the 
 House Committee to indme favouralile action on the Senate 
 Bill has boon exceedingly heavy, and the efforts of the 
 would-be mono])olists luive lieen of a nature so earnest and 
 persistent as to excite surprise even among the hahiluis of 
 the Capitol who were most accustomed to witness displays 
 of desperate lobbying — surjiriso, however, which was dissi- 
 pated when the magnitude of the coveted prize was placed 
 
 " While thus the press not only of California, but of tho 
 eastern States as well, condemned this monstrous scheme, 
 tho Chamber of Commerce and the most inllueutial citizens 
 of San Francisco t3ok tho most active steps to prevent the 
 passage of the Bill. A Memorial to Congress was prepared^ 
 by San Francisco merchants (28th January, 1809), which 
 reads as follows : — 
 
 " 'We, tlie undersigned merchants of the city of San Fran- 
 cisco, California, specially interested in the trade of Alaska, 
 and also interested for tho Iionour of our country in the 
 estimation of the civilized world, and anxious to save the 
 inhabitants of Alaska from a slavery inconsistent with our 
 Federal Constitution, and opposed to a niinous monopoly, 
 destructive not only to the interests of trade, but ob- 
 noxious to our free institutions, do solemnly protest, in 
 behalf not only of ourselves and of the Pacific coast, but of 
 commerce, humanity, justice, and an enlightened public 
 policy, against the passage of the Bill now before the Con- 
 gress of the United States, and introduced by Senator 
 Cole, of this State, entitled " An Act to prevent the Exter- 
 mination of Fur-bearing Animals in Alaska, and to protect 
 the Inhabitants thereof." 
 
 "'We, in common with all the citizens of the Pacific 
 coast, feel a deep interest in the newly-acquired Territory 
 of Alaska, and see in its great natural resources a legiti- 
 mate source of wealth to enterprising merchants and 
 traders, and we are unwilling that the whole trade of thia 
 
 
31 
 
 
 vast region should bo monopolized by one firm, whose only 
 claim to pulliG coiisidunaiou is tin; hi-^c. forlunu it lins 
 miidn in that toiTitoiy, and ila piu-sistent imd too successful 
 endeavours to discourage and destroy competition. 
 
 " ' While the helpless inhabitants of Alaska are unable 
 to mcmorializ(! your honouralilo Imdy for themselves, and 
 plead in their own behalf, we, as a matter of justice and 
 humanity, protest in their Jname against the attempt now 
 lieing made thnmgh this liill to reduce tlicm to a con- 
 dition of vassalage to one Company, from whom we 
 believe they have already suffered much. 
 " • All of which is respectfully submitted. 
 ■•(Signed) 
 •"Agapius Honcharenko, Taylor and Beudel, 
 E. Tibbey, ,Iohn Parrott, Louis R. Parrott, 
 Alsop and Co., W. II. Ennis, H. Cohen. 
 S. Martin, Langley, Crowell and Co., A. S. 
 Rosenbaum and Co., L. E. Ileck and Co, 
 Fordham and Jennings, Wcllman, Peck, and 
 Co., Mitchler and Kessing, Irvine and Co., 
 Wilmerding and Kellogg, A. Walker, L. N. 
 Handy and Co., Pioneer American Fur 
 Com]iany, Smith and Kittredge, N. B^ 
 Edgerly and Co., Jacob Deith, Cothn and 
 Patrick, Elisha Iliggins, 0. H. Collins, 
 
 A. Crawford and Co., Charles Hare, Wright 
 and Brjwne, L.W. Williams, W. B. llolcombe, 
 George M. Josselyn, C. J. Hansen, Cox and 
 Kichols, J. and J. Spruance, W. W. Dodge and 
 Co.,Lynde and Hougli, George Hughes, George 
 L Debrow, K. H. Waterraan, L. H. Bonestell, 
 
 B. H. Freeman, 11. Pestein and Co., I. Shirpser, 
 Samuel Adams, C. W. Hane, Wheelan and Co., 
 Adolph Muller, F. H. Piosenbaum and Co., 
 Frederic Clay, Dodge Bros, and Co., George 
 W. Stt^warl and Co., James N. McCune, Fargo 
 and Co., Josiah Stanford, L. L. Treadwell, 
 Hobbs, Gilmore, and Co., H. Liebes and Co., 
 Pacific Fur Emporium, T. Bearward, W. OJ 
 Gray, Marsh, Pilsbury, and Co., James R 
 Kelly, 1!. B. Swain and Co., E. A. Fargo. 
 
 " ' San Francisco, Cdifirnia, 
 January '2H, ISOO.' 
 
 "Another Memorial, to President Grant, which was 
 prepared in June, and very extensively signed, contains 
 still more urgent language. It reads :— 
 
 " ' Memorial to the President of the United States for tJie 
 protection of the JUi/hts and Interests of the People and 
 OovemmeM of the. United Stales in the TerrUuri/ of 
 Alaska, hy Merchants and Citixm <f the City of San 
 Francisco, California. 
 
 '"Vour petitioners, merchants, bankers, and business 
 men of the city of Sun Francisco, engaged or deeply 
 
81}' 
 
 interested in the trade of Alaska, and in its development, 
 respectfully submit the following Memorial for the con- 
 sideration of the Executive of the United States, trusting 
 that it will be favourably regarded and acted upon. 
 
 " ' The condition of affairs in Alaska, from the time that 
 territory was ceded to the United States, lin, been, and 
 still continues to be, highly prejudicial to the rights of the 
 citizens of the Pacific coast, and especially of tliis city, 
 interested in its commerce, and, we deeply regret to say, 
 disreputable to the United States' revenue olUcers in that 
 territory, and unfortunate for the true interests of our 
 Government therein. 
 
 "'We -will not weary you with lengthy details, but 
 respectfully submit the following facts, of which we have 
 been informed, and which we believe to be true. They 
 are within the personal knowledge of some of your 
 petitioners. 
 
 "'The trade of Ali>.ska, or, at least, that portion of it 
 which relates to the killing of seals and the acquisition of 
 their skins, has been, from the fiist, controlled by the lirm 
 of Hutchinson, Kohl, and Co., to the exclusion of other 
 mere .ants and traders, who possess the s.ime legal right in 
 that territory. 
 
 " ' The said firm has been permitted to control the action 
 of United States' revenue ofRcers in Alaska, to secure its 
 interests and break down and expel all compelitorsi. 
 
 "'Mr. Samuel Falconer, Speciil TJeputy Collector at Sitkn, 
 is an agent of said firm. In contirniation nf this suav- 
 ment wo submit the following extract from ihe Aliuska 
 "Herald," published in lliis city, ot tlie 1st May, 1809: — 
 " ' " Hutchinson, Kolil, and Co. imagine that all llussiaii- 
 Ameriea is their empire. A few weeks ago Mr. Falconer, 
 thu agent of this firm in Alaska, also de])uty collector at 
 Sitka, seized tlio .schooncis ' Alaska ' and ' Lewis Perry," not 
 for the viuhition of the law, but to prevent these tradei-s 
 from doing business in their empire." 
 
 " ' Nearly every sutler attached to the United States' 
 military posts in Alaska is an agent or employi5 of said 
 firm. Tlie six citizens permitted by law to remain upon 
 the Islands of St. Paul and St. George, a United States' 
 military reservation, are all connected with said firm. 
 Other ollicois of the Federal Government in Alaska, if not 
 in the actual employ of said firm, are at least attached to 
 it iu interest by corrunt means. 
 
 • » » • 
 
 " ' Ujion the Islands of St. George and St. Paul, said firm, 
 through its agents iu .sutler-iihips attached to the United 
 States' military posts lia.s been permitted to monopolize 
 the trade in the fur-seals, only found on said islands, to 
 the exclusion of all otlier citizens. 
 
 •"Wo respectfully submit that the monopoly of the 
 trade of Alaska, possessed by the said firm, is in violation 
 of our laws and of the spirit of our institutions, and is 
 in gross violation and disregard of the right, ot your 
 petitioners, in common with uU other citizens of 1.I10 
 United States in said territory, and tliat we feel deeply 
 aggrieved thereby. We resjectlully pray that such 
 
88 
 
 measures may be taken by this Government as will put 
 an end to said monopoly, and admit all other citizens of 
 the United States to equal rights and participation in the 
 trade of Alaska. 
 
 » • • • 
 
 " ' Your petitioners would further respectfully recommend 
 and pray, with respect to the fur-seal trade of Alaska, that 
 laws be passed, and in the meantime Treasury llegulations 
 be promulgated, prohibiting the killing of seals upon the 
 Islands of St. George and St. Paul by any but natives of 
 Alaska, and except from September to November of each 
 year, and that only a certain number per annum on each 
 island be killed ; that it shall be unlawful to kill female 
 seals, or pups under 1 year of age. Tliat every seal-skm, 
 before its sale, Ije exhibited to a United States' inspector, 
 to be appointed on each of said islands for such purpose, 
 who, if the same appears to have been killed in violation 
 of law, shall confiscate the same for the public lienefit, and 
 fine or punish, in such manner as may be prescribed, the 
 person exhibiting tiie same ; that said skins be sold to 
 traders in the presence of such inspectors, and that at the 
 time of sale by the natives the purcliaser thereof be 
 required to pay such inspectors such Government tax as 
 may be imposed for each skin, and, after surli payment, 
 the said skins shall be stamped or branded by such 
 
 officers.' 
 
 » • • • 
 
 "Tlie Chamber of Commerce, at regular and spcciid 
 sossion.t;, discussed the matter most earnestly, and at a 
 meeting held on the 22nd February, 18G'.), the President 
 was instructed to telegrai)h to our Delegates in Congress, 
 reipicsting thorn to imitedly use their inlhience to at least 
 delay action upon tlie sutiject of a disposition of the fur- 
 seal interest of Alaska. 
 
 " At this meeting a Petition of Aleuts to the Chamber 
 of Commerce of San Francisco was received, imploring 
 the same fur aid and i)votcction against oppression by 
 Hutchinson, Kohl, and Co. 
 
 " Soon after, a special meeting having been called for 
 the purpose, the Chamber of Commerce memorialized 
 Congress, asldng eiiual rights for all parties, and at the 
 same time protection lo llie fur-bearing animals; and a 
 Bill in regard to Alaska was preijared by tlie former, and 
 submitted to the latter, which, if it had been adopted, 
 woidd liave solved the problem to everybody's satisfaction. 
 
 " But amidst all this storm of incHgnaiicn and protests, 
 the President of tlie United States and the (,'ongress, then 
 in session, exhibited the utmost disregard for the wishes 
 of the people so unmistakably yronounccd. 
 
 "The interest of the whole I'a( ilic const, the clamour of 
 the entire press, the loud voice ul' llie public, ami the plain 
 letter of the Constitution of tlu' Cniteil Slal.'s were out- 
 weighed by the inllucncc ot one concern, that ciiiue 
 prepareil with unlimited lunds. v. lii. h it, (bstributed with 
 B lavisli band. It was coolly hmiU.,1 Hint the principal 
 wealth of Alaska should be 1i;uiiUm1 over to llutcliiiisiji. 
 Kohl, and Co., and that the un! •nuiiate Aleut.'i of St. Paul 
 [864] K 
 
8i 
 
 and St. George should be delivered into tlieir hands ; but 
 as this could not be done without Congress having regu- 
 larly acted upon it, a plan was devised which would 
 enable Hutchinson, Kohl, and Co. to enjoy, ia the mean- 
 time, nil the privileges which they coveted. 
 
 • • • • 
 
 "Thus Hutchinson, Kohl, and Co.'s vessel was com- 
 missioned to do the Government's worli, and General 
 Miller, who soon after resigned his CoUectorship to become 
 President of the Alaska Commercial Coinpan>, was 
 intrusted with the selection of two trustworthy inspectors. 
 Of course these orders were only a form ; the real inten- 
 tion was that Hutchinson, Kohl, and Co. should take 
 immediate possession of St. Paul and St. George, and 
 when Colonel Frank W. Wicker, then (-'oUector of Alaska, 
 and Jlr. Vincent Colyer visited the islaiuls during 18(19, 
 as Special Agents of the Government, they found that 
 instead of 3,()U0 seals altogether, over 00,000 seals had 
 been killed on St. Paul alone ; and when Colonel Wicker 
 made a report of the fact to the Government, he was 
 immediately relieved. Tlie skins were of coiuse appro- 
 priated by Hutchinson, Kohl, and Co. 
 
 " The TMise. 
 
 " ■\\Ticn the chances of Hutchinson, Kohl, and Co. of 
 getting possession of the fur-seal islands became almost a 
 certainty, not only Williams and Haven had joined them, 
 but Collector Miller (who is a special friend ami favourite 
 of Cieneial Grant, and who had served tlio Company so 
 well and his country so badly) resigned his CoUectorship 
 of the Port of San Francisco to become President of this 
 enlarged concern, which now called itself ' The Alaska 
 Commercial Compnuv.' In the meantime, while the 
 lobbying at Washington went bravely on, it had been 
 decided that said islan.is were to be leased, but in order to 
 preserve at least an appearance of fairness, not to the 
 Alaska Commercial Company, but to the highest bidder; 
 but that this was nothing else but a blind to satisfy 
 and appease the public subsequent events have sufficiently 
 proven. 
 " Congress passed an Act entitled : 
 " ' An Act to prevent the Extermination of Fur-bearing 
 Animals in Alaska," approved the 1st July, 1870. 
 " The principal provisions of the Act are the following : — 
 "No more than 100,000 seals a-year are allowed to be 
 killed on both islands together (75,000 seals on St. Paul 
 Island and 2.'j,000 on St. George Island), under pain of 
 forfeiture of the lease. 
 
 " Terms of the lease twenty years from the 1st May, 
 1870. The yearly rental to be no less than 50,000 dollars 
 per annum. 
 
 " The lease to be made immediately after the passage of 
 the Act— <o the best advantage of the United States— U> 
 proper and responsible ])arties, having due regard to the 
 interest of the Government, the native inhabitants, the 
 
85 
 
 parties heretofore engaged in the trade, and the preservation 
 of the seal fislieries. 
 
 "The wording of the Act clearly indicates that the lease 
 should go to the highest responsible bidder fiUing the 
 condiiions and qualifications renuired by the Act. This 
 seen.s also to have been the opinion of Secretary Boutwell, 
 but the Alaska Commercial Company insisted that the 
 Lease Act was passed for their special benefit. They were 
 so importunate that the Secretary of the Treasury felt 
 induced to apply to the Attorney-General for advice. 
 
 " This application was made in a letter, under date of 
 the 2nd July, 1870, to the purport that the lease should 
 be awarded to the highest rcBi)on3ible bidder, to the best 
 aa/antageof the United States, according to the wording 
 of the Act. 
 
 " The Secretary of the Treasury then issued the following 
 advertisement, dated the 8th July, 1870: — 
 
 "' A(lvcrt:sment. 
 
 '"The Secretary of the Treasury will receive sealed 
 proposals until 12 o'clock noon, Wednesday, the 20th July 
 instant, for the exclusive right to take fur-seals upon the 
 Islands St. Paul and St. George, Alaska, for the term of 
 twenty years from the 1st day of May, 1870, agreeably to 
 tlie provisions of an Act approved the 1st July, 1870, 
 entitled, " An Act to iirovent the Extermination of Fur- 
 bearing Animals in Alaska." 
 
 " ' In addition to the specific terms prescribed in the 
 Act, the successful liidder will be refpiired to provide a 
 suitable building for a public school on each island, and to 
 pay the expense of maintaining a school therein for not 
 less than eight months in each year, as may be required 
 by the Secretary of the Treasury. 
 
 " ' Also to pai' the natives of the islands for the labour 
 performed by them, as may be necessary for their proper 
 support, \mder regulations as n)ay be prescribed by the 
 Secretary of the Treasury.' 
 
 "The remaining Alaska traders, though having 
 strenuously worked against the Lease Act while it was 
 pending, ki,ew full well that the lease in such hands as 
 those of the Alaska Company would be equivalent to a 
 monopoly of the whole of Alaska territory, and also 
 equivalent to their gradual ejectment from it. 
 
 "They were consequently compelled, in order to save 
 their investments, to compete for and bid on the lease. 
 
 " The 20th day of July was the last day of receiving 
 bids. On that last day the Treasury Department issued 
 a singular Memoiandum, which we subjoin : — 
 
 " ' Office of the Secretari/, July 20, 1870. 
 " 'Memorandum in reference to Bids for the exclusive right 
 to tale Fur-seals upon the Islands St. Paul and St. George, 
 read lefirre the Persons present at the opening of the Bids 
 at 12 o'clock noon, July 20, 1870 : 
 
 " ' 1. The successful bidder will be required to deposit 
 security within three days, to the amount of 60,000 dollars 
 
86 
 
 in lawful money or bonds of the United States, for the due 
 execution of contracts, agreeably to " An Act to prevent 
 the Extermination of Fur-beariug Animals in Alaska," 
 a; >oved 1st July, 1870. 
 
 ••'2. It being apparent from the language employed 
 in tho Act aforesaid that it was the intention of Congress 
 to give a preference to the Alaska Commercial Corapr.ny 
 in the award of tlieir contracts, I think it proper to state, 
 before the bids are opened, that the contract will be 
 awarded to the said Company if their proposals shall be 
 not more than 10 per cent, below that ol the highest 
 bidder. 
 
 "■3. No bid will be accepted unless made by a re- 
 sponsible party acquainted with the business or skilled in 
 kindred pursuits to such an extent as to render it probable 
 that the contract will be so executed as to secure the 
 results contemplated by the lease.' 
 
 "The Secretary then proceeded to open the bids, of 
 which there were fourteen. 
 
 "The lowest bid was that of the Ala.ska Commercial 
 Company, amounting to 05,000 dollars rental a-year, and 
 the liigh'est bid that of Louis Goldstoue, for a combination 
 of various San Francisco lirms, amounting to a yearly 
 rental of 227,500 dollars. 
 
 "The principal parties in tlie combination of firms for 
 whom Goldstone bad made the bids were the firm of 
 Taylor and Bendel, one of the most respectable and jiro- 
 minent houses of .San Francisco, that had been engaged in 
 the Alaska trade from its opening, and having the addi- 
 tional advantage over the Alaska Commercial Company of 
 prior occupation. The in.iuiries immediately instituted by 
 the Government in Washington, through the agency of 
 Custom-house Collector Tlielps, of San Francisco, as to 
 their standing and responsibility, were of a character in 
 every way satisfactory. 
 
 " Notwithstanding this and the great discrepancy in the 
 bids, the Alaska Commercial Company entered various 
 protests, which were referred by Mr. Boutwell to the 
 Attorney-General, then Mr. A. T. Akerinan, who heard 
 arguments on both sides, and, under date of the 29th July, 
 decided in favour of Goldstone and associates. 
 
 " After the delivery of Mr. Akerman's opinion, it was 
 everywhere taken for granted tho lease would be awarded 
 to Goldstone. Nobody had any doubt of it. All obstacles 
 had been removed, and all protests done away \vith. 
 
 " On the 30th July, Mv. Goldstone consequently called 
 at the Trea-sury Office for the lease, but to his utter 
 astonishment and consternation he was informed that the 
 lease had been awarded to the Alaska Commercial Com- 
 pmiy on the terms of his own (Goldstone's) bid. The 
 communication was made by Acting Secretary William A. 
 Richardson, whose face, in giving the information, waa 
 crimsoned with shame. Mr. BoutweU had secretly left for 
 Maasachusetta. 
 
37 
 
 " Slate of tltc InhabitantH of the Fur-seal Mamln. 
 
 " Although thu Ala«kii Commercial Compuuy has, uvcr 
 since the wn^tchcd jhmiIjIc of St. George and St. Paul wen^ 
 delivered into their handu, asserti'd that tlie latter are well 
 satisfied with their condition, and that tliey are as happy 
 as the day is long ; yet the niua;,'re news that, in spit(^ of 
 the vigilance of the Company, have reached San Francisco, 
 tell a difl'erent tale, and they are so restricted by the terms 
 of the lease that they are in nolhing else Imt a state of 
 liondage and slavery. 
 
 " Till' inliahitants of these islands are shut olf from com- 
 munication with the outer world liki! a colony of convicts, 
 as no ve.s.sel is penuittcd to touch at, or no [jei'son allowed 
 to land on, their soil <'.\cept tho.se ludonging to the Alaska 
 Commercial Company. They are not allowed to leave the 
 island without permission. They are forced to accci)t 
 40 cents per skin, which are worth from 1(* dollars to 
 20 dollars each at Lcaidon, aial they nnist [lay for the 
 commodities of life wluil the Alaska Commercial Company 
 demands of them. And if we consider that they are 
 bnaiglit into this condition liy the Government of the 
 United States, which has the sacn^d duty to protect the 
 personal liberty of every individual within its domains, 
 wc cannot imagine a more Hagrant case of the violation 
 of the principles of lii'publicanism than that which here 
 presents itself. 
 
 " Considering, furthermore, the course which Hutchinson, 
 Kohl, and Co., which i.s now the Alaska Connuercial 
 Company, have ever pursued since their name has been 
 known, how little they have respected what humanity, 
 law, and justice demand, we arc forced to believe that the 
 condition of the inhabitants of St. George and St. I'aul is 
 not such as they represent. 
 
 " TIk suppressed Petition. 
 
 '■ We refer to the famous Petition of the inhabitants v( 
 St. George Island, which cannot be read without a feeling 
 of regret, shame, and indignation, and the history of whieli, 
 briefly given, is as follows : — 
 
 " When the fur-seal islands had lieeu about a year in 
 liossessiou of the Alaska Commercial Company, there 
 arrived in San Francisco a native oi the Island of 
 St. George, by the name of Peter Rupi, who lirought to 
 Agapius Honsharenko, editor of the -Alaska llerakl,' a 
 paper pulilished in San Francisco, a Petition, written in 
 the Itussian language, which had been drawn up by th.e 
 same Aleuts who once Ijefore appealed to the Chamber of 
 Connnerce, and whicli bad Ijeen signed by all the leading 
 men of said i.slands. 
 
 " The following is the Petition translated into readalile 
 Knglish : — 
 
 " ' Thf' sifp/}i'ff<scd !*> iitfvji. 
 
 '"We, the Undersigned, natives of St. Gc^orge Island. 
 Alaska, and citizens of the United States, by virtue of 
 [854] I- 
 
 I 
 
88 
 
 Tri'iiiy HlipuktidiiM, IVi'liiiK aggriiivcid ;il llii^ iiiisiiiaimf{u- 
 iiKMit, of \\w nll'iiifH III' this tciritiny, roHulliiiH in Heiioua 
 ^{liiwiiiiccis 1(1 UH, iivailwl oiirsL'lvi's of thr iiu'ilhiiii of a 
 I'ctitioii to lli(! (li'iii'iiil (lovciiumilit, in tliu hopes of 
 iii'(;oiii]iliHliin,i;, tliroiij,'li siifh mi'aiiH, siicli reforms in iho 
 iimiiiimiiiiiil of Alaskiiualfairs as would U'liil to aiueliornU' 
 tlui iiiilia]iiiy coiulition in which we foiiiid ourselves 
 placed. 
 
 ■"This I't'lition was fiaiiied in IHd',', and was intrusted 
 to tliu cure of our eouutrvinaii, J. An hiniaudriloir, to lie 
 fons'arded to the [iropur authorities at Washington for 
 their action thereon in our relief, but, we are sorry to say, 
 it never reached its destination. Aj;ain, we jirepared the 
 I'utition, and this tinu!, to assinv its delivery to the a\ilha- 
 ritu'3 at Washington, we intrusted it to Mr. N. liuynitski, 
 a United State.s' ollicial frcjni Wa.sliinglon, at tho time 
 present on the island. This ollicer received the I'etitiou 
 in 1870, and promised faithTnlly to present the same to 
 the authorities at Washington ; but on his return among 
 W.S in the year 1871, we were again destined to disappoint- 
 ment, for, on our urgent intiuiry as to what had been done 
 with our Petition, we received no an.swer. We have, in 
 view of these facts, been forced to the conclusion that our 
 Petition to insure ns the redress of our giievances, 
 ad<lressed to tin' suincnie authority at Washington, has 
 been suppressed. 
 
 '"Now, therefore, wi', the I'ndersigned, forward for publi- 
 cation, in the " Ala.ska Herald." a copy of the said snjipressed 
 I'etitiou, in hopes that it may, by that means, reach the ear 
 of the Oenoral flovernment, and the proper authorities 
 thereof at Washington ; — 
 
 ' Pktitiox, 
 
 '• ■ Siiiid (tconje hlnnd, Alaska, 
 " ' AiKjmt 5, 1871. 
 
 " ' We, the undersigned natives of Si.int George Island, 
 Alaska, and citizens of the United Suites, > lasider that we 
 have lieen treated by the United Htaics' Government 
 without due consideraiion to our w:\,il« .aid necessities. 
 
 " • That we can read and write, and are capable of holding 
 oonesiiondenec with the Government. 
 
 " ■ That tlovernnient, without consulting us, or under- 
 standing our situation, wants, and necessities, leased the 
 island on which we live for twenty years, thereby virtually 
 sentencing us to a twenty years' imprisonment 
 
 " ' Thatwe recognize bythi.s act that we have been reduced 
 to a species of slavery, and that we are compelled to labour 
 and to receive therefor only 40 cents per fur-seal skin, or 
 50 cents per day for labour, when we can procure it, an 
 amount entirely inadequate to our wants, and which leaves 
 us dependents and paupers, checking our prosperity and 
 impeding the progress of our civilizai.ion. 
 
 " ' That in consequence the education of our children, a 
 privilege secured to other citizens of the United States, 
 must be abandoned. Morally, religiously, socially, and 
 
8» 
 
 ' (pinmiTcinlly, oiir ilcstiny is in llu; llllHll^ '>!' tlii,' lessrcs of 
 
 till' CioVlTMIIllMlt. 
 
 "'Wi' iii'u till' slavi', I, I' thesis Iimsuuh, mil at ilii'ir 
 iiitTcy. 
 
 "' Wo are simi nut livmi all iiiti'ivdiir^c with ntliuf |ioi- 
 tioiis of till' lu |iiil)lic, nnd aiv, coiisi'iiiKMilly, ildiunvil I'nmi 
 impiovi'iui lit liy mutual I'liiirHiionilcMii' willi sister (■oin- 
 riiuuitius, and frum li'arninj,' (limui^'li smli iMturinnrsr how 
 to advance; in llu' coiunmn rivili/.ation ol' lair i'uunlry. 
 
 " ' Kvcn iniTchantH and triidcis avr rxiUidcd I'loni our 
 Rliort'n hy l\w!it'. h'ssc'c.'s, anil pomiiutition is thus cut oil', 
 and wu are dciit'iidi'nt oidy on the! nicn'ies of our masters. 
 The employes of the Company (lessei^s of our island) 
 often heat ancl vicdently assault us, threatening,' to drive 
 every Aleut rroni the island, and that they have that 
 power tlirou;;h this lease, ohiained hy them from (lovern- 
 ment at a cost of many thousand dollars. These employes 
 are candess and indill'erent about the fur-seal, our only 
 resource and su|il)ort for ourselves and I'amilies. The 
 lessees are permitted to kill UojIKIO per annum. When wo 
 brinj; them skins tlioy select only the lirst-clnss skins, and 
 orilt>r us to take the rest out of their sight, liy this 
 niean.s, out of 1(10 skins, about To are purchased by them 
 nnd the rest, 2." skins, have to be thrown into the sea. 
 The rejected skins whii.h are ca.st into the sea and 
 destroyed wmdd lind a ready sale with other outside 
 traders, who are ea^er to purchase thi'in ; and thus are the 
 fur-seals gradually disappearing; our labour is partially 
 lost, and 2."i per cent, of the wealth of our industry is lost 
 to US because no one is allowed to visit otir shores to 
 trade with us but the lessees of our island, whom we aie 
 compelled to regard in the light of masters and even 
 tyrants. 
 
 '"In conclusion, we beg respectfully of the I'nited 
 
 States' Government, and of our fellow citizens all over the 
 
 licpublic, to regard us not as wild Indians — we are not 
 
 .such — hut as I'ellow-citi/ens struggling to advance in 
 
 civilization, and to become woithy to bo esteemed as 
 
 fellow-(Mtizens of the liepublic. 
 
 "(Signed) 
 
 "'Peter Kezantzow, Andronic llezantzow, Xiciidior 
 
 Veculow, Peter I'upi, Alexis Shvctcow, Kg^r 
 
 Kolechow, Ivan I'hilemonow, Sahba Kolecliow^ 
 
 dob Philenionow, Zachar Ustugo\'.-, I'hiton 
 
 Veeulow, Ciprian Jlercuriew, Peter Chh'bow, 
 
 Ustin Shvetcow, Semen Philemonow, Ab-xis 
 
 Galamin, Gabriel Galamin, lioris Galamin, 
 
 Alexis Ustugow, I'.arpholomeus Malovanski, 
 
 Ivan Sliein, Ivan Popofl', Alexander U.stagow, 
 
 Sebastien Mercuriew, Neophit Shvetcow, 
 
 .To.'jrph Shvetcow, Nicholas Ustogow, Phoca 
 
 Shein, Ivan Akupski.' 
 
 "This Petition created a sensation in Californii as well 
 as in the East, and was a bomb-shell to the Alaska Com- 
 mercial Company. 
 
 " Again did the press raise its voice in behalf of thege 
 
40 
 
 unfortunate Aleuts ; again was the unconstitutionality of 
 the lease hM up before the pubUc, and again were justice 
 ana fairness demanded. I'.ut once more did the storm of 
 indi-nation break upon the stoical front that the (lovern- 
 meiit presented; the Alaska Commercial Company declared 
 the I'etiliou a fabri. alien, and probably spent another cool 
 50,000 dollars «here it di.l most good, and that ended the 
 matter. The Government did not take the slightest 
 notice of the petiJon, and the Alaska Commercial Com- 
 pany has been careful that mt another one should leave 
 the island again. 
 
 " We exclaim, again, alas, ^Maska ! 
 
 "One more Effort. 
 
 " It is now evid.Mit, beyond all doubt, that although the 
 Gei ral Goverumenl was fully aeiiuainted with every 
 <lctail of tliis disgraceful allUir, no redress could be obtidned 
 at Washington ; still, (.ue more ellbrt was made by the 
 indignant citizens of San Fraueiseo, and in February 1872 
 the Senate of the State of California was memorialized ami 
 implored to use its influence with the Government of the 
 I'uited States in behalf of this cau.e. We give here the 
 Memorial ; — 
 
 "'MaMrial to the Ilonom-nhle th Samk and the House 
 •"o/llcprcsaitdtiirs of the State of California. 
 
 ■■•The Memorial of the I'ndersigned, citizens of the 
 Tnited States and merchants and traders of the city of 
 San Francisco, most respectfully represents: — 
 
 ■■■And whereas liv the terms of said contract, or lease, 
 Con-ress has surrendered to the said Company, for a 
 period of twenty years, the entire resources of the said 
 islands, together with the inhabitants tlu'reof, in their 
 foreign inten'ourse and the entire regulation of the trade 
 tlurewith, and has invested the sai.l Comiuiny with such 
 arbitrary privileges and powers as to virtually give to said 
 Company a monopoly of the entire resources and com- 
 mercial interests of the said lonitnry, thereby shutting m 
 the iMhabitants thereof from all intercourse, through the 
 me^ihuu of commerce, with their fellow-citizens elsewhere 
 in ihe ruiou except through the agents and employes of 
 I be said monopoly ; 
 
 •■■And whereas, by th.' terms of the said coi.:™ct or 
 lease, the Congress of the United States has abdicate.l in 
 favour of said monopoly that portion of the sovereign 
 pow.-r of the Government of Hie I'niled States which can 
 ri'glitfullv be ex..T. ised hy Congress alone ; 
 
 '"'■■And whereas the executive branch of the General 
 Oovuinnent, through its ofUcers and agents, theret.. 
 prompted by like undue inlluences and corrupt ; ractice;- 
 nnd means, has been led to sustain and 8npi«.rt the sa .1 
 monopoly in tb.^ illegal exercise of its uncoustilulioi .J 
 privileges and poweis, iu that — 
 
41 
 
 " ' It has surrendered itself through its revenue officers 
 in Alaska to the control of this monopoly ; 
 
 " ' It has permitted Federal otlicors to act as agents of 
 the said monopoly ; 
 
 " ' ^t has permitted Fedpral officors to become stock- 
 holders in said monopoly ; 
 
 • » • • 
 
 " ' And whereas the Exectivo branch o' the General 
 Government, l)y the acts aforesaid and otherwise, has 
 abdicated that portion of the sovereign power and autho- 
 rity which can rightfully be exercised by the Executive 
 of the Government alone, acting through agents 
 and ofllceis oxcUisively devot(;d to the duties of their 
 respec'- ve otiicos, in favour of the agents of said mono- 
 poly, cliiiming to net under the double capacity of agents 
 for both the Government and said monopoly ; 
 
 " ' Now, therefore, we, the Undersigned, being per- 
 sonally cognizant of the above facts, and sincere in the 
 deductions derived therefrom, would, in view tliereof, 
 most respectfully petition your honourable bodies in joint 
 convention, by concurrent I'csoliition, address the Congress 
 of the United States, at its present session, petitioning 
 tliat honourable body, in the interests of your memo- 
 rialists, and of the merchants and traders and commerce 
 of San Francisco, the Pacific coast, and the entire nation, 
 and in the interests of humanity and progress, of right and 
 justice, and in vindication of the integrity of our institu- 
 tions, which denounce (U efforts at the enthralnient of 
 the peopled or any portion thereof, to annul the said illegal 
 and unconstitutional contract or lease above mentioned, 
 and to open up Alaska to free and unrestricted commer- 
 cial intercourse, subject only to such wise and wholesome 
 general regulations of trade as will iict and be binding 
 upon idl alike ; and as a proliminary to such a step, 
 praying that a Connnission be apijointed by Congress at 
 its present session to investigate the evils which attend 
 the management of Alaskan affairs, and the infractions of 
 the terms of the said contract or lease by the said Alaska 
 ("ommeicial Company, said Connnission to be composed in 
 wliole (ir in part of merchants of San Francisco. 
 " (Signed) 
 "'A. Crawford and Co., Johnson, Niokerson and 
 Vcascy, Lyndo and Hough, Jlorgau ami Co., 
 Thomas J. I'"ostcr, John If. Camiany and Co., 
 Sherwood, Huckly and Co., Thomas liurden, 
 J. Slurtevant, J. Marks, S. Folpe, Thomas W. 
 McCallinn, A. C. Nichols and Co., H. llorst, 
 Stair and Little, James K. Finlayson, 1). Beadle, 
 Charles Hare, S. M. llolderne.ss, David Shirpser, 
 Sam P. Ilolden, JI. J. Kelly, Charles J. Janson, 
 Koyal Fisk, And. Welch, A. C. I'uind, Jacob 
 Schrieber, W. A. Hughes, Wm. H. Rouse. 
 J. M. llickson, A. W. White and Co., Hdl, 
 Slopt and Co., A. Pallies, ,1. H. Ham, James 
 Cormack, jr., W. J. Loury, C. F. liassett, Adam 
 [851] M 
 
42 
 
 Booth and Co., S. Levy and Co., J. Green, 
 John Laws, Duff and Co., Lowiy and Wight- 
 man, Wm. Kibbe Benjamin, S. M. Henry and 
 Co., P. B. Smith, H. F. Baker, Ileywood and 
 Hendley, Dakin and Libbey, Brous and Per- 
 kids, LittlefieM, Webb and Co., H. K. Ciim- 
 minsa, A. A. Haseltine, J. W. Wolf, George 
 E Cole, J. Scott, James Rope, D. B. Stewart- 
 C. McCann, R. D. ThilpoU, L. E. Noowan, 
 R. E. Haseltine, C. R. Jones, G. S. Rogers, 
 John Bills, William C'hipnian, William Fullard, 
 T. J. Parker, W. Piobbins, Geo. E. P. Hunt, 
 Francis P. Devine, B. H. Madison, Geo. W. 
 Boyd, Wm. do Witt, Jolin C. Gunn, Henry 
 Dneyer, Henry Anderson, L. S. Allen, George 
 Charles Lester, H. Heiiu', John Mcl'herson, 
 R. D. Rliafon, G. D. Plato, John H. Druhe, 
 O. J. Preston, James McLoughlin, H. Applebce, 
 Peter Muhelson, Thomas Bewick, and 300 
 others.' 
 
 "Now, what was the fate of this Memorial? It was 
 presented to the California Legislature by Senator Perkins 
 on the 9th February, 1872, and referred to the Committee 
 on Federal Relations. Genei'al Jliller immediately inter- 
 viewed this Counuittee, and pronounced the statements 
 set forth in said Memorial as false, and his word out- 
 weighed the signatures of hunireds of the best citizens 
 of San Francisco ; and said lionest Committee refused to 
 forward the lii-niorial to Congress. 
 
 " Tlie result of the Lease. 
 
 " From the day the lease was signed, the doom of 
 Alaska was sealed, liaflled and cut off on all sides, the 
 dismayed firms and individuals that followed their various 
 pursuits in the country were forced to withdraw, one after 
 another; the plans then under consideration were aban- 
 doned, and to-day there are hardly any white men in the 
 territory but the employes of the Alaska Commercial 
 Company. 
 
 " It seems strange, at the first glance, that the lease of 
 two small islands should stop the development of the 
 whole immense territory, but it is not more so thi>,n that 
 the possession of a narrow thread of land through a 
 country should give a railroad-ring the power to lord it 
 over cities, counties, and States. 
 
 "On said two islands— St. George and St. Paul— the 
 wealth is heaped up on tJie beach in the form of millions 
 of fur-seals, worth from 10 dollars to 20 dollars each, and 
 without exertion the Alaska Commercial Company makes 
 here alone about 1,000,000 dollars clear profit per year. 
 (The dividends of the Alaska Commercial Company for 
 1873 reached 1,300,000 dollars.; Now, with such 
 tremendous riches at its command, it is an easy matter for 
 this Company to crush any enterprise in the rest of the 
 
43 
 
 whole territory, which it claims as its own dominion, and 
 wlierc enough natural dangers and diflicultios await the 
 trader, fisherman, and explorer without those prepared for 
 them by an uverwholming monopoly. 
 
 "As already the old tyrannical llussia Company 
 correctly anticipated that enterprise, discover)', and the 
 development of the territoiy would interfere with their fur 
 trade, would attract the attention of outsiders, and would 
 curtail their privileges, so lias also the Alaska Commercial 
 Company made in its principle to exclude everybody but 
 itself from Alaska, and has therefore declared war against 
 everytliing that looks like enterprise, exploration, discovery, 
 immigration, and development ; and, as already explained, 
 through the nutans of the tremendous wealth and other 
 advantages furr.ished to it by the lease of th: ''ir-seal 
 islands, has already succeeded in making itself the uaster 
 of the whole territory. 
 
 " To give stiikiug primf how, since the advent of the 
 Alaska Cdmmercial Ccimpany, the trade witli the territory 
 has almost entirely ceased, we will give the lists of the 
 vessels tliat cleared for Alaska during the months of 
 February, Jfarch, and April, respectively, in 18C9 and 
 
 1874. 
 
 * » • » 
 
 " The Coiimenls of tlie Press. 
 
 " We will again quote a few of the many papei-s and 
 authors that have recognized the fact and have discusseil 
 the matter. 
 
 "In a work entitled 'Hidden Treasures; or, Fishhig 
 Around the N(ji-th-Wesl Coast,' a veiy able little work, by 
 J. L. McDonald, we find the following ;— 
 
 '"The villainous law, passed ostensibly for the pro- 
 tection of fur-bearing aninial.s should have been more 
 justly entitled " An Act to en-'^lavi' the \)(io\<\(i of Alaska, 
 to obstruct the Fisheries, and to check the Development of 
 the North-West Coast." By the terms of this Act the 
 iuhabitants of St. Paul and St. George and the, adjaecnt 
 idtimh are strictly iralled in, b<'ing forbidden any inter- 
 course with "the rest of mankind;" they are forced by 
 lU'cessity to sell their products to the Company, and to 
 receive such considerations in return as this souHes.- 
 monopoly may see fit to give. Tif obstructions which 
 the Fur Company has in former years thrown in the way 
 of individual traders and fisliernien in those regions are 
 vi'iy well ku(.iwn. The subsidized Federal oHieers in the 
 interests of tlie Comi.any have given much trouble to 
 private enterprises ; several vessels have been seized on 
 very llimsy pretexts and sent for trial to San Francisi o. 
 In every instance those vesseb liave lieen lilierated, aial 
 the nuisters and supercargoes exonerated fjy the Courts 
 X'oyages liave tlius lieen liroken up, heavy losses have 
 faUen upon liundile adveiitun'rs, failures iiave followed. 
 and peaceful connnerce has l)ceu seriously obstructed. 
 Several suits for heavy damages are now ijeuding in the 
 
 [854] 
 
 N 
 
44 
 
 Courts ill tilt" North I'licifii: const a^iiinst tlic revenue 
 oflicers lornifrly Horviiig uii the I'oiist ol' Alaska.' 
 
 " And ngain, in the same book : — 
 
 " ' Sincerely believing that the " fur fraiuhise " in Alaska 
 is obatrnctive to the development of the vnst ri^soiircus 
 latent in tliost^ rej^ions, subviTsive of the liest interests of 
 the people of the territory, and embarrassing to the 
 traders and fishermen in iind around those sliores, we most 
 earnestly ask Conijress to repeal that odious measure, and 
 •' let justice be done though the heavens fall." ' 
 
 " The Sacramento ' Reporter ' {8th July, 1870), says : — 
 
 '" (Jradually this lirni or Comjiany threw off all cloak, 
 openly claimed a monopoly, and warred upon all traders.' 
 
 "From the Chicago 'Tribune' (4tli January, 1873) we 
 take : — 
 
 " ' It practically holds the same relation to Alaska that 
 the old Russo- American did, and that the Hudson's Bay 
 Company does, to the adjoining Briti.sh possessions. It 
 has rivals in the trade, but they are gradually disappearing 
 under the treatment known in California as " the little 
 game of freeze-out." The Comiiany is reported very 
 wealthy, and can aflbrd to undersell and overbuy its rivals, 
 until they have to give up the losing game. It is accom- 
 modating, even generous, when its own interests are not at 
 stake. It discountenances everything which tends to the 
 development of the country, such as exploiation, immigra- 
 tion, &c., because a settled territory produces no furs. If 
 a man is bound to go there, and it cannot help it, it is then 
 lull of accommodation, and helps him all it can during his 
 stay there, and hastens his departure.' 
 
 " This is an extract from an article by Mr. Harrington, 
 astronomer in the United States' Coast Survey, who had 
 been a year in Alaska. 
 
 " A distinguished olticer of the United States' army. 
 General Jefferson C. Davis, commanding the Department 
 of Ala.skn, reported : — 
 
 " ' Since the declaration of Congrt^ss at its last session of 
 St. Paul and St. George Islands as special reservations of 
 the Governraent, they have been under the control of 
 oflicers of the revenue service, sent there for the purpose 
 of executing the laws prohibiting the landing at or killing 
 of fur-seals upon them. During my offleial visit there in 
 the beginning of the present summer, and while engaged 
 in investigating the affairs of the natives, as well as the 
 manner in which the troops had i)erformed their duties, I 
 learned that, under one pretext and another, privileged 
 parties had been permitted to land and remain on those 
 reservations, and had been allowed to kill the animals at 
 pleasure. During last summer at least 85,000 seals were 
 killeil on the two islands, probably more than that number. 
 The pretext under which tliis was authorized was that of 
 
45 
 
 riiiiblinti till' imlivi's to subsist themselves \villi<i\iti'xiiciisc 
 tci llu' (.lovwiiuu'iit. Ill im .'(•iinuiiiionl iiniiil i.l' view tliis 
 would .suoiii (luite ri;;ht ; Imt tlic fncts urn llmt the iiiilivr i 
 aro cooiicil up on tlicso islands, whoro they aiu compelle.l 
 til work for tliosi' iirivute luirtios or starve ; in nthcr wunN, 
 llicij are tit-drnj in o fanijilele ilnle <;f slavini. (,'i)iiilielitioii 
 in trade has been universally cslnblislieil, and it is now 
 pretty well understood by the natives ami traders tliroiiRh- 
 nnt the country ; wherever the former can paddlo his canoe, 
 or the latter penetrate with his j,'n(ids, such is the case. 
 Thcs. inotateil isliUK/n of >St. Pant a ml St. Oanye, in Jiehrin;/ 
 Sia, the rkhcst posiussiuus in natiind wcaltli, lUiiMirimj 
 thrir nmoll itreo, on the continent, form the only fxceptions. 
 The natives are peaceful, honest, and capable of tranaactinj! 
 ordinary business ipiile Mell, and would dinditless improve 
 themselves if they had a fair chan<:e ; hnt thrir xircmnt 
 complete enslavement ami rohhei-y, hi/ an unscrupnlou-i rimj 
 of spi-culnlovfi, will n-cr prcrent such ;)/-o^re>iS.'— (Report of 
 Brevet Major-General, commanding Department of Alaska. 
 to Secretary of War, Auyust 20, 1870.) 
 
 " Conccalimj the tritf Value of Ahida Tcrntori/. 
 
 " In order to stifle the interest that the public took in 
 Alaska, and to prevent as much as pos.silile that the same 
 should be made the object of American enterprise, the 
 Alaska Commercial Company has always been very 
 an.xious to have Alaska represented as a very midcsirable 
 and inhospitable country, without chaniis of any kind, 
 and its fur trade as throwing otf but a limited profit, 
 exhibiting in this respect again the same spirit as the old 
 Russian Company. 
 
 "The Oovernment olUcials, wlio in various capacities 
 were sent out from time to time to Alaska, and who wen; 
 "enerally won over to private interests before they even 
 left San Francisco or Washington, gave, therefore, always 
 the most unfavourable account of the country ; while men 
 whose honour and integrity cann(>t be doubted, reiiiesent 
 the country as it is, so far as they know it. Such men are 
 Secretaiy Seward ; Professor Davidson, of scientific fame ; 
 (iencral Jefferson C. Davis, former Military Covernor of 
 Alaska ; Vince; ^ Colycr, and Dr. W. II. Dall, of the 
 United State'; ''la.-^ Survey. 
 
 " .VU these uusimguished persons speak of the a-loniehiug 
 mildness of climate of certain portions of Alaska, of the 
 I'ankness and luxuriousness of the vegetation, of the density 
 and extension of the timber lands, of the indications of 
 minerals, of the magnitude of the fur trade, and of the 
 incredible abundance of aquatic life." 
 
Q 
 
 
 •»^i 
 
 Alle 
 
 c 
 
rW ^^'^^ Cyvtr^o 
 
 r./fCi, 
 
 »jj-*i 
 
 Allegation tliat Russiau title to shores 
 of Ik'lirinij .Spa was undisputed 
 
 United Slates' Case, pp. 25, 2G. 
 
 United StkUt' 
 Case, pp. 25, 26. 
 ind 33. 
 
 )( IX 
 
 I »J. ' • 
 
 
 CONFIDENTIAL. 
 
 Second Draft of Counter-Case on behalf 
 of Great Britain. 
 
 THE arguments in the following Counter-Case 
 on behalf of tho Government of Her Britannic 
 Majesty are, for facility of reference, arranged 
 under the same leading heads which were adopted 
 in the Case presented on behalf of the Govern- 
 ment of Her Britannic Majesty pursuant to the 
 Treaty of the 29th February, 1892» Reference 
 will be made to the pages of tho Case of the 
 United States in which the same points are con- 
 sidered. 
 
 f-f 
 
 Head ®.— TAe User up to 1821 of the Waters 
 of the Behring Sea and other Waters of the 
 North Pacific. 
 
 It is alleged on behalf of the United States 
 that the claim of Russia to the territory em- 
 bracing the Aleutian Islands, the Peninsula of 
 Alaska, and the coast and islands of Behring 
 Sea, was undisputed ; while the shores and the 
 adjacent islands of tho American Continent 
 south of latitude 60° as far as California were, 
 prior to the year 1821, the subject of conflicting 
 claims on the part of Russia, Great Britain, 
 Spain, and the United States.^ If by this allega- 
 tion it is intended to be conveyed that prior to 
 the year 1821 a distinction had been drawn 
 between the parts of the coast of America north 
 and south of latitude 60°, such allegation will be 
 found to be wholly without foundation. 
 
 There is no evidence of any recognition 
 by any nation of the claim of Russia to the 
 eastern shores of Behring Sea; and there is 
 practically no evidence of any actual occupation 
 of these shores, or of any assertion of jurisdiction 
 over them prior to the Ukase of 1799. They 
 were, in fact, unoccupied by Russians or by any 
 civilized people, and their outlines were unknown 
 [741] B 
 
 { 
 
 ■1 WJ.C» 
 
 »u 
 
 {,^ 1 t-, i/.X c^." 
 
to geographers until they were explored by 
 Cook's expedition in 1778 and 1779. 
 
 The authority of Captain Cook is invoked as United States' 
 proving the existence of " Russian influence and "*' •*■ ^*' 
 customs " upon the eastern shores of Behring 
 Sea. Even if he had found Russian " influence 
 and customs," this would not prove Russian 
 occupation or possession of this very extensive 
 line of coast. But his narrative proves the very 
 reverse, and shows that along the whole coast-line 
 he met with no Russians or any other civilized 
 people, hut only with tribes of the native inhabi- 
 tants. He asserts of the Russians at Ounalaska Cook'a Voyage, 
 that " they were strangers to every part of the '°'" "' •*■ *^^' 
 American coast, except what lies opposite this 
 island." 
 
 And, further : — Ibid., p. 499. 
 
 " Both Ismyloff anil the others affirmed that they knew 
 nothing of the continent of America to tlie uortliward [of 
 Unnlaska], and tliat neither Lieutenant Synd nor any other 
 
 Russian had eviir seen it of late From wliat we 
 
 could gather from Ismyloff and his countrymen, the 
 Russians have made several attempts to get a footing upon 
 that part of this continent that lies contiguous to 
 Oonalaslika and the adjoiiung itlands, but have always 
 been repulsed by the natives, whom they describe as a 
 very treacherous people." 
 
 Captain Cook says that I^mylolf — Ibid., p. 498. 
 
 " was verj' well acquainted with the geography of those 
 parts, and with all the discoveries tliat had been made in 
 til em by the Russians." 
 
 ttymylolT furnished Captain Cook with Charts, Ibid., p. 502 
 ore 01 which — 
 
 " comprehended all the discoveries made by the Russians 
 to the eastward of Kamtschatka toward America, which, if 
 we exclude the voyage of Beering and Tschcrikoff, will 
 amount to little or nothing." 
 
 The writer says, in conclusion : — ii,id., p. jod. 
 
 " They assured me over and over again that they know 
 of no other islanils l^esides those which wcjre laid down 
 U]K>n this Chart, and that no Russian had ever soeu any 
 part ol the continent of America to tlie nortliward, except 
 thit which lies opj^site the country of the Tschutskis. " 
 
 The Pribylofl Islands themsdves were not United Sutes' 
 
 discovered until 178G and 1787, and as late as ^"•' PP- "• " 
 
 1821 it appears to have been unknown vhether ['nited Sutet' 
 
 th.To were islands to the northward, and, if so, t-"'. Apin-nd.i 1, 
 
 ' ' 'p. 68. 
 
 whether they were available for scaling. 
 
8 
 
 V^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 United Statei 
 ' ase, p. 26. 
 
 Oreat Britain's 
 Case, Appeadix 
 D. 5. 
 
 Great Britain's 
 Case, Appendix, 
 Tol. 11, Fart I, p. 4 
 
 The only Russian S'?ttlcment upon the eastern 
 shore of Behring Sea mentioned in the United 
 States' Case is that of Nushagak, and this fort 
 appears not to have been established until 1818, 
 and to have contained in 1819 a population of no 
 more that five Russian inhabitants. 
 
 The official Russian Map published in 1802, 
 which will be found in Appendix IV to the Case 
 on behalf of Great Britain, shows, by the striking 
 errors in the drawing of the coast, that the out- 
 lines of the eastern shores of Behring Sea were 
 not known to Russian geographers. Sir Charles 
 Bagot, writing in 1821 in a note made upon this 
 Map, asserts that — 
 
 " la Conipagnie no possede point d'fitablissements dans 
 et au nord de la presqu'ilo Alaska, quoique ses vaisseaux 
 visitent ces regions." 
 
 Uniicd States' 
 Case, Appendix, 
 vol. i, p. 49. 
 
 Lyman's 
 
 The inability of the Russian-American Com- 
 pany to maintain any effective hold upon the 
 territory which it claimed is freely confessed by 
 the Minister of Finance in his letter to the 
 Minister of Marino, dated the 9th April, 1820. 
 In the discussion of the Convention of 1824, 
 " Diplomicy of the j^j j jjj jj^ f,j,j^^ j,j « Lyman's Diplomacy of 
 
 United States, * . ,. ..i 
 
 2nd edition, Boston, tlio United States," vol. 2, p. 297, it is explicitly 
 .828....: i. p. 2:.7. stated:- 
 
 " We Imvo said nothing of the loast to the northward 
 of Bn^^tol Bay, beciiuse it lia.s never been pretended that 
 the Russians had any Settlements on tliat side." 
 
 United States' 
 Cast!, p. 25. 
 
 U'lited SUtes' 
 Caae, Appendi* 
 vol I, p. 14. 
 
 It is clear, therefore, that there is no founda- 
 tion for the assertion that — 
 
 " by first discovery, iimipation, and permanent colonization, 
 Ih: shores and islam I ■ -;/' Behrhuj Sea, the Aleutian chain, 
 and the Peninsida ol' Alaska became, probably as early as 
 1800, an undisputed part of the territory of the Russian 
 Empire." 
 
 While no other nation drew any distinction 
 between the title uf Russia upon the American 
 coast to the north and to the south of latitude 
 60°, it is clear that Russia herself made no such 
 distinction in her claims, but claimed to legislate 
 for the whole north-west coast from the 55th 
 degree to Behring Strait. 
 
 The Ukaae of 179!) asserts this plainly :— 
 
 " 1. By the right of discovery in pa.st times by Uu3.sian 
 navigators of the norlh-enslcrn [sic] part of America, begin- 
 ning from the 55<A degree of north latitude, and on the 
 
chnin of islnnds extending from Kamsehatka to the north 
 to America and south\ifard to Japan, and by right of pos- 
 session of the same by Russia, we most giaciously permit 
 tlio Company to have the use of all hunting grounds and 
 f stall ishmcnts now existim/ on the north-eastern [sic] coast of 
 America, Jrom the above-mentioned 5bth degree to Behring 
 Strait, and also on the Aleutian, Kurilo, and other islands 
 situated in the north-casteru ocean." 
 
 The Ukase thus claimed impartially the 
 whole of the coast so descrihed, and in the 
 absence of any distinction between the northern 
 and the southern portions of the coast affected 
 by that document, the facts stated in Chapter I of 
 the Case presented on behalf of Great Britain 
 have equal weight in the consideration of the 
 existence and extent of Russian jurisdiction over 
 any and every part of the coast so claimed, and 
 demonstrate that foreigners traded there freely 
 without molestation or interference. 
 
 That the Government of the United States did See " Memoirs of 
 not recognize as "undisputed" the claim of ^"^^"^^r;?, „ 
 Russia to the coasts of Behring Sea is clear from p. 163. 
 the statement made by Mr. Adams on the 17th "I 5 . '7 
 
 July, 18-23, to Baron Tuyll, the Russian Minister - / ' 
 
 at Washington, that — 
 
 '• we sliould contest tlie right of Russia to a7iy territorial 
 establishment on this continent." 
 
 Mr. Adams reiterates this contention in a Great Britain's 
 despatch dated the 22nd July, 1823, in which he C""- P- ^*- 
 declares that Russian rights — 
 
 " were confined to certain islands north of the 55th degree 
 of latitude." 
 
 And that — 
 
 "Russia had never asserted a right of sovereignty over .iny 
 part of the North American Continent." 
 
 But whatever may have been the claims of 
 Russia, whether admitted or not, of the right to 
 the possession of the shores of the north-west 
 coast of America and the islands adjacent 
 thereto, no claim had evjr betn made prior to 
 the year 1821 to exclude othor vessels from 
 navigating the waters of the Hehring' Sea, or to 
 exorcise jurisdiction over the waters of that sea 
 as mare clausum, or an internal sea. On the 
 contrary, the ground or justiflcaticn for the 
 
 X 
 
 
 »v<'l-« '■> «~/- 
 
A 
 
 /" 
 
 United States' 
 Cii!e Appendix 1 
 pp. ■Ifl-S?. 
 
 attempted interference by Russia in the year 
 1821 was the competition with the Russian- 
 American Company by the vessels and tradors of 
 other nations. Reference is made to the autho- 
 rities quoted in Chapter I, Head (A), of the Case 
 on behalf of Great Britain, and to the letters 
 Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 in the correspondence of 
 the Russian-American Company, which contain 
 numerous references to the presence of foreign 
 competitors in trade. 
 
 Allegtttion tliat Ukase of 1799 as- 
 SLTtcd oxclusivo rights, and was 
 acquiesced in by fiiicigu I'owerg. 
 
 United Stale.'!' Ca.se. pp. ?,5-b0. 
 United .States' 
 Case, pp. 35-50. 
 United States' 
 Case, Appendii I , 
 p. 12. 
 
 k 
 
 II 
 
 Mr. Middleton to 
 Mr. Adams, 
 American State 
 Tapers, Foreign 
 KelatioDS, vol. v, 
 p. 461. 
 
 Great Britain's 
 Case, p. 23. 
 Ibid., pp. S9-34. 
 
 Ibid., p. 27. 
 
 ^, 
 
 (I 
 
 -^cj 
 
 Uniteu States' 
 Case, Appeudii I, 
 p. 26. 
 
 It is further aUeged on behalf of the United 
 States, that by the Ukase of 1799 Russia claimed 
 the exclusive right to all products of the chase 
 and commerce north of 55°, and that this Ukase, 
 though setting forth a claim of exclusive Russian 
 jurisdiction down to latitude 55°, called forth no 
 protest from any foreign Powers. To the second 
 point there is the conclusive answer, in the words 
 of Mr. Middleton, that the — 
 
 "Ukase, which is, in ks/otm, an act purely domestic, was 
 never nutilied to any foreign State with injuncliun to 
 respect its provisions." 
 
 Moreov r, as appears from the provisions of 
 
 the Ukasc itself, it dealt only, as was pointed 
 
 out by Mr. Middleton and by Mr. Adams, with 
 
 the rights of the Russian-American Company, 
 
 . to the exclusion of other Russian subjects. 
 
 In support of the view, that the Charters 
 to the Russian-American Company were not 
 and did not purport to be international 
 documents, but purely domestic acts, not in- 
 tended to affect foreign nations, reference may be 
 made to the language of the doc; ,.ents them- 
 selves. In the year 1821 the Ukase of the 1th 
 September, which expressly affected foreiguers, 
 was officially communicated to the Governments 
 of Great Rritain and the United States. Ilis 
 Imperial Majesty the Emperor ot Russia, on 
 the 13tli September, 1821, i.e., within a few 
 days of the promulgation of the Ukase, granted a 
 Charter to the Russian- American Ctmpany for 
 twenty years, in which, by .iv-tide 2, it was 
 stated that the Russian- America i Company 
 enjoyed the privilege of huuting and lishiiig to 
 the exclusion ot all other Russian or foreign 
 [741] C 
 
6 
 
 ,2;. 
 
 .39. 
 
 subjects throughout the territories on the coast of 
 North-West America, from latitude 51° north to 
 Bchring Straits. And the exclusion of both 
 Russian sul)ject8 and foreigners is further referred 
 to in Article 6 of the same Charter. But by the United States' 
 confirmation of this Charter in the year 1829, the ^"^'^ Appendi. I. 
 right to profit in the fur and fishing industries is i(,id._ p, 
 reserved to the Company to the exclusion of all 
 other Russian subjects, and the rights of foreign 
 nations are expressly stated to be governed by 
 the Treaties of 1824 and 1825. Again, upon the Ibid., p, 
 occasion of a grant of a further Charter in the 
 year 1814 to the Russian-American Company of 
 the right to carry on the fur and fishing indus- 
 tries, it is made, as before, to the exclusiv. of all 
 Russian subjects. At no time prior or subsequent 
 to the Ukase of 1821 were the Cliarters to the 
 Russian-American Company treated by Russia as 
 documents affecting foreign Powers or otherwise 
 than as purely domestic Acts. 
 
 It is further again to bo noted, that the exelu- Great Bpium'i 
 sivo rights specially granted to the Russian- """' •" ' 
 American Company were rights to be exercised 
 on territories already acquired or thereafter to be 
 discovered within the prescribed area, and not 
 upon non-territorial waters of Behring Sea or any 
 other non-territorial waters. 
 
 It is further alleged on behalf of the United 
 States that, under the Ukase of 1799, the 
 Russian-American Company, acting under the 
 sanction of the Russian Government, did not 
 permit foreign vessels to visit Behring 
 that up to the date of the Treaties of 1824 and 
 l'-2.'j Russia did assert and exercise exclusive 
 riL;lits of commerce, hunting, and fishing in all 
 tlu! waters of the Behring Sea ; and that there is 
 ijo record tliat hunting and trading had ever been 
 carried on (by subjects or citizens of Great Britain 
 and the United States) in Behring Sea prior to 
 the year 1S21. No one of these allegations is 
 6Ui)ported by the facts, and the allegation that 
 under the Ukase of 1799 foreigners were not 
 permitted to visit that sea is in direct contradic- 
 tion of the assertions of Mr. Middleton and 
 Mr. Adams, quoted above, and of the Report of 
 Golovnin, (juotcd at p. 32 of the Case for 
 Great Britain. No instance is to be found 
 of Russia preventing foreign vessels from 
 visiting Bchring Sea, but, in addition, it must 
 bo distinctly remembered that the claims and 
 
 AUpj^ation tlmt under Uka.sc of 1700 
 (oit'if;n vessels wnrn not allownl U) 
 visit Bulirin" Soa. 
 
 United States' Case, p. 42 
 
 Sea ; United States' 
 Case, p. 42. 
 
 Ibid., p. 69. 
 
The Riccord-Piijott cimtracl 
 Unilc'it StiiU's' (Xso 
 
 p. 45. 
 
 L'nitpil Slalp»' 
 C«sp, p. 45. 
 
 United States' 
 Cme, Appendii 1, 
 pp 5/ -56. 
 
 United States' 
 Case, p. 45. 
 
 exercise of jurisdiction by Russia extended 
 equally to the whole coast of America from 
 Behring Straits to latitude 55°, and in the year 
 1821 to latitude 51°. There were at all times 
 numerous instances of foreign vessels trading to 
 places on the coast of America north of lati- 
 tude 51° and latitude 55°, and the claims 
 attempted to be set up by the Russian Ukases 
 purported to interfere with and limit the exercise 
 of these rights just as much as the rights of 
 trading within Behring Sea. 
 
 On the other hand, the solitary instance in 
 which it is alleged that Russia actually asserted 
 exclusive rights over Behring Sea prior to 1821 
 is the case of the lliccord-Pigott contract in 
 1819. Three letters (dated 10th April, 1820, 
 23rd April, 1820, and 31st March, 1821) are 
 relied upon as — 
 
 " illuatrating tliu complete control which Russia claimed 
 and actually exercised over Behring Sea prinr to 1821." 
 
 Letter, April 23, 
 IB30. 
 
 Prom the facts alluded to in these letters, it 
 appears that Riccord, the Superintendent of 
 Kamtchatka, had made an agreement with Pigott, 
 an Englishman, for ten years, from 1819 — 
 
 ' 1799 
 vcd to 
 
 " with reference to fishing for whales and extracting oil 
 from these and other marine animals on the shores of 
 Kamtchatka and on those of idl Eastern Siberia, in the 
 harbours and bays ami amongst the islands." 
 
 Letter, April 10, 
 I S20, para;;raph 1 
 (British transla- 
 tion) 
 
 This contract was undoubtedly disapproved by 
 the Russian Government, which, having granted 
 to a Russian Company a monopoly of trade in 
 these regions, to the exclusion of all other 
 Russian subjects, was naturally unwilling to 
 allow any part of this monopoly to be sublet to 
 foreigners. The Russian-American Company 
 is therefore insfnictcd to turn its attention to 
 the whale fishery, and to employ a ship in 
 fishing — 
 
 ".since the whale-fishing industry may be of use as a 
 means of as.sisting the inliabitant.s of Kamtchatka and 
 Okhotsk when the other fisln-ries fail" 
 
 M)id., parosr»ph 2. The Government further ordered that no 
 foreigner should be allowed to cntc n merchant 
 guild, or to settle at Kamtchatka or Okhoisik, and 
 that no foreign merchant-vessel should be per- 
 mitted— 
 
h^f /. 
 
 " to trade at those places under any circumstances, or to 
 enter the ports of Eastern Siberia except in case of 
 
 distress Furthenuorc, the Englisliuian Davis at 
 
 Okhotsk, and Dobello's agent in Kiiiiitehatka, are to be 
 informed .... that the Government refuses them per- 
 mission to remain at those jjlaccs, or to builJ houses or 
 hold real property there ; the local autliorities shall afford 
 them all proper facilities for disposal of their pi-ojicrty and 
 leaving the country." 
 
 These instructions bare been quoted at length 
 because they show clearly that the Russian 
 Government exercised in this instance no juris- 
 diction other than the strictly territorial jurisdic- 
 tion which attaches to every nation in right of 
 its possession of the soil. 
 
 The foreigners are prohibited from residing, 
 trading; entering ports, building houses, or 
 holding real property, and they are ordered to 
 leave the country. 
 
 No attempt is made io exclude them from 
 navigating the adjoining seas, though it is clear 
 that the Russian Government was prepared to 
 use every means within its power to prevent the . A ^ 
 possibility of foreign competition in trade. ^ 
 
 Several passages are quoted from the same 
 correspondence in the Case presented on behalf 
 of the United States, as proving the assertion by 
 Russia of a further jurisdiction over waters. 
 
 Special attention is called to these quotations, 
 because it has been found, on comparing the 
 English translations which are printed in vol. i of United States' 
 the Appendix to the Case of the United States ^T' •*''Pr"l"'' 
 
 » '■ vol. 1, p. 49, «c. 
 
 with the Russian originals which appear at the 
 
 end of the same volume, that in every passage 
 
 quoted in the Case in this connection the words 
 
 rehed on as proving an assertion of marine juris- Viv ". ''',»» 
 
 diction are mere interpolations of a translator or 
 
 annotator, and nowhere appear in the original 
 
 Russian text. 
 
 Tiie quotations in question are here set out, the 
 interpolated jiassages being printed in italics ; — 
 
 "Having for the l)enc£t of the American Oniiiiaiiy l.'nited Statu' 
 excluded all foreigners from Kamtcliatka and Okhotsk, *" '"' *^' 
 and prohiliit<id them from engaging in trade and from 
 hwitiiuj and fithituf in all the natcr.i of Eaatcrn Siberia, 
 the Government fully expects that thr Oimpiuiy, uti its 
 jiiirt, will hohl itself re.sponsible foi supplying tliiisc 
 regions with all necessaries 
 
 " In eotulution, it is utaled as the dtcisiim of HU Majesty Ibid., p. 47. 
 the Emperor, in vieio o/ ponnible future lompliinlions of this 
 nature, that no eontracls inrolviny the frei wlininsioii or 
 navigation for trade of foreign ships or foreign suhjects in the 
 
 Quotations frein correspdiidence of 
 the liussiaii-AmciKaM Ciniijmny. 
 
 United Stales' r.iS':, p. 4t'r 
 
 nUv 
 
 ■•1) 
 
 (,» 
 
9 
 
 Uniti'.l States' 
 Cftse, p. 47. 
 
 Ihid., p. 48. 
 
 c.w.c o( 
 ipiiny. 
 
 See Appendix for 
 c^irirct iranslatioii 
 ill full. 
 
 (IiiitoJ Stitfs' 
 Oa«i', p 49. 
 
 •-i.i..,,..i: 
 
 U^ 'c (.. 
 
 6rU^r «,'.•,,„ 
 
 ...'b 
 
 l-'w" 
 
 Jbiii 
 
 waters adjoining or houruled hij the coasts of Rmsian Colonics 
 will he approved by tlu Imperial Government." 
 
 Further, at p. 47 : — 
 
 ". . . . Basing your own action upon tliis proceeding of 
 our Highest Pi'otector, you a.s Coninr.Muler of all our 
 Colonies iiiu-st prohibit with eijual strictness all foreigneis 
 from engaging in any intercourse or trade with native 
 inha'.iilanls, as well as from visiting the waters frcqiunled 
 by sea-utters and fur-seals, nver which our operations e.etcnd< 
 under penalty of the most severe measures, including tlie 
 conliscation of ships and the imprisonment of crews 
 (engaged in tins illegal trafiic. You must act with the 
 greatest severity in cases where foreigners have sold to the 
 natives arms, powder, and lead. They must be made to 
 understand that their presence in our waters in contrary to 
 our lairs, and that they will never ije admitted to any port 
 \inle.ss yo" or your suljordinatcs convince yourselves that 
 such is necessary for the saving of life. In a word, you 
 must preserve an attitude in full accord with the views of 
 the Imjierial Government on this subject, and protect 
 against all intniders the ilumain of land and water granted 
 to us by tlie grace of the Euiperor and ncci isary for our con- 
 tinued cxistcnre ami prosperity. You must tran.smit these 
 instructions without delay to your suborduiate Com- 
 manders for their conduct in their intercourse with 
 foreigners, and especially to the Commanded of ships 
 navigating our waters, to enable theui to drive away ihe 
 foreign intruders." 
 
 And again, at p. 19 : — 
 
 ". . . . The principles invdved in tins .action of the 
 Ciovirnnu'nt you must also obsi'rve in dealing with 
 fdreigncrs Hhi> may visit our Colonies, using (ill the farce at 
 yuur command to drive them from our waters " 
 
 Other instances of in.aecur;ite translation and 
 of iutorpolations in the translation gtlgkt be 
 given, trnt |iio above^ which arc taken from 
 passages quoted and relied upon in tlic Case of 
 the United States, arc sufficient to prove the 
 utterly luiealiaWc nature of the translation given 
 in vol. i of the Apucndix to tlie United States' 
 Case. It will be seen that wlion the spurious 
 ])aa8agcs arc expunged, the whole of the evidence 
 disappears upon which ti\c advisers of tlie United 
 States' Government have relied as estahlisiiing 
 that the Ukase of 1821 was merely declaratory of 
 pre-existing claims of exclusive jurisdiction as to 
 trade iu Behring Sea, which had been enforced 
 therein for many years. 
 
 The " pre-existing claims" and tlieir enforce- 
 ment for many years, so far as thjy imply any 
 [741] 1) 
 
 ^^ 
 
10 
 
 extraordinary maritime jurisdiction, arc merely 
 creatures of tlie imagination or the translator. 
 
 Tlie whole of tlu^ lUissian correspondence Las 
 been carefully retranslated, and the correct 
 English version has, for the convenience of the 
 Tribunal, been printed in parallel columns side 
 by side with the United States' version, for 
 purposes of comparison. 
 
 It is much to be regretted that the advisers of 
 the Government of tlie Unitetl States should 
 have been misled in this and in many other 
 instances ^MTrnrn ivhirli appear to have an5p»-^-,...„,,»^ 
 from the ineompotencc of the translator fir fvorur 
 the accidental incorporation of the commeut&^f 
 an annotator into thtrtfeit«£-tl>ctnuislatioiv. _ ' 
 
 These letters j>rove, when more carefully read, 
 that the Russian Company recognized the i»reseiic(! 
 of foreign vessels upon the Iiigh seas as inevitable, 
 and that its powers of interference with their 
 op(>ra*.iors were strictly limited to the ordinary 
 territjrial jurisdiction possessed by Russia.- In 
 the letter of the 2;}rd April, 1820, the Board of 
 Administration writes to the Chief ilanager : — 
 
 'A /-> '{* ••»>* 
 
 
 " In view (if tlie fai:t tlmt the Govenimpnt has percfivcil I.ciiir, Apiil 5,3, 
 
 tlmt these scheiiio.s wimU have done nudi Iiariii to the '^tSO (lirilish 
 
 translation) 
 Company, and has jirohibiled foreigners ?iot o dy from 
 
 settling, hut also from trading, at Kinntchalkn and 
 
 Okhotsk, vhere there are estah'ishcd authoritie':, and wliere a 
 
 siirvtiHaiiee ean he exercised, it is yinir duty, as the Mana^'er 
 
 of the Colony, to >ise your lust endeavours to carry out 
 
 His luijierial Majesty's orders, by strietly prohiliitiiif- tlie 
 
 foreigners wlio may visit the Colony from fcnga;,'ing 
 
 in a traHic with the Indians, and in case C(ny rf them violate 
 
 the Jitgulntions. not to he afrnid to (irrcs/ tfte lioht udven- 
 
 tiirrfs, iu.d seize tlieir shijis, if they cany on n trafhc 
 
 injurious to tlie Company's interests at places, or on 
 
 islands occujiied liy it, and CRpecially if tliey supply the 
 
 Indians with arms, povnler, and lead. You shonhl not 
 
 even allow them to enter your jM^rts nntfs^ you find, it 
 
 ufCf^-iiiry to buy smnclhiiuj/fim Ihcni vhiih thf Cumpany 
 
 iiryently rcqnins. In a word, you .sliould ncUipt towards 
 
 these adventurous traders such an attitude as it is proper 
 
 lor the (lovernor of all the ]daees occupieil ly the Coni- 
 
 ]iii)iy to assume. Do not fail to in.stnut the autliorities 
 
 under you how to deal with forei),'ners roniing to your 
 
 .shores, S|iet'ial iiLstruction.") should he given to the Cuu- 
 
 manders of our ships nhieh are detached to tiie various 
 
 |Kiinl'- with r';_'artl •': the ai tioii they are to take if they 
 
 find anywhere foreign ships en;,'ageil in illicit trading." 
 
 The presence of forciirncrs is further proved l.«-it«r, a,;; 
 bv th.; letter of the 3rd August, 1820. in which •«•''"<'!"«; 
 the Hoard instruct tlieir Cliiel Manager — 
 
11 
 
 " Not [to] have nny dealings with tho foreigners, unless 
 you are absolutely coiiipdled to have recourse to them to obtain 
 something which is indispensable to you. Sucli dealings 
 liave idways liitheito been unprofitaWe, inasmuch as tlie 
 prices they give for furs arc very niueh lower than those 
 which obtain in Ilussia." 
 
 In the inclosiirc contained in the same letter 
 reference is rnaclo to instructions by which the 
 oflicers at Kadiak and Unalaska and the Seal 
 Islands were directed to abstain as far as possible 
 " from having any dealings with the foreigners 
 who come to our Colonies." 
 
 Allegation 
 WH." ini 
 .•iistmg 
 diction. 
 
 tbnl ihc Ukase of 1821 
 
 •rely de.lanitory of pre- 
 
 iliiiiiis of exclusive juris- 
 
 L'nil«d S'iitcs' C'a.-c>, \>\ 
 
 11-49. 
 
 United Slates' 
 Case, (). 49. 
 
 Ante, p. 
 Great IJrir.iin's 
 Case, p. 30. 
 United .State.' 
 Ca.se, Appendix 
 p. IC. 
 
 United Sutes' 
 Case, pp. 41-49. 
 
 Ibid, 
 
 United Stalen" 
 
 Csse, Appendix, 
 »oI. i, pp. 89, CO. 
 
 Uinted Stales' 
 Case, p. 41. 
 
 Head (B).— TAc Ukase of 1821. 
 
 The presence of foreigners in tho Russian 
 possessions has already been alluded to as the 
 chief motive and justification for the Ukase of 
 1821. 
 
 That this I'kasc did purport to exclude 
 foreigners from approaching within 100 miles 
 of— 
 
 " the whole of the north-west coast of America, beginning 
 froiu liehring Strait.i, to the 51st degree of northern lati- 
 tude," 
 
 may he admitted. 
 
 It is, however, denied that — 
 
 " so far as it concerned the coasts and waters of Behring 
 Sea," 
 
 the Ukase of 1821 was regarded by Ilussia as 
 merely declaratory of existing rights. 
 
 Tliis assertion is made more than once in the 
 United States' Case, but no ground for the dis- 
 tinction suggested between the coasts and waters 
 of Lchring Sea and those of other seas appears 
 in the Ukase itself, which, like the Ukase of 
 1799, asserts a claim to tho whole of tho specified 
 coast-linc, and regards tlie whole as subject to 
 the same jurisdiction. 
 
 The correspondence of the Russian-American 
 Company, which is quoted in proof of tho asser- 
 tion, has already been dealt with in this con- 
 nection. \ 
 
 It imiy, however, bo liere noted ;hat the 
 passage which is omitted in the quotation at 
 p. tl of the United States' Case imlicates that 
 the Russian version, and not tnV so-called 
 fransliiliou, is the correct text. 
 
12 
 
 The omitted passage runs as follows (as 
 
 printed in the Appendix to the United States' United States 
 *!^ . Case, AppeniJii 1, 
 
 Case) : — p. eo. 
 
 " In your dealings with fore ir/ tiers you will act e.s]iocially 
 uikIct the provisiiins uf the following i>iiragraiihs eoutaiuud 
 in the new Kegulations: 35, 39, 41, 43, 44, 40-40, 51, 52, 
 53, 55-00, 02, 04, 07-70. These jiarwjniphs hear pluinly 
 vpon the points in dispute between u% and other sea/arimj 
 Tuitions." 
 
 The words in italics are not in the Russian 
 text, wluch, without mentioning foreigners, 
 merely states that "the Board ealls particular 
 attention " to paragraphs 35, 39, &c. 
 
 A reference to the ahstract of these Eegula- Crent Briuin'i 
 tions, which is printed in the Appendix to the ^^H, pl'f,'."'"'' 
 Case on hohalf of Great Britain, will show that 
 none of the Regulations, with the exception of 
 Articles CO, 61, 62, and 70, Imve any reference to 
 dealings with foreigners. 
 
 ( 
 
 Head (C). — The question whether the Bchring Sea 
 is included in the phrase " Pacific Ocean,'" as 
 used in the Treaty of 1825. 
 
 The consideration of the Treaties of 1821 and 
 1825 in the United States' Case is prefaced l)y 
 the statement that — 
 
 " it was only when the Ukase of 1821 sought to extend 
 
 the Kussian claim to tlie American continent to latitude 51°, llnited States' 
 
 and to place the coasts and waters of the occiin in that ^»"'> P- ^'*- 
 
 region imder the exclusive control of the Russian-American 
 
 Company, that vigorous protests were made by the 
 
 Governments of the United States and Great Britain ; and 
 
 the correspondence wliich grew out of those protests shows 
 
 that they wore inspired by the claim of jurisdiction over 
 
 large portions of the Pacific Ocean (as distinguished from 
 
 Behring Sea), and by the conflicting claims of the three 
 
 nations to the coast over which llussia sought to extend 
 
 exclusive authority." 
 
 ,j, „,., <.., JV *; <^^ VA'^ 
 
 ; /c • ■ '• *' ' ' - 
 Allegation lliat phitesls were directwl 
 tJi claim of jurisdiction over Paeifii 
 Ocean a-itl In claim oq coast ol 
 Continent. 
 
 United States' Case, p. 50. 
 
 In the course of the subsequent discussion of 
 
 the Treaties, it is alleged, on behalf of the United 
 
 Stjttcs, that neither in the protests, negotiations, 
 
 nor Treaties is any reference found to Behring „ . ^ „^ , 
 ...'.. . . J Uuited St»le« 
 
 Sea, and that m the Treaties no reference is made case, p. 56. 
 
 to Russian jurisdiction so far as it relates ibid., p. 87. 
 
 to Behring Sea, although it is expressly and 
 
 conspicuously renounced as to the Pacific Ocean, 
 
 and that the body of water known as Behring 
 
 Allegation that Treaties recognizc<l 
 by implication Russia's rights over 
 Behring Si'a. 
 
 Uuitiul .States' Case, |i 50. 
 
18 
 
 /,.. 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 \ 
 
 i I 
 
 r , 
 
 Uiiittii St.itps' 
 Case, Apppndii, 
 vul i, p. 'li'L. 
 
 
 iCteil 
 
 4t 111 
 
 " // -J 
 
 Orent I'ritain's 
 Case, Appendix, 
 vol. ii, Ptrts I 
 and II. 
 
 nizcd 
 over 
 
 Ibid., .Appendix, 
 vol, ii, I'art 11, 
 No. 1. 
 
 United States' 
 Cam', Appendix, 
 vol. i, p. 133 
 
 Sea was not iucludcd in tlin plirase "Pacific 
 Ocean," as used in tl <) Treaty of 182.'. 
 
 This is termed tlie " imjdied rei-oLjiiition of 
 two great nations" of the rights of Russia in 
 Behring Sen. 
 
 It is difficult to understand upon what facts 
 these allegations are based. It is the fact that 
 during the whole of the negotiations prior to 
 1821 and 182.5 no refereiioo is made hy name to 
 Behring Sea, but this was because the whole 
 area ^tmmn airected by the U lease was the 
 subject of discu',.,ioii, and no distinction was 
 drawn between the parts of the I'acilie Ocean 
 north and south of the Alciitian Islands, 
 
 It would seem from tlu^ foot-nott; at p. 50 of 
 the United States' Case that the draftsman of the 
 Case had not h.-xd any opportunity of studying 
 the correspondence with Great Britain, except the 
 extracts which were inclosed in Lord Salisbury's 
 desp.-itcli, dated the 2nd August, 181)0, and the 
 positive assertion that no reference to Behring 
 Sea is to bi' found in the negotiations might have 
 been niodilied, if the writer had had access to the 
 complete correspondence. 
 
 It must be remarked, however, that .Air, G. 
 Canning's despatches of the 21th July, 1821, and 
 the 8th December, 1821, in both of which he 
 refers to Behring Stn.its, were inclosed in Lord 
 Salisbury's despatch, and it must be presumed 
 that tiie advisers of the United States' Govern- 
 ment were also acquainted with the emphatic 
 reference to the same point in Mr, Jliddleton's 
 Memorial of the 17th December, 1823, 
 
 Reference is made to Chapter II of the Case 
 on behalf of the Government of Her Britannic 
 Majesty and tlie correspondence set out in the 
 Appendix thereto. The Ukase of the 4th Sep- 
 tember, 1821, which led to the protests, negotia- 
 tions, and Treaties, claimed the pursuits of 
 eomraerce. wlialing, and fishing on all islands, 
 ports, and gulfs, including the whole of the 
 north-west coast of America from Behring Strait 
 to the 51st degree of the northern latitude and 
 the Aleutian Islands, 
 
 M. de Poletica, in his letter to Mr. Adams of 
 the 28th February, 1822, claims that the Russian 
 possessions in the Pacific Ocean extend on the 
 north-west coast of America from Behring Strait 
 to the 51st degree of north latitude, and on the 
 opposite side of Asia and the islands adjacent 
 from the same strait to the 46th degree. The 
 [741] K 
 
u 
 
 
 extent of sea thus limited ho claims as shut seas 
 (" incrs fcrm<!es "). The same limits are expressly 
 or impliedly referred to throughout the corro- 
 spoiulfuco.* 
 
 Further, the contention that the words " north- 
 west ii»ast of America" wore understood at the 
 date of the protests, negotiations, and Treaties to 
 ([e confined to the coast of America hetwcen 
 latitude 00° or 55° and latitude 51° is con- 
 elusively negatived hy the correspondence 
 referred to in chapter 3 of the British Case, Great Britiin'n 
 and the llussiau Alap which was ollleiiilly com- ^^": App«nd.« 
 
 ' " vol. IV. 
 
 munieated to the Britisii (lovernnient. 
 
 After the completion of the Treaty with the liniiwl Stales' 
 United States in conse(|uence of, it now appears, "'' ■' ^^ 
 certain representations made hy the llussian- 
 American Company to the Imperial Government, 
 ;in interview took place hetween liaron de Tuyll, . 
 
 on hehalf of the Imperial (Jovernment, and 
 •Mr. Adams, the Secretary of State, when Haroii do 
 Tuyll, in accordance with the instructions of his 
 Government, i)rop(>scd to Mr. Adams that an ex- 
 planatory note should he agreed to, stating that — 
 
 'it i.s iKil lliu iiilonliiiM (if liussiii to imiuilr tlit; free 
 iinviyalidii ol' tli(^ I'licilic Oocari. She wmiM l>i' satisfied 
 with cniisin^; to l>o reniguizril, a.s well iimlurstdcjil ami 
 jilftc'd licyniul nil manner nf iloubt, the iirincijilo, that 
 
 ^5=^=5^ 
 
 
 ■Hh^ I 
 
 )' 
 
 i<.* 
 
 
 nT 
 
 / 
 
 • See psrtidilnrly in the corrt'tpoiidence bctwi'cii Uuiiia and 
 (he Uiiileil Slates : — 
 
 -M. de Poletica to .Mr. Adams, 2iid April, 1822. 
 
 Mr. Adams to Mr Middleton, ■22iid July, IS23. 
 
 .Mr. Adams to Mr. Itush. 22nd July, 1823. 
 Memorial by .Mr. .Middlelon, Isl UcteiiLber, 1823. 
 
 In the correspondence between (ileal Britain and Ku8si,->; — 
 
 Baron Niool.iy to ilio Marquis of l.ondomlerry, JUst October, 
 1821. 
 
 Count Nesselrode to Count Lieven, /th October, I.S21. 
 
 Messrs. 1". Kuderby and Mellisli to Bonril of Trade, 27tli No- 
 vember, 18 .'1. 
 
 Mr. Ci. CanuinK to the Duke of Wellington, 27tb September, 
 1822. 
 
 Sbip-owners' Society to Mr. (i. Canning, lllb June, 1823. 
 
 .Mr. Enderb) to the llnnrd of Trade. 7th February, 1.S2-J. 
 
 And in the currespundence of the KussJan - American 
 Company :— 
 
 Minister of Finance to Hnssian-American Compuny, 18th July, 
 1822. 
 
 (Tlie paragraph of this letter relied upon at p. 54 of the 
 United Mates' I ase -^iU be consiiie lently.) 
 
 Count Nesselrode to N. S. .Moi 'nof, 11th April, 1824. 
 
 United Statei' 
 Case, Ap[ieii(lii 
 vol. i, p. i;!5. 
 Cireat Britain t 
 Case, Ai'peiidix. 
 vol. ii, I'art II, 
 p. 4. 
 
 Ibid., p C. 
 Ibid., p 7. 
 
 Ibid., Appeudit, 
 vol. ii. Part I, p I 
 
 Ibid., p, ?,. 
 
 Ibid., p. 13. 
 
 Itni., p. 21 
 
 Ibid., p. 36. 
 Ibid., p. 52. 
 
 United States" 
 Case. Appendu, 
 vol. ii, p. Ii:.'. 
 
 Ibid., p. U. 
 
15 
 
 
 ( 
 
 United Statu' 
 Cair, Al>prndii I, 
 »ol. i, p. -.'76. 
 
 Ibid., p. 277. 
 
 l)eyoii(l [i.f., nnrtli of] 59' 30' no forpif»n vcssol can approftch 
 her coasts iiiiil lior islands, nor fish nnr hunt within the 
 distanci! of 'i, inarino lt'af,'UC'S." 
 
 This limitation of the ri;,'ht8 grantrd for ten 
 years by Article IV is explniiicd in tin; not(! as — 
 "only (I natural consfiiucnoc^ of the slipulatiiiiis a^jrecJ 
 u|ion, for the ooa.'ita of .Siljiiia aro wa.-^hiMl hy the Sea of 
 Okhot.sk, the Sim of KaiiitchatKa. ami tin: Icy Sea, and not 
 by the Soulli .Sea iiicutioucd i'l the 1st Article of the 
 Convention of the .llh (I7tli) April, \^2i The Aleutian 
 Islaiida are also washed by the .'^ea 'A Kai.'tchatka, or 
 Northern l Icean." 
 
 As an alternative course, Uaron de Tujil was 
 instructed to propose ri niodificatJDii of the Con- 
 vention, by wliiob vessels of tlie I lilted States 
 sboulil be ])robibited fmni tnidint,' on the nortli- 
 west eoast north of latinuh! 57. 
 
 In rejjly to this representation, Mr. Adams 
 informed Uaron de 'ruyli tb.at a nwiditieatiou of 
 the Convention could not l)e made otherwise 
 than by a new Convention, .nnd tliat tlie eon- 
 struetion of the Conventiou as eoneluded — 
 
 " hel ringed to oilier Deparinients of the (lovornment, for 
 which til," Executive had no aullinriiy to stipiilato. That 
 if on the exchanjje of the ratilications he shmild deliver to 
 me a note of the purjiort of ihat whicli lie imw infonnally 
 l^ave me, I sliouhl ^rivc him an answer of that import, 
 namely, that the eoiistnictinii of Treaties diperulini; here 
 upon the Judiciary Trilninals, the Kxeeiilive (iovernment, 
 even if disposed In acquiesce in thai of the l!ii>sian 
 (iovernment lus announced by him, could not he hiiidin;; 
 upon the Courts, nor njioii this nation* If aiiytliini,' 
 affectiii}; its constructinii, or, still nunc. iinnhfyinL: its 
 meaninf!, were to ho presented on the part of the liussian 
 (iovernment before or at the exchan^je of the ratifications, 
 it must he laid liefon^ the Senate, and could have no other 
 possilile cllcct than of slartini,' dnubt.", and, iierliajis, hesi- 
 tation, in thai body, and of favniiriie,' tlic views of those, 
 if such there were, who mi^dit wi.'^li ti' defeat the ratilica- 
 tiou itself of the Convention." 
 
 Tiiis a]i])ears to be the first and only oceasion 
 tbrout,'li(iiit tlie wbol(> of tlie ncgcdiations uj)on 
 wliieli an attemjit was made to draw tlu' distinc- 
 tion, now so mueli rclieil iqion on the part of the 
 United States, between tiie wati'js "i' Bebring 
 Sea and those of the Nortli Paeilie. 
 
 The oriifiii of this distinction tberelDre deserves 
 careful considemtiou, 
 
 • This pasiiafre it omillcil by Mr. niiiino in 1 ' ■ ijuotation from 
 Mr. Aihiiis' Diary (I'nili'd Slates A|.i'en.!'.T. »(il. i, p. 277). 
 The passage Is impi rtnnt, iiin-tniich as ,t i* iniplieit li'.;it tiu' 
 United Stater' Government «as not disposed to acqui.Me in 
 the proposr.l construction of the Treaty. 
 
16 
 
 It is clear fmm Baron Tuyll's stntcmont to Umitd suku 
 Mr. Adams that ujioii tlio concliisinn of the ,01. i, ,,. 'j76. 
 Convention nf tlu' 5th (17th) A\>rl\, 1^21, the 
 Jluasian -American Company wore extremely 
 (lissatislled with its jiiiriioi-t. 
 
 A Coiimiittec was a|)[)ointc(l hy the Emperor Cmr."pi>n.ii'n(-p i.f 
 to examine the obs«rvatioas made hy the Com- "",";";;;/ ^'J^^ 
 pany. ( liriti>ii 
 
 T, ,,,,,, 1 i> ■• 1 /-I •., 1 1 trinslaiionl 
 
 irom the " i'vutoeol ol tl,p« Commrttee, dated 
 the 21st ,Tul_\, lH2t, it npiiears that amon;,' the 
 ol)jeeti<iiis oT the Company the two following 
 points were raised : — 
 
 1. It was thoutrht that Article I of the Con- Ibid., Iiiclo.nrr .n 
 
 vention pormittnl citizens of the I'nited States /("ntijh''"" 
 to resort to the coast upiin points noi already iraniiaiion) 
 occupied for the purpose of tradini; with the 
 natives upon llie shtn-es of Sihoria and the 
 Aleutian Islanils.* 
 
 2. The Company desired to confine tin; rii;ht of 
 fishing and trading trranted to tiic Unitinl States 
 for len years liy Article IV, to the coast soutli of 
 Cross Sound. 
 
 It was to meet the first of these j)oints that 
 the arL,'umenl that Mehring Sea is not j)art of the 
 Pacilie Oce.'iii, or Smith Sea, was lii-st develope<l. 
 
 Upon the second jKiint, the Committee ox- ibid . Innloaurr m 
 pres.sed the opinion that Y.ikuLit or Uohriii" ^'"- '<(l'"-it.«li 
 Bay was — 
 
 "situatfil in a Inlituili' ["i'.' .'lo' iii>rtli] wln'ii' tlic riL;lits uf 
 llu«.siii liiivc iicvii Imiii ilispiUcd, mill llii.s ini|«jrtiilil 
 circuiiis(,'iii<:i li:i.'i iiiriiiilti'il it Id Ik' iiicliiilnl ill the ^'I'litial 
 (li'(hii.iti'<n uilli K'gaid lu the Akutiaii Islaiuls ami oUiur 
 ncpithiiii ii'f^ions." 
 
 As to Cross Sound, the Committee agreed that — 
 
 "as it is .■'iliKitiil mnlii liitiliKlc J7' iinrtli. ami, imiisl-- 
 quuiitly, williiii the hiiiiit nf lini.io ijilamls ami trrril.nius 
 thi! lifjlit of Itiissia tn wliioli lias Imtii ilispiiliil, tin- saiiie 
 prirRi]iK' laiimil 1»' iiii|ilifil t.i il." 
 
 'J"he Committee tlierefore siitiijested thattieneral 
 de 'I'uyll .should he instructed tn use his hest 
 emloavoiirs \>> |iersuadi' tin- AVashington Cal)inet 
 to accept Cross Sound a.s the limit, without 
 insistinu' on the point, if that Cahiuet should 
 oliject to it. 
 
 Upon tile sulijecl of the Beport of this 
 
 • \>ilt. — "I"li«> ulion-* tif .Imem-fi " anti th^ viUrrrnmr ttat" 
 (Iwicr iiiriillon'ii III ilii> )i«r(|;ra|>li a> |iriiil«d iii I i.itnl Kutia' 
 C'liv, App«iidi>, vol I, |i, 19) arr not nuntiunrd in ill* origlniil 
 Hutfiin M'lt. Cumipiii' Baii>ii TiivH'* •l»lriii#nl, a« roimrlid liv 
 Mr. Aii*u» (Uoili'J bl >•«>' Ciir, Appi'iidiz, vol ■, p. '.'76). 
 
 
 I 
 
18* 
 
 %^l'' 
 
 Committee, and the negotiations between Baron 
 de Tuyll and Mr. Adams, which resulted from 
 it, the following points are to bo noted : — 
 
 1. That the interpretation of the words 
 "Pacific Ocean or South Sea," in Article I 
 of the Convention, upon which the Gorernment 
 of the United States now base their argument, 
 was first placed upon these words after the con- 
 clusion of the Convention, and with the i^xpress 
 purpose of reconciling the Directors of the 
 Russian-American Company to the terms of that 
 iVrtiele. 
 
 2. That ![••. Adams declined tin- overtures of 
 
 Baron de Tuyll, and that the Convention was 
 
 lually ralilleil in its original ti-rins, without 
 
 cxplanaiioii or modiliritioii. Tlie v.ibal assurance 
 
 hy Mr. Adams, that— 
 
 ".nil- uierohnnls wouiil iiol ^'H to iioul.lr ilc' liiissiaiis on 
 tliu tun^t of SibtTJii, («■ iioilli ..I' lilt! ''Vtli degree uf 
 lutiui'le," 
 
 ill no way aiTncted tlio nicanini; of tiic Conven- 
 tion as si'^ncd. 
 
 3. Tlial >'he distinction in iis|)ivi of jurisdic- 
 tion attempted to i)e drawn by Russia was not 
 between Biliring Sea and the r. st of tlii' Pacitir, 
 but between the coast-line north and south ol 
 Yakuiat Ray, in latitude Mt" ;W\ and this dis- 
 tinction was based on a suppose I ■ ecupation of 
 territory. 
 
 t. That the construction eoMtendeii for by 
 Harou Tuyll would have denieil •■> citizens of 
 the I'nited States the right to vis.t eitiier thr 
 southern or the uortbeni shores of the Aleutian 
 islands, or any part of tlu- raeilic coast beyond 
 latitude 5'.) oO, or to approach witliin 2 marine 
 leagues of these coast.;. 
 
 5. That neither the Report of the Commit tot? 
 of the 2lBt July, 1H24, referred to at p. 55 of the 
 United States' Case, nor tlie explaiuitory note 
 submitted to Mr. Adams by Baron de Tuyll, 
 were tjver communicated to Great Britain. 
 
 0. That no distinction is drawn in the Treaty 
 with Great Britain in 1825 between Behring Sea 
 and the rest ot the Paeitie Ocean, tliough tlie 
 attention of the Russian (iovernine.it had been 
 fon'ibly called to the point by tlie reiiionstrances 
 of the Russian-American Company, iij.on the 
 exmclusion of the Treaty with tlie United States. 
 Finally, there is evidence tiiat, in the opinion 
 of Mr. ISIiddleton on the one band, and of Count 
 Nesselroile on the otlier, the Treaty with tlie 
 United States was not modified (jr alVeoted in 
 any way by the negotiations instituted by Baron 
 Tuyll. This apptiars from the following extract 
 [741] K« 
 
17 
 
 from Uic (icspatch ol' Mr. S, ('aiiiiiM^' Im Mr. (i. 
 Caaiiint?, dnU'fl the :Jrd (15th) April, 1825. 
 
 Croat Briuir's " Iti'fcmnu \» llw .\iiiiTiiiiii Ti.mIv. I ,iiii iisiiinil, ii.< 
 
 Oa«o, ApiMiiidii II, ^y,,ll l,v Coiiiit Nrssclidilc as liv Ml. Mi'lcllcli'ii, t.lial llii^ 
 
 Part I, p. 81 
 
 Ibiil., A|i)ioniii> I. 
 f 39. 
 
 Unil«i 8utei' 
 a, p. 46. 
 
 raliliiiiliiiM of llml iiislniiin'iit w i.s imt lU'idiiilaliHil witli 
 iiiiy (■xplnna'imi.s I'aliiilaliil l<i iiKMlil'v ni alVnt in any xn\ 
 tilt! foic ami Micanint,' ol' it- Arli.li-^ Hut I nMdci-laiicl 
 tlmt, nl the rl<).si' (if the iicj,'otiati()n nl lliat Tivaty. a I'ro- 
 tocdl. iiitc'iiiliil liy till' l.'nssians tn li\ nnuf .■^piMilically llii' 
 liniitatiiiiis (if llic' ii^lit 111 tniiliii;; with tlirir piwscs.siiin.-i, 
 anil nnili'isluiiil liy llir Ainiriran Knvuy a.s liavms no .siio.li 
 cfUi't. was drawn up anil siyiicl liy Imlli partii'S. .Vn 
 rcforcncc wlialcvur was made tu tins pnpiT liy lliu Ru.ssiiin 
 
 Plcnipolcntiaiics in ll mirsr •<{ my niudtiatmn wjtli 
 
 iheia ; and vmi urr awari', Sir. tlial tin- .Sili'lcg ol' tin' 
 ConvoMtimi wlu.'h 1 - mh. hulrd ili'|ifnd fur tlieir liin'i' 
 cntiri'ly mi tlir jii'iioval arcrptallini "I lln' '.iTin^ in wliirli 
 they arr I'Xplc-if^i'd." 
 
 To till' aliovi' iiKiy 111' adiied tiw ai-i'oiiiit of tlic 
 sftiiii' tninsjictidii which i>- irivon liv ilic liiissiiiTi 
 writer Tikhrnc'iiictV : — 
 
 •' A.^ til. t oMM'iitii'ii li.id iii.t v.-i Iwcn riiilii'd, tin- 
 Knii'iiiir, on tlic ripri"ii'maii<.n nl tl"- <'(inipaiiv lii.it tlii'V 
 uuiild 111- piijuiid liy that pait ..f ilir I '.in\. lamn to which 
 wc ha\c rcrcrrcd, urdcrcd m piiiy in lie madi' inln the 
 inatl4;r tiy II S|H'ciiil t'oininis.-iiiiii. In tin- ridtm ol nf the 
 < 'iimitiiwijoii, whicli wa.^ approved hy the Kinpemr, it wii-' 
 declared, viirr iiliii. that the provision of llie Convention 
 ^'i-antin- In the citirena of the I'nilod Slaten the ri'^dil to 
 ti.<h in ihc water- ol llle Colony and tn Iriide with the 
 inhiiliitaiit.s of the eoa,sl, nmsl not U- imdei-sto.id .n f^ivinn 
 
 Iheni a ri..;!!! to appmarh tli )a.<! "f Fjistem SiUria, and 
 
 the .Aleiili.m and Knnle Isl.iiid.s. whirh had lonij i n 
 
 recocnucd liv the iilliei I'otteW an liein;; under I he i \cln- 
 siveiliiiiiinionnf liu.'i.sia.aiid that ihal provision only applied 
 to ih" di.'ipiiled lernloiy on the nnrihwist coast of 
 .\nieiicii, IhIWch ,"i4 40' and iT" 
 
 ■ In const'ipicn.i- of this dii larat.ion. the Head of llie 
 Forei^'ii Ollici- and the t'oniluissioli were of o)inuoii that. 
 Ill onttT to .-ah'guiifil llle hkIiU of thi' ('oinpuliy, a>iil ti. 
 ohviatc the inwsiliilily of the i .iHveiiCini heiii;; wnm^lv 
 inlerfn-ted, the ISiiHMiii Mini .It ti the I niied SUitiM 
 -^himlil lie iiistniitv>l to Miiik< a formal explaimtory decln- 
 rutioii on the oecasliiii of ihe excliiilii;e of the nitihuitions 
 of the ('miveation. Tlie Minister reported that he did not 
 8t'e liiM wiiy to cariyiii;^ out tluse instriiction.s,ani' tliat thu 
 only way in which he coiild , \plain the proMsi m in ipiex- 
 tion t(i the VVafliiiigton (alunit «as hy a veili.d note, lie 
 willed llml a foriiiftl dcchinition nu;-!!! :.'ive rise to serious 
 disiMites, prevent the taliliciunin of tin ( on\enliiin. anil 
 prtHliicu an ellecl which wa-. not intvndcd, hy iiroiisliii,' .sus- 
 picions which Would iitlnrwise novir he i iiti rt.iiiied. The 
 I oiivenlion was Mcord.'iiylv la'ilii'd' 
 
 It is UMiTteil, liowevcr, at \>. .'lj ul tin- I mtcd 
 ,Stat*>»' Vam.- tltut — 
 
 [741. 
 
 V 
 
18 
 
 ■ t(i fnllv aii])ro('iiiti' llie si;^iiirn'an(o nf ihr ruii'gniii;^ dcclii- 
 
 lulitiu [of the ('(ilniiiitU'e|, il iiiiisl lie iiiimiiilioivil 
 
 that it «a8 iniiilc sli.irtly iM'fmu llic si^tiiini; .if tlic Trpiity 
 with (iiviil ISrit.iiii, in wliicli, lljci'L'fdii'. llic liiiM.siiui iii'^'ii- 
 tiatdrs ilid nut (iiiisiilcr it iii'i'casiirv (iiny niorr tlinii tlicy 
 hail coiisiiliTud it iiectMsavy in ihi' tViriuer) to ikclare lliat 
 Bullring Sun was ii'it a )>»it of tlic I'acilic Oi'vnii, in wliich 
 latter the liyhl of (iw fishing' was ruLiyiiized to exist." 
 
 This is followed l>y tlio assortion, already 
 quoted, that — 
 
 " Neither in the jirotestii. nenotialions, or Treaties ia any United Sutet' 
 ruferonce found to Hehrin;; Sea, and il niu^'l he eoncecled, *' P" " 
 from a study of tlmse instrninentM and the snlwecjuent 
 evPlilB, lliat the i|ueslioii of iiirisilietional rights over it.s 
 wat'jrs WiW lell wInTi' it li.ul stood hefiuv ilie Treaties, 
 e.xenpt that the e\erei,se of tlnBe rii^iits hy llupsia had now. 
 llirough these Ti-eath-s, ri eeived the iniplied rceognition of 
 two 'Teat nations" 
 
 Thesr as'icrtiniis arc ])e.st answered by the 
 foUowiiii,' extniets frmu the Diplomatic corre- 
 spondence, wliieh are p;ivcn (o su|)|)leinent the 
 passages already (juotcd in (.'liaptcrs II and III 
 of llie Case for (iri'at Uritain, and tlie rci'erenecs 
 giv(!n at p. of this Counter-Case: — 
 
 Cnrreipondencr brtwren Hu.i.iin uwl thv United 
 Stales. 
 
 In the lett«'r of the 22nd .Inly, 1823, from 
 Mr. Adams to Mr. Middleton, the writer states 
 that — 
 
 " the preti'iisioiis of the Ini|ierial (loverninent extend to an 
 exelu.sive leriitorial jnri.sdietion frpiii thf A'ttli tltyrre i<f 
 north Idlitudr, on llit A'lniii- nui.st, In thi latitude vj .")1* 
 mirlh nil the western roOfl of the Amrrican C'ontiiteTit ; and 
 they assume the ri<;ht of interdicting' the nariijatiim and 
 Uie fishery of all other nations to the e.vlenl of lIMI miles 
 from the whole of that loast. The I'niird Stutm can admit 
 no juirt III Ihitf cliiims. Their ri('ht of navijiatin),' and of 
 fishing IS perfeet, and has Ihmm mi eonstaiit exerci.sc from 
 the ('{irliesl times, after the I'eaee of \~X:\, thron!,'hoiil the 
 whole of the Southern dceaii, .suhjerl only to thc> ordiiia.ry 
 exceptions and exclusions of the territorial juri.sdii lions, 
 which, .so jar as Itussian rights are concerned, are contini'il 
 to certain >.4iinil» iiorlli of tlie :"i5th degree of latitude, and 
 havir no I'xistence on the t.'niiliueiit of Ainurica." 
 
 Mr. Adams inelcsed a draft Convention, to 
 wliich he iiuthori/.ed Mr. Middleton to aj^ree, and 
 it is to lie noted that Article I of this draft 
 embodies the identical terms which afterwards 
 became the 1st Article of the Convention of the 
 17th April, 1H21'. Mr. Adams, therefort!, whose 
 emphatic views have just Ixicii quoted, was 
 
 ' I V- 
 
 fl^ f 
 
 ^ 
 
19 
 
 Unit^il Siati'i' 
 Cme, \)>pt!iiilix. 
 »ol i, 11)1. '^J'J «nil 
 2:0. 
 
 Amrrioan Slalf 
 Hapan, Furriun 
 Kelitiima, Tol t, 
 p 446. 
 
 (bid,, p. 4S'.' 
 
 Ibid., pp. 437-44H 
 
 Uiinsc'lf the draftsman of tliai Article, anil though 
 111) appears to liavc adopli'il tlic terms <>( (he 
 Spanish Treaty willi Grout Itritum of 1790 as a 
 c(invenic)\t pri'ccdont, there can he iid (hiiil)t that 
 lie reirarih'd its terms as eo-extensive witli tlic 
 jiroteiisions ol' the Ukase. 
 
 Mr. Middlelon's opinion upon tlie Mihjeet of 
 the Ui<ase, with its claim to elose even JJehring 
 Strait, c'li-arly apjirars in Ids Memorial of the 
 1st Ueeeinher. Ib'So, .[UoU-d i,'t pp. 5(» and 04 of 
 the Case for Great Hritaiii. lie considered the 
 miasnret" l)e withmit precedent and inadmissihie. 
 Neverlhelessi, his .Meni.'rrwKiiini, presented at tin; 
 Kcurtli CoiifereiUT of tlie J'lenipotentiaries, is 
 mire than onee ijuoted in the e(irres[)oii(lence 
 as ■■stahiishiiiff tii:M t'le <-omi.'i 1 1'l ■ ol' the I'nitcd 
 States ii. these jieii:' tiatioi.n ha.l :k) reference to 
 Hehriii- Sea. IIin niercur. to (i„- coast het.ween 
 the ."tinh and (ioDi (h-irree.s of north lalitudo is 
 allcRetl to defilie tlie liniilsof the cuasl iu lUspilte. 
 It will he- seen, however, that at the date of this 
 Memorandum, Article I. which dealt with the 
 maritime ehiim of ilu.-Nia, hail luen airreed upou, 
 and the Memorandum was nhvimisly iirepired in 
 view of disputes a.s to the territorial claims of 
 Russia. Artich' 1 hud furthei disposed of the 
 dispute ;is to the' rii,'ht of resortiuu' to the coast 
 u))ou points not already occupied, and tht! 
 remaining; Aitieles r-dated only to coasts aot 
 covered hy Article I. It was therefore essential 
 that Mr. Middlelon shi.uld clearly deline the 
 coasts tc which a rii,'ht hy occupation could fairly 
 bo claimed. 
 
 Upon this point he had hi-en expressly in- 
 structed that the United States coidd— 
 ■ 111 iiuwisc .iilniii till' ii'.^lit 111' liusshi 111 iv\rliisivf tem- 
 toiinl 11113.s1ss1.1n on :inv |«iit nf tin' ('uiiiiiioiii nf Niirtii 
 Aincriwi siiiiili 111 tlir 11O1I, ,lt"^rp,i nl ii.ntli liitiliiiliv" 
 
 and he h.id hiinsrlf pre]iared fur the Kmperor's 
 inspectimi a ("oululential Memorial, in which he 
 states that the only lUissiaii e.sUiblishment on 
 this side of the (iOth ilei,'rec was that on the 
 Isl.-uid of Sitka. 
 
 On the other hand, the .'lOth parallel was 
 reijanled as a])|iroxiinat(.'ly the noithenimost point 
 to which the territorial rii^litof the United States 
 exteiiiled. 
 
 Mr. Middletou therefore riu'htly mentioned the 
 space hetweeu the oOth ami (Ktlh parallel as the 
 rcj^ion within which he was .•luthorized to discu.ss 
 the question of territi rial ri;^hls, hut his Memo- 
 
IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 4 
 
 /> 
 
 J%s 
 
 '■^^ ^ M ^S^ 
 
 /- 
 
 y. 
 ^ 
 
 y 
 ^ 
 
 
 1.0 !r"- i 
 
 I.I 
 
 2.5 
 
 s'jf lis 
 
 Hi lii 
 
 - lis lllllio 
 
 1.8 
 
 11-25 IIIIII.4 llill.6 
 
 V] 
 
 ^W^/ 
 
 . ''M 
 
 % J> V 
 
 \% 
 
 A 
 
 
 V 
 
 /^ 
 
 Photographic 
 
 Scier^cos 
 
 Coiporation 
 
 33 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WEBSTER, NY. 14580 
 
 (716) 872-4503 
 
k, 
 
 ;% 
 
 9 
 
 X 
 
 ^ 
 
20 
 
 randum in no way shows tliat liis negotiations 
 had reference only to these territorial r"'i'hts in 
 this particular refjion, and to nothinj^ further. 
 
 Corres).''ndence between Great Britain and 
 Rufisia. 
 
 Mr. G. Canning, writing to Sir C. Bagot on the Great Britain's 
 12th July, 1821, inclosed tlie draft of :\" Projet " ^'''^:. ApP'nf' '■ 
 
 •' •> vol 11, Part I, 
 
 of Convention, which Sir C. Bagot was autliorized r- 61- 
 to sign. 
 
 This " Projet " contained the following 
 Articles : — 
 
 '■ .ai;tii'I,e r. 
 
 " It is iigveed Ijctwi/en tlio Ilinh Contrnoliii;,' I'artit's tlmt 
 their respectivi' f^ulijects sliall onjoy the riglit of I'rco 
 navigation ahuiij the whole extent of tlie Pacific Ocean, 
 compreliending the sea witliin riehrin.Li's .'^trait.s, ami .shall 
 neither be troubled nor molested in earrvii.g on their 
 trade and fisheries, in all jiarts of the .said ocean, either to 
 the northward or southward thereof. 
 
 " It being well nnderstood that the .said right of tislicry 
 shall not be exercised by the subjects of either of the two 
 Powers nearer than 2 marine leagues from the respective 
 possessions of the other." 
 
 AUTICI.E I. 
 
 " II est conveiui entre les llautes Parties Contractantcs 
 qui' leiirs snjets respectifs navigncront librement dans 
 timie letendiie de !'( tcean Pacififiue, y coinpris'3 la Mer iiu 
 dedans du Detroit dit de liehring, et no scront point 
 trouiiles ni inolestcs en e.\er(;ant leur commerce et lours 
 peeherios, dans toutes les parties du dit ocean, tant au 
 norj qu'au and. 
 
 " liieii entendu, ijue la ditc liberte de pechorie ne sen 
 exercee par les sujeta de I'nnc des deux Puissances (lu'a Li 
 distance de 2 lieues niaritimes des possessions respectivcs 
 de I'autre." 
 
 " AUTICLE v.* 
 
 " With regard to the other parts of the north-west coast 
 of America, and of the islands adjacent thereto, belonging 
 to either of the two High Contracting Parties, it is agreed 
 that, for the space of years from the April, lS:i4, 
 
 their resiicctive vessels, and those of their subjects, shall 
 reciprocally enjoy the hberty of visiting, witliout hindrance, 
 the gtilfs, havens, and creeks of the said coast, in places 
 not already occupied, for the jiurposes of fishery and of 
 commerce with the natives of the country, 
 
 " It being understood : — 
 
 " 1. That the subjects of either of the High Contracting 
 Parties shall not laud at any spot where there may be an 
 establishment of the other, witliout the permission of the 
 Governor or other authority of the place, unless they 
 should b(' driven thither by .stress of weather or other 
 accidents, 
 
 " 2. That the said liberty of commerce shall not include 
 the trade in .'^]urituous liciuors, in fire-arms, .swo'ds, 
 bayonets, &c., gunpowder, or other warlike stores. The 
 High Contracting Parties reciprocally engaging not to 
 permit the above-mentioned articles to be sold or trans- 
 ferred, in any matter whatever, to the natives of the 
 country." 
 
 "AliTICLE v.* 
 
 " Par ra]iport aux aiilres parties des cotes dii continent 
 lie rAm(5riqne du nord-ouest, et des isles (|ui I'avoisinent, 
 appartenantes a I'une et a Pautre des deux Hatites Parties 
 Contractante,s, il est convenu (|ue pendant I'esjjacc do dix 
 ans u compter du Avril, 1824, leurs vaisseaux respectifs, 
 et ceux de leurs snjets, pourront reciproquement fr(!quenter, 
 sans entrave, les golphes, Iiavres, et criques des dites 
 cotes, dans des endroits non di^jii occupes, afin d'y foiro la 
 peche et le commerce avec les naturels du pays. 
 
 " liicn entendu : — 
 
 '■ 1. Que partout oii il so trouvera un etablissoment de 
 I'une des Hautes Parties Contractantcs, les sujets de I'autre 
 ne pourront y alrarder sans la permission du Commandant 
 on autre pieposc' de cet ondroit, a nioins qii'ils n'y soront 
 forces par teinpetcs on quelque autre accident. 
 
 " 2. Que la dite liberti' de commerce ne comprendra 
 point celui des liqueurs spiritueuses, ni des amies i\ feu, 
 des amies ' lenches, de la poudre a canon, ou d'autrcs 
 ospeces de munitions de guerre. Tons Icsquels articles les 
 deux Puis.sances s'engagent recipraiiieincnt de ue point 
 laisser vendre ni transferer, en waiiierc quolconquc, aux 
 indigenes de ces pays." 
 
 Article 
 
 * Articles II and III hail dealt with the " liaiere de cote," which naa to form the boundary of the Kussian poaaeigioiii, and 
 :le IV with the Port of Sitka. 
 
21 
 
 !s Contractantes 
 librement daas 
 ipriso la Mer au 
 le seront point 
 nmerce et leurs 
 ocean, tant au 
 
 pf'chorie ne sera 
 uissances qu'a In 
 sions respectives 
 
 Great Britain's 
 Caae, Appeudii, 
 vol. ii, Part I, 
 p. 66. 
 
 itcs (111 continent 
 ()ui I'avoisinout, 
 IX llautes I'arties 
 it I'espace do dix 
 isseaux respectifs, 
 emcnt fr(!quenter, 
 n-iquos des dites 
 3, atin d'y foire la 
 a pays. 
 
 I'tablissement de 
 is sujets de I'autre 
 1 du Commandant 
 
 (lu'ils n'y seront 
 ident. 
 
 ;e ne comprendra 
 dcs annes i feu, 
 ;anon, ou d'autres 
 es(picls articles los 
 ment de ne point 
 e quelconque, aux 
 
 D poBsessions, and 
 
 Ibid., p. 69. 
 
 Ibid., p. 70 
 
 Ibid,, p. 67. 
 
 The "I'rojct" was communicated to Count 
 Lievcn, the Russian Ambassador in London, who 
 demurred to Article I as being foreign to the 
 special object of the negotiation, and as exposing 
 the Russian possessions in Asia in the Frozen 
 Ocean to visits of foi'cign vessels. He does not 
 seem to have raised any objection to the 
 " Projet " on the ground of any special maritime 
 rights of Russia over Bchring Sea as distin- 
 guished from the rest of the Pacific. Mr. 
 Canning wrote to Sir C. Bagot the letter already 
 quoted at pp. (J 1 and (;5 of the Case. 
 
 The Russian Plenipotentiaries delivered to 
 Sir C. Bagot in August 1824 (subsequently to 
 the meeting of the Committee already referred 
 to) a " Contrc-Projet," containing the following 
 Articles : — 
 
 "ARTICLE V. 
 
 " Les Hautcs ruissaiiccs Cmilractantcs slipulenl en 
 outri' que; lours sujets respectifs navigueronl librement, 
 .sur toutc I'cteudui' de I'Oct'an I'acifique, tant an nord 
 qii'au Slid, sans cutravc qiielcunque, ct qii'ils jouiront du 
 droit de pcclie en haute mer, mais que ce droit ne poun-a 
 jamais I'tro oxorcc qu'4 la distance de 2 lieues marines dea 
 cotes ou possessions, soit Russes, soit Britanniques. 
 
 " ARTICLE VI. 
 
 " Sa Majesti' TKnipcreur de Toutes les lUissies, vuidauL 
 mcme clouuer line preuve particulicre de ses cgards pour 
 les iutcrcts des sujets de Sti Majcstc Britanni(iuc et rendic 
 plus utile le succis des entreprises cpii auvaiont pour 
 vesultat de deeouvrir uu passage au uord du Continent 
 AiMc'ricain, consent a ce que la lilierte de navigation nieu- 
 tionnee en I'Articlc ]m'ccdcnl sctcnde sous les nu'ines 
 conditions, au Detroit de I'.ehring et a la mer situee au 
 nord de co di'troit.' 
 
 The negotiations, however, were broken off, as 
 reported by Sir C. Bagot, who wrote that on 
 certain points dill'erences had arisen which 
 appeared to bo irreconcilable. 
 
 One of the points on which the Russian Pleni- 
 potentiaries refused to yield was the proposal, 
 embodied in Article V of the IJritisb " Projet," 
 in so far as it permit^.ed British subjects to visit, 
 for a stated period, the gulfs, havens, and creeks 
 [741] G 
 
22 
 
 in places not already occupied on the north-west 
 coast of America from 00° north latitude to 
 Bchring Straits. This coast they declared to he 
 the absolute and undisputed territory of His 
 Imperial Majesty, and tlioy added that it was not 
 the intention of llis Imperial Majesty to ^'rant 
 to any Power whatever for any period of time the 
 liberty which was required. 
 
 But the stipulation for the free navigation ol' 
 the high seas, which was afterwards embodied in 
 Article I of the Treaty, Avas not one of the points 
 upon whicli differences arose. 
 
 The Russian Plenipotentiaries, like Count 
 Lieven, seem to have raised no objection to the 
 British proposal, on the ground that Russia 
 possessed exceptional rights over the non-terri- 
 torial waters of Bchring Sea. 
 
 Article VI of their " Contre-Projet " indicates 
 that they had no claim to exclude foreign vessels 
 from waters south of the Arctic Ocean and 
 Behring Strait. This Article purports, as a 
 favour, to waive any such rights in respect of the 
 last-mentioned ocean and strait, but Behring Sea 
 is not named. 
 
 At this stage the negotiations were broken off. 
 
 Sir C. Bagot reminded the Russian Pleni- 
 potentiaries that the maritime jurisdiction 
 assumed by Russia in the Pacific, which he had 
 hoped to see revoked in the simplest and least 
 unpleasant manner by mixing it with a general 
 adjustment of other points, remained, by the 
 breaking off of tlie negotiations, still unretracted ; 
 and that his Government would probably be of 
 opinion that, upon that part of the question, some 
 arrangement must yet be entered into. 
 
 With reference to the sixth Article of the 
 "Contre-Projet," he gave the Russian Plenipo- 
 tentiaries distinctly to understand that neither 
 the British Government nor those of the other 
 Maritime Powers of the world would, in his 
 opinion, be likely to accept the free navigation 
 of Behring Straits as a concession on the part of 
 Russia. 
 
 The negotiations were resumed in December 
 1821' by Mr. S. Canning, who received his 
 instructions from Mr. G. Canning, under date 
 the 8th December, 1824, as follows : — 
 
 i.f^' 
 
 
 " It is comparatively imliflevent to us whetlier we hasten q^jj Britain's 
 
 01- fiiistpnnc all (luosticiiis respectiiif; the limits of territorial Case, Appendix, 
 
 po.-H'.=sion nil the (.'onliiient of America, but the preten- ^"''i'' '!!"/'■ '• 
 
 'pp. 73, 74. 
 
sious of thi' Uiw.iuii I'kasr of lf!21 to exclusive douiiiiion 
 over tlie IVilii; rould not contiiiuu longer uureii"iilod 
 xvitlioiit, (■oinp(-'lliii;,' ns to Uike some uipasuve of inibliu nnd 
 I'lli'etiuil i-eiiioiistriiucc agiiinst it. 
 
 "You will thi'icfoii' tfiko care, ill the first iustauce, to 
 rejiress any attempt to i,'ivo this eliauye to the character 
 of I'le iie^oiialioii, anil will ilerUue without reserve that 
 tlie point to which alone llu^ solicitude of the llritish 
 Ooverinueiil and the jeidousy of tlio British nation attach 
 any f,'reat importance is the doing away (in a manner as 
 little disagrecahle to I'awsia as possible) of the effect of the 
 I'kase of 1821. 
 
 "That this Ukase is not acteil upon, and that instruc- 
 tions have been Ioul; ago sent by the Uussiaii 0<jvernment 
 10 iheir cruizers in the i'acihc to suspend the execution of 
 its provisions, is triie ; but a private disavowal of a pub- 
 lished claim is no security against the revival r.f that 
 claim. The s\i,spensioii of the e.M'cutiou of a principle, 
 may be perfectly compatible with the continued maiuteu- 
 auce of th<^ ]nincip!o itself, and when we have seen in the 
 course of this negotiation that the Itussian claim to tlio 
 jiosscssiou of the coast of America down to latituile ."il> 
 rests in fact on no other grouiul than the presnnicMl 
 ac(|uie.scence of the nations of Europe in the provisions of 
 an Ukase imblished by the l-aniieror I'liid iu the year 
 ISOO, agcinst which it is allirmed iliat no public remon- 
 strance was made, it becomes us to be e.xceedingly careful 
 that wo do not, by a similar neglect, on the present 
 occasion, allow a similar presumption to be raised as to an 
 ac(|uiescenco in tli.' Ukase of ISl'l. 
 
 "The right of the subjects of His Ifajcsly to navigate 
 freely ii> thel'arific cannot be held as matter of iudu!gc!i<e. 
 from any lower. Having ouc(! be. n publicly ([uestioncd, 
 it must bo publicly acknowledged. 
 
 "AVc do not desire that any distinct reference should be 
 made to the Ukase of 1321; but we do feel it necessary 
 that the statement of our right should be clear ami 
 positive, anil that it should stand forth in the Convention 
 in the place which jmipcrly belongs to it, as a plain and 
 substantive stipulation, and not be brought in as an 
 incidental conseipieuce of other arrangements to which wo 
 attach comparatively little importance. 
 
 "This stipulation .stands in the front of the ('onvention 
 concluded between Ihissia and the I'nited States of 
 .■Vmeriea ; and we .see no reason why upon sinuiar claims 
 we should obtain exactly the lib' satisfaction. 
 
 " For reasons of the same nature we cannot con.scnt that 
 the liberty of navigation through Behring Htraits should 
 be stated in the Treaty as a boon from Eussia. 
 
 "The li^ndeucy of such a statement would bo to giv<! 
 countenance to those claims of exclusive jurisdiction 
 against which we, on our own behalf, and on that of the. 
 whole civilized world, jirotcst. 
 
 " No specification of this sort is found in the Convention 
 with the United States of America, and yet it cair.iol be 
 doubteil that the Americans consider themselves as secured 
 
24 
 
 ill Ihr li-lit Hf iuivi-;itiii;,' I'.i'htiii'; Stniits iinil Uic suu 
 licyiiiiJ llic'in. 
 
 "It raimiil be oxiKctol ihaU'.n-liiml sliould rccoivc as 
 a Iioou tlial wliidi the Unitril States liold ns a i-i.nlit so 
 Tinquesliima'Mli' as not to br worth recoriliiiy 
 
 " IVihalis the siiiiplust <'c>iiisc after all will bf to sub- 
 (^liliite, lof all tliat part of the ' I'rojet ' ami ' Contre-rroji't ' 
 which relates to maritime rights aial l" navigation, the 
 lirst two Articles of the Convention already eonelmlod by 
 Ihi' Court of St. Velersburgh with the United States of 
 America, i:i tlu' order in which they stand in that Con- 
 vention. 
 
 " Uussia eaniinl mean to give to the United Stat.'S ot 
 Aua'rica what she withholds from us; n.ir to withh..ld 
 from us anythint; that she has e(aiseuted to give to the 
 United Slates. 
 
 ■'The uniformity of .stipulations ia I'uri mulcrid gives 
 ilearne.ssand furce to both arrangements, and will establish 
 th.it footing ..r equality between the several Contraclhig 
 I'iirties which it is most desirable should e.xist between 
 three Powers whose interests come so nearly in i.Minlacl 
 with each other in a part of th.. globe in which no other 
 Power is concerned. 
 
 •■Tlds therefore is what I am to instruct you to propose 
 at once to the Uussian Minister as cutting short an (ither- 
 wise inconvenient discussion. 
 
 •■ This expedient will <lispose of Article 1 of the ' Projet ' 
 iind of Articles V and VI of the ' Contre-Projet.'" 
 
 V 
 
 # 
 
26 
 
 In transmitting the Convention signed by the 
 Plenipotentiaries, Mr. S. Canning writes (17th 
 February (1st March), 1825) :— 
 
 " With respect to Ikhriiis; Straits, I am liapjiy to have 
 it ill my yiowiu- to assmc you, on the joint authority of the 
 Uussiiui ]'U'iiii)otentiiiries, thiit the Kinjieror of Ilussia haa 
 no iiitiiutiou wluili'ver of iiiaiutiiiiiinL! any cxclu.'jivL' cLiira 
 to tlio navigation of tiioso straits or of the seas to tho north 
 of them." 
 
 Allegation that geographers distin- 
 guish Behring Sea from I'acifl'- 
 Ocean. 
 
 United States' Case, pp. 52, 5.3. 
 
 United Stat«a' 
 Case, p. 92. 
 
 /k- 
 
 1^ 
 
 Y' 
 
 
 It is asserted in tho United States' Case at 
 pp. r)2 and W.\ lliut the terms " Great Ocean, com- 
 monly called the Tacific Ocean or South Sea," 
 and "the Ocean, commonly called tho Pacific 
 Ocean," as used in the Treaties, are shown by a 
 study of the contemporancious Maps, Charts, and 
 writings of navigators not to have applied to or 
 to have included Behring Sea. 
 
 These Maps aiul Charts, of which a list is 
 given in the United States' Appendix, are said 
 to prove that — 
 
 " tho host geograpiiers have nt all times distinguished tliis 
 hody of water from tlie oc(!aii lying south of it, by confer- 
 ring upon it some separate name." 
 
 United States' 
 Case, Appendix, 
 Tol. i, p. 265. 
 
 Great Britain's 
 Case, Appendix, 
 Tol. iii. 
 
 ."r> 
 
 ^ v\' 
 
 V 
 
 ^>- 
 
 y\ 
 
 The only argument afforded by the Maps and 
 Charts in question is that on each of them a 
 special designation is given to tho waters now 
 known as Behring Sea. 
 
 This argument may be shortly answered by 
 the following quotation from Lord Salisbury's 
 despatch, dated the 21st February, 1891 :— 
 
 " But I am not prepared to admit the justice of Mr. 
 Blaine's contention, that the words ' Pacific Ocean ' did not 
 include Behring Sea. I believe that in common parkmce, 
 then and now, Beliring Sea was and is yiart of the Pacific 
 Ocean ; and that the latter words were used in order to give 
 the fullest and widest .scope possible to the claim which 
 tho British negotiators were solemnly recording of a right 
 freely to navigate and fish in every part of it, and through- 
 out its entire extent. In proof of the argument that the 
 words ■ Pacific Ocean ' do not include Behring Sea, Mr 
 Blaine adduces a long list of Maps in whicli a designation 
 distinct from that of ' Pacific Ocean ' is given to Behring 
 Sea ; either ' Beliring Sea,' or ' Sea of Kamschatka,' or 
 the ' Sea of Anadir.' The argument will hardly have any 
 [741] H 
 
force unless it is applicable with equal truth to all the 
 other oceans of the world. But no one will dispute that 
 the Bay of Biscay forms part of the Atlantic Ocean, or that 
 the Gulf of Lyons forms part of tlie Jlediterranean Sea; 
 and yet in most Maps it will be found that to those 
 portions of the larger sea a separate designation has lu'en 
 given. The question whetlier by the vvorda ' Pacific 
 Ocean' the negotiators meant to include or to exclude 
 Behring Sea depends upon which locution was esteemed to 
 be the correct usage at the time. The date is not a distant 
 one, and there is no ground for suggesting that the usage 
 has changed since the Anglo-Eussian Treaty of 1825 was 
 signed. The determination of this point will be most 
 satisfactorily ascertained by consulting tlic ordinary books 
 of reference. I append to this despatch a list of some 
 thirty works of this cla.ss, of various dates from 1795 
 downwards, and printed in various countries, which com- 
 bine to show that, in customary parlance, the words 
 ' Pacific Ocean ' do include Behring Soa." 
 
 The list here referred to has been greatly Appendii 
 increased, and is printed in an Appendix to 
 this Counter-Case. The special attention of the 
 Arbitrators is invited to the language of the 
 various authors cited, which leaves no doubt 
 whatever but that at the date of the Treaty 
 Behring Sea was, as it still is, regarded by 
 geographers as part of the Pacific Ocean. 
 
 The Case on behalf of United States further 
 invites attention upon this point to — 
 
 " the express declarations of the Russian Government on 
 the subject during the negotiations, and after the Treaties 
 had been celebrated." 
 
 Two quotations are given in this connection 
 from the correspondence of the Russian- American 
 Company. 
 
 To the first quotation no further answer is 
 necessary than to append a correct translation of 
 the original Russian as compared with that relied 
 on by the United States : — 
 
 coastwise wate 
 other Maritimi 
 facing Hit open 
 over all waters 
 Sea o/ Okhotik, 
 (i.f in all gulfs, i 
 riglU to tU strii 
 
 
 .1 
 
 ^- 
 
 United States' 
 Case, p. B3. 
 
 (British translation.) 
 
 " These measures should be of such a nature as to make 
 it unnecessary for us any longer to insist on the distance 
 stated in the Rules of the 4tli September, 1821, to be that 
 within which no foreign ship may come, and such as to 
 
 (American trans! iMon.) 
 
 " The Rules to be proposed will probably imply that it 
 is no longer necessary to prohibit the navigation of foreign 
 vessels for the distance mentioned in the Edict of 4th Sep- 
 tember, 1821, and that we will not claim juriadiction over 
 
27 
 
 coastwise waters beyond the limits accepted by any 
 other Maritime Tower for tlic whole of our coast 
 facing tin open ocean. Over all interior waters, however, and 
 orer all waters iiuloscd hij Russian territory, stich as the 
 Sea of Okhotsk, Bering Sea, or the Sea of Kamchatla, as well 
 as in all gulfs, hays, and estuaries within our possessions, the 
 righi to tU strictest cmtrol mil always be niaintained." 
 
 )ably imply tliat it 
 .vigation of foreign 
 B Edict of 4tli Sep- 
 m juriadiction over 
 
 United Slates' 
 Cise, Appendii I, 
 p. 136. 
 
 enable us to conliiu; ourselves to exercising a control* over 
 sucli an extent of water only as is by common custom 
 considered to be under the jurisdiction of any Power 
 which has possession of the seaboard, and to introducing 
 on the coast such a system of surveillance as may be 
 found necessary for the protection of uur territory from 
 attack, and for the prevention of illicit trading." 
 
 By the introduction of the words " facing the 
 open ocean," and the addition of the concluding 
 paragraph, a passage which completely supports 
 the view of Uer Britannic Majesty's Government, 
 has, in the hands of a translator, become the 
 foundation-stone upon which the contrary argu- 
 ment of the United States is based. 
 
 The second quotation in support of the United 
 States' contention is taken from the Report of 
 the Committee which considered the effect of 
 the Treaty between Russia and the United 
 States. This has been already dealt with at 
 
 p. 
 
 Further evidence that no distinction was drawn 
 by th" United States' Government between the 
 coasts of Behring Sea and those of the rest of 
 the Pacific is afforded by the Notice which is 
 referred to at p. 69 of the United States' Case, 
 and is printed in full in United States' Appendix, 
 vol. i, p. 91- The Notice is as follows : — 
 
 " It is therefore recommended to American vessels to be 
 careful not to violate the existing Treaty liotween the two 
 countries by resorting to any point upon tlie liuseian- 
 American coast where there is a liussian establishment 
 without the permission of the Governor or Commander, 
 nor to frequent the interior seas, gulfs, harbours, and 
 creeks upon that coast north of the latitude of ."4° 40'." 
 
 It is difficult to believe that this Notice was 
 ever understood, or intended to be understood, 
 
 » Thi'. coimnunicalion from llie Minister of Finance to the 
 Russian-Amerioan Company i. dated the ISth Jul,. 1822, and is 
 in complete accord with the assurances given a fe* days later, 
 on the a4th July, by Count Capodistriai to Mr. Middleton :— 
 
 " L'Empereu'r a dOja eu le bon esprit de foir que cctte affaire 
 ne dcvrait pas etre poussee plus loin. Nous summes disposes A 
 ne pas y donner de suite. Les ordres pour nos vaisseaux de 
 guerre .eront bornC's i empCcher la contrehandc dans les limites 
 revonnuei par les autrts Puiimneen, «n prcnanl n„s Hablim- 
 menli aelueli pour bate de res opiralions." 
 
28 
 
 by sailors as applying only to so much of the 
 Russian-American coast as lies between lati- 
 tude 60° or latitude 59° 30', or any other 
 particular point, and latitude 54° 40'. 
 
 Head (D).— TAe User of the Waters in question 
 from 1821 to 1867. 
 
 It is alleged on behalf of the United States 
 that the jurisdiction of Russia over Behring Sea 
 was always exercised for the protection of the 
 fur-seals, and that the object of the Russian 
 Government in excluding Behring Sea from the Jj'^^^f^p®^*^" 
 effect of the Treaties of 1824 and 1825 was the n,^^'^ p' jy. 
 protection of the fur industry. Reference is 
 made to the documents referred to in Chapter II 
 of the British Case, showing that the object of the q^^^ Britain's 
 Ukase was to prevent illicit trading and inter- Cate, p. 39. 
 ferencc with the trading of the Russian- American 
 Company, and to the facts fully set out in 
 Chapter IV of the British Case, showing that 
 after the date of the Treaties, as before, foreign 
 vessels repeatedly irequented Behring Sea for the 
 purpose of trading, navigation, and iishing. The 
 instructions sent out by the Russian Foreign 
 Office, cited at p. 85 of the British Case, in the 
 year 1846, conclusively negative the present 
 contentions of the United States upon this point. 
 Not only was the suggested limit of 100 miles 
 not enforced, but, as appears by the instructions, 
 the only limit within which it was found possible 
 to prohibit the approac'.i of foreign ships was the 
 recognized territorial limit of 3 miles. 
 
 It is asserted on behalf of the United States United State*' 
 that " the reason why the limit of 100 miles was ""' ''* 
 chosen in 1821" was that this limit would "secure 
 to the Russian-American Fur Company tlie ibid, 
 monopoly of the very lucrative profit* " carried 
 on by them. It is argued that the Fribyloff Ibid., p. 41. 
 Islands are situated less than 200 Italian miles 
 from the Aleutian Chain on the south, and that 
 thus a sufficient portion of the eastern half of 
 Behring Sea was covered by the Ukase, to enable 
 Russia to protect the herd while there. 
 
 It has already been shown that the object of 
 the Ukase was to suppress illicit trading and 
 competition by foreigners with the Russian 
 Company, and it appears from the statement of 
 
 Allegation that Russia exercised juris- 
 diction in Behring Sea for protec- 
 tion cf seals. 
 
 United States' Case, pp. 57-59 
 
 • SiC! legi traffic. 
 
United States' 
 Case, Appendix 1, 
 p. 136. 
 
 uri3- 
 
 oteo 
 
 Alaslia, p. 538 
 
 UniUd SUtes' 
 Caic, p. 57. 
 
 M. Speransky to Mr. Middleton that the limit of 
 100 miles was chosen because it was thought 
 that the Treaty of Utrecht afforded a precedent 
 for this particular distance. 
 
 No reference, however, is made in the corre- 
 spondence to the protection of fur-seals as a 
 justification for the choice of the limit specified. 
 It is true that in the conversation with the 
 Governor-General of Siheria, already referred to, 
 which is quoted at p 40 of the United States' 
 Case, reference is made to the " very lucrative 
 traffic " carried on hy the Russian-American Fur 
 Company, hut tlie trade in fur-seal skins was not 
 the sole or even the most considerable item in 
 that traffic. The fur of the sea-otter was the 
 chief object of the hunting expeditions at tliis 
 date, and commanded a far higher price in the 
 market than any other skin. The traffic included 
 also foxes (blue, white, grey, and black), beavers, 
 hears, and other fur-bearing animals, while the 
 fur-seal skin commanded only a small price. 
 
 Bancroft writes : — 
 
 " In 1825 fur-seal skins wore bartered in tlie Sandwich 
 Islands liy the captain of one of the Company's ships on 
 tlie basis of 1 dol. 75 c. per skin. This seems an extrava- 
 "ant price, when, as will be remembered, the price at 
 Kiakhta was only 5 to 7 roubles in scrip (1 dollar to 
 1 dol. 40 c.) ; but it was the usual rate at which furs were 
 exchaiifed at Novo Arkhangelsk with American and 
 English skippers." 
 
 It thus appears that the quotation at p. 40 of 
 the United States' Case does not support the 
 inference which is sought to be drawn from it, 
 that the limit of 100 miles was specially chosen 
 for the protection of the fur-seals. 
 
 This limit, moreover, goes much further than 
 was necessary if the protection of fur-seals had 
 been the object of the Russian Government. 
 The enforcement of the 100-mile limit would 
 have absolutely ; precluded foreign vessels from 
 navigating for any purpose; in any part of Behring 
 Strait, Behring Sea, th(! Sea of Okhotsk, and a 
 laro'c area of ocean south of the Aleutian Chain, 
 and along the coasts of both continents. 
 
 An attempt is made at p. 57 of the United 
 States' Case to explain the undoubted fact, relied 
 upon by Great Britain, that no restraint was ever 
 placed by Russia upon fhe free entrance of foreign 
 vessels into Behring Sea for the purposes of 
 navigation and of hunting whales. 
 
 [7411 I 
 
80 
 
 It is asserted that — 
 
 " Russia never souglit to prevent vessels from ])assing 
 through Hehriug Sea in order to reach the Arctic Ocean j 
 nor Jill she always strictly enforce tlie proliihitioii uf 
 whaling within the distance of 100 wiles from its shores ; 
 but so far as the fur-seals are concerned, it will be made to 
 appear in what follows that the jurisdiction in (luestiou 
 was always exercised for their protection." 
 
 In support of this statement, quotations are 
 given at pp. 60 and 61 of the United States' 
 Case from the correspondence of the Russian- 
 American Company. 
 
 It is denied, in the first place^ that any right, 
 apart from Ti'eaty, to treat a sea as mare clausum 
 for one special purpose only is known to inter- 
 national law. No instance of such a right exists 
 at the present day, and from the silence of writers 
 on international law it may he presumed that no 
 such right would he recognized hy them. 
 
 The claim of jurisdiction now asserted assumes 
 the possihility of the occupation and appropriation 
 of the open sea by a single nation, a doctrine wheaton, Part II, 
 which is repudiated by all authorities at the ^'"'P-*- 
 present day. Such a claim could only bo based g^c.^^Me." '' 
 on the fact of an effective occupation of the sea Hall, p. 125. 
 to which the claim is made. No part of the 
 open sea can bo recognized as mare clausum 
 which has not been so completelj'' possessed 
 and occupied by the State which claims ifc as 
 to become practically a portion of its territorial 
 dominion : — 
 
 " En droit corame en fait, la proprit'te n'existe qn'k la Calvo, vol. i, 
 condition de reposer sur inie chose tangiljle, susceptible "''^' ^'^"* 
 Je possession et de detention exclusives." 
 
 The admission, therefore, that for the purposes 
 of navigation and iishing no exclusive dominion 
 was asserted, is in itself sufficient to destroy any 
 claim to possessory rights over the open waters of 
 Behring Sea. 
 
 Further, it is plain that in the absence of any 
 Treaty or other public Notification, the alleged 
 special reservation of seals (assuming that it 
 over had any existence in fact or any legal 
 validity) never could have come to the knowledge 
 of the sailors of various nations who from time 
 to time visited these regions. Nor did Russia 
 ever maintain in Behring Sea a naval force 
 cupabio of giving effect to any such proliibition 
 by force of arms. 
 
31 
 
 Circat Britain's 
 Case, p. )<9. 
 
 Britisli Commis- 
 sioners' lieport, 
 p. 100, paragraph 
 
 S86. 
 
 United States' 
 Case, p. 57. 
 
 Ill the spcond place, attontion is called to tlio 
 fact that no evidence is forthcomini,' to support 
 the alleged reservation of the exclusive right of 
 sealing. 
 
 It has already been shown that prior to the 
 Treaty of 1825 I'ussia possessed no such 
 sovereignty over the shores of Bchring Sea as 
 would enable her to exclude the vessels of other 
 nations even from the coasts. Much less had 
 she power to exclude vessels upon the high seas, 
 cither from navigating thereon or from the 
 (!xercisc of any particular industry. 
 
 In 1821, she made an attempt to assert a 
 dominion over hoth sea and shore. Tlie Ukase 
 of tliat year purported to exclude foreigners from 
 the pursuits of commeiec, whalii.g, and llshing, 
 and of all other industry, within certain limits, 
 and prohibited their approach within 100 miles 
 of the coast. 
 
 In tlie Treaty of 182.'), her territorial dominion 
 over all the shores of Behring Sea received for 
 the first time the recognition of a foreign Power. 
 But in the negotiations of the two Treaties of 
 1821 and 1825, the obn.oxious claim of an extra- 
 ordinary maritime jurisdiction was witluirawn, 
 and the withdrawal was eo-extensive with the 
 claim. 
 
 Neither in the negotiations nor in the Treaties 
 is thei'c any reservation of a right to exclude 
 foreigners from the particular pursuit of seal- 
 fishing, nor is there a single instance of the 
 exclusion of a foreign vessel from this fishery. 
 
 ■\Vhaling, whicli was expressly forbidden by 
 tlu^ Ukase, was admittedly carried on without 
 restraint after the Treaties, and there is amplo^ 
 evidence of the large development of this 
 industry. 
 
 There is no evidence whatever of the existence, 
 the enforcement, or the recognition by other 
 nations of any restriction upon sealing. 
 
 It is true that no instances arc forthcoming of 
 pelagic scaling in Bchring Sea at the time of the 
 Treaties, because this industry was unknown 
 before 18GG. But the fact remains that every 
 then known form of industry was freely carried 
 on in Bchring Sen, and demonstrates the complete 
 freedom of its waters. 
 
 It is emphatically denied that the burden of 
 proof on this point rests upon Great Britain. 
 The true construction of the Treaties indeed 
 leaves no point to be proved, but, in iny case, tho 
 
88 
 
 onus must, rest upon the nation which is cou- 
 tsiidiiif,' for a jurisdiction in excess oC that which 
 is admitted hy international consent to prove 
 the existence of such jurisdiction hy instances of 
 its exercise or of its recognition hy otlu-r Towers, 
 and tlie claims of tlie United States cannot he 
 sui)ported merely hy the negative fact that for 
 many years after the Ukase and the Treaties 
 tliere is no record of pclai,'ic sealini; in Bchrins 
 
 Sea. 
 
 It is clear, however, tliat the Uiissian Govern- 
 ment in 18 10 took a (lilferent view of its rights 
 from that now contended for hy the United 
 States. In that year, the Government was 
 specially invited hy the Governor-General of 
 F.ast;'rn Sihcria to enforce the prohihition of 
 whaling witliin a distance of 10 miles of the 
 sliorc. 
 
 The reply of the Government was not that 
 it nreferrcd not to " strictly enforce " its nn- Unitf.i Swics' 
 
 1 . , . , i • 1. 1 Case, II. 57. 
 
 (louhtcd right, hut that no such right existed. 
 The Torcign Office wrote :— 
 
 " ' Wo have no right to exclude foreign ships from that Tiknieuiefr, Gr.Nii 
 ,iiirt of tlie great ocean whicli separates the eastern shore /p|^'„"j.^^ "'„\'' ,_ 
 ot .'Liberia from the north-western shore of America, or to Xo. 5, p. 86. 
 make the payment of a sum of money n condition to 
 allowing them to take whale.';.' The Foreign Odlco wore 
 of opinion that the tixiug of the line referred to above 
 would reopen the discussions formerly carried on between c 
 
 England and Kranee fin the subject. The limit of a 
 camion-shot, that is about ;! Italian miles, would alone 
 give vise to no dispute. The Foreign Olhoe observed, in 
 conclusion, that no Power had yet succeeded in limiting 
 the freedom of lishing in open seas, and that such pre- 
 tensions had never boon recognized by the other Powers." 
 
 The instructions to cruizers with reference to 
 whaling in Okhotsk Sea, quoted at p. 113 of 
 the Case for Great Britain, are to the same 
 eil'ect. 
 
 A- 
 
 ,.«.\- 
 
 ,v 
 
 In conclusion, the quotations relied upon at 
 pp. GO, 61 of the United States' Case entirely 
 fail to support the allegation now under dis- 
 cussion. 
 
 In the first two quotations, no reference what- 
 ever is made to the fur industry. They arc 
 merely general assurances of the good-will of the 
 Gjverament. The third and last quotation reads 
 as follows : — 
 
 " It i.; His Majesty's firm determination to protect the 
 Companys interests in the catch and jmservation of all 
 
33 
 
 
 m'lHiic animtth, and to atcitre to il nil tin ndoantajcs to 
 irhlfU it M entitled uiukr Ihc Clmrtir tunl pricUcijci." 
 
 A rcforonco to the British translation of the 
 Russinn oriffinal will show that the words in 
 italics arc more interpolations upon i\w Russian 
 text. 
 
 These quotations an; the only evidence olTcrcd 
 in tlie United States' Case in support ol' the 
 contention discussed above. 
 
 , . „ • . 1 Co. At p. (11 of the L'nited States' Case, it is 
 
 Allegation Umt Kua.sm continued alter I 
 
 Tlvllli^^■^ to uxoicisc i (introl ovur asserted — 
 
 BiMiuiH >«». ^,^j^^^^ j^^ ^|^^_ Treaties of 1824 and 1823 Ilusiiia did not 
 
 United States' Ca.s(^ p. 'U. surriinder her claim to exclusive control ui trade, and 
 
 Cas'i).^fi°l'." esiiccially of the ftiv industrj- in liehrinj- Sea. I'ositivc 
 
 cunfirmation " 
 
 of thi; assertion is stated to he found in the 
 fact, taat the same control over the waters of 
 that sea was enforced after the date of the 
 Treaties as before. 
 
 T!;c evidence offered in support of this assertion 
 eo.isists of the Charters [granted to Russian- 
 American Company in 1829 and 1812, and of 
 extracts from the Company's records. 
 
 The Charter of 1229 is described in the United 
 States' Case as a confirmation of the Charter of 
 1821— 
 
 " exccjit in so far as it had l)ccn nindificd by the Treaties 
 of 1824 and 182:i." 
 
 The modifications liere rel'crred to are of the 
 utmost importance, and deserve most careful 
 consideration. 
 
 By Section 1 ,of the Rules attached to the 
 Ukase of the 7th September, 1821— 
 
 " the lairsuits (jf coainierce, whaling, and lishinq, and of all 
 other industry un all islands, posts, and ;^ull's, including 
 the whole of the north-west co.ist of America, begiunin}; 
 from lichrinf; Straits to the olst degree of northern lati- 
 tude .... is cxdnsii-cl/i grantrd to Russimt suhjcds." 
 
 By Article II of the Charter of the 13th Sep- 
 tember, 1821, the Emperor proceeded to grant to 
 the Russian- American Company — 
 " the privilege of hunting and Kshing /" the. cMlusiun of 
 alt vthcr Itussiuii nr foreign siihjertx throughout the terri- 
 tories long since in the pos.session of Kussia on the coasts 
 of North-west America, beginning at the northern point 
 of the Island of Vanco\iver, in latitude ."1 ' north, and 
 extending to Behriug Strait and beyond " 
 
 [741] K 
 
 Ihid. 
 
 Ibid., Appendix, 
 vol. i, p. 25. 
 
 Great Britain's 
 Case, Appendix, 
 vol. i, p. 5. 
 
 Ibid., p. 9. 
 
31 
 
 Article VI refers also to the exclusive rights of 
 the Company, and to the prevention of moles- 
 tation or disturbance on the part of Russian 
 subjects or foreigners. 
 
 In the first Charter granted subsequently to 
 the Treaties of 1824 and 1825, there is a striking 
 change in the language \:sed by the Russian 
 Sovereign. 
 
 Articles 2 and 3 of this Charter, which is iLute^States;^ ^ 
 dated the 29th March (10th April), 1829, are as ^^^^ PP*° " ' 
 follows : — 
 
 " 2. The limits of navigation and industry of the Com- 
 pany are determined by the Treaties concluded with the 
 United States of America the 5th (17th) April, 1824, and 
 with England the 16th (28th) February, 1825. 
 
 " 3. lu all the places allotted to Paissia by these Treaties 
 there shall be reserved to th<> Company the right to profit 
 by all the fur and fish industries, to the exclusion of all 
 otlier Bii^sian subjects." 
 
 The Charter of 1844 is equally significant. Ibid. 
 
 Section 2 sets out the boundary-Une which was 
 described by the Treaty of 1825 between Great 
 Britain and Russia. 
 
 Section 3 reads as follows : — 
 
 " Section 3. In all places annexed to Russia by the 
 
 above-mentioned delimitation there is granted to the 
 
 Company the right to carry on the fur and fishing 
 industries to the e.rclusioii of all Russian subjects." 
 
 The above extracts show conclusively that after 
 thf^ Treaties which resulted from tlio negotiations 
 upon the question of the Ukase of 1821, the 
 claim to exclude foreigners from navigating, 
 hunting, and fishing, asserted by Russia in that 
 Ukase for the first and only time, was definitely 
 abandoned. 
 
 It is further to be noted that the limits of the 
 Company's territories are clearly defined in each 
 of the three Charters quoted above, and though 
 they are not described in identical terms in each 
 Chaiter, the coast-line which is granted includes 
 in each case the whole Russian shore from the 
 Arctic Ocean to the southernmost limit. 
 
 If the Russian Government had considered 
 itself entitled, in spite of the Treaties, to close 
 Behrinf a to the approach of foreigners, it is 
 inconceivable that tlie Charters should not have 
 1)pcn so worded as to reserve the waters and 
 . oast of Behring Sea, while opening to foreigners 
 the waters and coasts to the southward of that 
 
 (iiii 
 
 ^m ■( 
 
 M 
 
 I. 
 
 
 sea. 
 
United States' 
 Case, Appendix, 
 vol. i, p. 68. 
 
 35 
 
 If this distinction was to l)o drawn at any 
 time it must of necessity have been drawn upon 
 this occasion, and the omission to do so becomes 
 more significant when the Cliarters of 1S29 and 
 1844 are read in connection with the protests of 
 the llussian-American Company a^^^inst the 
 terms of tiie Treaties, and the proceedings of tho 
 Committee which investigated those complaints 
 in 1821. 
 
 (,iiii,liilioiis I'rdiu (JorrusiJijiideiicc of 
 IJussiiin-Ami'iican Company. 
 
 Uiiitcil Stiitc's' Case, p. liL'. 
 
 
 '"\ 
 
 \ 
 
 ..^ 
 
 United States' 
 Case, p. 62. 
 
 Sec Appendix. 
 
 f J »' 
 
 Jniled States' 
 Case, pp. 62-66. 
 
 The remainder of the evidence upon which t^c 
 Case for the United States depends in respect of 
 the period now under discussion consists of 
 extracts from the correspondence of tho Russian- 
 American Company. 
 
 The first extract at p. G2 of the United States' 
 Case is merely a business letter from the Board 
 of tho Company to its chief :Manager, and 
 requires no comment, except that tho translation 
 is not accurate. 
 
 The letter of the Board, dated the 20th IMarch, 
 1853, from which several quotations arc made at 
 pp. (i2-G0 of tlic United States' Case, deserves 
 more detailed attenticm, as it affords the most 
 glaring instances of the interpolations and mis- 
 translation'- ^vltieh have been already mentioned 
 in com- action witli tho correspondence of the 
 
 Compai y. 
 
 The first quotation is as follows :— 
 
 "The Boanl of Adiiiiuistratioii rospcctfully rcciucsts 
 that in case the- inture^ts of tlio Company roquirc a 
 deviation from our plans, your Kxcellcncy will uuver lose 
 sight of the fact that thi intcicsh of the Compan;/ an: 
 cciitmdat the present time in the distnH snrromulhvi the 
 seal islands of the rnlnlof ,nvl Commander groups, ami 
 that consequently tho colonial walors must be visited by 
 the Company's cruizers constantly and in every part, ui 
 order to watch ,,,id warn the foreif,'n u-haUrs.- 
 
 This is twice quoted in the United States' 
 Case, and special attention is directed to it at 
 p. 03 as a communication which— 
 
 "throws much light upon the cMumercial activity of 
 the llussian- American Company, and may bo accepted as 
 indicative r,f the methods by which, in the last term of its 
 Charter, it enforced its control in the colonial waters." 
 
 The value of this passage for the purpose for 
 wliich it is quoted ;is, however, entirely destroyed 
 by tho discovery that the words wliich liavc !);.'.;a 
 
86 
 
 licrc printed iu i^aiJcfare mere interpolations in Sce Appendix, 
 the text of the despatch, and lo not exist in the 
 original Russian. 
 
 The second passage is as follows :— 
 
 " Ihis agent must observe and keep a record of all forcujn United States' 
 Mps seen during the vmjagc, awl of tlic position of the same Case, p. 63. 
 when obsemd, for the information of commanders of our 
 armed cruixers and of the colonial authorities in Sitka, 
 Kaincluitka, and Ayan." 
 
 This quotation has even less value than the 
 first, for it appears that not one word of the 
 whole passage is to he found iu the original 
 llussian. 
 
 The third quotation is of greater length than 
 the others, and refers to what is termed in the 
 TInited States' Case a " protective scheme." The 
 inaccuracies of the translation of this passage 
 arc too numerous to be here noticed, hut may be 
 seen at once by a comparison with the literal 
 translation in the Appendix to this Counter- See Appendix. 
 Case. The passage is here printed in a foot-note 
 for the purpose of showing the paragraphs which 
 are mere interpolations. They arc printed in 
 italics.* 
 
 • " ;;. One of the 1 rger vessels should leave the port of New 
 Archangel for Ayan not later than the l.ith May, to arrive at 
 the latter port at the end of June. This ship, tohich must be 
 armed, will carry passengers, stores, and supplies for our .Asiatic 
 stations. On the outward voyage the eounc of this vessel should 
 be laid lo the northward of the chain of the Aleutian Islands, in. 
 order to meetfoteisn ships ertering liering Sea, and lo warn 
 them u'jainst cruising in pursuit ofichales in the vicinity of the 
 seal islands of the Pribilof and Commander groups. . . ■ 
 
 •< 3. A second small vessel, the swifiest of the fleet, probably 
 the " .Menshikof," with a naval crew, ,nnd commanded by a naval 
 officer, must sail from Sitka at the end of April for the sole 
 purpose of watching the foreign whale ships in the southern par^ 
 of Bering Sc,» and along the chain of the Aleutian Islands. On 
 this vessel supplies may he forwarded to Copper and lierinfr 
 Islands, and, perhaps, to Attn and Atka. . . . This vessel 
 must be kept cruising constantly over the waters mentioned 
 above, and must not enter any ol the harbors except for the 
 purpose of obtaining water and wood, on which occasions the stay 
 of the vessel must be limited to the briefest possible period. 
 Each of the above-mentioned islands must be visited by this 
 cruiser at least twice during the season. ... The conclusion of 
 this cruising voyage depends upon the time at which the foreign 
 whale-ships leave Bering Sea, which is probably at the end of 
 August or the beginning of September. 
 
 "5. The second large vessel must be employed to supply the 
 islands (.f the Unalaska district, the Pribilof Islands, and 
 St. Michaers Keooubt, and also to carry on intercourse with 
 the coast tribes of Bering Sea, on the Asiatic as well as on the 
 
See Appendix. 
 
 Britisli translation, 
 paragraph 3, and 
 see paragrapli 5 
 and last paragraph 
 of despatch. 
 
 Ibid., paragraph r>. 
 
 41 
 
 37 
 
 Throughout this despatch, when coiTectly 
 translated, there is no mention whatever of the 
 proteetion ot the fur-seals. It is true that in- 
 structions arc given to— 
 
 "watch the foreign ^vlmlor,, nutil thoy leave Behring Sea 
 at tho en.l of August or tho beginning of September, 
 
 hut th(! only indication given as to the object of 
 
 such watching is— 
 
 -to see that Englishmen do not fallic with our natives," 
 
 liven if the preservation of fur-seals or fur- 
 seal fisheries had been specially mentioned as 
 the object of these instructions, it is denied that 
 they could have any weight as evidence for the 
 purpose for which they are ciuoted in the United 
 States' Case unless it could be shown that they 
 were acted upon in practice by the expulsion ot 
 a foreign ship. Of this, however, no evidence is 
 olfered, and it is confidently asserted that no 
 such evidence exists. 
 
 A„,erican coasts. . . . During tl,e whole tune of the pvesen e 
 of this .hip in the northern part of Bering Sea and the v.cn.ty 
 of .he Pribilof Islands, the commander must be charged «,th 
 „,e duty of cruising in search of foreign «hale-slups and of 
 
 English vessels carryin,; on trade with our savages. n.s sh . 
 
 also, must make no prolonged stay at any anchorage and must 
 
 :!; ;iaeed under the command of a naval officer, wth a cre« 
 
 consisting principally of sailors of the navy. ... 
 
 ..7 The fourth large vessel of the fleet. M, nu.y ie u.ed 
 
 ,„r rr.,Mes to Ka,nchatka, mu,t uU.. he fitUd out a. an armed 
 LJr Id kept in ,.rUne.. . pr.ce.' '" ""^ ,o,nt . W 
 
 Sea or in Siberian waters, fro,n ,M.h the presence of/o,e,jn 
 
 Mps ^a,J be reported by the .smaller vessels .n the course ,f th. 
 
 ""l"„ tra,*mitti,.g -o your Excellency the above outline plan 
 for the employment of the colonial fleet, the Boar o. Adnnn.s- 
 tration respectfully requests that in case the rnlere s o tin 
 Lpanv e.,uire a deviation from our plans, your Lxcelleucy 
 Sr ever lose sight of the fact that the interest, of the C^npany 
 are centered ot the present time in the di.tr..t surround. .gh^ 
 .eal islands of the PribiLf and Com,nander ^^'^j'^ ^ ^^_ 
 consequently the colonial waters mu.t be v,s,ted t Cm 
 „any- cruisers constantly and in every part, n. orde, .o w.> ch 
 'Z u-arn the foreign ,eha,ers. For this purpose etad^ 
 Ltructions have been formulated for our eru.sers. as we as tor 
 .,e commanders of the whalcships of tl,e Company, wluch are 
 ^iged to serve in the capacity of cruisers ^^'^'^ ;"^^^^- 
 „hain. in Bering Sea. In all cases the command of a v esse 
 : :,rdcrs .0 cruise in colonial waters must be g.vcu to naval 
 :£L. who will there.,. Hnd an opportunity to make themselves 
 cnuainted with the routine of colonial transoct.ons, w nle ,at the 
 .ale tinu. their rank will give authority to our proceedmgs. 
 
 [741 J 
 
88 
 
 At p. 07 of the United States' Case the follow- United State*' 
 ing extract is quoted from the letter from the """' ''' 
 Chief Manager of the Russian Colonies to Benjc- <: 
 man, dated 20th June, 1801 :— 
 
 ( British translntion.) 
 
 " 0. It has como to my knowledge thnt two whiilcrs 
 liavo tliis ycM Ifft San Frnncisco ti) tra<te on tlie Pribylnff 
 Islands. I have thureforc to instinct you to ]ierforin,wliik' 
 un the voyage you liave boon ilivectod to inaki-, the ilutios 
 (if a cniizor, acting in strict accorJano.- with the inclosed 
 instructions sanctioned by the Eniiieior." 
 
 (United States' tianslalion.) 
 
 " i). It lias conic til my knnwlcdge that in the piv-, ,:, 
 year two whaling-vessels have .■■ailed Iroui San Fraiii ii . 
 for the itmiinse of trading on the Priliilof Islands m / 
 hiialin;! In their n'rini///. Coii.«('(iiicntly, 1 would "Ui-'y ■:•■ 
 that during your jiiesencf in those waters yoii will e.\ii- 
 cise the duties nf an armed vrmmr, to preri-nt (mi/ unlavjvl 
 acta on the, part not niili/ ii/' these tn-o rcsii'l\ hut of amj vth is 
 ii'hii'h i/iiii May find in Bering Sea.' 
 
 United States' 
 Case, p. 67. 
 
 It will he seen that the passages printed in 
 italics are not to be found in the original Eusslau, 
 while the "inclosed instructions sanctioned by 
 the Emperor," which arc mentioned in the ori- 
 ginal, have been entirely omitted in the quota- 
 tion. The production of those " instructions " 
 is essential to the correct appreciation of the 
 despatch in which they were inclosed. 
 
 The Proclamation issued at Sitka in 1864 is 
 similarly made to serve as evidence in the United 
 States' Case, by the insertion of the words " or 
 waters." No such words occur in the original, 
 which is merely a notice to quit Russian ttrri- 
 
 tOTlJ. 
 
 Further quotations are made at pp. G8 and 6!) Ibid., pp. 68, g9 
 of the United States' Case, as to all of which it 
 may be remarked that the documents quoted 
 are of a purely municipal character, aifccting 
 Russian subjects only. 
 
 Two points, however, deserve more detailed 
 notice : — 
 
 1. In the proposals for the renewal of the 
 Ccnpany's Charter in 1865 and 1806, there is 
 no suggestion that powers should be granted to 
 exclude foreigners, such as had been granted by 
 tli'j Charter of 1821, and subsequently abandoned 
 in the Charters of 1829 and 1844. 
 
 2. Tlic letter of the Minister of Finance, dated 
 the 19th June, 1865, affords further confirmation 
 of the fact that the Russian Government was 
 tuiaware of the existence of any such special 
 iurisdiction over the waters of Behring Sea as is 
 now claimed by tlie United States as tiie suc- 
 c'jssor.s of that Government. 
 
 Tiie ^linister proposed, in paragraph 15 of his 
 
 exclusive 
 
 Ibid., p. 68. 
 United States' 
 Cise, Appendix, 
 vol. i, p. 75. 
 
 Ibid,, p. 77. 
 
 right cl' engaging in 
 
 Company 1 
 the fur trade on the 
 
30 
 
 in the pn-. , ■ 
 Sail Kiuniii ,, 
 
 Islanils './ ; 
 
 wrmlj «im';ai J', 
 ynii will exti- 
 it liny iinlapjid 
 lit 0/ ani/ijfhia 
 
 
 United Statei' 
 Case, p. 68. 
 
 bid. 
 
 r 
 
 Peninsula of Alaska, tiif islands, and the ivestern 
 shore* of Bohrini;; Sea — 
 
 '^H rcKfirds tlie region sli'etcliiu^ iiiirth-u:isl uf tliu 
 Aliiska Pfninsvilii, iiloiij; tlif wimlt^ of the cniist uii to the 
 Ixmndiiry-liiic contiguoiH with thf ]]oaHi'Ssioiis of (Irunt 
 Uritiiiii, anil on the islands sitimted ftloiiK that coast, 
 inclndini; Sitka and tlir whole of tlu' Koloshian Archi- 
 lndaj;o, and ULrvim nn tlu- cuntiiient of tin iiorlhcrii 
 part of Amn-lc'tj t\\e inivilego of the Company to ctclu- 
 sividy onga,L;c in Cur trade sliall he abolished." 
 
 Tliis is described in the United States' Case as 
 a proposal to extend the privileges — 
 
 "only to th(i ic'^'inn aliout Bchrinu Sen." 
 
 If this is intended to 1k> used as evidenee of 
 the exercise of the extraordinary jurisdiction over 
 Behring Sea which is claimed in the United 
 States' Case, it hecomes necessary to enter a 
 protest against the attempt which is made to put 
 upon the passage a construction which it was 
 never intended to hear, and which only hecomes 
 possible by the unwarranted assumption that when 
 the writer mentioned the western shore he 
 meant to refer to the eastern. 
 
 The passage shows that so far from asserting 
 exclusive rights — 
 "ill the rejiioii almut I'.tdiriii;,' Sea," 
 
 tlie writer actually proposed in abolish the 
 exclusive privilege of the Company ui)on tli(! 
 eastern shores of that sea, and treated those 
 coasts and the coasts of the Paciftc to the east- 
 ward and southward of the Alaskan Peninsula, 
 including Sitka, as subject in preeis(;ly the same 
 manner and to the same extent to the jurisdiction 
 of Russia. 
 
 Allci,'ation that Treaty of 18G7 \ya.s 
 a.ssertion of owner.ship of Bchring 
 Sea, 
 
 United Stitei' 
 Ca»e, p 70, 
 
 United States' Case, p. 70. 
 
 Ueau (E).— T/k' Trent;/ of Cession q/"1867. 
 
 It is alleircd ou behalf of the United States 
 that the Treaty of 1SG7 between llussia and the 
 United States was an assertion by the great 
 nations that Enssia had theretofore claimed the 
 ownership of Bchring Sea, that she then ceded a 
 portion of it to the United States, and that to 
 
 • Tliu foot-note. United States' Appendix, vol, 1, p, 77, !:• 
 obviously erroneous. The passage as it stand.-, deals, in dii.' 
 course, with nil the shores of the Russian possessions. Diit 
 the proposed subslitntion of " eastern " for "western ' involves 
 the omission of all reference to llie .Asiatic sliOiis, and renders 
 meaningless the siibseipKnt roterenee 10 the " rantineiit 0! the 
 northern part of .\nierien." 
 
 [741] M 
 
■ 
 
40 
 
 this assertion no objection has ever been made. 
 Neither the Treaty of 1867 nor any other 
 document communicated to foreign nations in 
 connection therewith asserted any claim to the 
 ownership of Behring Sea. Reference is made to 
 the observations in Cliapter V of the British Case. 
 The extracts from the debates in Congress and.tho 
 negotiations whicli took place prior to the com- 
 pletion of the Treaty show conclusively that it 
 was not supposed by the advisers of the United 
 States, or by any person on their behalf, that any 
 exclusive dominion over Behring Sea was bciD"?; 
 acquired. The Boport of the Committee, referred 
 to at pp. 75 and 7G of the United States' Case, is 
 not a Report made by or about the time of the 
 Treaty or acquisition of Alaska, but is a Report 
 made in view of the present controversy in the 
 
 year 1889. 
 
 No reference is made in the United States' 
 Case to the report of any previous communica- 
 tion which inquired into the facts connected 
 with the purchase of Alaska; e.ij., the Report 
 of 18G8 of the Committee on Foreign All'airs, 
 quoted by Bancroft, Alaska, p. 595. 
 
 The Coiumittoe of AVays and Means, to whom 
 in 187G was referred a Resolution of the House 
 of Representatives, directing an investigation 
 into certain matters relating to the lease by the 
 United States' Government to the iUaska Com- 
 mercial Company, presented a Report, from 
 whicli the following is an extract :— 
 
 'AVhfi the jiroiiositian to piiril;:isc tlio Alaska Territory j, ^ j^^. Do^,^ 
 from Ilussia ^^•as l.eforu Congress, tlie opposition to it was 44tl.^^Cons„^ ^^^ 
 very nmch l-osed on i.Uegoa banenness and worthlessncs,- ^ ^^ ' 
 „r the territory to hv aequirnl. It v.as supposed that 
 though there might he many politi.al reasons for tliis 
 .iihlitir.u lo li.e American Paoilic possessions, there were 
 n,>t e.,mniercia' or revenue .advantages. Tlio value of those 
 .,..al i^'.Miuls was not considered at all. liussia had derived 
 hut little revenue fr.im them, in.lcfd a sum not sullicient 
 lo pay the contingent exjienses of maintaining the oflicad 
 authority. Under our system, however, we have a very 
 dilVerent result." 
 
 Mr. n. W. Elliott, in his Report on the seal 
 Islands of Alaska (United States' 10th Census 
 Report, 1^«1), writes as follows upon this 
 ])oint : — 
 
 " '-lrin"e i"nor.iUCc i>l' their vahm in li^li" : <• Tlip Seal Ihlamis 
 
 ■.Cons;:ierC.g that thi. return is the o.dy one made .., l,:;';^:'KLt,, 
 I'.ieCovcvmmnt hy Alaska since its transfer, and that it ^y^J^„„^„„^ 
 
 „.... vcrtakon into account at lirst l.y tho most ardent Oov«nn,rnt 
 
 ad^UL:.tcs of the purchase of Kussian-A.neriea, it i ■ in Uself I^m.mK *)*ce^_ 
 
11 
 
 Foot-note in 
 original. 
 
 Gri'.it Unlain's 
 Case, Appendix 1, 
 
 p. 81. 
 
 11. R Ex. Doc, 
 
 50lli Cong., 
 
 2ncl Si'ss., 
 
 Nr). 38S3, p- 139. 
 
 liighly creditabk" and iiiU'Vcsting ; to Senator Sumner ih-. 
 fri°nds of the acquisition of tliis temtory in 18C,7 .lel.'j^iitcd 
 the tit.sk of making tlu'. principal argument in its (ovour. 
 Fviiryihing lliat wa.'i written in strange tnngw.s was caru- 
 fully translated for the choioe l>its ,.1' mention whieli enukl 
 1„. found of Alaska's value. Ilenen liis speeeli on the sub- 
 jeet pi sse.sses this interest (Speech on Cession of i;us.sian- 
 Ameriea, United Slates' Senate, 1807, ' Suniniary,' p. 48): 
 ft is the embodiment of evcrythini; thai couM be scraped 
 together, having the fah.test .shadow .if authculicity, by all 
 oflhc eager friends of the pureliase, wliiedi gave the least 
 idea of any valunblc natural resources in Alaska ; there- 
 fore, when, in summing uj, :dl this, he makes no reference 
 whatover to the .seal i.slands, or ihe fur-.seal itself, the. 
 extraordinary ignorance at home and abroad relative to the 
 Pribyloir Islands can be well appreciated." 
 
 Mr. Suinuei- did, in fact, make a reference to 
 the fur-s(>al, but in a sin;?le paragraph only, in 
 the course of hh long speech, and the perusal 
 of that speech shows the relatively small im- 
 portauee whicli he attached to the fur-seal ftsliery. 
 
 Mr. Elliott has since repeated the opinion 
 expressed in the ahove-quot(Hl lleport, in tin; 
 evidence which he gave to the Committee whose 
 Tleport is quoted at p. 75 of the United States* 
 Case : — 
 
 •■ Th.- i;us.siL.,ii.s made no effort to h"l,l th'-^e islands, at 
 the time of tlie transfer, simply because they did not value 
 their sealing industry ; it was of small conse.itienee lo 
 them, a skin only being worth from :! to i dollars in 
 London. 
 
 "They failed lo properly develop tlic market, as the 
 les,sees have divne under our Coycrumont." 
 
 In a letter written by Dr. W. H. Dall, to 
 correct some statements attriliuted to him in tho 
 discussion arising from tlie paper by ^h: W. 
 Palmer, read hefori" the r.iological Society at 
 Washington, he says :— 
 
 •• I said that in tSCo (uol ' m the early days of the 
 industry ') I pitrchased first-dass fur-seal skins at 121 eeutii 
 a-picee, that being the price at which they were sold hy 
 tho Rus.sinns. The point of this observation lies in its 
 apjdication to the aft-repeated .lalemi-t that, as Jlr. 
 Palmer says, ' Utile .-tress was laid upon .he fact that fur- 
 seals were' I'ouud in almndance ' at the time of the pur- 
 chase of the Territory by the United States. No str,-.s 
 could retisonably have been laid upon it, since IDii.uOO 
 seals would at that time have heen worth only some 12,.-|00 
 dollars, which W(ju!d landly have paid for the trouble of 
 taking them. Of course, almo.-t immediately afterwards 
 tiiia was no longer true.'-C Korest and .Stream," Novem- 
 ber ."'.. ism.) 
 
CONFIDENTIAL. 
 
 BEHRING SEA ARBITRATION. 
 
 Preliminary Draft Counter-Case to meet 
 Part II of United States' Case. 
 
 United Stales \>\w^- -p«cial reliauce 
 on Piiil U. 
 
 Arrangement. 
 
 I. General Statement (pp. 1 to 10). 
 II. General Character of United States' Evi- 
 dence (pp. 11 to 15). 
 III. United States' Propositions (dealt with 
 seriatim) (pp. IG to ). 
 IV. United States' Conclusions. Reply (pp. 
 to ). 
 
 I.-GENEllAL STATEMENT. 
 
 1. IT has hecome evident irom the considera- 
 tion of Part I of the United States' Case that hut 
 little reliance is placed hy the United States on 
 ohtainins from the Trihunal of Arbitration 
 decisions in favour of their views in regard to the 
 first four points of refi^rence, namely, those con- 
 cerned witli rights of jurisdiction over areas and 
 over waters of tlie North Pacific Ocean, and 
 especially over that portion now known as 
 Behrini,' Sea. 
 
 •2. It becomes cijually evident that the United 
 States intend their appeal to the Tribunal to 
 de])end in the m;iin on Part II of their Case. 
 Part n comprises nearly three limes as many 
 pasjes as Part I — 215 as against 75 ; and of 
 the 1,130 pages of testimony, no less than '.);50 
 pages are devoted to matter referring to Part II, 
 which deals exclusively with uie entirely novel 
 and strange assertion ol' a jiroprit-tary right in 
 the fur-seal. 
 
 H. It is seen that, as a matter of fact. Part I of 
 
 [818] 
 
 B 
 
the United States' Case cidminatcs in the asser- 
 tion (p. 85) : — 
 
 " Quito iudepcndently of this jurisdiction, the United 
 States has a right of protection and property in the fur- 
 seals frequenting the I'l'ibyloiT Islands wlieu found outside 
 the ordinary 3-mile limit, and it liases this right upon the 
 established principles of the common and civil law, upon 
 the practice of nations, upon the laws of natural history, 
 and u])on the common interest of mankind." 
 
 i. Tho United States therefore put forward, as 
 the niain clement in their Case, the fifth of the 
 five points suhmitted to the Tribunal, viz. :— 
 
 " lias the United States any right, and, if so, what right, 
 of protection or property in tlie fur-seals frequenting the 
 islands of the United States in Behring Sea when such 
 seals are found outside the oidinary 3-niile limit." 
 
 5. It is evident that the mere assertion of such 
 a claim renders nui,'atory the several pleas in 
 favour of jurisdiction over areas, -whether based 
 upon Treaties or international law ; for it is a 
 claim which can only he advanced on the suppo- 
 sition that the claims as to jurisdiction under tlie 
 four previous points of refereuce would not and 
 could not hold good. 
 
 It is, p. -haps, worthy of note that the four 
 volumes Avhich contain the United States' Case, 
 together with the Appendices, arc headed " Fur- 
 seal Arbitration," and not given the more com- 
 prehensive and official title— " Behring Sea 
 Arbitration "—which, according to the Treaty 
 under which the Arbitration takes place, speci- 
 fically includes tlic first and main point in dispute, 
 namely, " the jurisdictional rights of the United 
 States in the waters of Eclu-ing Sea." 
 
 6. It will he observed that this new claim to a 
 proprietary right in the fur-seal is advanced 
 by llie United States (p. 85) on two classes of 
 j>icas, which may be respectively termed the 
 Lr(jal and the Imhtstrinl. The Le(jal embracing 
 "the principles of the common and civil law 
 and the practice of nations," and the Industrial 
 the laws of natural history, and the common 
 interests of mankind." 
 
 1. Legal Pleas. 
 
 7. In regard to the "Legal" pleas, it is to be 
 uotcd that these are never again mentioned in 
 the Case, nor is any proof, or even argument, 
 
a. Common and Civil Law. 
 
 /J. Practice ot Nations. 
 
 advanced in tlioiv liohalf. It mny lie well, how- 
 ever, to set out briefly the move obvious objections 
 taken to any such picas. 
 
 8. In refcrcn(!e to " the privileges of the com- 
 mon and civil law" 
 
 [This for Coimsel to deal with.] 
 
 9. In roferencc to the " practice of nations," 
 it is clear from the records that in no jiart of the 
 world at any time has any nation ever claimed or 
 exercised any such rights, whetlun- in the >'ortli 
 Pacific, the Southern llcmispliere, or the North 
 
 Atlantic. 
 
 10. Tn regard to the ^'ortll racillc Ocea .i :— 
 
 (1.) The Russians nenr nssirkd ovj f-nch claim. 
 
 Mr. AJrniis (22n.l July, 182:!), <lofines Russia's claim to 
 be "the ri-htor intcrdiotiiig nuvi-.itiou or fisliory of all 
 olbcr nati.ins to tlic extent of 100 miles fi.m the whole of 
 
 that coast." _ 
 
 All (he (li?LU3sions arisiuy out ol' Uie Uka^o of 1<99 
 and thulTk.ase of 1821, ami culmiualin- in the Conventions 
 ot 182-1 and 1825, deal exclusively ^.■ith vi-hts contreUini; 
 and prohibiting luivigation, or li.shin;. in ;.iul over certain 
 areas For instance, I'-avou Tuyl (Cth l)econd,er, 1824) 
 elainied " that beyon.l .V.>:;0 no foreij.'u vessel can approach 
 Russia's toasts or islands, nor ph r,r hunt withm the 
 distance of 2 uuivino leagues." 
 
 A-niu, M. de Voletiea wrote to Mr. .1. Q. Adavns, 
 28tir February, 1882 (American State I'apers, Forei.^u 
 Relations, vol. iv, yV- 801-802) :— 
 
 "I shall be more succinct, Sir, in the exposition of the 
 motives which determined the Imperial Government to 
 prohibit foreiun vessels from approachin- the north-west 
 coast of .America belonging to Itusda within tb.e distance 
 „f at h-ast 100 Italian miles. This me^isurc, however 
 severe it nu.v at first appear, is, after all, but ,a measure of 
 prevention. It is exdusively directed a-ainsl the culpable 
 enterprises of forei-n adventurers, wlio, not content with 
 exeroisin" upon the coasts above mentioned an ilHeit trade 
 very prejudicial to the rights reserved entirely to the 
 Russian- American Company, taU.' upon them besides to 
 furnish arms and ammunition to tl... natives in the Russian 
 possessions in America, exciting them likewis,,' m every 
 manner to resist and revolt against tlie auth.a-.ties there 
 
 established." , , 
 
 Again, Count Xesselrode eommuniealed t.. m. lUiueoi 
 WeUin-toua "Confidential Mem..randum," dated the U'li 
 (2:!rd) November, 1822, which contr:ns the followin;.^ 
 
 passage : — 
 
 It was, on the contrary, bccausi' alio regardoil 
 
 those 'rights of sovereignty as legitimate, and because 
 imperious considerations, involving the very I'xistence of 
 the commerce w!>ich she carries on in the regions of the 
 
4 
 
 uorth-wesl coasl of Auicricn, comiielkd !ioi to c-t iMish ii 
 Bvstinii lit iirocautions which Ijecnmo iiulisiicnsftbU', tliat sho 
 causfd the Ukasu of l\w 4t!i (IGlh) Sfptcmbw, ISLM, to lio 
 
 issued." 
 
 Property in .se;ds is not so inuch as liintud at. 
 
 (2.) The CnUed ,Stittes ha.^ >ii:vcr asscrtal or exercisa/ 
 litis right. 
 
 (i) Tlic tii>'t .suu-cstinu of luiy stirh claim i< ;i hint, w 
 th.. letter of Mi. W'V'l {I'ccfiol.cr IHyO). There ha. 
 been uo olliciiil iiotilicalioii of r.uy mt:h claim. 
 
 (ii.) The L':iitv<l States have never attcmiitud to a.-,serl 
 or enfouf .such a chiim eiiher by Lti-i^lativc or Executive 
 acl, even a'.,'ainst United States' .'^oaling-vo.-'sels. 
 
 (iii.) The claim has never been \ml forward by United 
 State.?' Counsel whether in the Alaska District (Jourt oi 
 thu Supremo Court in AVashin.uton, or in regard to any of 
 the i.roceedhi:;s arising out of ihe seizure of sealing- 
 .schoouerd in I'lchrin;^ Sea. 
 
 (iv.) All seizures, wlielhi r of British or United States' 
 vessels, have been maile on distinct grounds of breach of 
 lieguhuious within a given area, .and never for larceny of 
 .seals. 
 
 (v.i The United St.ites' Government in all the argu- 
 ments ndv.aneed, and In all the precedents and examples 
 cite.l, as, for instance, from .'^t. Helena, Ceylon, Seollaial, 
 and .\iistralia, confine their plea to questions of jurisdic- 
 tion over areas which arc .luito beside the mark if property 
 in seala is to be regarded as a serious claim. 
 
 (3.) The Claim is oiih/ pnl/onvan' on the Plct that nov 
 the rjijhi is for thr Jirsf time invaded. 
 
 (i.) Mr. I'h.'lj.i- writes ("Harper," April IKOl) ;— 
 " I'rocedcnts illustrate principles, but do not create them. 
 Thev are only valuable so far as they .lisplay tlu; applica- 
 tion", if principU'S to new cases. They do not arise out of 
 ric'bt. lull out of attempted wrongs. A right cannot 
 obtain the sanction of a ,,reeedont until it is invaded. 
 Ami an invasion of a right is nut with,.ut redress, though 
 it may never have been invaded in the same way before." 
 
 (ii., Unfortunately for this theoretic contention, the 
 records show that the riglit of user in the harvest of the 
 North Pacific Ocean, including that portion named, in 
 recent years, i'.chrinu Sea, has always been fully conceded 
 by the territorial I'owcrs, and especially in regard to seals, 
 until the United Stales in the last few years has endea- 
 voured to assert jurisdiction and dominion over certain 
 specified areas,— a claim absolutely unmeaning and unnuces- 
 sary if there existed any proprietary riglits whatever in 
 
 seal . . 
 
 (iii.) The United States assert and press the chum 
 that by inheritance, from liussia they possess -exclusive 
 rights over an area of sea, whether the whole of Behring 
 Sra or lUO miles from the coastdiue. I'.ut rights of 
 property in seals are unmeaning if area rights are con- 
 
ceded, and urea rights niu unmeaning if iiroperty right? 
 ara conceded. 
 
 (iv.) The United St;itf3 have- consistently asserted area 
 rights, as, for instance : — 
 
 (a.) 1S8'.). ActofCoH'jrcis, March2. 
 
 " 5} .'!. Tliat !j 1905 of the Itevised Statutes of the United 
 States" (re.i,'ulaling the takin,;,' of all fur-hearing animals, 
 iniludinL; fur-seals) "is hereby declared to include and 
 apiily to all the dominion of the United States in the 
 wateis of l.ehring Sea." 
 
 (//.) IS'Jl and l.S'.)2. Tlic President's Annual Prodamrition. 
 
 " Hereby warn all persons against entering the waters 
 of lieliring Sea within the dominion of the United States 
 for the purpose of violating the provisions of said § 195G 
 Revised Regulations." 
 
 (4.) The. Practice of nil Parlies in Ike North Pacific Ocean 
 is well hnown from the Records. 
 
 (i.) From 17«5 onwards British vessels coming from 
 India sought furs in thrse seas for the Canton market, and 
 the only method adopted hy the Kussians, who were then 
 the territorial Tower, with a view to monopolizing this 
 trade, was to prevail upon the Chinese Government to 
 grant the liussians the exclusive right to import furs from 
 the American side of the Pacific Ocean. 
 
 (ii.) In the Treaty signed between the United States 
 and France in 1801 it is stipulated in Article XXVII : 
 "Neither party will intermeddle in the fisheries of the 
 other on its coa-sts, nor disturb the other in the exercise of 
 
 the rights which it now holds But the whale and 
 
 seal fisheries shall be free to both in every (juarter of the 
 world." 
 
 (iii.) In 1804 (see Report of Congressional Committee 
 on Petition for alteration ot Iv'avigation Laws in respect of 
 seals). 
 
 (iv.) In tli<! early part ot this, tintrry the fur trade to 
 China was ' nnsiderablo, and many tui3 were obtained in 
 the North \' ■!.- '. Mr. Bancroft (" Histor/ of the Pacific 
 State," xx.v.:i, p. 487) writes:— 
 
 "Trade was carried on to a small extent with the 
 Spaniards at San Francisco even before the Treaty of 
 1824, though before that date the Kussians were not 
 allowed to enter the harhuur for huntimj purposes. At the 
 Farallones, however, a station was established, which for a 
 time was fairly profitable. From 1812 to 1818 about 
 8,400 fur-seal skins were obtained there, and it is stated 
 that, before their occupation by the Russians, as many as 
 10,000 were taken on these islands in a single autumu. 
 Later, the supply was gradually exhausted, but the ground 
 was not totally abandoned until 1840." 
 
 (v.) Fur-sealing in the North Pacific was thus early an 
 established industry, as was incidentally mentioned by 
 [818] C 
 
6 
 
 Captain Scammon, who states that in IS")'-' lio proceoclcd to 
 sea " in command of a brig bound on a. sealing and whaling 
 voyage." 
 
 Indeed, about this time (18-10-50) American and other 
 whalers were frequenting the waters north and south 
 of the Aleutian Islands. The Behring Straits whaling 
 industry commenced with the " Superior," Captain Itoys, 
 whicli was the pioneer ship, in 1848. In 1840 there was 
 a fleet of 154 vessels. 
 
 The Russian authorities again wished to check this 
 foreign competition, but the only means they coulil adopt 
 was to del)ar whalers from refitting or provisioning in the 
 ports of Alaska, ( >:ropt in ca?o;- nf the utmost iieces>ify. 
 Professor Dall, in his book on "Alaska," writes, in 1870 — 
 claiming as one of the advant.igos of the purchase of 
 Alaska that this liindrani-e to a great industry would be 
 thereby removed. 
 
 (vi.) In 18G8 the United States came into possession of 
 thp '.'ribyloff Islands, and the pioneers of the new rt'gime 
 were the sealers who at once landed aiul secured more 
 than 300,000 skins. 
 
 When the Alaska Comiiiercial Company wasolitainiiig a 
 Government lease of the islands they found them ncttially 
 occupied by Cniinecticut .-scalers, uiuler Jforgan, with 
 whom they comlmied forces ti> drive oil' I'lliigel and others 
 who had come up from Ilunoliilu. 
 
 From the very first occuiiation of these islands the 
 United States' authorities have lomplained of raids made 
 on shore by sealing schooners. From 18T0 to 1892 the 
 TreaGury Agents have complained persistently of inade- 
 quate protection against such raids. 
 
 From the earliest years we find the rcventie cruizers 
 in.structed to prevent these raids, and to I'ruize in the 
 Aletitian Arehiiirlagii tn i)roti'ct the .seal fisheries ami sea- 
 otter hunting-grtiuiuls, but never a word of instructions is 
 there to prevent .sealing at sea. Ind' id, in the year 1872, 
 the Secretary of the Treasury, in reply to Kniiplaiuts that 
 Austr.alian and Hawaiian .sealers were likely to seal in tlie 
 Aleutian passes, writes : — 
 
 " I ilo not see that the I'nited States would have the 
 jurisdiction or power to drive off parties going up there for 
 ti;nt purpose unless they made such an attempt within a 
 marine league of the siiore." 
 
 The liritish Mini.4er at Wasliingtuu reports to the Earl 
 of Iddesleigh that in an interview on the 18th November, 
 18SG, the Secretary of State, Mr. liajard, said, in regard to 
 the seizures of l!riti.sli sealing- vessels, "it would be a 
 :;omplicated question of juiisdiction, for he- had been told 
 that many of the sealskins found on board the British 
 vessels were skins of seals which had not been shot, but 
 clubbed, which proved that a landing bad been effected," 
 
 (5). Th€ Eight, of tlu Natiiet to take Fur-Sail never 
 disputed. 
 
 (i.) Direct eviderce of the acknowledged right of others 
 10 a share in this "seal property" is the absolutely 
 unchallenged practice of the natives and residents all 
 
along the coasts and islands, from Sontlieru, C'allforui,i. to 
 Alaska, to capture fur-seal and make a profitaLle trado out 
 of the sale of the skins. 
 
 Tiiis has been a recognized industry from time imme- 
 morial, and proves conclusively that the residents all along 
 these coasts have always exerc icd this 'proprietary" 
 right in the fur-seal of tlie North Pacific. 
 
 °(ii.) Out of this aboriginal industry has developed the 
 modern " pelagic " sealing iu wldcli, at the present time, 
 several Imndreds ot natives are very protitaljly employed 
 assisting white men to capture tliu seals ^vllilc in their 
 winter and spring habitats. 
 
 (iii.) It may be mentioned tlia; tlie United States' 
 Government, by municipal lav, contr.)! and lii;iil the taking 
 o": seals by the Alinits on the I'riljyloff Islands, lint ihese 
 Aleuts, on whose belialf so much has been claimed by the 
 United States are not natives, but merely imported 
 labourers. Tliey are mostly half-breed Aleuts from the 
 Aleutian Islands, originally deported as labourers by the 
 ■Russians to the seal islands, and even to Kanisehatka. 
 
 (ij.) Tcrrituii'-tl jHrisiliiiinn aluue nm'rlal. 
 
 lu the North Pacific the free right to take seals han 
 only been limited by ilunicipal Law of Trespass. 
 
 In the North I'aciho Ocean tliii practice of the scaler.^ 
 from the first was in accord witli tlie I'ranoo-American 
 Treaty of 1801, viz., that the seal iisheries shall be free to 
 both parties in every (piarter of tlic world. Indeed, it has 
 only been by municipal legislation tliat sealers have been 
 prevented exercising the right to take seals on shore. 
 
 11. In regard to the Soutlierii ILcmispiierc :— 
 (1.) The fur-seal has been taken in tlie .^oulli.rn 
 Hemisphere in numbers far in excess of those taken in 
 the North r..:ilic, and in all cases these seals have been 
 exclusively taken on shore. And tliis has been done 
 without regard to territorial sovereignty or ownership. 
 
 (■J.) In the Southern Hemisphere it lias always been 
 customary f ' sealers to pursue tlioir calling on any unin- 
 habited coasts or i.slauds. and the onl) restrictions upon 
 this ri-ht are those wliich have comparatively recently 
 been set up l)y certain Governments for tlio ] aiiiose of 
 preserving the fur-seal from .'xtermination, but in no case 
 have these extended I'eyond the limits of territorial waters. 
 It, is to be noted that iu .South America, as in the i'^Iands 
 belonging to Tasmania and New Zealand, aU complaints of 
 .slaughter out of season, are eoiilined to the depredations 
 of United States' soaling-vc^sels. 
 
 (3.) The United States have speeilically asserted this 
 .ia.m, which altogether excludes any idea of a national 
 right of property in the seals themselves. 
 
 "The United States' claims lire most clearly set oui 
 in despatches of the United Sta1-.s' Charg' d'An'aires, 
 Mr. Bayliss, to the Bueuos AyreV Torcigu Jliuister :— 
 
8 
 
 (i.) 20th June, 1832:— 
 
 " The Undersigned is instructed and authorized 
 
 10 say that they utterly deny the existence of any right in 
 this liepulilic to interrupt, molest, detain, or capture any 
 vessels belonging to the citizens of the United States of 
 America, or any persons heini.' citizens of those States, 
 engaged in taking seals or whales, or any species of fish or 
 marine annuals, iu any of the waters or on any of the 
 shirres or lands of any or cither of the Falklaiul Islands, 
 Tierra del I'uego, Cape Horn, or any of the adjacent islands 
 ill tlie Athmtic Ocean." 
 (ii.) 10th July, 1832:— 
 
 "The United States of America desire no sovereign 
 jurisdiction or exclusive privileges over the water or the 
 soil of these regions. They only desire such ])rivileges as 
 they have been accustomed to exercise in common with 
 other maritime nations .... 
 
 " The ocean lishcry is a natural right which all nations 
 mav enjoy in common. Every interference with it by a 
 foreign Power is a n;itional wrong. When it is carried on 
 within tlio marine league of the coast, which has been 
 designated as the extent of n.ational jurisdiction, reason 
 seems to lUctate a restriction if, under pretext of carrying 
 on tlic fishery, an evasion Of the revenue laws of the 
 country may reasonably be apprehended, or any other 
 serious injury to the Sovereign of the coast, he has a right 
 to ]irohibit it ; but as such prohibition derogate? from a 
 natiu>d right, the evil to be apprehended ought to be a 
 real, and not an imaginary one. No such evil can be 
 apprLbi'iided on a desert and uninhabited coast, and there- 
 fore such coasts form no exception to the common right of 
 fishery in the sea adjoining them." 
 
 (iii.) Mr. liolieil (.irci.iibow. Librarian of the United 
 ■Slalo.i' Congress, write, in "Hart's Jlerchants' Magazine," 
 i-'uliiuary 18-12, in regard to the claims of tlie Huenos Ayres 
 (lovcnimciit ill respect to llic riilkland Islands:— 
 
 •To proceed unotlier step in admissions. Supposing 
 the Argentine i;epul>lic to liave really and uiKjucstionably 
 iiihrrited fiiMii Spain tlie sovereignly of the territories 
 adioiniiig it on liie south and the coiitiguou.s ishuids, that 
 (Uivernmeiil would still want tlie right to extend its 
 • IJegalations respecting the Seal Fishery' to tlie nu.settled 
 portio.iis of the coasts of those territories. That right was 
 indeed assumed by Spain, with many equally unjust, 
 whiel' '..ere enlfli-''ed so long as other nations did not find 
 
 it ;iriideiit to conies, them The common right of 
 
 a'l nnliiiiis to navigate and lish in the o])en sea and iu its 
 i i.lefiusilile .striiitf, and to use their unsettled shores for 
 teni).orary pur]joses. is now admitted among the priuii]',d 
 Maritime rowers, and the stipulations in Treaties on these 
 sniiieets are intended to prevent disputes as to what (.oasts 
 all' 111 be considered unsettled; what straits .are inde- 
 fensible ; within what distance frmn a settled coast the sea 
 ceases to he open," i*te. 
 
 (1) Similar dainis have been always asserted by Great 
 Uritain. For iiisUuite, Ixird Clarendon WTote to the 
 
British Minister iit Washington on the 21st September, 
 1854:— 
 
 "Her Miijcsty's Clcivcrnnient .... will continue to 
 oxerci.se tlie right inherent uniler the law of nntions in the 
 territorial Sovereign, mul will hold tlicniselves ontitleil, it 
 tliey think lit, to prevenl foreigner.'i, to whatever n.ation 
 belonging, IVoni fi.shing foiwhalo or .seal within '■'• niariiH' 
 miles of the coast, or from landing on any part of ihe 
 shores of the Falkland Islands for the [jurpose of lisliing or 
 killinL' seals" 
 
 12. In i'('g;ird to tlu- Xortli Atlantic : — 
 
 (J.) By international consent, property is recognized in 
 the hair-.seal only when c:iptured. 
 
 (2.) Tlie right of projierty in seals appears to be delined 
 in but one place, namely, the Newfoundland Act, entitleil, 
 " An Act to regulate the taking of, and right of property in, 
 Seals " (."jO Vict., cap. x.xiii), as follows :— 
 
 " 5 1. In any action or jiroceeding for the recovery of, or 
 in relation to, the property in seals, or seal pelts, killed by 
 persons engaged in or prosecuting the seal fishery in steam- 
 vessels going from (.r coming to tlie ports of this Colony, it 
 shall be held that no proi>erty, or right of property, sliall 
 have accrued except in seals killed, sculped, panned, or 
 bulked by, and in the actual charge of, the claimants, 
 or some per.son or persons for them, watching or engaged 
 in currying away such seals or seal pelts." 
 
 13. Thus it is seeu that th(3 "practice of 
 nations," and especially of tho United States, lias 
 been uniformly and universally in distinct 
 opposition to this now claim of property in the 
 fur-seal. 
 
 The practice of nations has l)ccu hased upon 
 the undeniable fact in natural history that the 
 fur-seal, thouixh necessarily resorting to the shore 
 I) breed, necessarily resorts to tlie deep sea to 
 obtain food. In regard to the seals frequenting 
 the I'rihyloll' Islands for breeding purposes, there 
 is lli(^ additional reason of severe winter weather 
 wliieli compels them— a fact freely acknowledged 
 in (he United States' Case — (o sojourn during the 
 winter 1,300 to 2,()(Kt miles to the southward in 
 the latitude of California. 
 
 2. Iiuluslriul Plens. 
 
 Why brought forward now. 
 
 11. In regaril to tlie " Industiinl" pleas it will 
 l)e necessary to point out, in limiiir, that the 
 United States' t'ontentions are liased on the 
 Several Report of (he two United States' 
 members of the Joint Commission appointed 
 fSlS] D 
 
10 
 
 under the IXth Article of the Arbitration Treaty 
 of the 29th February, 1892, and on a great mass 
 of other evidence contained in two volumes. 
 
 15. But the Reports of this Joint Commission 
 were, ill accordance with Article VII of the said 
 Treaty, to be laid 1)eforo the Arbitrators only in 
 the event of the determination of the primary 
 questions ivs to the exclusive jurisdiction of the 
 United States leaving the subject in such position 
 that the concurrence of Gn>at Britain is necessary 
 to the establishment ol' llegulations for the 
 proper protection and preservation of the fur-seal 
 in Bchring Sea. It is expressly stated in 
 Article IX that these Eeports arc to be drawn uj) 
 so that they " may be in due form sul)mitted to 
 the Arbitrators should tbi" contingency therefor 
 arise." 
 
 16. It would appear, therefore, that in presenting 
 this Report at this early stage of the proceedings, 
 the United States arc of opinion that the con- 
 tingency will arise, and that the concurrence of 
 Great Britain will, of a certainty, be necessary 
 to the c>lablisliniont of Regulations for the 
 preservation of the fur-seal. In so far the United 
 States are in thorough agreement with the view 
 talcen by Great Britain on p. 1;>7 of the British 
 Case. 
 
 17. We would here point out that, as fore- 
 shadowed in paragraph Ti of the Joint Report, 
 the British Commissioners in their Several 
 Report not only urge the necessity for measures 
 of preservation, but set out in all detail the 
 scheme of measures which tliev sironirlv recom- 
 mend for adoption. 
 
 ^'^. In examining (he Industrial Pleas, it is 
 found that the United States' Co.se is made to 
 depend upon a chain of allegations, arguments, 
 and calculations as to the habits of the fur-seal, 
 and methods of capture, wliicli arc op2)oscd in 
 material details to the known facts of seal I'Te. 
 
 19. It is therefore proposed on behalf of Great 
 Britain first of all, and with a view to affording 
 a complete view of the case, to deal seriallm ami 
 ir sullicient detail, with the allegations and 
 arguments of Part II of the United States' Case ; 
 and thereafter to give in summary the rejoinder 
 to the " Conclusions " del ailed (on pp. 2!).^ to 303) 
 of the United States' Case, so far as these refer to 
 Part II of the Case. 
 
 Treatment of Inchistrial I'lcas. 
 
11 
 
 The rvideiicc. 
 
 (i.) li'eport of Ccimmission. 
 
 (ii.) Dr. Allen's Memoraniluiii. 
 
 (iii.) Keplies I'roiu Niituialisti!. 
 
 [I.— CiENEItAL CHAR-VCTEll 01' rilE 
 EVIDKXCE ADDUCED liY THE UNITED 
 STATES.* 
 
 1. As it is ocrlp.iu tlint Hie 'L'ribuiuil of Arliilrn- 
 tion will I'omi tlieir juilgiiiciLi not upon wluit tlu- 
 rcspoctivo parties alieyjo, but upon \vliiit tli"y 
 prove, it becomos iiecessiiry, before deiiliug 
 serinfim witli tlio propositions sot out in Part II 
 of tlu! United States' Case, to note eertain general 
 eliaracteristies of llie evidence on wliieh these 
 propositions are based. It may be eouvenicut 
 that the altenlion of the Arbitrators should thus, 
 at the outset, be directed to certain general 
 features pervadin!^ tliis evidence. 
 
 2. The main evidenei; submitted by the United 
 States in support of L'art TI (jf their Case is found 
 under tlw; headin;j;s : — 
 
 (i.) The Report of the United States' Behring 
 Sea Commissioners. 
 
 (ii.) A full Memorandum by Dr. .T. A. Allen, 
 (iii.) Replies from distinijui.-hed Naturalises, 
 (iv.) AfTuIavits from a variety of persons. 
 Omissions will then be dealt witii. 
 
 3. The licport of the Cojumissioners will be 
 found lari;ely to eonr.ist of theoretic calculations, 
 aud to form, as a matter of fact, an argument 
 very skilfully arranged to lead up to tlie one 
 conclusion — that pc-lagic striding must be put an 
 end to. It is dated the 15tli April, 1^!)2, and 
 professes to be based on jier.^onal observations 
 and inquiries made in ]5eiu'ing Sea between tlic 
 28th July and the lOth August, 1S!)1, supple- 
 mented by extended obscrvavions and inquiries 
 conducted by subordinates. 
 
 4. Dr. .7. A. Allen has compiled an interesting 
 and full ^lemorandum <rn many aspects and 
 environments of seal life, hut it is obvious from 
 interr.al evidrneo that it was drawn up po.;' li/c:n 
 inolavt. The ^Memoraiulum is avowedly a mere 
 compilation from previous publications, and does 
 not lay claim to be based on any special or new 
 information. Tlie statements on which the 
 inc^vifable conclusion is based — that all the evils 
 arise out of pelagic sealijig will be dealt with 
 later on in detail. 
 
 .'). In regard to 'he replirs from ilistiuguished 
 naturalists to the specific inquiries of the United 
 States' Government, serious attention is hero 
 
 Tills tri'jtmcm i'ul'.Oivs the prcci'diMit of ilic ■' .Mabiima " C.s?. 
 
IS 
 
 failed to the circular lottcr of T)r. Mcrriam, one 
 of the United States' Commissioners. This 
 lottcr is dated tiio 2nd April, 18i)2, and tlierein 
 Dr. Merriani announees that he is lomniissioncd 
 hy the United States' Govcrameiit to report 
 upon seal lil'e; and he thou proceeds to give his 
 (leliherate oi)inions, based upon his ofTieial in- 
 v('sti|^ations, upon various phases of that life, 
 ineludini;' all points whicli can lead up to the 
 desired conclusion, viz., the abolition of pelagic 
 sealing. Tliis circular letter was distributed, 
 through the Legations of the United States, to 
 many distinguished naturalists, and replies 
 solicited. 
 
 (1. In tlie Arliitration 'L'reaty it is, iiowever, 
 distinctly stipulated (Article IX) that the 
 Ilejiorts of the Commissioners " shall not he 
 ma(l(> pul)lic until they shall he sul)mitted to the 
 Arbitrators." It remains, tbcreibre, for the 
 Arbiti-ators to call for adequate explanation as to 
 the action of the United States' Government in 
 perniitting one of their Commissioners to dis- 
 trilnite, through the United Stat(!s' Legations, 
 .nmong foreign naturalists a summary of the 
 United States' Report live montlis before its 
 possiljle submission to the Arbitrators. 
 
 7. It is also to be noticed that this letter gives 
 an entirely (w jxiric statement of the Case, and 
 was calculated to result in judgments of the 
 Case founded upon an imperfect knowledge of 
 the facts, and therefore of little value. 
 
 S. I'haf this consideration did have due clfect 
 is seen in six of the twelve replies. Six of the 
 naturalists reply briefly that they have read the 
 interesting lleport of Dr. ]\Icrriam, and agree 
 witli Iiis deductions. Five others, however, 
 point out that nothing can be done witliout 
 internal ional action, while one, Professor 
 Salvador!, of Turin, strongly asserts that too 
 many seals have been killed on the islands. 
 There is no intimation as to the total numl)er 
 of naturalists to whom this cr parte statement 
 Avas sent, or as to liow many did not send replies. 
 !). Ancillary to this circular letter are two 
 communications from Professor HuxL^y and 
 Dr. Sclater respectively. It is perhaps note- 
 worthy that Professor Huxley's evidence should 
 be individualized by the statement of tue United 
 States' Government that it was given by him 
 " as a scientist, and not as a retained advocate " 
 (vol. i, p. 411). 
 
18 
 
 (iv.) AfTidavits by various person=!. 
 
 10. Professor Huxley (vol. i, p. 112), however, 
 distinctly shows that any "ideal arraiigcMnents" 
 of confining the killin;,' 1o the I'rihylolV Islands 
 are quite " iuipraetieablo ; " that tlir pi;laL,'ic 
 sealers " cannot be reasonably expected to ^ivc 
 up tlicii- llshery for the sake of preservini; the 
 l'riI)yloll' I'lsherics, in which they have no 
 interest;" and comes to the conclusion that 
 extirpation of the fur-seal is preferable to 
 international squabbles, and that tiie 'inly other 
 solution is tho control of both shove and sea 
 sealing by mutual agreement in the interests of 
 both parties. 
 
 11. \)t. Selater's alfidavit is the only one given 
 of those sought for in England in the spring of 
 1R!)2 by ;Mr. Wliitrldge, of the New York Har, 
 and is simply and avowedly a statement of .-r 
 naturalist's opinion on the facts as placed before 
 him. It would be interesting to know what was 
 said by the other naturalists to whom application 
 was made by ^Ir. Wliitridge for their opinions. 
 
 12. In regard to the long array of affidavits 
 composing vol. ii of the I'A-idence, it is to be 
 noticed that every affidavit, without exception, 
 was taken in 1802, pout litem wotam, and after 
 the United States' Commissiouers had ai'rived at 
 their conclusions. It is not surprising, there- 
 fore, to find in all those affidavits a close correla- 
 tion of testimony and eoiielusions. In the ^reat 
 majority of cases, indeed, tho deponents seem 
 only too eager to state first of all the conclusion 
 that pelagic sea'ing must be put an end to, luul 
 only afterwai-ds to endeavour to afford proofs. 
 But, as will be subsequently pointed out in detail, 
 in these affidavits, as in previous classes of evi- 
 dence, tliere is much information which directly 
 conflicts with the main contentions of this jiortion 
 of the United States' Case. 
 
 13. In general, a perusal of these afBdavits 
 shows them to be merely replies to one sca-ies of 
 leading questions, and in many cases little more 
 than signatures affixed to copies of a list of 
 statements. Precisely the same phrases and 
 terms and language are used by natives and 
 whites, seamen and landsmen, captains and boat- 
 pullers. Treasury Agents and Indians. There is, 
 for instance, :i very noteworthy uniformity in 
 the replies alike of illiterate Aleuts, Government 
 officials, and expert white sealers, that " the los;- 
 of seals in drives is less than 1 per cent." It 
 would be interesting to know what is tho 
 
 [818] E 
 
' 
 
14 
 
 precise meaning attached by an Aleut to the 
 term " less than 1 per cent." 
 
 14. Again, numerous replies arc from Indians 
 unable to sign their own names, and though the 
 statements arc in English, there is no evidence 
 to show that these Indians understood or spoke 
 English, or that they had any knowledge of the 
 contents or the meaning of the documents to 
 which they attached their marks. 
 
 15. It may he noted, also, that two deponents 
 (pp. 198 and 201) actually place on aflklavit 
 their account of the inquiries conducted hy the 
 British Commissioners in their preseuce, and 
 when thoy were acting as interpreters. 
 
 10. As an instance of the misleading character 
 of these affidavits, it may be pointed out that in all 
 the evidence taken from the Indians on the north- 
 west coast of America there is a remarkable 
 uniformity in the reply, " I think the Great 
 Father should stop all schooners." Nothing is 
 given to show that this is merely the Indian's 
 appeal for protection against his most formidable 
 rival. The Indians repudiate any desire to allow 
 their own rights of pelagic sealing to be in any 
 way curtallc<l ; all they wish is to be rid of 
 dangerous rivals. Still less had these Indians 
 any knowledge whatever of the slaughter annually 
 proceeding on Llic breeding-islands. 
 
 Again, it is to be noticed that forty-one out of 
 the forty-hvo deponents in Cook's Inlet (pp. 223 
 lo 233) arc carerul to explain that fliey have no 
 p(;rsonal experience of fur-seal lumting. 
 
 17. It is also lo be renunnbered that these 
 ailldavits were the result of purchase. 
 
 [Here follows any Canadian evidence to this 
 clfect.] 
 
 18. Perhaps tho most serious general charac- 
 teristic of these volumes of Evidence is the nega- 
 tive [joint of tli(> intentional exclusion of a great 
 mass of readily available, thoroughly reliable, 
 contemporary record. 
 
 Tlie annual Reports of the resident Treasury 
 Agents on the l)n.'eding-islands, carefidly and 
 iHigularly transmitted over since 1870, are con- 
 spicuous by their al)senee. 
 
 Still moic retiiarl<abl(! is the fact that there is 
 not even the slightest allusion to the elaboi-ato 
 l{ci)orts made ii\ 1S72-7;!, and aii-ain in ISOO. by 
 llu! SpecinI Tri .siiry Agent, .Mr. Elliott, whose 
 " iloiiografih on the Fiir-scal " ha.s become the 
 test-book on the subject with naturalists. It will 
 
 OmissioBs, 
 
15 
 
 have been noticnd that the Britlsli Commis- 
 sioners obtain a iri'eat deal of information from 
 ^]r. Elliotl's elaborate work, done f)u tlifi spot 
 amongst the seals. 
 
 19. It is certainly desirable tbat tb'- Tri!)u;ial 
 should exaniine Ih: Ellidft's llepor. on the 
 state of the Seal Tslaiids in 1S73 and 1=100, 
 es])i!cially as they contain tb(> only detailed 
 reports on seal life made after personal investiga- 
 tion by the same anthority, with a suifieient 
 interval of time. They also Iiappcn \ery appro- 
 priately to be dated at the eommencemimt and 
 close of the very period under review. 
 
 20. It has to b(! stated tliat these contemporary 
 records afford a great mass of absolute evidence 
 directly opposed to thi- contentions advanced in 
 the Unived States' Case, as, for instance, on th(> 
 important points of denrtdi of males, evils of 
 drivim^, and so fortli. .Vgain, the annual He- 
 ports of the Treasury Agents never once mention 
 " dead pi\ps," although in tlic afTidavits many of 
 the A"cnts are curiously uiianinioiis in their 
 afterthought, recollected in IS'.):?, tliat (he dead 
 pups were found each year in numbers ^vhich 
 tallied precisely with t!ie numl)er of seals takcMi 
 by the schooners ! 
 
 ;jl. It is .specially significant to note that tlie 
 main eonclusions to be derived from these con- 
 temporary records are, however, dealt with in 
 v(n-y summary fashion in the United States' 
 Case. l?ut the treatment is only by anticipation 
 ,a)ul ii.eidental. And the Tribmial will need, 
 for a full understanding of these arguments, tlie 
 exhibit of these "contemporary " Reports of the 
 various Treasury Agents, and especially th(> full 
 lleport for 18i)() by Sjiecial Treasmy Agent 
 Elliott. 
 
 ■22. On tlie other hand, the evidence on which 
 the I'ritish Case is based was in the main 
 collected by tlie I'ritish Commissioners, wlio 
 were conducting their local inquiries from tlu; 
 •j:5rd June till the (5th October, IS'Jl, before 
 tbev hfid arrived at their conclusions as to the 
 facts of seal life or tlie measures necessary for 
 its preservation, (ireat attention was given by 
 them to all conlcniporancoiis records and reports 
 oriichiating in the actual localities. In short, it 
 will be seen th;it the Ifeport of the Britisli Com- 
 missi()U''rs is b:ised upon fiefs and records, and 
 not made to rest iqini; nvre allegations from 
 memeiv, or theoretical calculations. 
 
16 
 
 III.— THE UNITED STATES" PROPOSI- 
 TIONS. 
 
 1. Before summarizing the specific rejoinder.s 
 oi Great Britain to the final propositions ad- 
 vanced hy the United States it will be convenient 
 to comment seriatim on the propositions advanced 
 in Part II of the Case, and which are there 
 placed under the following hei'dings : — 
 
 (n.) Hahits of the Ala.skan ,5eal (pp. 89-12!)). 
 (6.) Management of the llookcrics (pp. 129- 
 
 lOt). 
 
 (f.) Decrease of the Seal Herd (pp. 165-lSG). 
 ((I.) I'clagic Scaling (pp. 187-217). 
 (e.) Protection and Preservation (pp. 218-203). 
 (/.) The Seal-skin Industry (pp. 2(5 1-287). 
 
 2. These headings lead up specifically to four 
 of the nin(> final propositions whicli arc put 
 forward hy the United States (pp. 295-298) as 
 proven by Ihe evidence advanced. While com- 
 menting upon these beddings it will be well 
 to have in mind the gist of these four final 
 propositions, which is as follows : — 
 
 Proposition I. That the Alaskan fur-seal is a 
 domesticated product of United States' territory. 
 
 Proposition II. That its present existence is 
 due wholly to the protection of the United 
 Stales, and the serious decrease in numbers is 
 due wholly to pelagic sealing. 
 
 Projiosition ITI. That pelagic sealing is ille- 
 gitimate, improper, wasteful, and wholly destruc- 
 tive of the sealing industry. 
 
 Proposition IV. That the profits, if any, of 
 pelagic sealing arc out of .all projiortion to the 
 destruction of the seal-skin industries in other 
 countries.* 
 
 Gcnoral I'lan. 
 
 (fi.) Habits of the Alaskan Seal (pp. 89-129). 
 
 3. The assertion that the Pribyloff Islands are 
 " thr home of tliefiir-sral" (p. 89) is not supported p^^^. gg 
 or proved eitlicr liy argument or evidence. 
 
 t. Some semblance of proof is indicated in 
 till- statement that from May to November the 
 majority of the seals are on shore on these 
 islands. But this statement, whitdi after all 
 involves only a temporary sojourn ashore for at 
 in 's! six months, is contradicted by the facts of 
 arrival and departure of the seals as stated in 
 
 • All iiuotalions from the Unitod States' Case nr» printed 
 III iialii-3. 
 
 The horn, nf tlic fiir-.-ical 
 
 Ponoil asliort. 
 
17 
 
 other passages in the Report itsell' and in tlio 
 evidence. 
 
 5. Thus, on p. lOS, tlic l)nlls arc dcscrihed as 
 arriving at the islands in the latter part of April 
 or hc^inning of May, and that ahout the 1st 
 August (p. 112) "somen/ the bulls beijin to leave 
 the islands and continue ijnimj till the eitrhj part of 
 October." Thus the hulls hegin to leave after a 
 sojourn of three to three and a-half months on 
 shore. 
 
 0. Of the cows it is stated (p. lOS) that " the 
 great majority, hoirerrr, do not haul up uvlil the 
 lalli-r part nf Juw, uiul the (trriviils rontiiiue till the 
 middle nf July.' 
 
 Tlieir departure is dealt with in more general 
 terms, tlie assumed cause hoing given as the 
 fact. "The lemjth of time a pup is dependent 
 upon its mother compels her to remain upon the 
 islands until the middle of November." As the 
 pups differ in age as much as three or four 
 weeks, so presumably would the departure of 
 the cows, the majority tlierefore leaving after a 
 • sojourn of at most three and a-hall' to four 
 months on shore, the latest arrivals landing in 
 the middle of July, and leaving in the middle of 
 November. 
 
 7. In regard to the younger non-breeding seals 
 tlie statement (p. 120) is that they hegin to haul 
 out in the latter cud of :M:ay, and tliat their 
 dciKirture " ijencrally tahcs place at the same time 
 as the cows," which would imply a sojourn on the 
 islands of five months, 
 
 S. But tlie evidence of the experts on the 
 hreeding-islauds invaria])ly gives sliorter limits 
 of time for the sojourn of tiie seals on the 
 islands. 
 
 Thus, Mr. Fowler, the agent of the lessees, 
 states (vol. ii, p. 25): ''Tlie hull seals arrive on 
 the islands from the latter jiart of April till the 
 luth .lune, and most all of them leave in August 
 
 and September The cows come to thr> 
 
 ishnids l)etween the 1st June and the 20-.li July, 
 
 and eommeuee leaving in October The 
 
 young male seals eonv; in ilay or June 
 
 Tlic pujjs ;ire born soon after the cows arrive and 
 remain until October or November." 
 
 Mr. Melntyrc, Treasury .Vgent (vol. ii, p. U), 
 says: "Tlie pups are horn in June and July , . . . 
 early iu November the pups leave tlie island." 
 
 Jlr. Norton, agent for the lessees and Treasury 
 Agent, says (vol. ii, p. C7) : " Hy the middle of 
 [818] ^' 
 
18 
 
 Sci)toml)or tlic systematic organization of tho 
 rookorius is ontin-ly broken up, and the major part 
 of the seals have left the land." 
 
 .laeob Kotcliooten, a native sr-alcr, says (vol. ii, 
 [). lyi) : " 'riu> most ol' tho bnlls leave tlic island 
 in S(']it{'mbiT, and the eows in the last of 
 October and early in November." 
 
 Anton MeiovedofF, another native, says (vol. li, 
 p. 114): "The bulls reaeli the islands late in 
 April or early in ilay, .... stay till August or 
 September." 
 
 !). Hut during lliis period of resent to the 
 islands the seals are not the whoh; lime ashore. 
 Thus in the United States' Case (pp. lis, 115)) 
 the correct statements tiint " tin: yrcat ilistaiici- of 
 the feedin(j-(jrounds from the islniuls," and " tin; 
 distmice thill the seals iramler from thi: l.slandu 
 duriiKj the summer in srarch of food," are ample 
 proof that during July, August, and September, 
 that is, in tho midst of tli(! period when tlic; seal is 
 supposed to be under control on United Slates' 
 territory, the fur-seal in gre.at numbi-rs are 
 oujoyiug full freedom away at sea entirely out of 
 all control. 
 
 10. Xo mention is made in ;lie United States' 
 Case of the " stagey season," whieii usually lasts 
 from four to six weeks, conmiencing in the 
 middle of August. At tiiis period, the seals 
 wliieli have remained continuously ashore com- 
 mence to slied their coats, and are then not 
 ijiciined to go into the water. The cause 
 geueraJiy iciven is remaining too long out of 
 the water, the essentially jjelagic animal tlius 
 sutfering from minatural environments. It is 
 also proof that a great many seals of all sexes do 
 not go to sea at all during their two or tju'co 
 mouths' sojourn on shore. 
 
 11. Thus the general tendency of tiie evidence 
 ])i()ves that the dilVerent classes of seal resort to 
 th(! islands at dill'erent dales and for dilTerent 
 periods. Morcovei', of the classes that are ashore, 
 with the exception of tlie breeding seals, it is 
 probably true that at least one-third of tlieir 
 number are at atiy given time disporting them- 
 selves in the waters immediately adjacent to tho 
 rookeries. Hut while it is true to say that the 
 great body of the seals commence to come ashore 
 in May and June, and to leave; in ScptumlR-r and 
 October, it will be seen that no cue class of 
 seals resorts to the shore for much more thaa 
 three or four mouths in the year. 
 
 Stnf,'t'y sriUiou 
 
19 
 
 I'triod 111 »C!i, 
 
 I'oliiiitioii of liDinc "1 Iiihitat. 
 
 12. \Vf find this I'nct cnrrohor.'ilrfl on ]). :i38 
 of the United States' Case, when the statement 
 is made, "for at least nine monllis nf the year tins 
 herd in ' tpo.scd to the relentless and untirinij pur- 
 suit of th'- pelagic hunter.''' a pursuit whieh can 
 only he nuide elVretive so loiej; as the I'ui-seal is 
 at sea and away I'nini tlie sliore. 
 
 13. AVlicrefore, s ) fnv as re-ards the rehitivo 
 periods spent mi !-.hoi(- and at sea n -ipectively, 
 til ■ fur-seal is essentially a pelai,'ie animal, havin!,' 
 for tlio greater part of eacdi year no occasion or 
 desire to approach tlw hind, and, as a matter of 
 fact, remainin'.,' .'.way at sea. liis li.mn- tor tho 
 
 i;reater portion cu' llu- y* 
 
 h the water and 
 
 not on the land. 
 
 It. Further ihaii tliis. it is pointed out in llu; 
 United States' Case (p. 2!)'.) that the Cur-seal is 
 compelled to resort to waters very distant- from 
 tho hreediiiiA-islands "fur food nnd tu aroid Ihe 
 rigour of wirlrr." The PrihylolV Islands do 
 provide the fur-seal with the necessary solitude, 
 climate, and sliores for livecidini^' purposes. But. 
 the ■ islands, even toi^'cther with their ti'rritorial 
 watei-s, do not and cannot supply the fur-seal 
 with food or with the climatic conditions iieees- 
 sarv to his existencp durhig the autumn, winter, 
 and spring. These islands are, therefore, tho 
 temjHirary hreeding-placii or nursery ol' the I'lir- 
 .seal, and he " neressiirilii viiijrnte.- " (as is pointed 
 out in the United States' Case, p. 122) hetween 
 this summer hahitat and his winter hahitat, 
 distant 1,."("' or 2,<>i)0 miles to the southward. 
 
 15. It is to he home in uiind that ccmld the 
 seals he forcihly confined to the immediato 
 vicinity of tlie I'rihylolT Islands, they would 
 assuredly die olf in one year. lUit if they were 
 forcihly prevented landing on these islands, they 
 would seek and find other hreeding reports. 
 Thus tin; excessive disturhance :ind ^lau^hter on 
 these islands in 18GS and 1*^00 resulted in unjirc- 
 cedented luuuhers of seals visiliiu the hays and 
 harhours along the Hritish Columhia coast in tho 
 following years. 
 
 Ki. Allen. 305, 
 
 17. The oiiiiiions of leading naturalists as to 
 what constitutes the home or hahitat of migratory 
 animals is well summed up hy the distinguished 
 natui-alist A. H. Wallace (" Geo-raphica! Dis- 
 trihution of Animals,^' vol. i, pp. 23-2S);— 
 
 ■' It is an ascertained fad that many individual MrJs 
 return year nftov year to 1'uild tlicir nc=t>» on tlic ;<amn 
 
20 
 
 spol tlic birds wliicli rdiiru in tho .--jiriug are ua a 
 
 ruli^ not luoro numerous than those which came in the 
 preiediiii^ spring, \\hcMeas those whieli wi'ut away in the 
 
 iiutunin were two or three linies as numerous 
 
 It is iissuuied liy Konie writers that tiie hreedin^r phue ol a 
 species is to be considered as its true lionie rather than 
 that to which it retires in winter; hut ihis can hardly be 
 accepted ns a ruK' of universal apphcation ; .... for the 
 purpose ol' the study oi yeogmphical distriUition, thete- 
 foro, we inu.st, e.\cept iu special cases, consider the true 
 range of the species to comprise all the rireti which it 
 I ciupies for luiy part of the year." 
 
 lb. Tlu' statemeni tlitif the requisitt- conditions i^gt s9. 
 ior fur-seal brecdin^'-places " are found at ihv 
 Piil.i.lo'f IslaiitiK and lunrhri-e rl-v hi Bcliriii'j 
 i<eii or the A"or/// I'livifir, savr <ft the Commandir 
 Islands" is an alii'i,':i1ion I'or \\Iiifli no proof 
 whatever is advanced. Indeed, llie facts arc 
 (|iiite to the contr.irv. Uohhcii Island, near 
 Saglialien Island, in the Oldiotsk Sra, has likewise 
 been, ever sinee \\< diseovery, neenpied as a 
 i)re<>ding rookery, and lan;<^ n umbers of skins 
 liave been obtained from it, iiolwitlistandinj^ tiie 
 in jm-ious eilcets produced by raids upon its sbf)res, 
 \vl:!"h liave been eliii lly atlributnble tn citi/ens 
 of the United States. Considerable breedini; 
 r()oseri(-'s likewise existed on .several of the Kiirile 
 Ishii.ds witliin the territorial jurisdietion <d 
 Japan and Russia, and some of tliese still survive, 
 til mull ill mueh diniinislu'd form, eonsec|iient on 
 the elVect of raids and illei,'al and ini])oli(ie 
 destructi(Hi on the shores of tliesi; islands (lii'in- 
 .selves. It is, moreover, eerlaiii that the I'lir-se.al 
 inrnierly i-esortel for brei'din^' purposes to several 
 places situated on the eo.ast of liritisli ('(iliinilii:i. 
 juiil it is bii;lily jtrobable, il' not absolutely eertiiiii, 
 thai :i considerable mnnber of younijj seals are 
 still toinually brou.^bt t'ortli on various onllyiiii,' 
 ])ai'ls of this coast. 
 
 l'.>. The siime elim.it ie coniiitions are known to 
 exist on all the islands of the North P.aeilic to 
 the northward of, say, latitude 10", until in the 
 far north the ice remains too late in the sprint; 
 and lelurns too soon in the autumn. J'reeisety 
 siiiiila' !;coloi;ieal formations similar ve!,'etafion, 
 and similar elinia'e are fouiirl on the American 
 and Asiatic coasts, and on all the islands of! tbche 
 coiists, and alon|5 the Aleutian chain. Those 
 faiiiiiitir with t'.iese eouiitric. know of many bays 
 and beaches precisely similar to the groat variety 
 of sites frequented by tlu- fur-seal on the Pribylof^ 
 
Ot 
 
 Doiiii'stiiUy 
 
 and Commamlcr groups. Moreover, a qualiiied 
 admission to thi.- ciFect is niad(.' by tlu' I'nik'd 
 States' Commissioners in their Ilei)ort (p. ;5.'{1) 
 wlion tliey state : " No islands to tli(> nortiiward or 
 soiitliv.ard of the I'rihylo.ir Islands, with the 
 jiossible exception of limited areas on the 
 Aleutian chain, are kn'Avn (a jxissessthe n'(iuisite 
 e<)nil)in'ili(iu of idiniatie and physical eondilions." 
 As a nia'tes ot fact, which is not disputed, the 
 fnr-seal hM\ ■• 'ired and si ill hr<;ed on many ol' tlicse 
 islands and coasts other than the islands named. 
 
 20. The statem(i\t is true (p. 90) that similar 
 climali" eondilions have also been ol)served to 
 prevail at the coasts and islands once frequented 
 by vast herds of fur-seals in the Southern Hemi- 
 sphere. Hut ii must he borne in mind that tliese 
 southern breedin;;;-[)laees of the same species of 
 seal {Otiiiiii) ranf^'cd from San iMdi.x, llas-a-fuera, 
 an<l ljf)hos Islands, ;ui(l Waltish IJay, in latitude 
 2.')" ti) 3."° south, down to Cape Horn, the Sand- 
 wich Islands, Ker|^nelen f,'ronp, &c., in latitude 
 50° to 00 sdutli, (Mubracini; a nutably wide ranire 
 of t,'eoi;rai)liieal .anil elima'ie conditions. 
 
 21. The evidence appealed lo is that of 
 Mr. Ibidiic't in (vol. ii, pii. r)y:{.,">!lt), who is, 
 liowever, can'l'ul to add that these resorts are 
 uninhabit(.'d by man. Tlu'rc are no si-al rookeries 
 alom^ any coasts that art; eoulinuously liuuted. It 
 is the eniiditinn of isolation — imjiosed l)y Nature 
 on tin' i'ribylod and Commander Islands until 
 man pcneti-ated the I'dus and discovered them 
 towards the end of last ei'ntury, and <'ontiniie(l arti- 
 fi<,'ially sineo man h.i-. takiMi eontrol -which has, 
 without uoulit, led 1(1 these j^roups becomint: tlie 
 jirivale resdi'f "t thi' liir-seal. On I'oliiien Island, 
 1)11 sevi i';il of the Knrile Isl.inds, and on various 
 places aloni,' the coast of Kamteliatka, seals still 
 breed l)ei'aiis(' tiny air nut continuously liunted. 
 as they h:;V ■ Iieeii all .aloiis; the coasts of Xortli 
 America Ir'in time immeiiiorial. 
 
 22. 'I'lii' ple.i, frr(|u.iitly advanced hy the 
 witnesses who speak on behalf ol the Company 
 which leases the islands, that tin- fur-seal is 
 essentially a domesticated animal, is one that is 
 not borne out by the facts of tlie case. 
 
 'i'<\. Domestic animals are those which have 
 beeoiui habituated to the control of man 
 tln-ouj^hout their lives. They live in con- 
 tinuous subject ion to man, and depend on man 
 for their daily food and for |irotectioi). Ar- 
 cordiny; to the " Imperial Dictionary " (lhN2), to 
 L818] " G 
 
IKSM 
 
82 
 
 domesticate is " to accustom animals to live near 
 the habitations ol' man ; to tamo ; to keep for 
 the use of man." In every case they possess 
 superior speed or strength, wliieh, if utilized, 
 would enable them to eseap'- or withstand sueli 
 pimtrol. 
 
 21. 'I'lie fur-seal, on the other hand, endeavour.s, 
 and for the ^.frcater part, of the year with success, 
 to flee the dominion nf man. Man is unable to 
 held, ]irovide with food or protect it from its 
 many natural enemies. But tiie fur-seal wliile 
 on shore cannot outriui human Ix'inns oi- si'ek 
 freedom and safety hy (lit,'h( or fitjht. It is 
 because the fur-seal is in .ipable on sliore "T 
 sj)eedy or proloni^ed loconioiion or exertion that 
 it can l)e and is broui;lii leiaptn'arily under the 
 control of man. Bu; it is to be noted that it is 
 absolutely uncontrolled and uncontrollable l)y 
 man when it chooses to proceed to sea, as it 
 invarial)ly does lor the ijreater part of tiic year. 
 
 2.'). The United Stat<>s have advanced I he p,,g,. 89. 
 furthi-r argument that the fur-seal is not 
 l)roperly classed under ferrr naturfr, because it 
 exhibits an anivnis mertrndi on leavinj^ tlie 
 l)reedin!,'-iilaccs. Equally co^'cnt is the ar!.;;ument 
 that the fur-seal, on leaving its winter home 
 and feeding-grounds, also exhibits an animus 
 reverteiidi, and, as a matter of fact, after a 
 sojourn of thre(! or foiu' months on the islands, 
 does, of its own uncontrollable will, leave these 
 islands and return to its winter home 2,000 miles 
 away. 
 
 2(1. The fur-seal is of a gregarious habit, 
 seeking safety in numbers, and ivsorting to 
 places frerpicnted by its fellows. On ohore it is 
 easily attacked by man. But i »cn in the la.st 
 stages of exhaustion after being " driven," it will 
 alw.-iys show tight, and to say that it can be as 
 vnaWy driven and handled as sheep or cattle is to 
 gloss over tlie fact that the fur-seal can only bo 
 "handled" when it is incapable of locomotion 
 through exhaustion and out of its r!i>iiieut on 
 sliore. 
 
 27. In general, then, the fur-seal of the North 
 I'acilic is essentially a pelagic animal, with its 
 Ihis instead of f(>et, and, as a matter of fact, 
 spends the greater portion of its time in the open 
 ••ea, many hundreds of mili>s distant from its 
 favourite breeding resorts, and during that period 
 ii(>i (lintr access to areas of water and to llsh over 
 
 v..:ie!i 
 
 !i all nations have rights of u-ufruct. 
 
23 
 
 Tw" S(i';ir.it( horiU 
 
 AVitliout doubt tlic Ciir-.scal comes under the 
 eatcijory of Jern: rifl/»rrr, and while it uses, for the 
 present, United States' and Russian territory for 
 breedinLj purposes in the Norlli rncilic, it iiono 
 the less ri'(|uiies aeeess, for fnmi ^ix to nine or 
 ten moiulis of tiie year (aecordin;,' to sex and 
 .•i-^c), to tlie high seas for purposes of feci linj;; and 
 of sccuiiiiL,' a coiis^euial winter home. 
 
 28. The division of the fur-seal of thi' North 
 Pacilie into two distinct herds which m-vcr iuter- 
 min^'le (pp. !M-9C) is a theory of very recent 
 origin. 
 
 •-'.». J5oth actuiil experience ami matured 
 opinion are a;^ainst any such contention. 
 
 30. That the fur-seal docs not necessarily 
 resort year by year to the same; l)rcedini,'-i,'rounds 
 is an established fact. 
 
 Si-iil> hiivc l)0(Mi iimrki'il :ui<i |.MVcil to resort tn otlicr 
 ))re««liii;,' 'H'"'""!'*. >-'veu in the tnllowiiig yciii. 
 
 (I.) Mr. Klliiiii (luscril)«s (■ IViisus l:«iion,' i-. MI) .-ui 
 .:XI.<riniuiil iiiii.lr I'V tlii^ Mussians mi St. \':m\ Isliiiul, 
 fully c'diitiniiin,' tin- iil«ivir statfiiu'iil 
 
 (ii ) 111 1S70 11 .■iiiiiilnr o.\i*'riiiii'iii «:is in.nlr "n .St. I'aul 
 l.sliiml, witli Hiniiliii n'sult.'s. 
 
 Ili'spectiii',' till' KM) siiil.-- iImii iiKuki'il, i''.llintt 
 writes : — 
 
 • (Jf tlii.s ii\iiiil»'i. 111 til.' -immui I 111' l.STJ, \\\wu I uius 
 ihiTf. Ihii natives fomul in tlii'ir driviii'.; "!' T.'.OdO simIs 
 I'riiiii llu' diftcrent l>anliiiK-|.'nmiiil.» .if Si I'aiil ii|. Im tlm 
 villa;;!' !iillin--.'r..un.lrt. tu.i "ii N.iVastiKlma niukcry 
 10 mill < iiurlh ol' l.iikaninm <tliv jmiiit at uliirli llu- si-ala 
 liad 111', n iimrki'il), ami tw.i .T tlir.'.' fnmi I'.n^'lisli liny and 
 Tn!!!t(ii nxikoiii'^. I'l niili's wi'st liy wilrv : "in .;• Iw.i were 
 taki'ii nil Si, dn.i-.' Klainl, 'M\ iiiilos t.. tliu si.iith«eisi, and 
 mil oil.' IVniii l.ukamiiiii was f'lHUMl :.ni.':':,- llii.^r tliMt were 
 ilrivon «|i frnm tlusi'." 
 
 (iii.) Caiilaiii Hryaiil ^ivcs tcrr.'^'f.ralivc inl.irmati.m 
 l.Ml.-li: '• Xnnii .\liniioali Tilinilnil-," ; . 4i'l . 
 
 (iv.i l>r U. 11. M.:liityn' ■ i ..ii.iv-i'.na! lii'iuiil i.n 
 ^'ur-.'-. .lis vif .Maska ' -tal.s > 
 
 ■Til.' swils born .'ii Si. I'lv 1 ..r. f..ii:;<l -n St. (M'iir.,'o, 
 (iml i-kt vtrm." 
 
 :;i. All authorities .'igrce that seal- may and 
 iKi shift In lai'ue muii'iers In.in one brccdii';,'- 
 plnce to iinotlier, whether in eoi.seiiuence .il' i!is- 
 iiirbance by ni;m or of M'vcre woatlier, .r uu<rely 
 »M<c;mse of niiiirntioKN of food lish or other 
 natural eau.scs. 
 
 .'■..) t'aptHin Scamtiiiin (p. V<2) says. — 
 
 'We may a.l.l Hk.'wi.ie. litHii "W "Wii ..Lsorvatioii, and 
 a.-- tl<e , .vpi'o.s.M..! opini.iii - f .m rd Npiriencii.l sealing 
 in.vstcrs. ihii! Iliiir (ill.' ^.als'i iiritui'i 1 nii.mtii)ns extetld 
 over a u'lvnl .'Npiilisi.- "f '^Jfiiii, ami if '.liey are unduly 
 
II 
 
 i'.i-tt:ilw il ill tlicii fii\'it;ritt' liuiiiits for scvfrnl successive- 
 vcars, lliry iifc i|iiiti' sine to seek sniiii' ilistunt iind 
 uiikiMiwii lilact', while tlu'v cau foiij,Ti'gatu uniiKilostpd by 
 mail" 
 
 (ii) In ,v l;i|"iit Miiaii iiivt'Stiftatiiiii mi llic Alaskii Cciii- 
 liieic iai ( ■■■iii|.;iiiy ly a ( 'iiiiiiiiittci' cif ( i.ii^rivss.ilaliMl ISTti, 
 Mr. .1. V. Miller, I'usi.liiii i.f tliu ('cniipany, in ii|>l\ lo a 
 iliifstinr as to V. lii'lliiT llic st'al.* were iii>l sm|iiiiiso(I aL a 
 U>vmi'T j.iTii..! lu liavr I'l^n iliivun I'lHin tlir I'lilvlirfl 
 L-laiids 1m tlu' ('DliiiaaiuliT Islaliils, .stutiil : — 
 
 " Tlicy no (luiilit wi'ic- at oiii! liiui'. Soiiio of lliini wt'iil 
 liver tlieie, and wlieic llie i. tilers wfiiil We do tint know, 
 lieeaiise ;liey r|o im n'a'?e iiiioii tlie linssinii islaiida ; so 
 liislory sliiiws " 
 
 (iii.) Mr. ('. A. Williiuns, one of the founders of llio 
 Alaska Comiiiercial (.'oiiipaiiy, ill his evideiiie before the 
 • 'uianiittee of the House of llepiesentativos in ISHS, 
 said ; — 
 
 " It was suppusi'd at that time (early in the IJiissiau 
 ri/^'iine) thai the lumnieiieement of seal life on the islands 
 lielirinij iiud CopiHT firobubly took place by means of the 
 iiidisirimiiiate killing' on the I'ribyhilf Islands diverting 
 the .seals from their usual haunts, and making them Beek 
 
 some other localities There had hardly been any 
 
 sealing or seal life to any extent on the Commander 
 Island, or Copjier and Liehring. It had not attracted the 
 attention of tho Itussians, but after the indiserirainate 
 killing on the Islands of St. I'aul and St. Cieorge it wr..- 
 iiotie«d that seal life increased rapidly on the other 
 islands, wid the supiMisition is a natural one, that they 
 were diverted from the island.s im whi.h they had before 
 
 been undisturbed, and sought other pliues Indeed. 
 
 it was iiredii tid liy Ku.ssinn authorities, conversant with 
 «cal life, at the time of the cession of the territory, that 
 the reckless and indiscriminate killing of seal by the 
 Americans would soon drive the I'ribylolf herd to the 
 lius.siaii islands, and thus they (the I!u.«sians) would regain 
 and ri;tain all that uas most valuable iii the ceded territory," 
 
 (iv.) .Mr. Klliott, 111 his Heport Inr isTi;-::', (p. C9) 
 writes : — 
 
 " Certainly, if the grmiiid on either liehring or Copjier 
 Islands in the (.'ommairder group is as well suited for the 
 waut.i of the breeding fur-seal as is that exhibited by the 
 rribyloir Lslands, then I say conlldeully that we may 
 at any time note a diminution here, and liiel a corre- 
 spondiiig augmentation there , for 1 have clearly shown in 
 my chapter on the habits of these animals, that tliej are 
 not so particularly attached to the respective jilaces of 
 their birth, but that they rather laud with an instinctive 
 iifitioii of the lltness of that ground as a whole." 
 
 Again, p. 'JC'i, he writes : — 
 
 " It is not unlikely that some soiison may occur when 
 an immense number of the fur-seals which have lived 
 duiiiig the hist four or live year.s on the I'riliylolf Islands 
 should I'C deflected from their usual feeding range by the 
 shilling of schools of liah, ic, so ,i.s to bring them round 
 quitu close to the Asiatic seal grounds in the spring, and 
 the scent from the rookeries would act as a powerful 
 
35 
 
 Rtiiiiiiluil Idi' llii'iu U) l;iiic] llii'ti-, wliiiL- conditions for 
 their lirceiliiiy nmy Im as liivour.ililu iis dcsiicd liy ilium." 
 
 (v.) In tlio " Con^'resoiiinal (.'ommittiM? Report on Fur- 
 Siial J'SsliLTii's of Alaska," <lat(Ml 1SS!» (p. ItJ), Mr, Uuynitrky 
 gives llio Idllowinj^ cvidrnoc: — 
 
 " (>. What, in your jinliiiiiunl from your expcriiMicu of 
 Ihiil bu.sine.ss in these islands, would be it.s edeet by 
 openin;,' np the busine.ss, that i.-i, roniovin;; the re.strictiou 
 so thiit everybody coidd jjo in there and kill lur-seals ?— 
 A. 'I'lic iiMJjabl.' ellect wouM Kr to drive the seals from 
 these i.slands to the l!u.>i.iiaii firiMip. 
 
 ■'V That i.s, drivinu' thiiu Iroiii tlu^ American i.slands 
 over to the Ilu.s.iian i.sl,it:d.s • — A. That is the moat 
 proliable eliect. That was conceded at thi! tinio by all 
 who studied th.: i|ue.-tion 
 
 "Seerctary Lloutwell knew that very well." 
 
 (vi.) M. (irebnitzky, the o.\perienced Huperintcudenl 
 of the Commander l.'-landK, .stales liis opinicjM, in ISS'.l, 
 that the iuca'ascd activity of llu- sealing .schooners aloiij^ 
 the shores of those i.^lands did much damage to ih'j .sealing 
 indu.stry on the islands princii.ally Iiy frii;hteidn<; and 
 flcarint; the seals, .so that they did not land, and that 
 c.<p(.'cially the breedino bnudcs ijideavourcd to escape 
 disturbance by resortin.L; to the n( ij^hbourin;,' coast ol 
 Kamorli.itko, where they confircgated in largo numbers, and 
 endeavoured to establish landinj; places in peace and (|uiet 
 
 .'50. Tlifsc liiiililloiial opinions arc eiiijdiaiiized 
 by the undoiihtoil fact that (lie fiir-.scal, say, 
 200 years ai;o, was miiuli niuic nididy liistrilmtcd 
 tlian now, and that he has hi.rome cont'cnttiitcd 
 on |iartifular l)i\'('dini,'-plai'(s ouinu; to coniiniiou.s 
 hunting in otlicr jncvious rosorts. 'J'luis, wIrmi 
 the Comniandt'r Islands ucic discovcrrd in 17 11 
 ami the Prihyloil in 17^."), the I'ur-.soals were not 
 found in any such (iiiaiititics as in more recent 
 years, and the islands ucn far nii,n' jiroduetive 
 id .sca-oiters and sea-lions. The cateh of .seals 
 on tlie Coniinauder and l'rii)ylolV Islands lias 
 ri.s( n from an annual average of a few thousand 
 to an annual average of 50,000 and 100,000 re- 
 si)';ctively in 1S!)0. Tin's eoneentral ion on tlie.se 
 Ida'tieuiar hreoding-p!a(;rs did not originate in, 
 nor lia-s it led to, diirerentiation of the I'ur-scal 
 into distinct " henls." iiistorically tiicy ibnn 
 one herd. 
 
 ."ii. The sc-aLs from the dilTcreut parts of the 
 North I'acilic arc not distinguisiial)lc in .science 
 either for species or genus, ;ind no eviiU'nce is 
 advanced liy tin United States to this ell'cct, 
 or even to siiow a varietal <lill'ercnce. 
 
 ',V2. As a matter of fact, i! is impossibh' to 
 identify a seal as having l)een liorn or hred upon 
 an\ pirticnlar roo|<( rv or lireedinu-island, except 
 [818j ■ fl 
 
IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-S) 
 
 A 
 
 
 
 1.0 
 
 1.1 
 
 11.25 
 
 lis 
 
 lU 
 
 1^ 
 
 ■ iO 
 
 1 2.5 
 
 2.0 
 
 JA 11 1.6 
 
 V] 
 
 <^ 
 
 /} 
 
 ^e 
 
 
 '4/ 
 
 #/ 
 
 /^ 
 
 '^ 
 
 7 
 
 PhotograDmc 
 
 Sdencps 
 
 Corporation 
 
 23 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WEBSTER, N.Y. M580 
 
 (716) 872-4503 
 

 
 
 ^^N^ 
 
 ^^ 
 
2G 
 
 by branding or marking with a tally. A seal 
 born on the coast of British Columbia or in the 
 Kurile Islands may take to frequenting the 
 Pribyloff or Commander Islands, or a seal born 
 on the Tribyloff Islands may spend the rest of 
 its life on the Commander group. 
 
 A slight difference in tL- exture of the fur 
 may result from living in the different localities, 
 but is not primarily due to place of origin. 
 
 33. It is absolutely impossible to determine 
 where a seal may have been begotten. The best 
 authorities acknowledge that effective coition 
 can and docs take place in the water. It is 
 certain, judgmg by the known period of gesta- 
 tion, that coition fn^qucntly takes place at dates 
 when the males and the females must have come 
 together in places far distant from the Pribyloff 
 or Commander Islands. 
 
 34. Throughout volume ii, that of testimony on 
 affidavit, tlie theory of the two herds is intro- 
 duced with strange uniformity. It is remarkable, 
 for instance, to lind (vol. ii, p. 214) a native of 
 the distant Island of Attn, on which he has lived 
 all his life, stating — 
 
 " I do not know the rentes the fnr-senl herds take in 
 their migrations to and from tlie Commander and Pribyloft' 
 Islands; nether do I think the two lierds come near 
 enough together in these hilitudes to mix." 
 
 The British Commissioners are certain that no 
 native on any of these islands ev'cr knew the 
 meaning of such words ps latitude or migration. 
 
 This same native does, liowever, speak clearly 
 as to the fact that — ] 
 
 "nliont twenty-live years ago I used to see small squads 
 of large seals <hn-ing the month of .Tune feeding and 
 
 sli'ciiing about the kelp patches They came from 
 
 the southward, and travelled in a north-westerly direc- 
 tion." 
 
 S5. In all this evidence the reference to the 
 " two herds " theory is mere matter of opinion. 
 Indeed, until the year 18!)1 there were no actual 
 observations or records available except in isolated 
 cases. It seems certain, from tlie evidence since 
 obtained, that while tlie fur-soal do in their 
 migrations follow the coast-lino at, perhaps, 
 distuTiccs varying from 100 to 300 miles olf the 
 coast, yet tluit tli(> I'ur-sea] does habitually 
 wander in tlio summer over the widest areas in 
 B.'lr.'iu- Sea, mid tliat it forms itself into 
 
27 
 
 independent bands of seals which remain, despite 
 all changes oi weather, and without resorting to 
 the shore, in distant parts of Behring Sea. 
 
 30. The evidence gleaned in 1892 by many- 
 observers may be thus summarized : — 
 
 37. It is also to be remarked that although 
 the seals at present frequenting anyone breeding- 
 place will for the most part habitually resort 
 thither year by year, just as all migratory animals, 
 fishes, and birds for the most part resort to the 
 locality where they were born, yet this will not 
 always be the case, more especially when con- 
 tinued disturbance or excessive slaughter scares 
 away the seal from his accustomed haunts. 
 
 38. There is, for instance, much discrepancy 
 between the statement (p. 1 20) that — 
 
 "nfthc baehdor sml.-i tlv r/rcakr ■niimhcf appear (iit the 
 islands) ioimrds the latter purl of Maij" 
 
 and the evidence given by tlie ilalcah Indians 
 (and others), (vol. ii, p. 390) — 
 
 "aljout the iiiitklle nf .Tunc, :it which timo tlic cows aro 
 pretty much all goiii', Imt the smaller seals reniaiii until 
 ahout the iiiiiklle (if July ;'' 
 
 or again (vol. ii, p. 391) — 
 
 " Tlio fur-seals apjiear nff Capo I'lattcry about the last 
 of December, ami go and come until about the middle of 
 June, but yearlings and 2-year-olds remain considerably 
 later." 
 
 If the rigid line is to be drawn as to herds, 
 certainly these seals wliicli aro fouiul as far south 
 as Capo Plattery, 2,000 miles from the Tribyloff 
 Islands, so late as tlie middle of July, cannot 
 possibly belong to the same " herd " which is all 
 ashore on the Pribylolf Islands " in the hitter part 
 of May and beginning of June." 
 Commercial elassiCcatiou. 39. The main argument advanced by the 
 
 United States in supiioit of this two herds 
 
■mB^^T! 
 
28 
 
 ilicory is that in the commercial classification of 
 the skins the distinction is hahitiially drawn ; 
 and that experts, even In the London lactones, 
 " can easUij distinguish an Alaskan from a Copper 
 shin." 
 
 to. On p. 5)5 of the Case tAvo of these supposed 
 authorities are quoted, and it A\"ill he observed 
 that while one avers that the Copper may l)e 
 distinguished from the Alaska skins because the 
 hair "has a i/elloiver tinrje," another authority, 
 only a few lines below, describes " flic difference 
 ■in tlie fur as lieinrj a little darker in the Commander 
 ttkins." 
 
 Turning to vol. ii, we find it stated on affidavit 
 by ^Ir. Beviugton, of the firm of Beviugton and 
 Morris (p. 552), " the Copper skins are lighter in 
 colour than either of the other two;" and by 
 :\rr. :Jartin, of tlio tinn of C. W. ]\rartin and Co. 
 (p. .")(;[)), "in the Copper Island skins the hair 
 has a yellower tinge than have the hairs of the 
 Alaskan seal ;'' which Mr. Teichmann, the well- 
 known London furrier, states (p. 580) : " The 
 Alaska and Copper skins arc (listinguishal)le from 
 each other partly by means of the difi'ercnt 
 colour. Tlic Copper skins generally have a 
 darker top b.iir." 
 
 ■IT Througliout the testimony put forward by 
 the United States there is not one word to 
 indicate that in classifying the skins for sale any 
 line ol' demarcation is drawn according to place 
 of origin. The experts uniformly speak of classi- 
 fying the skins by appearances, as colour, length 
 of hair, texture of fur, s]\ape of skin, and even 
 spear and shot holes. 
 
 It may be pointed out, however, that not only are 
 there the above contradictions as to colour, but 
 that the narrower " neck " and the wearing away 
 of fur on the under side arc taken by different 
 experts as distinguishing signs respectively ol' 
 male and female, and of Alaska and Copper skins. 
 
 ■{'2. The seal-skins marketed in London are 
 shipped direct from the I'ribyloff Islands, the 
 Commander Islands, and Victoria. They are, on 
 arrival, sorted and catalogued for sale under the 
 general headings of "Alaska," "Copper," and 
 " North-west," or " Coast," catch. 
 
 But the main principle adopted in the sorting 
 is classification by kind and appearance of skins. 
 [Further information to he obtained ? through 
 Treasury.] 
 
 t,"). How far this classification is reliable as 
 
29 
 
 indicating any diflorenco between "two herds" 
 is seen when we rcmeuihcr that the skins landed 
 in Victoria are olitaiiied at sea ofF tlie eoasts hoth 
 of America and Asia, an inorcasingly large pro- 
 portion coming from the Asiatic side. There is 
 also a considerable percentage, certainly amount- 
 ing to several thousand each year, of skins of 
 seals taken by cluljbing on shore, and by shooting 
 and spearing in tlie waters close to the rookerici', 
 at hotli the rribvlolf and Commander Islands. 
 These skins coining tlirougli Victoria would, of 
 course, be quite wrongly classed as \orth-wcst 
 catch. 
 
 •14. It is also well to rememl)er that botli in 
 the skinning and the salting the methods 
 necessarily employed on the schooners arc very 
 inferior to those possible on the islands, and tliat 
 for this reason alone the Xorth-wcst catch may 
 supply inferior skins, no matter from what 
 locality they may bo taken. 
 
 io. Thus it is evident that the theory of "two 
 herds " has no foundation in scientific, historical, 
 or commercial experience, and that the seal herd 
 of the Nortli Pacific resort to particular breeding, 
 places in various parts of the Pacific for lengthy 
 periods, and from these they are not to be 
 driven except by excessive slaughter or perpetual 
 disturbance. 
 ^"P'- 41). The statements iu regard to pujL, (pp. 98- 
 
 105) are generally in accordance with those 
 sunnnarized on p. 53 of the lleport of the British 
 Commissioners. 
 
 The important question of the period during 
 which a pup is dependent on its mother 
 for food is not specifically dealt with iu the 
 Unifed States' Case. On p. 105 it is pointed 
 out, with trutli, that when "from four to six 
 weeks old " the pujjs gather together into groups 
 called " pods," apart from the mothers, and by 
 degrees work their way down to the water's ci^a, 
 where they soon learn to swim. 
 
 •t7. But other facts are not alluded to. It is, 
 for instance, well ascertained that all seals are 
 capable of, and accustomed to, prolonged absti- 
 nence from food. According to the testimony 
 ol expert Atlantic sealers the pups of the hair- 
 seal are weaned after the twelfth day, but remain 
 on the ice, subsisting on their own fat and on 
 the last supply of milk until they become thin, 
 and even emaciated, when they take to the water 
 to seek their own food. With the fur-seal 
 [818] I ' 
 
so 
 
 records show that many of the ipups can swim 
 wel) oven before August, and by the beginning 
 of September they are met 'vith even (iO to 
 70 miles at sea. It is, therefore, probable that 
 the fur-seal pup, after eight weclfs, is no longer 
 in need of the cow'n care or milk. Thus the pups 
 on the Pribyioff Islands come to be independent 
 of their mothers, according to date of birth, from 
 the end of .Tuly to the latter part of August. 
 This docs not mean that they will not, if the 
 opportunity occur, continue to take milk, as is 
 the observed custom with tlie young of all the 
 mammalia. 
 
 48. In regard to hulls (pp. 107- et si'ij.), with 
 the general facts stated all will agree; but there 
 are veiy serious discrepancies in tlu' statements as 
 to the nimibcr of cows a ])ull can eil'ectually serve. 
 It will be observed thattlie six statements quoted 
 on pp. ion, tlO are opinions as to how many 
 cows a bull couW effectually serve. Dr. ilerriam, 
 the United States' Commissioner, in his Circular 
 letter to foreign naturalists (vol. i, p. •1]5) states 
 that "each male serves iifteen to twenty-flvo 
 females." The British Commissioners, in their 
 Report (p. 52), give the opinions of the experts 
 on the islands that the proportion in the early 
 years of the United States' lease of the islands 
 {lid not exceed twenty females to one bull, and 
 that that should be the maximum limit. 
 
 The facts of the case arc to be seen in the 
 unanimous agreement of all statements and 
 records in the earlier days of the rookeries that 
 the average limit would be; fifteen, or at most 
 twenty, cows to every IjuU. Whereas actual obser- 
 vation and record on the rookeries in 1891 showed 
 frequently forty, fifty, sixty, and even eighty, 
 cows to one bull, a disproportion which may 
 well be regarded as at once effect and cause of 
 dwindling numbers of seals on the islands. 
 
 -19. The remarks of various observers (p. 110) 
 that copulation in the water is impossible has to 
 be set against the assertion by equally reliable 
 observers that it is possible and even frequent. 
 
 Bryant and W. II. Dall are opposed on this 
 point to McKintyre and Stanley Brown. But 
 the matter is dealt with at length in the British 
 Commissioners' Report, (pp. 52, 53). 
 
 50. There is also to be borne in mind the 
 analogous case of the hair-seal, in which case, 
 according to the experienced testimony of 
 Captain D. Gray and other sea'ers, coition 
 
 Bulk 
 
81 
 
 Cows 
 
 invariably takes iilaoo in llio water, and not on 
 land or ice. 
 
 51. In regard to (Ic undoubled fact that tho 
 bulls fast the wliole time they are ashore, it is 
 also certain, and is specially mentioned in tho 
 Jnited States' evidcnoo, that tlic younger seals 
 do tho same, and no evidence is iirodur.'d lo 
 show that the females wliile rcsorlinij (o tho 
 island do not follow tho example of all other 
 classes of seals. The British Comvii^sloncrs 
 give as the result of their observations that tho 
 fema' 's and males as well, whou they first leave 
 tlie rookery grounds, do so rather to ]ihy and 
 bathe in th(> sea than to feed. And tlu-y ;u!dueo 
 the important fact that at no period in tho 
 roo'verics is any excrcmont whatever to ho 
 found. 
 
 52. In llie case of the hair-sea', experienced 
 sealers point out that t!icre is no excromont 
 wliat.n-er on the ice resorted to by hood-so.il and 
 floe-rals, both of which classes abstaiu altogether 
 from feeding whilst on the iee ; hut that the 
 ice to which the harp-seal resorts is covered with 
 dung, and the harp-seal arc known to feed 
 throughout the season. 
 
 53. The facts (pp. rl scq.) iv; to t!ie general 
 lire of the cows are agreed; and, in common with 
 many oth.r animals, it is probable that the cow 
 will not willingly suckle any pup ex.'cpt he/ own. 
 But, considering the heavy work done by tlio 
 bull while ashore and without food, there is no 
 apparent necessity, as stated on p. 115, for tho 
 cow to seek food while nursing her young. It is 
 certainly not necessary for or done by the hair- 
 seal in tho Atlantic. And it is to he presumed 
 that as all other classes of fur-seal abstain from 
 food the feninle is not likely to form the one 
 (Exception. 
 
 5i. The close observations on the spot con- 
 ducted by the British Commissioners (lieport, 
 p. .") t) hear out the t(>sthnony of tho native and 
 otiier exijcrts on the islands that the females do 
 not leave [\w. jealously-guarded harem to which 
 they may belong till they have been ashore loi- 
 at least four to six weeks — and during this time 
 they abstain from food, but certainty nurse 
 their young. Close observation also shows that 
 when the cows lirst leave the harem and enter 
 the sea they play around the shores in larn-o 
 numbers and do not leave the immediate nei<'h- 
 bourliood of the rookeries, Bryant ("Mono- 
 
S2 
 
 graph o" North Ancrican Pinnipeds," p. 386) 
 descrihes the females as " floating or playing in 
 the water near the shore, rctui-ning occasionally 
 to suckle her pup." 
 
 55. That these cows do not seek food is proved 
 by the fact (as set out in detail in the British 
 Commissioners' Report, p. ) that many kinds 
 of fish arc quite common in the waters close to 
 the rookeries. The evidence of actual cacclies of 
 cod m the British and United States' vessels and 
 by the natives in boats is conclusive on this 
 poiui, and completely at variance with the state- 
 ment in the United States' Case (p. IIG) that 
 "on account of the number of seals on the islands fsh 
 arc very scarce in the neighbouring u'aters.'' 
 
 50. The best observations show that the cows 
 do not leave the rookeries for six weeks, and the 
 adjacent waters until after another throe to six 
 weeks, after bearing their pups. Thus the 
 nursing cows earliest to arrive would not be 
 leaving the islands before August, mIuIc the 
 later arrivals — and in ISOl cows were observed 
 landing and bearing pups in the last week in 
 July — could not be goint;- to sea until the end of 
 September. The British Commissioners found 
 no trr.ces of food in the stomachs of two female 
 seals killed on the Cape Yusbin rookery, Behring 
 Island, on the 5tli September, 1S!)2. 
 
 57. It is certain, ho\v;'ver, that other classes 
 of seals leave the islands earlier and go great 
 distances to sea without returning to the islands. 
 It is probable that among these are cows whose 
 pups have been killed and also nursing cows 
 who have been sera-ed by being driven, or by 
 stampedes on the rookeries. Later in the season 
 cows in milk woukl b(> met wi'h whose pups 
 are practically weaned. 
 
 58. On p. 110 tliere is obvious confusion of 
 argument as to (lie distances at which seals arc 
 ibimd playing and feeding at sea, and the dis- 
 tances to which nursing cows will go to seek for 
 food. The evidence of the experts on the islands 
 (Biilish Conmiissiouers' Report, p. 50) generally 
 limits to a few miles the excursions of the cows 
 actually engaged in nursing. iVnd one of the 
 ni ist notable Tacts brought out in the 1891 
 inquiry was that while seals are frequent within 
 1 ov 2 miles of tlu; breeding-places they are not 
 m't with again in any abundance until the 
 islands are from 70 to 100 and even 200 mOes 
 distant. 
 
as 
 
 59. It is also to bo noticed that in the United 
 States' evidence cows in milk are reported as 
 being taken of? the coast of British Columbia, 
 and also in the Aleutian Passes. In neither of 
 these classes of case would the cows be supposed 
 to be returning to the Pribyloff Islands. 
 
 GO. The evidence obtained from the sealing 
 schooners themselves indicates [ ? ] 
 
 [See Macoun, new evidence.] 
 
 Bacliclors. 61. In regard to the bachelors (p. 120), the 
 
 statements in the United States' Case do not 
 agree with the evidence. It is inaccurate to say 
 that the bachelors as a body haunt the neigh- 
 bourhood of the breeding-grounds. As a matter 
 of fact they herd apart, and as the season 
 advances, instead of " coming down into the 
 breeding-grounds," they wander further inland. 
 
 62. It is equally inaccurate to say that the 
 elder bachelors never serve the cows. According 
 to native and other testimony, the 5- and 6-year- 
 old bachelors hang round the outskirts of the 
 rookeries and their sea-fronts, and have fre- 
 quently been seen in die act of serving a cow. 
 This habit has probably developed in later years, 
 when comparative scarcity of breeding bulls has 
 so largely increased the number of females each 
 old bull would appro))riate to himself 
 
 Mi'TitioM. 03. In dealing with mignitinn (p. 122), the 
 
 — — United States' authorities make the uncontro- 
 
 vertible statement that " the Alaslmn seal-herd is 
 migralori/ front nccessitij." But the further state- 
 ment that the seals remain on or near the I'ribylolY 
 Islands during unusually warm winters is abso- 
 luti'ly without foundation, if by "seals" it is 
 intended to convey more than a few stragglers, 
 for no evidence whatever is to be found for any 
 such statenient. It is not even true to say 
 (p. 123), " in fact, seals hare liccn killed there In 
 every month of the year." For t'lis statement the 
 reference is to a Table of killing on St. Paul 
 Island, vol. ii, p. 111-. But neither in that 
 Table, nor in any other, is any evidence of the 
 kind alforded. It is true (hav., in occasional 
 winters of exceptional mildues.s, a few stragglers 
 have remained through D(>cember, and even 
 until January, but such ri habit prevails with all 
 migratory animals, and stragglers from the main 
 body are to be noted at all stages of the migra- 
 tion. It is universally acknowledged by all 
 experienced authorities that the great bulk of 
 [818] K 
 
84 
 
 the seals have left the islands by the beginning, 
 or at latest the middle, of November. 
 
 G4. The problem stated on p. 123, as to 
 whether the seals could make the islands their 
 one home or not under other conditions of lati- 
 tude, is scarcely to the point, sec'.ng that it is 
 universally recognized as a matter fact that the 
 seals are forced by Nature to be away, and many 
 hiindrecs of miles away, from the islands for the 
 greater part of the year, seeking appropriate and 
 necessary food and climate in waters over which 
 all nations have common rights of usns and 
 fructus. 
 
 65. It may be noted that p. 12 !• contradicts 
 p. 123, unless it is intended to assert that the 
 " seal herd " met with in tlic autumn, winter, 
 and spring off the coasts of California and British 
 Columbia is quite distinct from the " seal herd " 
 frequenting tlic Pribylofl' Islands " nearly all the 
 year." 
 
 6G. It is in a sense true that, saving in excep- 
 i'.onal cases, the fur-seal does not land or breed 
 on the American coast. But that he did so in 
 the past is certain, and that he h been driven 
 off by the perpetual hunting by man to which he 
 has been subjected. The problem of re-estab- 
 lishing rookeries by means of protected areas on 
 these coasts is, however, under consideration. 
 Tilost of the Indians along the coast do, however, 
 report having seen seals occasionally on shore; 
 and all local' evidence tells of seals in numbers 
 visiting the bays and mouths of harbours, espe- 
 cially in Januarj', February, and March, at many 
 points along that coast. 
 
 [See British Commissioners' Report for details 
 (pp. SO and 30 a)]. 
 
 (6.) Management of the Rookeries (pp. 129-161). 
 
 07. In regard to the administration of the 
 Si.'al Islands, we are met on the very threshold 
 by the statement (p. 131) that — 
 
 " I' iiderthtyentral protective system adopted hy Russia .... 
 the seal herd cuntinucil fn increase until the Managers of the 
 Hussian Compiniyionsvleral itpofisiblc and iwprdicnt to lake 
 T.'i.OOO skins frmn SI. Pmd T.dnnd without dnngcr of 
 depleting the popidntinn" 
 
 T!)is is intended to lead up to the excessive limit 
 of 100,000 autliorized by tin- United States' 
 Government a few year later. But it is a state- 
 r.Kut ili-tinctlv at vntiance with fact. 
 
 i 
 
I .HIII.H 4 Jljl^l 
 
 35 
 
 68. Under Russian management ihc average 
 number of skins taken annually, and iii(.4usive of 
 pups, was as follows : — 
 
 Avcra;^.' Ximil.'er 
 of Skins. 
 1817-26 .. .. .. 40,500 
 
 1827-36 .. .. .. 10,000 
 
 18ii7-46 9,700 
 
 1817-56 15,000 
 
 1857-'J6 .. .. .. oii.OOO 
 
 In 18G7, the last year ol' tlic llussiau oeoupa- 
 tion, it is true that 73,000 skins were obtained, 
 but in no year sinee 1820 had more seals l)oeu 
 taken than 40,000. 
 
 G9. In the two letters referred to or. p. 131, as 
 proof of this strange statement, there is no 
 reference whatever to any such unmb(!rs. The 
 letter dated 1S57 (vol. i, p. 81.) speaks of an 
 annual supply not exceeding 25,000. The letter of 
 1859 (vol. i, p. 8G) states tliat the seals had so 
 increased that — 
 
 "it wnulil bu quite posfjiblu to take fruiu all tlie rookeries 
 a total of 70,0011 skins in one season ; .... it laav lie 
 positively .stated that the taking of 70,000 .-^kins each year 
 lor a long period to eurae will not re.iult in tlie iinpoverish- 
 inent of the rookeries." 
 
 But these rookeries were those ou both the 
 PribylofT and Connnander Islands. 
 
 70. Professor Ball, writing in 18(58 (" Alaska 
 and its llesourccs," p. 100), states that of lati} years 
 the Russians had not been allowed to take more 
 than 50,000 annually. Allen (" North Araeriean 
 Pinnepedia," p. 389) states that for many years 
 the Russians took liut few seals, and the; number 
 had so increased that in one year thoy liad been 
 enabled to take 40,000. 
 
 71. The statement on p. 131 that "the taking 
 of grey pups was practically stopped " towards 
 the close of the Russian occupation is true. But 
 the further fact is not mentioned that under 
 American occupation 4,000 to 3,000 pups were 
 allowed to be taken annually, in addition to the 
 quota of 100,000 adult seals for twenty years 
 until 1890. 
 
 72. In regard to " American management," that 
 is, after 1867, there is on p. 133 the statement that 
 " about 250,000 Iwchelor skins were taken that year 
 from the Pribyloff hlamh." Nothing is said of 
 the 40,000 femali! skins that were taken the 
 same year, or of the 40,000 additional skins taken 
 on St. George, nor that in tlie followiii"' vear 
 
86 
 
 87,000 skins were obtained. Tliero was certainly 
 little or no order or cai'e taken by the private 
 competitors in their greed to secure all skins they 
 could before any restrictions were enacted. 
 
 73. On p. 130 it is shown that the United 
 States' Government very properly took ample 
 powers to control the seal fisheries, but what is not 
 shown is that these powers were never exercised. 
 Parliamentai'y inquiries were indeed necessary 
 in 1876, and again in 1888, but in each case the 
 conclusion an-ived at was that the Company was 
 doing its duty, and that the condition of the 
 natives liad vastly improved. It is not pointed 
 out, however, that these natives (numbering only 
 about 300) were in reality imported labourers, 
 who have been greatly aided and advanced by 
 the luerati\e natui'e of their occupation, but are 
 not, like the thousands of natives of the coast of 
 British Columbia and Alaska, autochthonous, and 
 for generations, indeed from time immemorial, 
 habitually engaged in taking fur-seal. 
 
 71. Nor is any notice given to the fact that 
 the limit of 100,000 seals, although eslablislied 
 as avowedI\ experimental in the first instance, 
 has never been lowered or altered throughout 
 the period of the lease, in spite of Reports and 
 evidence (to be described in detail when we 
 come to deal with the decrease of the seals), all 
 indicating that this cmtirely unprecedented drain 
 npoi>. seal life was fiir more than tlic si'.pply of 
 seals eoiiiu stand. Without this explanation the 
 statement (oa p. 153) that the limit of 100,000 
 " is varia])le, t;nd entirely within the control of 
 the Treasury," would be gravely misleading. 
 
 75. In regard to the management of the seal 
 herd (pp. 147-105), the United States' Case has 
 been prepared ol)viously in igncance of many 
 essential details and facts of seal life. 
 
 70. In the first place, m\ieh care is taken to 
 show that the seals are as capable of domestica- 
 tion as a herd of cattle. 
 
 But, as has been already shown in another 
 passage, no notice is taken of the fact that man 
 lias no control whatever over these seals when- 
 ever they choose to leave the islands, whether 
 temporarily in the summer or permanently in the 
 autumn. 
 
 77. -Moreover, the only basis for this assertion 
 of domesticity is that the seals can be driven up 
 in floeks to the killing-grounds. As a matter of 
 fact, this is simply because while ashore the seal 
 
 Seals. 
 
 Domesticity. 
 
37 
 
 is incapable of escaping from man by flight. 
 Cattle, slieep, poultry, horses, and all other 
 domestic animals can escape by superior speed, 
 but their nature is altered by domesticity and they 
 allow themselves to be controlled by man. The 
 seal, however, always remain savage, and will 
 escape ii' by any means they can, and invariably 
 show fight until too exhausted by the over- 
 exertion • inevitable to "driving." Their savage 
 nature leads them always to resent ratlier than 
 avoid human interference ; but the whoh; herd is 
 al)solutely out of control when in due season it 
 chooses to depart on its migrations, nor can the 
 proprietors of the islands in any way or degree; 
 provide food for tlie seals or retain them on the 
 islands. 
 
 78. No seals can be caught except by com- 
 pulsion, whether pups or not. As a matter of 
 fact, the seals, when driven, tire and sink on to 
 then- haunches after progressing for 50 yards or 
 so, and when in that condition can be approached 
 and " controlled " and killed V)y man. 
 Females. 79. It is certainly a favourable feature that 
 
 owing to the inability of the seal, when driven on 
 shore, to escape, great discrimination can be 
 exercised in the killing. But the boast that 
 fenialcs are never killed is peculiar to this one 
 industry. The idea was started among the 
 Russians in the year 1831, and has since become 
 a tradition, especially with the natives. The 
 same theory inspires the United States' Com- 
 missioners in tlu! elaborate calculations made in 
 tlicir Report by means of imaginary theories as 
 to what ought to be, and in which no notice 
 whatever is taken of the large numbers of females 
 wliieli must come into being every year, and 
 while ill surplus males are killed off, must 
 result in a very large excess of females, and great 
 and unnatural disproportion ol' the sexes. 
 
 80. In no other ease of the control and killing 
 of animals by man is this rule observed. With 
 cattle, sheep, deer, rabbits, pheasants, partridges, 
 salmon, in every case in short, females are killed as 
 well as males ; and in all cases the " herds " have 
 been successfully maintained Trom tiun imme- 
 morial. To kill males only is obviously to 
 interfere with the course of Nature and results in 
 a disproportion of the sexes which has serious 
 effects on the brc^eding-grounds, wlieu an excess 
 of iicmales must lead to ineffectual service l)v tlic 
 males, and to females wandering to otlier haunts 
 [818] ^ L 
 
38 
 
 in sraich of males. It is well ascertained by 
 cxpcrioncc with shoep, cattle, and doer, all 
 polyijamous and uniparous, that it is best each 
 year to kill a certain proportion of females. The 
 details provided l)y experts an; given in Ap- 
 pendices. 
 
 81. On [). l.')2 the statement is made that "the 
 most xtrinrjent rnlvs an- vnforced to prevent any 
 disturbance of the breeding seiils." 
 
 It is true that over and over again notice has 
 been taken of several causes of disturbance whi(!h 
 have resulted in stampedes, whereby hundreds of 
 pups have been crushed to deatii. Smoke from 
 passing steamers, smell from oil-boilers, perpetual 
 visiting of the rookeries (see the British Com- 
 missioners' Jlcjiort, p. 59), arc among such 
 causes. 
 
 But one cause that has operated greatly in 
 recent years has liecii the necessity, while the 
 100,000 quota had to bo provided, of driving 
 seals from close to th(> rookeries. This evil 
 involves the more frequent inclusion of females 
 in the drives. But its evils are very fully 
 described by the Special Treasury Agent in his 
 Report for 1890. He states :— 
 
 Disturbance. 
 
 82. In regard to the " manner of taking " seals 
 (p. 135 et seq.), the statement is distinctly made. 
 
 Methods. 
 
3'.) 
 
 " // Is the univer.'nil trslimoiti/ nf a I iicqiiaiiiled with 
 the melhoda employrd Ihal iheyiaitiiit be iiiiproicd 
 upon." 
 
 It will 1)(! observed, howovor, tlint the state- 
 ments quoted frc.ii various juilliorltics ari> 
 cvidontly made in rcbultal of definite statomcjuts 
 to till! opiiosiu; (>ll'ect, and tire very limited ia 
 n umbel'. 
 
 83. Other authoritie. are of (jiiUe an o])iiosito 
 ojiinion. 
 
 The United States' l'i)mmissionrrs, for instanec, 
 in their Ileport (p. ;Uil), stato: " No doubt that 
 in some instanecs excessive drivim; has been 
 allowed .... tliat jjrnper eare lias not been 
 takini to eliminate the non-killabh' seals," and 
 they reeommend the employment of more respon- 
 sible and competent offieors. 
 
 Hut it is the Special Treasiuy Agent, in his 
 Report for 1S90, wJio ui several passages describes 
 tho evils of ovcr-drivint', and other Iiighly injurious 
 and destructive details "n the methods at ))resent 
 employed on the PriLylofT Islands. 
 
 In tho liepfjrL of tho British Commissioners 
 (pp. 121-133) will be found quoted the various 
 authorities on this point. 
 
 84. Tlie (!vils of driving- have also been 
 aelcnowlcdgcd by the local authorities in the new 
 precautions and improvements Avhicli they have 
 from time to time devised and adopted. If it is 
 true, as stated on p. 1.j8, *' Certainly no such s'jal 
 thus driven was ever seriously injured or his 
 virility affected by such redriving," why was all 
 tho care and circumspection enjoined detailed in 
 the following pages, and why was it specially 
 ordained, and frequently, that all means must be 
 taken to shorten the length of the drives ? 
 
 (c.) Decrease of Herd. 
 
 85. The decrease of the seal herd may be said to 
 be the causa motiva of tlie whole question. It is 
 the prospect of the loss of a supply of seal-skins 
 which has stirred the various interests, com- 
 mercially concerned, to agitate for Government 
 interference and protection. The United States' 
 Case is therefore bound up in the main with this 
 aspect of the question. 
 
 86. It is, however, to be observed that tho 
 decrease of the seal herd is attributed, throughout 
 Part II of their Case, alone to the injurious 
 effects of pelagic sealing. The larger question. 
 
I I I l>Mt>Pyi ^;"".'|W«Vff'»»»' 
 
i 
 
40 
 
 viz., the riglits and interests of pelagic sealers, 
 that is of an industry shared in alike liy British 
 and United States' vessels, is ignored altogether, 
 while the claims of the one American Company 
 (which has secured a high-priced lease of the 
 PribylofC Islands) to crush their legitimate rivals 
 are alone advanced and supported in the United 
 States' Case. These claims culminate in the 
 astonishing prayer with which the United States' 
 Case concludes (p. 303) : — 
 
 '•That .:,houl(l it lie conaidoreJ that the United States 
 Ivive not the full property or property interest asserted Ijy 
 I hem. it he then declared and decreed to he the inter- 
 national dnty of Great Britain to concur with tlie United 
 States in the adoption of such regulations as will elfectunlly 
 jirevent the capture anywhere upon the high seas of any 
 seids bclonKiniz to the said herd." 
 
 S7. Unfortunately for this strange plea, based 
 tluoughout on an ingenious juxtaposition of 
 results and assumed causes, the argument is in 
 direct contradiction of the knowc facts of seal 
 life. 
 
 SS. Specially is this evident in dealing with the 
 decrease of the seal herd. This will be amply 
 ])r<)ved in the succeeding detailed criticism of the 
 United States' contentions. 
 
 8!). In regard to the general fact of the de- 
 crease, the remarks ou p. 03 as to the impossi- 
 bility of an actual census of seal life, and as to the 
 praclicality of watching increase or decrease by 
 means of comj^.-ring the area covered by seals in 
 given years, are in thorough accord with the 
 views of the British Commissioners, as set out ou 
 pp. 01 to 07 of their Report. It is there shown, 
 however, that tliis latter method has seldom been 
 adopted because of the continuous changes in 
 the personnel of (hose ia (diarL,'e of the islands. 
 The only case of the same individual forming 
 estimates by measurements in dilferent years on 
 similar lines is that of Special Treasury Agent 
 Elliott in 1872-7 1, and again in 1890. But 
 neither ot these Reports are even alluded to in 
 the United States" Case, altiiough both Reports 
 were very carefully considered, ahnig with other 
 contemporary records -nd observations, by the 
 British Commissionc; . 
 
 !)0. In regard to the particular facts of the 
 deer-'ase, Tart II of the United States' Case deals 
 l)ui lightly witl' the two most important points, 
 viz., the recorded dates and the kind of decrease. 
 
41 
 
 Date of fommeucemcut. 91. Iq regard to the dates when the decrease 
 
 commenced, the British Commissioners (pj). IIG 
 et seq. of their Ileport) give numerous quota- 
 tions to show that suspicions were first aroused 
 in 1875 by Captain Bryant, who stated before 
 the Congress Committee in 1877 : — 
 
 " I tliink that the number of 100,000 was a little more 
 than ought to have lieeii be^'un with. I think if we hntl 
 begun at 8;"i,000 there would ha\-e been uo necessity for 
 diminishing." 
 
 In the Report of the same Committee it is 
 stated (House of llepresentatives, 4Jith Congress, 
 1st Session, Report No. (523, p. 11): — 
 
 " II is certain th;it tu kill more tlian this number 
 (100,000) would tend to a rapid decrease of the animal 
 .supply, and end in tlie extinction of tlie animals on these 
 islands long before the expiration of the twenty years lliat 
 the lease had to run." 
 
 92. As a matter of fact the official records of 
 seals killed on the islands during the nineteen 
 years in which the lease was in full operation 
 show an annual average of 104,000. So that 
 extinction of the animals should have followed 
 even according to the de'lberate opinion of the 
 Congress Committee. 
 
 03. The allusions to decrease in the official 
 Hejiorts are very fcM-. In 1882, however, 
 Assistant Treasury Agent Wardman specifically 
 reports a decrease in the numlier of "Idllablo" 
 seals on St. George. 
 
 !)1. Other recorded facts are, however, highly 
 significant. Thus, in 1872, the Treasury Agent 
 rejiorted that 100,000 seals could he easily 
 obtained — 
 
 " within a railius of 1^ mile- from the village and from ilie 
 .salt-house on Nortli-Kast I'oi.it, (United Slates' Census 
 Ileport , i'. 72.) 
 
 But in 1879 it became neeessaiy lor the i'ir.st 
 finic to extend (he drives to the Polavina and 
 Zaptidnc balding-grounds. 
 
 1)5. Among other authorities, Colonel J.Murray, 
 Assistant Treasur}- Agent, states iit his Report 
 I'or 18S)0 :— 
 
 "Tile whole trutli must, nevertheless, be told, and tlial 
 is thai the seals have been steadily decreasing since 
 1880." 
 
 [818] M 
 
)P^i^HI!-nTT-^ 
 
42 
 
 Dr. H. H. Mclntyre, at the time Agent for 
 the lessees, admitted before the Congressional 
 Committee in 1888 (House of ReprescntatVes, 
 50th Congress, 2nd Session, Report No. 3883, 
 pp. llG-119) that the seals had decreased since 
 1882, and that it had become difficult to obtain 
 the full (juota of marketable skins, adding ; — 
 
 " there; are at present ton few Imll .si?;ils to keep the 
 rookeries up to their best condition." 
 
 ^Ir. D. Webster informed the Britisli Com- 
 missioners in 1801 that seals began notably to 
 decrease in 1870 and 18S0. !Mr. ]M organ said 
 that he first noticed decrease in 1884. 
 
 96. Further evidence of fact is forthcoming in 
 regard to the lowering of the standard of size in 
 the skins taken. 
 
 Dr. n. n. Jlclntyre (p. 118, as above) says : — 
 
 " In 1SS3 tlie sizes decreasctl, and liave deereased ever 
 '^ince." 
 
 It is well known on the islands that in 1886 
 and 1887 the reductions in weight of skius was 
 fully recognized ; that in 1888 many 5-lb. and 
 (!ven l;^-lb. skins were taken (the old average 
 having been from 6 lbs. to 9 lbs.) and 2-, 3-, and 
 ■t-ycar-olds killed. In 1889 as many as 40,000 
 very small skins were taken, a great proportion 
 not exceeding 3^ lbs. But this was the last year 
 of the Company's lease, in which Colonel Murray 
 says the Company scraped up any seal they could 
 lay hands on. 
 
 In 1890 Treasury Agent Goff writes, in his 
 Report : — 
 
 "Tliere have been no 2-year-t)lds of an average size 
 turned away this season ; they were all immediately 
 clubbed to swell the catch." 
 
 97. The natives on the islands informed the 
 British Commissioners (Report, pp. 138, 139) 
 that in 1883 the rookeries were much reduced 
 from what they were when the Americans first 
 took charge, for instance, from South-West Bay, 
 St. Paul's, they " used to drive 3,000, but only 
 1,000 now," and that the decrease became 
 noticeable in 1S82. Many places were pointed 
 out to the British and the United States' Com- 
 missioners on St. Paul in 1801, by the various 
 i;,land authorities, especially by Mr. Tingle, on 
 which there had been " no seals since 1879." 
 
43 
 
 98. But perhaps the clearest evidence as to 
 the date when the decrease commenced is to be 
 found in numerous passages in the " Testimony " 
 put forward by the United States. In this the 
 dates of the commencement of the decrease arc 
 placed before 1881 by most of the authorities 
 with any personal experience of the islands. We 
 may quote the following : — 
 
 (i.) ])r. Jlclntyro, Treasury Agent, states 
 (pp. 45, 51, and 52) : — 
 
 " Up t(j 18S2 there was no ilillycully in procuring; tliu 
 roiinired inimlicr of killaMu seals." 
 
 " I loft till! rookene.s in 1S.S2 in tiieir fullest and best 
 condition, and found them in l.SBfl already showing a 
 slight falliny-off, and exiiericiiiced that year for tlie lirsL 
 time some dilluailly in securing just the class of animals 
 
 we desired Wc; wen; obliged in 1888 to content, 
 
 ourselves with smaller skins than we had hitherto taken. 
 This was in part due to tlu- necessity of turr.ing hack- to 
 the rookeries many half-grown bulls, owing to the notablo 
 scarcity of breeding males." 
 
 "A very noticeable decniase in the herd commenced, 1 
 have already pointed out, in 188G. 1 was, therefore, 
 always alert to see that tin; due proportion of breeding 
 males of serviceable age was allowed to return to the 
 rookeries. This was a comparatively easy task prior to 
 1882, but liocame from year to year more diiRcult as the 
 seals decreaiiod." 
 
 (ii.) IMr. Morgan (p. G3) :— 
 
 "In ISSu, and in every year thereafter, there vras a 
 marked decrease in the number of marketable skins that 
 could bo obtained. We were able down to the last veav 
 (1887) to get our totiil catch of 100,000 seals, but in 
 order to get that number wo had to take what in previous 
 years we woidd h;i\e rejected, namely, under-sized skins. 
 .... Up tii the year 1884 the breeding sjiace in the, 
 rookeries had increased, and from that year down to 1S87 
 the acrer.ge covered by seals constantly diminished." 
 
 (iii.) Mr. Morton (p. G9) states :— 
 
 " Since 1883 there is said to have occurred a very 
 terial diminution of the seal life on the Pribyloff Islands." 
 
 ma 
 
 (iv.) :Mr, Niebaum (p. 78.) states :— 
 
 "As early as 1882 it was noticed that the rookeries had 
 
 stopped expanding In 1887 wo were forced to 
 
 commence taking smaller skins iu order to obtain oiu- 
 ijuota iin<I preserve enough breeding bulls." 
 
 (v.) Captain D. Webster (p. 181) states :— 
 
 "My oliservation has been that there was an expansion 
 of the rookeries from 1870 up to at least 1870 r,i 
 
the year 18.S0 I thought I liegiin to iiolico u fnlling-off 
 
 from the yeni' previous in the luimbcr of sials In 
 
 1884 and 1885 I noticed ii decrease, and it became so 
 marked in 188C that every one on the island saw it," 
 
 (vi.) The native Chief on St. Paul Island (p. 99) 
 states : — 
 
 " From 1870 to 1884 the seals we^• swiirming 
 
 All of a sudden, in 1884, we noticed there were not so 
 many seals, and tliey have been decreasing very rapidly 
 ever since." 
 
 99. Purther evidence to the same effect is to 
 be found in abundance in vol. ii of the United 
 States' testimony. 
 
 100. It is perfectly clear that material decrease 
 was noted by all as early as ISSl, and by many 
 as early as 1881. Thus, as to date of commence- 
 nieut, the United States' (estimony leads even 
 further than the otherwise significant contention 
 in the United States' Case (p. 105) :— 
 
 " From ilie year 1880 to the ymr 1884-85 the condition uf 
 
 the rookeries shoircd neither inercafc nor thcreasc In 
 
 ISHi, however, there n'as a 2>erc(jitilk decrease noticed 
 
 iSincc- thul time the decrease his leeonic more evident from 
 year lo year" 
 
 101. In regard to kind of decrease, in general 
 the actual complaint on the PribylolT Islands is 
 that there has been a continuous decrease in 
 killablc males (from 3 to G years old), and that 
 the pelagic scalers chielly destroy females. The 
 actual complaint of the pelagic scalers is that 
 there is a dearth of males because too many 
 males are taken on the breeding islands. 
 
 102. On p. 1G9 the Report of Treasury Agent 
 Goff is quoted for the year 1890, in which it is 
 shown that it was impossible in that year to 
 obtain more than 21,338 young males on the 
 islands, whereas in previous years it had been 
 possible to obtain 100,000. On p. 45 Treasury 
 Agent Mclntyre points out that — 
 
 " in 1887, 1888, and 1880 the depleted rookeries would not 
 furnish the (juota of 100,000 large skins, 2- or 3-year-old 
 male seals were taken to make up the quota." 
 
 Kind ill' ilecve;iso. 
 
 103. It is therefore |astonishing to read, on 
 p. 175 of the Case, the assertion : — 
 
 " It haa also been shoivn that the decrease in the seals took 
 jilacc primarily among the female portion of the. herd." 
 
45 
 
 Them is nothing wliatoviT, either in the previous 
 iirgiiinent or in the testimony, to bear out sucli 
 an asscn-tion. 
 
 101. As a matter of faet, tlie (k'erease, whicli it 
 now seems had been notieed on the islands in a 
 i,'n)\vini5 dearth of young males ever since ISSO, 
 was not odicialiy taken note of until after the 
 year 188!), the last year of the lease of the Alaska 
 Conimereial Cdinjiany. In that year it had been 
 found inipc/ssible to obtain more than 50,000 
 " killable" males, and the remainder of the quota 
 taken was from tlie younger classes of seals of 
 from 2 to J. years old. 
 Canscj. 105. Such being the facts as to date of eoni- 
 
 - meneement and kind of decrease in seal life, tin- 
 
 jiroblem as to causes can Ix- ent(n'cd upon. 
 100. Thf United States' Case (p. 177) asscrts- 
 
 " tliL' siili! cuu.se iif tlif prwiciit ili'iilctfd cemlilidii of llif 
 .Miiskii siiiiljliiiril is jn'l;it;ic mjiiIIhl;." 
 
 107. The testimcmy summarized (m p. 177 in 
 support of this assc^rtion is that of Government 
 otlieials, men interested in the PribylolT Islands 
 fishery, and Indians hostile to their great rivals 
 in pelagic sealing. The general timdency of this 
 evidence, most of it mere statciments of opinion 
 or hearsay, is based on the assumption given on 
 p. 18.'.— 
 
 " tluil the ilocrdiise in tlic .seal lind has bfuij pvojicji'tiourtto 
 to tin; increase in tlir sunling llcot." 
 
 lOS. In the United States' Case (vol. i, p. 590, 
 and vol, ii, p. 49G) arc set out tlu; numbers of 
 schooners engaged in pelagic sealing, and also 
 tlu! catch of the schooners year by year. It is 
 important that these be borne in mind. 
 
 [818] N 
 
46 
 
 Pelagic Catch. 
 
 
 Schooners. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 TotuI Catch 
 (Dr. Xleiiinm, 
 vol. i, p. 366). 
 
 Year. 
 
 Total Nuinl)cr 
 
 Official 
 List of 
 
 Xurnbcr 
 entncd 
 
 
 (vol. i, p. 590). 
 
 iiriti^h. 
 
 Hchriiig Sea. 
 
 
 1875 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 1,046 
 
 1876 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 •J.04J 
 
 1877 
 
 , , 
 
 , , 
 
 . , 
 
 5.700 
 
 1878 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 
 9,593 
 
 1879 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 
 12.500 
 
 1880 
 
 16 
 
 4 
 
 
 is.con 
 
 1881 
 
 V2 
 
 5 
 
 
 13,540 
 
 1882 
 
 15 
 
 S 
 
 
 17,700 
 
 1883 
 
 13 
 
 ;) 
 
 
 9,195 
 
 1884 
 
 11 
 
 11 
 
 1 
 
 14,000 
 
 1885 
 
 15 
 
 13 
 
 •2 
 
 13.000 
 
 188t? 
 
 34 
 
 Ifi 
 
 16 
 
 38,907 
 
 1887 
 
 17 
 
 i; 
 
 15 
 
 33.800 
 
 1888 
 
 39 
 
 ■ji 
 
 17 
 
 37,789 
 
 188a 
 
 OS 
 
 2- 
 
 .->■> 
 
 40,998 
 
 1890 
 
 Gl 
 
 30 
 
 ^3 
 
 48.519 
 
 1891 
 
 115 
 
 ■JO 
 
 Motlus Vivendi 
 
 62,500 
 
 109. On p. 21G certain further conclusions are 
 definitely stated as the — 
 
 " results of pelagic sealing." 
 
 We are told that — 
 
 " bctnxcn 80 and 00 p-:r cent, of the !.cals lal.cn nrc females ; 
 of these, at least 75 /)•-/■ ecnt. urc eitlier prcjiuint or nunin'j ; 
 . ... at least (il! per cent, (f the seals /.iV/t.,' hi/ ivlutc 
 hunters are nercr secured." 
 
 110. lleturning to the simple tacts, it is seen 
 that the pelagic catch did not assume any ffreat 
 proportions until the year 1886, and for five 
 years until and including 1890 the average total 
 taken, according to the United States' Comniis- 
 sioners, ^vls iO.OOO, the average for the previous 
 ten years having been only 11,000. 
 
 111. Lut of this catch the United States con- 
 tend that at least 80 per cent, arc females — a 
 kind of seal not killed on the islands, but the 
 slaughter of whicli involves t!ie death of pups, 
 one-half of wliicli are males and one-half breeding 
 females. They would make an additiou of not 
 less than GO per cent, to these tigures for seals 
 killed and not secured. Thus, even according to 
 the ligures given by the United States, the accu- 
 racy cf wliich is not conceded, and whicli will 
 licreafter be dealt with, \vc arrive at the following 
 jgures as alfecting the question in luml ; — 
 
 112 In the ten years previous to 1S8G an average 
 
"^rnr^ 
 
 47 
 
 Sumiiiary us in dc'cn.'nso. and t? 
 a>;serlcd cauEP. 
 
 of, say, 9,000 females being assumed, increase;! 
 by 00 per cent, loss to ll.,000 breoding females, 
 represents an annual loss of 7,000 male pups. 
 
 For the five years 188G-90 tlio annual loss, 
 on the same assumption, would be 23,000 male 
 pups. 
 
 But in 1889 there was acknowledged a deficit 
 of 50,000 d- to G-year-old males, tlic mothers of 
 which must have been killed in the years 1883, 
 1884, or 1S85 — years in wliicli, according to the 
 Table given by tL' United States' Conimissioiiers 
 (p. ."(JG), the pelagic catch readied an average 
 total of only 9,000 seals, reprcsontiiig ;iu annual 
 loss of loss than 0,000 male pups— to msituro 
 in '.889— even on flu; extreme assumptions 
 advanced by the United States as to proportions 
 of females killed and of seals killed and lost. 
 
 113. It may further be pointed out that this cause 
 — " pelagic sealing"— (.'insisting in the slaughter 
 of gravid and nursing females, is said to ba^•e its 
 main eilect in the destruction of young pup seals. 
 It is therefore obvious that the clfcct of any oni^ 
 year's killing will not be visiljje on tlie raokc-ics 
 for at least three years in regard to female; ad 
 six or seven years in rc^-ard to brecdiii<; males. 
 It is pointed out in the totals of the pelagic catch 
 and numbers of schooners employed that tJio 
 totals were immaterial until ISSO. It is there- 
 fore certain that the dlect of tlie killing in the 
 flret year, that is, 18S0, would not become 
 noticeable as to the supply of i'cinaies on the 
 rookeries till 1889, as to the supply of l- and 
 5.year-old killablcs on the hauling-grounds until 
 isno and 1891, and as to breeding bulls on the 
 rookeries until 1S92. 
 
 But, as has been clearly shown in tlio United 
 SLates' Case and in the ample testimonyput forward 
 by the United States, skrinkage of the rookeries— 
 dearth both of males and females — bad become 
 self-evident in 188-1 and 1885, and dearth of 1- to 
 (i-year-old males on the bauling-grouiuls was 
 found liy 1889 to have reduced the numbers 
 available to c>iie-balf of what could be secured in 
 previous years. 
 
 lit. It is not denied that the growth of pclanjc 
 sealing, in that it involved the taking of 20.000 
 to 30,000 more seals, has been a contributory 
 cause; but it is contended, from the Inct's 
 advanced by the United States and otherwise on 
 record, that flic decrease in seals on the Pribyloir 
 Islands bad .ittaiiud to dimensions of such 
 
'¥-» 
 
gravity as lo threaten the very existence of the 
 rookeries before the development of pelagic 
 sealing had had sufficient (jll'ect to account for 
 any such results. 
 
 115. It is, in addition, to be noted that the 
 figures of the pelagic catch above dealt with arc 
 j)roporly subject to two classes of reduction, in 
 so far as they represent the numbers of seals 
 frequenting the PrihylofT Islands taken in the 
 open sea, because the totals here given include 
 not only seals taken in raids on shore or along 
 th( shore fronts of the breeding-islands, but also, 
 and in later years V' • v considerable, numbers of 
 seals taken on the ' ide of the Korth 
 
 Pacific and often arouiu hreeding-places on 
 
 the Commander, Kurile, au .lobben Islands. 
 
 IIG. In regard to raids, the admission is made 
 in the United States' Case (p. 17 1) that " a few 
 thousand skins " were thus seciived. But in the 
 evidence (vol. ii) wo find incidental references 
 which fully bear out the estimate of this cause 
 advanced 1)y the British Commissioners in their 
 lleport (pp. 12.">-13]). It has never been con- 
 tended that raids !)y themsidves caused the 
 decrease in the seal herd, but the actual evidence 
 amply 1)ears out tlie continitiou of the British 
 Commissioners (p. 131') that— 
 
 "in ii-L;iiril til tin- juactioiil tfTi'iil nf lln-'Si' laiibnii ihu tutiil 
 tatfh cif .seals, it woiikl iijijiuar that fniiii the annual loconluil 
 totals of the cati-h lamlcJ from scliucmfrs vc.-ry niati:iial (h - 
 tliictious must be made, and transferred to tlu' annual total 
 catch on the T'rihylolV fslands as lioiiig tlie result of 
 niK'ralions on ami around the rouki'rirs on tin I'riliylnll' 
 Ishiuds, and forniiuL.', tlierefori', jiropeily sprakin;4, no put 
 of the [lela^ie r:\\i li.'' 
 
 Kaids, 
 
 117. Concerning the extent to wliich raids are 
 committed both on shore and in the adjacent 
 waters, there are naturally no records of all cases. 
 But complaints of and precautions against such 
 raids have been taken annually ever since the 
 United States first took charge of the Pribylolf 
 Islands. In 1891 the island authorities bitterly 
 and coutina.iusly complained to the British and 
 United States' Commissioners of the disturbance 
 and destruction at the time being caused by 
 scbf)oners close by the rookery shores. 
 
 ll'^. It is certainly not correct to state that all 
 raids must necessarily bi' krown to tlic residents. 
 In fact, in nearly every ease on record tin; raid 
 has only been r.^eidcntally discovered. It is not 
 
49 
 
 in accordance with observed facts to state, as is 
 stated in the United States' Case (p. )— 
 
 •■■ ir other laid.s liad laken iilaco besidi'S tliese, the fact 
 would certainly have Ijoeii known on Iho. islands, as theii 
 effect would have boon soon on the breeding-grounds in 
 the shape of ilcad cavcasses of [vims and other seals," 
 
 In the first place, in regard to the carcasses of 
 dead pups, the United States' evidence teems 
 with allusions to tlieir discovery — a matter which 
 will be dealt with later on. But in regard to 
 carcasses of adult seals, it is the invariable 
 custom of raiders, whether on shore or along the 
 shore fronts, to take the carcasses on to the 
 vessels and skin them leisurely at sea. 
 
 119. In the evidence put forward by the United 
 States there is much proof of these statements. 
 
 (i.) Mr. Glidden (vol. ii, p. Ill) says :— 
 
 " I only knew of one raid upon .St. I'aul while I was 
 there (1882-85). It was by a Japanese vessel, and they 
 killed about 100 .seals, the carcasses of which we found on 
 board when we cajitured the vessel." 
 
 It is notable that every one of the officials la 
 his affidavit, and sp(;aking from memory, 
 invariably states tbat there were very few raids 
 while he was in (diarge. 
 
 (ii.) Mr. Morgan, lessees' agent, states :— 
 
 " One eauso of destruction is raiding, which bus been done 
 upon the shores of those islands. A hall'-do.ven such raids 
 are known to me [lersonally; but while if is not possible 
 for tne to state witli certainty the skins actually secured 
 by such raid.s, I believe that althon.u'li such laiding i.- 
 detrimcntal, its injurious ell'ect as compared witli the 
 disastrous results of pelagic .soaling is insignificant" 
 
 (iii.) Ml', ^'iobaum, once a Company's ein- 
 j)loye, states (p. 78) ; — 
 
 "IJaids by poachers on the Seal Islands. Very (Vw u( 
 these have occurred, and the inindjcr nl' .^kins obtained by 
 the poachei-s has been comparatively iulinitesimally small. 
 I think the whole nundier does not exceed :',,l)00 or 4,0U(J 
 skins." 
 
 (iv.) Mr. Clark, on St. George's Island from 
 1884. to 1889, states (p. IGO) :— 
 
 "During my stay several attempts weri' made by 
 poachers to get on .shore and steal the seal, but they 
 succeeded. ;is far as I am aware, only on three occasions, 
 and in all those three I do not think they killed more 
 than 1,20(1 oi l,.".i)('. seals." 
 
 120. [(ict Canadian evidence, 1892. j 
 [818] o 
 

JLII-iJILM-W^^ 
 
80 
 
 121. Special allusion is made on p. 175 of the 
 Case to the statement of these raids prepared on 
 behalf of the Treasury and the; Conipany re- 
 spectively. 
 
 It will be observed, however, that these two lists 
 by no means aijrec. The Treasury i^ives raids on 
 the 1st September, 1874, 1875, October 1881, 
 autumn 1884, June 1885, 20th July, 1885, 
 July 1886, 8th August, 1880, July 1887, No- 
 vember 1888, September 1889, August 1890. 
 September 1890, November 1890, 7th November, 
 1891, and 29th November, 1891. 
 
 The Company give records (p. 29) of raids in 
 October 1881, lOtli October, 1881., 20th July, 
 1885, 22nd July, 1885, 17th November, 1888, 
 30th September, 1889, all on St. George's Island, 
 and that " an examination oi' the St. Paul record 
 docs not show any destructive raids upon the 
 ii^laud " — a flat contradiction of the detailed 
 statement made by the Treasury. 
 
 122. Perhaps the most important point omitted 
 from the United States' Case in this connection 
 is the fact that on more than one occasion, and 
 many years before any seals whatever were taken 
 at sea, the supply of seals on the Pribylofif 
 Islands fell so short that commercial extermina- 
 tion actually threatened. In all the recorded 
 cases the dearth was due cither to want of earo 
 and proper restrictions in the slaughter on the 
 islands themselves, or to some natural cause, 
 such as disturbance of the seals or climatic 
 influences. 
 
 123. In 1805 the Special Imperial Commis- 
 sioner EezauofE found the Pribyloif Islands in a 
 a very bad state, and — 
 
 " came to tlie concliisiim that unless an end wore put to 
 this wanton destruction, a few years more would witness 
 the extirpation of the fur-seal." (Bancroft, p. 445.) 
 
 Previou-- instances before pelayic sealing 
 
 The causes are said to have been carelessness 
 and waste in the killing ; 30,000, for instance, 
 liad been kill(>d for food and their skins thrown 
 :i\vay. Veniaminoif states: — 
 
 ■' From the liiiie of tlie discovery of the PribylolT 
 Islands till MiViJ, i.e., till General I'ezaiiolf came to 
 Angelica, no ;iccoiinl was kept of the luimhor of fur-soalH 
 l;illed, and rio control whatever was exercised in the 
 m.;lter, owing to the fact that there were a ntunlier of 
 Coni])Linies engaL;''<l in the iudu.-~try, and tla^rofore many 
 ma-iias, each of whom tried to take as many seals as 
 pcssilile. Hut Kezanoll, seeing that this state oi' things 
 
51 
 
 Tiiust incvitiiWy lend to tlio oxtinotion of tlio species, gave 
 nnli'rs fur tlio killini,' nf scnls to cense; consoiitipntly, iii> 
 t'ur-suals were killed in IROG niul l.S()7 uii tlie rriljylDlV 
 Islands, and all tlii; persons eniploycd in the indnsliy 
 were taken to Unalaska. The killing was to eoniuiunce 
 again in 1808, but, owing to certain cirounistancc,-, it was 
 resumed on the Island of St, George only; on St. I'ae.rH 
 Island no seals were killed that year or tlie I'ollowin'.; 
 year, and even the year alter that only hall' the usual 
 imrnherof seals wen; taken on that island. After tlie.sc 
 clogo year.?, i.e., m St. fieorge's Island from l.SOS, and on 
 St. I'aul'.s Island from ISIO until 1822, the killing went 
 on uncontrolled on both islands; so little thought was 
 taken for thi; future that (iven the sekatsh were killeil for 
 their fars, while, the cows jierished by hundreds in tho 
 hatlim and on tli" way from the rookeries to the place of 
 slau'diter." 
 
 Si''us nf decrease. 
 
 124. Yrniamiiioll' explains tliat froin 1S17 to 
 1S37 a gradual diminution of seal life was 
 notiopd, and lie eliaractorizes tho annual killing 
 of 30,000 as oxpcssivo and leading to diminution 
 of the numbers of the .seals frequenting the 
 islands. In 1S2:' llio killing was rediiecd from 
 ■tO.OOO or .jO.OOO to inider 10,000 on St. Paul's 
 Island, and from 1822 to 1S2J. a period of rest 
 was enjoined, wliieh was repeated in 182G-27 for 
 St. Georg(!'s Island. In 1S2G, when it was again 
 attempted to take lO.OOO on St. Paul, it was 
 found quite impossible, and ncnv precautions 
 and restrietions were advoeated. In ISoi the 
 number taken on St. Paul was reduced from 
 12,000 to 1,000, and this was continued until 
 1837. In 1S3(), however, tho ice remained 
 ;irou;id the islands all the summer, and tho 
 i'emah^s especially were unable to land to hear 
 their young. There was that year an enormous 
 mortality of seals, and for many years aftcr- 
 waivls tln> yield of seal-skins was very low. 
 
 12."). The experience on the islands, therefore, 
 is that if excessive slaughter on shore is indulged 
 in over a period of years dearth of seals must and 
 does ensue, and this at a period when ])elagic 
 sealing was absolutely unknown. 
 
 120. The argument as to the evidciace in regard 
 to decrease to bo derived from signs on the grass 
 and rocks is fully dealt with in tlie Ri^port of tho 
 British Commissioners (pp. G8 vt seq.), who report 
 that, on revisiting the hunting-grounds later in 
 the season to the time when the United States' 
 Commissioners were on the islands it was gene- 
 rally observed that the seals were, as a matter of 
 
52 
 
 lad, hnuli'd out upor the "yellow" ami llie 
 
 T27. Ic is tlicrcf'oro ndv.'iiiccd as incontostablc 
 that the main t-auso of the dearth o[ seals ou 
 the I'libyloIT Islands is due to the excessive 
 slaughter, year after year, ever since 1870. To 
 this eaust' lias hccni added in latter years tin- 
 draft nmde by i)elai,ac scalers; hut this, so far as 
 concerns 4- and G-year-old males (the killin-; 
 of renmles not having assumed any material 
 (liniensious until the year 18S7), would not have 
 any eifoct on the supply -f killable males on the 
 islands until the vears 1801 and 1S92. 
 
 Sniiiiii.u V •'' to decrcuHo. 
 
 Pclaijic SfiiUng (pp. to ). 
 
 128. The vi!,'orous attack made ou pelaijie 
 sealing ii. the interests of one Company, which 
 liiilipens to hold the Governmei't lease of the 
 i'ribyloif Islands, will not bear the light of 
 facts. 
 
 129. The waste invoIv(vl in the method, 
 especially in the numbers that are shot and 
 killed but not secured, is gravely overstated. 
 The statement, p. lO'l, that— 
 
 ■■till' siH'cilic- griivity nf tlif si'iil lunng groiiti'i- than wdtii 
 it sinks tielovc it <:un bf spcuivd" — 
 
 is contrary to the evidimee of all practical 
 iumters. This question is gone into in detail in 
 the British Commissioners' lleport (pp. 104 el 
 se(].), and also in the supplementary (evidence 
 collected in 1802, and ample proof is given that 
 the seals that are severely hit, and yet not secured, 
 are comparatively few. 
 
 130. A remarkable point never touched upon 
 is that, if so many seals tire mortally wounded, 
 no mention has been made of their bodies being 
 found lloating. In the case of the hair-seals in 
 the Atlantic, which are known to sink far more 
 rapidly than the fur-seal, the taking of carcasses 
 of seals killed, but not secured, by other 
 hunters, is a matter of very frequent and usual 
 occurrence. 
 
 131. It i-? also acknowledged (p. ) that the 
 increase of pelagic sealing has caused the seals 
 to become wilder and more and more difficult of 
 appvoach (p. 106). Experiments made in 1802 
 on British men-of-war indicate that it is practi- 
 ciUy impossible now to get within shot of a 
 Wi'.king seal. Again, scaling is only possible on 
 
8S 
 
 P»3e 20&. 
 
 comparatively smootli days, ami thus tlic auto- 
 matic clicck of rrcqucnt rouLjli wcallu-r checks 
 thi.s method of t.-ikini,' seal, :^^()l•eovpl•, the 
 vessels and the boats tend to get in one another's 
 way. Thus it is that the increase of the sealing 
 fleet does not proi)ortionately increase the 
 number of seals taken. 
 
 1.'52. Allusion lias already l)een made to the 
 methods and times of selection by which the 
 furriers in London classify their skins, and (? fresh 
 proof) proof is ^'iven that the classification is 
 by kind and i|uality of skin ratlicr (ban by place 
 of orijjin. 
 
 133. ^luch effort is made to prove I ho great 
 pereenta^o of females taken by pelagic sealers. 
 But in all other animals at all under the control 
 of men a large proportion, often exceeding oiu:- 
 half of the total number killed each year, are 
 I'cmalcy, and the herd increases in numbers. 
 
 134. The important point in regard to the pups, 
 and np ( , which all the United States' arguments 
 lead, is that a large and increasing number of 
 dead pups an; fouiul on the rookeries of the 
 I'ribylofl" Islands, and that this is entirely due to 
 the slaughter of the nursing mothers l)y the 
 pelagic sealers. 
 
 V.io. In the United States' Case there is no 
 statement whatever as to the dates, localities, 
 and other important details in coiuieetion with 
 these dead pups, nor is any evidence offered 
 except the ex post facto .statement by officials of 
 more or less vague recollections. In short, Ib.e 
 Case of the United States on this point is made 
 entirely to dei)cnd upon affidnvits made and 
 drawn up in 1.S92, which became strangely 
 e.xj)licit as to (he precise uuml)ers of dead pups 
 in a long series of years, making out that they 
 tally c-.actly with the numbers of females taken 
 by the pelagic hunters. 
 
 130. ]5ut ihe Triliunid will neees.sarily ei\ter 
 into this (luestiun in greater detail. They will 
 call for prof)f that th(^ asserted cause could h;iv(> 
 been the cause, was (he cause, iuid was t'le only 
 possible cause. 
 
 137. It is to be remarked that no oilieial notice 
 whatever was taken of dead pups until the atten- 
 tion of the authorities on the islands was drawn 
 to the fact by the British Commissioners in 
 August 1891. No official records exist of any 
 such facts. 
 
 loS. It, is true that the United States put for- 
 [818] p 
 
64 
 
 ward a Memorandum by Professor J. A. Allen 
 (vol. ii, p. 405). On this supposed effect of pelagic 
 scaling lie writes : — 
 
 "Duinl pu))3 at tlie Pribyloll rookLries were of raro 
 occurreuce prior to pelai^ii: sealing in Beliriiig Sea, being 
 toil iiifreiiuerit to attract ntteiitiuii. .... Soon after pelagic 
 su.iling began dcai! pups becnnie .so numerous as to attract 
 "eneral attention tlieir extreme emaciation clearly- 
 indicating death from stai-vation." 
 
 13!). The facts as to the finding of the pups in 
 1891 arc set out in the British Commissioners' 
 Report as follows (p. Gl) : — 
 
 " When visiting Tolstoi ruokory ou the 2'Jth July, we 
 observed and called attention to several hundred dead 
 
 pups Neitl'.er tlie Govfrninent Agent who was with 
 
 with us nor the native.'* forming our boat's crew at the 
 time woidd at fusl. believe that the objects seen ou the 
 rookery wore dead pup.s, nffinuing that they were stones." 
 
 110. In the United States' testimony this 
 account is fully coi-roboratcd by the affidavit of 
 Colonel Barnes (vol. ii, p. 101). 
 
 111. Colonel :\Iurray has given as the reason 
 why the dead pups were never noticed before that 
 never until the investigations conducted in 1891 
 were any visits whatever paid to the rookeries, 
 especially after the close of the killing season 
 towards the en 1 of July. 
 
 112. The explanations given to the British 
 Commissioners immediately they brought the 
 fact of the dead pups to the notice of the 
 authorities were as follows : — 
 
 On the 30th .Inly Mr. R.dpath said they had 
 pr(jbably been Iramplcd to death by a stampede 
 from above. On the 2ud August ilr. Webster 
 sugL^ested a heavy gale, because many years 
 before, after a heavy gale, " the beach was strewn 
 wili; dead pups " on North-East Point. 
 
 113. Certain facts as to those dead seals are to 
 be noted ; — 
 
 («.) The pups in 1B91 were found dead and 
 decayed on the 29th Jtily, and must have been 
 foiu'teen days dead. 
 
 {b.) Generally the jmps were found dead over 
 definite and often very liniit<'d areas, in groups 
 or patches. 
 
 (c.) The pup.* ;n any one place had evidently 
 .all died about the same date. 
 
 {(I.) The great majority were found dead doso 
 to the sea margin (see vol. ii, p. )• 
 
5S 
 
 141. The pups seen in such numbers on Tolstoi 
 rookery on the 29th July liad been dead at least 
 fourteen days. It is acknowledged that a seal 
 pup does not need to suekle for several days, tlie 
 cows have been known to be absent a week. 
 Wlieroforc, had these pups died because of tlie 
 deaths of their mothers, those must liave been 
 taken about the 11th July. 
 
 l-l.j. It is confidently assumed in the United 
 States' Case that if ever a cow "in milk" is 
 taken it necessarily involves the dcatli of a pup 
 by starvation. But in his evidence a boat-stoeror 
 states (p. 350) that— 
 
 " 111 ]'"ebru,;ry lSf'2 .... xve coinmcncud .sealing a.-i 
 .-oou 113 we got outside llie Cape [ ' ], ami captiireil 
 about, 270 ac'dh up a\mvj, ihe coast. Most of tlie seals 
 cauylit ^^•ere pregnant females, and when we would skin 
 tlieiii the milk -.voulil run oui nf them on deck." 
 
 These cows " in milk " had no pups on shore 
 to die of starvation. Agaui, cows in milk are 
 obtained (vol. ii, pp. 321, :537, and 318), very late 
 in the season, in the last days of August in tlio 
 Uuimak, tli(> 172nd, and the Akutan Passes, and 
 these cows were I'vidcntly " travelling " south, 
 and not about to return to any pups on the 
 Pri' yloff Islands, 
 
 i l(i. It is probable that seal pu))s, like the 
 young of all other r.;iimals, will suckle, if per- 
 mitted, far beyond the period when they couhl 
 gain tlieir own food, and that thus <?me seals are 
 seen to suckle so long as tlicy rnnain on the 
 islands. Certainly pups killed in Noveiul'.T have 
 been always found to he full of milk. IJnt as 
 was pointed out by y\\: 'Webstr-, this was in spito 
 of the fact that ihe cows had h: i the islands. Late 
 in October and early in November large pods of 
 pups remain on the islaiuls, but comparatively 
 few mothers, and certainly noi mothers for every 
 pup. 
 
 1 1". The analo,:;T of the hair-seal is apposite. 
 They are weaned at from tvvclve to fifteen days 
 after birth, and they are then plump and full 
 of "cream," bul I hey spontaneously remain on 
 the ice for some time after, faking no food what- 
 ever, and gradually consuming the cream and 
 their own fat, until, when they have become 
 quite lean, they take to the water to seek food. 
 
 1 IS. It lias already I)ecn shown that the eow.s 
 remain A'ithin the harems with their pups foi-, 
 perhaps, four weeks after birth. The cows after 
 
56 
 
 this commence to frequent the water, but tlie 
 absence of any excrement, an(' the fact that 
 the waters along the rookery fronts teem at this 
 period witli cows simply sporting in the water, 
 and that cod and other fish arc quite common 
 in the hnmedif.ie nelghhourhood, tend to show 
 that the cow does not as yet seek food when in 
 the water. Indeed, it seems certain that the 
 cow, Arhile actually uursini,' her pup, does not 
 leave tlu' immediate nelghhourhood of the 
 I'ookery, and that she remains in attendance 
 I'roni six to ci^'ht weeks, during which time, like 
 1 lie bulls and all other classes of seals, she ahstains 
 from food. Tn corrohoration of this is the general 
 opinion of all natives, wlio say that the cows do 
 not seek food at this season. The British Com- 
 missioners report that, in the case of two cows, 
 driven direct from the Cape Yushin rookery, 
 together with hulls and pups, and killed then 
 and there on the Gth Sei)tcmhcr, 1801, no traces 
 of food were found in any of the stomachs. 
 
 1 1!). I; — ould then appear to he certain that 
 tlio cows ..ifli jnips do not leave the rookeries, 
 or their imn^ediate niMghl)ourliood, and do not 
 make excursions to seek food until six or eight 
 weeks after the hirth of the pup, and by then it is 
 pr.'iliable tliat the pup, if it became necessary, 
 could maintain itself, or at all events would not 
 need fresh nourishment until such time came as 
 it could and would make its way to the water. 
 
 150. It is certain, however, that for a variety 
 of reasons cows would give over nursing, and 
 then very probably start for the deep sea to 
 rest and refresh before entering on the autumnal 
 migration. Among such reasons would he the 
 loss of the ])up, whether in a stampede or by 
 bulls (Igblin?,', or by its I'et.'ling itself wcani.'d, or 
 by its waiidei'ing away. Tln^ marked absence of 
 alTeclion I'or its olfspring noticeable in the seal 
 has already bciii stated, and it is quiti- jiossibl ' 
 that the cows may (iesert sickly pups. There 
 is tilso the ' vil i'tfect of over-driving, which both 
 wenlans and scares seals, and may well give 
 <'0\\s so severe a fright that they seek safety 
 in liight. Treasurj' A.gent Elliott, in his Report 
 !u" 1800, speaks of the severe strain over-driving 
 lias been in recent years, and especially on the 
 female seals. 
 
 151. It will 'ue ol)served, however, that many 
 witnesses speak of the emaciated condition of the 
 pup seals. Such a result could hardly be other- 
 
57 
 
 wise than looked for, if consideration is given to 
 the anomalous condition of the rookeries in 
 these latter days. Apart from the old natural 
 dangers of storms and surf and killer-whales, the 
 perpetual driving and re-driving scare and 
 physically injure a certain, prohahly a large, 
 proportion of the seals, and as the drives are now 
 made close along the rookeries, not only are 
 females more commonly driven up, but stampedes 
 are frequent. Again, the hulls have very much 
 larger harems, and the service will in many eases 
 not he so eU'octivc. 
 
 152. In the testimony put forward by the 
 United States, there occur very many allusions 
 to these dead pups. In the great majority of 
 cases the remark is made that the iueroase is 
 coincident with tliat of pelagic sealing. 
 
 153. Mr. Lord, for instance, says (p. 38) : — 
 
 " In 1880 I s.iw a large uuuilici' of ilead pups lyiiii; 
 aliout. I aecounl. for this by the killing of the 
 
 mothers by the open sea sealerK before the pups were 
 weaned." 
 
 But in no case does any record appear to have 
 been made at tlic time, or any report whatever 
 sent in at the time to the Treasury or the 
 Company. 
 
 154. The estimates for the numbei' seen iu 
 IfeOl range from 20,000 to 30,000 dead pups, 
 and the new feature is accounted for l)y ^U\ 
 Tratis, employe of the; lessees, who states 
 (p. 108) :_ 
 
 " I began Ui .see mure Mid more .lead pup.s on tlie 
 rookeries until, in 1891. the fleet of .sealing-.'ichooner.s 
 numbered nxire than lllO, anil the rookeries were coveicd 
 with (lead pups." 
 
 155. Taking tliis year, ISOl, the total [ulagic 
 catch as given in the Report of tlic United States' 
 Commissioners is (52,500. Of this total, the 
 Custom-house records show ihat ,000 were 
 secured outside JJehring Sea in the spring. Of 
 the remainder, at least ,000 were taken in 
 Asiatic waters, leaving ,000 only taken in 
 Heiiring Sea. 
 
 Moreover, the British schooners were wtu'u.-d 
 under the morfu* livcndi of that year, and either 
 did not enter Behriug Sea or returned to Victoria 
 before the cud .d' July. It is well aseerta.'iied 
 for that year that tlie actual Behriug Sea caich 
 was but small. 
 
 [818) Q 
 
58 
 
 156. Again, the dead pups found in 1891 on 
 Tolstoi and Lukannon and Gorbatoh were all 
 killed in July, most of them probably in the first 
 or sceond week in July, at a time when the 
 mothers for the most part were still in the harems, 
 and before the rookeries had become disorganized. 
 
 157. The final faet remains that, on the same 
 lookeries in 1892, yet more dead pups have been 
 found and photographed bofli by Mr. Macoun 
 and Professor Evermaiui. It was noticed that in 
 the various i)laces where found all the pups were 
 in the same; st;.ge of decomposition, and mot their 
 deaths about the same date. Antoine, a well- 
 known naiive on St. Paul, said in 1892 : — 
 
 " ThiTo iiri' more i^f them tliis year thnn Inst ; more than 
 I have ever seen liefure." 
 
 [Further evidence for 1892 coming from Canada.] 
 
 158. But in 1S92 there has been i)ractically 
 no pelagic sealing anywhere near the PribylofT 
 Islands. 
 
 [See now evidence, gathered in 1892.] 
 
 159. No further proof can be needed to show 
 that several causes may have and did contribute 
 to causing the deaths of the pups on the 
 rookeries, but that the killing of nursing mothers 
 1)y pelagic sealers is at most merely a contributory 
 cause, and that the main causes may be 
 enumerated as follows : — 
 
 1. Stampedes. 
 
 2. Bulls fighting. 
 
 3. Raids along the rookery fronts, causing 
 stampedes, as well as killing nursing mothers. 
 
 '4. Surf along the shore. 
 5. Desertion by mothers through scare, over- 
 driving, or sickness. 
 
 Protection and Preservation (pp. 219 to 2 ). 
 
 160. This portion of the United States' Case Pag« 219, 
 opens with the remarkable assertion that — 
 
 " the indiscriminate slaughter of seals in the waters of the 
 Pacific Ocean cannot fail to produce a result similar to 
 that observed in the Southern Ilemisiihere, where the fur- 
 seals have become practically extinct. 
 
 The inference here sought to be drawn is that 
 pelagic sealing, similar to that of the North 
 Pacific Ocean, brought about extinction of the 
 fur-seal in the Southern Hemisphere. 
 
59 
 
 101. As a matter of fact, the ('xtiiu-tioii of llin 
 Soutlicm fur-seal wan brought aliout eiilirdy liy 
 excessive slaughter on the breeding-places ; no 
 seals were (;ver taken away at sea. 
 
 It was the continuous unrcmittinf; -.laughter 
 on or close (o the breeding islands which brought 
 a1)out the extermination, and tliat alone. It was 
 then found that tlu^ (continued killing and con- 
 sequent continued disturbance of the rookeries 
 scared away to other resorts all the seals which 
 were not (mtircly killed. 
 
 1G2. On pp. 221 to 229 of tlie United States' 
 Case measures of protetitioii are cited as set up 
 in various IJritish Colonies, and quite truly is it 
 stated that — 
 
 ■•wherever fur-.senl.s breed in territory nver which Creal 
 IJriluin !ia.s control, the si.eciea hu.s received i.articulnr 
 prolectioii from iiKligeriiiiinate .sliiuijliter." 
 
 1C3. There is one significant omission, however, 
 in this connection. The New Zealand legislation 
 (juoted on p. 223 j.s made to cover a large ai'ca of 
 ocean. As a matter of fact which should hav(! 
 been cited, the Act is made to refer sj)eciallv ouly 
 to lands within that area. 
 
 Kil. Another significant omission is of the fact 
 that all legislative enactments of tlie kind which 
 extend outside territorial waters apply only to 
 British subjects and British vessels. When t:io 
 enactments were made to carry out the inter- 
 national arrangem(>nt made in regard to the Jan 
 -Alayen seal fisheries, the United St.ifes declined 
 to join on the plea of having no direct interest 
 in these fisheries, 
 
 105. Xonc of the States mentioned have pro- 
 tected fur-seal outside the ordinary limit of 
 1 marine league except by legislation affecting 
 only their own subjects. 
 
 100. Thus the assertion on j). 229 : 
 
 •'V.irious nations have deemed u necessary to adept 
 stringent regulations, not ouly in waters adj.icent to. hut 
 also at great .iistuncc' frnni. their respective laud houn- 
 daries " — 
 
 is absolutely without foundation unless there is 
 added — 
 
 " hy means of iuteruatioual ^.greement," or '■ over tlieir own 
 vessels and subjects." 
 
 107. The statement on p. 23U that— 
 •all nations and races in all ages have recognized the 
 necessity of aftording s\iHicient protection for tlie repro- 
 
m^ u«f wv^p**" 
 
 60 
 
 'Iiution am! ooiitimit 1 existence of nil uoiiual life useful 
 to human I icings" — 
 
 is true of most nations, with the notable exception 
 ot the United States. The extermination of the 
 tbc buffalf) because it was of usi- to the Red 
 Indians is a notorious instance of extermination. 
 
 1G8 In no countiy has the protection of ferec 
 nalura: useful to man been prosecuted for so long 
 or with such success as in Great Britain. 
 
 109. Deal with the Fishing Acta, pp. 231-237. 
 
 [For Couu.scl.] 
 
 170. Thus, the statement on p. 237 that it is an 
 established principle tli-.U any nation having a 
 peculiar interest in the continued existence of 
 animal life on the high .- is may adojjt such 
 measures as are essential to its preservation, 
 without limit as to the distance from land at 
 wliich suth measures may be enforced, is seen 
 to be absolutely unfounded and without any 
 warranty whatever. 
 
 171. The further contention that — 
 
 ■■ tin Alaskan se.ol In rJ istanda almost aloni- in U'iiig doniini 
 pu'lection " — 
 
 is equally without foundation, seeing that over 
 sinci' attention was fii'st directed to that "horil' 
 the Britisli Gnvenuncnt has jx^rsislently expressed 
 ;ind acted up t it-^ decision to sec those .seals 
 «!flie'ently protected. Indeed, the details giv('n 
 in the pni^es (2 -219) which follow, coiu-lusively 
 prove this strange assertion to be absolutely 
 witliout fouTidation. 
 
 17L. Thocnrnniunieations from naturalists havi' 
 already beeo dealt with, but notice must be taken 
 of the f|uotationoi\ p. 210, presumably indicating 
 Professor Huxley's opinion. The quc'ation is : — 
 
 " Tliat the In--! ii>iir.sf woulil U- tn pn.liibii tlir taking 
 I't fur-swUs anywlnro excop' on thf I'riliylofT lalnmls" 
 
 But there is the very signiiicant omission of the 
 ■words which follow in Profes--or Huxley's i<>tter 
 (vol. i, p. 4.12) :— 
 
 ll if i^uio 'teal that thi.s iilejil armngi'munt i> ini- 
 
 pi.ic tic'lili' " — 
 
 Avoids which can .scarcely l)e omitted if Profes.sor 
 Huxley's r.'.il opinion is to ]v made known. 
 
 IT'i. Dr. Merii.im's Ciix'ulat letter to naturalists 
 is Mil r.r [iiirti s'litement, on which some, but not 
 all, have given their opinions. Professors Huxley 
 
61 
 
 and Snlvatlori precisely agree with the British 
 Commissioners' recommendations, and others 
 merely content themselves l)y saying that pro- 
 tective measures should be taken, and must be 
 international in character. 
 
 The furriers and buyers of skins all ask fof 
 regulation of the pelagic industry. Great 
 Britain also suggests regulations in the interests 
 of that industry. 
 
 174. The vjmarkable statemiMit is maih on 
 p. 250:— 
 
 " Adfiirc/fi/ Ihc iiuijiirllij iif Ihmc uluisr intciri/.') woit/il Ik 
 aJI'erlcil hij an ubi^oliifi jiiiihihi/lnn of uneii acn sruHwi ... . 
 ii-Ui hi foiiihl alfiiini()(j Hir nwl nf limited jirnhihiliuii" 
 
 It is not i>xplaiue(l why tho.-,e interested in and 
 deriving profit from pelagic sealing, whether 
 American citizens or British subjects, are quietly 
 to surrender all fo others, or, as Professoi- TTuxley 
 writes : — 
 
 1 7'). On p. 25:5 the alternatives to total prohibi- 
 tion are set (iu( as four separate remedies : the\ 
 are dealt wifli and iHscaideil as beini; eaeii iii- 
 sulTieient in itscll. Xo iu)(iee whatever is taken 
 of the obvious alt(!ruative of eonibining all tliisc 
 remedies in one practical .sebenie, wliicli would 
 provide a practical and sufricient control. 
 
 17f). As is set out in the i>ci)ort of the Hritish 
 Commissioners, each of thesi' measures can be 
 made effective in its own province. Ihus, aeio't 
 season can be made to stay the taking of gravid 
 females. The prohibition of lire-a-nis would 
 prevent scarinu; and loss of seals ald'i' being hit. 
 The (juestioii of closing an area of sea to sealing- 
 vxNsels — whatever the size of the ari>a or zone- 
 around til" islands must infallibly, in its dcree. 
 limit the total cateli by the sehooiirrs, and save 
 the killimr of mothers a<'tually nursing their 
 young. 
 
 177. 'I'll!' I'onlcntinn advanced bv mauv autho- 
 
 [818] 
 
 B 
 
---'f?w^'^»^.i lijin- ■ T«n" 
 
62 
 
 ritics that practically to protect thi^ fuv-soal 
 measures must extend over the whole of the 
 North Pacific is without doubt correct. But the 
 whole of the North Pacific includes the PribylolV 
 Fskutls. That tliese measures should (exterminate 
 ont' l)i-aneh of the industry is not t(j he thought 
 ijf, and I'ould not he agreed to by any of the 
 nations interested in that branch. 
 
 178. Tin; establishment of a protected area or 
 zone around the islands would without doubt 
 enable eruizcis, with far greater ease, to check 
 raiding on shore, and would also enable them to 
 ^eizc vessels scaling anywhere along the rookery 
 fronts. The waters are so shallow that vessels 
 habitually anchor with a kedgc and warp in calm 
 weather, and when seized they could be so 
 ancliored even in thick fogs until their position 
 could be ascertained. As an au.xiliary measure a 
 zone would be of tlic greatest service. 
 
 179. The conclusion arrived at on p. 261 — l'»ge 264. 
 
 " Til- i-rsdlt, there/on, Cj Ihi.-i cuimthmtion is that, if it ii 
 dumcJ luitmarii or npidiciit from a ■prudical ur nmi- 
 inerciul jioiiil nf i'ieiv to presera the seats of tlte Soitli. 
 P't'lji^ find Bthiinj Sea, pditgic scalimj in tverij form and 
 <n all 'vt'rs must he nhsolutettj prohit'itcd at nil tiiaat " — 
 
 is totidem vrbis the plea advanced by the; 
 Lessee Company. It calmly ignores altogether 
 the rights and the commercial interests of all 
 nations to take fur-seal in the open ocean. It is 
 a conclusion for which there is no warranty in 
 the facts and cireumstanccs of seal life. The 
 seals may he extirpated, as they were in the 
 Southern Hemisplicre, and as they nearly were 
 on the Pribyloif Islands in 1800, and again in 
 1830, altogether in the absence of any pelagic 
 sealing whatever. Pelagic sealing can easily be 
 so regulated as to rcmove all risk of extermina- 
 tion or even injury by its means. 
 
 The Senl'skin Industry (pp. 284 to 286). 
 
 180. It is pointed out witli great, tnith in the Page 2G4. 
 United State?' Case that the commercial value ui 
 the fur-seal is the rosidt of the woi'k of the 
 Al.iska Commercial Company after the year 
 1870. Before that period, and ever since the 
 fur-pcai began to he rhascd for its fur, in the 
 
(J3 
 
 raicUllc of last century, the chief mai'kct was in 
 Cliinn. It was hy the skilful actiou of C. ^l. 
 Lampson and Co. ihat the fur of the fur-sea! 
 '«'enm<' an article of fashion in general use. 
 The couseqiience is that iiriees have risen fri.ni 
 2 to 14i dollars tlio skin. ]?ut for many years 
 past all resorts of the fur-seal have heen di'awn 
 upon, and especially lias there heen a natural 
 development of the sealing in the sea along the 
 const of North America, whieli has heen the 
 normal work of Ihe n.'sident Indians from time 
 immemorial. 
 
 181. On p. 200 we are told— 
 
 "Tht! destruction of thu Ahiskan iu'rd meiins tlic iiiiiiilii- 
 liitiim of tlis sea)-skiii imUntry (if tin.' Wdild." 
 
 Sucli a result would he greatly deplored, although, 
 as Professor Huxley says in his deposition pi-e- 
 jiarod for th(; American Governminit^ 
 
 ■'Munkiiid will nut sidlLM- iinali it' llu' ladii's an- oMiged 
 t(i d" without .si;ul-<kiii jacki'ts ; and tin' IVaoliou of the. 
 Kn^lisli, t'anadian, and Anu'riuan iiii])ulatioii whirli livos 
 "U till! si'al-skiii iiidu-'iy will li>' nu worse nlV tlian tlm 
 vastly '^ri'ator niultiludi' wlm liavu had to sudor I'V tho 
 vai/arios of fasliiou tinios out of luunlicr." 
 
 182. At the same time it must he rememb(H'ed 
 that, according to all experience in otho' times 
 and ])lac(.'s, if the seals frequenting the Pribylolf 
 Islands are too much disttirhed and harassed and 
 killed in their present hn-eding - places tiie 
 survivors will for a certainty seek other .shores. 
 
 1S3. The United States' Case is particular to 
 point out (pj). 26i)- ct .wy.) tlie loss to tho 
 various countries should the fur-seal industry hn 
 put an end to. 
 
 1st. Jt seems somewhat supertluou.s to indicate, 
 as is done on pp. 269 and 270 in detail, that 
 the United States' Government levies a tax, 
 amounting in full years to 2()0,0()()/. per annum, on 
 the industry in the breeding-islands, and forces 
 Ajiicrican buyers of furs to contribute yet another 
 75,000/. per annum in import duties on the 
 finished skins. In addition to this, somethim,' like 
 .")00,000/. is annually made by tJio.se who deal in 
 or dress the skins in the United States. But this 
 is purely a national allair of the United States, 
 and has no place whatever in the discussion of 
 rights of taking the raw malerial from an inter- 
 national or natural history point of view. 
 
64 
 
 IS.j. Scfircelj- move to the point is tlie argu- 
 ment (p. 271) lliaf tlic present less(>cs of tlie 
 island are put to a cost (including a tax of 
 dol. G2J e. per skin) of 13 dol. 25 c. before 
 their skins reach market, whereas the ]i(dagic 
 scalers, whether of the United States or Canada, 
 pay no tax whatever. That is purely a fiscal and 
 not an industrial or seicntific question. 
 
 186. It is also shown that the "annual loss to 
 Great Britain in case the lu-rd is eoiumcrcially 
 exterminated is 910,000/." I5ut uo notic(! is 
 taken of the fact that all that the iiulustry in 
 tireat ]5ritain asks for is a regular and full 
 supply of skins. Where they come from or 
 are obtained matters not to Great Uritain, and 
 if by excessive slaughter the seals were cxtir- 
 pa(. d on the PribylofT Islands no doubt supplies 
 would be forthcoming from other old or noM 
 roi liveries. 
 
 1S7. The loss to France hy the destruction of 
 the herd is based on the sam(> fallacy, viz., that 
 the excessive slaughter, and consequent dearth 
 on the PribylolT Islands, means the extermination 
 of the herd everywhere, and not (as would 
 undoubtedly be the ease) its change to other 
 breeding-grounds. 
 
 188. France (p. 273) has no need to fear any 
 dearth in the supply of skins so long as she and 
 other nations maintain inviolate the right of 
 lishery on the high seas. France has shown herself 
 properly jealous even of search of vessels by a 
 foreign man-of-war on suspicion of being engaged 
 in the Slave Trade — a business repugnant to 
 and denounced by all nations. But France has 
 always stringently upheld fhi^ free access to the 
 high seas, and will not brook interference merelv 
 in defence of the financial interests of a i)rivate 
 Company seeking to establish a monopoly. 
 
 IbU. On p. 274, tlu- total ar.nual loss to the 
 civilized world by tlu^ " destruction " of this " seal 
 lierd ' is estimated to amount to over 1,000,000 fr. 
 JJut I Ids and numerous similar remarks and 
 criU'ulations are all made on the unfounded 
 assumption that if the Pribylofl: herd were killed 
 oli it would be impossible to ])rocure seals from 
 anywlure else. 
 
 1!)0. That a constant and regular supply of 
 se:il-skius should be available for the trade goes 
 witb.iut saying (p. 275), but such a supjdy can 
 well bo kei)t up provided that nmtual restrictions 
 
66 
 
 aro enjoined over all sourcL>s . f supply of tlio 
 seals-kins. 
 
 191. The Tribunal will notiee that nof one 
 woi-d is said in the United States' Case in tin.- 
 event of i.ela!,'ic soalinfj boin- annihilated, the 
 United States would in any way pledge them- 
 selves to .,'uarantee a continuous supply of seals 
 from the IVibylolf Islands, or any elVective limi- 
 tative on the number of seals there killed. 
 
 102. Pages 275 to 285 of the United States- 
 Case are devoted to an endeavour to depneiate 
 the initial value of the profits and prospeets of 
 pelagic sealing. 
 
 193. We are told that many of th(,. vessels are 
 old; and then the industry (p. 277) is compared 
 with — 
 
 " the [iritish rMpiUil (1,000,000/.) invested in the sonl-skiii 
 '"liii.'^tiy, \v\nch lallei- miisl lie al.;iiKlo!u>cl if 
 acnUni; contiiiMLy." 
 
 l>elii,L,'ic 
 
 P.ig. 281 
 
 lot. As a matter of fact, these respective 
 industries may he thus tabulated :— 
 
 Capital 
 employed. 
 
 (".) I'nicuriiif,' mw inateriiil— 
 
 • -'apital in use on I'l-ibvlolf Ulan<h 
 Ditti) oil sfhuonci-.s (U'niled States' 
 and Jiritisli) 
 
 (l>.) Dressing raw material and saU — 
 Capital. United Kiiindoni 
 Ditto, United .States 
 
 ! N'umbir of 
 I Men 
 eiiipluyed. 
 
 £ 
 1 -'0,()(i() 
 IfiO.OOO 
 
 I'.tO.OOO 
 100.000 
 
 nio 
 
 1,100 
 
 3,000 
 3,360 
 
 !»•>. It is pointed out (p. 2S1) that the number 
 ol persons emi)l()yed in the manufacture of se-il- 
 skhis in the United States is " over three times as 
 many «.v ,rerr enguijed in pelagic sealimj." It 
 should be added that it is twelve times as many 
 as are employed on the PribylofF Islands, although 
 It IS impossible to see what bearing such°a 
 statement can have- on any tiuestion referred to 
 the Tribunal. 
 
 196. The statement (p. ) ti.at the vessels, 
 guns, and boats can be used in any other employ- 
 ment is ..qually true of the men, steamers, .-tnd 
 houses of the PribylofT industry, in both eases 
 "•.th the proviso, « if tlu>y can discover other 
 employment."' 
 
 197. The United States' Government are at 
 
66 
 
 mucb pains to show (pp. 282, 283) that pelagic 
 sealing is a speculative and altogether profltleas 
 undertaking. Then follows another instance of 
 theoretic elaboration, which again leads to 
 curious results. The assumption is made, " if 
 the men were paid 30 dollars it-month nu the 
 average " — and an elaborate ealeulntion is raised 
 on this purely hypothetical assumption; as a 
 matter of fact payment is by result and per skin 
 collected. Similar catena' of baseless assump- 
 tions are then indiilged in until it is shown that 
 jjclagie sealing does not yield any prnlUs. 
 
 If this be so, pelagic sealing will very speedily 
 die of inanition, for Hritisli subjects arc not in 
 the habit of continuing to work in undertakings 
 which no longer pay. 
 
 198. On p. 28t tlie very remarkable and in- 
 scnitjiblo argument is advanced that those who 
 .supjdy the ca])ital for pelagic scaling belong 
 to diiTercnt classes in life; and it is added 
 (p. 285) :— 
 
 " The people v;ho undertake this venture arc as varied in 
 Uttir orciipatimiH as the purchasers of lottery tickets." 
 
 According to the United States' evidence, 
 which gives an elaborate list of the oceu2)ations 
 of persons having shares in schooners, the in- 
 dustry is supported by a wide section of the 
 IJublic. Pr(HUscly the same account can bo 
 made of the shareholders in the North Americau 
 Commercial Company, not one of whom is a fur- 
 seal hunter. 
 
 109. Thus the United States build up their 
 plea for "protecting and preserving the world's chief 
 supply of fur-seal sldnn," quite oblivious of the 
 fact that the Tribunal will deal merely with 
 two methods of supplying a portion only of the 
 raw material used in that .rrcat industry, and 
 that both methods, if carsicd to excess, must 
 result in the destruction of one present source of 
 supply, but both can be so controlled and regu- 
 lated as to insure a permanent continuance of the 
 supply. 
 
 200. There is no reason why one class of pro- 
 ducers of the raw material should surrender their 
 industrial rights and profits (however small) in 
 order that another competing class may pay an 
 c.vorbitant tax to some one else's Government, 
 aud look for profits besides. 
 
 201. The raw material is produced aud pi- ^ 
 in market at an original cost of 3 dollars pci ^:in. 
 
67 
 
 TIic shore sealors liiiv(! to pay, in addition, a 
 Government lax ol" aljout 10 dollars, from which 
 the j)elngi(! sealers are exempt. 
 
 Tiie ricjlit. eomimrison is between the capital 
 ii'vested and wa^es earned in the respective 
 . ranchoa of the industry. The capital employed 
 on the islands does not exceed 50,000/. That 
 eniployc'd in the schooners probably reaches 
 120,000/. 
 
 2i)'J. It is nolrwortby that tlie United States' 
 Case omits all notice oi' tlie I'aet that nearly one- 
 half of the pelaj,'ie industry is carried on in 
 I'liited States' bottoms. In 1801, of the vessels 
 eiiLi;ai,'cd, fifty were JJritish, and IV)rty-two b(!- 
 loii^'ed to United States' citizens. 
 
 Dnmnijes riaimcd (pp. 280-201). 
 
 203. The United States make a statement hero 
 of daraa,i,'es under the Modus Vivendi Convention 
 of the 18th April, 1802, wher.'as the reference 
 to the Arbitrators under Article VIII of the 
 Arbitration Convention of the 29th Februaiy, 
 1802, is confined to questions of fact (not of 
 amounts) under the ;»eneral claims presented for 
 the decision of the Arbitrators. 
 
 (A.)— Thu I'nitofl States' rroposition* 
 
 IV.-,SUMMA11Y or REJOINDER Oi? 
 GREAT liRITAIN. 
 
 204. It will be convenient, in summing uj) the 
 rejoinder by Great Britain to Part II of tho 
 United States' Case, to follow the order of tho 
 conclusions set out on pp. 295 to ;503 in so far as 
 these apply. 
 
 205. Part II (A) covers four of the nine pro- 
 positions upheld by the United States (pp. 2!)5- 
 298) ; (B) is the foundation for the two question.? 
 set out on p. 200, and (C) of the four linal claims 
 l)ut forward on ])p. 300 and 301, as well as of 
 the final prayer (D), with wbicli the Case con- 
 cludes on p. 303. 
 
 20G. The four propositions (pp. 295-298) may- 
 be summarized as follows :— 
 
 1st. That the Alaska fur-seal is a domesticatetl 
 product of a portion ci United States' territory. 
 

68 
 
 2ncl. That its present existence is due wholly 
 to thf pi-otcctiou ot the United States, and that 
 the serious decrease in numhev; i'; due wholly to 
 pelagic sealing. 
 
 ;!rd. That pelagic sealing i> illciritimate, iiu- 
 l)ropcr, wjistcful, and wholly destructive of tlie 
 scaling industry. 
 
 9th. That the profits, if any, of pelagic scaling 
 arc out of all jii-oportion to tlic dcslruction of the 
 scal-skin industries in various countries. 
 
 207. In regard to the fir'^t jiroposition, (he P^jrc J95 
 foregoing evidence and stat' nients eoiiclusively 
 prove that the Ala.skan fur-seal, helonging to the 
 Olmidee of the family PinniprcHa, is essentially a 
 pelagic animal which resorts to the land for a 
 brief j)oriod of eacii year for purposes of proj)aga- 
 lioi', ;iiid cannot exist without access for the 
 ri'n::iiniug and greater porti')n of the year to the 
 deep .sea for fwHl and for suitahle climate; that 
 it is not, and has not been. domestic;ited, for it 
 cannot he herded or fed in sutricient nuniliers hy 
 man; that while its limhs, designed fi.i locomo- 
 tion in tile water, do not enable it to escape from 
 man on land, yet its movements at sea are 
 iincDntrolled and uneontrotlahle by man; th;it it 
 is an animul whicii produces :i fur .at jircsent in 
 fashion and valuable to mankind; th:U the 
 fur-i-cal found in the North I'acilic presents no 
 .'^pcciHc or generic dilTercnces, and is known to 
 land in many widely dilTeient l(K'alili('s at the 
 present day; that its course, when absent front 
 the breedini;- islands, is on the hiuli seas, 
 nltogetlu'r outside territorial watev-, and it 
 possesses all the legal attributes of a free- 
 .swjnimiug ti.sli, and that at cert.ain seasons it 
 aiipitiaclus aiul feeds olT the coasts of Hii'ish 
 Columbia, oi the United 8ta1e>. <ir the .Vsiatie 
 tenitorics of Russia, and of .lajtan ; that no dis- 
 tinction can lie drawn betWv-en .any .separate 
 herds of these seals; that althougli it m;iy 1m 
 the case ihat thf)se seals which at present r«'sort 
 at the brciHling season to ib( I'rihylolf Isl.inds 
 spend the winter months om the eastern side of 
 th: North i'aeilie, while fho^e resorting to the 
 Commander Islands spend the eiirres|)on(!ing 
 months iin the westt'rn side of the same ocean 
 (or in the vicinity of the eouNts of JSritisli 
 Columbia and Japan respiTfively), that the 
 scnh- pertaining to these two mi trrat ion -tracts [tie 
 ol the sann- kinil and are not >.peci(ically dis- 
 tinguishable; tiiat connection and interchange 
 
69 
 
 Pag3 396 
 Pufti 30S. 
 
 exists bctwoou flic several breeding-places, and 
 that !! similar or correlative cliange eaii lie traeed 
 ill ri'gard to the condition of tlio ro(,kcrics from 
 year to year on the two princiiial tjroups of 
 breediny-islands ; while seals brei-dini; cls(;ulieiv, 
 
 H-iict'ier on the Kurile Islands, l!ol)l Island, 
 
 or at various isolated points to tJic south of 
 Hehring Sea alonj,' the coast of North America, 
 arc also identical in kind and appearance; (iiat 
 ill tile past it has been proved that the seals, if 
 harasM>d and distiirhcd in one lireeding-place, 
 seek some other; that, the identity of an indi- 
 vidual seal can be established by inarkin;,' the 
 individual, but that it is absolutely imiio-^-il-le 
 to identify the place where begotten, and timt 
 to identil'y by place of birth, as has been prcved 
 by actual experiments, does not prove that (he 
 seal will ever ri>turn to the same breeding- 
 ground; that while the seal has a fixed inten- 
 tion (o return somewhere to breed in the 
 summer, it has an ciiually fixed intention to 
 return during the longer migration, in the 
 autumn, winter, and spring, to its regular 
 feeding-grounds iu the open sea; that the 
 Alaska fur-seal comes under the category of 
 fn-n tuilura, and while it uses at present 
 United States', Hnssiaii, or .lapanes(' territory 
 (or briH-'ding purposes, it uses l!ic high seas llir 
 feeding |)urposes and as its winter home. 
 
 2(»8. In regard ti> the .v-cofK/ i,injmsitii)ii, it is 
 slidwn that, under United States' manaircment, 
 
 H innrkici iliuiiiiutinn in nunilx-r of wais cm uml liai.i- 
 tunllv R'^iirtiiiy ti. the I'riliyloir Idhu'ds 1ms t.ikiii plaiv . 
 timl II hrts Wen nniudativr in .•(lect, iiml that it is tl|,. 
 nsiill (if rxiessivp kilhiit; liy man ;" 
 
 Thai the dates and facts of the decrease prove 
 it til have commenced as loni; ai;o as 1SS(), and 
 to luive been in tu-tivc and cumulative opci-ation 
 w 18Sf(, nnd in IH'^O to ba\e already reduced to 
 one-half the supply of killahlc seals .available for 
 slaughter; that the killing of seals at sea, by 
 which, under the present sysitcin, many females 
 are ttikcn, wiis not of material importance until 
 the yeju-s lsS(t and 1>'S7, in which years for the 
 lir«it tinu; suhstaiitial numbers 'if sciN were 
 taken in the Hehring Sea or within ever.il 
 bnndrcrl mih-s of the brcediug-islnnils, and that 
 in sii far as this eateh was in bnciling females 
 the results in the supply of billable males (! to 
 (1 years old) or bicedini? f<>males (at least ■'{ years 
 
 [818J 
 
 T 
 
ttn: ^ 
 
old) on the Pribyloff Islands could not liavo 
 liceomc appnrcnt until the years IRSO and 1800 ; 
 that pelagic scaling has never hccn practised 
 " with otlier herds," and that the one cause of the 
 commercial extermination of the fur-seal in otiior 
 places or at other time is well known to have 
 heen initirely caused liy excessive and indis- 
 criminate slaughter on shore ; that on the 
 PribylolT Islands it liad never heen found practi- 
 cal)l(! to lake more than an averas^e of liO.OOO 
 seals in the year until the islands passed to the 
 United Stales, when the quota was at once raised 
 to the very hii,'h limit of 100,000, and that this 
 severe drain u|)on the seal life, actually averaiifinsj; 
 lOtjOOO a-year for twenty years, is the main and 
 sufficient cause for the present dearth of seals, and 
 that the additifi?ial numbers taken by the pelagic 
 scalers will in the future be a contributory cause. 
 
 200. In rei,'ard to the third jtrnpnxilion, Page 897. 
 it has been shown that pelagic sealing is 
 essentially legitimate, l)cing (1) a development 
 of the uiuloubted rights of the aboriginal inhabi- 
 tants of the coasts of North Anu-rica, exercised 
 by them to their great profit and advancement ; 
 and (2) an (>xcrcise of tin; equally undoubted 
 rights of various nationalities to the usu^ and 
 /met us of the high seas ; that tlu' barbarous, 
 imi)roper, and wasteful attributes of pelagic 
 sealing have been gravely exaggerated, and can be 
 easily abated and removed. That if conducted 
 under sensible restrictions, which are asked ftn- 
 by the pelagic sealers themselves, pelagic sealin;;' 
 can be carried on so as to yield a steady and 
 reliable supply of seal-skins, and aid to liuild up 
 and preserve the ;;rcat industry of which it is an 
 integral [lortion; but that lu) restrictions at sea, 
 not even the absolute prohibition of pelagic 
 sealing, could insure the preservation of the seals 
 unless adequate limitations are also imposed on 
 the breeiling-islands, 
 
 •JIO. In reference to the remaininrj iiroimsilion, Ptgp'jSBo 
 the industry of jiela^'ic sealing, if so unproiitable 
 as tliere stated, will >.i»on come to an end so far 
 as British -.n • t-. ai-e concerned; but in eom- 
 pai'ison with tlif mily other industry of proeuring 
 seal-skins, viz., that of the lessees of the breeding- 
 i^'ands, it cmjdoys twice as much ca|iit«l and 
 provides a livelihood for 1,100 white Jiu'n, and 
 ill! live times as many natives as arc employed on 
 the I'ribylolT Islands. 
 
 In reirard to the lemaining statement thai ihe 
 
 (E 
 
71 
 
 (R ) — Till' United Slates' questions 
 
 Page 299. 
 
 I'u^r 299. 
 
 (C)— Fcmr tiiiiil chiiiin 
 
 Psje 300. 
 
 i'agf SOU. 
 
 profits of pclaj^ic soaliug are out of all pro- 
 portion to the destruction ol' the seal-skin 
 industries in various eountries, ii lias heen shown 
 that ])elagie sealiny;, properly controlled, will not 
 destroy the supply of seals, eypeeially if the 
 eorrcspondini; industry on shore is jilaead under 
 equivalent limitations. 
 
 L'll . The two conehidini^ (jueslions propounded 
 by the I'nited States may lie replied to as 
 follows :— 
 
 In rejily to the first of the two, viz., whether 
 the United States nuist submit to the destrtietion 
 by foreigners of one of their national industries, 
 the reply is that the "foreigner" equally resents 
 the destrui'tion of his international industry by 
 excessive slaughter on the United Slates' islands, 
 but is willing 1o agrei' to mutual concessions 
 securing tiie preservation to both of the industry 
 as a whole. 
 
 In reply to the second of these questions, 
 viz., whether international arrangements should 
 not be made to avct such a eatastrojihe, the 
 reply is that Great Britain is and always has been 
 quite willing to enter into the iieeessaiy inter- 
 national iirrangements to aehievt! the above 
 results. 
 
 '2'. \ I'd i]i,' four Jiiial clnims advanced by the 
 rnited States the following rejoinders are made 
 by the Mrilish Government: — 
 
 121. To \lir Jiixt claim it is replied: that in 
 view of the facts and cireumstanees established 
 by the evidence, the I'uited States neither has, 
 nor can have, any projierty in an Alaskan se:il 
 herd, seeing that the fur-seals of these regions arc 
 inhabiianls of the deep sea; but that those who 
 liav<' till' riglit coninion to ,ill nations to ca|)ture 
 these sea's have a joint com|)laint against Inc 
 United States I'm' having permitted that excessive 
 slaughter of the scUs while tcnipornrily ashore 
 for breeding jjurjioses on the I'ribylolV Islands, 
 which is the main cause of the present threatening 
 dearth of seals. The destrnetion of the iiiilustry 
 is not in (jiiestion jirovided nmtual measures be 
 adopted for the proper control rif ;il| methods of 
 taking the seal whether on sluu'c or at sea. 
 
 'l\i). To the scioml ilaini it is replied: that 
 Great Britain has for herself and for h-i- people ,ui 
 ii.tciesf, .lii iiulustry, ;ui(l ,i eoiiiMiei<'e derived from 
 the legitimate and proper use of the pioduee of 
 the seals of the North i'aeitie which it is entitled 
 to protect against destruction for the nieiv sake 
 [flH] U 
 
78 
 
 ol' f('iniK)rary !,'aiii; that these its iiitcrosfs arc to 
 lie ciijdvrd on the hi!,'li sens, and that all nations 
 ail- j>rnj)crly jeahjiis of their acknowledged 
 eomnion rights to tiie mtus and /ructiis of 
 the o|ien ocean, and will never eoneede to any 
 one nation the light to stop the exereise of any 
 sueli lomnion rights as it may eoneeivc to he 
 injurions to some one of its doniestie industries. 
 
 21 !•. To the third claim it is replied; that Page SOO. 
 I'lUssia, the United States, and .Japan have the 
 l)o\ver and the duty of preserving tlie fur-seal 
 during its tenijioraiy sojourn on shore, hnt that 
 mankind has eoniUion rights on the open oeean, 
 including right of eapture of tlie fur-seal, ^vllile 
 in its proper element, and of these riglits (ireat 
 Hritain is, in this ease, in a sense the guardian or 
 trustee for other nations, and they arc rights 
 whieJi these nations will he unwilling to sur- 
 render for the >ol.' l)enetit of a single Com- 
 mercial Company. 
 
 •215. To the/ou)7Ar/(/iw, that the extermination Page 301. 
 of the seals can only he prevented hy the aholi- 
 tion of pelagic sealing, it is replied that in all 
 ])revious eases of eommereial extermination, 
 slaughter on shore has heen the only cause, and 
 I hat th(! destruction of the industries involved in 
 this ease can i-eadily ho prevented hy timely 
 intematiniial an-angc^nents covering all sources 
 of supply of the Kiw material — the seal-skin — 
 whether on shore or at sea. 
 
 2IG. rt is therefore contended on tlie ])art of 
 Great Britain that — while, for the purpose of pre- 
 servation of the fur-seal, special responsihilities 
 undouhtedly devolve upon the Powers luider whoso 
 territorial jurisdiction the principal hreeding- 
 islands of the fur>ieal are included, hecause th(>se 
 J'ow( I's.hy an injudicious or excessive exercise of 
 their rights, might seriously injure the u;eneral 
 interests involved in the fur-seal tlshery — no 
 limitation of, or interference with, the right 
 of killing the fur-seals upon the high seas can ho 
 \i\A\y or properly asked for hy these J'owers, or 
 either of them, without a corresponding olTer and 
 stipulated limitation of the killing of seals upon 
 thi' hreeding-islaiids and in the adjacent territorial 
 waters. 
 
 That the demand for such limitation or inter- 
 ference with the seal lisliery has, -io far, liecn 
 made only on the part of and in the exclusive 
 interests of the lessees of tht> United .States on 
 the rribyloil' Islands; and that evi-n if the 
 
73 
 
 nii'thods of I'diitml and restriction wliiili :iri- 
 ri-portfd to liiivr lic.-ii cxcrci-scd upon tlic 1)n<iliiii,'. 
 islands Jiavf licivtoforr hcun strictly and inii)ar- 
 tiiilly iMilorccd, witlioiit sonic s|iccilic i:nanntci« 
 "f'tlic continnod rxi-rcisc of snch .'ontn.l, anil of 
 adcijiiMt.' rcdnction of nnnihrrs taken, iu< curtnil- 
 niont ..r i.'.!ncral ri^'hts npon tlir liiirh seas can Imi 
 justified. 
 
 (). H.-R 
 Octnbir M, ISWi.