IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) ^ '/■ f/.. fe /; »^ 62d GoNc 1st Best A/W 99' L/5 / PRES CoUectiorv r A Conven emmeni to arbit ments c waters i March 8, If on Foreig orderpd t^ March 9, 3 To the Set I herev .signed at ernments to arbitra iiients coi waters of fur seal ii the citizei seal in, oi The COI to the Be: initted wi EXBOU The Ui United K vide for « tween the of the Ui also the ] ■Mi 62d OoNOBESS, ) SENATE. ( Ex. Doc. ItA Sestion, ) \ No. 65. MESSAGE FROM THX PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, TRANSHITTINO r March 8, 1892. — Bead; Conyenticn read the first time and referred to the Committee on Foreign Kelaiions, and, together with the message and accompauyiug papers, ordered to be printed in confidence for the use of the Senate. Mabch 9, 1892. — ^Iigunction of secrecy removed, and, with the accompanying cor- respondenoe, ordered to be printed. To the Senate: I herewith transmit, with a view to its ratification, a convention signed at Wa8hingt the cas he other If, howi he evidei hirty daj five uotic lelivery o ;uch addi he three If in tl (pecifled i session, w )arty thi hereof; s ors, to p: 18 eviden liter deli )e delive brty dayi It shall he expir; )n both 8 o the Ag md refer nther pai M'gumeni Hucidati( lent or a her country to, the said 18 involved", se have ap- k O. Blaine, Britain and IT Majesty's ited States: ipective full re agreed to nent of the iity concern- bers of Beh- r-seal in, or the dtizens r-seal in, or a tribunal jhall be ap- e named by >y Her Bri- 3h Republic es to name 1 name one : requested )e jurists of ly or either of the said e President sellency the ng of Italy, «e may be, person to ' originally hs after re- ties of Hif l^esty the S^orway, to or to fill a mt shall be High Con after the all proceed s that have BERING SEA. 8 )een or shall be laid before'tliera aw herein provided on the part of the Governments of the United States and Her Britannic Ma-jesty re8i)ec- tively. All questions t'onsidered by the tribunal, including, tlie final decision, shall be determined by a majority of all the Arbitrators. Each of the High C/ontracting Parties shall also name one person to [ittend the tribunal as its Agent to represent it generally in all matters connected with the arbitration. Article III. The printed case of each of the two parties, accompanied by the docu- ments, the official correspondence, and other evidence on wliich each elies, shall be delivered in duplicate to each of the Arbitrators and to he Agent of the other party as soon as may be after the appointment of :he members of the tribunal, but within a period not exceeding three lonths from the date of the excliange of the ratiUcations of this treaty. Article IV. I Within three months after the delivery on both sides of the printed ^.ase, either party may, in like manner deliver in duplicate to each of he said Arbitrators, and to the Agent of the other party, a counter !ase, and additional documents, correspondence, and evidence, in reply o the case, documents, correspondence, and evidence so presented by lie other party. If, however, in consequence of the distance of the place from which he evidence to be presented is to be procured, either party shall, within liirty days after the receipt by its agent of the case of tlie other party, live notice to the other party that it requires additional time for the lelivery of such counter case, dociuuents, correspondence and evidence, uich additional time so indicated, but not exceeding sixty days beyond he three months in this Article provided, shall be allowed. If in the case submitted to the Arbitrators either party shall have ipecifled or alluded to any report or document in its own exclusive pos- iession, without annexing a copy, such party shall be bound, if the other )arty thinks proper to apply for it, to furnish that party with a copy hereof; and either party may call upon the other, through the Arbitra- ors, to produce the originals or certifieil copies of any papers adduced IS evidence, giving in each instaiice notice thersof within thirty days liter delivery of the case; and the original or copy so requested shall )e delivered as soon as may be and within a period not exceeding brty days after receipt of notice. Article V. It shall be the duty of the Agent of each party, within one month after lie expiration of the time limited for the delivery of the counter case )n both sides, to deliver in duplicata to each of the said Arbitrators and o the Agent of the other party a printed argument showing the points uid referring to the evidence upon which his Government relies, and ither party may also support the same before the Arbitrators by oral 11 gument of counsel; and the Arbitrators may, if they desire further 'lucidation with regard to any iwint, require a written or printed state- neut or argument, or oral argument by counsel, upon it; but in such c»ii>e 173549 4 BERING SEA. the other party shall be entitled to reply either orally or in writing, as the case may be. Abtiolb VI. In deciding the matters submitted to the Arbitrators, it is agreed that the following five points shall be submitted to them, in order that their award shall embrace a distinct decision upon each of said five points, to wit: 1. What exclusive juri.sdiction in the sea now known as the Behring's Sea, and what exclusive rights in tlie seal flsheries therein, did Bussia assert and exercise prior and up to the time of the cession of Alaska to the United States? 2. How far were these claims of jurisdiction as to the seal flsheries recognized and conceded by Great Britain? 3. Was the body of wat-er now known as the Behring's Sea included in the phrase " Psicific Ocean," as used in the Treaty of 1825 between Great Britain and Russia; and whjit rights, if any, in the Behring's Sea were lield and exclusively exercised by Russia after said Treaty I 4. Did not all the rights of Russia as to jurisdiction, and as to the seal flsheries in Behring's Sea east of the water boundary, in the Treaty be- tween the United States and Russia of tlie 30th March, 1867, pass un- impaireoint and employ the necessary officers to assist them. Abtiole XIV. The High Contracting Parties engage to consider the result of the proceedings of the tribunal of arbitration, as a fiill, perfect, and final settlement of all the questions referred to the Arbitrators. S. fix. 9 19 6 BEBINO SEA. ARTIOLK XV. The present treaty shall be duly ratified by the Prewident of the United States of America, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate thereof, and by Her Britannic Majesty; and tlie ratitications shall bp exchanged either at Washington or at London witliin six months from the date hereof, ov earlier if posHible. In faith whereof, we, the respective I'lenipotenliaries, have signed this treaty and have hereunto afiixed our seals. Done in duplicate at Washington the twenty-ninth day of 1^'ebruary, one thousand eight hundred and ninety two. Jami:s G, Blaine IhealI JULIAI^ PATINCEPOTE [SEALJ PR Furth Toth I h print* treaty to the Tht in Sei sion ; gessio secoui Ex] MESSAGE FROM THR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, TRANSMITTINO Further correspondence with Oreat Bri tain resp'^oting the fur-seaf Jisheriea in the Bering Sea. To the Senate : I herewith transroit a copy of the correspondeDoe, not heretofore printed, in relation to the Bering Sea negotiations terminating in the treaty between the United States and Great Britain which I sabmitted to the Senate on the 8th instant. The previous correspondence in regard to this subject is contained in Senate Executive Document No. 1U6, Fiftieth Congress, second ses- sion ; House Executive Document No. 460, Fifty-lirst Congress, first session, and House Executive Document No. 144, Fifty-first Congress, second session. Benj. Habbison. Executive Mansion. Washington, March 9, 1893. m ■ N LIST OF PAPEBS. From and to whom. LortI Balisbnry to Sir J. Paddoo- fote. If r. BUine to Sir J. Pmnoefote. Sir J. PMiiMrote to Kr. Blalno . . Ifr. Blaine to Sir J. Pannoafbte. Sir J. Paonoefoto to Ifr. Blaine. Dttto. IMl. Feb. 21 Apr. 14 Apr. M Kay 4 May S Mr. A dee to Sir J. Panncefote Sir J. Pannoefote to Mr. Adee . . Mr. Adee to Sir J. Paunoefote ... Sir J. Paancefota to Mr. Adee . . Sir J. Pauncefote Do \ Mr. Wharton to Sir J. Paoaeefote May 20 May 21 May 2« May 27 June 3 ...do .... Jane 4 (MltllMt Page Reply to V Illaine't inte of Ui-oe'iiit'ur 17. States tW.tOt ^ Britain ixokerer.v Htupwiilob It waa iu lu \t . or to tal(« in nnl.'r to make it clnar to Ruptiia tliat Khn ul not accept claim to exclude her suliji'cti for 1(A> niilee dialanoe from the coaiit which \> .tl bj. u jmt forward in Dkaw^ of 1821 Clalnii b»t worda ' racifloOoeao," iiiwd in trratv nf 18:!5 with KuMia, did include Berins Mea. 'ronoae* iianie ohan/{ea to the qiieatuiu* to be auninitted to arbitration. OiveR »ix oueiitlooKpruiiOMd for arbitration. The United i'latex clHimt the same ri^ht to power bevomi :< mlleillmit aaOreat Brituui oiten a>.. Tnsista that the terme of arbitration and modtu be agreed on gimnltaneoaely, as the saspeusion of sealing could not be acceded to another year. Reply to the above. Objects to the claim of su- pervision by British authorities of the killing on land which is already supervised by AmerT can otiiciaU whose integrity is to be upheld, but agrees to the appointment of one or two com- missioners for the collection of facts to lie placed before the arbitrators. Subniita proposal em- bodying this and other conditions agreed upon. Subroits, in reply to the above, an agreement tele- graphed from London and containing modiflca- tiong of and additions to that submitted in said note. Beply to the above. Protesta 'against the pre- senting of new propositions at this time ; pro- ceeds to discuss them and snbmite a form of agreement drafted with slight modifications af- ter thnt presented on June 6 ; Insists upon the necessity of a speedy settlement. Presents a defense of the motives of Lord Salis- biiry in iuirodiioisg new propositions at this time,ibnt says they will prouably not be insisted upon except that for a joint commission of four experts to report on the necessity for interna- tional arrsngeraenta. Reply has been received by telegraph fVom Lord Salisbury who regrets that the auguestlous in regard to Russia have l>eon rejected, bat will anthorize him to sign agree, nent if assurance Is given respecting the commission of experts Aeknowledeus the above and accepts, pending a fuller reply, the terms therein presented. He has received telegraphic permission to sign agreement under previously understood voiidi tion as to joint oommisHion. Appointment for the formal attestation to the mod lu Vivendi. Proclamation in re modut vivendi Instructions issued by the Navy Department in pursuance of the aiiovfc )>raclaination. 8ir J. Panncefote is furniHiied fopies thereof and asked for iustractious issued by the BritUh Government. Appointment of British coniniisslouers under the agreement announced to visit PribyloflT Islands. Instt'uctions issued to lirltlsb naval senior ofllcer stated. Suggestion of iiuleinnity for any act in execution or the modut vivendi submitted. Objections of British Government tn arhltratlon preposition No. 6, presented bv Mr. RIaine on Dec. 17, 1890. Reply to Lonl ^llsbury's note of the 26th of Kebmary, 1891, and of Sir J. Panncefote's of Jnne 3. The olijection of the reference o*' the question of closed time to ar- bitration in sach words as to attribute abnor- mal rights to the United States is met by a new proposition avoiding th-it olijection ; submits also a final clause In the matter of Indeuinifica- tion by which the interests of the Uniteil States as owner of the seal ilsherioa ai-e not Ignored as in the suggestion made in the note of June 3. Agreement in regard lo the appointment of uommissioners to visit the Piibyloff Islands proposed. Instructions for the reception of the Hrltish oom- mii-siooers at the flslierles transmitted. Instrnotions Issued to lirltlsh navy, as per note of the 24th, have been comm unio«ted to the Navy Department. Kote (Uthe2Bth acknowledged Commissioners to visit the Bering Sea. Pro- poaea they go and act togeUur, 87 87 40 43 44 44 44 46 45 40 48 49 40 SirJ.P Same t< Same t( Mr. Ad Mr.Wli SirJ.P Mr.Wt Sir J. Pi Mr.Wh Same t« Sir J. Pi Same to Same tc SirJ.P Mr. Wu Same tti Same to 51 61 63 ea BERING SEA. LIST OF PAPERS— Continued. 11 Pane. e note 87 dltion toau- on the >e ei- tiBiata ItM be HiOD of rear. of sa- kniinir 87 Pro- 40 43 Sir J. Paiinoefote to Mr. Wbarton . Same to aame . Same to name . 1891. July 6 July 6 July 7 Mr. Aden to Sir J. Pnnncefote I July 8 Mr.WhartontoSlrJ.Panncefote. July D SirJ.Pauncefote to Mr. Wbarton. July 13 44 44 46 4S 46 48 49 49 Mr. Wharton to Sir J. Pauncefote. Sir J, Panncefote to Mr. Wharton . Mr. Wharton to Sir J. Pauncefote . Same to same Sir J. Pauncefote to Mr. Wharton Same to aame [telefsraui] Same to aame [unotUclal] Sir J. Pauncefote to Mr. Blaine. Mr. Wuartoa toSir J. Panncefote Sameti ifune July 23 Aug. 8 Aug. 17 Aug. 22 Aug. 24 Aug. 20 Aug. 26 Aug. 26 Sept. 2 Sept. 7 Same to name .~ Oct. 19 61 61 62 6a Keply to the above. Paaeage for the BrillRh Comir.iasionerH baa already been arranged for but (hey will be inatnic'ted to cooperate aa munb as noaaible. Act ol l*ai'ii:inieDt and order in council In purau- auce ol' motliit mvendi agreement inclnaed. Inatructiona (in full) to the iiaval forcca of Great Britaiu ill tlie Bering Sea inclnapd. JNote ol tilii iiiniMiil, Iiiultmiut: iicii o[ i'ariiament and oriler in council, acknonleiltred. Note of 7lli unil inclciHure ac.knnwiodgetl. The prnpo^Uion in regard to indvmniflcatiou made in tb« note of June 25 apppara to Lord Salia- bury (o prejudge the qiieation of lialiilit.v. A form ia Hiiliniilted by which not only the facta but tile liability ariaing from them aball be paaaod iiiioii by tli« arbilratora. Tne objection p'reaented in the above note waa not nnticipalc'd. It ia contended that it waa made with dae regard to Lord Saliabury'a own language and in a apirit of entire equality pre- aenta olmiirvations in aupport of that poaition; but, with a view to removing ibe laat point of differenre, the propoailion ia nmdifled so aa to meet the objection made againat it. Indemnittea for acta committed by cruiaera of either nation. Solicita a reply to the t|ues(ion relating thereto included in the memorandum trauHniitted with bis note of June 23. Reply to the above. TbePreaiilent thinks it will be time to ponaider the ijuestion of indemnity when oocasiuu has been giveu to claim the annio. RequeatH a rejily to his note of July 23 Kegreta hia inability to fumiah aa yet the reply above i'C(iui'Ht»d. Your note of 22d. Iiiiporlant letter post«d to-dnv. The Bi'itiah Government can not accept propoaeil form in note of July 2.1, becanae implying tin- admiaaion of lh» doctrine that govern nieiita are liable for acta of their nationals. Wiiliont leav- ing tbequestlonofdama^ea entirely out, aa aug- geated by Mr. Wbarton at one time, a middle course niHIit be adopted, and, omitting the qneation of Ilabilitv. qiieationa offset might ba roforre.d to the arbltratora. Submita the wonl- ing of the clause drafted on that basis. The killing of seals is permitted, according to re- ports reoeivml from the Bering Sea Commission- ers, to continue, although the number agreed upon, 7,500, Is al ready exceedetl, tbcexcu.seoeing that the limitation begins with the sig'iature ot the mndvu Vivendi agreement. This Govern- ment is convinced the President will not coun- tenance auy puch evasion of the spirit of said agreement. Kote f August 26 (above) shall receive immedi- ate attention. The objection preaented in (unoflioial) note of Au- gust 26 ia groundless. The President does not assume lialiility on the part of Great Britain, but, on th? contrary, winbes to put the qiieHtion of liability to the arbitrators. He can not ac- cept the counter proposition to submit the question of facts only, as those are well known, and iiiiist insist that the question of liability aball go to arbitration. Allegeiikillint: of seala in exoeas of numlier pro- vided for by ngreoiiient. A reply to the note of August 26 has been delayof both parties; a large niiiiiber bail been killed between that date and that of the receipt of Inst rue liona by the agent, leaving then but .1,029 to be taken "for the suliaistenc.e and care of be native.)" from July 2, 1891. to May 1, 1892, and the agent see- iiig that it would be ina(ieqi;ai~i>. called upon the lessees to supply the deflci-aoy with aalt meat S2 53 59 90 60 61 62 63 63 64 64 64 66 06 66 67 12 BERING SEA. LIST OP PAPEES-Cojiiinned. llr. Wharton to Sir J. P»iuio«fote. 8ir J. PkODoefoto to Mr. Wharton Samoto Mr. Wharton toSirX Vannoeibte Sir J. Pannoefoteto Mr. Wharton Sir J. Panncefote to Mr. Blaine. . . Mr. Blaine to Sir J. Panncefote. . Sir J. Panncefote to Mr. Blaine Mr, Blaine to Sir J. Panncefote . 1891. Oct 12 Oet It Oet. 17 Oct sa Oct 28 IfoT. 28 Not. 27 Dec 1 Deo. 2 Delav of ten weehs in replying to the propoHal of Jnly 23, for the aettlement of claima for dam- axea ia oalleA to Sir Paoncefote'a attention, to- gether with the frot that the modiu vivtndi ex- piree May 2, 1M>2. The President feels that if any effeouTe action u to he taken in the matter herore the next Ashing season opens all the terms of agreement of arbitration shonid be dispooed of immediately. Reply to the abtrre. Iiord Salisbory Is expected in London this week) mnch of the period of ten weelis was takin "p in informal disoussions. The British GoTemment Insists npon its inter- pretation of the damage olaase as presented in his auUi of Angast 20. The same proposition is practically renewed. Begrets the determination reported in the above note and discusses it at some length, hnt with ariew to indnoe a prompt solnnun sabmits a wording of theolansein conformity to the wish that qaestions of fltct only shall be submitted to arbitration, the qoestion of liability being reaerred for (titare negotiations. Acceptance of the above propositi's has been received by telegraph. States that two reservations are desired in arti- cle 0, vis, that the necessity and nature of any regnlations are left to the arbitrators, and that such regulations will not become obligatory upon the United Staves and Great Britain until they have received the assent of the maritime Xrawers. States that within a few days the ininister had furnished the exact points that had been agreed upon for arbitration I that he now informs him by his noteof the 23d instant that two reserva- tions are desired in the sixth article ; that all regulations shonid be left to the arbitrators, and that they shall be accepted by the other maritime powers before becoming obligatory upon the United States and Great Britain. Snnh a proposition will pobtpone the matter indefinitely, and it can not be taken into con- sideration. Tliere is no ol^eotion to submit- ting it to the maritime powers for their assent, but the United States can not agree to make the adjustment with Great Britain dependent upon the action of third parties, who have no (llrrct interest in the seal nsheries. States that with regard to the first reservation proposed in his note of 23d ultimo, the state- lueut made in Drpurtnient note of the 27th ultimo assures the same and it may be put aside. The objeot of tho second reservation was to prevent the fisheries ftvm being pnt at the mercy of some third power. The regula- tion might be evaded by British and Ameri- can sealers by simnly hoisting the San of a non- adhering power. Suggests that after the lapse of one year if either government oomplaina that injury is being clone to the tiHiierien it may give notice of a suspension of tlie regnlations. ongcests also that if any dispute arises be- tween the two nations the question in contro- versy Hhsll be referred to an admiral of eaioh, who may choose an umpire. In ro]il,y to note of 1st instjtnt, states thst Presi- dent Ih unable to see the apprehended danger of a third nation engaging in sotiling; no otaer nation ever has. Russia will not dissent (Vom the agreement because It will endsnger her owu sealing property. We may look to her to sanction and strengthen it. The two nHlions, however, sbn jid unite in a note to the principal powers advising them of whst has been done and asking their approval. If the agri'timent is disturbed by a third nation Great liritsln and United Stlates can act coi;)oiutly. It is therefore hoped that arbitration may be id- owed to proceed. 80 70 71 74 76 7« From I Sir J.Pannoel Hr. Blaine to Sir J. Pannoe Mr. Blaine to i SirJ.Pannee: Same to aame ifame to aame Same to same Same to aame 4anie to aame. Ur, Blaine to y '•ge. W 70 71 74 BERING SEA. LIST OF PAPEilS— Continued. 13 From and to whom. Sir J. Psanocfote to ^r. Blaine. Mr. BUine to Sir J. Fannoefoto. . Sir J. Faanoefoto to Mr. Blaine. Mr. Blaine to Sir J. Pannoefotfl . 76 76 Sir J. Fannoefoto to Mr. Blaine Same to ^&me toaame. anie to same . jitme to lamA. fame to same. . Ur. Blaine to Sir J. Fannoeroto 1801. Dea 8 Deo. 10 Deo. 11 Doo. 14 Dec 16 Deo. 17 Deo. 80 1892. Jan. 16 Jan. 21 Jan. 30 Feb. 4 States that hisGoTemmentdoes not fear that the powers will reject the refnil atlono, but that they will ref\i8e to allow the arresi of their sliips which may enxage in aealioc in viola- tiou of the roKulations. It is probable that during the clo»« season sealing will go on noiler other HnfiH. States, in reply to note of fith instant, that since the diHpiite began not a~vesseloi France or Ger- many has ever engaxed in sealing ; it would be unprofitable for them to sail 20,000 miles todoso. If we wait nntil they agree that their ships may be Hearclied the last seal will have been taken. Russia is regarded as an ally and no American country will loan its Hag. To stop now tor out- side nations is to indefinitely postpone the whole queation, The Fresident adheres to his ground, that we must have the arbitration as already signed. States tliat, in view of the strong opinion of the Prei^ideut that the danger apprehended by Lord Salisbury is too remote to Justify delay, the British GoTernmriit will not press the point, explained in his note of the 8tn instont, out it reserves the right of raising it when the qaes- tion of framing the regulations comes before the arbitrators. It is nnderstdod that they may attach such conditions to them as they may " a priori" Judge to be necessary and Jnst :o the two powers. States that he is aathorized to sign the text of the soven articles and of the Joint commission Hrticle. Will ohII at Department at any time appointed. In reply to note of llth instant, states that Pres- ident objects to Lord Salisbury's making any reservation at all, and can not yield to him the right to appeal to the aibitrutors to decide any point not embraced in the articles : to claim this right is to entirely change the arbitration. The President claims the right to have the ■et en points arbitrated. The matters to be ' arbitrated must be distinctly understood before the arbitrators are chosen. Is prepareecTii Declines to have the nomber of the arbitrators reduced from seven to five, bni prefers that each country should be renreaentod by two and the other three appointea by foreign govern- ments States that Messrs. Baden-Powell and Dawson will arrive on the 29th. His government a proceed oOiclally to a discliargo of their duties, but as it became necessary to await approval of the draft of the instrument has interpost^ no objection to pre- liminary conferences. Deprecates the intimation that the British com- missioners may be l)iBsed by previous public expressions of opinion; presents the defense of both of t'iieni; remarks that the same observa- tion might b) urged in the case of the American comniisi!ioners, and expresses satisfaction that the course adopted is in accord with that siig. gested bv biin in tlie note dated April 29, 1890. The British comniissionerg wishing to postpime joint cont'erences until arbitr;ttion convention shall have been signeil, the United States com- missioners have been instmoted to make known their readiness to proceed witliout further delay, the United States Government regarding tlie convention as Hubstautially agreed upon. Acknowledges above ; makes mention of two pre- liminary conTerences, and savs the British com- missioners hopo to arrange for the formal open- ing of their session. Refusal to discuss modu« vivendi by the British nommissioners ; tlie value of the work of the commission will be diminished thereby. What is the scope of the duties of th j Priti'h commissiouerel He is awaiting instructions of Lord Salisbury, to whom the draft of arbitration convention in- closed in the note of February 4 has l>een for- warded. No opinion can be expressed by the British Gov- ernuient as to the mod^(«vi««»((i question raised. in the interview of the 2d instant, until they know what is proposed. Urges the necessity oramod«*»ii.'endi; the terms aliunid l>e similar to those of last year, butliettor executed; asks that the contents of this note be tiansmitted by telegraph, evi'ry day of delay Involving great trouble to both Gorernments. Sealing schoouiers are reported by United States consul at Victoria to have cleared to the num- ber of forty -six with six or seven more to go, as against thirty same dato last year. The need of ainagreement will soon be over if it is not arrived at soon. Fixes the 29th as the day on which to sign the treaty of arbitration. Keply to the note of the 24tli. Lord Sallsbary does not admit that the delaly s have been greater en the part of Great Britain ; the British coui- mlssioners have reported that there is no danger of a serious diminution of the seals, and there- fore the necessity of a modui viiifndi is not ap- parent. Still he would not object to the pro- nibition limited to a zone not more than 30 miles •round the I'ribyloif Islands, provided the catch on the islandit be limited to 3U,000. The simile of trees would be more appropriate if applied to grass, which, like the seals, will be reproduced next year it cut this year, pending the reaolt of •rbit ration. Ft From and J. Pannoefoto Wharton to t'oto. KRESPONDE From ai Mr. Pbelps Mr. White t Mr. Lincoln Same to Ban Same to aan Same to san Pi n appointed to f witb British e to prenerva- lonfer inform- tlieir conven- , States that wn have been matter of the iiHtH IhaL ar- I for flio nieet- y, Ml inslnnt. anei'H are iiieu ■eecaine e draft of the jeotion topre- » British oom- •evious public the defense of Bamo observa- the American tisfuction that rith that sng- Lpril 20, 1890. g to postpone )D convention id States ooDi- rmmki' known .further delay, regarilini; tlie )d upon, ion of two pre- e Britiah com- e formal open- tiy the British work (if the led tlier^by. of thj Priti- h . Salisbury, to invention In- lias lieen for- 9 British Gov- iicstioii riilsed. .nt, until they di ; the terms ear, but lietter of this note be day of dttlay orernments. United States 'd to tlie uuro- mure to go, as r. n be over if it ih to sifni the ord Sallsbnry n bf>en Krenter B British coui- rn in lui danger lis, and there- tndi is not ap- K't to the pro- D than 30 miles ided the oatch I. Tbo simile late if applied liiireprod»c<'d g the result of BERING SEA. LISTS OP PAPERS— Continued. 15 From and to who;a. J.Pannoefote toHr. BUtne .. Wharton to Sir J. Pannce- fote. Date. 1X92. Mar. 7 Mar. 8 Snbjeot. Presents argnments in support of Lord Sallsbnry 's refusal to aocedo to another modm vivendi; llie drst was agreed to (as per note of June 6. 1801) under si ipniation that the measure could not be repeated; there is no apparent danger to the seal xprcins ; the zone proposed is more ex- tensive than that mentioned. If Great Britain declines, a' shown by quotations froniprevioos correspncdence, to assume responsibility for acts of her siilijeots she should restrain the same from committing such acts. I'he prohibition of xeal killing waa a matter of coinily before arbitration was agreed upon ; it is now a matter of obligation. The killing under the restrictions of last year was four tiroes that made on land, it would become enormonsin the absence of any restriction. The impracticability of a 30-iuilu zone, now pro- posed by Lord Salisbury, was pointed out by himself when the proposal came from this Gov- ernment. The United Stales can not be ex- pected to forego protecting its property while the arbitration is proceeding. Vage. 00 KRESPONDEKCB WITH THE LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES AT LONDON. From and to whom. Mr. Phelps to Mr. Bayard . Mr. White to Mr. Blaine. . Date. 1888. Sept. 12 1889. Dec. 4 IKOl. Mr. Lincoln to Mr. Blaine ... Jan. 24 I Same to same. Same to same. \ Same to same. June 6 June 10 1802. Jan. 6 Sub,ject. Great Britain will not enter into any convention for the protection of the seal fisheries without the eoucuTience of Canada, which can net be expected. Hecommends that strong measures be taken to prevent the wholesale slaughter of seals. Letter of Sir George Baden-Powdll to the London Timet with regard to the Bering Sea (jueation, and a letter of Mr. Flower, commenting thereon, in the same paper, transmitted. Question in the Uonso of Commons relating to the status of the Bering Sea fisheries ques- tion, and reply given by Sir J. Ferguson, trans- mitted. Debate on the seal-fishery bill in the House of Commons, transmitted. The bill was read in the House of Lords without debata Delmte in the House of Lords after passage of the bUL Speech of Sir George Baden-Powell tojliis constitu- ents relative to the Bering Sea qnnstion, on Jan. 5, 1892, transmitted. Page. 93 95 97 08 99 101 t-1 The die een care of the di Mimeuts low quite ng's Sea ition in e izure of terests OJ ight for not otbe vatioD ol i deservii fers upon ower ecu claim of y other i nt which Alexand< aching w ig to Kusi he Bassi 3sed any i e act of i limit of I. But it ty and fc mt can b< e asurpAl Lional la^n it Goven n not coi as agains )n it did Governm Govemi ID, has e'v ntion is, 1 eat Britj ) I)retensJ t ban cat( 1. Ex. a COBRESPONDENOE. Loti Salisbury to Sir Julian Fauncefote. .] FoBBiGN Office, February 21, 1891. The dispatch of Mr. Blaine, under date of the 17th December, eeii carefully considered by Her Majesty's Government. The of the discussion which has been carried on between the two nmeuts has been materially to narrow the area of controversy. ow quite clear that the advisers of the President do not claim Dg's Sea as a mare clausum, and indeed that they repudiate that tion in exi^ress terms. Nor do tbe.y rely, as a justification for eizure of British ships in the open sea, upon the contention that terests of the seal fisheries give to the United States Government ight for that purpose which, according to international law, it not otherwise possess. Whatever importance they attach to the vation of the fur-seal species— and they justly look on it as an deserving the most serious solicitude — they do not conceive that fers upon any maritime power rights over the open ocean which )ower could not assert on other grounds. » claim of the United States to prevent the exercise of the seal flsh- y other nations in Behriug Sea rests now exclusively upon the 8t which by purchase they possess in a ukase issued by the Em- Alexander I, in the year 1821, which prohibits foreign vessels from aching within 100 Italian miles of the coasts and islands then be- g to Kussia in Behring Sea. It is not, as I understand, contended he Russian Government, at the time of the issue of this ukase, sed any inherent right to enforce such a prohibition, or acquired I act of issuing it any claims over the open sea beyond the terri- limit of 3 miles, which they would not otherwise have pos- . But it is said that this prohibition, worthless in itself, acqaired ty and force against the British Government because that Gov- mt can bo shown to have accepted its provisions. The nkase was e usurpation ; bat it is said that it was converted into a valid in- ional law, as against the British Government, by the admission kt Government itself, n not oouoerned to dispute the contention that an invalid claim as against another Gh)vernment, acquire a validity which in its in- D it did not possess, if it is formally or effectively accepted by Government. But the vital question for decision is whether any Government, and especially whether the Governmeut of Great D, has ever accepted the claim put forward in this ukase. Our ntion is, that not only can it not be shown that the Government eat Britain, at any time since 1821, has admitted the soundness I)retension put forward by that ukase, but that it can be shown t has categorically denied it on more than one occasion. On the S. Ex. 56 2 W 18 BERING SEA, irricLK 1. I not b« tr< Oeotm, v'\t vf8, iindvr iindersta 'uded to es from tiinity of On the 17th October in the same year the Duke of WellingtODj a bassador at Yerona, addressed to Count ll^esselrode a note ooutaini^ the following words: the coucl iug over 18th January, 1822, four months after the issue of the ukase, Lord L( <>ii to wli doiidorry, then British foreign secretary, wrote i ' the following terjovvs to Count Lieven, the Kussiau ambassador in Loudon : Upon tho Hiibject of this ukase generally, and especially upon the two main prii pk's of claim laid down therein, viz, an exclusive sovereignty alleged to belong ts^of the RiisNia over the territories therein described, as also the exclusive rightof uavigat nnd trading within the maritime limits therein sot forth, His Britannic Majesty m be understood as hereby reserving all his rights, not being prepared to admit t the intercourse which is allowed on the face of this instrument to have hitherto s sisted on these coasts and in those seas can be deemed to be illicit ; or that the sli of friendly powers, even supposing an unqutililied sovereignty was proved to api' tain to the Imperial Crown in these vast and very imperfectly occupied territorV could, by the acknowledged law of nations, be excluded from navigating within or of full distance of 100 Italian miles, as therein laid down, from the coast. imouly Ci III that c( sea tbat (s on to C( include J Objecting, as we do, to this claim of exclusive sovereignty on the part of KnsAveu if tl] I might save myself the trouble of discussing the particiilar mode of its exercis<' set UtTth in this ukase. But we object to the sovereignty proposed to be exercii under this ukase not less than we do to the claim of it. fVe oan not admit the ri of any voteer possessing the sovereignty of a country to exclude the vessels of oil re reticen from the seas on Us coasts to the distance of 100 Italian nnics. irived un bo suflftc ition the iut lam I The second ground on which we object to the ukase is that His Imperial Maje t the WOI thereby excludes from a certain considerable extent of the open sea vessels of ot nations. We contend that the assumption of this power is contrary to the lav nations; and we can not found a negotiation upon a paper in which it is a^ broadly asserted. We contend that no power whatever can exclude another from jive use of the open sua; a power can exclude itself from the navigation of a oert tlsh uego coast, sea, etc., by its own act or engagement, but it can not by right be excliii Uj-u j„ „ by another. This we consider as the law of nations : and we can not negotiate u . ~j a paper in which a right is asserted inconsistent with this principle. "^ argil ii 1, Mr. Bh It is evident, therefore, that so far as diplomatic representation we ;iiict froii the King's Goverrinent of that date took every step which it was their power to take in order to make it clear to the Bnssian Go» ment tbat Great Britain did not accept the claim to exclude her sijlal truth 1 jects for 100 miles' distance from the coast, which had been put forwi e that th( in the ukase of 1821. Qujf ^f j Mr. Blaine does not deal with these protests, which appear to I pa it will Majesty's Goverment to be in themselves amply sufficient to decide t ignation question whether Great Britain did or did not acquiesce in the K e Ocean " sian claim put forward by the ukase. He couflnes himself mainly, lends upo the dispatch under consideration, to the consideration o*" the treat time. T which were subsequently made between Great Britain a;ad Eussia a ting that America and Russia in the year 1826, and especially of that betw( 5 was 8ig Russia and Great Britain. This treaty, of which the text is priu^orily ace Again, on the 28th November, 1822, the Duke of Wellington dressed a note to Count Lieven containing the following words : e that iiij t of the I the ehring S( ument w at the close of Mr. Blaine's dispatch, does not contain a word to sign ttie acquiescence of Great Britain in the claim recently put forward Russia to control the waters of the sea for 100 miles from her coalibinu tos There is no stipulation upon which this interpretation can be irapos incimio B by any process of construction whatsoever. But there is a provisi having in our judgment a totally opposite tendency^ which indeed v liuiing th intended to negative the extravagant claim that had recent.y been me ollows tin on the part of Russia ; and it is upon this provision that the main p tnin iu th of Mr. Blaine's argument, as I understand it, is founded. The sti] iring Sea )eud to th dates frc kase, Lord L( foUowiDg ter BERING SEA. 19 refer is contained in the first article and rans as on to wbich I ows: irritLK 1. It is nKfoiid that the rt^spective subjects of the high contrncting parties II not be troiibletitiiig the siinio, iu fishing therein, or in landing at snch etwomainpri ^^ _ legert to belonfj |y „(• (i,e euast as sliiill not liavo been already occupied, in order to trade with the [ighiof uavigat ■ — .. . . - — »nnic Majesty m red to admit t have hithertos ; or that the si: s proved to ap|i copied territor igating within vfs, under the restrictions and conditions specified in the following articles. understand Mr. Blaine's argument to be that, if Great Britain had LMided to protest against the (jiaitn of Kussia to exclude ships for 100 es from lier coasts in Behring iSea, she would have taken this oj)- tunity of doing so ; bub that, in confining herself to stipulations in or of full liberty of navigation and fishing in any part of the ocean imonly called the Pacific Ocean, she, by implication, renounced any in tliat could arise out of the same set of circumstances in regard to sea that was not part of the Pacific Ocean. And then Mr. Blaine 18 on to contend that the phrase ''Pacific Ocean" did not and does , include Behring Sea. thej)art of Riis! Cveu if this latter contention were correct, I should earnestly demur the conclusion that our inherent rights to free passage and free ing over a vast extent of ocean could be efl'ectively renounced by e reticence or omission. The right is one of which we could not be rived unless we consented to abandon it, and that consent could be sufficiently inferred from our negotiators having omitted to )tion the subject upon one particular occasion. 5uf lam not prepared to admit the justice of Mr. Blaine's contention 8 Imperial Maje t the words '* Pacific Ocean " did not include Behring Sea. I be- e that in common parlance, then and now, Behring Sea was and is t of the Pacific Ocean ; and that the latter words were used iii order ;ive the fullest and widest scope possible to the claim which the tiah negotiators were solemnly recording of a right freely to navigate fish in every part of it, and throughout its entire extent. In proof be argument that the words »* Pacific Ocean "do not include Behring Mr. Blaine adduces a long list of maps iu which a designation ;inct from that of "Pacific Ocean" is given Behring Sea; either ehring Sea," or " Sea of Kamschatka," or the " Sea of Anadir." The iiment will hardly have any force unless it is applicable with al truth to all the other oceans of the world. But no one will dis- e that the Bay of Biscay forms part of the Atlantic Ocean, or that Gulf of Lyons forms part of the Mediterranean Sea ; and yet in most )8 it will be found that to those portions of the larger sea a separate ignation has been given. The question whether by the words '• Pa- Ocean " the negotiators meant to include or to exclude Behring Sea ends upon which locution was esteemed to be the correct usage at tinje. The date is not a distant one, and face is no ground for sug- ting that the usage has changed since the Anglo-Russian treaty of 5 was signed. The determination of this point will be most satis- orily ascertained by consulting the ordinary books of reference. I )eud to this dispatch a list of some thirty works of this class, of vari- dates from 1795 downwards, and printed in various countries, which Vellington^ a lote coutaini } of its exercis. ed to be exerci not admit the ri he veaselt of ot Wellington g words : sea vessels of ot trary to the lav which it is ag le another from ation of a oert right be exclii not negotiate u le. isentation we (vhich it was inssian Go> >' xclude her s een put forw appear to )nt to decide esce in the Bi nseli mainly, o*' the trea aad Russia of that betW' text is print word to sign put forward from her coa ibine to show that, in customary parlance, the words " Pacific Ocean " ' iidude Behring Sea. f, theu, in ordinary language, the Pacific Oceen is used as a phrase hiding the whole sea from Behriug Straits to the Antarctic Circle, can be impos is a provisi hich indeed v Eit the main p ent.y been mt nllows that the Ist article of the treaty of 1825 did secure to Great tain in the fullest manner the freedom of navigation and fishing in led. Thesti iriug Sea. In that case no inference, however indirect or circuitous 20 BEBINO SEA. can be drawn from any omission in the language of that instrament U show that Great Britain acquiesced in the usurpation which the nkasi of 1821 had attempted. The other documents which I have qaotec sufficiently establish that she not only did not acquiesce in it, but re pudiated it more than once in plain and unequivocal terras ; and as th( claim made by the ukase has no strength or validity except what might derive from the assent of any power whom it might affect, results that Russia has never acquired by the ukase any right to cur tail the natural liberty of Her Majesty's subjects to navigate or fish i these seas anywhere outside territorial waters. And what Russia dii not herself possess she was not able to transmit to the United States Her Majesty's Government have, in view of these considerations, ni doubt whatever that British subjects enjoy the same rights in Behriiif Sea which belong to them in every other [)ortion of the open ocean ; bu Theflr to the fui ordinary referred which asf the br( nvolves the prese :o accede of Ui it is, nevertheless, a matter of sincere satisfaction that the President ii willing to refer to arbitration what he conceives to be the matters whic! have been under discussion between the two Governments for the last four years. In regard to the questions as tbey are proposed by Mr Blaine, I should say that as to the first and second, no objection will b( offered by Her Majesty's Governmeiit. They are as follows: »?« tl (1) What exclusive Jiiriadiotion in tlix sea uow linown as the BohrinK Sea and w exclusive exclusive ri'jrbts in the seiil tiHhuries tliorein did Russia assert and exerois* prior and up to the time of the cession of Alaska to the United StatesT (2) How far wore these clan.^j of jurisdiction as to the seal fisheries recognized an conceded by Great Britain T The third question is expressed in the following terms : Was the body of water now known as the Behring Sea included in the phrase " Pa oiflo Ocean "as used in the treaty of 1825 between Oreat Britain and Russia am what rights (if any) in the Bering Sea were given or conceded to Great Britain b; the said treaty T Her Majesty's Government would have no objection to referring to arbitration the first part of that question, if it should be thought desira ble to do so; but they would give that consent with the reservation tha they do not admit that the decision of it can conclude the larger ques tions which the arbitrator would have to determine. To the latter pa of No. 3 it would be their duty to take exception : What rights, if any, in the Behring Sea were given or conceded to GreatBritaiabj the said treaty f Great Britain has never suggested that any rights were given to hei or conceded to her by the said treaty. All that was done was to recog nize her natural right of free navigation and Ashing in that as in all other parts of the Pacific Dcean. Russia did not give those rights to Great Britain, because they were never hers to give away. (4) Did not all the rights of Russia as to jurisdiction and as to the seal fisheries Behring Sea east of the water boundary in the treaty between the United State and Russia of the 30th March, 18()7, pass unimpaired to the United States under tha treaty t This fourth question is hardly worth referring to an arbitrator, as Great Britain would be prepared to accept it without dispute. The fifth proposed question runs as follows: (5) What are now the rights of the United States as to the far-seal fisheries in th^ waters of the Behring Sea oatside of the ordinary territorial limits, whether sue rights grow out of the cession by Russia of any special rights or jurisdiction htC by her in such fisheries or in the waters of Behring Sea, or out of the ownership the breeding islands, and the habits of the seals in vesorting thither and rearing theii ^oung thereon, and going out from the islands for food, or out of any other tact oi incident connected with the relation of those seal tiuheries to the territorial poww sious of the United States t iirise m c. lin, woul( ler Maje ion of a iir the eii )f the sea fippearinj nitedSt There i (rovernmc the refere the persoi lat the a without w Majesty's [Jovernnu iidjustmei ii matter ( I have f eave a co I ai ' Kamschal lani, John. Beering's Sea. Beering's a.] (Bro Kixmschat iviimtscha lul south b; lore. "Coi lleering's Ion, 1804.) Beering's III i versa! O Kamtchat Kamtchat >cean. Islands in leudium of Stilles Me tiirme. [1 .G. A. "I ISehrinr's (lition 1^2 Beering's &.>3.) S. of instrament U ich the akasi have qaote( in it, bat re s; and as th Luept what i i{;bt affect, i right to our gate or fl^h it at Russia di rnited Statea ide rations, n its in Behritif en ocean ; bu e President matters whici ts for the last posed by Mr jection will ws: an Sea and wha (^j liert and exercis sT s recognized smi the phrase " Pa and Russia am heat Britain b; up Ui b. o referring t( lought desira nervation thai e larger ques he latter pan GreatBritainb] ) given to hei was to recog that as in al lose rights to seal fisheries ii e United State tates under tba arbitrator, a» )Ute. I fisheries in th^ whether hucI icisdiotion h»I( he ownership o d rearing tlieii ny other fact oi ntorial poMW BERING SEA. 21 The first clause, "What are now the rights of the United States as to the fur-seal fisheries in the waters of the Behring Sea outside of the ordinary territorial limits t" is a question which would be very properly referred to the decision of an arbitrator. But the subsequent clause, which assumes that such rights could have grown out of the ownership ' the breeding islands, and the habits of the seals in resorting thereto, nvolves an assumption as to the prescriptions of international law at the present time to which Her Majesty's Government are not prepared to accede. The sixth question, wiiicb deals witii the issues that will irise in case the controversy should be decided in favor of Great Brit- lin, would perhaps more fitly form the substance of a separate reference, ler Majesty's Government have no objection to refer the general ques- tion of a close time to arbitration, or to ascertain by that means how ar the enactment of such a provision is necessary for the preservation )f the seal species; but any such reference ought not to contain words i|)pearing to attribute special and abnormal rights in the matter to the nited States. There is one omission in these questions which I have no doubt the rovernment of the President will be very glad to repair; and that is the reference to the arbitrator of the question, what damages are due to the persons who have been injured, in case it shall be determined by him lat the action of the United States in seizing British vessels has been without warrantin international law. Subject to these reservations, Her Majesty's Government will have great satisfaction in joining with the (ioverument of the United States in seeking by means of arbitration an Adjustment of the international questions which have so long formed .1 matter of controversy between the two Governments. 1 have to request that yon will read this dispatch to Mr. Blaine, and eave a copy of it with him should he desire it. I am, etc., SALIS' :y. Appendix. (Mal- KauBchatka Sea is a large branch of tbe Orioutal or Nortb Pacific Ocean, laiii, John. "Naval Gazetteer," 1795.) Heering's Straits, which is the passage from the North Pacific Ocean to the Arctic k'i\. Beering's Island. An islandin tbe Pacific Ocean. [Bthring's Island is in Behriug's )(!i.] (Brookes, R. " General Gazetteer," IHOii.) Kftmschatka. Bounded east and south by Pacific. Kiimtsobatka. Bounded on the north by the country of the Koriacs, on the east lul south by tbe North Pacific Ocean, and on the west by the Sea of Okotsk. (Monte- lore. "Commercial Dictionary," 1803.) Heering's Island. In the North Pacific Ocean. ("Geographical Dictionary," Lou- ou, 1804.) Heerine's Island. An island in the North Pacific Ocean. (CruttwoU, C. "New 111 versa! Gazetteer," 1808.) Kamtchatka. River, which runs into tbe North Pacific Oraan. Kamtchatka. Peninsula, bounded on the east and south by the North Pacific Jcean. Islands in tbe Eastern or Great Pacific Ocean : Bohring's Islti. (Mangnall, R. Com- lendinm of Geography," 181,5.) Stilles Meer. Vom 5 niirdl. Br. an bJH ziir Beringsstrasse aufwiirts stets heftige tiirme. [Behring's Strait is at the northern extremity of Behriug's Sea.] (Galletti, A. "Qeographisohes Worterbuci.," Pe&th, lH*i.) iiebring's Island. An island in the North Pacilic Ocean. ("Edinburg Gazetteer," (lition 182a, vol. l,p.432.) Heering's Island. In the North Pacific Ocean. ("General Gazetteer," London, m.) s. Ex. s — US 22 BERING SEA. (AnowHiiiith. "Oram- Berhlng's Wand. In the Pacino. (" New London UniverBnl Gazetteer," 1826.) Met Pacificine. II s'dteiid dn nord an Hud dcpiiis le Cercle Polaire Arct.iqiio, o'e«t- &-dire, depiiiH le Detroit de Bidiriiij;, niii le fait coimiiiuiiqiier h l'0c6an Glacial Aus- tral. (Uictionnaire G<'><>»(rniiiii miles apart. This strait may beconsidered as clos- ing the Pacil'ic on the n'ortb. ("Penny Cyclopaxlia." 1840.) Behring (Detroit de) A I'extr^init^ nord-ent de I'Asie, sdpare ce Continent de l'Aui6rique et l'Oc6aM Glacial Arctique de I'Ocean Paoiflque. (" Dictionnaire Uuiver- sel d'Histoire et de G<5ograpbie," par M. N. Bouillet. Paris, 1845J.) Bebring (Mer de), partiede I'Ocdan Pacifiqne. Behring (Detroit de). Canal de l'oc6au » • • unissantles eaux del'Oc^an Pa- cifiqne A celles de rOcdan Arctique. ("Dictionnaire Gdographique et Statistique," par Adrien Guibert. Paris, 185U. ) Pacific Ocean. Between longitnde 70° west and 110° east, that is for a space of over 180° — it covers the greater part of tbe earth's surface, from Berings Straits to the Polar Circle, that separates it from the Antarctic Ocean. ("TlieNew American Cyclopwdia," edited by George Kipley and Charles A. Dana. New York, 1851). Bebring (Detroit de). Canal du Grand Oc6au unissant leseanx de I'Ocdan Paoiflque & celles de I'Ocdau Glacial Arctique. ("Grand Dictionnaire de Gdographie Uni ver- 8elle,"par M. Bescherelle Aln<5. 4 vols. IS^xt.) Behrings' Sea, sometimes called the Sea of Kamtchatka, is that portion of the North Pacific Ocean lying between the Aleutian Islands and Bcbrings' Strait. (" Imperial Gazetteer," 1855.) Behring's Island. An islandin the North Pacific Ocean. (Fullarton's "Gazetteer of the World," 1856.) Bebring's Strait, which connects the Pacific with the Arctic Ocean, is formed by the approach of the Continents of America and Asia. (" C vclopmdia of Geography," by Charles Knight, 18.56.) Pacific Ocean. Its extreme southern limit is the Antarctic Circle, from which it stretches northward through 132 degreesof hititude to Behrings' Strait, which sepa- rates it from the Arctic Ocean. (McCullocb's " Geographical Dictionary," edited by F. Martin, 1866.) Behring (Detroit de). Canal on bras de mer unissau les eaux de I'0c6an Glacial Arctique A celles de l'Oc(^au Pacifique. (" Grand Dictionnaire Universel," par M. Pierre Labousse. Paris, 1867.) Behrings' Strait. The narrow sea between the northeast part of Asia and the north- west part of North America, connecting the North Pacific with the Arctic Ocean. (Encyclopajdia Britannica." 1875.) Bering (Detroit de.) Passage qui unit I'Ocdan Glacial Arctique an Grand Oc6an. (St. Martin, " Nonvean Dictionnaire de G6ographie Un^verselle," Paris, 1879.) Behring Sea, or Sea of Kamchatka, is that part of the North Pacific Ocean between the Aleutian Islands in latitude .5.5° north and Bering Strait in latitude 66° north, by which latter it communicates with the Arctic Ocean. (Lippincott's " Gazetteer o the World," Philadelphia, 1880). Behring, or Bhering. A strait, sea, island, and bay, North Pacifio Ocean. (Bryce and Johnston, " Cycloj)a!dia of Geography." London and Glasgow, '880.) Bering's Meer. Der jordostlicbste Teil des Stillen Ocean's. (Brockhaus' "Conver- sations Lexicon." Leipzig, 1882.) Beringsstrasse. Meerenge das nordostlicbste Eismeer mit dem Stillen Ocean ver- biudend. (Bitter's " Geographisch-Statistiscb Lexicon." Leipzig, 1883.) teer," 1826.) Arotiqiie, o'eat- m Ulacial Aus- ite venlieut er II da un bia sun leogrni'.biHcher- Library: Oeof^- iiiiith. "Qrani- (•hring'H Strait; A the inninlaiul 'au tro|iiqiie d« •1.2, p. 181, edl- 1 (ou Oc6an Pa- , Oc6ttn. (Lan- y th« ailjiicent ig Strait, which laldured as clos- ) Cuiitinunt d« onuaire Uuiver- : de I'Oc^ati Pa- nt Statistique," ) for a space of rings Straits to New American rk, 1851). Dc<$an Paciflquo ;iaphieUniver- on of the North t. ("Imperial a " Gazetteer of s formed by the Geography," by from which it lit, which sepa- y," edited by F. .'Oc6an Glacial versel," par M. kand thenorth- I Arctic Ooeau. I Grand Oc6an. :i8, 1879.) Ocean between le 66° north, by " Gazetteer o Ocean. (Bryce D.) haus' "Conver- llen Ocean ver- 183.) BERENO SEA. 23 nohring's Sea. Northeaat part of the Paoiflo between Asia and America. (" Pocket KiicyolupiiMlia." Sampson Low, 18H8. ) lieliring Strait ooDueots the Pacitic with the Arctic Ocean. (Chunibur's "Eiicycio- pu'dift." 1888.) Hohring Sea. A part of the Pacific Ocean, coniinonly known as the Sea of Kamchatka. Heliring's Strait, connecting the North I'acilic with the Arctic Ocean. (HIackie's " Modern Cyclopiedia." 1889 edition.) Hchring's Sea, souietimos called the himv of Kuincliatka, is that portion of the North Pacific Ocean lying between the Aleutian Islands and Uuhring's Straits. In support of his argument that tlu^ term " Pacific Ocean " was not understood at the time as including Behring Sea, Mr. Bluinu Inis (inotcd a note which, it ajipears, was presented by the Russian minister at Washington after the ratification of tiio treaty of the 5th (17th) April, 1824, between the United Status and KuHsia. In this note Baron Tuyl stated that " the Alentiiiu Islands, the coiiKts of Siberia, and the Kussiau possessions in general on the northwest coast of Ani'riea to 59*^ :)0' of north latitude were positively excepted I'rou) the liberty of hunting, tishing, and uouimerce stipulated in favor of United States' eitizeus for ten yeart." The rights alluded to could not be those contained in the first article of the treaty, which is nn- liuiited in duration, but those of frequenting the interior f m. h.iiuors, and creeks conferred by Article IV. Baron Tuyl grounded this construction of the treaty on the .irgumeut that " the coasts of Siberia are washed by the Sea of Okhotsk, the Sea of Kainsclmtka, and the Icy Sea. nd not by the South .Sea mentioned in the flr.st article of the convention," and till) " the Aleutian Islands were also washed by the Sea of Kanischatka or Niirthei a Ocean." He added that " it was not the intention of Itnssia to impede the free navigation of the Pacific Ocean, and that she would be satisfied with causing to be rtxognizcd, lis well understood and placed beyond all manner of doubt, the principlti that be- yond 59° 30' DO vessel could ap]>roach her coasts and isliinds, nor fish or hnnf within the distance of two marine leagues."* Mr. Adams, on being shown the draft of the note, stated to Baron Tuyl that, if it were presented, he should return an answer to the eli'ect that "the construction of treaties depending here npon the judiciary tribunnls, the executive Government, even if disposed to acquiesce in that of the Kussian Government, as announced by him (liaron Tuyl), could not be [Tuiake it] binding uiion the courts or upon this niition." He went on to say that it would be much lietter not to present the note, as the United States merchants would not go to trouble tlie Knssiniis on the coast of Siberia or north of the fifty-seventh degree of latitude, and it was wisest not to put such fan- cies into their heads. The incident, therefore, shows nothing material to the present issue, except that the Russian minister attempted in a note, which has hitherto been kept secret, to argue that Behring Sea was not a part of the South Sea (a term which is not em- jiloyed in the British treaty), and that Mr. Adams stated that, even if the United Stales Government were disposed to acquiesce in this view, they could not bind the nation or the courts to a. On the other hand, th<4 Regulations of 1881, under which the American schooners Eliza and Henrietta were seized by the Russian authorities, are headed — "Notice of order relative to commerce ou Russian Pacific coast; " "Without a special permit or license from the governor-general of Eastern Siberia foreign vessels are not allowed to carry on trading, hunting, fishing, etc., on the Rus- sian coasts or islands in the Okhotsk and Behring seas, or on the northeastern coast of Asia, or within their sea-boundary line." (Memorandum in Mr. Lothrop's dispatch to Mr. Bayard of the 7th March, 1882. Ex. Doc. No. lOti, Fiftieth Congress, second session, p. 271.) M. do Giers, in his subsequent note of the 8th May, 1882, speaks of these regulations is " a notice published by our consul at Yokohama relative to fishing, luintiug, and to trade in the Russian waters of the Pacific." {Ibid., p. 2<)2.) Mr, Frelinghuysen also speaks of the matter as " touching the Pacific coast fisher- ies." (iWd., p.258.) *It (Iocs uot appear, however, that the proponed limit of two leagneH was observed or enforoed, for in 1808 the Runsion minister lor foreign affairs, explaining tlie treatment of the Aniurioan sealer Java in the Sea of Okhotsk, writes: "ConslderinK that foreiRU sealers are forbidden liy tlie laws iu force to fish in tlie Kuasiun giiifM and baya at a distance leas than 3 milet. .rem the shore.'* (Mr. WeitmaDQ to Hr. Clay, Slst July, lUOii, Bx. Uoo. Na 100, Fiftieth ConKreas, second session, p. 253.) 24 BERIN« SEA. Mr. Blaine to Sir Julian Pauncefote. Department of State, Washington, April 14, 1891. Sir: The modifications which Lord Salisbury suggests in the ques- tiousf'or arbitration do not wholly meet the views of the President; but the President changes the text of the third and fifth in such manner, it is hoped, as will rcbult in an agreement between the two govern- ments. While Lord Salisbury suggests a difl'erent mode of procedure from that embodied in the sixth question, the President does not under- stand him actually to object to the question, and he therefore assumes that it is agreed to. The six questions as now proposed by the President are as follows: First. What exclusive jurisdiction in the sea now known as the Behring Sea, and what exclusive rights in the seal fisheries therein, did Kussia assert and exercise prior uud up to the time of the cession of Alaska to the United States? Second. How far were these claims of jurisdiction as to the seal fish- eries recognized and conceded by Great Btitain? Third. Was the body of water now known as the Behring Sea in- cluded ir t-he phrase " Pacific Ocean," as used in the treaty of 1825 between Great Britain and Hussia; and what rights, if any, ib the Behring Sea were held and exclusively exercised by Russia after said treaty 1 Fourth. Did not all the rights of Kussia as to jurisdiction and as to the seal fisheries in Behring Sea, east of the water boundary described in the treaty between the United States and Itussia of March 30, 18G7, passed uninpaired to the United States under that treaty t Filth. Has the United States any right, and. if so, what right of pro- tection or property In the fur seals frequenting the islands of the United States in Behring Sea, when such seals are found outside the ordinary 3mile limit! Sixth. If the determination of the foregoing questions shall leave the subject in such position that the concurrence of Great Britain is neces- sary in prescribing regulafiitnsfortlie killing of the fur seal in any part of the waters of Behring Seti, then it shall be further determined: First, how far, if at all, outside the ordinary territorial limits it is neces- sary that the Uiiit'?d States should exercise an exclusive jurisdiction, in order to protect the seal for the time living upon the islands of the United States and feeding therefrom ? Secoau, \>h"*^her a closed sea- son (during which the killing of seals in the waters of Behring Sea out- side the ordinary territorial limits shall be prohibited) is necessary to save the seal-fishing industry, so valuable and important to mankind, from deterioration or destruction ? And, if so, third, what months or parts of months should be included in sUch season, and over what waters it si ould extend? The President does not object to the additional question respecting alleged damages to English ships, proposed by Lord Salisbury^ if one condition can be added, namely : that after the issues of the arbitration are joined, if the United States shall prevail, all the seals taken by Canadian vessels during the period shall be paid for at the ordinary price for which skins are sold. This seems to the President to be the complement of Lord Salisbury's proposition, and he dou' ts not that it will secure his lordship's assent. ATE, 14, 1891. n tbe ques- sulont; but }h manner, wo govern- r procedure } not nntler- )re assumes 18 follows : [)wn as the therein, did e cessiou of be seal fish- ring Sea ifi- aty of 1825 any, iij the a after said on and as to ry described ■ch 30, 18G7, right of pro- inds of the outside the all leave the ain is neces- in any part ined: First, it is neces- urisdiction, lands of the i closed sea- iug Sea out- necessary to to miinkind, months or what waters 1 respecting bnry, if one e arbitration Is taken by he ordinary ut to be the 8 not that it l^wlio nw» any sncb metliod of fl^hlne In contr*- -^h byelaw shut b« liable, nn nonviotiou under the tion (Scotluiiil) Act«, to a tinr not cNcenliii^ fivo »t ott'nuct*, anil nut I'xcveiliug tw<. l..v.waia T^ ft-' * 3 H -rtfc a i&W' mt^^M^^^ In th< he mak( It is DO as »iare c/ Lord I lie so inl resting i clausum. ship to 8 euiphati( put an e current c Lord g written I lie hHd b seventh ] specially the text t HehriugJ lingtonol the shore In the fli 1S22, add in dispute xian Vroii Ocean, an in the seai evident tl liiigton hi tween the flie Behrii identical \ iiiff on the 1 regret tl oC great ii In Lord now rests of Kiiss •solely on liOrd Salis iif* to limit I'liited Sti to any of priinient h, ot proved i Two or 1 ••pyoiid th< tliiis far, to other case i 18«t, only «tt'ect of wl t'n' 3-mile control a t Scotland, ?, ods of flsbii BERING SEA. 25 In the first paragraph of Lord Salisbury's dispatch of February 21 he makes the following declaration : It is now quite clear that the adviserH of the I'residetit do not claim Behriug Sea as viare clausum, and, indeed, that they repudiate that contention in expreits teriua. Lord Salisbury's expression is put in snch form as to imply (whether he so intended 1 know not) that the United States had hitherto been resting its contention upon the fact that the Behring Sea was mare clausum. If that was his intention it would have been well for his lord- ship to specify wherein the United States ever made the assertion. The emphatic denial in my dispatch of December 17 last was intended to put an end to the iteration of the charge and to eliminate it from the current discussion. Lord Salisbury complains that I did not deal with certain protests, written by Lord Londonderry and the Duke of Wellington in 1^22, which lie had before quoted. If he will recur to the twenty-sixth and twenty- seventh pages of my dispatch of December 17, he will observe that I specially dealt with these ; that 1 maintained and, I think, proved from t lie text that there was not a single word in those protests referring to the liehring Sea, but that they referred, in the language of the Duke of Wel- lington of the 17th of October, 1822, only to the lands "extending along the shores of the Pacitic Ocean from latitude 49° to latitude C0° north." Ill the first paragraph of Lord Londonderry's protest of January 18, 1822, addressed to Count Lieven, of llussia, he alluded to the mai.ers ill dispute as ^^especially connected icith the territorial rights of the Rus- xian Crotcn on the northwest coast of America bordering on the Pacific Ocean, and the commerce and navigation of His Imperial Majesty^s subjects in the sea^ adjacent thereto.'''' From these and other pertinent facts it is evident that the protests of Lord Londonderry and the Dukt^ of Wel- lington had nothiag whatever to do with the points now in issue be- tween the American and British Governments concerning the waters of flie Behring Sea. They both referred, in different and substantially itlontical phrases, to the territory south of the Alaskan Peninsula border- ing on the Pacific and geographically shut out from the Behring Sea. ] regret that my arguments on a point which Lord Salisbury considers of great importance should have escaped his lordship's notice. In Lord Salisbury's judgment the contention of the United States now rests wholly upon the ukase of 1821 by the Emperor Alexander I of Russia. The United States has at no time rested its argument solely on the ground mentioned, and this (ioveninient regrets that Lord Salisbury should have so misapprehended the American i)osition as to limit its basis of right in Behring Sea to the ukase of 1821. The United States has, among other grounds, insisted, without recurring to any of its inherited and superior rights in Alaska, that this Gov- ernment has as full authority for going beyond the 3-mile line i:i case ot proved necessity as Great Britiau possesses. Two or three instances of the power which Great Britain exercises beyond the 3-mile, line have already been quoted, but have failed, tbiis far, to secure comment or explanation from Lord Salisbury. An- other case can be added which, perhaps, is still more to the point. In 1H,S<», only two years ago, the British Parliament enacted a law, the efl'ect of which is fully shown by a map inclosed herewith. Far outside tile 3-miIe line the Parliament of Great Britain has attempted to control a body of water situated beyond the northeastern section of Scotland, ?,7()0 square miles in extent, and to direct that certain meth- ods of fishing shall not be used within that great body of water under 26 BERING SEA. a prescribed penalty. It will be observed that the inhibition is not alone against British subjects, but against "any person." 1 here quote the pertinent section of the Parliamentary act in (jnestion : 7(1) Tbo fisl'Mig board may, by by-law or by-laws, direct that the methods of t'mbin^ known as beam trawling and otter trawliiifr shall not be used within a line drawn from Duncansby Head, in Caithness, to Rattray Point, in Aberdeenshire, in any area or areas to be deliiied in such by-law, and may from time to time make, alter, and revoke by-lawrt for the purposes of this section, but no such by-law shall be of any validity until it has been confirmed by the secretary for Scotland. (2) Any person who uses any such method of iishingiu contravention of any snoli by-law shall be liable, on conviction under the summary jurisdiction (Scotland) acts, to a fine not exceeding £r) for the first ottoiise, and hot exceeding £20 for the second or any subsequent oliense, and every net set, or attempted to be set, in contravention of any such by-law, may be seized and destroyed or otherwise disposed of as in the sixth section of this act mentioned. If Great Britain may thus control an area of 2,700 square miles of ocean on the coast of Scotland why may not the United States pre ("cribe a space around the Pribylotf Islands in which similar prohibi tions may be enforced ? The following would be the needed legislation fur such a purpose by Congress, and it is but a paraphrase of the act of Parliament: The Fur Seal Board may, by by-law or by-laws, direct that the metbods of sealing known as spearing, or harpooning, or with firearms, shall not be nsed within a line drawn from the shores of the Priby loft' Islands, (iO miles in the Behring Sea, and said board may, from time to time, make, alter, and revoke by-laws for the purpose of Ibis section ; Itut no such by-law shall be of any validity until it has been confirmed by the Secretary of the Treasury. Second. Any person who uses any such method of sealing in contravention of sncb by-laws shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $100 for the first ofiTenge and not exc&ding J.'jOO for the second or any snbsequent offense, and every spear, harpoon, or firearm attempted to be used in contravention of any such by-law may be seized and destroyed or otherwise disposed of as said fur seal'board may direct. It must not escape observation that the area of water outside the 3-mile line on the coast of Scotland, whose control is assumed by Great Britain, is as large as would be found inside a line drawn from Gape Cod to Portland harbor, on the New Englatid coast. Lord Salisbury reasserts his contention that the words " Pacific Ocean" at the time of the treaty between Russia and Great Britain did include Behring Sea. Undoubtedly the Pacific Ocean includes Behring Sea in the same sense that the Atlantic Ocean includes the Gulf u Mexico, and yet it would bo regarded as a very inaccurate statemeutj to say that the Mississippi River flows into the Atlantic Oc^an think Lord Salisbury fails to reco^'nize the common distinction betweeii| the "Atlantic Ocean " and " the waters of the Atlantic." While tli Mexican Gulf is not u part of the Atlantic Ocean, it would, I am sure, comport with general usage to say that it belonged to the waters of tlr Atlantic, and, while Behiing Sea is not technically a part of the Paciti Ocean it undoubtedly belongs to the waters of the Pacific. The English Channel would not ordinarily be understood as inciud in the term "Atlantic Ocean." One would not say that Dover or Calai is on the coast of the Atlantic Ocean, and yet clearly the English Chan nel belongs to the waters of the Atlantic. In point of fact, therefore, accordiijg to the usage of the world, there is no dispute of any conse quence between the two governments on the geographical point undei consideration. The historical point is the one at issue. The explan tory note from Russia, tiled in the State l!)eparttnent of this country specially referred to in Mr. John Qiiincy Adams's diary and quoted ii my note of December 17, 1890, [)laitily draws a distinction between tl:< Pacific Ocean on the one hand, and the " Sea of Okhotsk, the Sea oi BERING SEA. 27 bition is not 1 here quote the methods of 1 within a line >erdeeiiBhire, in ine make, alter, -law shaU be of I. on of any such [Scotland) acts, for the second n contravention sed of as in the nare miles of d States pre iilar prohibi ed lep:iRlatiou ise of the act thods of aealing od within a line ng Sea, and said r the purpose of ) been confirmed tvention of such the first offense nd every spear, iich by-law may rd may direct, outside the assumed by drawn from ords '• Pacific lat Britain did udes Behring } the Gulf of •ate statement tic Ocjan. ction betweeu ,» While the d, I am sure i waters of the of the Pacilic c. _ od as includ© ►over or Galaii English Chan act, therefore, of any conse al poiut undei The explana this country and quoted ii n between tl; ik, the Sea o Kamchatka and the Icy Sea" on the other; and so long as Eussia drew that distinction it must aiiply to, and must absolutely decide, all the contentions between the two countries as far as the waters of the Behring Sea are concerned. To discuss this point further would, in the opinion of the President, contribute nothing of value to the general contention. In the opinion of the Presidetit Lord Ssilisbury is wholly and strangely in error in making the following statement: Nor do they [the advisers of the President] rely, as a justification for the seizure of British ships in the open sea, upon the contention that the interests of the seat lislieries give to the United States Government any right for that purpose which, according to iuternatioual law, it would not otherwise possess. The Government of the United States has steadily held just the reverse of the position which Lor Salisbury has imputed to it. It holds that the ownership of the ihuii.ds upon which the seals breed, that the habit of the seals in regularly resorting thither and rearing tlieir young thereon, tiiat their going out from the islands in search of food and regularly returning thereto, and all the facts and incidents of their relation to the island, give to the United States a property in- terest therein ; that this i)ro|)erty interest was claimed and exercised by Kussia during the whole period of its sovereignty over the land and waters of Alaska; that England recognized this property interest so far as recognition is implied by abstaining from all interference with it (luring the whole period of Kussia's ownership of Alaska, and during the first nineteen years of the sovereignty of the United States. It is yet to be determined whether the lawless intrusion of CanSdian vessels ill 1880 and subsequent years has changed the law and equity of the ciise theretofore prevailing. 1 have the honor to be, with the highest consideration, sir, your most obedient servant, James G. Blaine. Sir Julian Paunce/ote to Mr. Blaine. British Legation, Washington, April 20, 1891. Dear Mr. Blaine : I informed Lord Salisbury, in a private letter, of your alternative suggestion for a modus vivendi pending the result of the Behring Sea arbitration, namely, to stop all sealing both at sea nd on land. Lord Salisbury seems to approve of that alternative, and he asks me whether, in case Her Majesty's Government should accept it, you would prefer that the i)roposal should come from them. I thought you would like to know Lord Salisbury's view of your proposal as early as possible, and that must be my excuse for troubling you with this let- ter during your repose at Virginia Beaeh. May I ask you to be so good as to let me know, as soon as you con- veniently can do so, what answer you would wish me to return to Lord Salisbury's inquiry I Hoping that you have already benefited by the change of air, I remain, etc., Julian Pauncefote. 28 BERING SEA. Mr, Blaine to Sir Julian Pauncefote. I )!' a t' an Department op State, Washington, May 4, 1891. Sm: During the month of March last, a lew days after the adjourn nieut of Congress, acting under the instructions of the President, J ])roposed to you that a modus vivendi be agreed upon touching the seal fisheries, pending the result of arbitration of the question at issue be- tween the two Governments. The President's first proposal, which I submitted to you, was that no Canadian sealer should be allowed to come within a certain number of miles of the Pribylofif Islands. It was, however, the conclusion of the President, after reading Lord Salisbury's dispatch of February 21, that this modus vivendi might pos sibly provoke conflict in the Bering Sea, and, to avoid that result, he instructed me to propose that sealing, both on land and sea, should be suspended by both nations during the progress of arbitration, or dur ing the season of 1891. On both occasions it was a conversational exchange of views, the first in my office at the State Department, the second at my residence. The President was so desirous of a prompt response from Lord Salis bury to his second proposition that I ventured to suggest that you re quest an answer by cable, if practicable. Especially was the President anxious to receive an answer (which he trusted would bo favorable) be fore he set out on his tour to the Pacific States. He left Washington on the night of April 13 without having heard a word from your Gov ernment. It was then a full month after he had instructed me to open negotiationa on the question, and the only probable inference was that Lord Salisbury would not agree to his proposal The silence of Lord Salisbury implied, as seemed not improbable, that he would not restrain the Canadian sealers from entering Behring Sea, and, as all intelligence from British Columbia showed that the sealers were getting ready to sail in large numbers, the President found that he could not with justice prevent the lessees from taking seals on the Pribyloflf Islands. The President therefore instructed the Secretary of the Treasury, who has official charge of the subject, to issue to the lessees the privilege of killing on the Pribyloff Islands the coming sea- son the maximum number of 60,000 seals, subject, ho ,vever, to the abso- lute discretion and control of an agent appointed by the Secretary of the V fur the Treasury to limit the killing to as small a number as the condition of the herd might, in his opinion, demand. On the 22d of April, eight days after the President had left Wash ington, you notified me. when I was absent from the capital, that Lord Salisbury was ready to Hgree that all sealing should be suspended pending the result of arbitration. On the 23d of April I telegraphed Lord Salisbury's proposition to the President. He replied, April 25, expressii. ^ great satisfaction with Lord Salisbury's message, but in structing me to inform you that '^some seals must be killed by the natives for food; " that " the lessees are bound, under their lease from the Government, to feed and care for the natives, making it necessary to send a ship to the Pribyloff Islands each season at their expense; " and that, for this service — a very expensive one — the ** lessees should find their compensation in taking a moderate number of seals under the lease." The President expressed his belief that this allowance would be readily agreed to by Lord Salisbury, because the necessity is abso lute. You will remember that when I communicated this proposition from lie Presid) uree with oiirself as our judgn iii.l and ii topped on TJie narr II r clearly I) a furthei lit. The l,v mainta full posf liat in del When th f. Paul, in certa onero Dinpany. Under th II ts of the r number cr of salt 1 ocretary c Tiie com] it'se islanc )rtable dM lall keeps "he com^ li table scl aitifain di ition of tt lit teache 1 to the sti The com li^ious w( cians and Tlie com I liiiuls, wni And it is Jiio and p( Mil native And it is ative inha nliey are i'lisation, t ml, also, 1 leasonal ote the m( In short, ire. of hei le (iomfort >st'(l upon iiNt'. I in< e 303 pers iiole comii] BERING SEA. 29 PATE, ly 4, 1891. the adjourn President, i ing the seal at issue be- sal, which I ) allowed to nds. eadiug Lord { might pos at result, he a, should be tion, or dur- nversational artment, the I Lord Salis that you re tie President ivorable) be Washington m your Gov i nie to open uce was that{ improbable, ring Behring red that the sident found ling seals on ,ho Secretary > issue to the I coming sea- , to the abso- iretary of the condition of i left Wash- il, that Lord e suspended telegraphed ed, April 25, sage, but in- illed by the •,ir lease from it necessary ir expense;" issees should ■als under the wance would isity is abso )Osition from ho President to you, on the evening of Monday, April 27, yon did not jiTiiCt with the President's suggestion. On the co»'«^rary, yon expressed ourself as confident that Lord Salisbury would not accept it ; that in our judgment, the killing of seals must be cutoff absolutely on the iii.l and in the water, and that it could not be stopped on either unless opped on both. The narrative of facts which I have now given (absolutely necessary )v clearly understanding the position of this Government) brings me ) a further statement, which I am directed by the Presiclent to sub lit. The President refuses to believe that Lord Salisbury can possi- ,Y maintain the position you have taken when his lordship is placed full possession of the facts which I shall now submit to you, some- liat in detail. When the privilege of killing seals on the islands of St. George and t. Paul, in Behring Sea, was leased to the North American Company )!' a certain sum per skin to ue ]iaid to the Government, other duties t' an onerous, costly, and responsible character were imposed upon the oinpanj". Under their lease the company is obliged "to furnish to the inhabit- iits of the islands of St. George and St. Paul, annually, such quantity number of dried salmon, and such quantity of salt, and such unm- (>r of salt barrels for preserving their necessary supply of meat as the ocretary of the Treasury shall from time to time determine." The company IS further obliged to '< furnish to the inhabitants of lese islands 80 tons of coal annually, and a suflBcieut number of com- )rtable dwellings in which said native inhabitants may reside, and lall keep such dwellings in- proper repair. The company is further obliged " to provide and keep in repair such litable schoolhouses as may be necessary, and shall establish and aintain during eight months of each year proper schools for the edu- ition of the children on said islands, the same to be taught by compe- nt teachers, who shall be paid by the company a fair compensation ; 1 to the satisfaction of the Secretary of the Treasury." The company is further obliged "to maintain a suitable house for lif;i()us worship, aud will also provide a competent physician or pliy- cians and necessary and proper medicine and medical supplies." The comjiany is still further obliged "to provide the necessaries of for the widows and orphans, aged and infirm inhabitants of said lands, who are unable to provide for themselves. Vnd it is finally provided that "all the foregoing agreements shall be 1)110 and performed by the cojnpauy f''"e of all costs and charges to the lid native inhabitants of said islarids or ''o the United States." And it is made still further the faity of the company " to employ the itive inhabitants of said islands to perform such labor on the islands •i they are fitted to perform, and to i»ay therefor a fair and just com- iisation, such as may be fixed by the Secretary of the Treasury." nd, also, the company " agrees to contribute, as far as in its power, ' reasonable efforts to secure the comfort, health, education, and pru- ote the morals and civilization of said native inhabitants." In short, then, the means of living, the facilities for education, the in- of health, the religions teaching, the training of the young, and 16 comfort of the old, in a community of over 300 persons, are all im- isi'd upon the company a« its solemn duty by specific articles of the ISO. I inclose you a copy of the census of 1890, giving every name of 10 303 persons, old and young, male and female, who constitute the liolo community of the Pribyloff Islands. lo 30 BERING SEA. Tlie duties tliHH imposed upon the company must be discliarged ai miaKy with punctuality and exactness. Thecorafort, possibly the safetj of all these iinman beings, peculiarly helpless when left to themselve is dependent upon the company under the lease, and the lessees ai ]>aid therefor by the Government in the seal skins which the compaii receives for the seivice. If the company shall, as yon say Lord Salii bury requests, be deprived of all privilege of taking seals, they certain! couid not be coin|)elied to minister to the wants of these 300 iubabitaii for an entire year. If these islanders are to be left to charity, ti North American Company is under no greater obligation to extend to tliem than are other citizens of the United States. It evidently ri (|uires a considerable sum ot money to furnish all the supplies nam in the lease — supplies which nrist be carried 4,000 miles on a speciallj chartered steamer. If the lessees are not to be allowed paymeutin an] form for the amount necessary tosupport these 300 people on the island they will naturally decline to exiMjnd it. No appro])riation of mon has been made by Congress for the i)urpose, and the President <; not leave these worthy and innocent people to the hazard of starvatioi even to secure any form of agreement with Lord Salisbury touching so life. Seal life may be valuable, but the first duty of the (iovernme of the United States in this matter is to protect human life. Jn this exigency the President instructs me to propose to Loi Salisbury that he concede to the North American Company the rig to take a suthcient number of seals, and no more than sutlicient, recompense them for their outlay in taking care of the tiatives ; a that, in the phrase of the President, all '^ commercial killing of seals j)rohibited pending the result of arbitration." The Secretary of t Treasury has the right to fix the number necessary to the end desiiw After full consideration, he has limited the number to 7,500 to be kill by the company to repay them for the outlay demanded for the sii port of the 300 people on the Pribyloff Islands. He further directs tin no females be killed, and that thus the (n-oductive capacity of the hei shall not in the slightest degree be impaired. This point being fixed and agreed to, the proposed arrangemei between the two countries would be as follows: The Government of the United States limits the number of seals to killed on the islands, for purposes just describere.sent proposal, although the reservation as to the killing of a limited lumber of seals on tbe islands is maintained. 32 BERING SEA. I am glad to think that tlicru is yet tiiiui to curry out for thin ilHhoi season any arrangement whicli may promptly he. agreed to, and I ho that the above exi)lanation may remove tlie impression you appear hiive formed that there has been any delay on my part in expeditiu tlie consideration of the modtin vireudi wliicii you iiave proposed. 1 have, etc., Julian Paunoefote. Mr. Adee to Sir Julian Pauncefote, [Peraonal.] Department of State, Washington, May 20, 1891 M Y Dear Sib Julian : The President is desirous to learn the r ply of Der Majesty's Government to the proi)osition submitted in D ]»artment'8 note of the 4th instant, to stop sealing by citizens of t United States as well as by subjects of Her Majesty pending the arl trationsof questions in dispute touching thesealfisheries iu Behriug S« I should be glad to know as soon as possible the present state of tl matter. I remain, etc., Alvey a. Adee, Second Assistant Secretary. Sir Julian Pauncefote to Mr. Adee. f Fertoiial. | British . Legation, Washington, May 21, 1891 Dear Mr. Adek : / regret that I am not yet in a position to ans\v( the inquiry of the Pre;; dent communicated to me in your letter of ya terday, but, immiiWy ce\y on its receipt, I telegraphed the substaiii of it8 contents so tie Marquis of Salisbury, and I hope to receive the course of to day a telegram from his iordshi]) in reply. You may rely on my using the utmost expedition in the matter. I remain, etc., Julian Pauncefote Mr. Adee to Sir Julian Pauncefote. Department of State, Washington, May 26, 1891. Sir: In my personal note of the 20th instant and ou several occi sioiis in oral communication, I have had the honor to express the demi of the President to be informed at the earliest possibly moment of tl response of Her Majesty's Government to the proposal, which foriiit tlie subjectof Mr. Blaine's note to you of the 4th instant, that seal takin ou tue islands aud in the waters of Behring Sea be limited, as in sai note expressed, as to citizens of the United States and subjects Great Britain pending the arbitration of certain questions in ooiitn versy between the two Governments. Ill severa •' Preside! en reathri The situa L'iuses the 'II ts to m ported th) months o it'iiiie cru iitly need I' very pu tible with tted toco Ample op Itriiig thii ll is still mill be gli i{.'i'r hold ;iliiiiate i iites. I, am, thei vc been g amis. Another i idy to sai reached her to tl 11(1 how fi s season, ility of 1 rani to H a<;reeinei I am, im: I ha\ itcrday's d nee of its t'cel assui i(!li niay b ning an it e to me ol jonl Siilis ; utmost e ioii.s attac lordship 1 vernmeut. 1 have S, Ex. BERING SEA. 88 or this tiHlion to, and I lioij you appear ill expiHlitin ropoHed. LUNOEFOTE.l State, (ay 20, 1891. learn tbe )uiitte(l in iitizeus of tl din^ the aili u Buhriug St int state of til , Adee, nt HecretaryA ION, lay 21, 1891 tiou to an8\vi r letter of yci the substaiii to receive III several interviews witli you since the 20th instant the desire of If fresideiit for an early response to the note of the 4th of May has *('ii reafflrnied. jTlie situation evidently calls for prompt action. Each day's delay iii- 'iises the existing ditleretice in the ability of the respeoiive govern- 'iits to make the proposed limitation of seal-taking etl'uctive. It is jported that a large tleet of Canadian .sealers has been for some weeks months on the seas. They are daily going farther out of reach. The Ivfiiue cruisers have awaited detliiite orders. Their presence is ur- ]iitly needed in the Behring Sea. Any further delay tends to defeat jc very purpose for which the agreement is sought. It is quite incoiii- Itilile with fairness and justice to our citizens that this should be per- tted to continue. |Aiiiple opportunity has been afforded to Her Majesty's Government III iiig this coiiditior> to a close l>y an effective agreement; but the re- li i.s still uiicertai.i and, to all appearances, remote. The President liiilil be glad to know that it is near at hand and certain ; but he can no jifzcr hold back in furtherance of a vague hoi)e, to the detriment of the Lntimate interests of the Government and citizens of the United liltl'S. li, am, therefore directed by the President to inform you that orders Jvf been given to the revenue steamer liunh to proceed to the sealing laiiiLs. Another revenue steamer, the Corwin, is at San Francisco, nearly |i(iy to sail, and will very shortly put to sea. Should an agreement reached before her departure, appropriate orders may still be sent licr to the islands. I mention this in order that you may compre- IikI how fully this Government desires to etf'ect an arrangement for Is season, and that you may realize how each day's delay lessens the |ility of Her Majesty's Government to eiiectively cooperate with tiird to Hritish sul»ject8 and tends to destroy the practical utility of iij;reemeiit to limit the seal catch. I am, etc., Alvey a. Adee, Acting Secretary. le matter. aunoefote. State, ray 20, 1891. several occi tress the desii uoment of t! which foriii« hat seal takin ited, as in sai nd subjects ous in ooiitr( Sir Julian Pauncefote to Mr. Adee, British Legation, Washington, May 27, 1891. IB: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your note of tcrday's date, and to inform you that I have communicated the sub- iici' of its contents to the Marquis of Salisbury by telegram, ftel assured that his lordship will greatly regret any inconvenience icli may be caused to your Government by the impracticability of re- iiing all immediate reply to the proposal contained in Mr. Blaine's e to me of the 4th instant. iord Salisbury, as 1 had the honor to state to yon verbally, is using I utmost expedition; but the lateness of tbe proposal and the con- ions attached to it have given rise to grave difficulties, as to which lordship has necessarily been in communicr>tioD with the Ganadiaa vei nmeut. Bis reply, however, may now arrive at any moment. 1 have, etc., Julian Paunoepotb, S. Ex. 55 3 . .v^ 34 BERING SEA. Proposal of Her Majesty's Oovernment for a »»:"'?'"« vivendi in the Behri Sea during the present *isMng seus,oMHof either power who nh ]i{(n] Stjltf be shown to have beesi damnitied in the pursuit of tiie industry of sealing by I ,„„f ij-.-i. • action of the other power. .^ uriiai; JULUN Pauncefotb. ii" <'ontro Third. Th( 'K liraitin ssia, pres€ _Hii adherei Mr. Wharton to Sir Julian Pauncefoie. |lii.s opiniot I'ly cause t Depahtment op State, Bse both G< Washington, June 4, 1891.Bjult duj i,oi Sib : I am directed by the President to say, in reply to your noteB'fill bo ap) the 3d instant, conveying to the Goveriiuieut of the United States t^^'ud you t BERING SEA. 35 n the Belirh no 4, 1891. tl States alia g Sea or an ability, insu^ r, aiul the ve bition. 8 Governmel in tlie BehriiJ I "exequatun convention | A.UNCEI'0'IE. sponse of Her Majesty's Government to the proposal of Mr. Blaine r a modus Vivendi, relating to the seal fisheries in BeHring Sea during ■e present season — First. In place of the first and second subdivisions of the agreement, submitted to you, the Pr jsident suggests the following : (1) The Government of Great Britain shall prohibit, until May, 1892, e killing of seals in all that part of the Behring Sea lyiug east, east- ardly or southeastwardly of the line described in article 1 of the con- iitiou between the United States and Russia, of date March 30, 1807, d -vill promptly take such steps as are best calculated eftectively to sure the observance of this prohibition by the subjects and citizens of reat Britain and all vessels tlyiug its tlag. (2) The Government of the United States shall prohibit, until May, !t', the killing of seals in that part of Behriug Sea above described, id on the shores and isiands thereof, the property of the United [tiites (in excess of 7,500 to be taken on the islands), and the Govern- ent of the United States will promptly take such steps as are best Iculated effectually to insure the observance of this prohibition by le citizens of the United States and the vessels flying its flag. These changes are suggested in order that the modus may clearly ive the same territorial extent with the pending proposals forarbitra- 1)11 ; that the stipulation for a prohibition of seal killing upon the iiids of the United States may rest upon its own order ; and that the )ligation of the the respective pfovernments to give proiai>tand vigor- is etttct to the agreement may be more clearly apparent. Second. The pertinency of the suggestion contained in the third sub- vision of Lord Salisbury's proposal is not apparent to the President. le statutes of the United States explicitly prohibit the landing- of any issels at T,uc seal islands and the residence thereon of any ptirson un- 8s specifically authorized by the Secrciiary of the Treasury. It is, enlbre, obvious that no consular functions could be discharged upon e islands by any representative of Her Majesty's Government. The resident regards this law as declaring an exception as to the residence consuls within the meaning of article 4 of the ronvention of coiu- Tce and navigation of December 22, 1815, between Her Majesty's vernment and the United States. If the proposal is intended to re- e U) the islands of fSt. Paul and St. (ieorge, and has for its object eoss for such agents of the Government of Her Majesty as may be pointed to investigate f^^ts that may be involved in the pending oposals for arbitration, or in the hearing before the arbitrators, lam ectcd by the Pre'Ldent to say that, in the event of an agreement for isation as in tliBblti atiou of the questions in dispute between Great Britain and the IT power who nl^iited States, he would be willing to extend reasonable facilities to of sealmg i»y»eat Britain foi the investigation at the islands of any facts involved 'AUNCEFOTE-B ^'" (controversy. ^Third. The fourth clause of the proposal of Her Majesty's Goveru- nt, limiting the t ikiiig effect of the modus vivendi upon the assent of ssia, presents what seems to the President an insuperable difliculty, KM adherence to that suggestion by Her Majesty's Government will, Ills opinion, prevent the conclusion of any agreement, and wili inev- bly cause such a delay as to thwart the purposes which ho must sup- State, Bseboth Governments have had in view. IJ^ is surprised that this June 4, 1891.fclt did not suggest itself to Lord Salisbury, and does not doubt that to vour iioteVi'l bo appaiont to him on a reexamination. I am also directed to lilted States tB^'id you that the contention between the United States and Great ruue4, 1891.) of Salisbury 's Governme sed to be m \. Blaine to ll it to the six oy i)ropose , of whom t in who shall inline and om externiinatii Great Britain ?'s Goveruiiv 36 BERING SEA. Britain bas been, limited to that part of Behring Sea eastward of tin liiie of demarcation described in our convention with Russia, to whic reference has already been made, and that Russia has never assertei any rights in these waters affecting the subject-matter of this contei tion, and can not therefore be a necessary party to these negotiations, if they are not now improperly expanded. Under the statutes of tli United Stages, the President is authorized to prohibit sealing in tin Behring Sea within the limits described in our convention with Russi and to restrict the killing of seals on the islands of the United Stat but no authoriy is conferred upon him to prohibit or make penal tbi taking of seals in the waters of Behrijig Sea westward of the line referre to or upon any of the shores or islands thereof. It was nf ver supposei by anyone representing the Government of the United ■'tn^js in tliii correspondence, or by the President, that an agree . .-a» . > luoditi Vivendi could be broader than the subject of contenl '^ fi' a in tL correspondence of the respective Governments. Negotiations for an arbitration have been proceeding between th Unit^c" States and Great Britain, and, if these powers are competcii! to settle by this friendly method their respective rights and relatiom in the disputed waters upon a permanent basis, it would seem to folio tLat no question could arise as to their comi)eteucy to deal directly witi the subject for a single season. If Great Britain now insists upon in possible conditions, viz, that the 'joiic'.asion of the modus vivendi is ti be delayed until, and made contingent upon, the assent of Russia ti stop the killing of seals on its own islands and in its own waters, am upon the exercise by the President of powers not conferred by law] this would be, in his opinion, a practical withdrawal by Great Britiiii from the negotiations for a modus vivendi. This he would very mucl regret, and he confidently hopes that a reconsideration will enai'li Lord Salisbury to waive the suggestion of Russia's participation in ' agreement and the inclusion of other waters than those to which i contention between the United States and Great Britain relatea- lu case the terms of the modus vivendi are agreed upon, the Piv i^ " f| suggests that a i»rovision, heretofore considered in another uoimv -t. ^^ in the general correspondence, by which the naval or other duly con missioned officers of either party may arrest any offending vessel aiii turn it over at the neareut port of the nation whose flag it carries f( such judicial proceedings as the law provides, should be incorporat here, the more effectuully to carry out the stipulatious of the respectiv Governments toprciiibit their citizens and vessels from taking seals ii the specified waters of Behring Sea. Having, with a view to an exigency which he has several times caii» to be explained to you, promptlj res[)onded to the suggestions of youi note of yesterday, the President directs me to say that he will In. , >;» to have from Lord Salisbury a prompt response to these sugg- ■•■•■; 1 am further directed by the President to say that your nou- < same date, referring to the conditions of the proposed arbitratio. , ^ stating the objection of Lord Salisbury to some points in the proi)o.si of Mr. Blaine, will have the early attention of the President. I have, etc., WjLLii*.A V. Whaeton, Acting Secretary. Sir: In •elative tc Its cont ;ni louor * J i: [rem h .s 1( lemoiand lbs rier Majes \irendi, if ag Iflicors of eit \oTt of the n i(iP8." By 1 le United 8i k the prop( IpinioD.entil loiuling pon nl iHlunds. 500 seals is i lajt'sty's Qo^ gM of satis ^' issiiii suggests ,*ki ij of a ''/dshi[ :int. bi i i.ion t< ler Maj« ..ibjec Lo)(* Salisb aginary lin " 't will hi e possession III couclnsio utter of grei 'bitration at lueasnre wh: Sir : I ant ei't satisfa y note of f >li8l)iiry th )8oliitely M BERING SEA. 87 ;ward of th lia, to wbic ver asserte this conteii legotiationsj itutes of tU laling in th with Russii nited Stat le penal tbj sliuereferrei \rer suppose :itHt«j8 in thi r ,V- ; >. tnodiii BV. ■■■ a in 111 between thJ re competeuj and relation^ leem to folio* 1 directly witlj sists npon iin s Vivendi is t of Russia tl u waters, anij "erred by Great Britiii!| Id very uiucl n will eniU' ipation in •"; i to whicb ia| relates- ^ the Piv iu Iv ler coiiiit^ • her duly com lug vessel aii^ it carries foj incorporate the respectivJ iking seals i^ il times cause! Bstions of jouj willlM , >•:»« SUgfe' ■? ur non bitratio. u the proi)osa| lent. [ABTON, ng Secretary Sir Julian Paunce/ote to Mr. Whurton, British Legation, Washington, June 6, 1891. I SiE : Immediately on the receipt of your note of the 4th inatant. relative to the proposed modus vivendi in Behring Sea, I communicated Its cont ;nts to the Marquis of Salisbury by telegraph. I have now the lioiior * J inform you that late last night I received a telegraphic reply from h s lordship, of which the substance is contained in the inclosed lemoiandnm. I have, etc.) Julian Paunoefote. BEHRINO SEA MODUS VIVENDI. (Ino^oinre in Sir Jalian Pauncerote'a letter. — Memornndam.] Her Majesty's Government accept the proposal of the President that the modus iiTiirfi, if agreed upon, should provide that "the naval or other duly commissioned Dicers of either party may arrest any offendiu^^ vesso! and turn it over to the nearest ort of the nation whose flag it carries for such Judicial proceedings ps the law pro- ides." By accepting this proposal Her Majesty's Government give 1 1 the cruisers of e United States the power of supervising t\w conduct of British si; ijects iu observ- lij; the proposed agreement at sea. This is a concession which, in Lord Salisbury's pillion, entitles Her Majesty's Government to ask from the United States the corre- oiiding power of supervising the proceedings of the United States citizens on the a! islands. It is on the fidelity with whicli the condition of not killing more than ■)00 seals is observed that the equality of the proposed agreement depends. Her ajesty's Government, therefore, regard it as indispensable that they should have the );M of satisfying themselves that this condition is fnlly observed ijy citizens of the M States. If there be an objection on the part of the United States Govern- to issuing an exequatur to a permanent consul on the seal i^^ilauds, Lord Salis- 8uggests that rhey can, urdoi the statute "«peciflcally authorize " the residence -.■^ of a British agent during the present season. : U^dship will not insist on the condition that Kussia shall be a party to the i'^nt. but he must earnestly press the United States Government to extend the ii i vion to their citizens and vessels over the entire area of Behring Sua. In that Her Majesty's Giovernment on their part wi'.I "'railarly extend the prohibition to .iibjecta anri vessels. LcKi Salisbury voints out that, if seal-hunt' prohibited «/n one side of a purely Bfriuary line drawn in the open ocean, whil ) u is permitted ca the other side of the e, it will be impossible in many oases to prove unlawful staling or to infer it from le imssession of skins or fishing tackle. In conclusion, Lord Salisbury states that Her Majec^j':; liovernment consider it a latter of great importance thai the two Governments should agree on the terms of bitrution at the same time as on a modus vivendi. The suspension of sealing is not iueasure which they oould repeat another year. Julian Paunckfote. fkr.' Mr. Wharton to Sir Julian Pauncefote. Department of State, Washington, June 6, 1891. iSm : I am directed by the President to s'ty that he has received with hut satisfaction the note of Lord Salisbury of to-day's date in reply to (y note of the 4th instant. Be directs mo to ask you to remind Lord ftli8l)iiry that the limitation of the killing of seals upon the islands is psoliitely within the control of the United States, as a daily count is S. i:x. S 14 38 BERING SEA made by sworn officers, and to inform him that already, in order to as- sure such control pending these negotiations, the agents of theTreasury Department, who have been dispatched to the seal ^'^lauds, have been instructed to stop the killing wiien 7,500 have been taken and to await the arrival of further orders, though ordinarily the takiLig of seals on the islands does not begin until about July 1. The enforcement of an agreed limitation being so fully in the control of the United States, the President is sure that Lord Salisbury will not question the absolute good faith of this Government in observing its stipulation to limit tl'o C:;\b to 7,600. This Goverumeut could not, of course, consent to any a: ; ent that implied such a doubt or involved any foreign super visic the islands. If the prompt and effectual recall of the fleet o(| Canau a sealers now at sea was as fully within the control of Great! Britain, the President would not have suggested the provision for the arrest by either party of vessels violating the prohibition, but would! have rested conftdeutly in the assurance given by Her Majesty's Gov. ernraent. But in view of the fact that the evidence which the respective gov eruments will present to the arbitrators (if that hai)i)y solution of thi pending difficulties shall be attained) must be collected during present season, and as the definitive agreement for arbitration can nol be concluded contemporaneously with this agreement, the I'residen directs me to say that he is quite willing to agree that Her Majesty'i Government may send to the seal islands, with a view to collecting thi facts that may be involved in an arbitration, and especially facts relal ing to seal life and to the results of the methods which have been |)ur| sued in the killii';? of seals, a suitable person or persons to make tin necessary observa,tion8. The present and the comparative condition of the rookeries may become an important consideration before arbi trators in a certain event, and the President would not ask that tbi evidence upon this snl)j<»ct should be wholly from one side. He i desirous that the prohibition of the killing of seals for this season sba be as wide and absolute as possible, and will iiot omit the exerciei of any power confided to him by law to promote that end. He directi me to assure Lord Salisbury that he is extremely desirous to bring to speedy conclusion the pending negotiations for the submission to iinj partial arbitration of the points of difference between the two govern ments, and regrets that, for reasons which have been explained to yon an immediate answer can not be returned to his lordship's note iipoi that subject of the 2d instant. He feels sure, however, that the prouiji announcement of an agreement for a modus for this season, while tben is yet time to make it mutually effective, will not fail to have a happ] influence upon the final negotiations. It is hoped that authority may be given to you, as the representati of Her Majesty's Government at this capital, to conclude, imraediatel] upon the passage of the bill now pending in Parliament, the followin] agreement : For the purpose of avoiding irritating differences and with a viow proinote a friendly settlement of the questions pending between t governments of Great Britain on the one side and the United States America on the other, touching the rights of the respective nationsi! the Bering Sea, the following agreeinent is made, which shall have effect to limit or prejudice the rights or claims of either power, excc] as therein expressly stipulated and for the ti-ne therein limited : (1) The Government of Great Britain will prohibit until May, 181 the killing of seals in all that part of the Behring Sea lying east, Ihj ins Sir: h Olh orhs vivei liic'li I con 'iiry. ^ liave th iisinits loiis and at I IX'g tt> j 'OUgil to 81 I hav< for tiio pari "I'lly settlen BERING SEA. 89 >rder to as- leTreasury , have been! nd to await of seals on >ment of ani [ States, tbel be absolute] to limit tb sent to atiyl reign superf f the fleet ofl rol of GreatI ision for tliel I, but wouldl ajesty's Gov| spective gov •lution of till ;1 during th ation can noi the I'resideni Her Majesty'i collecting thi lly facts relaf ive been pur J to make tbi ive condition! lu before arbi^ ask til at thi side. He ii season sbal the exercii He di recti s to bring to uission to m\ le two gov ained to yoi ip's note upo^ at the prouiii in, while tberj have a happl representrttivj u, immediiitel , the folloffini with a view I r between tl nited States! itive nations 1 shall have I power, excepi wardly, or southeastwardly of the line described in article 1 of the con- vention between the United States and Russia of date March 30, 1807, aiid will promptly take sucli steps as are best calculated effectively to insure the observance of this proliilution by the subjects and citizens |oI' Great Britain and all vessels flying its flag. (2) TheGovernmentof the United States will prohibit until May, 1892, |ibe killing of seals in that part of Behriug Sea above described, and on be shores and islands thereof, the property of the United States (except bat 7,500 seals, and no more, may be taken on the islands) ; and the overnment of the United States will promptly take such steps as are est calculated effectively to insure the observance of this prohibition y the citizens of the United States and the vessels flying its flag. (;}) All vessels or persons violating the laws of their respective gov- rnnients in this regard outside the ordinary territorial limits may b'^ eized and detained by the naval or other duly commissioned officers of itber of the high contracting parties, but they shall be handed over soon as practicable to the authorities of the nation to which they espectively belong for trial and for the imposition of the penalties and 'orleitures provided by law. (Jr) In order to facilitate such proper inquiries as Her Majesty's Gov- rnnient may desire to make with a view to the i)resentation of the case f that Government Wt>re arbitrators, and in the expectation that an grcement for arbitration nay ultimately be reached, it is agreed that a iiitiible person or persons, to be designated by Great Britain, will be )erniitted at any time, upon application, to visit or to remain upon the eal islands during the present sealing season for that purpose. I have, etc., William F. Wharton, Atiting Secretary. Sir Julian Pauncefote to Mr. Wharton. British Legation, WaHhington, June H, 1801. StR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your note of jbe Olh instant containing the terms of a proposed agreement for a \mh(s Vivendi during the present seal flshery season in liehring Sea, pirli I communicated at once by telegraph to the Marquis of Salis- |iiry. bave this day received a reply from his lordship, in which he iiisniits a draft of the projtosed agreement, with certain modiflca- |ons and additions, 1 bt'g to inclose a copy of it, and to request that you will be good Mough to submit it to your Government for their connrideration. 1 have, etc., Julian Pauncefote. inni tod AGKKKMENT. [looloft.ire in Sir Julian Paiincefote's letter.] itil May, 18» lying east, * It'or the purpose of HvoiiliiiK irritating diileroiKv^s and wiHi u view to promote l«n(lly Hettlemeut of the qneHtions ptMidiiig l)etwecn the two OovcriuneutH, touching 40 BEEING SEA. their respective rights in Behring Sea and for preservation of the seal species, tliJ following agreement is made without prejudice to the rights or claims of eitliei] party : (1) Her Majesty's Government will prohibit, until May next, seal killing in tliaij Sart of Behfing Sea lying eastward of the line of demarcation described in article o. 1 of the treaty of 1807 between the United States and Russia, and will pronipilJ use best ettbrts to insure observance of prohibition by British subjects and vessels. (5J) The United States Government will prohibit seal killing lor the same period iol the same part of Behring Sea and on the shores and islands thereof, the proper y of the United States (in excess of 7,r>0U to be taken on the Lslands as food skins, aur' that niitioa 1 tliis clni'' 'I'luuu'iitslial a most ex' ordinary, and not altogether clear, condition (T quote), •• to be taken on I lie shores and islands as food skins, and not for tax or shipment." This new condition is entirely inadmissible and, in the opinion of the 1 'resident, inconsistent with the assent air»^ad^, given by Her Majes- tv's Government to tlie proposition of the United States in tliat be- liiilf. It had been particnlarly explsiined in the correspondence that the Itssees of the privilege of taking seals upon the islands assumed obli- {{iitions to supply to the natives the food and other things necessary for llii'ir subsistence and comfort, and that the taking of the limited num- ber of seals was not onlv to supply Hesh to the natives, but, in some part, to recompense the«;ompany forfurnishingotherneeessary articles (if food, clothing, and fuel. The President is surprised that it should now be suggested that cone of these skins should be removed from the ■"'.ivud, aud he can not understand how British interests can be promoted by allowing them to go to waste. The previous communications of Her Majesty's Government had, in jthe opinion of the President, concluded this matter. As to the third clause of your proi)osition, I am directed to say that he contention between the TJnited States and Great Britain has rela- ion solely to the respective rights of the two governments in the waters f EeliringSea outside of the ordinary territorial limits, aud the stipu- lations for the cooperation of the two govtiuments daring this season ave, of course, the same natural limitation. This is recognized in rticles 1 and 2 of your jn-oposal, for you will observe that the obliga- ion assumed by Her Majesty's Government is to prohibit seal-killing 11 a certain i»art of Beliring Sea, whereas the obligation assumed in lie second article by the Government of the United States is to pro- libit seal killing in the same part of Behring Sea and the shores and slands thereof, the property of the United States. The killing, there- 'ore, of seals on the islands or within the territorial waters of the United tatt's falls only within the prohibition of this Government. His lord- liip will also see that it is altogether beyond the power of the Presi- ent to stipulate that an offense committed in the undisputed territory f tiie United States against its laws shall be triable only in the courts if another nation. The extension of this clause to the territory and imitorial waters of the United States, therefore, involves an insuper- lile legal difficulty on our part and a concession which no independent ovcninieut could be expected to make. The mutual police, which is |0 be stipulated for, could not, in the nature of things, api)ly to the jeriitorial waters within the undisputed and exclusive jurisdiction of litiier. To the fourth clause, which is in substance the same as the proposi- iou made by this Government, no objection is interposed. As to the fifth clause, 1 am directed to say that the President regards « proposition to appoint a joint conunission to investigate and report to what regulations or international agreements are necessary to pre- rve the seal fisheries to be one of tho incidents of the agreement for bitiation aiid to have no proper place here. This distinction seems liavo been recognized by his lordship, and his proposal of such a niiiiission was made part of the separate note discussing the terms of liitration presented by you on June 3, and has never until now ap- ared in the correspondence relating to a modus Vivendi. The Presi- iit tliinks the fourth clause, which has been accepted, makes ample fseiit provision, but will give a full consideration to the suggestion of joiut commission in connection with the negotiation for arbitration. 42 BERINQ SL:A. To the sixtli and last clause the President directs me to say that, so far as lie is aware, no vessel bearing the Russian flag has at any time intruded into the waters described in the proposed agreement. He is entirely in sympathy with the expressed desire of Lord Salisbury to secure such .limitations as to the hunting of seals in the whole of Ber- ing Sea as will preserve to mankind this valuable industry ; but he does not think that an agreement to unite in any joint note to Russia should be interposed here and at this time. Moreover, Lord Salisbury will perceive that, in the present state of the Americjiu law, if Russia should ask for reciprocal action by this Government west of the treaty line, the] President would be confronted with the same difficulty that prevented him from extending the agreement with Her Majesty's Government to| the whole of Behring Sea. As the President understands, the adhesion of the two Governments has been given in this correspondence to the following propositions: For the purpose of avoiding irritating differences and with a view to promote friendly settlement of the questions pending between the two Governments, touching their respective rights in Behring Sea, and fori the preservation of the seal species, the following agreement is made without prejudice to the rights or claims of either party : (1) Her Majesty's Government will prohibit, until May next, seal- killing in that part of Behring Sea lying eastward of the line of deniarl kation described in article ^o. 1 of the ireaty of 18H7 between tlie United States and Russia, and will promi)tly use its best etForts to insure tliel observaace of the prohibition by British subjects and vessels. (2) The United States Government will prohibit seal-killing for thel same period in the same part of Behring Sea and on the shores and is- lands thereof, the property of the Tiiited States (in excess of 7,500 t()b« taken on the islands for the subsistence and care of the natives), and] will promptly use its best elforts to insure the observation of this prohi bition by United States citizens and vessels. (3) Every vessel or person offending against this prohibition in tlie| said waters of Behring Sea, outside of the ordinary territorial limits ol the United States, may be seized and detained by the naval or otlierj duly commissioned otticers of either of tlie high contracting parties, bul they shall be handed over as soon as i)racticable t() the authorities ol the nation to which they respectively belong, who shall alone havejuri* diction to try the offense and impose tiie penalties for the same. Tbi witnesses and proofs necessary to establish the offense shall also be seni with them. (4) In order to facilitate such proper inquiries as Her Majesty's Gof ernment may desire to make with a view to the presentation of the ca of that Government before arbitrators, a'ld in expectation thatanagi ment for arbitration may be arrived at, it is agreed that suitable per] sons designated by Great Britain will be permitted at any time, u|)Oi application, to visit or to remain u[)on the seal islands during the preSj ent sealing season for that puri)08e. The President directs me to inform you that the Government of tfc United States is ready to conclude this agreement, if it can be put inti force immediately. The value of such an agreement to the Uiiiti' States is daily lessening, and the President therefore feels that hemus] ask that the negotiations be brought to a speedy determination. I have, eto.| William F. Wharton, SiE: I June 9, d transmits l)ropo8ed fishery se; suggested 1 have lordship, j tliereon in while, wit been sugg point out a desire t( is possible of the seal In my b Niiggestiou coiisideraii tioM in arti which you and sale of cover the iiiitives. I and redrlvi resorted to stated by e on the islar I would Agent C. J also to the **; and tha oltiie same As regar< "0 means ai countries. arbitration i 1)6 signed ( But as your tiation to a liigbeat imp once, in ordt Lord Salisb article provi nvendi, of m ment, be a c Tlic objec; 'appears to n itself in the ^m\ Salisb '•lich excep accede to iii{ 1 hav( BERING SEA. 48 Sir Julian Pauncefote to Mr. Wharton, British Lkgation, Washington, June 10, 1891. Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your note of June 9, delivered this day, in reply to my note of the 8th, in which I ti'iuisinitted for the consideration of your Government the draft of a ])ropo8ed agreement for a modus vivendi during the present fur-seal fishery season in Behriug Sea, with certain modifications and additions •suggested therein by the Marquis of Salisbury. I have telegraphed the substance of your note under reply to his lordship, and 1 hope to be able to communicate to you his observations thereon in the course of to-morrow or the following day. In the mean- while, with reference to the com])liunt that new conditions should have been suggested at this stage by Lord Salisbury, I would beg leave to point out that all his lon injurious pr.ictice of driving and ledriving the herds to the killing grounds for selection, which is resorted to in the case of seals killed " for tax and shipment," and is stilted by experts to be the main cause of the depletion of male seal life on the islands. I would refer you on this point to the report of Special Treasury Afient 0. J. Goff, laid before Congress (Ex. Doc. No. 49), pp. 4 and 29 j also to the report of Assistant Treasury Agent Joseph Muri'ay, at page 8; and that of Assistant Treasury Agent A. W. Lavender, at page 9, of the same Oongre'jsional paper. As regards Lord Salisbury's proposal of a joint commission, it is by' 110 means anew cue. it has long been called for by public opinion in both countries. It *Yas inserted among Lord Salisbury's last proposals for the arbitration agreement in the expectation that the latter document would be signed contemporaneously with the agreemeut for a modus vivendi. But as your Government is not prejiared to bring the arbitration nego- tiation to a conclusion without further (consideration, and as it is of the bighest importance that the joint commission should be appointed at once,in order to enterupon its functionsduringthepreseutfishery season, Lord Salisbury has had no alternative but to urge the insertion of the article providing for a joint commission in the agreement for the modus tivendi, of which it should, in the opiniou of Her Majesty's Govern- ment, be a component part. The objection of the President to that article in the modus vivendi appeiirs to me to create the greatest ditiiculty which has yet presented itself in the course of this negotiation, and I earnestly hope that, if Lord Salisbury should be disposed to waive the other conditions to which exception is taken in your note, the President, on his part, will accede to his lordships wishes in respect of the joint commission. 1 have, etc., Julian Paunoefotb. 44 BERING SEA. Sir Julian Paunce/ote to Mr. Wharton. British Legation, Washinf)ton, June 11, 1891. Sir: With reforence to my note of yesterday, and especially to tlie conclndiug part of it, I have the honor to inform you that 1 liave tills day received by telegraph from the Marquis of Salisbury a reply to the l)roposal for a modus Vivendi during the present fur-seal fishery season in Behring Sea, contained in your note of .June 1). His lordship states that the Presi(1ent's refusal to adopt his sugges tions with respect to Russia renders the proposed modus vivendi much less valuable, and that he is reluctant to abandon the words which bu had proposed for insertion in article 2 in relation to the reservation of the 7,500 seals to be killed on the islands. Nevertheless, in view of the urgency of the case, his lordship is dis posed to authorize me to sign the agreement in the precise terms formu' lated in your note of June 9, ))rovided the question of a, joint commis- sioD be not left in doubt and that your Government will give an assiir ance in some form that they will concur in a reference to a joint com- mission to ascertain what permanent measures are necessary for the preservation of the fur-seal species in the Northern Pacific Ocean. I have the honor, therefore, to inquire whether the President is pre- pared to give that assurance, and, if so, 1 shall, on receipt of it, lose no time in communicating it by telegraph to Lord Salisbury and in ap plying to his lordship for authority to sign the proposed agreement. I have, etc., Julian Paunoefote. Mr. Wharton to Sir Julian Pauncefote. Department of State, Washington, June 11, 1891. Sir : I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your note of tO' day's date, and in reply I jim directed by the President to say thattlie Government ot the United tSlntes, recognizing the fact that full and adequate measures for the protection of seal life should embrace the whole of Behring Sea and portions of the North Pacific Ocean, will have no hesitancy in agreeing, in connection with Her Majesty's Gov- ernment, to the appointment of ajoint commission to ascertain what per- manent measures are necessary for the preservation of the seal specief) in the waters referred to, such an agreement to be signed simulta- neously with the convention for arbitration, and to bo without preju- dice to the questions to be submitttd to the arbitrators. A full reply to your note of June 3 relating to the t^rms of arbitra tion will not be long delayed. I have, etc., William F. Wharton, ■ - • Acting Secretary. Sir Julian Pauncefote to Mr. Wharton, British Legation, Washington, June 13, 1891. Sir : I lost no time in telegraphing to the Marquis of Salisbury thej contents of your note of June 11, conveying the assent of your Goveru-f BERING SEA. 46 ATION, 11, 1891. ially to tliel 1 have tliial reply to the I liery sea hod | his sugges- Ivendi much (Is which b«| servatiou of| dship is (lis- erins tbrniu- )int commis- ve ail assur- a joint com- isary for tlie [i Ocean, lident is pro- of it, lose no •y and in ap greeuient. UNOEFOTE. ;tate, le 11, 1891. [urnoteofto- 3 say that the fhat full and [embrace the c Ocean, will lajesty's Oov- ];ain what per- ^ seal specie)! [ned siniulta- ithout preju Is of arbitral 1 ment to the appointment, in connection with Her Majesty's Govern- ment, of a joint commission for the purpose mentioned in my note to you of the same date, such agreement to be signed simultaneously with tlic, convention for arl)itration, and to be without prejudice to the ques- 1 lions to be submitted to the arbitrators. I informed his lordship at the same time that, in handing me the note I under reply, you had assured me that the President was anxious that the commission should be appointed in time to commence its work this Keasou, and that your Government would, on that account, nse their I utmost ofiForts to expedite the signature of the arbitration convention. 1 now have the honor to inforn) you that I have this day received a Itelegraphic reply from Lord Salisbury, in which, while conveying tome lauthority to sign the proposed agreement for a modus vivendi contained lin your note of June 9, his lordship desires me to place on record that lit is signed by me on the clear understanding that the joint commission I will be appointed without delay. On that understanding, therefore, I shall be prepared to attend at the [State Department, for the purpose of signing the agreement, at such [tiuie as yon may be good enough to appoint. I have, etc., Julian Paunoefote. Mr. Wharton to Sir Julian Pauncefoie. Department op k3tate, Washington, June 13, 1891. Sir: The President directs me to say, in response to your note of lihis (late, that his assent to the proposition for a joint commission, as pi)r(;88e(I in my note of June 9, was given in the expectation that both Movernments would use every proper eftort to adjust the remaining poiuts of ditterence in thOi general correspondence relating to arb'*ra- [ion, and to agree upon the definite terms of a submission and (s -ke Appointment of a joint commission without unnecessary delay. He is glad that an agreement has finally been reached for the pend- ing season ; and I beg to say that, if you will call at the Department at lO o'clock Monday next, I will be glad to put into writing and give |ormal attestation to the modus vivendi which has been agreed upon. I have, etc., William F. Whabton, Acting Secretary. ^.BTON, Secretary. Modus vivendi respecting the fur-seal fisheries in liehring Sea. BT THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OP AMEIUCA. ATION, \e 13, 1891. Jalisbnry tliej /our Goveru-I A PROCLAMATION. I Whereas an agreement for a modus vivendi between the Government Pthe United States and the Government of Her Britannic Majesty, iiKlation to the fur-seal fisheries in Behring Sea, was concluded on 46 BERING 3EA. tlie flftcoiitli day of Juno, in the year of our Lord one tli«j4i8an(l eigh hun.lred and ninety-one, word for word aH follows: Agreement between the (larernment of the Utiiled Statee and the (lovemment of Her /(Hdii ftto Majettji for a modus virendi in relation to the fur-teal Jisherien in IMiriiig Sm. IIIIIICC ( )f tl the mod II TliiH(i()V« iicli Inst r IK iciit on the i hav Sir: I have •ell ixHiicd b; Idtisli (lover; Very rei For tho piirpoHe of avoiding irritatiug differences aud with a view to promntotli riendly sottlenieiit of tho question pending between tlie two Governnienta loiicliiii [heir respective rights in Behring Sen, and (or the preservation of the seal spccioH, tli following agreement is made without prejudice to the rights or claims ut' eithi party: (1) Her Majesty's Oovernmont will prohibit, until May next, seal killing in tha part of Behring Sea lying eastward of tne line of demarcation described in Article .Vi 1 of the treaty of 18fi7 between the United States vid Russia, and will promptly in its best efforts to ensure the observance of this prohibition by Itritish siibjeettt andv« sets. (2) The United States Government will prohibit seal killing for the samu period the same part of Behring Sea and on the shores and islands thereof, the ]irnpert,v the United States (in excess of 7,600 to be taken on tho islands for the subsiste'ni i . i- i and care of the natives), and will promptly use its best ertorts to ensure the obsen [ n l' i"."'i ancoof this prohibition by United States citiitens and vessels. :'' ' (3) Kveryvessel or person offending against this prohibition in ihe said watersc Behring sea outside of Ihe ordinary territorial limits of the United itcs, mayb seized and detained by tho naval or other duly commissioned oflloerp bur of tl High Contracting Parties, but they shall bo handed over as soon as ) \ble tot authorities of the nation to which they respectively belong, who shall we juiii diction to try the offense and impose the penalties for the same. The witrositeNan proofs necessary to establish the offense shall also be sent with them. (4) In order to facilitiite such pro]>er inquiries as Her Majesty's Qovein'ocut^ ; desire to make, with a view to the presentation of the case of that Governiiiflnt fore arbitrators, and in expectation that an agreement for arbitration may bn arriv at, it is agreed that suitable i)crHons designated by Great Britain will be piTiiiiti at any time, upon application, to visit or to remain upon the seal islands during ihl present sealing season for that purpose. Signed and sealed in duplicate at Washington, this lifteenth day of Juno, 1891, behalf of their respective Governments, by William F. Wharton, Acting Secretary State of the United States, aud Sir Julian Pauucefote, G.C.M. G.,K.C.B.,H.B. Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary. WiLUAM F. Wharton [seal], Julian Pauncefote [seal], Now, therefore, be it known that I, Benjamin Harrison, Presiclento the United States of America, have caused the said agreement to I made public, to the end that the same and every part thereof may observed and fulfilled with good faith by the United States of Americi aud the citizens thereof. In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand aud caused theseaj of the United States to be affixed. Done at the City of Washington this fifteenth day of June, in tlij year of our Lord, one thousand eight hundred and ninety-one, and the Indei)endence of the United States the one hundred and fit'teeutl^ [SEAL.] BENJ. HAKUISON. By the President: William F. Wharton, Acting Secretary of State. jLOMMANDINO Procliiiimtif irlot Siiii 1'' iriicwil with IfSililiii;; vc lllilt IlilUl "Hill to liav< mlice. Fun illi lisl.s of fiirtliiT ins rl to .Saiul iliuguii his ICOMMAN'DING Mr. Wharton to Sir Julian Pauncefote, Department of State, Washington, June 20, 1891. Sir: I have the honor to transmit to you herewith copies of thei^ BtractiODS that have been issued by the Secretary of the Navy, in pi> lam luir pMident/s pi ' with ill P*"'!!-. Not J"uiite8, iiiayh \«rj rtspecttully, B. P. Thacy, Secretary of the Navy. Mr. Tracy to commanding officer of Thetii. ITeleerain.] y of Juno, 1891,o^0MMANniNa Officwr IT, Acting Secretary ».,K.C.B.,H.B S. 8. Thetis, San FranviHco, Cal. Navy DRPARTintNT, Washington, June 1.5, 1891. caused the sea of June, in tlil Procliitiiiition of President doHinii BMriiig Sea has been telegraphed to collector of riot' Siin I'rivnclsco. Make immediate ap|)Iication for copies as soon ns received ; iMteiMJ with Thetis to Sa'id Point, Pojjott' Island ; distribute the proclamation among sailini^ vcsselH. Wiirn master of each vessel to whom you mar deliver proclama- illiiil name of vessel has been taken, and that vessel will be liable to capture if "111(1 to liave l)een or to be sealing in Herin};; .Se;i east of lino of demarcation alter miioe. Furnish all United States and Hritish vessels of war and revenue cutters itii llitls of vettsels warned. Remain in neighborhood of Sand Point until receipt fiirllii'i' instructions, which will be sent by Marion. Receive ou board and triins- >rt til Sand Point, C. H. Bullard, deputy collector of customs, but do not debiy liliug oil his account. Tracy. Af*". Tracy to commanding officer of Mohican. Navy Department, Washington, June 15, 1891. ICmimaxdinq Officer U. 8. 8. Mohican, San Francisco, Cal. : itiiiii immediately from collector of customs, San Francisco, printed copies of iilcnl's proclaraition in reference to Boring Si'a. On receipt of such copies, pro- 'e*d T If so. you must conminnicate with liiini Suud Point where her o.ders of yesterday directed her to await your arrival. On roceipt of 'ais order proceed Immediately lo Bering Sea with Thetis, Mohican, ami Alert, Tel graph departure. B. F. Tracy. Tiie foil ifficer at stj's shij f demure nga)' Br s to confl lately ofl irosecutio ikrately ogc titer V ng Ui, te( Uor Ma fl!!-. shiji <\mun\ til rniiieiits 1 essHl of t; tlier iiatit Hit Maj lents sha, lifted iu he vesseh Sir Julian Paancefote to Mr. Wharton. British Legation, Washington, June 21, 18!)l. Sir : I have the honor to inform you that I have received a commiiiiij catun from .Ber Majesty's principal secretary of state for foreign aflaii* to the effect that the Qneeu has been graciously jileased to a])poiiit Si'l George Baden Powcl, M. P., and Prof. Dawson, commipsioners to i)roT ceed to the Priby!off Islands for the purpose ol exaniintng into the tiirj seal fishery in Berng Sea. In accordance with the instruction of the Marquis of Balisbuiy.ll BERING SEA. 49 b least the mas I 1 of her crew ail declaiation inl giving Intitiidtl and send, with| of seized ves* of seized veasell tte stating aiul ;o since seiiiiire.f given, nnd liir-j of list. Bcforel , to coal at Ooiil nds, rendezvouil 8 and Alert, audi rect him to coui-| Tracy. jliave tb'j honor to request that i)ermission may be granted to these jgentleuieu to visit and remain on those islands during the current fish- |ery season. I have, etc., JJLIAN TAUNCEIFOTE. CPAKTMENT. June Ifi, le'.il, States vespcl: ibute the force inl (vith the ordt'iHot m. Instrnct •t*! t'j Oonalaska, to| h aiarine giiiird. Bvenne cntit isto| Utilize the i Imr- rlomation and t«| horitiesof n;itioD I, and Mohi(iiii\o\ 'oint, as dincitd, nre to Ooimliish Point about .Iniyl ^ two ■wt'eltion, wliicli deals witli the issi^es that will arise in case tlie contm- rsv HhoiiM he decided in favor of Grout Uritain, wonld, perliap.s, more Htly form |eHiilisiiiiu;e of a seiiurate reCereiioe. Her Majesty's Governineiit have no ol)Je<'tio:i rcltirlng the general (inesliou of a closed time to arbitration, or to ascertain l)y lit iin'!inH tiow tar the enactment of siicli apmviHion is necessary for tlie preserva- |>ii of tlie Heal species ; liiit nucIi rul'erenee ought not to contain words appearing to jtribiite special and abnormal rigitts in the mutter to the United States. S. Ex. 56- 50 BERING SEA. I am uow directed by the President to submit the following, which | he thinks avoids the objection urged by Lord Salisbury : (C) If the determination of the foregoing questions as to the excliisivel jurisdiction ot the United States shall leave the subject in such \m\-[ tion that the concurrence of Great Britain is necess^Hry to the estiililish I raentof regulations for the proper protection and the preservation ofl the fur seal in, or habitually resorting to, the Bering Sv'*a, thearbitratorsj shall .on determine what concurrent regulations outside ihe juris- dic< a1 limits of the respective Governments are necessary, and cverl what waters such regulations should extend ; and, to aid them in thatl determination, the report of the joint commission, to be appointed bTJ the respective Governments, shall be laid before them, v itli such otherl evidence as either Government may submit. The contracting powers! furthermore agree to cooperate in securing the adhesion of other! powers to such regulations. In your note of the 3d instant you propose, on behalf of Her Maje8ty's| Government, the following additional article : It shall be competent to the arbitrators to award snch compensntion as, in thcirl judgment, shall seem equitable to the subjects and citizens of either Power wlio shall I be shown to have been damuilied in the pursuit of the industry of sealing bytliel action of the other Power. The President can not give his assent to this form of submitting the! question of compensation. It entirely omits notice of the imi>oitaiitl tact that the Government of the United States, as the owner of tlic sealj fisheries on the Priboloft" Islands, has interests which have beei« iiijiuil ously affected by the pelagic sealing, of which complaint lias been made| in this correspondence. This Government has derived a very large annual income from this! property, and this income has, in the opinion of the President, bt'eul very seriously impaired and imperiled by the de8tru<;tiou of the seal! in the sea while passing to and from the breeding grounds on these! islands. The Government of Her Majesty has directly interposed to! support the Canadian sealers, and will not, the President assumes, (le[ sire to avoid responsibility for any damages which have resulted totliej United States or to its citizens, if it shall be for.nd by the arbitnitorsi that the pursuit of seals by these Canadian vessels in the sea was anl infraction of the rights and an injury to the property of this Goveriir ment. The proposal submitted by you distinctly limits the liability ofl Her Majesty's Government, in ca'jc of a decision in favor of the Uiiitedj States, to compensation to tho citizens of this cou itry. It will be ap-r parent to Lord Salisbury th^it whatever damag«»r, liave resulted froiiii pelagic sealing as pursued by vessels flying ihe British flag have acT orued tc the U 'ited States or to its lessees. The President does iiotj doubt that the purpose of Her Majesty's Government, in the proposall under discussion, was to secure to the party injured equitable coinpi'iiT sation for injuries resulting from what may be found by the arbitratorsj to have been the unlawful and injurious act of either Government. From the note of Lord Salisbury of February 21, to which refereiic«| has been made, I quote the following : There is one omission in these questions which I have no doubt the Government ofl the Presiilcnt will be very glad to repair, and that is the reference to the arliitratorl of the question, what damages are due to the persons who have been injured, in ('iwl it shall hi determined by him that the action of the United States in seizing itiiti8b| vessels )uih been without warrant in international law. I am directed by the President to propose the following seventh audj final clause in the basis of arbitration : (7) It shall be competent to the arbitrators to award such compeDMl BERING SEA. 61 Her Majesty's! ion as, in their jiKlgfinent, sball seem equitable to the subjectH or citi- ;eiis of Great Britain wliose vessels may have been seized by the United tates in the Bering Sea, if such seizures shall be found by the arbitra- ors to have been unwarranted ; i nd it shall also be competent to the rbitriitors to award to the United States such compensation as, in heir judgment, shall seem equitable for any injuries lesulting to the iiitcil States or to the lessees from that Government of the privilege if taking seals on the Pribilott Islands by reason of the killing of seal.s D the Bering Sea by i)ersons acting under the protection of the British ig, outside of the ordinary territorial limits, and since the Is*, day of aiiuary, 1886, if such killing shall be found to have been an infraction the rights of the United States. It being understood thi\t an arrangement for a joint commission is be made contemporaneously with the conclusion of the terms o," rbitration, I am directed by the President to propose the following ieparate agreement : Each Government shall appoint two commissioners to investigate :oiijointly with the commissioners of the other Government all tho acts having relation to seal life in Bering Sea and th^ measures neces- lary for its proi)er i)rotection and preservation. The four commis- lioiiers shall, so far as they way be able to agree, make a joint report acb of the two Governments ; and they shall also report, eitiier oiiitiy or severally, to each Government on any point>^ uy.'m which liey may be unable to agree. These '"^ports shall not bo made public util tliey shall be submitted to the i oitrators, or it sliiiil appear that he contingency of their being used oy the arbit' rs can not arise. 1 have, e*^^c., WiLLlA.; l'\ Whari'oin. Mr. Wharton to Sir Julian Pauncefote. Department of State, Washington, June 20, 1891. Sir: In accordance with the request contained in your note of the list instant, I have the honor to transmit to you herewith a letter ad- Jressed by the. Acting Secretary of the Treasury to William H. Wil- liams, esq., special agent in charge of the seal fisheries in Alirskii, Instructing him to afibrd to Sir George Baden Powell, M. P., and Prof. peor};^ Mercer Dawson, agents of Her Britannic Majesty to the Pribi- off Ishinds, the facilities desired to enable them to examine into the arseal fisheries in Bering Sea. I have, etc. , William F. Wharton. Mr. Wharton to Sir Julian Pauncefote. Department of State, Washington, June 2»», 1891. 1 The Acting Secretary of State presents his compliments to the Britisij piiiister, and has the honor to state that the memorandum that Sir luliaii Pauncefote left at the Department of State on the 24th instant, 'liitivc to the instructions given to Her Britannic Mnj»'st.\'s vessels in P^'iiii^^ Sea, was immediately communicated to the Navy Departmeut Pf its iufornjation. 62 BERING SEA. Sir Julian Pannce/ote to Mr. Wharton. British Legation, Washington, June 27, 1891. Sib : I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt ot your uotcof'tliel 25th instant in relation to the proposed Beiing Sea arbitration, and tol inform you that I transmitted a copy of it to the Marquis of Salisbury! by the mail of the 26th. I have, etc., Julian PArKOEFoiE. Mr. Wharton to Sir JuHan Paunce/ote. Department of State, Washington, July 3, 1891. Sir: Her Majesty's Government having appointed two ageiitG toi visit the Bering Sea under the agreement between that Goveriimentl and the United States of date June 15, 1891, and the President beingl about to designate two persons to visit the Bering Sea for the parposel of examining all questions cojiuected with seal life iu that sea and theT adjacent waters, 1 have the honor to propose that arrangements beBimited made to have these agents of the respective governments go togetber| so that they ur.ty make their observations conjointly. Awaiting such communication as Her Majesty's Government may (lfr| sire to make upon the subject, I have, etc., William F. Wharton. Sir Julian Paunce/ote to Mr. Wharton. British Legation, Washington, July 6, 1891. Sib : I have the honor to acknowledge the receii)t of your note of tliol 3d instant, in which you propose that arrangements be madetoenabla the agents apiiointed by our respective Governments to visit tie Bering Sea for the purpose of "examining int(i .seal life to go together, so tliatj they may make their ob.servations conjointly. I at once communicat«i this proposal to the Marquis of Salisbury bvl telegram, and I have rectived a reply from His Lordship to the effectj that a ship has already h^en chart • red to take the British commission- ers to the seal islands, and that tlie engagement could not now becau] celed, but that the British commissioners will be instructed, when the^ arrive in the islands, to coilperate as much as possible with the comuii* sioners to be appointed by your Government for the purposes of ' inquiry. I have, etc, JTJLIAN PAUNOEFOTE. h'ict. BERING SEA. 53 TJKOEFOTE. Wharton. Sir Julian Fauncefote to lUr, Wharton. British Lhoation, Washington, July 6, 1891. Sir: I have the lionor to transmit to you herewith, in accordance iriili instructions which I. have received from the Marquis of Salisbury, topiivs of an act of Parliament enabling Her Majesty the Queen to pro- J ' ;: by order in council the catching of seals by British ships in Ber- I likewise inclose copies of an order of Her Majesty in council issued In virtue of the powers given by the said act and prohibiting the catch- ing of seals by liritish ships in Bering Sea, within the limits defined jtlieieiii, from the 24fch of June last until the 1st of May, 1892. 1 have, etc., Julian rAUNOEFOTE. ORDER IN COUNCIL. [£nolo8ure 1 in Sir Julian Pauiiccfote's note.] At tlio Court at Windsor, the 23(1 day of June, 1891. Present, the Queen's Most tscclleiit Majesty, Lord President, Earl of Limerick, Mar(|uiB of Salisbury, and Lord rthiirllill. WlutiiMS by tlio Hi'ul iisliery (Herinj; Sea) act, 1891, it is enacted that Her Majesty llie (>'.i('fii may by order in council proliil>it the catching of seals by Hritish ships in kriiij; Sea or such part thereof as is defined by the said order, during the period limitcil liy the order: And wliei'cas the expression " Bering's Sea" in the said act means the seas known iliirinu' Sea within the limits described in ai: order under the said act. J Now tlicrefore, Her Majesty, in virtue of the powers vested in her by the said re- |ile(l act, by and with the advice of her privy council, is hereby pleased to order, inrt it is liereby ordered, as follows: 1(1) This order may be cited as the seal lisluiry (Bering Sea) order in council, 11. (:') From and after the 24th day of June, 1891. until the 1st day of May, 1892, the jjtcliiiiir of seals by British ships in Bering Sea as heveinafter defined is hereby Itoliiliiicd. I (3) For the purposes of the said recited act and of this ordi the expression " Behr- pp's 8cii " means so much of that part of the Pacilie Oceu known as Bering Sea lii-8 bpi '.^een the ])arallel of 65^ '.W north latitude and the chain of the Aleutian lianas, and eastward of the following line of demarcation, that is to say, a line com- wiriiij: at a point in Bering Straits on the said parallel of 65- 30' north latitude, its iiilerscctiou by the meridian which pa-sses midway between the islands of In'soiisipvn or Ignalook and the Island of Katinanotf or Noonarbook; and proceed- Igtiitiiie in a course nearly southwest through Bering Straits and the seas known "iiiiig Sea, so as to pass midway between the northwest point of the island of iiwroiu'e and the southeast jtoint of Cape Chonkotski to the meridian of 172" lf8tloii;,'itude; thence from tlie intersection of that meridian in a southwesterly ptectidii, so as to pa^s midway between the island of Attou and the Copper Islnud Vtho Konnanderski couplet or gronp in the North Pacific Ocean, to the meridian of »" west longitude. C. L. Fbbjl. AUNCEFOTE. I Vict, SEAL FISHERY (BEII RING'S SEA) ACT, 1891. [Knoloaure 2 In Sir Julian Pauncefoto'snote.] Chaptek 19. K the nler. * ACT to enable Her Mnjonty, by 'iiriug the period named in (lie oi illthJmii>, 1801.) |B« it (Miacted by the Queen's Most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and »i»'ni of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Connnons, in this present Parlia- |«iit.H«cnibled, and by the authority of the same, as follows: • (1) Ib^r Majesty the Qneen may, by order in council, prohibit the catching of 8. Ex. 9 13 54 BERING SEA. seals Ity BritiHli sliips in Ruhring's Sea, or such part thereof as is defined hy tbeaail order, ilining tlie period limited by the order. (2) While an order in council under this act is in force — (rt) A person belonging to a British ship shall not kill, or take, or hunt, orattempL to kill or take, any seal within Behring's 8ea during the period limited bj' the order! and (ft) A British ship shall not, nor shall any of the equipment or crew thoreof, I used or employed in such killing, taking, hunting, or attempt. (3) If there is any eontraventiou of this act, any porsoii committing, prociirini aiding, or abetting such contravention shall be guilty of a misdemeanor witliiiith| meaning of the merchant shipping act, 1854, and the ship and her equi])uieut ai everything on board thereof shall be forfeited to Her Majesty as if an odVnse hai been committed under section 103 ofthesaidact, and the provisions of sections 103 ad 104 and part 10 of the said act (which are set out in tne schedule to this act) Hhullaiipll as if they were herein reenacted and in terms made applicable to an oifoiisu iiud t'o| feiture under this act. (4) Any commissioned officer on full pay in the naviil service of Her Majesty shaj have power, during the period limited by the order, to stop and examine ai British ship in Behring's Sea, and to detain her, or any portion of her equipment, any of her crew, if in his judgment the ship is being or is preparing to bo used ( employed in contravention of this section. (5) If a British ship is found within Behring's Sea having on board thereof fi8| ing or shooting implements or seal skins or bodies of seals, it shall lie oil the i or master of such ship to prove that the ship was not used or employed in eontd vention of this act. 2. (1) Her Majesty the Queen in council may make, revoke, and alter orders f the purposes of this act, and every such order shall be forthwith laid before bo| houses of Parliament and published in the London Gazette. (2) Any such order may contain any limitations, conditions, qunliticatiou8, exceptions which appear to Her Majesty iii council expedient for carrying iutoei the object of this act. 3. (1) This act shall apply to the animal known as the fur seal, and to any marij animal specitied in that behalf by an order in council imder this act, and the exprt sion "seal" in this act shall be construed accordingly. (2) The expression "Behring's Sea" in this act means the seas known as Behrini Sea within the limits described in an order under this act. (3) The expression "er payme)\t of such' costs nil expenses (if any) as are payable or allowable upon the trial of ai y misdemeanor Biler iii;y existing act or ordinance or as may be payable or allowable I'.aaer any Ktorliiw for the time being in force therein. (2) Kvery offense declared by this act to be a misdemeanor shall also be deemed to (an (iltense hereby made punishable by imprisonment for any period not exceeding nntlis, with or without hard labor, or by a penalty not exceeding £100, and may (proseouted accordingly in a summary manner, instead of being prosecuted as a Misdemeanor. 13) Every offense hereby made punishable by imprisonment for any period not ex- wliiid () months, with or without hard labor, or by any penalty not exceeding £100, Aallin England and Ireland be prosecuted sumnnriliy before any two or more jus- pices, us to England in the manner ilireoted by the act of the eleventh and twelfth »ra (if tiie reign of Her Majesty Queen Victoria, chapter 43, and as to Ireland in Huiiniier directed by the act of tlie fourteeutli and lifteenth years of the reign of r Majesty Queen Victoria, chapter 9.3, or in such other manner as may be directed r any aet or acts that maybe jiassoil for like purposes. And "' provisions eon- kineil in the said acts shall l)e applicable to such prosecutions in the same manner as ptlie otl'enses in respect of which the same are instituted were hereby stated to be i(ffD808 in respect of which two or more justices have power to convict summarily iiomalie a summary order. I (t) hi all cases of sumniaty convictions in England, where the sum adjudged to be liiil ixeeerts £.'>, or the period of imprisonment adjudged exceeds 1 month, any por- |tinvh() tliinks himself aggrieved by such conviction may appeal to the next court ifgcni ral or ((uurter sessions. [(■i) All (iffensoH under this act shall in any British iiossessiim be pnnisahble in any Wt or by any justice of the peace or magistratti in which or by whom offenses of a . Befhinaeter are ordinarily punishable, or in such other manner, or by such other Justices, or magistrates, as may from time to time be determined by any act lordiiiance duly made in such po.ssession in such manner as acts and ordinances in ich possession are required to be made in oriler to have the force of law. ISec. alit. Any stipendiary magistrate shall have full power to do alone whatever FO justices of the peace are by this act authorized to do. !E(;..')L'(). For the purpose of giving jurisdiction under this act, every offense shall • ileonied to have been committed, and every cause of complaint to have arisen, piT in t lie place in which the same actually was committed or arose or in any place kfliieli the offender or person complained against may be. |Sk('. rci. In all cases where any district witliin which any court of justice of the »oc or other magistrate has jurisdiction, either under this act or under any other ■^oriit eommonlaw, for any purpose whatever, is situate on the cnp.st of any sea, falmtting on or projecting into any bay, channel, lake, river, or other navigable F>t«r, every such court, justice of the peace, or magistrate si' all have jurisdiction Jaauy ship or boat being on or lying or passing off such co:.st, or being in or near p'lav, eh.annel, lake, river, or navigable water as aforei'aid, and over all persons Aboard Kiich ship or boat or for the time being belonging, thereto, in the same man- TasiiHiich ship, boat, or persons were within the li-aits of the original jurisdic- » of such court, justice, or magistrate. l*Ec. 52J. Service of any suiiHiions or other matter in any legal proceeding under • aetsliall be good service it made personally on ttie person to be served, or at his t place of abode, or if made by leaving such summons for him on board any ship 56 BERING SEA. to wliicli li»» ip.ny ItoloiiK witli tlio pornon Ixiiiij^ df appoarlng to lie In command or chnTi;o of sucli slii)). SJ'X'. oL'li. Iti Mil cMSfs wlicic iniy CDiiit, Justice or /iiisticcs of tlio poaco, ov other maj^iHlratc, has or have power fn iiiakc an onlir dircctin;; payment to be made of any eeanian's wajics, pcnallii's, or other huhis of money, then, if tlit! party so directed to pay the tianie is the niastcr or owner of a sliii), and tlie same is not (laid at tlie time anil in manner ])reserilie!irt thereof to i)e a]iplied in compensatiiijj any person for any wrony or damage which he may have sustained by the act or default in re8i)ect of ■whicli sneh penalty is im])osed, or to he ajtplicd in or towards ))ayment of the ex- penses of the proceedin,nB; and, srUject to such directions or sfxcitie a])])lication as aforesaid, all ])enalties recoveri'd in the liiiited Kingdom shall ho j»aid into the re- ceipt of Her Majesty's exchef[Mer in such manner as the treasury may direct, and shall he cmried to and form jiart of the consolidated fund of the I'nited Kingdom; and all pcuialties recox-erod in any British |)ossessi(m shall he paid over into the puhlic treasury of such jiossessiou, and form ))art of the i>nl)lic revenue thereof. Skc. 52.5. The lime for instituting suimnary proceedings under this act shall be limited as follows, that is to say: (1) No conviction for any ollenso shall 1)6 nuide under this act in any summary proceeding instituted in the I'nitcd Kingdom, unless such proceeding is commencud within 6 months alter the commission of the ollenso; or, if both or either of the parties to such proceeding liap]ten during such time to be out of the United Kingdom, unless the same is commenced wit hiu 2 months after they both lirst happen to arrive or to be at one time within the same. (2) No conviction for any olVcnse shall be made under this act in any proceeding instituted in any liritisli possession, unless such proceeding is counnenced within ti months .'ittcr the commission of the offense; or, if both or either of the parties to tlie proceeding hai)pen during such time not to he within the jurisdiction of any court capable of dealing with the case, unless the same is commenced within 2 raontlis after th(\v both first happen to arrive or to be at one time within such jurisdiction. (3) No order for the payment of money shall be made un:'er this act in any suni- m.iry ])roceetliiig instituted in the United Kingdom, unless such proceeding is com- meuced within fi months after the cause of com]daint arises; or, if both or either of the parties hajipcn during such time to be out of the United Kingdom, unless the same is commenced within 6 months after they both first happen to arrive or to beat one time within the same. (4) No order for the ])aymeut of money shall be made under this act in any sum- mary ])roceeding instituted in any Hritish possession, unless such proceeding is com- mencetl within (5 montlis after the cause of comjilaint arises; or, if both or either of the parties to the proecHvling hajjpen during snch time not to be within the jurisdic- tion of any court capable of dealing with th*; ease, unless the same is commoucwl within 6 mouths after they both first happen to arrive or bo at one time within sach jurisdiction. And no provision contained in any other act or acts, ordinance or onanances, for limitinj^ the time within which summary proceedings may be instituted shall affect any summary procee!• otlior Hindis- )r lid may Iimvo f iiii)iaiii to 1)(" i'uniitnri', and under tliis not links fit, direct ]ierson ibr any t in r('8])ct't of iiont of tbo px- a))])licatioii as lid into till! rc- iiay direct, and it(^d Kingdom; into tbe jnihlic ^of. is act shall be 1 any snininary T Is coninicnt'«d or either of the iiited Kingdom, appento arrive any proceeding icneed within (i e parties to tlie m of any court ithin 2 moiitliti ch jurisdiction, ct in any sum- ceding is com- otli or cither of oin, unless the ive or to heat ct in any sum- ceding IS com- th or eitlier nf n the Jurisdic- is eoninioiiccd me within such oruinances, for ted shall aliect prtisence of or videncc of any ling the attest- cansed to any cts by any for- or river of the lawful for the Ige of the high of the county to him by any the misconduct dor directed to r him to detain bas made sutis- d by the judge, may be iusti- ,ay be awarded thereon; and any officer of custoiiin or other ofllcer to whom such order is directed shall detain such ship accordingly. Si:(;. 51^8. In any ease wiiere it appoiirs that before any aiiplication eaii lie made nnder the foregoing section sucii foreign shi]) will hnve depaiti'd lioyond the limits therein mentioned, it shall be lawful for any eommiMsinncil ol'tiecr on full ])ay in tho niilitary or nav.il service of Her Majesty, or any lirilisli oHicer of eustoius, or any liritish consular ottii^er to detain such ,slilp niitii sucli time a.s will allow sueb apidi- cat ion to be made and the result thenvof to be eommiiui(^!it(^d to him; and no suidi ollicer shall be liable for any costs or damages in respect of such detention unless the same is proved to have been mad-' wilhuiit reaaoiiiible grounds. Skc. 52n. In any action, suit, or other proeoediiig in relntion to sneli injury, tho person so giving seimrity as aforesaid shall bo made defondautor dcfcmb^r, ami shall he stated to be the owner of the sliip that has occasioned sn(^h damiige; and the pro- duction of the order of the judge made in rtdation to such security shall be conclu- sive evidence of the liability of such defendant or defender to such action, suit, or other proceeding. Legal procedure (Scotland). Sec. 530. In Scotland every offense which by this act is described as a felony or misdemeanor may be prosecuted by indictment or criminal letters at the instance of Her Majesty's advocate before the high court of justieiiiry, or by eriiniiiiil libel at the instance of the procurator iiseal of the county Ix'Coro the sjierilf, and shall be punishable with fine and with imprisonment, with or without lianl lalior, in default of payment, or with imprisonment, with or without hard labor, or with both, as the (•(iiivt may think fit, or in the ease of felony with |)eniil servitude, where the court is e(un]ietent thereto; and such court may also, if it think tit, order )iaymcnt by the (ittender of the costs and expenses of the jiroseeutiDU. Skc. 531. In Scotland, all prosecutions, com))laiiits, actions, or proceedings under this act, other than prosecutions for felonies ttv mis(lem(!:mors, may be brought in a summary form before the sheriff of the county, or before any two justices of the ]iiaeo of the county or burgh whore tim cause of such i>rosceuti(Ui or action arises, 01' wh^ro the offender or defender may be for the tinn-, and when of a criminal na- ture or for penalties, at the instance of the jirocurator iiseal .,f court, or at the in- staiKic of any party aggrieved, with com^nrrcncc of the ]>roeurator tiseal of court; anciidenee. Skc .">H3. In Scotlaiul, on any ccnnjdMiiit or other ]Moefeiling brought iu a sum- mary form under this act being prcscntiMl to the sheriff cleric or (derk of tbe pcac^e, he shall grant warrant to cite the defender to a|>)ienr ])ersotiiilly before the said sheriff or justices of the peace on a day lixcd, and at the saim; time shall ajipoint a iii|iy of the same to be delivered to him by a sherilf olliecr or eonstable, as tlii! ease may be, along with the citation; and such (hdivcrance shall also emitjiin a warrant tor citing witnesses and haviM's to eoiii])ear at th(> sam(^ time and ])laee to give evi- ilence and produc^such writs as may be specititMl iu their citation ; and where such warrant has been prayed for in the comjilaint or other proecciliug, the deliverance of the sheriff clerk or clerk of the peace shall also contain warrant to arrest upon the dependence in common form: Proridcd aliraiiK, I'liat wbcre tlic ajiiirchension of any party, with or without a warrant, is authorized by this ai't, such jinrty may be dei;iiuod in custody until he can be brought at the earliest op)un-lunity before! any two justices, or the sbcritf who may have jurisdiction in the place, to be dcilt with iis tiiis act directs, ami no citati(m or inducia' shall in such case lie necessary. Skc. 534. When it becomes uecesaary to execute such arrestment on tlnMlependcuco fiuai list goods or ellVcts of the defender within Scotland, but not locally situated wiiliiii tTio jurisdiction of the sherill' or justices of the jicace by wbomtlie warrant to iinest has been granted, it shall be eoin[ietciit to carry thi; warrant into execution "11 its being indorsed by tlii; slicrilV clerk or clerk of the ]ieace of tbe county or burgh respectively within which such warrant comes to be executed, Si;c. !r>'d't. In all proceedings under this act, in Seotbind the slieritf or justices of tho peace shall have the same power of (jompclliiig attendance of witnesses and havers as ill i-ases falling under their ordinary jiirisdictiou. 68 BERING SEA. Skc. 536. The whole procedure iu cnsi-s hronght in a sumiiiary fonn before the shcrilT or juHticos of the peace in Scotland hhnll be conducted riva j'opo, M'i thou t written pleadiufjs, and without taking down the evidence in writing, and no record shall )ii' kept of tlie iiroceediiigs other than the conipluiut and the sentence or decree pro- nounced thereon. Skc. 537. It shall be in the power of the sheriif or justices of the peace in Scotlimd to adjourn tlie proceedings from time to time to any day or days to lie fixed by them, in the event ot absence of witnosHes or of any other cause which shall ajipear to them to rend<*r sucli adjournment necessary. Skc. 538. In Scotland all sentences and dec-recs to be pronounced by t\w sheriff or justices of peace upon such summary complaints shall be in writing; an«l wliciu there is a decree for payment of any sum or sums of money against a defender, such decree shall contain warrant for arrestment, poinding, or imprisonment in default of payment, such arrestment, poinding, or imprisonment to be carried into effect by sheriffs' officers or constables, as the case may be, in the same manner as in cases arising under the ordinary jurisdiction in the sheriff' or justices : Provided always. That nothing herein contained shall be taken or construed to rejieal or affcet an act of the fifth and sixth years of William the Fourth, intituled " Au act for abol- ishing, iu Scotland, imprisonment for civil debts of small amount." Sec. 539. In all summary complaints any proceedings for recovery of any penalty or sum of money in Scotland, if a defender who has been duly cited shall not appear at the time and place required by the citation, lie shall be licld as confessed, and sentence or decree shall be pronounceil against him in terms of the complaint, with such costs and expenses as to the court shall seem tit : Provided always, that he sliiiU be entitled to obtain himself reponed against auy such decree at any time before the same be fully implemented, by lodging with the clerk of court a roponing noto, and consi.:{ning in his hands the sum decerned for, and the costs which had been awarded by the court, and on the same day delivering or transmitting through tlio post to the ])ur8uer or his agent a cojiy of such re])oning note; and a certilicate liy the clerk of court of such note having been lodged shall operate as a sist of diligeiu'e till the cause shall have been reheard and finally disposed of, which shall be on the next sitting of the court, or on any day to which the court shall then adjourn it. Skc. 510. In all summary coinplaiuts or other proceedings not brought for the recovery of any penalty or sum of money in Scotland, if a defender, being duly cited, shall fail to appear, the sheriff or justices may grant warrant to apprehend and bring him before the court. Skc;. 541. In all cases where sentences or decrees of the sheriff" or justices require to be enforced within Scotland, but beyond the jurisdiction of the sheriff' or justices by whom such sentences or decrees have been pronounced, it shall be competent to carry the same into execution upon the same being indorsed by the sheriff clerk or clerk of the peace of the county or burgh within which such execution is to take place. Sec. 542. No order, decree, or sentence pronounced by any sheriff' or justice of the peace in Scotland under the authority of this act shall be quashed or vacated ioi iiny misnomer, informality, or defect of form; and all orders, decrees, and sentences so pronounced shall be final and conclusivroceod to Iliuliuk Harbor, Oynalaska, from (liiiia, to be under command of .Xymphe, who will give copy iustriictions for guidance. These vessels to remain on this service until close of fishing season. "The line of demarcati(m proceeds in a course nearly southwest through Bering strait and Bering Sea, so as to pass midway between the northwest point of the Island of St. Lawrence and the southeast point of Cape Tchukotoki to tin' meridian uf ITC^ west lonitude; thence from thiMntersectioii of that meridian in a soutliwcst- crly direction, so as to pass miilway betwiuiu tiie Island of Atton and the Copper Island, of the Kormandorski couplet or group, in the North Pacific, to the meridian of 107^ east longitude, so as to include in the territory conveyed the whol»» jf the Aleutian Islands east of that meridian." Mr. Adee to Sir Julian Paunccfote. Department of State, Washington, July 8, 1891. Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge, with thanks, the receipt of the (!opies of an act of Parliament relating to the catching of seals by I'>iitish ships in Bering Sea, and aLso of the copies of an order of Her Hii tannic Majesty in (iouncil on the aame subject that accompanied you note of the Gth instant. I have, etc., Alvey a. Adee, Acting Seoretary. CO BERINQ SEA. Mr. Wharton to Sir Julian Pauncefote. Dkpartmknt op State, ]V(itiliiii(jtoH,Jul!f 9, 1891, Sir: I liavo tho honor to iicknowkHlgo the receipt of your note of tlie 7tli iuHtaut, with accouiijaiiyiiig t^opy of the iiiatnieti.'UB ;o Her Britannic Majesty's oHiiiers ni Bering Sea, anil to inform you that I have com- nuinicated a copy thereof to the American Navy Department. 1 have, etc., William F. Wiiauton, Acting Secretary. Sir Julian Pauncefote to Mr. Wharton. British Leoation, Washington, July 13, 1891. Sir: Since the receipt of your note of tlie 2r)tli ultimo, of wl.-'-liI transniitted a copy to tlie Alanpiis of Salisbury, I have been in U!. graphic communication with his lonlshij) respecting the two clauses (6 and 7) which, by direction ot th(^ l*resin8, and with :,he President which I shall roui the con- u relation to rnment may e recognized uit it is inex- senting such vbility by de- tic al state of sgal liability I arbitration, as the facts lear and that le same foot- owing clause sident : r compensntinn ct of any losses ieh such other the legality of 1 couipeusatidu JNOEFOTE. BKKINO SEA. Mr. Wharton to Sir Julian Patmcefote. 61 DKl'Ani'MKNT OF STATE, Waiiliinnton, Jnhj 23, ls<)1. Sir: The President dircc^ta me to say, in response to your note of the l.'Uh instant, that he notices with i)l('iisnve tiie j-ood i>ro: 11 Hliall be c()iii]>etent to tbi! iirMtratorH to iiwiird hiu'Ii ('(iiii)ii'iiHtitior. '8, in tlioir jiiilKinont, Hhall Hoem equitable to tlio Hiihjects or fitizoiis of Orciit Hi'itaiu whose vt'.sHelH may have been sci/oil by the I'liitcd States in the Meriii^- Sea, if siieh st^i- /■tirt's shall be foaiul by the arltitratorn to hiive been iinwarriiiited ; and it Hhall also 111) rompeteut to the arbitratoi'H to award to the L'liited SlateH Nurh eoiujii'iisalion ax, ill tiieir judjjnieiit, bIuiII Hceiii e([uitable for any inJMries reNnlHiij; to the United StiiteH or to tli(> lessees from that (iovcvnnienl of the privihfrc of taking; seals on the Piiliilof Islands, liy reason of the killin.u: of stsals in tlio Itijhrin;; Sea by p(>rsons .ii'ling under the jiroteetion of the Hritish llaj;, outside of the ordinary territorial iiiiiits, and since the 1st day of .lanuary, 1881), if such killing shall be foiunl to have lii'cn an infraetion of the rights of the United States. The objection you made to this clause is thus stated by you: Her Majesty's Government, have no desire to exclude from the consideration of the lU'liitrators any claim of compensation in relation to the Mering Sea lisheries which the L'uitetl .States (iovernmentnuiy believe themselves entitled to prefer consistently with the recognized ]>rinciides of international law. Itut they are of ojdnion that it is inexpedient, in a case iuvolvin<,' such imi>ortant issues and prcsentiiLg such novel t'latures, to prejudge, as it were, the (|Ucstion of liability by de<-laring tiiat compen- siiiion shall be awartled on a iiypothetica! st.ite of facts. Her .Majesty's (iovornment cDUsidia- that any legal liability arising out of th() facts as jiroved and cstablislied at the arbitration sluuild be as much a i|uestioii for arginucut and decision as the (lilts themselves, and, in order that this should lie made ipiite clear, and that both (iovcruments should be placed, in that res|ic(tt, on tiie same footing, etc. The President was not ])repared to anticipate this objection, in view of the fiict that Lord Salisbury, in his note of February 21 last, had iisked a specitic submission to the jirbitrators of the Uritish claim for seizures made in the liering Sea. His huiguage, which was quoted ill my note of June 135, was as folhnvs: I'here is one omission in these (lucstious which 1 have no do>ibt the Oovernment of the I'residont will be very gUid to rcjiair, and that is the reference to the arbitrator (it the ea by persons aeting under the protection of theHritish flag, the arbitrators shall consider and decide upon such claims in accordance with justice and e([uity and the respective rights of the high contracting parties, and it shall be competent for the arbitrators to award such coni- peusatiou as, i;i their judgnu'ut, shall seem c(|uitable. The President thinks that a particular statement of the claims of the respective Governments is more likely to lead to a satisfactory result than the general ret'crentse i)roposed by you. It is believed tluit the form of reference now pntposed by him removes the objections urged by you to his fiuine. proposah I have, etc., William F. Whabton, Acting Secretary. Sir Julian Panncefote to Mr. Wharton. British Legation, Ifeivport, It. J., Augmt 8, 189 -l SiB: On the 23d of .Tune last I had the honor to place in your hands a memoranduni endtodying the substance of the instructions issued r<> British cruisers in Ilering Sea in pursuance of the moduH iHvcndi aignvd ou the loth of that month. The memorandum also contained a i)roposul BERING SEA. 63 ato of fat'ts ilness or un- lay justly be i.jui'ies (lone by <^he seal- len the rij^lit therein tlie >matic iuter- BS til at Her ne by th(>,se ly as if each e acts com- erson, iiuder lent, creates if his pres- agiiinst the eclared pur- ' of this rule 1 tribunal oi ible. urovermnent alers, whicli :he proposal 'evenue vos- ast p(»iiit of itra<'ted, the to otier the ts 8nl).j('cls lor erinj; Sea and If, iiH well as Inims for coin- acting uiiilcr (le upon such ts of the lii^'h uhI such oom- aiuis of the ctory result d thut the tions urged TON, 'Sevretary. rioN, t^ 8, 189x your baud-; iS issued i<' thereco'ptof yonr note oftlie 22(1 instant, in which yon ask me to inforni you when you may expect an answer to your note of the 2;)(l ultimo, relative to the proposed agreement of arbitration of certain matters affecting tlie seal fisheries iu Bering Sea. 1 very much regret that 1 have not yet been in a position to reply to the note in question, but 1 hope to be able to do so in the course of tlie next few days. I have, etc., Julian Pauncefote. ajiTcc, 8ir Julian Pavnecfote to Mr. Wharton. [Telegram.] Newport, 11. I., Aiifiuat 26, 1891.. Tour note of 22d. Tm])ortant letter posted to day. Pauncefote. Sir Julian Paunevfotc to Mr. Wharton. [Private and uuuflic'inl.1 British Legation, Newport, R. /., Angunt 211, 1891. Dear Mr. Wharton: In my reply to yr ur oiUcial note of the 22(1 instant 1 stated that 1 hoped to be able to send an answer to your note of the 2;5d ultimo in a few days. Before doing so, however, I am anxi(nis to explain to you privately and unollicially by letter, as 1 would do verbally were 1 in VVashingt(»ii, the objection which my Government entertain to the latest form of clause relating to c(nupensation which has been j)roposed by the I'vesident tor adoption as article 7 in the Beri'ig Sea arbitration agreement. Sueli a private and nnotlicial exchange ol" \ lews at this ])ointof the negotiations may abridge the olliciid corres])on(lence and facilitate a solution of tlu! pn^sent difhculty, on the basis (»f a suggestion which you made wlieii we discussed the (]uestions informally at Washington. .My (iovennnent are unable to accept the form ofclau.se proposed by the President because it appears to them, taken in conne<;tion with your note oftlie 2;5(1 ultimo, to im])ly sin admission on their part of ii doctrine resiuM'ting the liability of governments for the acts of tlitir nationals (»r other persons sniling under their Hag on the high siiis which is not wiuiiinted by internati(rnal law and to which they can ii(»t subscribe. -I lieed liiudly siiy tliiit th(^ discussion of such ii point (whi(^h, al'tci' all, mny never iirise) must ]>rolong the negotiation indelinitely. IMoic over, it seems ])rem;it are t<» entei- iiito such a di.sciission before theollni' (jnesfions to be submitted to the arbitrators imve been determined iiiul all the facts on which any lial)ility can arise have been ascertained. St 24, 1H91. ir note oftlie I may expect lie proposed seal fisheries n to reply to course of the JNCEFOTE. art ol' n lets of lllfil e liifrji seas tliey can not [which, afler tely. More- >re tlieothcr I'linined iiii- to the arbitrators any ciuestion of fact which either Clovernment may put to them with leference to the claims for compensation it believes itself to i»ossess. The ap])lication of the facts to international law might be a matter for negotiation after they are determined, and, if the two Governments agree, might be referred, in whole (u- in part, to the arbitrators. The clause Fiight be worded as foll'.ws: Ci.Ai'SE 7. Kitlier of the two Governments may vSiiltniit to the arbirrators auy HR'stion ot'fai't niiicli it may wish to put before them in velVrenco to tlie chiims for ciiiiipcnsation wliicii it I>eli8 itself or its nationals to jiosscss au;ainst tli<^ otlier. TIki question whether or not, and to what ut if, after submitting it to the President, you should be able to inform iiieju'ivately thiitsucli a clause, under the circumstances, would be acceptable to your Government, I would tiien address you otlieially in re])]y to your note of the 23d ultimo and formally mal.e the above proposal, stating the grounds on which it is l)ased. iioi>ing that this mode of settlement of the last point in dis- l)nte will meet with your approval, and that this elfort on my part to bring the negotiation at once to a satisfactory terniinatiou nniy be suc- cessful. I remain, etc., Julian Pauneriiig Sea c<»mniissioiu'rs have U'liorted, in a comnuinication dated Seal Island, August a, that they find that this year's catch of seals already materially exceeds 7,000, and til, It the rnite;1 States agent i)ermits the killing of seals to continue, assuming tint t! c limitation agreed upon commences from the date of the signature of he modus vireiidi. In bringing this information to your notice 1 am at the same time in- stniet(Ml to express the conviction of ller Majesty's (iovernment that the I'lesident will not countenance any evasion of the true si)i'it of this agreement, and that he will take whatever measures appear to him to be iiecessfiry to insure its strict observance. I have, ete (!lanse li».' the arbitrators the (piestion ;»f tlie liability of Great Britain for the a' ts of vessels sail- ing under it^ flag. It did not assume a liability, but was framed ex- pressly to r.void this objection, which had been urged against the pre- vious proiK>sal. I (piote from my note of Jidy 23: The I'nitod Stati'H tni^lit wt'll inHiNt thiit Her Miijesty'w Govorument should adiiiit responHibility for the actH ol'tlio ('iiuadian Heiilois, which it him ho directly encour- aged and ]»roniotod, nreciKcly as in tlie ^iroposal ttu' United States admits re8]K'ii- siliility for the .acts ot the revenue vessels. lint, with a viev.' to remove wiiat sefiiis to be the hist point of dillcrenec iu a discn.Ksion whicli has been very much iirn- tracted, the President is willing to nioilify liis i)r(>i>()sa! and directs nie to ofl'er the following: The claim of the United States Avas stated in my note of Jul^ "3, accomi)anying the proposal, and the J'resident does not see how the (ilaims of the respective governments (iould be more fairly or fully sub- mitted. This Government proposes to submit to the arbitrators tlie question whether (ireat Britain is liable for the injury done to tin seal fisheries, tlie proi)erty of the United States, by the Canadian vessels that have, under the stimulation and 8up])(>rt of the Briti.sh Govern- ment, been for several years engaged in tlu> Bering Sea. The pro- posal of this (loverniiu'nt was that the arbitrat(U's should consider and decide such chiims in accordance with justice and equity and the re- spective rights of the liigh contracting parties. The President is unable to accept the last suggestion which yon make in your note, as it seems to him to be entirely ineffectual. Tlie facts connected with the seizure of Canadian sealeis by the leveiuie vessels of the United States, on the one hand, and with the invasion BERING SEA. 67 TE, er 2. 18!)J. V note of the at the Seal nriitting the uiuler. this Govern- BTON, Secretary. .TE, >er 7, 189J. te of August ■■ under their tional hiw." e arbitrators vessels sail- framed ex- nst the pre- slioiild iidinit rcclly eiicuiir- (liiiits resiKUi- V(! Wllilt St'tMllS ory much pio- iiie to otter the of July "3, see how the [)]• fully sub- itrators the B to the seal lian vessels ish Govcru- , Tlie ]>ro- onsider and and the re- whieh you ctual. 'flie ;ho levoiiue he invasion ni the sea and the taking of seals by the Canadian sealers on the other, an well known, and doubtless could be agreed upon by the respective ;;ov(irnment8 without difficulty. It is over the question of liability to resi)ond in damages for these acts that the controversy exists, and the i'resident can see no other course for this Government than to insist ni)on the submission of the question of the liability of Great Britain tor the 'acts it complains of to arbitrators. This Government does not insist that Great Jiritain shall admit any liability for the acts com- pliiined of, but it may well insist, if this arbitration is to result in any etl'ectual settlement of the differences between the two governments, tliat the question of Great Britain's liability shall go to the arbitrators tor decision. If you have any suggestions to make in support of the objection that the proposal made by the President assumes a liability on the part of Great Britain, the President will be very glad to receive them, and, if necessary, to reconsider the phraseology; but, upon a careful and crit- ical examination of the proposition, he is unable to see that the objection now made has any support in the terms of the proposal. I am, etc., William F. Wharton, Acting Secretary. Mr. Wharton to Sir JuUan Paiincefote. Department of State, WaNhington, October 10, 1891. Sir: It is a source of regret that an aiiswer h.as been so long delayed to your note of August 20 last, relating to the comnuini(;ation of the British Bering Sea commissioners as to the alleged killing of seals on the seal islands in excess of the number flxed by the agreement of June 15 last. This delay has been occasioned b\ the necessity of receiving from the United States agent in charge of the islands a full report on the subject. Tlie agent rei)ort8 that he reached the islands on the 10th day of iluiie, 1891; that from the 1st of Janujiry to the 1st of May, 1891, no seals were killed on the islands; and that from May 1 to June 10, the (late of the agent's arrival, there were killed by the jiatives .'"n r,;;>d l,m virendi was received, were not available for the future subsistence of the natives. As statti), there only rciinained 3,029 seals to be takoii for their subsistence from July 2, 1801, to May 1, 1892. The agejit cites the fact that from the close of tiie commercial killing season of 1890, on July 20, there were killed by the natives for food u]) to I)e cend»er 31, 1890, 0,218 seals, including 3,4(i8 pup seals, the further kill- ing of the latter being now ])rohibite(l. It was })lain to tlii^ agent that, under the c(rastruction which he had ])laced upon the modus vireiiHw/»f« r5(*!aragraph 2, he understood to refer to the period within which the Britisli Government undertook to i)r Very My DeA] skiiig for , lanse propi rbitration i telegraplu f tlio subst understi ifi south ot !• my telegi BERING SEA. 69 named in iistence itnd e .says tliat, (ins Vivendi, Mendeiiliiill )l8 Mohuan, the 'special if paragraj)!! at form part 8 that in liis adeii- Powell (jiiestion to ■ the British • the season; ted that the to the views ■ Prof. Men- accord witli and spirit of rht of all the of the agree )sistence aud tives for food Y them, as is le Avinter and )reserved for |r their (piota and have no ised for food en June 10, of the modm ibsistenco of to be taken The ageiit ing season of lod u]) to l)e furtlier kill- agent that odvH virciuU ter would be nds he called ■ to carry the 1 hvoiiUl be claimed that their provisions were to take effect on one date ill I lie interest of the British scalers and on another in the interest of ItLe United States. I have thus taken pains to communicate to yon in some detail the laction of tlie agent of the United States on the subject coni])lained of Iby the British commissioners, and I hope what has been set tbrth will [convince your Government tliat there has been no disposition on the Ipart of the agent to evade or violate the stipulations of the agreement lof June 15 last. I have, etc., William F. Wharton, Acting Secretary. Mr. Wharton to Sir Julian Panncefote. Department of State, Watthington, October lx\ 1801. My Dear Sir Julian: On July 23 last I wrote you a note present- ng a proposal for the settlement of claims for damages which was to foiiii a part of the proposed agreement of arbitration of certain matters fleeting the seal fisheries in Bering Sea. On August 132 I wrote eqnesting you to be kind enough to inform me when an answer to my lote might be expected. On August 24 you wrote me acknowledging he receipt of mine of August 22 and expressing the hope that you ivoiild be in a position to reply to my note of July 23 in the course )f (lie next few days. More than ten weeks Imve elapsed since sending oil my note of July 23, antl no answer to it has yet been rex;eived. The 'resident is very desirous to have a conclusion reached in the negotia- ioiis concerning the Bering Sea matters, and has requested me to draw our attention again to the importance of an early reply to his latest ii'oposal. Tlie period ti xed by the agreement for a moduK vivendi expires lay 2 next. The time within which it is hoped to obtain a final settle- iient of the questions in disi)ute between the two Governments is fast [oiiig by, ar.d the President feels that, if any eflective action is to be lad ill the matter l)cfore the next fishing season opens, all the terms of igrecment of arbitration should be disposed of immediately. Very truly yours, William F. Wharton, Acting Secretary. meaning 01 note, "this I iiir comiuuiii to be given] >hs 1 and -. I to refer to »k to i)ro1iil it n formed the] id not he^in sufBcientforj ed the paia- Buuie that it I Sir Julian Panncefote to Mr. Wharton. British Legation, Washington, October 13, 1891. My Dear Mr. Wharton: On receipt of your letter of yesterday, skiiig for a reply to your note of July 23 last, containing a form of jlaitse i)roposed by your Government to be inserted in the Bering Sea jrbitration agreement to settle the long-debated question of damages, ] telegraphed to Lord Salisbury for further instructions, informing him i the substance of your communication. I understand tliat his lordsjiij) is exjiected in London this week from he south of Europe, and 1 shall probably therefore receive an answer Illy telegram before many days. S. Ex. 9 1« 70 BERING SEA. Although, as you observe, more thau ten weeks have elapsed since the date of your oftiiiial note above referred to, 1 need hardly remind yoii that the intervening time has been taken up with informal discussions between us with a view to finding a solution of the ditticulty without unduly lengthening the otticial correspondence. This informal inter- change of views, which, no doubt had the approval of the President, has not been witliout advantage in throwing light on the troublesome question which still impedes tlie conclusion of the agreement, and 1 now hope I may soon be in a position to resume the ofticial correspondence, Very truly yours, Julian Paunoefote, Sir Julian Pauncefotc to Mr, Wharton. British Legation, Washington, October 17, 1891. Sir : Immediately on the receipt of your note of the 23d of July Inst, relative to the form of compensation clause to be inserted in the Bering been asce iu whole The abi tbe diflQci favorable Iiis accep Ih Sir: I and he di seen tit to jiroposed Thi« mc obviate tl is unable Sea arbitration agreement, I transmitted a copy of it to tlie Marquis of of Great 1 Salisbury. Since then 1 have been in correspondence with his lordship respect for the ad on the hi^ iug the new form of clause on that subject proposed in your note aa| The propc article 7. I regret to inform you that Her Majesty's Government, after the full est consideration, have arrived at the conclusion that this new clause could uot properly be assented to by them. In their opinion it implie.> an admission of a doctrine resj)ecting the liability of governments foi the acts of their nationals or other persons sailing under their flagoii the high seas, for which there is no warrant in the law of nations, Thus it contains the following words : Tlie Goveruiiient of the United States having presented on its own behalf, nn «el as of the lessees of the privilejre of taking seals on the Pribilof Islands, claliiiH foi compensation by reason of the ln to tlic arbitrators by the United States of claiiim for compensation by reason of the killing of seals by persons actinj» under till! pro tec tioii of the British Ua;; shall not be considered as implying any adiiiissiou oiiiliG part of the Government of Great Britain of its liability for the acts of its nationals or otber persons sailing nndei its (lag. 72 BERING SEA. We liave now bnen inrormed by you thai your Government is nn- williiij; to accept tli6 clause even with tliis addition by way of amend- niont. Wboii in yonr note of February 21 last you communicated tbe desire of Lord Salisbury for a " relereiice to the arbitrator of the question of dauiiifics (iiic to persons who liave been injured, in case itsltould be de- termined l)y liiui that the action ot the United States in seizin}; British vessels has been without warrant in international law," the rresideiit cheerfully accei>ted the suftfiestion, and, coupling with it the claim of dama{;es preferred by the United States, proposed to submit both qnes- tions, as presented by the respective (Jovernments, to arbitration, thus nialdu}'' a complete and final settlement of all differences between the the two Governments connected with the seal flsheries. To withdraw this compreiuMisive submission of specified claims and substitute for it a mere reference to the arbitrator of (luestions of fact touching the same chiims which are not to be iield binding ajmn either Government, as you propose, is, in the oiiinion of the President, an imperfect, and, he fears, may im)ve an ineffectual, disposition of the question of daiinn. But, haviiig failed in his effoi ts by modification and amendment to se- cure the acceptance by your Government of the clause fo" a full adjust- ment of these claims, and heartily i)articipating in the desire expressed in your note for a i»rompt solution of the dithculty which impedes the conclusion of the arbitration, he has thought it best to terminate the discussion by proposing to you the following, to constitute the text of clause 7 : The respective GovcrnniontH having fomid tlieniselvos iiijal)ie to agree upon a ref- {•rencc wliicli sliall iuclndc tlu> (iiicslion of Hie lialiility of each for tlie injuries al- lc.|)ointed by the respective (ioverniiients shall Maid before them, withsnchother evidence as either Goverinnenf may siiluuit. The tontiiictiug powers furthermore agree to cooperate in securing the adhesion of other lowers to such regulations." 74 BKRINd HKA. Lord Salisbury doHires to make the following two reservations on the above article: Ilia lonlsbip iinderstaiKla, HrHt, that the nfoessity of any regulations is left to the arbitrators, as well as tiie nature of those regulations, if the necessity is in tlieir judgment proveil. Secondly, that the regiila tions will not become obligatory on Great Britain and the United States until they have been accepted by the other maritime powers. Otlii'i wise, as his lordship observes, the two Governments would be simply handing over to others the right of exterminating the seals. 1 have no doubt that you will have no ditticnlty in concurring in the above reservations, and subject thereto I shall be prepared to sign tlie articles as proposed. I have, etc., Julian Paunoefotk. Mr. Blaine to Sir Julian Paunce/ote, Department of State, Wanhington, November 27, 1891. Sir: In the early part of last week you furnished the exact points which had been agreed u])on for arbitration in the matter of the Behriiig | Sea negotiation. You called later ami corrected the language which introduced the agreement. In lact the two copies framed were taken entirely from your minutes. It was done with a view that you and 1 1 should sign them, and thus authenticate the points for the arbitrators! to consider. "You inform me now that Lord Salisbury asks to make two reserva- tions in the sixth article. His tirst reservation is that "the necesHityl of any regulation is left to the arbitrators, as well as the nature of those | regulations if the necessity is in their judgment proved." What reason has Lord Salisbury for altering the text of the article! to which he had agreed ? It is to be presumed that if regulations are needed they will be made. If they are not needed the arbitrators will not make them. The agt cement leaves the arbitrators free upon lliatj point. The first reservation, therefore, has no special meaning. The second reservation which Lonl Salislniry makes is that "tliel regulations shall not become obligatory on Great Britain and the United States until they have been accepted by the other maritiinel powers." Does Lord Salisbury mean that the United States and (ireatl Britain shall refrain from taking seals until every maritime power Joiiisl in the regulations? Or does he mean that sealing shall be resuiiKHlj the Ist of May next and that wC; shall proceed as before the arbitra [ tion until the regulations have been accepted by the other " maritiiuej powers?" " Maritime powers" may mean one thing or another. Lord Salisburyl did uot Sfiy the principal maritime powers. France, Spain, Portiij;al.| Italy, Austria, Turkey, Russia, Germany, Sweden, Uolland, Belgiiini,r are all maritime powers in the sense that they maintain a navy, gieiitj or small. lu like manner Brazil, the Argentine Confederation, Cliilel Peru, Mexico, and Japan are maritime powers. It would require a longl time, three years at least, to get the assent of all these powers Mr-f Bayard, on the 19th of August, 18S7, addressed Great Britain, GeriniinyJ France, Russia, Sweden and Norway, and Ja|)an, with a view to si-ciirj lug some regulations in regard to the seals in Behring Sea. FruuceJ tionson the j;uluti()iis, il the re^ilii uitedStiiti's ira. Otlier I be .siiii|)ly I. rring in the [ to sign tliu NOEFOTK. BERING SEA. 75 >r 27, 1891. exact points ■ the Behrini; [;iiage wliicli [ were taken it you ami 1 e arbitrators two reserva- he necessity iture of those of the article filiations are bitrators will ■ee npon that aniug. is that "the ain and the her maritime tea and (Ireat e power Joins be resuiiK'il Q the arbitra er " maritime ord Salisbury lin, Portugal. iiid, Belfiinin a navy, };'reat| iration, Oliile require a Ion jiilian, and Russia rei)lied with hinguid iiidiil'erence. Great Britain iit'vtu' rejdied in writing. Germany did not re|)iy at all. Swetlen and Norway said the matter was of no interest to them. Tims it will be apiin. Such a proposition will postpone the matter indetlnitely. riie President regards Lord Salisbury's second reservation, therefore, as a material change in the terms of the arbitration agreed upon by this Government; and heinstruiits me to say that he does not feel will- ing to take it into consideration. He adheres to every point of agree- ment which has been made between the two powers, according to the text which you furnished, lie will regret if Lord Salisbury shall insist uii a substantially new agreement. He sees no objection to submitting the agreement to the principal maritime powers for their assent, but he can not agree that Great Britain and the United States shall make their adjustment dependent on the action of third parties who have no direct interest in the seal fisheries or that the settlement shall be post- poned until those third parties see tit to act. I have, etc., James G. Blaine. powers MrJ ain,Gernianyl view to secitrj Sea. Frauce^ Sir Julian Pauncefote to Mr. Blaine. British Legation, Wanhington, December 1, 1891. Sib : I communicated by telegram to the Manpiis of Salisbury the sulistance of your note of the U7tli ultimo, respecting the two reserva- tions which Her Majesty's Government desire to make in relation to liie sixth clause of the pro|)osed Behring Sea arbitration agreement, as stilted in my note of the 23d uMmo, and 1 have now the honor to iu- lorni you that I have received a reply from his lordship to the following etlect': As regards the first reservation Lord Salisbury observes that the statement contained in your note that the clause leaves the arbitrators free to decide whet'jer regulations are needed or not, assures the same end as the proposed reservation, which therefore becomes unnecessary and may be put aside. With respect to the second reservation, his lordship states that it was not the intention of Her Majesty's Government to ilefer putting into practical execution any regulations which the arbitrators may prescribe. its object is to prevent the fur-seal fishery in Behriug Sea from being placed at the mercy of some third power. There is nothing to prevent Mich third power (Russia, for instance, as the most neighboring nation), if unpledged, from stepping in and securing the fishery at the very seasons and in the very places which may be closed to the sealers of Great Britain and the IJnited States by the regulations. Great circumspection is called for in this direction, as British and American sealers might recover their freedom and evade all regulations by simply hoisting the flag of a non-adhering power. How is this diiHculty to be met ! Lord Salisbuiy suggests that if, after the lapse of one year from the date of the decree o" regulations, it shall .appear to either Government that serious injury is occasioned to the fishery from the causes above mentioned, the Government com- plaining may give notice of the suspension of the regulations during Hie ensuing year, and in such case the regulations shall be suspended Qutil arrangements are made to remedy the complaint. 76 BERING SEA. Lord Salisbury further projjoses that, in case of any dispute ariRiiig between the two Goveriiinents as to the gravity of the injury canscd to the fishery or as to any other fact, tlie question in controversy shall bu referred for decision to a Britisli and an Amoiican admiral, wiio, if tlicy should be unable to agree, may select an unii)ire. Lord Salisbury desires me to ascertain whether some provision of the above nature would not meet the views of your (iovernment. I have, etc., ' Julian Paiincefote. Mr. Blaine to Sir Julian Patincefote. Department of State, Washirif/ton, December 2,1891. Sir: I have attentively read your note of the 1st instant and sub mitted it to the President. The President is unable to see the dan<;t'i' which Lord Salisbury apprehends, of a tJjird nation engaging in takiiij; seals regardless of the agreement between Great Britain and the fJniteil States. The dispute between the two nations has now been in progress for more than live years. During all tliat time, while Gieat Britain was maintaining that the Behring Sea was open to all comers, at any time. as of right, not another Euroi)ean nation has engaged in scaling. A German vessel once made its aj)pcarance in Bclning Sea, but did not return, being satisfied, I suppose, that at the great distance tlioy have to sail, the (Jermans could not successfully engage in sealing. liussia, whose interference Lord Salisbury seems to specially appie heud, will not dissent from the agreement, because such dissent would put to hazar*■< caused by introducing new elements into the agreement to which both nations have given tiieir consent. I have, etc., James G. Blaine. BERING SEA. 77 mte arisintj y (iaiiKcd to ■sy shall be H'lio, if they )rovisioii of inent. SCEFOTE. ATE, 'w 2,1891. lit and suli- i tlie (lniii;('r ii}>' iu takiiii; il the United 11 ill progi'fHS Britain was at any tiiiK*. 'aiiii<>-. Soa, but (lid i.stance they e ill sealing, cially appie issent would 3ea. On the il streiigtiien ies may con- ippreheiisioii lat, however ites iuay ter- note to the lat has been believe that, rb the ajriee be disturbed the United !e upon wiiiit lie seals tluiu ; Britain aiul eeiiieut legu natiouH that oducinK new e given their }. Blaine. Sir Julian Fannce/oie to Mr. Blaine. British Legation, Washington, December 8, 1891. (Hoceived December 9.) Sir: The Marquis of Salisbury, to whom i telofjfiaphed the contents (it your letter of the 2d instant on thesulijecrt of the sixth article of the ))i()posed Behring Sea arliitration agreement, is under the impression that the President has not rightlv und ■ ctive Governments shall app<»int two each, anose. All seven arbitrators to be jurists of repute and the three foreign ones v nnderstaud the Eng- lishjanguage. 1 remain yours very truly, •llt^.IAN Pauncefote. Sir Julian Pmmm^Ote to 3fcr. Wmne. Dear Mr. Blaine : Sir G. Baden Powell Kew York, whence he come to Washington with 20th in.st. Believe me, yours, very iTisH Legation, Wankmiton, January 16, 1892. I have just reeei\ e*l a telegram to the effect that leaves Liverpool this day by the .Etr'uria tor will proceed to Ottawa for a few days, Hud then Dr. Dawson. They hope to be here on the uuly, Julian Pauncefotb. in doing HO i\\ consent he arbitra- ote of tlie ent seems Id not be issent wim nt in his hich is not ip author- proposed willing to OEFOTE. ION, iber 30.) as youde- irbitrators to five by )()iie eacii, irbitrators iites. 'H'ec.t that, A'edandto ire consid- the tribii- relbre that };(Mnent at unal shall iients shall by foreign litrators to 1 the Eng- OBFOTE. roN, L6, 1892. effect tliat ijtywria for , and llicii ere on tlu- OEFOTB. BERING SEA. Sir Julian Faunce/ote to Mr. Blaine. 81 BUITISII LKGATION, Washiiif/foH, f/iinuary 21, 1892. Sir: I have the honor to inform you tliat iinnicdiatt'ly after my in tervievv with you on the IHtli instant in regard to tiie countries who are to name the arbitrators in the Behring Sea controversy, 1 telegraphed to tiie Marquis ot Salisbury th.-r you did not insist upon tiie knowledge of English by the arbitrators as a condition, but merely as a desirable (|ualiiication. 1 have now received a telegram from His Lordsiiip stating that Ilcr Majesty's Government accept your juoposal that the arbitrators shall be chosen by France, Italy, and Swedeu. I have, etc., ■ Julian Pauncefote. Sir Julian Pauncefote to Mr. lUaine. BIUTI8H liK(iATl<)N, W'(ishhn}fi>n, Jainiari/ 3i).i 1892. Sir : All the details of the Behring S*vt arl)i(ratiou ii \ iiig now been liiially settled by tiie understandiiig arriveil at »ts to the (Joveriiments wiio shall be invited to select the thre<' foreign arbitratois. I have the honor to request you to be good enough to inform me whether you are prepared to i)roceed at once to the pn-paration aiul sig;»atnre of the formal arbitration convention and of the ,i«)int commissiitn ;ij4ieeineut. ill accordance with the text of the ariielos to Ih» mailed therein wliich was signed by us on the 18th l>ecembor hist. 1 have, etc., Jl'LlAN PAl'Nt KFOTE. Mr. Elaine to Sir J^tinn IVw»i!«/M»> l>r VUVMKNT OK STATE, Sir: 1 have the hoiK>r to acknowlodju'thc txwiptof your note of tlie '^"'th ultimo, in which y(>u refer to tln'setiVuuMit which haslHvu reached ill completion of tlH> details of the Uehrmg Sea arl)itiat; >'i,aud inquii^ whether 1 am proiMwed toi>roc*v»l at ouce to the p»x'(>aralt»>u and sijf- iiature of tlie Kwinal arbitration convention ami of the joint coH»i»»»Hiou iinrwjment, in ac^'ordance with the text of tho articles to l>e iSKwrted thi'rein which x»i**s Nti^ned by us 011 the USth lK>ceml>er last. In reply I luv<' t>»K' ]deas«iv to hand you a copy of !*• test of thf iiliitiutiou (HHiveiiiiou, including the text ot the }im Hi «vaDttU8»M»« iijintiuent, as agreed upoji in eotifeieiices hold since tt» 3ltli iiiid 1 uni instnicliil b\ the rrcsidenl to sa\ that 1 hold «iy8elfii Mess to meet yon forthwith, in order that we may at "Mice paamMi to till' signature (d said convention. I liave, etc., Jamks (i. Blaink. {^ Ex. 56 6 82 BERING SEA. Mr. Blaine to ISir Julian ^"unccfote. Department of State, Washington, February 4, 1892. Sir: I have tlie honor to inform you that the Presidont has this day appointed and commissioned Tliomas Corwin Mendenliall and Clinton Hart Merriam to act as commissioners on the j)art of the Government of the United States, in accordance with the af^:reement which I signed with you on ])ecember 18, 18!)1, to investigate and report conjointly with commissioners to be api)ointed by the British Government, ujwu the facts having rehition to tiie i)re8ervation of seal life in Behring Sea, and the measures necessary for its protection and preservation, with a view to the submission of their conclusions to the ooard of arbi- trators whose constitution has already been agreed upon by us. Until the convention for arbitration shall have been signed the com- missioners will not be expected to agree ui)on or formnlate any report, but after I shall be otlicially advised by you of the appointment of com- missioneis on the part of the British Government, the commissioners on the part of the United States will hold themselves ready to confer informally with their British colleagues at such time as may suit tbeir convenience. 1 have, etc., James G. Blaine. Sir Julian Pauncefote to Mr. Blaine. liRiTisH Legation, \Vaiiliin(jt07i, February a, 18Q'2. SiR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your note dated February 4 (but only delivered yesterday evening), in which you inform me that the President has jipjiointeil Mr. JMendeniiall and Mr Merriam commissioners on the part of the Government of the United States on the joint commission therein referred to. Sir George Baden-Powell and Professor Dawson, whom I had the honor to present to you on the 1st instant, have been duly appointed commissioners on the part of Her Majesty's Government, and, as I have already 8tater. Dawson on the 1st of the month. They have been wait ing ever since to be placed in communication with the United States commissioners, and I trust that arrangentcnts will be made for liie meeting of the commission on Monday next, for the purpose indicited in the last paragraph of your note under reply, although the British commissioners came prepared not for an informal conference, but to proceed officially to business. I have, etc., Julian Pauncefote. BERING SEA. w- Mr, Blaine to Sir Julian Paunce/ote. Department of State, - ■ Washington, Februnry (I, 1892. Sir: I am in receipt of your note of this (bite, in wliicii yon give me tlie official notification of the apimintment of Sir (leorf^e Badfn Powell and Prof. Dawson as commissioners on .the part of the British Govern- ment on the joint commission created in view of the proposed furaeal arbitration. In acknowledging' your note, I deem it important to direct your atten- tion to the fact that the Government of the United States, in nominat- ing the commissioners on its i)art, selected gentlemen wiio were espe- cially fitted by their scientific attainments, and who were in no wise disqualified for an impartial investigation and determination of the •luestions to be submitted to tliem, by a public declaration of opinion previous or subsequent to their selection. It is to bo regretted that a similar course does not seem to have been adopted b\- the British Gov- ernment. It appears from a document whicli you transmitted iu me, under date of Alarch 1>, IS!M) (inclosure 4), tliat one of the gentlemen selecied by your Government to act as a commissioner on its i)art has fully committed liimself in advance on all tiie questions which are to be submitted to him for investigation and decision. I am further informed that the other gentlem;^n named in your note iiad previous to his selection made public his views on the subject, and that very recently he has announced in an address to his parliamentary constituents that the result of the investigation oi this commission and of the proposed arbitration, would be in favor of his Government. I trust, however, that tliese circumstances will iu)t imiwir the candid and impartial investigation and determination which wa.s the object iiad in view in the creation of the commission, and that the result of its labors may greatly promote an ecpiitableaud mutually satisfactory ad- justment of the questions at issue. The commissioners on the part of the United States iiave been in- Ntructed to put themselves in communication with the Britisii commi«- siouers, to tender them an apartment at the Department of State for the joint conference and, if it shall suit their convenience, to agiee with tiiem upon an hour for their first conference on Monday next, the 8th instant. It is proper to add that when I indicated to you on the l.'ith ultimo that the British Commissioner, then in London, might <'ome at once to Washington, I supposed we should before this date iiave signed the arbitration convention, and thus have enabled the Commissioners to l)roceed officially to a discharge of tiieir duties. But as it became neces- sary to await the approval of the draft of that instrument which you Iiave forwarded to London, I have interposed no objection to preliminary conferences of the Commissioners, anticipating the signature of the con- vention within a very brief period. I have, etc., James G. Blaine. JNCEFOTE. Sir Julian Paunccfote to Mr. Blaine. British Legation, Washington, Felmiari/ 8, 181)3. SlB: 1 have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your note of the 6th instant, in which you observe upon the selection made by our 84 BERING SEA. rospt'ctivo GoveriiTueiits ot tiie ineinbers of (lie Joint Commission which is about to sit at \Viisliinaragraph of your note contains the following passage: I ili'ciii it iiii]i()rt!mt to ilircit your nttciition to tbo fact that the Ooverninent of tho lliiitfd StiitcH, III nominiilinj;' tho Coiiiiiii.ssioiKM's on itH part, selected gentleimin who woio os|)('c'iall,v litt<'il by tlicir s<"i('iiti(ic attaiiimt'iitH aud who wore in no wIho dis(|ii!ilifie(l for an iiiiiiartiiii investigation or determination of the questions to lio Bnbniilted to tlieni, by a imblic declaration of opinion ]ireviou8 or subsequent to their Heieetion. It in to be regretted that a similar cours(i does not seem to have been adopted by the British Oovornmeut. While I have inueh ))leasure in congratulating your Government on having secured on their side the services of two such distinguished gentlemen as Prof. Mendenhall and Dr. Merriam, I must express my surprise aiul regret that you should have thought fit to refer in terms of disparagement to the clioice iiiiide by Her Majesty's Government. The British commissioners, Sir Cieorge Baden Powell and Dr. Daw- son, are gentlemen wlio.se scientific attainments and si)ecial qualiliea- tions for the duties intrusted to them are too well known to require any vindication on my part, But you comi)lain of the fact that Dr. Dawson in 181K) wrote a paper on tlie protection of the fur seal iu the North Pacitic iu which he committed himself to certain views. This shows that he has made tiie subject his special study, and it appears to me that he is all the more qualified on that account to take part in the labors of the Joint commission, whicii, I beg leave to point out, is not a board of arbitration, but one of investigation. Dr. Dawson's note on the fur seal to which you refer, was uierely based ui)on such publisiied material as was at the time available, and I have his i.uthoiity for stating that he does not feel himself in any way bound to the oi)iMions expressed from the study of that material, iu the light of subsccpu'iit personal investigation on the ground. You likewise complain tiiat Sir George Baden Powell had, previously to his selection as commist-ioncr, made public his views on the subject, and also that he is reported t(t have stated in an address to his parlia- mentary constituents that the result of the investigation of the joint commission and of the proposed arbitration would be iu favor of his Government. Sir George Baden-Powell is particularly qualified to take part in the inquiry by reason of his personal investigatiou into the industrial part of the question, which he pursued in 18.S7 and 1880 in Sau Francisco and British Columbia. From the tirst he has advocated in all his pub- lic statements a full imjuiry into the facts of seal life in Bchring Sea before any final agreement should be arrived at, in order that tho views of all parties shouhl be tested as to the best method of protectiug seal life. There is no just ground, therefore, for charging him with partial- ity. As regards the language imputed to him on the occasion of an address which ho recently delivered to his constituents in England ou the labor (juestion, it a])pears that some introductory remarks in which he referred to the Behving Sea (luestion were inaccurately reported. What he did state was that, thanks to the arrangement arrived at be- tween the two Goveruinents, the Behring Sea difficulty would now bo settled in the true interests of all concerned and not of any one side or the other. I nuiy mention that the opinions of Prof. Mendendall and Dr. Mer- riam ou the fur-seal question were published in several journals in this BERING SEA. Hf) (lonntry shortly after their return from Behring Sea, and were stated (I know not with what accnnicy) to bo opposed to the views which have lict'ii urged on the side of Her Majesty's (iovernment. lUit I do not sufifjest that the United States Commissioners on that account are disqualified from taking part in the labors of the joint com- mission. 1 claim that all the commissioners, British and American, are ('(|iially entitled to the confidence of both Governments, as men of science, honor, and impartiality. Tlie course which has been adopted for ascertaining what measures may be necessary for the protection of the fur-seal species is substan- tially the same as that which I had the honor to propose to you on behalf ol iler Majesty's Government nearly two years ago in the form of a draft convention, inclosed in my note of April 29, 1890. I rejoice that the jtroposal I then made is now to be carried out, and I cordially unite in the hope expressed in your note under reply that the result of the labors of the joint commission will promote an equi- t aide and mutually satisfactory adjustment of the qncjstions at issue. I have, etc., Julian Pauncefote. Mr. Blaine to Sir Julian Pauncefote. ' Department of State, Watihinffton, February 9, 1892. SiK: I have been informed by the American Seal Commissioners that ill an informal nieetingwitli tiieir British colleagues on yesterday the lat- ter expressed an unwillingness to enter upon conferences of any other than an official character, and they therefore projjosed that their joint cou- Iciences be postponed until after the arbitration convention shall have l)cen signed. 1 beg to state to you that the Government of the United States is very anxious to expedite as much as i>088ible the consideration of the important questions submitted to the commissioners, and in view of the lact that it regards the arbitration convention as substantially agreed iil)on, the American commissioners have been instructed to make known to the British commissioners their readiness to formally arrange the joint conference and proceed without further delay to the discharge of the duties assigned to them. I have, etc., James G. Blaine. Sir Julian Pauncefote to Mr. Blaine. BiiiTisn Legation, Washington, Feb niary li, 1892. Sm : I had the honor to receive yesterday your note of (he 9th in- istant, in which you state thatyou have been informed by the AnuMican I seal commissioners that in an informal meeting with their Biitish col- kauues on the 8th instant, the latter expressed an unwillingness to en- |tei upon conferences of any other than au official character, and they s. l;x. 5 — 17 -- 86 BERING 8EA. therefore proposed that their joint conferences be postponed nntil after the arbitration convention has been signed. Tlie Britisli commissioners, to whom I communicated your note, have informiMl me that at the prtdiminarj' conference of (he commissioners on tlie 8ti» instant they discussed witli tlieir colleagijes what work of a proj). ratory character could begot tlirough at once. The meeting was informal, according to the conditions laid down in the last paragraph in your note to me of the 4th instant, and it was arranged by the four commissioners to hold a second preliminary conference this day at the State l-)ei)artmentat3 o'clock, at which they could discuss certain mat- ters, which they had undertaken to consider in the interval, and other preparatory work. In consequence of youi note of the 9th instant, the British commis- sioners hope at the confereuc-*^ to day to arrange with their colleagues that the joint conference shall proceed to business formally. I have, etc., Julian Pauncefotb. Mr. Blaine to Sir Julian Pauncefote. 17 Madison Place, Washington, February 12, 1892. My Dear Sib Jutjan: The motive you have always urged upon me for assembling the <^oinmissiouers on seal fisheries at an early date, was that they could provide a modus vivendi that would be sufficient, while the arbitration should go on with plenty of time to consider the various points. I was surprised to hear that your commissioners yesterday declined to discuss the modus vivendi on the allegation that that was a subject reserved for you and me. This puts an entirely new phase upon the work of the commission and largely diminishes its value. Will you have the goodness to advise me of the precise scope of the work which you assigned to your commissioners t Very truly, yours, James G. Blaine. Sir Julian Pauncefote to Mr. Blaine. British Legation, Washington, February 13, 1892. Sir: With reference to your note of the 4th instant inclosing a (ioj) of the draft of the proposed Behring Sea arbitration convention, I have the honor to inform you that, as previously arranged between us, I trans- mitted a copy of the draft l)y the mail of the 6th instant to the Marquis of Salisbury for the approval of Her Majesty's Government, and that I am awaiting his lordship's instructions before proceeding further in the matter. I have, etc., Julian Pauncefote. HKHINCJ SEA. 87 Sir Julian l\mnc(^'oti} to Mr. Blaine. Ul.'I'lISII Lkgation, WaHhi)u/ton, FfV/nmn/ 19, 18(»L;. (Ilcceivcd Fchruar.v 20.) 8m: Oil tlie occasion of our iiilcrview on the. lid iii.stiiiit, wIhmi .vou hiiiKled tiic the. draff of the JW'hriii;;Sea Arhitrutioii Convention, which 1 r.)rwar..cd to London for the consideration of Her .Majesty's Govt in- iiicnt, you asked mo wlietiier they were prejjared to a^ree to a '■'■modm rirendp^ for the next fisliery season in nelirinp: Sea. In transniittinjj the draft of the arbitration convention to the Marquis of Salisbury, I (lid not fail to inform liini of your in(]uiry, and I have now leceived a reply from his lordship to the effect that iler Majesty's (lovernment can iKit exitrcss any opinion on tlie subject until they know what '■'■modus rirendi^ you desire to propose. I Lave, etc., Julian Pauncefote. NCEFOTE. Mr. Blaine to Sir Julian Pauncefote. Department of State, Washington, February 2i, 18d2. Sir: T am in receipt of your favor of the 19th. Yon therein inform lilt' that Lord Salisbury can not express any opinion on the subject of tbc. modus vivcndi until lie knows what we desire to i)ropose. I am glad to hear that Lord Salisbury contemi)lates a modus; for it is obvious that it is impossible to conclude the arbitration within the tiineori{iiuaIly^ set. Indeed, we shall hardly be able to enter upon it. The delays have been much greater on the part of Great Britain than on the part of tlie United States. In rejdy to your inquiry, the President suggests that the modus should be much the same as last year in terms, but that it should be better executed. It was very ineftective last year, for there were a Inr;;er number of .seals in Bering Sea taken then than ever before. The vessels had already set out before the morfj/s was agreed upon, and it viis impossible to give them notice in time to avoid tiieir taking seals. Her Majesty's Government did not take such efficient measures as an earlier date this year will render practicable. If Her Mai' ;!.; 's* Government would make lier efforts most effective, tlie -coaling fi the Torth Pacific Ocean should be forbidden, for there the slaughter oi" the motiiers heavy with young is the greatest. This would lequire a notice to the large number of sealers which are prepar- ing to go forth ;'roin British Columbia. The number is said to be greater than ever before, and without any law to regulate the killing of seals the destruction will bo immense. All this suggests tiie great need of an effective modus. Holding an arbitration in regard to the rightful mode of taking seals while their desf ruction goes forward would be as it, while an arbitration to the title of timber land were fn I progress, one party sliould remove all the trees. 1 shall have to ask you to transmit the contents of this note to Lord [Salisbury by telegraph. Every day that is lost now entails great [trouble ujwn both Governments. 1 have, etc., James G. Blaike. • IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-S) A US ■^ li& 12.2 1.8 L25 1114 ■ 1.6 71 8 /2 /: V 7 S Photograpbr. Sdences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 (716) 872-4503 \ ;v A 6^ '^^ i iV $^ 88 BERING 8FA. Mr. Blaine to ISir Julian Pauneefote. Department of Statb-, WaHhington, February 26, 1892. My Dear 8m Julian : Mr. Mj ers, our consul at Victoria, telegrapbs (o day tlint there are — Foity-six hailii)K t-cbooiieiB cleared to date. Six or seven more to go. At the same date last year thirty -ouo cloareil. I tbink from tbi8 you will gee tbiit if we ropo8ed by experienced er ill further I ultimo will es, a reason- y safeguard trised in the tors. NCEFOTE. rATE, oh 8, 1892. to your two the deei)e8t ree upon an lehriug Hen, iruinent aiul d in the lur jive right to ty'8 Govern- al8 in those ntrovers.v, it (tenoiUiUiou iotion of the •, be readied tovernnients : the urgent nteruatioual BEBINO SEA. 91 comity, require of the parties to the arbitration t If the contention of this Uovernment is sustained by the arbitrators, then any killing of seals by the Canadian sealers during this season in these waters is au injury to this Government in its jurisdiction and property. The injury is not measured by the skins taken, but utf'ects the permanent value of our property. Was it ever heard before that one party to such a con- troversy, whether a nation or an individual, could appropriate the whole ur any part of the income and profits, much less the body of the con- tested property, pending the litigation without accountability! Usu- ally a court of chancery would place a receiver or trustee in charge and hold the income of the property for the benefit of the prevailing party. You say that Lord Salisbury, rejecting the illustration used by Mr. Blaine, "suggests that the case is more like one of arbitration respect- ing title to a meadow. While the arbitration is going on we cut the grass; and quite rightly, for the grass will be reproduced next year and so will the seals.^ He can hardly mean by this illustration that being in contention with a neighbor regarding the title to a meadow, he could by any precedent in the equity courts or by any standard of common honesty be justified in pocketing the whole or any part of the gains of a harvest without accountability to the adverse claimant whose ex- clusive title was afterwards established. It is no answer for the tres- passer to say fhat the true owner will have an undimished harvest next year. Last year's harvest was his also. If by the use of the plural pronoun his lordship means that the harvest of the contested meadow is to be divided between the litigants I beg to remind him that the title of the United Statea to the Pribylofi" Islands has not yet been contested, and that our flag does not float over any sealing vessel. The illustra- tion is inapt in the further particular that the seals not taken this year may be taken next, while the grass must be birvested or lost. This Government has already been advised in the course of this cor- respondence that Great Britain repudiates all obligations to indemnify the United States for any invasion of its jurisdiction or any injury done to its sealing property by the Canadian sealers. The attempt to make a damage clause one of the articles of the arbitration agreement failed, because Her Majesty's Government would not consent that the ques- tion of its liability to indemnify the United States for the injuries done by the Canadian scalers should be submitted. Two extracts from the correspondence will sufficiently recall the attitude of the respective governments: In my note of July 23, 1 said: * The President lielieves tbat Her Mnjesty's Government may Justly be held respon- Bible, under the atteudant oircunmtaaoea, for iMJurieii done to the juriNtlictionsl or property rights of the United States by the sealing vossels Hying the Britisli flag, at least since the date when the right of these vessels to invade the Behiing Sea and to pursue therein the businesH of pelagic sealing wm made the subject of diplomatic in- tervention by Lord Salisbury. In his opinion justita requires that Her Majesty's Qovernment nhould respond for the injuries done by those vessels, if their acts arp found to have been wrongful, as fully as if each had borne a commission from the Qovernment to do the act complained of. The presence of the master, or even of a third person, under oiroumstauces calculated and intended to give encourage- ment, creates a liabilitv for trespass at the coininun law, and much more if his pres- ence is aocompanied with declarations of right, protests against the defense which the owner is endeavoring to make, and a declared purpose to aid the trespassers if they are resisted. The justice of this rule is so apparent that it is not seen how in the less technical tribunal of au iutei national arbitration It could be held to be inapplicable. The United States might well insist that Her Majesty's Government should admit responsibility for the acts of the Canadian sealers, which it has so directly encour- aged and promoted, precisely as in the proposal the United States admits responsibil- ity for the acts of its revenue vessels. But, with a view to remove wiiut sut-ms to be 92 BERING SEA. the last point of difference In a disonwnon which has heen very ranch protracted, the PreHJilcnr in willing to modify his proponal and ilirects me to ott'er th« following: " Tliu (iovci'iiiiiuut of Great Britain liuvinK presented tlio uluiui'j of its aubjectafor I'oinpuuoation for the aeiisure of their veHHela u.v the United States iu Hehrlng Sea, and the Odvcninient of tlie United States having presented in its own behalf, us well as of the lesseex of the privileges of taking seals on the Pribyloflf Islands, claims for oom- pensHtion by riMisou of the killing of seals in the Behring Sita by persons acting nnder the protect iou of the British tlag, the arbitrators shall consider and decide upon suuh claims in at'cordtince with justice and equity, and the respective rights of the high contrncting powers, and it shall be competent for the u< bitratora to award such com- pensation as, in their judgment, shall seem equitable." Iu your note of October 17, you say : I regret to inform you that Her Majesty's Government, after the fnllest considera- tion, have arrived at the conclusion that this new clause could not properly be as- sented to by them. In their opinion it implies an admission of a doctrine respecting the liabilities of governments for the acts of their nationals or other persons sailing under their flag on the high setis for which there is no warrant iu the law of nations. Thus it coiitnins the following words: "The Government of the United States have presented on its own behalf, as well as of t..e lessees of the privilege of taking seals on the Pribyloff Islands, claims for conipeiis:i(ion by reason of the killing of seals in Behring Sea by persons acting under the protection of the British dag, the arbitrators shall conaider and decide upon such claims." Tlies'' words involve the propositiou that Her Majesty's 'Jiovernmvint are liable to mak<« good losHns resulting from the wrongfnl action of ndrsons sailing outside their jurisdiction under the British flag. Her Majesty's Government con'd not accept such a doctrine. Tbe President can not believe tbat while holding this view of its ac- countability the Government of Great Britain will, pending the arM- tration, countenance, much less justify or defend, the continuance cf pelagic sealing by its subjects. It should either assume responsibility for the acts of these sealers, or restrain them from a pursuit the law- fulness of which is to be determined by the arbitration. In your note of February 29 you state that Her Majesty's Govern- ment has been informed by the British Commissiouers '< that so fur as pelagic sealing is concerned, there is no danger of serious diminution of the fur-seal species as a consequence of this year's hunting," and upon this ground Lord Salisbury places his refusal to renew the modus of last year. His lordship seems to assume a determination of tbc arbitration against the United States and in .favor of Great Britain, and that it is already only a question of so regulating a common right to take seals as to preserve tbe. species. By whaC right does he do this! Upon what principle does he assume that if our claims are es- tablished, any diminution of the seals, whether serious or not, during this season, or indeed, any taking of seals, i.s to be without recompense 1 In the opinion of the President, it is not consistent with ^ood fuith that either party to an arbitration should, pending a decision, in any degree diminish tbe value of the subject of arbitration or take any profit ^"om the use of it without an agreement to account. Before an agreement for arbitration had been reached the prohibition of pelagic sealing was a matter of comity ; from the moment of tbe signing of that agreement it became, in his opinion, a matter of obliga- tion. During tbe season of 1891, notwithstanding the restrictions resulting from tbe modus adopted, the Canadian sealers took iu tbe Behring Sea alone 28,768 skins, or nearly four times as mauy as therastricted catch upon our island. This Government is now advised tbat 61 vessels from British Columbia and 16 from Xova Scotia have sailed or are about to sail for the Behring Sea to engage in taking seals. This large increase in the fleet engaged makes it certain, in the absence of an effective re- strictive agi'eement, that the destruction of seal Life daring this season and this BERING 8£A. 93 )trj»cted, the lowing: Bubjecta for lug 8ea, and f, lis well as .inisfor ooin- ictingundor Ih upou Huuh of tbe high :d Buob com- it considera- perly be oh- 10 respectiug raontt sailing nr of nationH. half, as well s, claiiiiH fur raous acting ' and decide are liable to intside their t accept suuh IV of itsac- ; the arhi- iuuaube cf pousibili'.y t the law- Govern- 8o fur as liininntion ting," and the modus ion of tbo it Britain, mou right oes he do J18 are es- lot, during orapen8e? ;2[Ood faith iOQ, in any take any by pelagic sealing will be unprecedented, and will, in the opinion of our comniisHionerH, flo nearly destroy the value of the seal tishericH as to make what will remain, of so little value as scarcely to bo a worthy 8ul»- jcct for an international arbitration. The proposition of Lord Salisbury to prohibit the killing of seals at sea " within a zone extending to not more than thirty nautical miles mound the Pribyloff Islands " is so obviously inadequate and so impos- sible of execution that this Government can not entertain it. In the early part of the discussion of the subject of a modus for last year, this method was tentatively suggested among others in conversation between .yourself and Mr. Blaine. But it was afterward in effect agreed by both (iovernments to be inadequate, and was not agaiu referred to in the correspondence. In the memorandum furnished by you with your note of June 0, you say: Lord Suli^biiry points out that if seal hunting be prohibited on one side of a purely imaginary litiu drawn in the open ocean, while it is permitted on the other side of the line, it will be impossible in many cases to prove unlawful sealing or to infer it from the possei^Hion of skins or fishing tackle. This was said with reference to tiio water boundary of our purchase from Rnssia, but is quite as applicable to tbo 30 mile zone which lie now suggests. The provaleni-e of fogs in thi'se waters gives increased force and conclusiveness to the point made by his lordship against an imaginary water line. The President can not agree, now that the terms or arbitration have been settled, that tbe restrictions imposed shall be less tlian those which both Goveininents d"emed to be ap])ropriato when it was still uncertain whether an early adjustment of the contro- versy was attainable. He therefore hopes that Her Majesty's Govern- ment will consent to renew tho arrangement of last year with the promptness which the exigency demands and to agree to enforce it by refusing all clearances to sealing vessels for the i>rohibited waters and by recalling from those waters all such vessels as have already cleared. This Government will honorably abide the judgment of the high tri- bunal which has been agreed upon, whether that judgment be favorable or unfavorable, and will not seek to avoid a just responsibility for any of its acts which by that judgment are found to be unlawful. But cer- tainly the United States can not be exp(c':ed to suspend the defense, by such means as are within its power, of tbe property and jurisdic- tional rights claimed by it, pending the arl)itration, and to consent to receive them from that tril^unal, if awarded, shorn of much of their value by the acts of irre8ponsil)le persons. I have the honor to be, etc., William F. Wharton, Acting Secretary, )rohibition jnt of tbe of obliga- resultlng ihriug Sea cted catch isaels from e about to :e increase t'ective re- his season COREESPONDBI^OE WITH THE LEGATION OP THE UNITED STATES AT LONDON. Mr. Phelps to Mr. Bayard. No. 825.] Legation of the United States, London, September 12, 1888. (Received September 22.) SiE : Beferriug ^ the subject of the Ala8kq,n i^eal fisheries, and tp the previous corrsspondence on the subject between the Department and this legation, I have now the honor to acquaint you with the pur- 94 BERINU SEA. port of a conversation whicb 1 held with Lord SaliHbiiry in regard toit on the 13th August. IllneHH, which han incapacitated me f^om business during most of tiie Interval, has prevented ray laying it before you earlier. One of the objects of the interview i then sought with his lordshi)) was to urge the comjiletion of the convention between the United States, Great Britain, and Jiussia, which under your instructions had previously beeu the subject of discussion between the secretary for foreign atiairs, the Russian ambassador, and myself. This convention, as I have be- fore advised you, had been virtually agreed on verbally, except in its details; and the liussian as well as the United States Govcirumeut went desirous to have it completed. The consideration of it had been sus- pended fur communication by the British Government with theCanadiaii Government, for which ])urpoi^e an interval of several months had been allowed to elapse. During this time the attention of Lore' Salisbdrv had been repeatedly recalled to the subject by this legation, and on those occasions the answer received from him was that no reply fruin the Canadian authorities had arrived. In the conversation on the 13th, above mentioned, I again pressed for the completion of the convention, as the extermination of the seals by Canadian vessels was understood to be rapidly proceeding. His lord- ship in reply did not question the propriety or the importance of Uiking measures to prevent the wanton destruction of so valuable an industry, in which, as he remarked, England had a large interest of its own, but said that the Canadian Government objected to any such restrictions, and that until its consent could be obtained, Hor Majesty'^ Guvernment was not willing to enter into the convention ; that time would be re- quisite to bring this about, and that meanwhile the couveutiou must wait. It is very apparent to me that the British Government will not exe- cute the desired convention without the concurrence of Canada. And it is equally apparent that the concurrence of Canada in any such ar- rangement is not to be reasonably expected. Certain Canadian vessels are making a profit out of the destruction of the seal in the breeding season in the waters in question, inhuman and wasteful »« it is. That it leads to the speedy extermination of the animal is no loss to Canada, because no part of these seal fisheries balong to that country ; and the only profit open to it in connection with them is by destroying the seal in the open sea during the breeding time, although many of the animals killed in that way are lost, and those saved are worth much less than when kille'd at the proper time. Under these circumstances, the Government of the United States must, in my opinion, either submit to have these valuable fisheries de- stroyed or must take measures to prevent their destruction by cai'tui- ing the vessels employed in it. Between these alternatives it does nut appear to me there should be the slightest hesitation. Much learning has been expended upon the discussion of the abstract question of the right of mare clausum. I do not conceive it to be ap- plicable to the present case. Here is a valuable fishery, and a large and, if properly managed, per- manent industry, the property of the nations on whose shores it is car- ried on. It is proposed by the colony of a foreign nation, in defiance of the joint remonstrance of al. the councries interested, to destroy tiiis business by the indiscriminate slaughU'r and extermination of the aiti mals in question, in the open neighboring sea, during the period of gestation, when the common dictates of humanity ought to protect them, were there no interest at all involved. And itis suggested that BERING SEA. 96 wc are prevented from (IcfciKling oitraclvrs n^iiinst hucIi deprediitiona because the sea at ii cei-tain distance iVoni the coast is free. The same Hue of argument wouhl take under itH protection piracy and the slave trade, when prosecuted in the open sea, or would justify one nation in destroying the commerce of anotiier by placing danger- ous obstructions and derelicts in the open sea near its coasts. There lire many things that can not be allowed to be done on the open sea witli impunity, and against which every sea is viare clausnm. And the right of self defense as to person and property prevails there as fully as else- where. If the fish upon the Canadian coasts could be destroyed by scattering poison in the open sea adjacent, with some small profit !«> those engaged in it, would Canada, upon the just principles of iiilernn- tional law, be held defenseless in such a case f Yet that process would be no more destructive, inhuman, and wanton than this. I( precedents are wanting for a defense.so necessary and so proper it is because precedents for such a course of conduct are likewise un- known. The beat international law has arisen irom precedents that have been established when the just occasion for them arose, undeterred by the discussion of abstract and inadequate rules. Especially should there be no hesitation in taking this course with the vessels of a colony which has for three years harassed the fisheries of our country with constant captures of vessels engaged in no viola- tion of treaty or legal rights. The comity of nations has not deterred Canada from the nersistent obstruction of justifiable and legitimate fishing by Ameriwm vessels near its coasts. What princii>le of reci- l)rooity precludes us from putting an end to a pursuit of the seal by Canadian ships which is unjustifiable and illegitimate t I earnestly recommend, therefore, that the vessels that have been al- ready seized while e^^gaged in this business be firmly held, and that measures be taken to capture and hold every one hereafter found con- cerned in it. If further legishttion is necessary, it cau doubtless be readily obtained. There need be no fear but that a resolute stand on this subject will at once put an end to the mischief complained of. It is not to be reas- onably expected that Great Britniu will either encourage or sustain her colonies in conduct which she herself concedes to be wrong and which is detrimental to her owir interests as well ns to ours. More than 10,(K)0 people are engaged in London alone in the preparation of seal skirs. And it is understood that the British Gorernuieut has requested that clearances should not be issued iu Canada for vessels employed in this business ; but the request has been disregarded. 1 have, etc., E. J. Phelps. Mr. White to Mr. Blaine. No. 132.] Lega.1 ION OF THE United States, London, December 4, 1889. (lieceived December It.) 8iE : Keferring to my dispatch No. 128, of the 30th ultimo, I have the honor to inclose herewith, for your inforniatiou, cuttings from the Times of the 3d instant, containing further correspondence with reference to the Bering Sea fisheries. I have, etc., Hbmby White. 96 BEBINQ SEA. fTrom the TiOodon Times, Saturday, November 30, 1880.] THK BKKINO 8BA QUK8TION. To the Kdltor of the Times : Sir: Mr. Stuvuluy Hill lius done aKr<*at public Hervice in cnlling attention nnnw to tbe niBttera in diHpute in regard to the seal (inherieB in Hering Sea. He givt>H in hh interesting letter information of the greatest value to those who would wish to un- derstand the ({uestion. But in order rightly to understaud the question it is neces- sary to supplement and even modify Mr. Staveley Hill's account — briefly indeed— ou three main points. First, then, as to the " pretended apathy of Great Britain." Certainly nothing has yet been done. But since I made my tirst inquiries ou the Pacitio coast in lUHt>, iiii- uiediately after the troubles commenced, up to my visit to Vancouver Island in the spring of this year, I know that both the Imperial and the Canadian governmenlH have had the matter constantly' in hand. The Bering Sea dispute was one intrusted to Mr. Chamberlain's commission, although for specinc reasons it was not proceeded with at Washington. In the House of Commons, where I have taken occasion to call attention to eaou Bering Sea seizure as it has occurred, we have from time to time been told of negotiations in progress, and I donbt not but that when the next install- ment of ofiSoial correspondence is published we shall find much strong and probably "vigorous" language in the diplomatic record. Secondly, Mr. Staveley Hill's graphic description of the tisheries on the Pribilof Islands would lead one to suppose tliat Canadian sealers captured the young males, "dry cows," and others of the seal community who can not nnd room on the rooker- ies. As a matter of fact, the Canadian sealers take very few, if any, seals close tu these islands. Their main catch is made far out at sea, and is almost entirely com- posed of females. Again, Mr. Staveley Hill advocates a clone time, excepting for the months of July, August, and September. But the Canadian sealers commence seal- ing in December, and seal continuously from then till August. Nor does a close time get oyer the difficulty of jurisdiction over the high seas, for the seals are chiefly cap- tured 25 to 30 miles from land. But I will uot.now point out other numerous detailH which I gathered in ray inquiries from the point of view of natural history. I have said enough to show bow complex is the subject. The third point I would mention in supplement is that American as well as Cana- dian sealers engage in, as they term it, this " marine fur industry ; " and, asl know by personal inquiry among them, are just as indignant as the Canadians at the high- handed proceedings of the Alaskan authorit:ea. But, sir, as I have said on more than one occasion, I believe the matters in dispute can best be settled on economic rather than on diplomatic plcts. All sides wish the seals preserved ; all wish to see the market prices of skins maintained. Judging by what I know to be the views held by ofticials in Washington, in Ottawa, and in Lon- don, by " marine sealers," whether Canadian or American, and by >^.he Alaska Com- mercial Company, it would be easy on one coudiliou to arrive at an international agreement embodying regulations which all would obey and all would accept as use- ful and right. These regulations would cover more than a close time, but all inter- ested would accept them as a final close of a vexatious dispute. The one condition of success is that these regulations be drawn up in tbe light ot a full and complete knowledge of the natural history of the case. They must em- body the one general view of the whole industry, and not the partial views either of the rookery owners or of the " marine " sealers. Mr. Stavelv Hill has, with great point and ability, alluded to the hollowness of the case for Alaska in international law. I would venture to add that internatie maintained, at leant in tlie flnit instance, from the snprume tribunal of the United StatoH. At pre en t I am unable to say anythini; an to the |)reHentatlon of further paiiers. [Hear, hear!] Mr. Hryce. Can the right honorable guniluuian at nil indicate when be thiiikit uny papera bearing on the question of the proceedings in the Snprome Coart will be ]>re- seiited f Sir J. Fergnsson. I think the honorable member will see that, as the application has not been heard, it is quite iiupussible to make any proiuiso at present. [Hear, hear.] Mr. Li icoln to Mr. Blaine. No. 470.] Legation of thk United States, London, June (i, 1891. {Received June 17.) Sib : Referring to my diBpatcb imiubered 468 of 3d inHtant, 1 liavu the bonoi to inclose herewith, for your information, the report of a de- bate which took place on the 4th instant in the Houho of Commons upon the third reading ot the Behring Sea (seal fishery) bill, which, 1 may add, was read for the first time in the Houro of Lords without debate yesterday. I have, etc., BoBEBT T. Lincoln. [From the London Time*, Friday, June 5, 1801.] SKAL FI8HBRY (BBRINO 8BA) BILL. The consideration of thin bill in committee was resumed on clanne 1 (power tp pro- hibit by order in council the hunting of seals in Bering Sea). The first subsection enables Her Majesty by order in council to prohibit the catching of seals by UritiHJi ships in Bering Sea during the period liinitecl by such order. Mr. A. 8. Hill moved to add after "order" "if the Legislature of the Dominion shall consent to such prohibition." Hc' said that the persons most concerned wuro tlie Canadians, and they were by no means conHenting parties to this measure. The Americans required that they should be allowed to kill 7,500 seals on their own ac- count. Whatever number of seals they claimed to kill, they ought to kill in the open seas and not in the rookeries. These 7,500 seals were not to be Icilled for food for the islanders. But the United States said that they kept 300 Aleutian inlanders in the seal fisheries, and if the prohibition was to affect them they would have themselveH to keep these servants of theirs, and for their wages would have to p^y some £20,000. A more monstrous claim could not be put forward. If there waa to be any claim at all it should be made by the Victorian fishermen. Mr. W. H. Smith regretted that his honorable and learned friend was not satisfieil with the assurance which the Uovernnieut had given. He said distinctly on the sec- ond reading that the Government could not assent to the introduction of these words. The Dominion httd a right to legislate so far as her own people were concerned, but she had no right to legislate for the British flag. The Bering Sea was some thousand miles away from Canada, and the Canadian Government bad received every ansnranee that compensation should be given to any British subject who, it ,could be shown, would sutler loss. Her Majesty's Government hoped that the Bri'tish losses would be a great deal less than his honorable and learned friend supposed. The destruction of 7,5ij0 seals was considerable, but they were willing to oouoeat to that proposal in order to put an end to » sericns danger. e !niitAnr)> nf Rrninent, ami iflo liflfnre tlin ftbl« to point loniatio niioN- Mi.v Iia8 liceii InniHoy. Tim relereiioe to a lal Imw of tlx^ t IciiNt in tlitt [int cut I am , hear!] tie thinkd any t will be pro- le application sent, [iluar, June 17.) ant, I liavu ort of a (le- F Oominoiis ill, which, I ids without Lincoln. >ower tp pro- '8t subsection Is by UritiNJi lie Dominion icerned wuro eaanre. Tli» heir own ac- 11 in the open foo right honorablo gentleman, he wituld not, of course, proceed further with his amendment. He had, however, re- ceived a onbiegram from Canada on thri subject. Mr. Drvce iiHked for some inforniatioii as to what had passed betweon the Govem- iiii'ut anil the Canadian Government and the nature of the terms tliat had been ar- mnged. Nlr. W. H.Hmitli said the Government IimI sat isliud themselves that the Canadian (iiivernment hiid accepted the view he had previonsly indicat(;d. He would endeavor to \>\\b the House further information on tho sul>|ect as soon as possible. Sir G. Campbell want«!d a more explicit ussurauce on the subject of compensation and expressed the hope that the British tax|)ayer was not to become liable. The amendment was withdrawn and the ciuuse was added to the bill, as was also cl.'inse 2. On Icause \\ (applioation and construction of act nnd short tulo^ .Mr. G. O. Morgan referred to the phrase " marine animal," aoil .i jeotion would be taken to the course suggested by the right honorable gentleman. He asketl the First Lord of the Treasury to lay on the table of the House tho couimuuications which l.id puHsed with the Canadian government. Mr. W. H. Smith said there was no reason why the HouHe should not be placed in jioNsession of the information. .Mr. Sexton hoped that the First Lord of the Treasury would appreciate the for- Wiirance of the Irish members in allowing the bill to be read a third time, [Laugh- ter.! The bill was read a third time. Mr. Lincoln to Mr. Blaine. Ko. 472.] Legation op the United States, London, June 10, 1891. (Received June 19.) Sir: Referring to my dispatch numbered 470 of 6tb instant, I have tbe honor to inclose herewith the report of a short d«^bate which took jilace in the Douse of Lords on the 8th instant, when the Bering Sea bill was passed, after having been slightly amended on the Marquis of Salisbury's motion. I Lave, etc., Eobbbt Lincoln. (Inolosure in Xo. 472.] [From the Times, June 9, 1891.] The Marquis of Salisbury, in moving that the bill be read a second time, said * * The measure I am now submitting is one to enable Her Majesty to stop seal hunt- ing on the part of British subjects in Behring Sea for terms to be specified in an order ill council. The first aim of thi.s provision is to enable Her Miijcsty's Government to come to an agreement with the United States to suspend the hunting for seals in Ber- ing tSea, or a great part thereof, during the ensuing season. As your lordships are awiire, there has been for some time a very vigorous discussion proceeding between lliu United States and this country. The United States have asserted claims over the pen sea, and a right to stop the bunting of seals in that sea, which Her Majesty's Qovernment hare not admitted and oau uut Kdutit. After mnob diaoussion we have 100 nERING SEA. agreed in princinle that the difference shall be referred to arbitration, and we hope that the terms on which that arbitration is to be established are almost agreed upon. I believe there are very few points of difference remaining, but in the meantime the Question raised by the motive which mainly actuates the United States, namely, the esire to prevcutthe extermination of the animal which sustains a valuable industry, remnins uuHolved. There are many persons in the United States who are of opinion that if we wait antil the arbitration is completed a very serious, if not a fatal, blow may have been struck against that industry. There is no doubt that the catch of seals has increased largely of recent years, and SDme experts declare that grounds which were formerly covered with them are now almost denuded. I do not at all concede that that opinion is universal. The Government of Canada doubts very much whether the statistics on this point are correct. At all events, these apprehensions have this circumstance in their favor, that unrestricted permission to all nations to hunt the seal at all times has resulted in other parts of the world iu its entire extermination. Formerly seals were common on the coasts of South America and those of the Falkland Islands ; now they are hardly to be found there. There is, therefore, a serious danger to be averted, and we can hardly wonder that the United States should be anxious that an industry which is so very valuable should not incur any danger from neglect. They propose that oter that part of ttie sea which they are authorized to deal with, and on all the islands and coasts belonging to the United States, there shall be no seal killed until the month of May, 1892, if Her Majesty's Government will arrest tbe progress of British seal hunting in the same waters during the same time. It seems to us that on the whole the proposition is a reasonable one, and we should be fully incurring the censure, not only of the United States, but of the civilized world, if by adhering too closely to any technical right we should run the risk of the destruction of this valuable industry and of a valuable animal. Of course we are aware that some injury may be done by these arrangements to private interests, the claims of which it will be necessary to meet. The notice has come late in the year, and the seal hunters have made preparations which can not now be stopped. Ships have been fitted out for sealing in these particular waters which may not be able to tiud employment elsewhere. On the other band, there is no doubt that seals that are caught more to the west will very much rise in price, and a certain compensation will to that extent be afforded. It is impossible to say before?:a::d whether there will be any practical loss or not. The consent of the Dominion Government to the bill we propose mainly turns on one or two points. First, we are agreed with respect to arbitration, if the United States agree with ns, which I believe they fully intend to do. Secondly, they are agreed that compensation should be given whenever there has been a real loss in consequence of the action of the British Government. Who is to pay that compensation is a vexed question. We d» not deny that a pnrt may properly fall on the British Government, but we are inclined to dispute that the whole should do so. I do not know what is the view taken by the Dominion Government; but time presses, and it wouM be impossible to defer action until, by who exchange of tele- grams this difficult question should, have been solved. Therefore, as in the first in- stance, as stated in the House of Commons, we have assumed the liability. 1 do not know that in any case it can be heavy. The provisions of the bill are few, and I do not think they lend themselves mncli to criticism. There is only one change we de- sire to be allowed to make in the bill ; it is not a large matter, and it is in the nature of restricting rather than extending its action. I wish to alter the first clause, which prohibits the catching of seals by British ships "in Behring Sea," jy adding "or any such part thereof as may bo named in the said order." 1 do not know how far the Dominion will be inclined to go, but this is not a question of principle and there is no other alteration. It will be convenient if your lordsliips, after rea ling the bill a second time, will pass it through itR remaining stages; but if there is a strong ob- jection to that course, I will not press it. Time is running out, and every day or two IS of importance. With these observations, I move the second rea«ling of the bill The Earl of Kimberley. • • • With regard to the bill itself, I have no criti- cism to offer, and I would rather confine myself to an expression of satisfaction at the prospect of this controversy being terminated. I have bad the opportunity, as your lordships have had, of reading the dispatches of the noble marquis, and I have ceon with great pleasure the firmness with which he has maintained the rights of this country to use an open sea. At the same time in matters of this kind, which influence the relations between this country and the United States, it is clear that it is an advan- tage to both that disputesarising between the twocountries should be settled by arbitra- tion and by peaceful means, and therefore 1 welcome the announcement of the noliU' marquis that the terms of arbitration are practically settled, so that we may look forward to a speedy termination of the dispute. I now only ask the noble niarqiiiH for information upon tho point whether- an understanding with Russia has been ar- rivetl at, I am sorry to hear that no agreement has been come to with the Govei'U' BERING SEA. 101 ment of the Dominion with regard to the question of compensation. Certainly it appears that the Dominion has so Jarge and so direct an interest in the question that, at all events, a portion of the compensation should be borne by the Oovernment of Canada. No one desires to impede the progress of the bill, and I think that the House will assent to the suspension of the standing orders. [Hear, hear.] • ••«•<«• On the question that the bill do pass. The Marquis of Salisbury moved an amendment to the effect that " Her Mi^esty, tlie Queen, might, by order in coanoil, prohibit the catching of seals by British ships in Behring Sea during the period limited by the order or such part thereof as was de- scribed in the said order." The amendment was agreed to, and the bill was passed. Mr. Lincoln to Mr. Blaine. \ No. 592.] Legation of the United States, London, January 6, 1892. (Received January 15.) Sir: I have the honor tx) inclose herewith an extract from the Times I newspaper of to-day containing the report of a speech made by Sir George Baden-Powell, M. P., to his constituents, relative to the Behiing I Sea question. I have, etc., BoBEBT T. Lincoln. [From tbs London Timea, January 8, 1802.] SIR O. JSADBN-POWKLL AND THE BKRING 8BA QUESTION. Speaking last night at a meeting of his constituents in the Kirkdtile Division of I Liverpool, Sir George Baden-Powell gave an account of his niisHiou tu the Bering pea. He said that Lord SaliHbury told him it was a very difficult, complex, and del- icate question ; that, above all things, be wanted to avoid war with the United States, I but that at the same time he wanted to be strong, to sh iw no fear in his policy, but I to show that he was not going to yield one jot or tittle of British rights. [Lond I cheers. ] But Lord Salisbury had an additional purpose in sending him there.. Three or four years ago the Americans seized some British vessels, imprisoned the [captains aiul crews, and lined them for taking fur seals out of the high seas. This I country, of c->urse, promptly denied that these vessels were acting illegally, and last ls\immer and Hutumn, by their work in the Bering Sea, he thought they had finally l)rought thai awkward ai8put«, which might have resulted in war, to arbitration, and it was his Cv eviction that this country would win in that arbitration. [Cheers.] I He spent three months in the Bering Sea investigating the full facts. When he [arrived thero he found three British luen-of-war and seven Aincricati Government jsliips, the la>t« r with instructions to seize the British sealers it they attempted to waI ; but the British commissioners were able, without any breach of the peace, to make satisfat tory arrangements which enabled the British sailors there to take home what seals they h..d got. [Cheers.] He had stmie difficulty in getting at the full facts of seal life op the American islands, but he managed to become good friends with the Americans, and parted with them a tt'ectionately, after finding out nil the facts. He discovered that no one knew where the seals went to after leaving those Ani- ■■^ican islands, and he accordingly arranged that the three men-of-war placed at his krvioe and the transport steamer which carried himself should explore all these spas. Hi) thought they acquired, as the result of that exploration, all the facts as to the migration of the seals—facts never before known. To do this they had to go through a great deal of rough work ; the weather was cold, and there was usually fog, except when there was agale ; but somehow or other he found his body thoroughly suited to these elements, perhaps more so than to the House of Commons. [Laughter. ] Lord Salisbury had been good enough to say more than once that what w.ts done in the Biring Sea greatly exceeded his expectations and those of Her Maj esty's Govern- ment. [Cheers.] s.E..»-.» 173549 102 BFQING SEA. The iuvestieations they had made were important, but the friendliness they had established with the Americans and the Russians had yet to bear fruit, and Lord Salisbury was now very anxious that he should go back at once to WashinKtou, there to consort with officials of the American Government nid to come to a joint agree-, ment with them in view of the approaching arbitration. He was to leave ou Satur dav next, but he hoped to be back after two or three weeks' work in Washington, ami to be able to report that the negotiations were as successful as the luvestigatious. He was happv to say that both sides had not only agreed to leave the question to arbitration, but had agreed on the details of the arbitration, and ho was conviuce.l that all right-thinking public men, both in America and in this country, were de- lighted to lind that this serious bone of contention was to he put out ot sight in such a nappy and peaceful manner. 88 tbey had t, aud Lord tiKtou, there joint agrecv I'e oil Satur lington, anil eatigatiuus. question to 18 COUviUL'Cd ry, were de- light iu Huch