1*^ s^. IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 1.1 a Hi 12.5 ■ 2.2 !!! m S La IIP HJ4 11.25 in 1.4 6" 1.6 '^^•^ -K^"* "> > 7 ^ # Hiotographic Sdences Corporation 23 VtflST MAIN STRUT WEBSTER, N.Y. 14510 (716)S73-4S03 A CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques A Technical and Bibliographic Notas/Notas tachniquas at bibliographiquaa Thfl to 1 Tha Institute has attamptad to obtain tha bast original copy availabia for filming. Faaturas of this copy which may ba bibliographically unique, which may altar any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checlced below. D D D n n D D Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur Covers damaged/ Couverture endommagAe Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaurAe et/ou peiiiculAe Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque Coloured maps/ Cartes gAographiquas en couleur Coloured init (i.e. other than blue or biacit)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bieue ou noire) Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ ReliA avac d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La raiiure serrie peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion la long de la marge intirieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within tha text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajnutias lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais. lorsqua cela Atait possible, ces pages n'ont pas M filmAas. L'Institut a microfilm* la meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a 4tA possible de se procurer. Les d6tails de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-Atre uniques du point de vue bibliographiqua, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la mtthoda normale de f ilmaga sont indiqute ci-dessous. r~p\ Coloured pages/ D Pages de couleur Pages damaged/ Pages endommagAas Pages restored and/oi Pages restaurtes et/ou pellicuiies Pages discoloured, stained or foxei Pages dAcolorAes, tachatAes ou piquAas Pages detached/ Pages dAtachias Showthrough/ Transparence Quality of prir Quality inigaia de I'impression Includes supplementary matarii Comprend du materiel supplAmantaira Only edition available/ Seule idition disponible Fyl Pages damaged/ r~~\ Pages restored and/or laminated/ r~p\ Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ I I Pages detached/ r~^ Showthrough/ ry\ Quality of print varies/ I I Includes supplementary material/ |~~1 Only edition available/ Th< poi of fiN Ori be{ the sio oth firi sio or Th< shi Tir wh Ma dif ent bei rig req me Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un fauiliet d'errata, une peiure, etc., ont At* filmAes A nouveeu de fapon A obtenir la meilleure image possible. V Additionei comments:/ Commentaires supplAmantairas; Various pagings. This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est film* au taux de r*duction indiqu* ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X 26X 30X 12X 16X aox a4x 28X 32X e (tails s du lodifiar r une Image Tha copy filmad hara has baan raproducad thanks to tha ganarosity of: Vancouver Public Library Tha imagas appaaring hara ara tha bast qus'lty possibia consldaring tha condition and iagibility of tha original copy and in kaaping with tha filming contract spacifications. L'axamplaira filmA fut raproduit grAce A la gAnArositA da: Vancouver Public Library Las imagas suivantas ont AtA raproduites avec le plus grand soin, compta tanu da la condition at da la nattatA da l'axamplaira filmA, at an conformity avac las conditions du contrat da filmaga. Original copias in printad paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression IS Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprimis sont filmAs en commen^ant par le premier plat at en terminant soit par la darniAre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, salon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont filmAs an commen9ant par la premiere page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration at en terminant par la darniAre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol ^^ (me ling "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol y (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la derniAre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbole -^ signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbole ▼ signifie "FIN". Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure ere filmed beginning in the upper left hend corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les cartas, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre filmis A des taux de reduction diffirents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre raproduit en un seul clichA, il est filmi i partir de Tangle supirieur gauche, de gauche i droits, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images ndcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la mithode. irrata to palure, nk 32X 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 BEHRING SEA. Vrmoranda on 4|Mr«fllaNa 1 1* S. Autlioritios on suarcli. Hcizurc and Hclf-ilcfciice A note of authorities arran^cil under iievcntecn b<;a>lt Extracts from Wharton's International Liw Right of searuh Amcriean reply to riglit claimed l>y Great Britain during the war with France to scareli neutral vessels on the high seas, and to seize her own snhjects when found serving under a neutral Hag .- Collection of authorities touching — • 1. A marine league as to extent of coastal jurisdiction 2. The freedom of oi'cau fisheries 3. Inland seas 4. Hovering Acts 5. Collection of Statutes and treaties touching the universal adoption of the nntrine league Menioran<1uni on the extent of coast to which Articles VI and VII of the Treaty of February 10 (JK), 1K'J5, between Great Britain and Russia were respectively intended to apply Chronological notes on the progress of trade and discovery in the northern jiart of the North Pacific, with special reference to Bebring Sea and the Aiuerica.i coast USirKn STATKS. Correspondence respecting extent of maritime jurisdiction as claimed at various times by the United States A history of the Treaty of Arbitration and " Modus Vivendi " Memorandum on the argument of the United States in its relation to inter- national law Notes as to when and how the United States first attempted to exercise authority in Behring Sea outside of the ordinary three-mile limit Memorandum of M. E. Clunet. — Legal position of animals Point 6 of Article VI Protection of or property in seals Question 3 of ca, 1H20 Protection and preservation of other bcal herds r? i^:> •Si ™jg_ v^ r (^ /^ii / BEHRING SEA. Authorities on Search, Seizure, and Self-Defence. io " Le Louis," 2 Dod., 210. " The Antelope," 10 ^Vheaton, 66. " The Apollon," 9 Wheaton, 362. "The Mariannn Florn," U Wheaton, 1. " La Jeuno Eugenic," 2 Mason, 409. Huron f. Dcnman, 2 Ex., 167. Hansard's "Parliamentary Debates," 3rd scries, vol. cl.', p. 2078. Wheaton's "International Law," 8th ed., s. 179, with Mr. Dana's note (108). Phillimore's "International Law," 2nd ed.. vol. i, chapter. X and XI. [423J B 152908 In the case of " Lo Louis." 2 Dod ,210, Lord Stowoll said : — " Upon tho lirat question, whether the right of soarch exists in time of peace, I liave to observe tliat two principles of public law are generally recognized as fundaiuoutal. One is the perfect ern;ality and ciiliro iiidepcnilonce of all distinct States. Eulative magnitude crcales no distinction of right; relative imbecility, wliether peinui- nent or casual, gives no additional right to the more powerful neighbour ; and any advantage seized upuu that ground is mere usurpation. This is the great fuuiidal ion of public law, which it mainly concerns the poacc of man- kind, botli in their politic and private capacities, to pre- serve inviolate. Tlic second i.s, that all nation.s being equal, all have an equal right to tlie uninterrupted u.se of the unappropriated parts of the ocean for their navigation. In places where no local authority exists, where tho sub- jects of all States meet upon a footing of entire equality and independence, no one State, or any of its subject.s, has a right to assume or exercise authority over tho subjects of another. I can find no authority tliat gives the riglit of interruption to the navigation of States in amity upon the high seas, excepting that which the rights of war give to both belligerents against neutrals. This right, incom- modious as its exercise may occasionally be to those who are subjected to it, has been fully established in the legal practice of nations, having for its foundation the necessities of self-defence, in preventing tho enemy from being supplied with the instruments of war, and from having his means of annoyance augmented by the advantag(?.s of maritime commerce; against the property of his enemy each belligerent has the extreme rights of war. Against 'that of n'iutitils— the friends of both—each has the right •of visitation and search, and of pursuing an inquiry syhcHiyr they are employed in the service of his enemy, tiie-right belna si-.tjeot, in almost all cases of an inquiry wrongf.^llj pjisucd, to a compeusaliou in costs and damages. "Witli professed pirates there is no state of peace. Tiicy are the enemies of every country, and at all times, and tiicrcfore are universally subject to the extreme right.s of war. An ancient authority— tlie Laws of (Jlcron comiwsed at the time of tlie Crusades, and, as supposed, by an eminent leader in those expeditions, our own Richard 1, represent.s infidels as equally subject to those riglits ; but tins rests partly upon tlie ground of notion.s long ago exploded, tliat such persons could have no fellowship, no peaceful communion, with the fnitliful ; and still more upon tlic gi-ound of fact that they were for many centuries engaged in real hostilities with the Cliristian State.«. Another exploded practice was that of Princes gran;in.i,' private letters of marque against tiie subjects of Powers in amity, by wiiom they iiad been injured, without ljoii,'n ablo to obtitin redress from the Snvoriiigu or Tribunals of that country. But at present, under the law, as now giMiernlly \indpr«lf>o(l and i>mctim>d, no nation can exercise a rigJit of visitation and search upon the common and nnaprropriatcuis' (2 Dodsoii'a liups, 238). Tho opinion of .Sir William Scott in that < use dcinonstnites tlie attention ho liad bcstjwod upon it, and j,'iv<'s full assurance that it may lie considu, 1 is aellling tlic law in the liritisli Courts of Admiralty n., :. r as it goes. "Tho • Louis' was a Frencli \os8cl, captured on a slaving voyage, before si had punhascd am- slaves, brought into .Sienu Led, aid eonilemned by tlio \'ice- Admiralty Court at tliat place. On >n appuil to tlie Court of Admiralty in England, the seutc.:.. • was reversed. " In the very full and elaloratc opinion given on ihis case, Sir W='!iani Scott, in explirit terras, lays down the broad principh) that tlin riglit of cch is confined to a state of war. It is a riglit sliielly belligerciif in its ibaracter, which can :ic\er lie exercised by a nation at peace, except again-t professed pirates, who are the enemies of the human race. The act ot Imduj^- in «Invea, however detestable, was not, lie said, ' the act of free- booters, enomie.s of the human race, renouncing ovcry country, and ravaging every country, in its coa.sts and \esaels indiscriminately.' It was not piracy "The right uf visitation and .seaicli being strictly a belligerent right, and the Slave Tiade being neither piratiad nor contrary to tho law of nations, the principle is as.serted, and maintained with great strength of reasoning, tliat it cannot be exercised on the vessels of a foreign _rower, unless permitted by Treaty. Fi-anc^e Iiail refused to assent to the insertion of such iui Article in her Treaty with Great liritaiii, and, consequently, the right could not be exercised on tho high seas by a British cruizer on a French vessel." (Pp. 118, 119.) [423] m^ In the case of the •• ApoUon," 9 Whcator, 362, the opinion of the Supreme Coui-t was delivered by Story, J., who said : — " The laws of no nation can justly extend beyond its own territories, except so far as regards its own citizens. Tliey can have no forc3 to control the sovereiynty or rights of any other nation within its own jurisdiction. And, however general and compreheasivc the Tjlirases used in our municipal laws may be, they must always be restricted in construction to places and persons upon whom the Legislature have authority and jurisdictior.. In the present case, Spain had an [equal authority with the United States over the lUver St. Mary's. The attempt to compel an entry of vessels, destuied through those waters to Spanish territories, would be an usurpation of exclusive jurisdiction over all the navigation of the river. If our Government had a right to compel the entry at our custom-house of a French ship in her transit, the same right existed to compel the eutry of a Spanish ship. Such a pretension was never asserted; and it would be an unjust interpretation of our laws to give them a meaniu" so much at variance with the independence and sovereignty of foreign nations " But, even supposing for a moment that our laws had required an entry of the ' Apollon ' in her transit, does it follow that the power to arrest her was meant to be given after she had passed into the exclusive territory of :> foreign nation ? We think not. It would be monstrous to suppose that our revenue oflicers were authorized to enter into foreign ports and territories for the purpose of seizing vessels which had offended against our laws. It cannot be presumed that Congress would voluntarily justify such a clear violation of the law of nation.?. The, arrest of the offending -issel must, therefore, be restrained to places where our jurisdiction is complete, to o>ir own waters, or to the ocean, the common highway of all !.ations. It is said that there is a revenue jurisdiitiou which is distinct from the ordinary maritime jurisdiction over waters within the range of a cannon-shot from (jur shores. And the provisions in the Collection Act of 1799, which authorize a visitation of vessels witliiii 4 leagues of our coasts, arc referred to in proof of tlii' asserlion. But where is that riL'ht of visitation to li,. exercised >. In a foreign territory in tlie exclusive jinis- dictioii of another Sovereign ? Certainly not ; for tlic very terms of tlie Act conline it to the ocean, where all nations have a common right, and exercise a common so^•ereignty. And over what vessels is this right of visitation to be exercised > By the very words of tiie Act, over our own vcs.seLs, i.nd over foreign ve.ssels Iiouik! to our ports, and over no others. To bavc' I'ono bcv' ii I •li lilil this >vo sovereigi right of f ledged I with moi then, the to a case foreign ' Apollon house, an wholly \v " The I whether I The mosl point is t under the that secti a forfeitu enforce a in rem co facts urg£ it may no of probat matter oi obscurity between I jure belli, respect to law of pi merely ex If there 1 right, to 1 of strong I to entitle propoeds i rxpensca far (linen <'auso lias except wl lion from peril ; if iicijuittal, Icirt, uules some Stat 2 this .vould have been an usurpation of exclusive sovereignty on the ocean, and on exercise of nr. universal right of search, a right which has never yet been acknow- ledged by other nations, and would he resisted by none with more pertinacity than by the American. Assuming, then, the distinction to be founded in law, it is inapplicable to a case where the visitation and arrest have been in a foreign territory. It appears to us, then, that the ' Apollon ' was not bound to make entry at our custom- house, and that the arrest v/as, under the circumstances, wholly without justification under our laws. " The next question which lias been argued at the ]5ar is, whether there was in this case probable cause of seizure. The most that can, with correctness, be argued on tliis point is timt there was probable cause to arrest tiie vessel, under the 29th section of the Collection Act ; but neither that section nor any other law authorized a seizure as for a forfeiture in tliis case, much less a prosecution in rem to enforce a forfeiture ; and so, indeed, the original libel in rem considered the case. But before adverting to the facts urged in support of the suggestion of probable cause, it may not be improper to consider liow far the existence of probable cause can be inquired into, or constitutes matter of defence in a suit like the present. Some obscurity arose at the argument from not distinguishing between the elfect of probalilo cause in cases of capture jure belli, and the effect in cases of municipal seizures. In respect to the former, no principle is better settled in the law of prize thau tlio rule that probable cause will not merely excuse, but even in some cases justify, a capture. If tliere be probable cause, the captoi's are entitled, as of right, to an exemption from damages ; and if the case be of .strong and vehement suspicion, or requires further proof to entitle the cluimant to restitution, the law of prize proceeds yet farther, and gives the captors their costs and I'xponscs in proceeding to adjudication. But the case is far (lilferent in respect to municipal seizures. Probable cau.sc has never been supposed to excuse any seizure, I'xcept where some Statute creates and definus the exomii- tion from damages. The party who seizes, seizes at his ]poril ; if condemnation follows, ho ia justified ; if an acquittal, then ho must refund in damages for the marine lurt, unless he can shelter Iiiiiiself behind the protection of .«omc Statute." (Pp. 370 to 373.) _J In the "Marianna Flora," 11 Wheaton, 1, Story, J., delivered the opinion of the Supreme Court. He said : — " It is necessary to ascertaiii wliat ,ire the riglitu uiul duties of armed and other ships navigating tlie ocean in time of peace. It is admitted that the riyht of visitation and searcli does not, under such circumstances, belong to the public ships of any nation. Thi.s right is strictly a I Ijelligerent j ight, allowed by the general cons;ent of nations | in time of war, and limited to those occa.sion.' <. Il is inrij that it has been held in the Courts of tliis country that American ships offending against our laws, and foreign ships in like manner offending within our Jurisilittion, may afterwards bo pursued and seized ujion the ocean, and rightfully brought into our ports for iuljudication. This, however lias never been supposed to draw after it any right of visitation or searcli. The party, in such case, seizes at his peril. If he ..'stablislies the forfeiture, he is justified. If he fails, ho mu.st make full c omponaition in damages. * "Upon the oteau, then, in time of peace, all possess an entire equality. It is the common highway of all; appropriated to the use of all ; and no one can vindicate' to himself a superior or exclusive prerogative there. Every ship .sails there M-ith the unriucstionaMe right of pursuing her own lawful business without interruption; but whatever may be that business, sl.e is bound to pursue! it in such a manner as not to violat.' the rights nf othei-s. The general maxim in such cases is, ■' ,,,> ,^erc tuo, ut ,wn. nlkinm Ixda-i." (T. 4l'.) [m] D In the case of " La Jeune Eug(5nie " 2 Mason, 409, Story, J., said ; — " I am free to admit, as a general proposition, tlint the right of visitation and search of foreign ships on the high seas can he exercised only in time of war, in virtue of a belligerent claim ; and that there is no admitted prin- ciple or practice which justifies its exercise in times of peace. It is unnecessary to scan opinions or autliorities on the subject, since the point was not controverted at the ai^guiuent, and it is no part of my duty to reascend to the source of its origin. But if, from a denial of a right of visitation and search on the high seas, it is meant to be concluded that there exists no right of seizure of any vessel on the high sens bearing a foreign flag, under any circumstances, I am not ready to admit the correctness of such a conclusicn. "The right of visitation and search is, in its nature, distinct from a right of seizure. A belligerent cruizer has a right to search all vessels found on the high seas, for the purpose of ascertaining their real as well as assumed character, and capturing the property of its enemies. The exercise of such a right, being strictly lawful, involves the cruizer in no trespass or wrong, entitling the party searched to damages if it shall turn out upon examination that there was no ground for tlie search, and that the property is in all respects neutral. If, indeed, upon such search, the captor proceeds to capture the vessel as prize, and sends her in for adjudication, and there is no probable cause of capture, he is liable to responsibility in costs and damages. But this is not for the search, but for the subsequent capture, which, being without sufficient reason, is treated as a tortious act, and ii usu.pation of possession. It does Jiot, therefore, by any means follow that a right of search justifies a mptiire, so that the latter may not bo deemed a gross violation of the riglit.s of a foreign neutral ship, It is, indeed, difficult to perceive how a tortious capture,y«rc helli, can clothe ii parly with any more riglite, in any respect, eitlier as to evidence or grounds of condemnation, tliaii a tortious seizure in time of peace. And the right of scarcli, as such, neitlior protect.^ nor aids a capture ; if considered /ar se, the latter is inca- pable of jusUlication. " But a right of seizure may exist on the high seas independently of any right of .'ioarcli, or the ])rotfclion from damages whicli tiiat right guarantees. For instance, no one can doubt tiiat vessels and property in the possession of pirates may bo lawfully seized on the hinh seas by any person, and brought in for adjudication, lint such a seizure is at the peril of tiie party. If tlie proportv UjX)n examination turns out not to be piratical, or piratically employed, the seizor is a lresi)aivi-iter on international law has that right ever been asserted; and, in the no.\t place, that there is no decision of any Court of Justice having jurisdiction to decide such questions in wliiih that right has liecii admitted. I wi,sh, in making this assertion, to fortifv myself by some authorities ; and 1 cannot quote a higher or ft better English authority than that of Lord SluIm, who states distinctly, in the words which lam aiioiil ul read— in conformity with what I have stated— dial no such right lia.s ever been asserted by any conii.ctcni authority. His woi-ds are tl.csn : - " ' I can find no authority that gives the right of inter- ruption to the navigation of States in amity upon i]w high seas excepting that which the rights of war .yivo lo both belligerents against neutrals,' Ihe " That is a distinct statement made by that noble and (earned Lord. In addition, I beg leave to refer to hcaton, the eminent American authority on international aw, who states the proposition in these t«rms : — " ' It is impossible to show a single passage in any nstitutional writer on public law, or the judgment of any Court by which that law is administered, which will justify Jtho exercise of such a right on the high seas in time of peace, independent of special compact.' " So that your Lordships perceive that both on this side of tlie water and in America, by the l>est authorities and by tlio highest jurists, that right, in the passages to which have referred, is controverted instead of being admitted. It bus been agitated long between this country on the one j8idc and America on the other. The eminent jurist on jthe other side of the water makes his statement and pssertion ; our corresponding authority on this side of the vater makes his assertion ; and those assertions directly and distinctly agree. For my.self, my Lords, I have never ?bocn able to discover any principle of law or reason on ||which that right could be supported. I will refer again I the same high English authority — Lord Stowell — upon khis subject, and you shall hear what he emphatically ,^tates with respect to it. That distinguished jurist piys : — 'No nation can ex-ereisc the right of visitation and search on the high seas c.vcept on the belligerent claim. No such right has ever been claimed, nor can it be e.\er- fcisod, without tlic oppression of interru]iling and harassing llip real and lawful navigation of other countries, for the fight, when it e.\ists at all, is universal, and will extend all countries. If 1 were to prcis the consideration funher, it would lie l>y Htating the gigantic mischiefs vliich such a claim is likely to produce.' " I may add tliat another very high authority — the Uucrican Judge Story — in tlie well-known case of the 'irnriauna Flora,' ox])r('ssod the same opinion in almost I lie (laiiie k'lnis.aiicl in language us pinphatic. So hero again is coincidence of authority Iiclwccii the two parties agitating Ihe question — the authority on (his side of the water corre- S^i'oiMling exactly witli the autliority on the other. Ikit I ilo not think it necessary to refer to any cases in support of the ([uestiou I am considering; I will refer only to the 1 III noiplo on which the iiucstion rests. What is the rule \\ illi respect to the high seas and to the navigation of the lii-li soas ? All nations are equal upon the higli sens? \\'lirlher they be strong and powerful, or weak and [imbecile, all are on a footing of perfect equality. What li.9 the position of a mercliant ship on the high seas ? A Ifcliip is part of the dominion of the country to which she |beloiigs, and what right has the ship of one nation to iinterfcro with the ship of any other nation, whero the b-ights of both parties are equal? The principle is so clear and so distinct that it will not admit of the smallest 8 u- poses; and I wish to know whether the Government intend to maintain the existing instructions. " The Ea,-l of Mahicshunj. — Tlie noble Earl (the luirl »i Aberdeen) omitted to mention one very imptntant matter. No doubt the noble Earl and the Ministry witli which i.c he was connected assumed that tlie law was such as it bus been laid down by my no))le and learned fiiendi Imt be did not .say tliat tlie American Government invariably went furtlier, and assorted tliat they hail a riglit to main- tain their own police, and that wliatever might W mi board a vessel, if the American flag were flying, we had im right to visit it. They said that they ennstantly liurieil out a visitation by their own pidico, ami that they wmild not be meddled with by any other country. TIk'u cmhic the question of discri'tion. I admit that lately— I know not by whose orders — lliere ha.s ajipeared lobe an increased activity o.xhibitcd by our cruizers in .searching American vessels. Thero can be no doubt that the accounts xi\ en to (he American Governmeut iiave been immensely exag- gerated, and I may .state that, after a careful exaiiiiiialioii, [425] H ' 10 I hnvu not found any instance in which our cruizers have bchavoJ even with incivility to the officers of any American vessel which they have hoarded; but at the samo time I must admit that in the exercise of that discretion which is given to them under the instructions of the noble Earl there has been a want of judgment in some cases, iindtliat our officers have visited vessels which there was no fair reason to suppose were engaged in the Slave Trade. The noble Earl has asked mo whether I have altered those instructions. 1 have not done so. Tliey remain precisely as tliey were; but I do not think they are so safely worded as they might be, and I think they imght be improved so as not to expose our officers to the risk of nuikini; mistakes which amount to an infracti(jn of inter- national "law, and which place them in an unfair position- mich as no officers, and especially young officers, ought to nccupy. Tending the an-angement which I have sketched uut, that English cruizers should search suspected English vessels, tliat Americans should search suspected American vessels' and that French cruizers should search suspected French' vessels, without actually altering the instructions heretofore acted upon, we have thought it right to suspend them until the negotiations have proceeded further. We have also ordered our cruizers on that coast to respect the American flag under any circumstances. The Americans, on their part, have added a considerable number of cruizers on the coast, and have promised, .luring this period of inactivity on our part-which, 1 trust, may be but short- 10 use all the activity ihcy can in order that the American Ha- which, I fear, has been several times used by slavers, nia)- not be prostituted to the purposes of tlie Slave Trade." ' ' Wheaton's "International Law," edited by Dana, s, 179, 8tli edition : — " It appears from Sir Leolino Jfukiiis lluit huih in tlie leigns of Jnrnes I nnd Chailes TI tlio si;curily of liiitirth comiuercu was provided for by express pniliibitions iiguiiist the roving or hoverini; of foreign ships of war so near thi; neutral coasts and liarbom-s of Great Britain ns to disturb or threaten vessels lionioward or outward bound ; and that captures by such foreign cruizers even of tlicir cueniy's vessels would be restored iiy the Court of .vdniiv.dty, if made within the King's Cliambers. So also the 15ri''sh 'Hovering Act,' passed in i736 (9 (ieo. II, cap. 35), assumes, for certain revenue purposes, a jurisdiction of 4 leagues from the coasts, by prohibiting foreign g(jods to be transhipped within that distance without jiayment of duties. A similar provision is contained in the Revenue Laws of the United States ; and both these provisions have been declared by judicial authority in each country to be consistent with the law and usage of nations."* " 108. Municipal Sei'Mtr.^ leyond the Mitriiii; Lca.jni: or Cannon-shot.— Tha statement in the text requires further consideration. It has been seen that the consent of nations extends the territory of a State to a marine league, or cannon-shot from the coast. Acts done within tliis distance are within the sovereign tcrritoiy. Tlie war right of visit and search extends over the wliolo sea. But it will not be found tliat any consent of natinns can he shown in favour of extending what may bo strictly called ten-itoriality, for any purpose wliatevei-, beyond the marine league or cannon-shot. Doubtless States have made laws, for revenue purposes, touching acts done beyond temtorial waters ; but it will not be found that, in later times, tlie right to make seizmes l)oyond sucli waters has been insisted ujion against the remonstrance of foreign Stales, or that a clear and unequivocal judicial precedent now stiinds sustaining such seizures, when tlie question of jurisdiction has been presented. The Revenue Liws of the I'nitcd States, for instance, provide tliat if a vessel bound to a port in the Tnited States shall, except for necessity, unloail cargo within -4 leagues of the coast, and before coming to tlie proper port for entry and unloading, and receiving permission to do .so, the cargo is forfeit, and tho master incurs a j)i'iiaUy (Act of the 2iid March, 1797, § ^7) ; • ■• Life anJ Worka of Sir L. Jonklm," ii, 727, 72?, 790 ; Oiilnion of tho UdIIccI StatiB' Atloincy-Oener.il on the capture ol tlio British ship ■' Gr»ngo " iu tlio Ilclaw.iro Bay, 1793 ; Waito'a American Stale TopcM. i, 75; DoJson'H Admiralty Reports, ii, 24.5-, " Le Louis," Cranch'n Rtporls, ii, 187 ; CliiMoh •■. Ilubbinl ; Vnltel, " Droit i1m Ucn»," Liv. \ chap. 22, sec. 2S1. ■ ■ lint tlio statute does not authorize a seizure of a foreign vessel when beyond the tonitoriiil jurisdiction. Tho Statute may well bo construed to mean only that a foreign vessel, coming to a American port, and there seized for a violation of Revenue llegulations committed out of the Jurisdiction of tho United States, may be confiscated ; but that, to complete the forfeiture, it is essential that the vessel shall Iw bound to, and shall come within, tlie territory of the United States, after the prohibited act. Tlic act done beyond the jurisdiction is assumed to be pnrt of an ttttmds of that territory for different objects. But as the line of teiritorial waters, if not fixed, is dependent on the unsettled range of artillery lire, and if fi.xed, must lie by an arbitrary mea.3ure, the Courts, in the earlier cases, were not strict as to standards of distance where no foreign Powers intervened in the causes. In later times, it is safe to infer that judicial, as well as political, Tribunals will insist on one line of marine territorial jurisdiction for the exercise of force on foreign ves.sels, in time of peace, tor all purposes alilce." (I'p. 2-57, ••M, 259, 2ti0.) riiillimore's " International Law" (2n(l cditiou), vol. i, Chapter X. Self-preservation : — " C'CX. The right of ^clf-preservuti-jii, by that ilifouci; wliifh provonts, as well as tliut wliicli lept'li*, attack is tlio iioxt iiitfi'iiatioiml right which prcsent-i itsi'lf for diKCiissioii, and wliicli, it will hu .seen, niay unAn- curtain cirt'iinistiuiccs, ami to a certain extent, moilify tlie ritjlit nl' tuniturial inviolability. "C'CXI. Tin; right of sell'-prc-.-frvaliuii i.-i the lirst law of nations, as it is of imliviilnnls. A S(p(.ii4y whicli is not in a conilitiou to repel aggression from wilho\it h wanting in its principal duty to the meinbrr.-; i.f whicli it is loniposod, and to the ehief end of its institution. " All means which do not affect tlie independence, of other nations are lawful for this end. No nation has a right to proscribe to another what tlu;.se mean.s shall be, or to require any account of her conduct in this respect. " C'CXri. TIio means by which n naliun usually pro- vides for her safety are: — " 1 . l?y alliances with otiicr .Statt's ; " 2. Jiy maintaining a military and naval force ; and " 3. By erecting fortifications and taking measiires of the like kind within lier own dominions, "Her full lilierty in this respect cannot, as a general ;)unoiple of international law, be too boMly announced or too firmly maintained, though some modilication of it appears to flow from the equal and corresjioiKhng rights of othci' nations, or ,at least to be required for the sake of the geneml welfare and peace of the world. "C'JXIir. Armaments suildenly increased to an extiu- ordi',iary amount are calculated to .alarm other natioim, whoS(.' liberty they ajipear, more or less, according to llie eircninstances cf the case, to menace. "It has been usual, therefore, t': ;'(piirc and receive amicable i>xplanatioiis of such warlike jireparations; the answer will, of course, much de;'' ;c,l apon tlie tone and s|)irit of the recpiisition. "T.'ius, the Ihitish Secretary for Koreign Affairs (Lord (ireuville), in HOj, replied to M. C'hauvelin (who had been the accredited Minigter of the King of I'ranco, and reiuained in Kughnid after thc^ IJcpublic was declareil); ' It is luldcd that if these explanations should appear to us unsatisfactory; if you are again oliliged to hear the language <.it haughtiiu'ss ; if hostile [ 'reparations arc coii- liuued in tlu.' iioits of England, after having exliausted i-verytliing wideh could lead to peace, you will dispcise yourselves to war, " ' If tliis nolilicatiou, or that which related to ibu Treaty of Commerce, had been ma(h) to me in a regular and ollieial form, I should have fonnd niy.^elf obliged to answer 2 that a threiit of drolaring war against England because sliii tliiuks proper to augment her forces, as well as a declaration of breaking a solemn Treaty, because England lias adopted for lier own security precnutinns of the same nature as those which are already established in France, could neither of tlieni be considered in any other light llian that of new offences, which, while they subsisted, woidd preclude all negotiation.' " CCXIV. We have hitherto considered what measures a nation is entitled to take, tor the preservation of her safely, toithin her own dominions It may happen that tlii^ same right may warrant her in extending pre- cautionary measures without these limits, and even in liansgressing the borilers of lier neighbour's territory. For international law considers the riglit of self-preserva- tion as prior and paramount to tliat of territorial inviola- bility, and, where they conflict, justifies the maintenance i,r Uu; former at the expen.se of the latter right. '■ The case of conflict indeed must be indisputable,— ^mntcridiana luce clarior, in the language of canonists. Such a case, however, is quite conceivable. A rebelUon, or a civil commotion, it may happen, agitates a nation ; while the authorities are engaged in repressing it, bands of rebels pass the frontier, shelter them.selves under the protection of the conterminous State, and from thence, with restored strength and fresh appliances, renew their inva'.ions upon the State from which they have escaped. The invaded State remonstrates. The remonstrance, whether from favour to the rebels or feebleness of the Executive, is unheeded, or, at least, the evil con.plained of ri'urains unredressed. •• In this state of tilings the invaded Slate is warranted l,y international law in crossing the f.ontier, and in taking tile necessary means for her safety, whether these be th<- caplure or dispersion of the rebels, or the destrueli"U of their stronghold, as the exigencies of the case mny fairly rei |ui re. '■ CCXV. Vattel maintains strungly this opinion :— " n at certain qw :^X K: r A Note of Authorities arranged under Seventeen Heads. 1. Sources of Internntionnl Law. 2. RIglit to AhIi in tlic Sen. 3. Adiiiirulty Jurisdiction. 4. Piracy. 5. Slavery. 6. Eight of Seiircb. 7. Kiglit of Seizure. 8. Hoveri^ig Acts. 9. Preseriptioii. 10. Bdiriiig Sen Jurisdiction. 11. Operation of Muiiicipnl Laws 1 2. Operation of Colonial Laws. 13. Right of Defence. 14. AnimaUywrc natura. 15. Pofiseiwioii. 16. Damages. 17. Procedure nnd Evidence. Text-Books cited. Blackstoiie's Commentaries (1802 ed.). Comyn's Digest. Hefftcf's Droit International de I'Europe. Kent's Commentaries on American Law (9th ed.). Kent's International Law, by Abdy. Manning's Law of Nations, by Sheldon Amos. Martens' 'I'raitfc de Droit li.ternational. Maxwell on the Interpretation of Statutes (2nd ed.). Pollock nnd Wright on Possession. Sedgwick on the Interpretation and Application of Statutory and Court l.nw, New York, 1857. Story's Coamunturies on the Conflict of Laws (8th cd.), by Higelow. AVheaton's International Law, by Dana. Caaea cited. A.-G. for Hong Kong v. Kwok A Sing, L.K., 5 P.O., 179. " Anlelojie," Tlie, 10 Wlicaton, 60. " Argeiitirio," The, 14 A|ip. Cus., 519. Blades V. Higgs, 11 II.L.C, 021. Itritisli I.ir.er, Company f. Drummond, 10 B. and C, 903. Buron r. Dcnn;an, 2 Ex., 107. Cnrriiigton v. Taylor, 11 Kast, 571. Cope v. Dohertv, 2 De O. nnd J., 614. [290] B 2 Evans v. Nicholson, 32 L.T., 778. Torbcs f. Cochrane, 2 13. nnd C, 448; 2 Slnte Trials, N.S., 117. Giahninu. Kwnrt, 11 V.x., 320; 1 H. nnd N., 680; 7 U.L.C., 331. " HiiUuy," Tlie, L.U., 2 P.C, 193. Jeffreys v. Booscy, 1 H.L.C, 926. Kceble v. llickeringill, 11 Kiist, 574 «. Leroux v. Brown, 12 C.B., 801. Lonsdale v. Rigi;, 11 Kx., 654; 1 H. nnd N., 923. "Lc Louis," 2 Dod., 210. " Louisa Simpson," The, 2 Saw., 57. Mttcleod I). A.-(i. for New South Wales, L.U., 1891, A.C., 446. Madrazo !•. Willes, 3 (!. and A., 353. Phillips I'. London nnd South-Wcstcrn Railway Com- pany, 5 C.P.D., 280. R. f. 49 Casks of lirandy, 3 Hagg. Ad., 257. R. t'. Keyn, 2 Ex. b., 63. R. V. Leech, 7 Cox, C.C., 100. R. V. Rogers, 3 Q.U.I)., 28. R. V. Shicklc, 1 C.C.R., 158. The Slave, Grace, 2 Hagg. Ad., 94; 2 State Trials, N.S., 274. Triquet v. Bath, 3 Burr., 1478. "Twee Gcbrocders," The, 3 Rob., Adin., 336. Young V. Hichcns, Q.B., 606. " Zollvcrein," The, Swabcy, 98. 1. Sources of International Law, Wheaton's International Law, s. 15. Dana's note thereto, 11. Kent's luternatioual Law, pp. 4 and 37. Triquet v. Bath, 3 Bun-., 14.78 (at p. 1481). The last two authorities are set out in the printed Argument at pp. 34, 35. 2. Right to fish in the Sea. The exclusive right to fish is one of the purposes for which the 3-mile limit exists. Wlieaton, s. 189 ; 1!. i: 49 Casks of ISraiidy, 3 Hagg. Ad 257, ut pp. 289, 290, per Sir John Nicholl ; Miiniiiiig's Law of Xntions, by Shclilou Amos, pp. 119, 120. Tlifsu anthovities are .set out ou pp. 81, 82 of British Couutov-Case. A nation has no right to impose on h.de- pendent nations conditions relative to the use of the sea. This would involve the power of depriving mankind of the fishery. Hefiter, p. 149. The right of fishing in the open sea cannot be forbidden to any nation. Martens, p. 497. 3 3. Adiiiinilly Jurisdirlion, A loroigncr in command of a foreign slii)) passing within ;5 miles of the English coast negligently ran into a British ship and sank her, therehy drowning a passenger. Held, by sevi-ii Judges to six, that the Central Criminal Court, whieh has the po\v(!rs formerly jjossessed hy the Admiral, had no jurisdiction to try the captain for manslaughter. It. /•. Keyn, 2 Ex. D., tij. The crime was not committed on hoard the British .ship, because there was uo intention (as there is in murder) ; nor Avas the man who com- mitted it within the jurisdictio7i. Per (.'ockburn, ('..I., Liiali ami l''ii'lil, .1.)., anil I'oUock, 15. Ihid., ]>\i. 232 cl set/. "Xfitlier in will nor in deed can lie he considoii'J to linve lieen on board the British vessel." Per Sir I!, riiillimore. Ihiil., ]<. GO. " If the act WHS wilful, it is done wliere tlie will intends it slionkl take effect ; alike when it i.s negligent." Vn- BraniwcU, L..r. Ibid., p. l.'jU. A false pretence by letter is made at the place of delivery. IX. I.: Leech, 7 Cox, CC, 100. A letter admitting a debt forms a continuous account stated to the place of delivery. Kvan.s r. Nicholson, :!2 T..T., TT8. A letter from a clerk falsely representing that he had not received certain money for his em- jiloyers, was ludd to be an act of embezidemcnt at the place of delivery. U.r. Ifogeis, :l Q.r..I).. 2S. •1. Piracy. Definition of piracy jure gentium. A.-G. lor Ilonu Kong r. Kwok A Sing., Lll., ."i I'.C, IV'J, at lip. 199, 200. Uefftci, p. 203. 5. Slavery. A ship seized on the high sea for being employed in the Slave Trade and forcibly re- sisting the search of the King's eriiizers, held to have been wrongly condemned. "I.e Louis," 2 Dod., 210. Ship not to be condemned, unless Trade pro- hibited by law of her own country. Ibid., p. 24:1. Two principles are fundamental: (1) perfect equality of States ; (2) equal right to tise of iinappropriated sea. Ibid,, ]i, '.'4". Tins pnsHiigc is sul out on p. 77 of liritisli ('uuiilei-Ciisct. Extravasjjant claims to the appropriation of particular seas discussed. Ibid., !>. 240. A foreigner who is not prohibited from carry- ing; on the Slave Trade by the laws of his own country may, in a British Court of Justice, vecovor damages sustained by him in respect of the ■wrongful seizure by a British subject, of a cargo of slaves on board of a ship then employed by him in carrying on the African Slave Trade. Madrnzo v. Willes, 3 B. iiiid A., oi>o. " Africans who are first captured by a liclligerent privateer, tilted out in violation of our [United States'] neutrality, or by a pirate, and then recaptured and liroiight into the ports of tlie United States, under a reasonable suspicion that a violation of the Slave Trade Acts was intended, are not to be restored without full proof of the proprietary interest ; for in sucli a case the cajituro is lawliil. "And wliether in such a case restitution ouj^^ht to be decreed at all, was a question on which the Court was cipiully divided." The " Antelope," 10 AVlieaton, p. GG. A trade protected by the laws of all com- mercial nations cannot be contrary to the law of nations. Per Jiarshall, C.4. ii/i/., p. 115. Legality of capture of vessel engaged in Slave Trf.do depends on its own law. Ibid., p. 1 18. Slave Trade neither piratical nor contrary to li.'W of nations. Jbid., p. ll!l. Pi'i'lcH't equality of nations universally ac- knowledged. Jhid., p. 122. Ni) nation can prcseriiii.' a I'lilu I'or otlici's, iiiul tlio Trade iciiinins lawful to tliose wliose Govern- ments have not forbidden it. IM., p. Vl-1. Tlic nnnilicr of slaves must be [)rove(l by the claimant of tliem. //-,./.. p, IL'S, The individual owner of tlif slaves must be sliown. slaves belon!j;ing to a Uritisli subject earryiii;; on business in Spanisli territory escaped, aii'l went on board a British shi]) not lyinu; ia Spanish ■waters. The commanding officer declined to compel them to leave his ship, and, as tli(>y did not wish to do so, conveyed them to a Uritisli Cobmy. Held that no action would lie by the owner aiijainst the otTieer, the law of slavery being a local law only. Madrazo v. Willes dis. tinguishcd on the ground that there illegal force was used in the capture of the ship and slaves. lAirlics r. Coclirniie, 2 I!, ami C, U8; '.' State Trials, X.S., 147. Temporary residence in Englaud without manu- mission suspends, but does not extinguish, the status of slavery of a person who, after such residence, voluntarily returns to a countiy where slavery is legal. I'iu' Slave, Grace. 2 Hay;.'., 04; 2 State Trials, N.S., 274. A foreigner can maintain trespass in the English Courts for the seizure of his slaves abroad. Buron )•. Deiiiiian, 2 Ex.. It.i7. G. Right of Search. If no right to search, no right to take advan- tage of discoveries made by search. IVr Lord JStowell, in the '■ f.c Louis," 2 Dod., 21ii, at p. 242. Except against pirates, no right of visitation and search on the high sea, save on the belligerent claim. Ihui.. pp. 244, 240 [290] Crime, other than pimcy, gives no right of search ; still less does mere possibility of crime. And notliing can be recognized as criminal which the law of nations docs not so roi,'ard. //.(./.. yy. L'48, L'4!). The riglit of visitation and seurch is strictly a bellii?crent rigiit. I'.T .Miiishiill, ('..I., ill "Tlic! Antrliipc," 1(1 Wli.-itoii, iWi, at i>. l\X. Riglit of stopping and searching ships in time of peace l)elongs to no nation except by contract with the nation to which the ships belong. Per I'lirke, 15. (suminiiig up in trial at liar), in liiirnn /•. Dcnnmn, 2 Kx., 167, at p. 187. Observations on evils of right of search. Per Lord Stowell, in tlio " Le Louih." 2 Dod, 210, at pp. 2,57, 258. No State can stop or visit the ships of another country. Martens, y. 407. 7. Kiijht of Seizure. No right of bringing in for adjudication in lime of peace for anything not repugnant to the law ol nations, nor jiiracy. P,>r Marshall. <'.,l., ill tliu '■ Aiilclui.c." 10 AVheat'.n, lii;, at y. 122. 8. HoicriiKj Ada. ^faritime States have claimed a right of visita- tion on parts of the ocean allowed to be parts of their dominions for various purposes. Such are our Hovering Laws. 'I'licy have nothing in common with a right of visit and search on the unappropriated parts of the ocean. Tor Lord .Stuwdl, in lli.' " \m Lnii.s" 2 Dud., 21 U, at pp. 245, 241".. Wlicaton says that the Hovering Acts give a jurisdiction 1 leagues from the coast, and that the English and United State.*' Courts have declared them consistent Avith the la« of nations. Dana differs in an elaborate note, and bays that municipal seizures cannot be made, for any purpose, beyond territorial waters. Wliealon'.s iiitiaiialitmal Law, s. 179 ; and note 108, liv Dana. 9. Preieription. Portions of tho sea may bo prescribed for, but the presumption is against such exclusive rights. Per Lord Stowell, in tlin " Tweo Oebroeclers," ;> lioli., Adm., 3M0. The open sea is not capable of being possessed as private property. Kent's Inturimtionnl Lnw, liy Abdy, p. 97. The sea cannot become the exclusive property of any nation. Wheutoii, 187. However long acquiesced in, an appropriatioa of the open sea by one nation is inadmissible. Dana's note to same, 1 V^. 10. Behrim/ Sea Jurhdiction. In a suit to enforce a forfeiture of the schooner " Louisa Simpson " and cargo for infringing section 4 of tho Act of the 27th July, 1808, by importing distilled spirits into Alaska, Deady, J., held the Act to have been infringed when tlu! vessel, which had passed through Behring Sea, came to an anciior east of a line drawn from Point Hope to Cape Prince of Wales. This line is in the Arctic Ocean, and lies well east of the water boundary of 1867. The " Loui'a .Simp.son," 2 Saw., 57. 11. Operation of Municipal Laws. These alfcct only subjects and foreigners whof3 persons or property may be within the jurisdiction. Sedgwick (in tlio Interpretation and Apiilication of Statutory raid Court Law, New York, 1857, p. 70. .Sti>ry's Commentaries on the Conflict of Law.s, 8tli ed., by 15ij;elow, Boston, 1883, s. 20. Ma.\well en the Interpretation of Statute.9, 2nd ed., 1883, p. 1G8. The " Zollverein," Swabey's lieports, p. 98 (per Dr. Lushingt'in). The above authoiities are set ibrth on pp. 97 to 09 of the Britisli Counter-Case. Per Tiu'ner, L.J., in (,'ope c. IJoherty, 2 iJe G. and J., GI4. Tor Tarke, 13., in Jeffreys i: Boosey, 4 H.L.C., 92G. These last two authorities are set out on p. 57 of the Printed Argument for Great Britain. [290] D lu a case of tort, an English Court will not cul'orco a foreign municipal law by giving (laniagcs for an act which hy English law imposes no liability. Tlie"lIiaioy," L.1!., L'r.C, 193. 12. Operation of Colonial Laim. These arc conlined to the Colony in which they are made. Jlftcleod ('. A. CI. for New .s..\illi A\ ik's [,.1!. J 891. A.C., 445. 13. Rif/ht of Defence. This is founded on the reason that on the high sea there is no common law or any authority capable of making itself respected. The incon- veniences caused by the absence of a common law are attenuated by various rules : among others, by the rule that the laws of each State bind its subjects. Heffter, p. 1 (i3. 14. Animals ferae natuite. The law as laid down in Comyn's Digest, vol. ii, p. 135 ; in 2 Blackstone's Com. (1802 ed.), p. ;?9G ; and in 2 Kent's Com. (0th cd.), p. d.32, will be found on pp. 82 and 83 of the British Counter-Case. Where iish had been laken in a net in which there was still an opening of about 7 fathoms, it was held tliat a man who rowed his boat to the entrance and look the tish was not liable to an action, because the owner of tlie net had )io possession of the fish. Ynung i: Hiuheu.s, l^.B., GOG. The right of taking M'ild animals on land part of a manor is a territorial, not a seignorial, right. This was common ground to all the .ludges in the three Courts. (.irahaiii i: Kwiirt, 11 Kx., :iL>G ; 1 IT. iiiid .V, ik'iI ;' 7 H.L.C., 331. Seo nlsci LonsUnle i: liigg, 11 E\., i')"i4 ; i II. hikI N., 023, A trespasser cannot, by his wrongful act in killing wild animals, obtain the property in 9 them as against tlie owucr of the land ou which he stai'ts and kills them. Partridges, hatclied am* reared by a common hen, while tiicj' remain with her, and from their iiiahility to escape, are practically under the dominion and in the power of the owner ol' the hen, may he the suhject ol' larceny, tliough the hen is not confined in a coop or otherwise, i)iit; allowed to wandcir with licr hrood ahout th(i premises of her owner. K. /,-. Shioklt, ] C.C.]!., 158. Disturbance of wild fowl in decoys by firing of guns. Caniiigton v. Taylor, 11 lOiiat, 571 ; Keeblu c. llickor- iugUl, ibid., 574 «. 15. PusM'sslon. Animus clomiiii is not necessary to possession. I'oUock ami Wrigbl on ro.-j.io.ssioii, pp. -Q, jS, aiij 69. Physical control is not necessary to possession. JIml.. p. 22. Possession may be had of a thing which, to common apprehension, is lost or abandoned. Jii(l.,l,. J!l. IG. Dainai/cs, Prospective earnings may be taken into account in calcuiat ing damages caused by an interruption to the employment of an existing vessel. The " Arfionliuii," M .Vpp. Cn"., ." I'J ; slm' also I'liillip.'s V. I.onilon ami Suiitli-Wcst«ni[ liaihvay Company, 5 (MM)., 280. 17. Piocrdiire anil Ecidencc. English Statute of Limitations bars action on foreign contract. Uritisli Linen Company r. Iiinnnuoml, 10 1), ami (,'., 90:',. Statute of Frauds prevents an action in England on a foreign contract not evidenced as required by s. 4. Leroux v. Ihown, 12 CI!., SOI. n^ EXTRACTS WHARTON'S [NTEUIVATIONAL LAW DIGEST, VOL. Ill, O.N lUGUT OK SEABCD V. 14S. Ur. Cass, Secretary of State, to Mr. Dallas. Feb. 23, 1859. The forcible visitation of vessels upon the ocean is pro- hibited by the law of nations, in time of peace, and this exemption from foreign jurisdiction is now recognized by Great Britain, and, it is believed, by all other commercial powers, even if the exercise of a right of visit were essen- tial to the suppression of the slave trade. Whether such a right should bo conceded by one nation to its co-states of the world is a question for its own consideration, involving very serious consequences, but which is little likely to en- counter any prejudiced feelings in favour of the slave trade in its solution, nor to be inllucnceil hv them. V. 148. Prfsidenl Gnml. Fifth .hmuiil Me!i\a(jf, 187,3. It is a well-established principle, asserted by the United Stales from the beginning of their national independence, recognized by (ireat Britain and other marilime powers, and stated by the Senate in a rcsdiutlon passed unanimous- ly on I6lh Juno, IH.HS, Mial American vessels on the high seas in lime of peace, bearing the American Hag, remain under the jurisdiction of the coun'.ry to which they belong; and therefore any visilalloa, uuilestalion, or detention of such vessels by force, or by the exhibition of force, on the part of a foreign power, is in derogation of (ho sovereignty of tho (Jnited Stales *!?», p. 141. Mr. Marcy, Secretary of Slate, to Mr. Cueto. March, 28, 1S55. The right of visitation and search is a belligerent right, and no nation which is not engaged in hostilities can have any pretence to exercise it upon the open sea. The established doctrine upon this subject is that the right of visitation and search of vessels, armed or unarm- ed, navigating the high seas in time of peace does not belong to the public ships of any nation. This right is strictly a belligerent right, allowed by the general consent of nations in time of war, and limited to those occasions. The undersigned avails himself of the authority and lan- guage of a distinguished writer on international law :— We again repeat that it is impossible to show a single passage of any institutional writer on public law, or the judgment of any court by which that law is administered, either in Europe or America, which will justify the exercise of such a right on the high seas in time of peace independent of special compact. The right of seizure for a breach of the revenue laws, or laws of trade and navigation of a particular country, is quite different. The utmost length to which the exercise uf Ibis right on the high seas has over been carried in respect to the vessels of another nation has been to justify seizing them within the territorial jurisdiction uf the slate against whose laws they Oifend, aiir/ pursuing them in case uf lliglit beyond thai limit, arresting Ihem on the ucean, and bringing llieni in for adjudication. This, however, suggests (he Supreme Court of the United Stales, in the case before (piuted, of the Marianna Flora, has never been supposed to draw alter it any right of visitalion or search. The party in such case, seizes at his peril. If he establishes the (lufeiliiro he is justified. p. 166. Manhall C-J — Th« Ntreidt - Q. Craneh, 406. What is this right of search? It is a subslaative and independeat right wantonly, and in the pride of power, to vex and harass neutral commerce, because there is a capa- city to do so; or to indulge the idle and mischievous cu- riosity of looking into neutral trade; or the assumption of a right to control it. The right of search has been truly denominated a right growing out of and ancillary to the greater right of capture. Where this greater right may be legally exercised without search, the right of search can never rise or come into question. P. 134. President Tyler'.% menage. Feb. 27, 18*3, The attempt to justify such a pretension [to subject the trade of the world to a system of maritime police adopted at will by a naval power, in any places where such power might see fit to prohibit to its own subjects or citiiens] from the right to visit and detain ships upon reasonable suspicio n of piracy would deservedly be exposed to universal con- demnation , since it would be an attempt to convert an established rule of maritime law, incorporated a-i a prin- ciple into the international code by the consent of all na- tions, into a rule and principle adopted by a single nation, and enforced only by its assumed authority. To seize and detain a ship upon suspicion of piracy, with probable cause and good failli, affords no just ground cillior for romplainl on Ibu part of llie nation whosr lliig she bears, or claim of indemnlly on the part of the owner. Tho universal law sanctions, and the common good requires tho existence of such a rule. The riijht , under such circumstances, not only to visit and detain, but to search a ship, is a perfect right, and involves neither responsibility nor Indemnity. But with this single exception, no nation lias, in time of peace, any aulliorlty In detain llio ships of another upon the high seas, on any preloxl whatever, beyond the limits other lerrilorinl jnril upon commercm vessels, on the high seas, in tiu,o of peace, ,s,ncons>stent with the n.ainlenauce of even the uu.st "''"""O' sem- blance of friendly relations helwcon the nat.on wh.ch Ihu s. conducts itself and that whose n.erchanl vessels aro expo- sed to systematic detention an our ports to a reasonable range of appro..ch to such ports, needs only to be pointed out to be fully appreciated. Every nation has full jurisdiction ol commerce with, itself, until by treaty stipulation, it has parted with some- portions of this full control. In this jurisdiction is easily included a requirement that vessels seeking our ports, in trade, shall be subject to such vStion and LpeCion as the exig,.ucies of our tra e may demand, in the judgment of this Oovernment, fo tl pro taction of the. evenuos and (he adequate admin.slial.on of the customs service. This is not dominion over the sea where these vesse s are visited, but dominion over this commerce with us, Us vehicles and cargoes, even while at sea. It carries no asscT- „on of dominion, territorial and in i.n.U.m, bulover volnn- ,Bry trade in progress and by its own election, submissive ,0 our regulalions of it, even in its approaches to our coasts, and while still outside our territorial doimnion. iirjMiT iniijUBiiKM ■HIMWHPPP /" wmmmm T V Printed for the use of the Cabinet. December 7, 1861. Mr. Madiion to Mr. Monrue ; Januai-y S, 1804. Laid before Congreni, 1806. American Reply to the Right claimed by Great Britain during the War with f)rance to Search Neutral VeueU on the High Seas, and to Seize her own Subjects when found serving under a Neutral Flag. (1804.) WE consider a neutral flag, on the high was, as a safeguard to those sailing under it. Great Britain, on the contrary, asserts a right to search for, and seize, her own subjects ; and under that cover, as cannot but happen, are often seized and taken off citizens of the United States, and citizens or sul 'Cts of other neutral countries, navigating the high seas, under the protection of the American flag. Were the right of Great Briuiii, in this case, not denied, the abuses flowing from it would justify the United States in claiming and expecting a discon- tinuance of its exercise. But the right is denied, and on the best grounds. Although Great Britain has not yet adopted, in the same latitude with most other nations, the immu- nities of a neutral flag, she will not deny the general freedom of the high seas, and of neutral vessels navi- gating them, with auch exceptions only as are annexed to it by the Law of Nations. She must produce, then, such an exception in the Law of Nations, in favour of the right she contends for. But in what written and received authority will she find it ? In what usage except her own will it be found 7 She will find in both that a neutral vessel does not pro- tect certain objects denominated contraband of war, including enemies serving in the war, nor articles going into a blockaded port, nor, as she has main- tained, and as we have not contested, enemy's pro- perty of any kind. But nowhere will she find an exception to this freedom of the seas, and of neutral flags, which justifies the taking away of any person, not an enemy, in military service, found on board a neutral vessel. [340] If Treatien, Britiah ai well as othera, are (o be consulted on this aubject, it will equally appear that no countenance to the practice can. be' found in them. Whilst they adroit a contraband of war, by enume- rating its articles, and the effect of a real blockade by defining it, in no initance do they affirm or imply a right in any Sovereign to enforce his cUims to the allegiance of his aubjecta on board neutral vessels on the high aeas. On the contraiy, whenever a belligerent claim against pcraons on board a neutral vessel is referred to in Treaties, enemies in milir«ry service alone are excepted from the general immu- nity of persons in that situation ; and this exception confirms the immunity of those who are not included in it. It is not, then, from the law or the usage of nations, nor from the tenour of Treaties, that any sanction can be derived for the practice in question. And surely it will not be pretended, that the sove- reignty of any nation extends, in any case whatever, beyond its own dominions, and its own vessels on the high seas. Such a doctrine would give just claim to all nations, and, more than anything, would countenance the. imputation of aspiring to an uni- versal empire of the seas. It would be the less admissible, too, as it would be applicable to times of peace, as well as to times of war, and to property as well as to persons. If the law of allegiance, which is a municipal law, be in force at all on the high seas, on board foreign vessels, it must be so at all times there, as it is within its acknowledged sphere. If the reason alleged for it be good in time of war, namely, that the Sovereign has then a right to the service of all his subjects, it must be good at all times, because at all times he has the same right to their service. War is not the only occasion for which he may want their services, nor is external danger the only danger against which their services may be required for his security. Again, if the authority of a municipal law can operate on persons in foreign vessels on the high seas, because within the dominion of their Sovereign they would be subject to that law, and are violating that law by being in that situation, how reject the inference that the authority of a municipal law may equally be enforced, on board foreign vessels, on the high seas, against articles of pron<"^Y exported in violation of I 3 tuch a law, or belonging to the country from which it waa exported ? and thua every commercial regu- lation, in time of peace too, as well aa of war, would be mfle obligatory on foreigners and their vesitolf, not only whilst within the dominion of the Sovereign making the reguUtion, but In every sea, and at every distance where an armed vessel might meet with them. Another inference deserves attention : If the subjects of one Sovereign may be taken by force from the vessels of another, on the high seas, the right of taking them when foond implies the right of searching for them— a vexation of commerce, especially in time of peace, which has not yet been attempted, and wbwh, for that as well as otiier reasons, may be regarded u oontradicting the prin- ciple from which it would flow. Taking reason and justice for the tests of this practice, it is peculiarly indefensible ; because it deprives the dearest rights of persons of a regular trial, to which the most incouaiderable article of property captured on the high seu is entitled ; and leaves their destiny to the will of an ofiicer, some- times cruel, often ignorant, and generally interested, by his want of mariners, in his own decisions. Whenever property found in u neutral vessel is auppoaed to be liable, on any grounds, to capture anti condemnation, the rule in all cases it, that the question shall not be decided by the r;aptor, but be carried before a legal Tribunal, where a regular trial may be had, and where the captor himself is liable to damages for an abuse of his power. Can it be reasonable, then, or just, that a belligerent Com- mander who is thus restricted, and thus resiionsible in a ease of mere property of trivial amount, should be permitted, without recurring to any Tribunal whatever, to examine the crew of a neutral vessel, ■ to decide the important question of their respective allegiances, and to carry that dt«ision into instant execution, by forcing every individual he may choose into a service abhorrent to his feelings, cutting him off from his most tender connections, exposing his mind and his person to the most humiliating disci- pline, and his life itself to the greatest dangers? Reason, justice, and humanity unite in protesting against so extravagant a proceeding. ^impqiPqHPPi wfimimmmmmm ^TCnipi!PiPP**ii|pi ?; ■ fmm \ mmmmmmimfim^^m^^i^imft BEHRING SEA ARBITRATION. Collection of Authorities touching — (1.) A Marine League as the extent of Coastal Jurisdiction. (2.) The freedom of Ocean Fisheries. (3.) Inland Seas. (4.) Hovering Acts. (5.) Collection of Sffl^futos and Treaties touching the universal adoption 0£ tha Si wine League. [674] wmmmmmw'Kmi^^''mmmmmmm wmm^ ippii?P5^P5^i|ii5W!^ V BEHRING SEA ARBITRATION. Wharton'f " Dignt," p. 100. United States of America committed to the principle of a marine league. MR. JEFFERSON, Secretary of State, wrote to the Minister for Great Britain in 1793 : — " The limit of our sea league from shore is provisionally adopted as that of the territorial sea of the United States." On the 10th July, 1832, the United States' Charges d'Aff aires at Buenos Ayres, writing to the Buenos Ayres Foreign Minister on the question of the seil fishery at the Falkhind Islands, says : — " The ocean fisheiy is a natural right which all nations may enjuy in common. Every interference with it by ii foreign Power is a national wrong. When it is carried on within the marine league of the coast which has been designated as the extent of the national jurisdiction, reason seems to dictate a restriction ; if, under the proie.xt of currying on the fishery, an evasion of the res-enuc laws of the country may reasonably be apprehended, or any otlicr serious injury to the Sovereign of the coast, he has a right to prohibit it; but as such prohibition derogates from a natural right, the evil to be apprehended ought to be a real, not an imaginary, one." Mr. Webster, in 1842, writes to Lord Ash- burton ; — "A vessel on the high seas beyond the distance of 1 marine league from the shore ie i-cgarded as part of the territory of the nation to which she l)cIong8, and subjected exclusively to the jarisdiotion of that nation." Mr. Buchanan, Secretary of State, 1849, wrote : — Wharton's " The exolftsive jurisdiction of a nation extends to thi' "Digttt," p. 101. ports, liarlioui-s, bays, mouths of rivers, and adjacent parts of sea inclosed by headlands, and also lo the distance of 1 marine league, or so far as a caniion-sho( will re»cl) from the shon; along all its coasts. Within these lis.iUl the Sovereign of the mainland may arrest, by due process of law, alleged offenders on board of foreigu mcrchant- ships." Wharton, in his "Digest of the Inter- national Law of the United States," 1886, section 32, vol. i, p. 102, citing MS. notes, Spain, prints portions of a letter from Mr. Seward, Secrotary of State, to Mr. Tassara on the 16th December, 1862, where, in connection with the maxim, " Terr/e dominium Jinitur uhifinitur armorum vis," he lays down that — "The range of a canuon-ball is shorter or longer according to the circumstances of projection, and it must be always liable to change with the improvement of the science of ordnance. Such uncertainty upon a point of '•j'isdiction or sovereignty would be productive of many and endless controversies and conflicts. A more practical limit of national jurisdiction upon the high seas was indispensably necessary, and this was found as the Under- signed (Mr. Secretary Seward) thinks in fixing the limit at 3 miles from the coast. This limit was early proposed by the publicists of all maritime nations. Wliile it is not insisted that all nations have accepted or acquiesced and bound themselves "^o abide by this rule when applied to themselves, yet these points involved in the subject are insisted upon by the United States : (1) that this limit has been generally recognized by nations; (2) that no other general rule has been accepted ; and (3) that, if any State has succeeded in fixing a larger limit, this has been done by the exercise of maritime power, and con- stitutes an exception to the general understanding which fixes the range of a cannon-shot (when it is made the test of territorial jurisdiction) at 3 miles. So generally is this rule accepted, that wi'iters commonly use the expressions of a range of cannon-shot and 3 miles as equivalents of each other. In other ca.ses, they use the latter expression as a substitute for the former." In the brief of the United States' counsel at Sitka in 1886, already referred to, it is said : — " It thus appears that our Government asserted this Wheatou's " Inter- doctrine in its infancy. It was announced by Mr. Jefferson "sj'"'"' *^'»» vol. I, sec. 33, as Secretary of State and by thi' Attorney-Genera) in „„. g^ioo. 1793. Mr. Pickering, Secretary of State in 1790, re- uHirins it in his letter to the Governor of Virginia, in the following language : ' Our jurisdiction has been fixed to extend 3 geographical miles from our shores, with the exception of any waters or bays which are so land-locked as to be unquestionably within the jurisdiction of the States, be their extent what they may.' "Mr. Buchanan, Secretary of State, to Mr. Jordan, in Idem., p. 101. 1849, reiterates this rule in the following language: 'The exclusive jurisdiction of a nation extends to the ports, harbours, bays, moutlis of rivers, and adjacent parts of the sea inclosed by headlands.' " Mr. Seward, in the Senate in 1852, substantially enunciates the same doctrine by declaring that, if we relied alone upon the old rule f-.at only those bays whose entrance from headland to headland do not exceed 6 miles are witliin the territorial jurisdiction of the adjoining nation, our dominion to all the large and more important arms of the sea on both our Atlantic and Pacific coasts would have to be surrendered. Our right to jurisdiction over these rests with the rule of internationnl law which gives a nation jurisdiction over waters embraced within its land dominion." And also : — Wheaton'i " Inter- national Law," Tol. i, fcc. 32, pp. 100 and 109. " The Z-mili Limit. "Concerning the doctrine of intcnational law esta- blishing what is known aa the marine league belt, which e-xtendg the jurisdiction of a nation into adjacent seas for a distance of 1 mai'ine [league or 3 miles from its shores, and following all the indentations and sinuosities of its coast, there is at this day no room for discussion. It must be accepted as the settled law of nations. It is sustained by the highest authorities, law-writers, and jurists. It has been sanctioned by the United States since the foundation of the Government. It was affirmed by Mr. Jefferson, Secretary of State, as early as 1793, and has been re- affirmed by his successors — Mr. Pickering, in 1790 ; Mr. Madison, in 1807; Mr. Webster, in 1842; Mr. Buchanan, in 1849; Mr. Seward, in 1862, 1863, and 1864; Mr. Fish, in 1875 ; Mr. Evarts, in 1879 and 1881 ; and Mr. Bayard, in 1886. " Sanctioned thus by an unbroken line of precedents coveting the first century of our national existence, the United States wonld not abandon this doctrine if they could ; they could not if they would." The American publicist, Wheaton, p. 320, thus states the rule of international law : — " Maritime territory of every State extends to the ports, harbours, bays, mouths of rivers, and adjacent parts of the sea inclosed by headlands belonging to the srme State. The general usage of nations superadds to this extent of territorial jurisdiction a distance of 1 marine league, or as far U3 a cannon-shot will reacli, from the shore along all the coasts of the State. Within this territory its rights of property and territorial jurisdiction are absolute, and exclude chose of every other nation." Mr. Lawrence, in a note to Wheaton, says : — Whoatou Bee. 179. " I' l">s been shown (note, p. 226), referring to visitation in time of peace, that no apprehended inconvenience on account of the revenue laws or the public safety would give a right to a ship of war to stop a merchantman belonging to another country, even near the coast, beyond 1 marine league. So far as there is any interference [674] * IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) fi I 1.1 11.25 ■A&12.8 12.5 |50 ■^" l^H Ui Uii 12.2 !!J 144 ■" Lo 12.0 us I' i U lllllj^ - 6" ^>:^' V 7 ^ Photographic Sdences Corporation 33 WEST MAIN STRUT WEBSTER, N.Y. H5S0 (716)872-4503 4^ ^ .*7^ 8 to prooure on eminent good by meua that aie unbwfal, ia as little consonant to private morality as to publio jostioe. Obtain the concurrence of other nationa if yon can by application, by rumonstranoe, by example, by every peaceable instmment which man can empU^ to attract the consent of man, bat a nation ia not JuatiBad ia assuming rights that do not belong to her merely becaoaa she means to apply them to a laudable purpose, nor in aetting out upon a moral crusade of converting other nations by acts of unlawful force, nor ia it to he aigned that because other nations approve the ultimate purpose they must, therefore, submit to every measure which any one State or ito subjecto may inoonsidemtely adopt for its attainment . . . " If it [the exercise of the right of seisnre] be assumed by force and left at krge to operate reoipmoally upon the ahips of every Stote (for it must be a right of all against •11), without any other limits as to tiiu?, place, or mode of inquiry, then such is the pretence in each instance as particular States or their individual subjecte may impose, I leave the tragedy contained in this case to illnstrato the effecto that are likely to arise in the very first stages of the process without adding to the soooont what must be V -sidered as a most awful part ol it, the perpetual inita- «.on and the universal hostility which are likely to ensue." " If either this Court nor any other can carry ite private Pag* t^9. apprehensions, independent of law, into ite public judgments on the qualit" of actions. It must conform to the judgment of the law upon that subject, and, acting as a Court in the administration of law, it cannot attribute criminality to an act where the law imputes none. It must look to the legal staiidord of morality, and, upon a qnestion jf this nature, thai . omdard must be found in the law of nations, as fixed and evidenced by general and ancient and admitted practice, by Treatien, and by the general tenour of the laws and ordinances and the formal transactions of civilized Stetes." " . . . . Much stress is laid upon a solemn deolarstion of Pag* Ut. very eminent persons assembled in Congress, whose rank, high as it is, is by no means the most respecteble founda- tion of the weight of their opinion that this Tra£Bo is contrary to all religion and morality. Great as the reverence due to such authorities may be, they cannot^ I think, be admitted to have the force of overruling the esteblished course of the general law of nationa." "A country has right to enforce ite navigation laws so Kg* 9SS. long as does not interfere with righte of others, no right, ia consequence, to visit and search all the apparent veasela of other countries in high seas." " It is said, and with just concern, that, if not permitted Psg* 2S6l in time of peace, it will be extremely diflioult to suppress the Traffio. It will be so, and no man can deny that tha anppression, however desirable and however sought^ ia attended with enormous difiSonlties, diiBcultiea whidi bun JP^|ii-4ili{ipppilip||pp||W I. ■^i^ ipp V»pW. baffltid the most zealoui endeavours for many yean. To every man it must have been evident that, without a general and sincere concurrence of all the Maritime States in the principle and in the proper modes of pursuing it, comparatively but littld of positive good could be acquired, ■o far, at least, as the interests of the victims of this com- merce were concerned in it ; and to every man who looks to the rival claims of these States, to their established babits of trade, to their real or pretended wants, to their difTorent modes of thinking, and to their real mode of acting upon this particular subject, it must be equally evident tiiat suc.h a concurrcncu was mutter of very diffi- cult attainment. But the difficulty of the attainment will not legalize measures that are otlierwiso illegal. To press forward to a groat principle by breaking through every other great principle that stands in the way of its establish- ment, to force the way to the liberation of Africa by trampling on the independence of other States in Europe ; in short, to procure an eminent good by means that are unlawful is ao little consonant to private morality as to public justice. Obtain the concurrence of other nations, if you can, by application, by remonstrance, by example, by every peaceable instrument which nmn can employ to attract the consent of man. But a nation is not justified in assuming rights that do not belong to her merely because «he means to apply them to a laudable purpose, nor in setting out upon a moral crusade of converting other nations by acta of unlawful force. Kor is it to be argued that because other nations approve the ultimate purpose they must therefore submit to every measure which any one State or its subjects may inconsiderately adopt for its attainment." " The practice of visitation and search during peoce is likely to produce great mischiefs." The Judgment of the Vice-Admiralty Court of Sierra Leone, condemning the French ship for being employed in the Slave Tmde and for forcibly resisting the search of the King of England's cruizers, uras reversed by the above Judgment. ^he Judge remarked that this was " the first case of the kind." 10 WheotoD, 66. The decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of the "Antelope" is to the same effect. There Chief Justice Marshall delivered the opinion of the Court, holding that the Slave Trade, though contrary to the law of nature, was not in conflict with the > law of nations : — "No principle of general law is more universally acknowledged than the perfect equality of nations. Bussia and Geneva have equal rights. It results from this equality that no one can rightfully impoim a rule on another ; each legislates for itself, but its legislation can [674] D mm ipiPllfPWW"^^^"»Pii"l) I •■!|«,|W|ilfl-«''*»'!^ '"«'<;•»'■■'' 10 operate on itself alone. A right, then, which is vested in all by the consent of all, can be divested only by consent; and this trade, in which all have participated, must remain lawful to those who cannot be induced to relinquish it As no'Yiation can prescribe a ruin for others, none can make a law of nations, and this traffic remains lawful to those whose Governments have not forbidden it. " If it is consistent with the law of nations, it cannot, in itself, be piracy. It can be made so only by Statute, and the obligation of the Statute cannot transcend the legisla- tive powtr of the State which may enact it. " It" it be neither repu<»naut to the law of nations nor piracy, it is almost sup' < fluous to say in 'this Court that the right of biinging in for adjudication in time of peace, even where the vessel belongs to a nation which has prohibited the trade, cannot exist The Courts of no country execute the penal laws of another, and the course of the American Government on the subject of visitation and search would decide any case in which that right had been exercised by an American cruizer un the vessel of a foreign nation not violating our mimicipal laws against the captors, " It follows that a foreign vessel engaged in the African Slave Trade, captured on the high set'j in time of peace by an American cruizer and brought in for adjudication, would be restored." Tho whole subject is fully disposed of in Mr. Dana's note No 108 to Wheaton (p. 268), whero it is said of Chief Justice Marshall, in Church against Hubbard, 2 Cranch, 187 : — "It is true that Chief Justice Marshall admitted the right uf a nation to secure itself against intended violations of its laws by seizures made within reasonable limits, as to which, he said, nations must exercise comity and concession and the exact extent of which was not settled, and in the case before the Court tho 4 Icagiies were not treated as rendering the seizure illcf^al. This remark must now be treated as an unworranted admission It may be said that the principle is settled that municipal seizure!! cannot be made for any purpose beyond territorial waters. It is also settled that the limit of these waters is, in llie absence of Treaty, the marine league or the ennnon-ahot. It cannot now be successfully maintained either tliat municipal visits and beavch may be made beyond the territorial waters for special purposes, or that there are different points of that territory for different objects ; but as the line of territorial waters, if not fixed, is dependent on the unsettled rnnj" of rrtillery fire, and if fixed must be by an arbitrary measure, the Courts in the earlier cases were not strict as to standard of distance vihtre no foreign Powers interveiud in the cauacs. In later times, it is safe to infer that judicial as well as political Tribunals will insist on one line of marine territorial jurisdiction for tho exercise of force on foreign vessels in time of peace for all purpose^ alike." '■P|J;i|WiyM'W«npipinqmpi|i^^ 11 The United Stutea' position in 1877 aa to marine league. Expositions of the Law of England as to what are territorial waters, and as to the extent of jurisdiction, for any purposes, heyond low-water mark, will be fosnd in the case of tho "Fran> conia," decided in November 1876 before all the Judges of England. Queen v. Keyn, L. B., 2 Exoh. Div. 68. The opinions of the different Judges were said by the Agent of the United States before the Halifax Fisheries Commission (froui whoso brief many of the following authoiities arc rci)ro- duced) to be a "repertory of nearly all the learning, ancient and modern, English, A merican, and Continental, which could be collected from treatises and reports," The question was whether the criminal jurisdiction of England extended to a crime committed by a foreigner on a foreign vessel, within 3 miles of the English coast. The following authorities were relied upon by the United States before the Halifax Com- mission. Sir Robert Phillimore : — " Whatever may have been tho claims asserted l>y nations in times past, and perhaps no nation has been moru extravagant than England in this matter, it is at tlie pre- sent time an unqucstionahlo proposition of international jurisprudence, that the high Eeas are of right navigable by the ships of all States " The question as to dominion over portions of the seas inclosed within headlands or contiguous shores, such as tho King's Chambers, is not now under consideration. It is enough to say that within this term ' territory ' are cer- tainly comprised the ports and harbours, and the space between the flux and reflux of tide, or the land up to the furthest point at which the tide recedes. " With respect to the second question, the distance to which the territorial waters extend, it appears, on an examination of the authorities, that the distance has varied (setting aside even more extra vagauu claims) from 100 to 3 miles, the present limit " Tlie sound conclusions which result from tho investi- gations of tho authorities wliich have been refencd to appear to mo to be these : — "The consensus of civilized, independent States has recognized a miffitime extension of frontier to the distance of 3 miles ttom low-water mark, because such a frontier, or bolt of water, is necessary for the defence and security of the ac^acent Statj. " It is for the attainment of these particular objects that a dominion has been granted over this portion of the liigh seas." Lindley, J., expressed himself as follows : — "Tho controversy between Orotius, in his 'Mare Libemm,' and Selden, in his 'Mare Clausum,' hns been /1 mmfmlmmmmtim IP" ij" i!iH,"JW»l'S,5" ''-;';ll 12 observed upon by almost oveiy writer on international law since their day, and the result has been that, whilst the extravagant propositions contended for by each of these celebrated men have been long ago exploded, it appears to mo to bo now agreed, by the most esteemed writeie on intemationnl law, that, subject to the right of all ships freely to navigate the high seas, every State has full power to enact and enforce what laws it thinks proper for the pre- servation of peace and the protection of its own interests over tlioae parts of the high seas which adjoin its own coasts, and ai'e within 3 miles thereof; but that beyond this limit, or, at all events, beyond the reach of artillery on its own coasts, no State has any power to legislate, save over subjects and over persons on board ships carrying its " It is conceded that, even in time of peace, the terri- toriality of a foreign merchant-ship, within 3 "tiles of the coast of any State, does not exempt that ship or its crew from the operation of those laws of that State which relate to its revenue or fisheriea" Grove, J. : — " The proposition that a belt or zone of 3 miles of sea surrounding or washing the shores of a nation — what is termed ' territorial water ' — is the property of that nation, as a river flowing through its land would be, or, if not property, is subject to its jurisdiction and law, is not in its terms of ancient date ; but tliis defined limit, so far, at least, as a maritime country like England is concerned, is rather a restriction than an enlargement of its earlier claims, which were at one time sought to bo extended to a general dominion ou the sea, and, subsequently, over the channels between it and other countries, or, as they were termed, ' the narrow seas.' Tlie origin of the 3-miIe zone 'appears undoubted. It was an assumed limit to the range of cannon — an assumed distance at which a nation was supposed able to exercise dominion from the shore." " The principal authorities may be conveniently arranged as follows : — " 1. Tliose who affirm the right, in what are generally termed 'territorial waters,' to extend, at least, to the distance at which it can be commanded from the shore, or as for as arms can protect it. " 2. Those who, assigning the same origin to the right, recognized it as being fixed at 1 marine league, or 3 geo- graphical miles, from the shore. " 3. Those who affirm the right to bo absolute, and the same as over an inland lake, or (oUowiug for the difference of the subject-matter) as over the land itself. "4 Those who regard the right as qualified, and the main if not only qualification that seems to me fairly deducible from the authorities is, that there is a right of transit or passage, and, as incident thereto, possibly a right of anchorage when safety or convenience of navigation \ requires it, in the territorial waters, for foreign ships. "Pnffendorf, Bynkershoek, Oasaregis, Moier, Atuni, £l a territorial jurisdiction over a neigh- Inuring belt of sea had its origin in might, its limits being at' first doubtfiil and noutested, but ultimately, by a conces- sio'i or crimity if nations, it became fixed at what was for a long time the supposed range of a cannon-shot, viz., 3 miles' distance. "In addition to the authority of the publicists, this 3-milo luiigo, if not expressly recognized as an absolute boundary by in*^ernational law, is yet fixed on, appniontly without diupute, iu Acts of Parliament, in Treaties, and in Judgments of Courts of Law in this country and America." Brett, J., uses the following language : — "What are the limits of the realm should, in general, be declared by !!'arliament. Its declaration would bo con- clusive, either as authority or evidence. But, in this case [674] E miimmm ■HP"W^^PWP""T" ^ ' ' ' ■■ - ' ^:- '■'ii'f-'f'l mMabms-JSfyt' !!i'ri"*W>y'rf''*TvS- ■ •>.<>• 14 of the open sea, there is no such declaration ; and the question is in this case necessarily left ti< the Judges, and to be determined on other evidence or authority. Such evidence might have consisted of proof of a continuous public claim by the Crown of Ehigland, onforced, when practicable, by arms, but not consented tu.by other nations. I should have considered such proof sufficient for I'^ngUsh Judges. In England, it cannot be admitted that the limits of England iKpend on the consent of any other nation. But no such evidence was offered. The only evidence suggested in this case is that^ by law of tions, every country bordered by the sea is to be held to have, as part of its territory (meaning thereby a terri- tory in which its law is paramount and exclusive), the 3 miles of open sea next to its coast ; and, therefore, that England, among others, has such territory. The question on both sides hss been made to depend on whether such is or is not proved to be the law of nations. " I cannot but think, therefore, that substantially all the foreign jurists are in accord in asserting that, by the common consent of all nations, each which is bordered by an open sea has over 3 acljacent miles of it a territorial right And the sense in which they all use that term seems to me to be fully explained by Vattel (lib. i. c. 18, §205). He says:— " ' Lorsqu'une nation s'empare d'un pays qui n'appartient encore k personne, eUe est cens^e y occuper I'empire, ou la souverainet^, en m@me temps que le domaine. Tout I'eapace dans lequel une nation 6tend son empire forme le ressort do sa juridiction, et s'appelle son territoire.' At lib. ii, § 84 : ' L'empiru, uni au domaine, dtablit la juridic- tion do la nation dans le pays qui lui apportient, dans son territoire.' "This seems plain: sovereignty and dominion neces- sarily give or import jurisdiction, and do so throughout the territory. "Applying this to the territorial sea, at lib. i. c 23, § 295, he says :— " ' Quand une nation s'empare de certaines parties de la mer, elle y occupe I'empire aussi bien que le domaine, &c. Ces parties de la mer sent de la juridiction du territoire de la nation. Le Souverain y commaude ; il y donne des lois, et peut rL'T^Fry^^' w -¥>■ •• First, then, let us see how the matter stands as regards Treaties. ' It may be asserted, without fear of contradiction, that the rule that the sea surrounding the coast is to be treated as a part of the adjacent territory, so that the State shall have exclusive dominion over it, and that the law of the latter shall be generally applicable to those passing over it in the ships of other nations, has never been made the subject-matter of .uiy Treaty, or, ns matter of acknowledged right, has formed the btjsio of ^ny Treaty, or has even been the subject of diplomatic discussion. It ha« been entirely the creation of the writers on inter- national law. It is true that the writers who have been cited constanUy refer toTioaties in support of the doctrine thoy assert. But when the Treaties thoy refer to are looked at. they will be found to relate to two subjects ^ wmmmmfm. w^mmm only — the observance of the rights and obligations of neutrality and the exclusive right of fishing. In fixing the limits to which these rights should extend, nations Lave so fiir followed the writers on international law as to adopt the 3-mile rouge na a convenient distance. There are several Treaties by which nations have engaged, in the event of either of them being at war with a third, to treat the sea within 3 miles of each other's coasts as neutral territor}', wiiliin which no warlike operations should be carried on : instances of which will be found in the various Treaties on international law. " Again, nations possessing opposite or neighbouring coasts, bordering on a common sea, liave sometimes found it expedient to agree that the subjects of each shall exercise an exclusive right of fislung to a given distance i^oni their own shores, and berc also have accepted the .3 miles as a convenient distance. Such, for instance, are the Treaties made between this country and the United States in relation to the fisheiy off the coast of New- foundland, and those between this country and France in relation to the fishery on their respective shores; and local laws have been passed to give effect to these " But in all these Treaties this distance is adopted, not OS a matter of existing right established by the general law of nations, but as matter of mutual concession and con- vention. Instead of upholding the doctrine contended for, the fact of these Treaties having been entered into has rather the opposite tendency ; for it is obvious that, if the territorial right of a nation bordering on the sea to this portion of the adjacent waters had been established by the common assent of nations, these Treaty arrangements wo\iId have been wiioUy superfluous. Each nation would bave been bound, independently of Treaty enga(;ement, to respect the neutrality of the other in these waters, as much ao in its inland waters. The foreigner invading the rights of the local fishermen would have been amenable, con- sistently with international law, to local legislation pro- hibiting such infringement, without any stipulation to that effect by Treaty. For what object, then, have Treaties been resorted to ? Manifestly, in order to obviate all questions as to concurrent or conflicting rights arising under the law of nations. Possibly, after these precedents and all that has been written on this subject, it may not be too much to say that, independently of Treaty, the 3-mile belt of sea might nt this day be taken as belonging, for these purposes, to the local State. " So much for Treaties. Then bow stands the matter as to usage, to which reference is so freciuently made by the publicists, in support of their doctrine ? When the matter is looked into, the only usage found to exist is such as is connected with navigation, or with revenue, local fisheries, or neutrality; and it is to these alone that the usage relied on is confined. " It may well be, I uay again, that, after all that has been said and done in this respect, after the instances vrhich bave been mem - .. 'd of the adoption of the 3-nule distance, and the repeRued assertion of this doctrine by the ■P"^p "P««p» 21 writen on public law, a nation which should now deal with this portion of the sea as its own, so aa to make foreigners within it subject to its law, for the prevention and punishment of offences, would not be considered as infringing the rights of other nations. But I apprehend that, as the ability so to deal with these waters would result, not from any original or inherent right, but firom the acquiescence ox other States, some outward manifesta- tion of the national will, in the shape of open practice or municipal legislation, so as to amount, at least construc- tively, to an occupation of that which was before unappro- priated, would be necessary to render the foreigner, not previously amenable to our general law, subject to its control. "And this brings me to the second branch of the ergument, namely, that the jurisdiction having been asserted as to the narrow seas at the tiiue the Statute passed, it must be taken to have been transferred by the Statute. The answer to snch a contention is, that no reference being made in the Statute to this now-exploded claim of sovereignty, we must read the. Statute as having transferred — as, indeed, it could alone transfer — such jurisdiction only as actually existed. Jurists are now agreed that the claim to exclusive dominion over the narrow seas, and consequent jurisdiction over foreigners for offences committed thereon, was extravagant and unfounded, and the doctrine of the 3-mile jurisdiction lias taken the place of all such pretensions. In truth, though largely asserted in theory, the jurisdiction was never practically exercised in respect of foreigners. " Hitherto, legislation, so far as relates to foreigners in foreign ships in this part of the sea, has been confined to the maintenance of neutral rights and obligations, the prevention of breaches of the revenue and fishery laws, and, under particular circumstances, to cases of collision. In the two first, the legislation is altogether irrespective of the 3-mile distance, being founded on a totally different principle, namely, the right of a State to take all necessary measures for the protection of its territory and rights, and the prevention of any breach of its revenue laws." - Citing these decisions, the Agent for the United States, in 1877, at Halifax, remarked in his brief:— " Such are tho gpneral principles of English law to-day as laid down by the Chief Justice of England. The jurisdiction of a State or country over its adjoining waters is limited to 3 miles from low-water mark along its aea-coast, and the same rule applies equally to bays and gulfs whose width exceeds 6 milca from headland to headland. Property in and dominion over the sea can only exist as to those portions capable of permanent possession ; that is, of a possession from the land, which possession can only be maintained by artillery. At 1 mile beyond the reach of const-guns, there is no more possession than in mid-ocean. This is the rule laid down by almost [674J O wmm ^■•■pppp sa ■n the writers on international la7, a (ew extracts bom whom — " The Agent proceeded to quote : — " At present," says Vattel, " Law of Nations," Book 1, ch. xxiii, §§ 289, 291, "the whole space of the sea within cannon-shot of the cooat is considered as making a part of the territory ; and, for that reason, a vessel taken under the guns of a neutral fortress is not a good prize. . " All we have said of the parts of the sea near the coast may be said more particularly and with mnch greater reason of the roads, bays, and straits, as still more capable of being occupied, and of greater importance to the safety of the country. But I speak of the bays and straits of small extent, and not of those great parts of the sea to which these names are sometimes given — as 'Hudson's Bay and the Straits of Magellan— over which the Empire cannot extend, and still less a right of property. A bay- whose entrance may be defended may be possessed and rendered subject to the laws of the Sovereign ; and it is of importance that it should be so, since the country may be much more easily insulted in such a place than on the coast, open to the winds and the impetuosity of the^ Professor Bluntschli, in liis " Law of Nations," Book 4, §§ 802, 309, states the rule in the same way: — " When the frontier of a State is formed by the opea sea, the part of the sea over which the State can from the shore make its power respected — ie., a portion of the sea extending as far as a cannon-shot irom the coast — ^is considered es belonging to the territory of that State. Treaties or agreements can establish other and more precise limits." Note. — The extent practised of this sovereignty has remarkably increased since the invention of far shooting cannon. This is the consequence of the improvements made :" the means of defence, of which the State makes use. The sovereignty of States over the sea extended originally only to a stone's-throw from the coast ; later to an arrow-shot; fire-arms were invented, and by rapid progress we have arrived to the far-shooting cannon of the present age. But still we preserve the principle : ** Terrm dominium Jinilur vHfinitur amumim vis." "Within certain limits, there are submitted to the sovereignty of the bordering State : — " (a.) The portion of the sea placed within a cannon- shot of the shore. "(6.) Harbours. "(ft) Gulfs. "(d) Roadstead." NoU. — Certain portions of the sea tie so neariy Jdnai tu the ttrra firma, that, in some meuuie at least, the^ mfm'mmm mmm PW«""B" 28 oof^t to form a part of the territory of the botdeiing State ; they are conaidered aa accessories to the terra firma. The safety of the State and the public quiet are so depen- dent on them that they cannot be contented, in certain gulfs, with the portion of the sea lying under the fire of cannon from the coast These exceptions from the general role of the liberty of the sea can only be made for weighty reasons, and when the extent of the arm of the sea is not large; thus, Hudson's Bay and the Gulf of Mexico evidently are a part of the open sea. No one disputes the power of England over the arm of the sea lying between the Isle of Wight and the Fjiglish coast, which could not be admitted for the sea lying between England and Ireland; the English Admiralty has, however, sometimes main- tained the theory of "narrow seas;" and has tried, but without success, to keep for its own interest, under the name of" King's Chambers," some considerable extents of the sea. KlQber, "Droit des Gens Modernes de I'Europe (Paris, Edition 1831)," vol. i, p. 216 :— "An territoire maritime d'un £tat appartiennent les districts maritimes, ou parages susceptibles d'une pos- session exclusive, sur lesquels r£tat a acquis par occu- pation ou convention) et continue la souverainet^. Sont de ce nombre : (1) les parties de I'oc^an qui avoisinent le territoire continental de I'fitat, du moins, d'apris I'opinion presque gdn^ralement adoptee, autant qu'elles se trouvent sous la port^e du canon qui serait placd sur le rivage; (2) les parties de I'ocdan qui s'dtendent dans le territoire coucinontalde rfitat.si elles peuvent @tre gouvem^ par le canon des deux bords, ou que I'entrde seulement en pent £tre d^fendne aux vaisseaux (golfes, boies, et cales) ; (3) lea d^troita qui apparent deux continents, et qui ^gale- ment sont sous la port^e dii canon plac^ sur le rivage, ou dont I'entr^e et la sortie peuvent §tre d^fendues (ddtroit, canal, bosphore, sonde). Sont encore du mSme nombre ; (4) les golfes, ddtroits, et mers avoisinant le territoire continental d'un £tat, lesquels, quoiqu'ils ne sont pas enti6rement sous la port^e du canon, sont n^anmoins reconnua par d'autres Puissances comme mer fenn^e ; c'est-it-dire, comme soumis k une dominatioii, et, par con- fluent, inaccessibles aux vaisseaux dtrangers qui n'ont point obtenu la permission d'y uaviguer." Ortolan, in his "Diplomatie de la Mer," pp. 146, 163 (^tion 1864:), after laying down the rule that a nation had control over the .navigation in a straight or road whose width did not exceed 6 miles, continues : — " On doit ranger lur la mfime ligne que rades, et les ^rtea, les golfea, et lea baiea, et tons lea enfoncements xsonnua sooa d'autres denominations, lorsque cea enfnnce- ments, fonn^ par lea terrea d'un m@me £tat, no diSpassent .pas en laigevr la double port^e du canon, ou lorsque ■rfHPPiiPiiPppp ^^m^^li^ wsm a I'entnie peat en 6tre gouvera^e p«r I'trtillerio, oa qu'elle est defend ue naturellcment par dei Ilea, par des banca, ou par deg roches. Dans tous ces cas, en effet, il est vroi de diro que ces golfes ou ces bates sont en la puissance de r£tat maltre du territoire qui les enserro. Cet £tat en a la possession : tous les raisonnements que nous avons fait k regard des rades et des ports peuvent se nSpdter icL Les bords et rivages de la mer qui boigne les c6tes d'un £tat sont les li mites maritimes naturella de cet £tat Mais pour la protection, pour la defense plus efficace de ces limites naturelles, la coutume gdndrale des notions, d'occord avec beaucoup de Traitds publics, permettre [sic] tracer sur mer, k une distance convenable des cdtes, et 8uiv<\nt leurs contours, une ligne imoginoire qui doit @tra considdrde comrae la frontiire maritime artifioielle. Tout b&timent qui se trouve & terre de cette ligne est dit 6tre dam lu eaux de r£tat dont ello limite le droit de souve- rainetd et de juridictioa" Hautefeuillo, "Droits et Devoin des Nations Neutres," torn. 1, tit. 1, ob. 3, § 1 : — " La mer est libre d'une mani^re absolue, sauf les eanz baignant les cdtes, qui font partie du domoine de la nation riveroine. Les causes de cette exception sont (1) que ces portions de I'ocdan sont susceptibles d'une possession continue ; (2) que le peuple qui les possMe peut en ezclure les autres; (3) qu'il a int^rSt, soit ponr aa sdcuritd, soit pour conserver les avantagea qu'il tire de la mer territoriale, k prononcer cette exclusion. Ces causes connues, il est facile de poser les limites Le domaine maritime s'arrSte k I'endroit oil cesae la possession continue, oil lo peuple propridtaire ne peut plus exercer sa puissance, k I'endroit oi^ il ne peut plus exolure les Strangers, enfin k I'endroit oil, leur presence n'dtant plus dangereuse pour sa s(lret^, il n'a plus intdi^t de lea exclure. " Or, le point oil cessent lea troia causes qui rendent la mer susceptible de possession privde est le mSme ; c'est la limite de la puissance, qui est reprdsentde par lea machines de guerre. Tout I'espoce paicoum par lea projectiles lancds du rivage, protdgd et ddfendu par la puissance de ces machines, est territorial, et soumia au domaine du mattre de la c8te. La plus grande portde du canon montd k terre est done rdellement la limite de la mer territoriale. " En effet, cet espace seul est rdellement soumis k la puis- sance du Souverain territorial, I&, mais 14 seidement, il peut faire respecter et exdcuter sea lois ; il a la puissance de puuir les infracteura, d'exclure ceux qu'il ne peut pas admettre. Dans cette limite, la presence de voiaseaux dtrangers veut menncer sa sftretd ; au del&, elle eat indif- fdrentc pour lui, elle ne pent lui causer aucune inquietude, car, au delik de la portee du canon, ila ne peuvent luinuire. La limite de la mer territoriale est r^ellement d'aprte le droit primitif, la portde d'un canon ploc^ k terre. " Le droit secondaire a sanctionn^ cette diapoflition ; la -"TPW? WfW^ ''n«'.7?ii^^^f"iwi!%s;v''ji''f*y«i"»'"';'.'if^r!u*,yr' 95 plupart dm Tmit^aqui ont parld de cette portion de la mar ont adopts la mSme rigla Orotins, Hubner, Bynkershoek, Vattel, Qaliani, Azuni, KlUber, et presque tous lea publi- oifltea modcrncs Ivs plus justomeut estimda, ont pris In port^ du canon comme la soule limite de la mer territorialij qui fut rationnelle et conforme aux prescriptions du droit primitif. Cette limite naturelle a 6t6 reoonnue par un grand nombre de peuples, dans les lois et r^glcments intdrieurs. " Les cdtes do la mer ne pnSsentent pas uno ligne droite et nJguliire; elles sout, au controiro, presque tonjonrs coupt'us do baics, de ci> is, &o. ; si le domaine mnritime devuit toujours £tr« most ti de chacun des points du rivage, il en rdsulterait de groves inconvdniants. Anssi, est-ou convenu, dans I'usage, de tiror une ligne fictivo d'un pro- montoire & I'autre, et de ,>rendro cette ligne pour point de depart de la portde du canon. Ce mode, adopts par pTCKiue tous les peupleB,ne a'applique qu'aux pctites baies, et non aux golfes d'une grande ( by the GonTention of 1818, United States' &hermen were prohibited from fishing within 8 marine miles of the entranee$ of any sooh bays, creeks, or harbonn of the British dominions in America. While there is no evidence of either an assertion (in the sense of persisting in a claim), or an exercise of exdosiTe maritime jurisdiotion by any Power tn Behring Sea, it is submitted that even if Bussia> by the Ukase of 1821, did claim and afterwards assert exclusive jurisdiotion over a coastal limit of 100 miles in that sea, such an assertion established no right or authority according to international law. Phillimore,!, §174:— "The right of navigation, fiahing, and the like upon the open sea, being fura merce /tuullatit, rights which do not lequite a continuous exercise to maintain . their validify, but which may or may not be exercised according to the free will and pleasure of those entitled to them, can neither be lost by non-user or prescribed against, nor acquired to the exclusion of others by having been immemotially exercised by one nation only. No presumption can arise that these who have not hitherto exercised such rights have abandoned the intention of ever doing so." Oalvo recognizes the temptation which the proximity to the coast of "fish, oysters, and other shell-fish" affords to nations to extend their sovereignty beyond the 8-mile limit. Yet, instead of permitting such an extension, espe- cially when supported by long use, he distinctly says : — "De pareilloB derogations anx principea nniverselle- ment reconnus ont besoin, pour devenir obligutoiies, d'fitre sanctionn^es par des Conventions expresses et 4crites." The reason which flows from the nature of pi«soription, however, is sufficient to establish the point in question, without the aid of authority. Unlike adverse possession or limitation, prescrip- tion rests for its validity on a presumed prior grant. Now, in international law there is no room for such a presumption. National archives are not so susceptible of oblivion and destruction as to call it into existence. [6743 I mm i^ni^ppppij^i^vfvniiipil^ itottiiMMMii^MMiiiiiiiiiiliiBMiil^^ ignnn '!'WftM''''?f'lfS'lP.'W,,l!:!l!. »Wi»i .•;j,'i WF ^mmmmmmmfmm mmirmim. 80 Advene possesiiion and limitation have no place in marine international law. The controversy between Orotius and Selden as to the right of appropriation by a nation of the sea beyond the immediate vicinity of the coast is thus reviewed by Wheaton : — * There are only two decisive reoaons applicable to the Wbtttoo. question. The first is physical and material, which would EUaeals, 1 187. alone be sufficient, but when coupled with the seoond reason, which is purely moral, will be found conclusive of the whole controversy : — '* 1. Those things which are originally the common property of all mankind can only become the exclusive property of a particular individual or society of men by means of possessioa In order to establish the claim of a particular nation to a right of property in the sea, that nation must obtain and keep poesession of it, which is impossible. " 2. In the second place, the sea is an element which belongs equally to all men, like the air. No nation, then, has the right to appropriate it, even though it might be physically possible to do sa " It is thus demonstrated that the sea cannot become the exclusive property of any nation ; and, consequently, the use of the sea for these purposes remains open and common to all mankind." pp. )tO-196. In a note on the foregoing passage of Wheaton, Mr. Dana adds that — " The right of one nation to an exdnsive jurisdiction over an open sea was, as stated in the text, vested solely on a kind of prescription. But, however long acquiesced in, such an appropriation is inadmissible in the nature of things, and whatever may be the evidence of the time or nature of the use it iii set aside as a bad usage, which no evidence cun make legal. The only question now is, whether a given sea or sound is, in fact, as a matter of politico-physical geo^phy, within the exclusive jurisdic- tion of one nati( n. The chum of several nations, whose borders surround a large open sea, to combine and make it mare clausum against the rest of the world, cannot be admitted. The making of such a claim to the Baltic was the infirmity of the position taken up by the Armed Neutrality in 1780 and 1800, and in the Russian Ueclank tion of War against England in 1807." He then quotes the following authorities in support of his position: Ortolan, "Bip. de la Mer," I, 120-126; Kent's "Comm." (Abdy's edit.), 1, 110-112 ; Wildman's «• Int. Law," 1, 71 ; Heffter, "Europ. VSlkerr.," § 76; De Oussy, "Droit Mniit.," Uv. I, lit. 2, § 89; Halleok's "Int. Law," I, p. 136; Woolsoy's " Int. Law," §§ 64-66; Uanning's "Iaw of Nations," 85; "•■'• i/«'jp,wwm5piwi.i.'n.. v-i , .. nfm^t^n^i.' 31 8M*lM|il8S- 19a Droit, lie., 1 1, 1. 1, 8. tsiii, {Ml. Rajneral'B "De la liberM des Men," II, LIOS; HaatefeQiUe, "Droits des Nat. Neutr.," Ut. I, lit 1. ch. I, $ 4; "Twee Oebraeders," Bob. III. 886; "Forty-nine Casks of Brandy," Hagg. Ill, 290. Wheaton proceeds to state that — "By the generally approved uuge of nstioiis, which forms the basis of international Uw, the maritime terri- tory of every territory extends : — " 1. To the ports, harbours, bays, months of rivers, and adjacent parts of the sea inclosed by headlands belonging to the same Stata " 2. To the distance of a marine league, or so far as a cannon-shot will reach from the shore, along all the coasts of the State. "8. To the straits and sounds, bounded on both sides by the territory of the same State, so narrow as to be oommanded by cannon-shot from both shores, and com- monicating firom one sea to another. " The Behring Sea can be brooght under the head of neither strait nor mugiual belt In that it is not entirely surrounded by land, it faUs short of the requisites of nn inclosed sea. For not only is the Behring Strait .36 miles wide, and the distance between many of tiie islands forming the southern boundary of this sea far in excess of that^ but the distance between the last island of the Aleutian chain and the nearest Russian island of the Commander group is 183 miles. "Again, regarded as a bay or gulf, the Behring Sea foils to enter the category of dosed seas. For, waiving all physico-geograpbical objections to such a classification, there still remains to its character of closed sea the insuperable objection of impossibility of possessioa " The name bay or frilf does not necessarily carry with it the idea of possessibility, and international law, when importuned to accord such a character to the Behring Sea, cries out with Vattel : — "Mais je parle des bais et d^troits de peu d'^tendne, et non de ces grands espoces de mer auxquels on donne qnelquefois ces noms, tels que la Baie de Hudson, le Detroit de Magellan, sur lesquels I'empire ne saurait s'tftendre, et moins encore la propri^t^.' " Under the olaoses of the Gonvention of the 8th February, 1853, the case of the " Washing* ton" came before the Joint Commission for settlement of oliums in London, and on the disagreement of the Commissioners was decided by Mr. Joshua Bates in favour of the United States. In his decision he said : — "The question turns, so far as relates to the Treaty stipulations, on the meaning given to the word ' bays' in the Treaty of 1783. By that Treaty, the Americaas had ao right to dry and cure fish on the shores and ftoyi of WiPiPPWpw'^^^'f^flPPPPiPlfl^IPfWip^^ , iipi||fjijip(!!ipif!l,|i|lit,,LfPW 'J m whieh no bays art traatcd u within tha Urritorial jariidietion bf a Stat* vhleli an mart than A milM nida on a itraiiht Una mciMuiad from o«* haadlMid to tb* othar. ssfif;pB'fWAW!W''WlS-'-*''^-'''' 88 OrtoUD, " R^let Internitioules et Piplonutie de It U«r," vol. i, p. 147. as mare claumm, because that nation claimed the territory on botli sides : — " ' Un droit exclusif de domaine et de sov.verainet^ de la part d'une nation sur une telle mer n'ost incontestable qn'autant que cette mer est totalement enclavie dans ce territoire de telle sorte qu'elle en fait partie int^grante, et qu'elle ne pent absolument servir de lieu de communica- . tion et de commerce qu'entrc les seuls citoyens de cette nation,' or, in the words of Sir Travera Twiss, ' is entirely inclosed 'by the territory of a nation, and has no other communication with the ocean than by a channel, of which that nation may take possession.' (' Rights and Duties nf Nations in time of Peace,' p. 174)" Halleck't Int«matioiul Law, Tol. i, cap. 6, pp. 142-146. So Halleck says : — " 21. It is generally admitted that tlie territorj' of a State includes the seas, lakes, and rivet's entirely inclosed within its limits. Thus, so long as the shores of the Black .Sea were exclusively possessed by Turkey, that sea might with propriety be considered as a mare clausum; and there seemed no reason to question the right of the Ottoman Porto to exclude other nations from navigating tho passage Avhich connects it with the Mediterranean, both shores of this passage being also portions of the Turkisli territory. But when Turkey lost a part of her possessions bordering upon tills set'., and Russia had formed her coraiaercial establishments on the shores of the Euxine, both that Empire and other Maritime Powers became entitled to participate in the commerce of the Black Sea, and, consequently, to the free navigation r 1' Ihe Dardanelles and the Bosphorus. This right was exjircssly recogniied by the Treaty of Adiianople in 1829. • • • • " 22. The great inland lakes and their navigable outlets are considere I iks subject to the same rule as inland seas ; where inclosed within the limits of a single State, they are regarded as belonging to the territory of that State ; but if di.'fereut nations occupy their borders, tlie rule of mare clautMii cannot bo applied to the navir'ation and use of their wal^rs." Tiieie Treatiea univerially accepletl until now, ■a an abandonment of Ruuia'i claim. Wharton, ««c. 15?, where, alto, Pmident Monroe's conilruction of the Treaty appear*. Wharton, section 32, p. Ill :— " Bussia having asserted in 1822 to 1824 an exclusive jurisdiction over tI)o north-west coost waters of America from Bchring Strait to the 5l8t degree of north lati' iidc this claim was resisted by the United States and Great Britain, and was surrendered in a Convention between Uuifsia and the United States in April 1824 . . . . , and in a Canvention between Oroat Britain and Russia, in Feb- ruary 1825." — (2 Lyman's " Diplomacy of the United States," chap. 11.) Davis, p. 44 : — ■'Russia, in 1822, laid claim to exclusive jurisdiction over that part of the P.vciflo Ocean lying north "^^ the [074] K m^ ■pi mfmm^^m ^m^mm W9 1 YV H M Slat degree of north latitude, on the gronna rliat it pos- sessed the shores of that sea on both continents beyond that limit, and so had the right to restrict commerce to the coast inhabitants. England and the United States entered vigorous protests against the right claimed by Russia as contrary to the principles of international law, and it was formally withdrawn in 1824." Woolsejr, 6th edition, section 69, p. 78 : — " Russia finally, at a more recent date, baesd an ex- clusive claim to the Pacific north of the Slst degree, upon the ground that this part of the ocean was a passage to shores lying exclusively within her jurisdiction ; but this claim was resisted by our Oovemment, and withdrawn in the temporary Convention of 1824 A Treaty of the same Empire with Oreat Britain in 1825 contains similar con- ressiona "The recent controversy between Qreat Britain and the United States involving the right of British subjects to catch seals in North Pacific waters appears to be an attempted revival of these old claims to jurisdiction over broad stretches of sea. That an international agreement establishing a rational close season for the fur-seal is wise and necessary no one will dispute, but to prevent foreigners from sealing on the high sea or within the Kamschatkan Sea, which is not even inclosed by American territory, its west and north-west shores being Bussian, is as unwar- ranted as if England should warn fishermen of other nationalities off the Newfoundland banks. "The right of all nations to the use of the high sea being the same, their riglit to fish upon the high seae or on banks or shoal-places in them are equal." Hall, 3rd edition, 1890, p. 147 :— " Avte. — A )iew claim subsequently sprung up in the Pacific, but it was abandoned in a very short time. The Uussiau Government pretended to be Sovereign over the I'acific north of the Slst degree of latitude, and published im llknse in 1821, prohibiting foreign vessels from approaching vithin 100 Italian miles of the coasts and islands bordering upon or included in thnt portion of the ocean. This pretension was resisted by the United States and Great Britain, and was wholly given up by Conven- tions between the former Powers and Russia in 1824 and 1825. . . . With flagrant inconsistency the United States, ttince acquiring possession of Alaska, have claimed as attendant upon it, by virtue of cession from Russia, about two-thirds of the Behring Sea, a space of I,.')00 miles long and 600 miles wide, and upon thu ground of tliis claim have seized British vessels engaged in seal-fishing. In at least one case the master and mate of a voHsel so taken have been fined and imprisoned ; the vessel was seized for fishing at a distance of more than 70 miles from land." Tr ^^^W^^^mfrnmrnt 36 It is troe that, by the British "Hovering Act" of 1736, and similar legislation in the United States for certain revenue purposes, a jurisdiction of 4 leagues from the coasts is assumed. Mr. Wheaton states in his text (p. 323) that these laws have been declared by judicial authority in each country to be consistent with the law and usage of nations ; but Mr. Dana, in his note, section 179, says : — " The atntcment in the text requires further considera- tion. It has been said that the consent of nations extends the territoriality of a State to 1 marine league or cannon- shot from the coast. Acts done within this distance are within the Sovereign authority. The war-right of visit and search extends over the whole sea, but it will not be found that any consent of nations can be shown in favour of extending what may be strictly called territoriality for any purposes whatever beyond the marine league or cannon- shot. Doubtless, States have made laws for revenue pur- poses touching acts done beyond territorial waters, but it will not be found that in later times tho right to make seizures beyond such waters has been insisted upon against the remonstrance of other States, or that a clear and unequivocal judicial precedent now stands, sustaining such seizures, when the question of jtirisdiction has been pre- sented. The revenue laws of the United States, for instance, provide that if a vessel bound to a port in the United States shall (except from necessity) unload cargo within 4 leagues from the coast, and before coming to the proper port for entry and unloading, and receiving permis- sion to do so, the caigo is forfeited, and the master incurs a penalty (Act of 2nd March, 1797, section 27). But the Statute does not authorize the seizure of a foreign vessel when beyond her territorial juiisdiction." Treaties and Statutes declaratory as to the marine limit. A Collection of Statutes and Treaties touching the universal adoption of the Marine League. In 1794, in a Treaty between Great Britain and the United States of America, there was a recognition of the limit of maritime jurisdiction. Article XXV laid it down that : — "Neither of the said parties shall permit the bhips or goods belonging to the subjects or citizens of the other to be taken within cannon-shot of the coast, nor in any of tho bays, ports, or rivers of their territories by ships of war," &c. The Congress c! the United States in the same year (Cap. 226, approved the 5th June, 1791) enacted that:— " The District Courts shall take cognizance of complaints, by whomsoever instituted, in cases of captures made [674] L ppiiilp ^Iv iiiiiiinpiiip"p SPPIPW" S' mmmm mmm wmift ^niRifPPPnNip!i 86 within the watets of the United States, or within 1 marine league of the coasts or shores thereof!" Again, in 1810, when Great Britain and the « state hMn," United States of America were settling their ▼ol^n.lMa, fishery rights, the United States renounced all claim to "take dry or cure fish on or within 8 marine miles of the coast, hays, or harhours of His Britannic Majesty's dominion in America." Article IX in the Gonvention between Great Britain and France (2nd August, 1839), a Treaty for the purpose of defining the limits of the exclusive right of fishery, provides :— " The subjects of Her Britannic Majesty shall enjoy the exclusive right of fishery within the distance of 3 miles from low-water mark along the whole extent of the coasta of the British Islands," &c. Article X provides that these miles shall be geographical miles, whereof sixty make a degree of latitude. On the 6th December, 1875, the German ship German ofloial "Deutschland," on her voyage from Bremen to R«p«rton _ ■traadinr of New York, was stranded on the Kentish Knock, ■• Deutschland," 17 English nautical miles from Harwich. l^lchrtiT^nar The German Gh>vemment were asked on the 19, 1876. 8th December, 1876, by Her Majesty's Govern- ^^ '* ment, if they wished an ofiBicial inquiry on the matter to be held in England. On the 11th December the German Govern- ment assented to this course. The inquiry took place before Mr. Bothery and Captains Harris and White, the Gterman Government being represented by counsel. The matter gave rise to an interpellation in p^gesg. the German Reichstag by a member named Dr. Capp, who asked for explanations on three points, the last of which was, " How comes it that disasters of this kind occurring at a distance of some 17 miles from the English coast are dealt with exclusively by the English autho- rities?" In the debate which took place in the Beioh- p,ga as. stag, Dr. Capp called attention to the fact, that according to the law of nations maritime countries had only jurisdiction to the distance of a cannon-shot from shore, which distance was commonly interpreted as 8 English nautical miles. England, he said, had in a Statute of George II, in 1786, positively laid down this distance as 4 English miles. It did not there* ^mi^^qn fnummimmm mm ¥■<• 87 fore teem to be clear why England, in spite of this, had held an inquiry into a case which had occurred 17 miles from her coast, where England had nothing to say to it— on the high sea, in flact. Pag* 17. Herr von Philipsbom, Privy Goxmcillor and Director in the Prussian Foreign Office, ex- plained in reply that in England, under the Merchant Shipping Act, the Receiver of Wrecks had the power to inquire into the circumstances of wrecks near the coast both of Bi'itish and foreign vessels, but, in the case of the latter, only when the wreck occurred within 3 nautical miles of the English coast. He went on to say that it was desirable to come to an understand- ing with the English Qovemment, whereby the Wreck Receivers should be empowered to inquire into cases of (German wrecks occurring outside the 3-mile limit. Patw4S-67. Correspondence took place on this subject between the British and Oerman Governments, which ended in authority being given by Ger- many for the British Wreck Receiver to deal with such cases as occurred outside the 8-inile zone. The only condition attached was that the authority was to be confined to cases where the ships or crews came to British harbours or coasts after the wreck. The whole question, and the arrangement finally concluded, arose entirely out of the recognition by both parties of the S-mile zone. '¥".'■' ' miwmiifft^rim^i^''i^Kmmmiffigrmillii^^ K ^'Piiip^ ■»iP|lflPSm».WP"!'-"i ^ IPWPPISPpiwpi A The Law re- lating to Waters, H,J.W.Coulsnn d Urquhart.A, Forbes, London, LHSO. p: T. Chapter T, Of the S-^a and rights therein. The Utah Seas The high seas include the whole of the seas below low roater mark and outside the body of a county, (foot-note I,) The realm of England only ex' ends to low foater mark, and all beyond is the high seas, (font-note 2, ) The reaso'^ of the thing, the prepondS',iJ O - '^Ci .\ 'v..',.^iisVC^ Jtfi.'^'^ .£\l>Vvl_^Vj -^^•■S 'VoA '>fA'Y .1 •.^\ V •s.\u:> 0*1 ?.N 111 .'y.ai. \n a^tlvn 'M^a &^U\jos<^^.\ ' -.-J \>s■<■i^\'^.^'■'^^;)^a V»j\a .A p: 2. Ibid. .1 •.',• \ P- Ibid. " The free navigation, com^nerce, and fishery "in the high seas is therefore the common right "of all manJiind: (3) and as a physical necessity 'the soil of the bed of the sea can b;. the ex- "clusive property of no one individual or nation "except in those rare cases where a portion of "the bed of the sea 'las been beneficially "occupied for a sufficient time by any one "nation to give a prescriptive right to that "portion, by the acquiescence of the other "nations " " It would also appear, that when the sea or "the bed on which it n^sts can be physically "occupien permanently — as by the erection of or "piers, harbours, breakwaters,^ forts, — it may "be the subject of occupation, the same as an "occupied territory, independently of prascrip- "tion. Foot-note. (3) IVheaton's International Law, by Boyd,p:25I. ^ "^^ oO '\ ,0 ^ '. . «•?! o ZKi \ i • ■? v» o - - ■ ■, ■/^Ov .■^."'^.o'r.'os^'' no f| .c% 'A\ .i^'ilil ^The Lan Wlating ff.J,W,C d Urqul London, p: I .^^^.^'\.\,h^ .c% 'A\ .The Lav re- lating to Waters, H.J,W,Oou2son d Urquhart, A.Forbes, London, 1880. p: 8, • i'jioi Tliis appears to be the view taken by the Legislature, for immediately after the decision of the cage, an Act entitled 'The Territorial Waters Act (41 ^ 42 Vic. c,73.J, was passed, defining the territor- ial waters of Uer Majesty's dominions to be so much of the sea adjacent to the coast as is deemed by international law to be within the territorial miters of Her Majesty, and declaring that for the purposes of the Act any part of the sea within a marine league of the coast, measuredfrom low voater marii, shall be open sea within the territorial waters of Her Maj esty's dominions. It then enacts 'that any offence committed by a person, whether he is or is n<'t a subject of Her Majesty loithin tue territorial loaters of Her Majesty's dominions, is an offence within the jurisdiction of the Admiral, although it may have been committed on board or by means of 'j. foreign ship, and the person who commits it may be arrested and tried and punished accordingly' --v-^ "ciA ■A''.'? a ■ ^ .a-^r.-iaXl o.i iuu\i,l'9%WTh0 Law . ' .8 '.t-i w u \- 1 a s^.r ' s ^i an' ^. "^ -'i c^ j V' <>" r-'.'''.'^ ?.s ^» ^".aoo Ot^^ r>'\t 'No i'^'.y.\ \'J^a ""i^K t>5Vi \q t?.^',ir',(?t\H^ "No ^'v:,Ac^^• ..r^y-'-'^^i .' Ki^iSos \<^aa{,d\ ^o^^^Wo r»c 'tis , ?.f f s^ 'v. r- c\ ^.'•.•■A?,' ■;, ■■■. ,ls:;'\\-. "A '^ '-O V . '^ ' /;. - >■ V ^■y?^ ^a?!*"' ■: ' '. ■,>■■ . ^ •A^,'':-'T•0'^ O'-.V •■>;-■?/'■,..■ : • I • * • la ting H.J,W,C Urquhar London ^The Law re- lating to Waters. H.J»W,Coulson d Urquhart. A, Forbes. London 1880. p: 399, The main ocean is incapable of being the property of any one state, but a nation may aciguire exclusive right of navigation therein as against another nation by virtue of the specific provi- sions of a Treaty (foot-note 4.), or by the tacit acquiescence of such other nation in its appropriation for certain portions for navigation, (foot-note 5.) Foot-notes, (4) Phillimore, International Laro.Vol.I, pp: 210, 211. (5) Vattel, Droit des Gens,t. I, c. XXIII. ' Ka I,' /ZW. !r f\\jU-iM. «-^ iV^ C^^^tt 'J^V-WLj*fc ^> A Y- > y ^ ^ we have jnst as ranch right to fish ont«idc of that marine Icaano as any fishermen of Canada or Ureal Britain. We hold that right under the Almighty God, who malics the sea open, aixord- ing to our constraction and nccordinff to the liritish constrnction as well. ' V ^^ ^ V ^ ^~ Y yc Y y.y. / ^ 7*- /* *- -<^ J^: Lnt^. '>> h t lnir « tlin wlinln tlnnry nfll^i trnnty aud u Hi l l (:oilS»UlitlUU Ul ' tt w^ in thia direction. A bay wa; an inclosed water 3 miles from cen- to shore, and hy no liiir cinsti iction between cqnal peoples conld [is meaning ho extended beyo d that. Thorcloro, as a matter ot ;ht, I belicvo that wo have just s much right to fish in the bays ont- le oftho3-iniIe Ihuit .is we ha' 2 anywhere else. StIT nB IU_muu ii i!ul i jLil u^Uii l i jiiiii iji i nirl bnniilnn il has lji.i.u uiiul e lhj««*T»*^!^!i*i(('ofriendly nations oi||ht to sit down and reasin al)out. But, retneirfner that every foot of sea gnk|ted by tho Unitedlstates outside o^f^iarine league is In excess of th^ifdits stipulated for hy OreatBfroiin by the express terms of the treaty^i^ras our Jght to gownhin 3 miles, and if they demanded of ns or appealSlhtonalo exteu^liat line they were bound to give ns an equivalent, to giSiilineiimcession to correspond with it, and then the Oovernment of thel Mted States might properly treat ' li|Hiu linrVXtfflffion ol' ihe'^anTHF^qiiie. ^ .4f /s.n / >^ J l/Vutv/^w l'\f}t/J^ /kvc u Iv^', (u:^ 7^3^ >^ U^ \nrvi^ ( v' u^* iX *. l'^ % V n. «.y**i 1 uk utttiutiun now iu n-^ard to tliosc ilshcriea, tu wliich I liave rc- Airred fta a aubject of iutcreiit to our pooplo from the hi»tory of tho Guvemiu«nt, and now of u.i ^ruxt intfri'Ht to them lui over, la nddl- tioQ I wish to uak uttcntum to tbn rule.-i of the law of nationa as un- derstood to Koveru in inUTprotutiou or limitatiou of the territorial rJKhta, as they nro cnlletl, of tlio Uttorid domiuion in tlih or that gov- erumcDt over the udjaccut bcos. It iit, I take it, not disputed that all thU area of the liitbin}; waters in on tho high bcos. Wherever it bi| if it be beloff the low-wutcr murk, tlicro by the demand and by the con- eent of all nationn the high seoM be^in. All, then, our ri^ht there, as origiualiyeatabliHbod in]78.'tand IHlH, iiiid nticlaimod or occupied and enjoyed by other foreign nations, ul I tlii-i Hshiug by uur llHlicrmcu is on tlio high Beaa. Now, how doea there come to bu, and to what ex- tent, a deference or a fU)nces8ion over uitjucent wiitcrn; for witliout tlio deference and conccsfiion of the nations no nation e.ui claim Beawnrd, bt-yond ttiat line between hi^^b water and low watt-r, at its ov.-n will, the power in any sense of appropriating to it.self any part ofthe high Bcas. The high seas are not capable of appropriation by the di-mand of ono nation, except by tho conceftsion of anuther, or by tho goneral contca- sion governing tho rights and needs of all tlic nation.s. Whence comes this notion that, although the hi;c^an whcru the tide'marks its l;.sf TccossioQ, thereisintlielittuiaL shores tiome ad vauluges accorded to th:. proprietary g.ncrument that otrupies and p:wvrt;isL*H dominion over the Phores. What is tho rule? In tho I'lrat place, withoutanydiscu.s- f ion of how it comrs about, a strip of 3 miles along tho shore, in all its s.juositif^, measured from low-wutcr mark, is the linutof the conceded right. Thcu, ia ri'^ard to bays, rccesnes, ports, and Iiurhurs, this slioro CO «omiHf,the 3-mile strip, follows tiie windings of every port and of every bay and of every liarlrar, butwiienby concession, cither, ns I have stated, of explicit aud individual concession, or of u general arrange- ment in regard to ports and bays and iiarlrars not continuing tho high seas OS the common t;i>?isc«iion of nil natious, what does that rest upon? Does it rest upon tho right of a foreign nation to expropriate tho seas and appropriate tho seas a:^ an appurtenant to land by its liat or by merely natural and geographiuit marks? No. Ai in respect to tho origiDM beUof 3 miles, so nil the rights in regard to bays, harbors, ports, or what not, it is one of deference or of concession on the part of the nations making up tho system, which make and cxccnte what is called tha law of nations, delcrmino what are the ports and what are the harbors and what ore tho bays that under a ri^htrul need and occosiim of the state whose sliore-i are washed, shouhl be rea-:onably required and rea.sonably lie com^ded by the nations. •V ¥• /^ •'- ' .fci"^!!?* ""*''«?»'•'!' "'■dcferencefor theses miles? Is it pretended that the ownership within tho 3 milM i, fouced.d to the nation wE shores are w«hcd ? Hi„ the nation a right to exelnde for the purpo^ haft's"'."? '^ ^"',"" ^ '•■'"» "«"*'"« "^en Pretend«l?rt ne^; ?e^ed^ Tti°i^;rfi",''""J"'^'?'=»'«=«'«': it never will be™" sfon withTS?!^ « , "'' ""'f" """B-tion, and there is no conces- sion within 3 miles, eo nominf, in respcctof peuccfnl naviiration bv the «■; ^^""^^".l''- There is adegr«of defVrence-whef the suKrior re n iremeut for the ownership and dominion of the land demanX tiie if t Si""'"?.'? «"■",?'■"'.'' n^""- «l"eh ocrupies it^n rte par? S^''°.'''^'5%'!r'™''.'«''''«"'"'"'''"*»«"'»'">'tforeeofthUiSMciul . £p;™rt"o?tt;^^h"'z,"""-i."^"4i"^ wh n l^v.^^ i» the concession by the law of nations for . ihip. and fl8hinj7ith^nttS^^!l'"f ■,•"';? *?''"»?* '"*« """'O" of fore^K" "fha ^ai'^^J^ Tu 1 ^ of Smile, from land, then it must be nnder "7%f ^f^":^^/ ^^Q* ^as the domestic vurposes of ^m^^ "not nln/J"^ £?^o^^Q^^^r5 have called them hays aZ ''onlhi%i7Zi °^ ^^^'^f •'^^0^ and deperuiing entir-fly V/.w f ^^W°^"^-balancing demands in thp mr- 'shores ^^°' '"^ ^°^'"^ '^ advantages to the ^ Y -*- Y I« "k» "'If I. A «^ /. ./ m7- fip?i. l^As V. /, ^m- .•.T^*,"? """"" •" fonmUny where any principle in the 1 w ofnAtinna Ihot allows ■ nittlon to eitend itaprlvil tn ol tiie lnu>on, as it were, drawn along the shores with all their sinuosities. No ipiestion arose, no question was diK)io6ed of as to what concession coald lie applied or oonld be found, except by explicit convention as to rights inside of harbors and hays on the principle I have alluded to. A nation has no right tu exclude foreign nations from the enjoyment of the high sras anywhere except by that concession of deference to the oM'oaions of one power just as properly might be re(|uired of an- other under siinilar circuiustances. The question of delerential con- Ge»siuu is not what it ought to be; the question in, what ^vas by tha law ut' nations and had been accepted. In respect of belligerency and in respect of tisbiug, the 3 miles belt drawn along the shores was the only rule that has ever been by a consensus of nations laid down. Lord CairuH, then lord chancctlur, considering this a very grave deci-sion, important to British interests, and, theretbre, finite important to foreign iutcrcst^. too, brought in a bill not long alier for the action of rarliament on the subject, which in duo course was passed. I^t me call particular attcution, then, to this, the only parliament- ary imperial law on tiic subject of designation and demand of exten- sion ot peculiar privileges on littoral waters of the high sens. This is chapter 73, of 41 and 42 Victoria. This proceeds to extend this juris- diction of punishment, and the only point interesting to us is to as- cerlriu how far this imperial assertion proposed for foreign nations to consider and it'^elf thought right to go. Hy this act of Parliament the jurisdiction of the admiralty, for the purpose In view, is described, and then the opeiative clause of the act proceeds: *'Tli« U-rritorlnl walen uf llf>r Mujeiitr** dotn Intone," In rcferpnco to the nea, incnii!! Pucli part ot llu; Hrn ndiucfnt to the cuaiilorihe L'riltcd Khiviloiii, or the (■onnt of Mfoic otlirr )>iirl of Her Mi^<*"ly''* (luiniiiionM H-" nrr eiii<-d hy Inlernn- tloiml Iaw to Im) witlifii ihc trrrftori:il in'iK»ty of llcr Mnjt>nly : HiitM) of uiiy otTi'tiHT -Juvlureil by lliin ntt t|)eii rcu wilhhi I luarlno Icakuo uf tho comI uiea*- urrd frotii lon-watrr nitirk «hAll be ilui'uied to bo open nea within the territc^ tIaI waters of II*>r Mivicsty'e dominions. Here, then, wo have an explicit fitatenicnt by an imperial statute of what the law of nations is supposed to coiu>o(le iu regiml to the atrip of the high sea. ^f^ •N-r^ r- We claim that on 'lie Bens between Uie eiipcn of tho Dehiwaro there Is a Hhore oc«t.ii»t;'>n, a commerce, a prevalence of lunii intercHls, and of trade and of cantom l:i\v», nud all tlmt marlts a siioro occupation liy our popniationii, which ninljc it impossil)le tliat we should allow tho course of tlieso uses of the bay to be treaiM bh still open, at will, tO general and c-- ... , ^^ ht'^-) ^"P^ i^ ^^'K »>l( / • ;; '-^1,'< 7 For iiwlanee, if on hoanl an American ihip a uiuruar siiouia be com- mlttcil while it wa» sailinn within :i niilciiof tlie Urilinh dominion in any part of the world, and then that nhip Hhould purauo iu naviKutlun and briuK lis burden of wUneenes and occuied to the courts of lhi« toun- «r» where we would have full .juriwlietluu under our Conntltulioniind onr I«w«, can It be prclrnded that if an indictment should be found in a British court n dcniund would he maflo iwainst this Uovernnent for a surrender of the criminal under tliu oxtrudition treaty of IHlj'/ This BUtute, ciinaiileriiig it as sUippiuK nhort, twth in area and lu de- mand, OH I have Klutcd it, has gone too far and too fast, prohaljly, for the concessions of forcinn nations. Wheuuveracaie »hall arise the cau- tionary provisions of this Htatute requiro that the peremptory cournoof law shall not talce place until one of the principal lecrelariea of stjite ■hall consider it ani" thus bring tlie government face to face with a for- eign nation Iwfore that government «liould undertake to execute that law against the Hulijecl ol a foreign jnrisiliction. Nor would tills country ever tolerate, in my opinion, such an execu- tion of criminal law upon a citizen of the United Ktatcs for a crime happening on an American ship sailing within 3 miles of the coast of ~ or or any other part of the United Kingdom. ^ y ^ v^ f y *-7^ ^' "f wfsh now to nllndo to flshftg vcmcLi and to the llaherlca in their irciita and values as profits ifiil as pursuits. /•? ''^^^)<\ e arc three elcmpiits reiilisite in the prosperity of tho fishery— In thoptisiicrity of ilii.s li.ilurjl ^ ^ - ■ ■"ng tho habitat and the rfflort of fishes "••licry " without fish, waters without in may have a right to lish there. ion of shores to those waters. Tho irUiin ndvantiigcs in the pursuit of Uno is inkdlshing water.s, as li that are oliJeSS^ pnrsnit. A flah, are not a llslhiy, although Tho next clomenn^t' tho rul nation that owns the sNf.e.-t h.i tialiing in these adjacent v lishing waters aro at » disiulvl Tiio third element la the marl tho bay is full of them, and altlil nnd protection, If thero is no mar Now, of these three clementa, i participation between the I'rovin of limitation as may be, we will' enjoying only audi limited ncccss the marltelaud they have not. Tl common to ua both, they really d uniting the Uaheries and the lishi could pursue their iudnstrh s, am prolltablo commerce to our c vrly tho West Indies, ofSpain, etc.— tli US and drive us out, aimply by tl tage, we make no complaint. d foreign nations not bounding tlie in that respect. for nobody catchea flah, although tho shore ia lined with shelter t Tk^nsume tho Usii. , tli^hhing waters, aro of common and ouN|icople, within such lines ly. TheyBIB shared with u.s— wo the trctttiesVlow. lint we have is the troublcV Markets abroad, e ua out of by tt^ advantage in ahorca, so that tho^oioro cheaply hat was once an extensive and tlcmcnts on our coast^Lincan of ould successfully compkto with vantage. Of this, their iklian- ^ J,t-feJ^»^ /f.c. rui^ 7 V^ Pa J' ^J ^^ /- • /J^> «^ '^' V-*«-^*' i. ■? ^. '^.'^.' It ij true iliat upon jarisdiition of a ivo oi/^ poyo;i^tT, f^^ 'ncosod within tho n marine lonRne, or ii miltS f?om I . «wf "''l"' " '''""'»° «'""• "' timia tho other. '"""i soi'ieCnos one and some -^ ^^ ., t-ry f^ •^ ^ « (vi. iV.i ''" •'''-.'■.™ "'"^ ""= Prapo-f'tion which tho Senator hm, A al.:,niasuB«e»t., L'ndoul,lcai.y tho territorial ril.lmnof :[ mile, which h.v intcrnalional law attaches to the im. ^ J \a^»,t 'fit is npoessary, ai i)i ''!'f™Siii' ""I'LTy, that tlie N.liiiw n|-T)wh.4mtions, niiil o l!>n tlint sli:ill iKrimiimdMi^wiij Lotwecn them, then ivetakoiTs othiTof the actual elinionsionsof cnce upon them, and then theyai MUliuslcu between two nHtieor,ii ; micrests between t>M;-5hliieratin^ fontention^JUhrSc great tople, of p^ ! ease of the )-reneh an.l i:nKli«l»-fiS,i , "•K grounds shall l-o paliollyMVtlK. "''^'^ » !■■'l'"»^^ a„HJ,;<:5iami A' irpre«,on,a„dsl«lIbe,n,i,artial tfiT^r (-TOijOrfnt one side or Iho "'"— Kftijiviiis and of 1 ■rsine . the iiKiK eourse all llie'c sut ■of eulargenient, of i :i\ 'J^^ i?i. J lii.s KliM i)f Cdiiccssiiin Wiis (l(piil)tlt'.s,>( x\w {jnmiid iuiil tjiiiilc upon wiiicli the ti't'iit.v o IHIS was loiiiided. At tlu' time of tliiit treaty the Ciiited States cisiiiiiod (and justly as tlic coininitJoe tliiiiks) that thu lishiiifT liffhts rr("0(fiii/.ed l>y the treaty of 17.S.! on all the shores of Urit- isli North Aineriea wen- property ri;;hts and tliat they were not lost by the war of 1812, and that after the treaty of peaoo of 1814, which made no raention of the Hiiiiie(>t, those ri;;hts existed with all their original force. The Uritish (ioverniiient insisted upon the eontrary and that the right of citizens of the I'liited States to llsli in any Hritisli North American waterH had \w'\\ entirely hist. This led to a partition of the disputed territory — wlii'tiier wise or unwisi^ is immaterial to the present (piestioii — liat in maUiiig vhis settlement the eontraetiug parties had evidently in view the then understood law of initions, that territorial w. iters only I'Xiendeil to lliree iiiiles fioin the shore; \ ~ 'ittu^uiU pnsMl.le Mne.lion lhal\'.,uM fail I.N aris.. under the tn^at.y of lSI,s\i*l^U>n*U;ftnoi, uhMt w»., a\l!iiiish Lay. liat Uu;jil«^f ion. as a ,„,„.tieal , luiThr^frsu^llie siVtv nine yea;;^>tfle;. the makii.K of that l.ralv ot liltle or i,,r>rm.---rTT' "s is Known, the only „ei/,nie of an Anunean vessel Uy-lT>HulM;i«-<>li''nli- I'"' "^'""« more Ihao .1 nnles lrn,M>-'>1iore in \. Way M,o>ri^i.iles wide was the sei/.ure of tUiMr„«/,i»,,(..«. in is^.!. and in thai 7>h;^1ui- l>"en l.el.uc sl»i*ei/.n>>s^ have lic>i»t plaiv in respect of the nuitters now in hand. i , —- ,'IU^ ^iippi.,,...! pn,f.,.,l,.iit f,.r »^n..|i ;»u treafy><(f the convention of 1S,S2 (I- x. i>oc. II.'!, p. IS), betwei^w-^ireat Britain, (ierTmiiy, lielfjium, Denmai k, France, ami tlujjvtrtherlauds, is very far indeed from bein;? such. 'I liat was (itrjUxfT imliir rcyuliiliini of the lisheries in the Xorth Sea, and i ii thjM^oasts of all the coniractiny; liarties. It was limited to iiveyearji,; tfA e.ot perpetual, as this treaty is. It neither granted m)r reiuJiHfSetl a ly riftlit. The freedom of naviga- tion, etc., inside the ',\jytiMi limit was eserved. The naval vessels of the respective jioweurwere to <'nforce t le regulation. Vor seriouiinifrae- tioiis not^>t*ftIed at sea the ofl'endinjj vessel was to be takeii to a port "^il'f*^"" '""intiy f'"' '^'''' — i'"!'!"""""''' •'■' •"•■ JC Tins Idea of concession was doubtless the ground ami guide upon whidi the treaty of 181H was foniide.l. At the tinio of that treaty the United States claimed (and justly as t :ommitfee thinks) that the fishing rights recogidzed by the treaty of 17.s:( on all the shores of Jtrit- ish >'orth America were property rights and that they were not lost by the war of ISlli, and that after the treaty of peace of 1SI4, which luade no mention of the subject, those rights existed with all their original torce. The Uritish Government insisted upon the contrary and that the right of eiti/.ensof the ruite.l States to ll.sh in any Uritish North Ainerioim waters had been .■utirely lost. This led to a partiti.m of the disputed territory— wheJu-r wise or unwise is immaterial to the present ,,,„,siion-bul in making this settlement the contracting parties had evidentlN >u view the then understood law of imticms, that territonal waters oidy extended to three miles from the shore: \ „,„..b.e.,ues.i....inA -"-■^■"'-""'•'■•■'i:;;^";,':; 7u>TSi4^..ll llic >iViy "ill'- .""''^l T priwuitujl oil Unit treaty of l.itle or no a< »,i/,iire of an A rieaii vessel Uy „„re than .'. miles froni^U^sl"'"- *" tbe sei/.niv of J^.-HT^i"', .»,/''"'• "' '- beloie s>i*«^ il"' internaliomd on. iMjwf^jMllegal and mm.iusI one. ffie the making of Tir as is known, the ]i .siicli lui iliii^ioii li.v (iiiMt" liritaiii iis^T the lias^ini^ I'liiiii s^icli tlic .'tiiiili' liijTt is loitr'lnpi.snri'il. btiij^slill ail ()i>eu^iiesli(Vii, the chiriiXolJ either side were a iiecessaijr t'eatiuv in lliiriie;,'()tiaticVii of this trear IlouV eiiiiteiitioii i^s inili-iimlahn just, a peiein^Di-TMtmaiicl lor its aUowiVmxjwrrTIWTmly course woVoiihl a(h)i)t. sVh a (Ninand, wo l)elieve, has urpvj/r lieeii roiiiially niVle liy this (loveiiirHeiiy ( 'iiiij;res.>i certainly h«(^j*('ver alliriiiedjjii) iiiilHttiiilalile jiistiee ol'cijr^liuiii. The I'uitedytate.Vlmili llinei red to let Jps qiiestioii, witlijfll t lie ft^ie"^ that haviyfriseu under the treaty ill' i/l'A eoiitliuie in /eaeh nt disefmticni aii^ne^sotiatiiin. UlufaaUnttii ' ii t i ii M ii ii i ii I , II I i i i > tfi^iTi^tTT#i»M>-to« »l l lii i^unli ii w i..y . .Mr. Hayard )ui)|msed to the liritish Governnieiit that the ','> mile lisli- in;; limit sliimld !ii' measiireil, iu the bays that were HI miles or less in width, I'roiii that iioiiit nearest the entrance where the shores are lit miles distant IVom L'ach other. He loiind his snjiiiort lor that oiler iu lliCiirraiiKenieiit between On at Ibilaiii an 1 otliiT Kuroiu'iii iintions tor llshiiij;' in the biivs and liaili(ns nl' their respective coasts ahni;; the Xoitli .Mlantic and the iiorlliern seas. It beiiij; ;;eiierally eoni'eiled that the limit el' local jnri.sdiction ex- tcmled .'! miles t'rom the coast onl into Ihi 'ioiis that when the ran;;i' of arliller.' is c.vtended to ."> miles :t is due to the secnrity <<( b.iys and harbors "eachin;r l.ir inland that treaty arran;;eiiients IKiiiL;' a new measiiiemi it slninld lia'c smiie ref- erence til the increased limits for the pi.itecti i of the peopl.' res'din;.;- alont; such shores corresponding with the im;' )vcd laiijtc of arlllk" ::u-^.w^ jl^*, m, "--/W^Kafcc ._. X 7 ^m OCEJIN FISHERY I^IGHTS IN TEBBlTOBIAIi ANI> EXTBA-TKBBITOBUI. VATEBS. Au Addrn* deli^Hrei btfort tkt Conftrtna of th» AuoclatioH for llu CoH\ficalion of Hit Laa of Natioiu, at the Town Hall, Uverpool, eotit Auguit, 1890. SIR GEORGE BADEN-POWELL, K.G.M.6., M.P. UTIBPOOL: C. Tniuiio AKB ooi, puHTsaii, vioiow* »Taii*r. •w ^/te Extent of Coast to yes VI and VII of the \February i6 (28), 1825, \mt Britain and Russia, Hve/y intended to apply. ire the first five Articles of the f jntion sent by Mr. G. Canning |Her Majesty's Ambassador at Uth July, 182'i :— "ARTICLE I. >.\i the High Contracting Parties that ■jicts shall eujoy the right of freo [whole extent of the Pacific Ocean, ti within Behring's Straits, anil shall 'j' molested in carrying on their trade rts of th(! said ocean, either to the (I tliereof. (stood that the said riglit of fishery '. jy the suljjects of either of the two marine leagues from the respective r. uVltTICLE II. ites the possessions of the two ties uiion tlie continent and the islands of America to the nortli-west slmll he drawn in the manner following: " Commencing from tlie two points of the island called 'Prince of Wales' Island,' which form the soutiiorn extremity thereof, which points lie in the parallel of 54° 40', and between the 131st and 133rd degree of west longitude (meridian of Greenwich), the line of frontier between tlie liritish and Ilussian possessions shall ascend northerly along tiie channel called Portland ( hannel, till it strilies the coast of the continent lying in the oGth degree of north latitude. From tliis point it sliall be carried along that coast, in a direction parallel to its windings, and at or within the seaward ba.se of the mountains by which it is bounded, as far as the 139th degree of longitude west of tlie said meridian. Thence the said meridian line of 13Dth degree of west longii'ide, in its extension as far as tlie Frozen Ocean, shall form ti.e boundary of tlie liritish and Ilussian possessions on the said continent of America to the north-west. 18811 B wmmiifiifmff^^ wmmn, m OCEJIH FISHERY I^IGHTS IN TEBBITOBIAL AND EXTBA-TBBBITOniAL WATEBS. An AJdrtit delimtd before the Conference of tlu Auociation for the Codijieatwn of the Lute of Nation; at tlu ToKn IlaU, Liverpool, SOth Augutt, 1890. SIR GEORGE BADEN-POWELL, K.G.M.Q., M.P. UTEnPOOL: o. Tnuva UD co., puirrsM, tiotoua irurr. |« t/ie Extent of Coast to ^'.les VI and VII of the February i6 (28), 1825, \ :at Britain and Russia, ^'vely intended to apply. kre the first five Articles of the 'pntion sent by Mr. G. Canning Her Majesty's Ambassador at |th July, 1824 :— :*" ARTICLE I. |u tlie lligli C'ontractiuf; Parties that jets shall enjoy the right of free [whole extent of the I'acilic Ocean, a witliiu Behring's Straits, and shall ;[ molested in carrying on their trade of the said ocean, either to the tliereof. tood that the said right of fishery ly the subjects of either of the two arine leagues from the respective .•• ARTICLE II. mrates tlie possessions of the two , >.«hie8 upon tlie continent and the islands of America to the north-west sliall he drawn in the manner following : " Commencing from the two points of tiie island called 'I'rincc of Wales' Island,' wliich form the southern extremity thereol', which points lie in the parallel of 54° 40', and between tlie 131st and 133id degree of west longitude (meridian of Greenwich), the line of frontier between the liritisli and Russian possessions sliall ascend northerly along the channel called I'ortland ( haiiuel, till it strikes the coast of the continent lying in the 56th degree of north latitude. Krom this point it shall be carried along that coast, in a direction parallel to its windings, and at or within the seaward base of the mountains by which it is bounded, as far as the 139tli degree of longitude west of the said meridian. Tlieuce the said meridian line of ISOtii degree of west longitude, in its extension as far as the l-'rozen Ocean, shall form the boundary of the British and Russian possessions on the sfid continent of America to the north-west. 18811 B IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) |J.j_ 11.25 Hi |2B 12.5 ta l&i 12.2 Sf 144 ■" 1.4 ill 1.6 y] 0% / ^>>' /^ y: '■^ '/ Photograiiiic Sdences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STRUT WEBSTER, N.Y. 14S«0 (716) 872-4503 k ) % ii 1 \ \ RIGHTS OF FISHERY. IN TERniTORIAL AND EXTBA-TEnniTOBUL WATEB3. INTRODUCTORY. TliB iKiinswhat twilinicsl title of this addrmi ilrfiiim > milijiwt which Jiiit iiuw tliiinM a liugu ■hitn u( iiuliliu atteiitlciii, and whiuh has Ikwu in thH |>ut tliB uauM iif KiriuUK diapntoa auiuug nutittntt. In udilinuinjT a ocinferenoe of thit aMucintiun 1 wiHh, hdWHVert t*t cfinHtiH niyiwlf t« thu inteina- tiiiiml a»|ie<.t vt tho siihjw — tbat i» ti> myi U> tiuNte righn of fl»hory in thir oiieu Mtt, wllieh lie- lonK til nnyunu nation or to til nntlonii in uiuiniun. At thu inuHont mouiunt rival ulaim* tj itiiult rinlitB of lisUHty ar» urvatinit grave internalional eL-tu|ili<-ationH in variou* |Mirt« of the wjrid. In IVhrinK S«a and thf Nuctii Allautio tliu United Htiites and the l^nitud KinK lout are in active dis- iiute ; in Nawf:>nnillan1 wu Hnd ouiielven contrat- inif the claims of fninco. In roifnt veara in the Knniliean waten of the North Sea finhcry righto have been the DUbjuct of intematiunul dincuiwion. iind ha|iiiilv of international axreeinent ; whil i ■uaa adjacent to Aiintialia and C^eylon finhery rin -• are ula-iiiiiiK the KerioUH attention uf the (luvern' ntentHC.'iiicerned. rurliu|itancn of iK,«au fialuiy lights is tne ruiiij inciKiMi in nteans of niarine luconio- lion, coupled with the rapid Krowlh of the population, and thu new facilitiea with which capital a^ s*euni and sailing vessels uillecting (Kail shell in the Indmn Uccau or Iwche-de-'uer 9^ tt the Extent of Coast to lies VI and VII of the February i6 (28), 1825, '.at Britain and Russia, r '■ vely intended to apply. , !TO the first five Articles of the * mtion sent by Mr. G. Ganningf ler Majesty's Ambassador at th July, 1824 :— ARTICLE I. n the High Contracting Parties that ots shall enjoy the right of free whole extent of the Pacific Ocean, I Vfi- ain Behring's Straits, and shall tr jlested in carrying on their trado ts of the said ocean, either to the r d thereof, ■stood that the said right of fishery py the subjects of either of tlie two uarine leagues from the respective •• ARTICLE II. mratcs the pos,sessions of the two u -Jn*^ upon tlu) continent and the islands of America to the north-west sliall be drawn in the manner following : " Commencing from the two points of tlie island called •ftince of Wales' Island,' whicli form the southern extremity thereof, which points !io in the parallel of 54° 40', and between the ISlst and 133rd ilegree of west longitude (meridian of Greenwich), the line of frontier between the British and Russian possessions shall ascend uortheriy along the channel called Portland Channel, till it strikes the coast of the continent lying in the 56th degree of north latitude. From this point it shall be cu.,;ed along that coast, in a direction parallel to its windings, and at or within tho seaward base of the mountains by which it is bounded, as far os the 139th degree of longitude west of tlie said meridian. Thence the said meridian liuo of 139th degree of west longitude, in its extension as far as the Frozen Ocean, shall form the boundary of the British and Russian possessions on the aoid continent of America to tho north-west 18811 B \ in tho Pucifiu. BritUh aipit»l farm Urmi pti»wfi)undl»nrl Mcl luiland i iie»lei» fruni M C)u»rl«i»— r.o»» Sixititt, Hiiw»ii, .Iu|Mn, Calift'mw, and llnliiih Coliinibin— are conuHitratilig Ihnir enenriM in thi> Northwent PaoiHo.which in now thu on» renia.ninff habitat of the uluable fur w-al. Out (>( niiliin 400,000 «wil«kinii broiiftht to market in 1889 only 10,000 were obtained i.iitnide the N oil h Paul He, where the Main atill breed in niillii na on thu Ptitieljv, Culimiander, and Ijcbiia lalonda. Ilaiiinly, alw, there i» a irrowinif di«iio«ilion m thbii! dayn lor nation* to determine Iheae utrittly industrial iiuestiona hy the peaiwlul uieaua of ne- injtiutiKn aiii aibittation. . „ , u In the old days the whaleta in the South Seaa or IluHinn Bay exercine I a nainh juiliraj one with the other in llio abeeniM ol all oi nttollinu jKiwera. Ownenhiuof thu whale de|iendud on " hmt liar- IKxin in ;" and the niaineuynng and racing with this iibiect in view lent a piotiireaque and eiL'iting element to an otherwiaa unmvit- in|{ ijiirnuit. Again, in the uldijub- liihed wmI Huheriea in Nova S>«tia and Noa- toundland, tho tijherxjn adventurwta who vame over annually (roni Kuroiw eMtablwhed a roiigh adn-iniitiation amonipit thBiiiwIveii, electing ona of their nnnibei a« ndniiral of tlin Kahing fleet for the year, and entrusting hin> and hill colleaguea with certain lu'wem to be exer- ciaud for tho amimon good. Hut in thuM days all luined to work in (loniniintho uinimon tight of the Jiarveat of the ooean on the iiriiiuiple that all >ra Hah were unaiipropriated and sea Hsliin^came under the legal mii\\m. " Jlt$ nnlliua nilU mcu/kmi/i. • III thu.e dayK, aUi, no State could well mtellore or ehiliiM(i|(h«r wuuli luttuirt that it lirud iml niovufl and Imil n. Hu t-^ ill tliCM*) dayH w« hear that in Newfuuiid- land thu Krvniiti wera f^iven *ti« tniatr riiiht " tti uatcti Huh and dry th4*ni cm the hIhiiv. 1 buy nuw nut III! liilMttT uaiiniiift facturiuN, and th« \uw- fiiundlandun nlijuL-t that lufaHterit are not Hnh. and onrtainly L-annint; ii not " drying,*' H haleii ai^iii an:* * H»h " |iar«Yuullunoe to thu whalur wliatuvur thu naturalint may nay. On thin ouuaNinn wt) are dualinjt fffnurally witli thu *' fruutUH " 'ir harvuMt of thu wa, and nhall thurvfnru havu to aihtpt thu wider dufinition of KiMh an " any hving buinjr that iuhabitH thunua," and ** Kiffht of Fi«hury *' an t>te riKht of an iudi- viilual tij uuptura suoh ** K»h." Tl.niu riiihts af^in, are either " natural " or " iMX(uirud.*' Aocordinff to the frreat autliority Kent (Cotnmnntariuii, iia;^ ?A.) " Thtt free uiMi of the ouean fur naviirttinfr and fithinir in common to all mankinil, and thu imbiiu JiirintH irenh-rallv and e\iilicitty iluny that thu main uuvan i«n ever las appntpriatf d." Thu fith uf thu Ilea are thu |tro|ierty of nobotly until uaimht. Hojh ii« a bald ittateniunt of thu natural rit'ht in the abiftract. But with civitiiiatiun fi)irua(]infr fa^t uvnr the world uomplux liinit'itionM of thu *' natural li^ht" rapidly ariws, juitt an over lanru aruaM of land nuwadayit the natural riglit of thu inifividual to utipture fertt; witur.£ hasi liuooinu in nearly all land!* very much uirunm«uribe:l. Thura thun gctiw up on thu iten anquiruj righta of tishery— by uuntnin and nrenariptiun, by thu right of thu Ktrong, liy mutual atn*eeinent, and by treaty. In thuiu latter dayn thu lout inuthud 14 ajquiriiig new and mora uonitant force ~a in.ivt duiirablu ouasummition pruvi ted duu rc»i>9u; 1m . I I'", I •m^^^^^ n tfie Extent of Coast to •les VI and VIl of tite February j6 (28), 1825, '.at Britain and Russia, 'vely intended to apply. , ire the first five Artioles of the ' sntion sent by Mr. G. Canning ler Majesty's Ambassador at { th July, 1824 .— I i'AKTICLE I. n the High (.'onti-acting Parties tliat cts shall enjoy the right of free whole extent of the Pacific Ocean, » within Behring's Straits, and shall molested in carrjiug on their trade •ts of the said ocean, either to the ' d thereof. •stood that the said right of fishery ij tho .subjects of either of the two marine leagues from the respective r. ARTICLE U. mmtu.s thu possessiuus of the two _ -Jties upon the continent and the islands of America to tlio north-west shall he drawn in the manner following : " Commencing from the two points of the island called •Prince of Wales' Island," wliicli form the southern extremity thereof, which points liu in the jMirallel of 54° 40', and between the 131st and 133rd degree of west longitude (meridian of Greenwich), the line of frontier between the British and Eassian possessions shall ascend norUieriy along the channel called Portland Cliannel, tUl it strikes the coast of the continent lying in tho 56th degree of noitli latitude. From this point it shall ho carried along that coast, in a direction parallel to its windings, and at or within the seaward base of the mountains by which it is bounded, as far as the 139th degree of longitude west of tho said meridian. Thence tho said meri.lian line of 139th degree of west longitude. In its extension as far as the Frozen Ocean, shall form the boundary of the British and Hussian possessions on tho said continent of America to the north-west. 18811 B \ \ \ imii to two o(ln^itioo^ In the llrnt iiliwe, tim with IIm> iHwt of titlmiiiil kllowlirtKu M iiiliim»iiil. it ia almoiit iiii|iu<«iblu lii iliaft treaty (tiivuxxniviila whiuli «h»ll i>rivi;lo lit*!™! nil the cf>ntin)(eiiv;i«i uf the future. Now uonrtitimiH are »iir« Hi illlwr- vnne. Fit ijwtnnje, thn f«ilure "f tli» Tie»ty iH WiuliinKKir , liisdo w> Ulely «" 187), n m ([reiit iMrt due Ui tho tact that thii «k1, anil ««ip«.mn» the miwkrml, havii chanitotl tt.eir haunt", iiliil tluw iHideiwI imitauiry many of the »tipul»li"n« (if that truaty. In tho Koomil i>lac« it ahould Ix'cun on«. tduury to ••Mviso tlinBe troatioa oa ciioumfttAnL-«* a'l-iT, and in decidinif on tho uutual olt«ialion» it •would Ud woll if arbittatii'H w»t more ooiniminly utiliiwd. In the proient Nowfoundlanil diflioulty thore Khould b« no hoiitatiun wh«t«»or in (MitrustinK t« arlntrntion tho doBnitiona of the lilfht of tho very anuiant treaty which Mill rMtulatoa Hahery ri({ht» on tho Ktenoh ahore. TIih duiiiaion of tho arbitrators should be ndoptwl Willi tho direct obi«.t of buyinir out the Kronuh, which IH the iinly inothud of puttiuK Bn end tu a tloublo- eoine and' pf rennial dinpute. Kithery ri^lin in the ocoan are thiw llenned. Wo aUo' a\v inturnatiottal axitfut it found whm wa diiwiMH tliH rtfawanl liniitH of ^u-^h WkUtrx and thiiH tlt^turtiiinu wlu^n* iiit«iruatiuiia ri« muuh latitude to be allowed an to iie.tward limitH. It in not pmbable, howevur, that the uotiBensui of nations w.tuld ever Iw not-ordi'd to the extreme views put forward by Mr. Dana ut the Halifax Conferenue, when he uontBnded that a tUhetman could piir'iuu frue-nwimuiiujr ti^h oven wilhin tho sail threnmile limit, pMtvidi»d hu did not touuh bottom with nnchi r, trawl, »r weighted bait- tine. It may, however, Ite tronerally anwrted thai; within territorial waterx, whatever the l"nit w!». wanl, thtt nation enjoyH full right of (i!)hk.'ry to thti exuluiiiun of all foreirruern nut admitted by Hiwciid treat7 or iieimiiiion. w ^Ae Extent of Coast to :les VI and yil of the February i6 (28), 1825, '.at Britain ard Russia, 'vely intended to apply. ue the first five Articles of the sntion sent by Mr. G. Canning 9er Majesty's Ambassador at tth July, 1824 :— 'ARTICLE I. m the High Contractiug Parties that cts shall enjoy the right of free whole extent of the Pacific Ocean, \ within Behring's Straits, and shall ' molested in carrj-ing on their trade rts of tho said ocean, either to the d thereof. •stood that the said right of fishery )y the subjects of either of tho two marine lecjues from the respective ARTICLE II. mrates thu possessions of tne two . -r-t — ^Jties upon the continent and the ialands of America to the north-west sliall be drawn in the manner following: " Commencing from the two points of the island crllcd 'Prince of Wales' Island,' which form the southern extremity thereof, which points lie in the parallel of o4° 40', and between ohe 131st and 133rd degree of west longitude (meridian of Greenwich), tlie line of frontier between the British and Russian possessions shall ascend northeriy along the channel called Portland Channel, till it strikes the coast of the continent lying in tho 56th degree of nortli latitude. From tliis point it shall be carried along that coast, in a direction parallel to its windings, and at or within the .seaward base of the mountains by which it is bounded, as far as the 139th degree of longitude west of tlie said meridian. Thence the said meridian line of 139th degree . west longitude, in its extension as far as the Frozen Ocean, shall form the boundary of the British and Russian possessions on the said continent of America to the north-west. £8811 B \ ■ IN KXTRATERRITOBIiVL WATERS. Ill thu otien ocwin, frHnamlly HiNiftkinir, tlin ■iii>- ply (if liali H in»xh»u«ibl», but thure do siint |iar- tiuillar uroiu ur inrtiouUr HnhoriM, whcra Uia liiirvmt of tha iM*n ui»y bu (iMtroyed, or thH fiiutiial rixhtu of tha Ailiamiun ignonxi iinlmi fouie ooiitnilliiig (iithurity in set up to protect tha iiit*4iuMtH of nil fwntwriiad. l*t iMo illiKtmU) thmatwo iKiiiiH. « a have tha lltitnlila lind innmiinr oniia of thn fur m«Iii ill tha Norlhelll r»cilic. Tha «h»I» bread on the CcipniiiiindBr und VriWUiv lnliindM in tha inontlia ol Jnly, AuguHt, »nd Saiiteniber ; for tha ruuiaind«r of tha year thoy tiai'al Hway 3,000 inilao uoiilh m twKruh of food, and ruttirn in time fur tha brea iMKneuwin. About 200,000 iii<,t luaHt 50,000 m»ls >ra captured at hw at vari- 1 u» piiinta over tha 3,000 mile iimta. I'nhaiia inu third of thia latter toul are isptured in the nurnjw rhannelt between the Alnntian la'anila und other watura within 100 mdo» of the breedmlf plaoea. The nwnen of thuoa ialnndu, laaaad Irum the United Sutoa and Ku»aian lioveininonta, ure HN*tarting that tha indiHuriininiite capture, whiuh only ooniuienced in 188«, of aeals out at ma, and en|wuially in the uliannela leadiuR to tha inland', IH already materially raducinif thu number oi naiila uiluiiiK to breed. They point out that preuiavly aimilar killing haa inaitively deetioyad the K'hul* of thu fur aeal cnpturcii m varioua gruuiM of iilands in the South Seaa, and they maintain that they have an eii'litable ulaini that the aaala thay |uotect in their breeding plaoea ■hall nut be elterminikted by being thua " Hihed for at ma. . On the other hand, (piite a large mdua'.ry ain £150 t<> £180 in the Limdon market, iit obtained by the fmiiluynient of Munie 80 or 90 llriciMt) v<>»-iwU in an aiea ut the Indian Oueun hi- Jauunt t<) Weetuni AuMtraliu. It MO happenii that thti imrtiiin of the ooean ii included within tlm bi>ini(lariM of the citU>ny iim «et out iu the u«imniiiwiun to the ndingover an urfa of ofeun 600 uiilmi in width. The ixil iny now maintains a ruvuniie vusnel on the fiHhing ground to uontrol the tiibing. adiuinixter iUMtice and aid in MMjunng that the lit-hing v^hmiU imv ciiittunii dutien on the MtoroH they ime. The colony levied liuence feeti (of £1 |wi veMel) and an iixp'jrt duty of £2 iwr ton on |M»!.rt ihi'll landed, in order to meet the iieceMaiy uxpenditura lliit the finhing tukes plaue, in tha main, out- tide the three mile limit ; and the Culonial JuriM* diction ih not HUpiNwei to eitcnd nu Tar. Thim umutiually, the diitieH can only be levieJ on Itritish veHHelH at eea or ;)n thiwie whii-h uuiue into |iort in WuHtern Aurttnilia to teKt, to land carf(oeH» Ac Foreign veMelx could bu exempt, piovidetl they did not enter an AuHtialian purt, but Fee* auented mute non Auitialitin port. In Huuh uaxtj le iticreaHel dixtance might prjve more exiwn* mve than the light dum levti-d. The right to charge thow dues and to exerciite thin cautn*l t*utNide the three mite liutit ill tmsed on an aut uf the Federal Cuunc-il uf AiwtralBMia, which (Federal Counuil act, lti&5 fle:;tiin 15) enaote that the counuil Hhalt have legislative authority, inter elia, in n-ituuot of *'fiMh« enea in Auntralinn waten uutiiiJe territorial liiuita.*' lDl889thii council laused an aot tu H tfie Extent of Coast to ies VI and VII of the February i6 (28), 1825, tat Britain and Russia. 'vely intended to apply. * ira tho first five Articles of the sntion sent by Mr. Q. Canning^ ler Majesty's Ambassador at Ith July, 1824 :— •AKTICLE I. in the High Contracting Parties that «t8 shall enjoy the right of free whole extent of the Pacific Ocean, 1 within Bearing's Straits, and shall ' molested in carrying on their trada pts of tlio said ocean, either to the d thereof. rstood that the said right of fishery )y the subjects of either of the two marine leagues from the respective f- ■ AKTICLE ir. mrates the possessions of tho two ^__ o — -Ities upon the continent and tho islands of Amsrica to the north-west shall be drawn in the manner following : " Commencing from the two points of the island called •Prince of Wules' Island,' which form the southern extremity thereof, which points lie in the parallel of 54° 40', and between the 131st and 133rd degree of west longitude (meridian of Greenwich), the line of frontier between the British and Hussinu possessions shall ascend northeriy along the channel called Portland Channel, till it strikes the coast of the continent lying in the 56th degree of north latitude. From this point it shall be carried along that coast, in a direction parallel to its windings, and at or within tho seaward base of the mountains by which it is bounded, as far as the 139th degree of longitude west of the said meridian. Thence the soid meridian line of 139th degree of west longitude, iu its extension as far as the Frozen Ocean, shall form the boundary of the British and Russian possessions on the said continent of America to the north-west 18811 B \ 10 "rnruliiKi tli« |iw«rl »i.tfll Mill hejhn domw Hih»riM in Au«ii.lii.i»n w»t..r. •ij)i««n« »» lh» i,.l,.nv >'» W«.t»Mi Aiwtrelm "In IHM • .luill.r ««« haiMiBfn |««<«l "tralioK with Ih" H«hwi»i in thi ■MM »ilj»c«nl M I Jm*iii'l»nit (cm lll» MM w»»t). It i" (urtlier to I" r<-nii'nil»'nil thut in mioh u«i«« tximt lliuni ln> Mium fiiniiuUiwI |Hil)lui right, nut only in iniliKuriniinntu l>nil iiljimuun HuhinB furriod "ii, but iliKn. i« nii l»w Iwlweon nmn »nntii i.l »n» iKittiuiilnr KPiunil. In llii- North .HfB Ihwe f vll« wnra Wiry wiiimnlv f 't. Kor in»t»ntB, ■ iKimitliil Iniwler 1. lid Miil " riKht i,»fr limit linw or lirilt lli-ln, nnil H.hinK voniwU iliil «iitii«lly uirry v«iiiiiiii inKiniiiieiitu iimnlriiileil fur tin) hoib imriioneofiiittinir Ihelinm ami niit« o[ otlitirH, whilh timy iiiiBht Hnil to h« m thmr own w»y. TliiH in rmiiril tn •ttrntirriloiiul wilt«r» Iho Liiwrvulion of lliB " ti'ti" "H'l th» niiini»l nylit« 1.1 tlia H«hiiiiiii>n »n> Willi ilifHuuliy iiirwriKil m thii alwnui of miy coii.nion .■oniiwllinij |«.wi.r. Anil yit in iwvdriil plxi-i. iit f,i) imwnt tilnn (trrnt iliiiumre will lie iluim to tlio iioiniiiiin imhtii il tUlury unlim •onm imlicn control l« H«t u|i. ThH imtontrollp 1 grwl of tlin iiiiIivh1ii«I niny eanily ilMttoy llin iniliinlry. to un wiiinl i-liitru in whiuh Ku ni»iiy ulhtr inJividiinlii bnvurn miiiitiiblu (lUiui. UEMKBUCS. I have -ndovoiiMil to inli<.»t« in imtlini) what la tlw iiroMiiit oonditioii if thu 'ighla of tinliery in th« M*. I nwKl miirwly unlhr into tin) inuwtin « aixi'iint of tliB n>lii« of ihi"*' uctan liMhwiBa to) liiankiiid, of their iiroductB in fooiln and artitlM iil ouliii.i«i»-Hiih, »alt Huh, oiln, lum. [imiiIk. and lipail "hell, rorul, «I«in(?i», h tml may be deMireble. Iii the iWMHrvtttiun ii' the Hihary, methods of H«hioir. tiuM n( Hstiing, and liiniU ii( uituh niny bu otKMWMry. Fuc Ihe Mfvty lit the fliihurmnn ihHnt i* ttm iniiMirlant quettiun of li^htt uarriiid hr ttiuin itt nifht. Heoently this (|iiuetiMn hM buitn v«ry fully g;'n* Intu »• ihn Interfwtiun»l MariCiun OunferumM M WwhitiffUm, on thH iiicxmim of whivh we all urmKrattiUCe utimelven, Mpeuially a» this «a!f jCFHatlv due tn twii of 'lur vioepran* ftnnM, Sir Oharltit Hall, the chief IliitUh rapn- aetitfttivu, and b> I>r, Hieveking. The eUboraW MVHUiin of liKhU and nifihe RiiruitU to diiCiiwiiith drift neta, trawlera, fta, autluniited by thia OuD* (urenue i« uf little vklitu iinluaa ti:for:.«d. Other refpilationi, Ruch lu the enfonwiDHnt of n oummon law and rt^iUtionn uf drink tmttlu, are alwi uf the ffrealeit alvantaffe to thuM freiiuentinff •uiy ouDiinnn Hiihinfc frn^iind. The Kuidinff pnnutple to be followed U that tb« nation* taking rart in any Hua Hiihery ehall be en> fjouraiTHd to (MtablJMh by mutual agreement regn* lationn l:ir the cxtntrul of all fiequenting the H«hery,iind the uuitoni Klimild Iw fiMtered that any nationa ^ubie^uuntly iiharinK in theee fliheriea «hall oonform t«t thu wme rufrulatioiiA. The Itn- mediate cminw uf action i« by international ooo> ferentie to decide on the area aul the regulation*. the delegatei binding their reeiwoti'/eOuvemmente by ojinindent and iJentiral lagtitlatuio to oumpel tniir own iihip* and eitixtnN, entering the area under their flag, to oonfonn to the regulationi. In the highly eucueMful North Sea Fiiheriea Ounvuntion we have an intertiptinf( and unuourag- ing exuinple uf what can be dona in eittabluhin^f iM it wur<% international It^nlatiun anJ admiaia- trati(m over great areait of the ocean for the pteeoi- vatian of ooiamon Hahery righto, We niuHt remember that in more than one inetanoe there haa reappeared a tend«nQy for nakiona to ruaaaert over larf[e areae of ocean the aasuuiption ut actual auveraiRnty, and where luch an arrangement haa the merit of aiupliuity it would neoeaaitattt, bt*fi>re it came into general adoption, a general agreement among the Powera (^muemed a aort uf partition uf the ocean int'f ^ 9- H the Extent of Coast to Us VI and yil of the February t6 (28), 1825, mt Britain and Russia, Ively intended to apply. ue the first fire Articles of the 9ntion sent by Mr. G. Canning; Her Majesty's Ambassador at Ith July, 1824 .— •ABTICLE I. in tlie High Contracting Parties that ets shall onjoy the right of freo whole extent of tlio Pacific Ocean, » within Behring's Straits, and sliall ■ molested in carrjiug on their trade Its of the said ocean, either to the d thereof. rstood that the said right of fishery )y the subjects of either of the two narin-i leagues from the respective r. AHTICLE II. [)amtcs the possessions of tlie two ..-0 - Jties upon the continent and the islands of America to the north-west shall be drawn in the manner following : " Commencing from the two points of tlie island called •Prince of Wales' Island,' which form the southern extremity thereof, whicli points lie in the parallel of 54° 40', and between the ISlst and 133ixl degree of west longitude (meridian of Greenwich), the line of frontier between the British and Kussian possessions shall ascend northerly along the channel called Portland Channel, till it strikes the coast of the continent lying in the 56th degree of north latitude. From this point it shall be carried along that coast, in a direction parallel to its windings, and at or within the seaward base of the mountains by which it is bounded, as far as the 139th degree of longitude west of the said meridian. Thence the said meridian line of 139th degree of west longitude, in ita extension as far as the Frozen Ocean, shall form the boundary of the British and Eussian possessions on the said continent of America to the north-west 18811 B uaii£..l^Ak,' ^:;,.:5iilSi.*.''l '■f v< ^^^Tli-'f \ II italilMtiiMhNUcarf .1 Lfl«nuMr». rtim : ~ \ . \ H the Extent of Coast to .Us VI and VII of the ^February i6 (a8), 1825, ■vat Britain and Russia, iveiy intended to apply. ue the tint fire Articles of the snti., sent h}' Mr. G. C.iuning CI Majesty's An baaaador at Ith July, 1H'21:— F •ABTl^LE I. in tlie High Cnntrocting Parties timt Kits shall uiijoy the right of free :'whn1e extent of the Pacific Ocean, ;;'a within Behring's Straits, and shall } molested in currj'ing on their trade ; fts of tiiu said ocean, either to the '^Vl thereof, rstood that the said light of fishery l)jr the subjects of either of the two ' fnariiie leagues from the respective ^ARTICLE II. ,. ' • 5 'imamtcs thu poasessions of the two :. ,:;y^-i^- ■'■: ...I^-'^miea iijion the continent and the islands of America to the north-west shall bo drawn in the manner following : " Commencing from the two points of the island called 'Prince of Wales' Island,' which form the southern extremity thereof, which points lie in the parallel of 54° 40', and between the ISlst and 133rd degree of west longitude (meridian of Greenwich), the line of frontier between the British and Russian possessions shall ascend northerly along the channel called Portland Channel, till it strikes t' ■\ coast of the continent lying in tho 56th degree of north latitude. From tliis point it shall be carried along that cooot, -i a direction parallel to its windings, and at or within the seaward base of the mountains by which it is bounded, as far as the 139th degree of longitude west of the said meridian. Thence the said meridian line of 130tli degree of west longitude, in its extension as far as the ]<'rozcn Ocean, shall form the boundary of the British and Russian possessions on tho said continent of America to the north-west, 18811 B * ,'i!^' \ \ CONFIDENTIAL. Memorandum on the Extent of Coast to which Articles VI and VII of the Treaty of February i6 (28), 1825, between Great Britain and Russia, were respectively intended to apply. THE following are the first five Articles of the " Projet " of Gonvention sent by Mr. G. Canning to 8ir G. Bagot, Her Majesty's Ambassador at St Petersburgh, 12th July, 1824 :— "ARTICLE I. " It ia agreed between the High Contracting Parties tliat their respective subjects shall enjoy the right of free navigation along tlie whole extent of the Pacific Ocean, comprehending the sea within Behring's Straits, and shaU neitlier be troubled nor molested iu carrj-iug on their trade and fisheries, in all parts of the said ocean, either to the northward or southward thereof. " It being well understood that the said right of fishery shall not be exorcised by the subjects of either of the two Powers nearer than 2 marine leagues from the respective poxsesdions of the other. "ARTICLE U. " The line which separates the possessions of tlio two High Contracting Parties upon tlie continent and the islands of America to the north-west shall be drawn in the manner following . " Commencing from the two points of tlie island called 'Wnce of Wales' Island/ which form the southern extremity thereof, which points lie in the parallel of 54° 40', und between tlie 131st ond 133rd degree of west longitude (meridian of Greenwich), the line of frontier between the British and Rassian possessions shall ascend northerly along tlie channel called Portland Channel, till it strikes the coast of the nontiiicnt lying in the 66th de;,Tee of north latitude. From this point it shall l)e ctrricd along that coast, in a direction parallel to its windings, ond nt or within the seaward base of the mountains by which it i^ bouuded, as fnr as the 139th degree of longitude west of the said meridian. Thence the said meridian line of 139th degree of west longitude, in its extension as far as the Frozen Ocean, shall form the boundary of the British and Russian possessions on the said continent of America to the north-west 18811 B HP ivippviWPpnnPRniff ipflPfPSffPf-'/ywi »ww' jw'.i,f«"'»,' « " 'i'' ■ P ^^^WfW" «.l »:l|l;PI!f lU ^^^qPPifPPPiiiiiPPIII "ARTICLE III. " It is, nevertheless, understood, with regard to the stipulations of the preceding Article : " 1. That the said line of coast on the continent of America, which forms the boundary of the Russian pos- sessions, shall not, in any case, extend more than marine leagues in breadth from the sea towards the interior, at whatever distance the aforesaid mountains may be. " 2. That British subjects shall for ever freely navigate and trade along the said line of coast, and along the neighbouring islands. " 3. That the navigation ond commerce of tliose rivers of the continent wliich cross this line of coast shall be open to British subjects, as well as to those inhabiting or visiting the interior of this continent, as to those coming from the Pacific Ocea who shall touch at these latitudes. "ARTICLE IV. " The port of Sitka, or Novo-Archangelsk, shall be, and shall for ever remain, open to the commerce of the subjects of His Britannic Majesty. "ARTICLE V. " With regard to the other parts of the north-west coast of America and of the islands adjacent thereto belonging to either of the two High Contracting Parties, it is agreed that for the space of years from the April, 1824, their respective vessels, and those of their subjects, shall reciprocally enjoy the liberty of visiting, without hindrance, the gulfs, havens, and creeks of the said coast, in places not already occupied, for the purposes of iiaheiy and of commerce with the natives of the country. " It being understood : " 1. Tliat the subjects of either of the High Contracting Parties shall not land at any spot where there may be an establishment of the other, without the permission of the Governor or other authority of the place, unless they should be driven thither by stress of weather or other accidents. " 2. That the said liberty of commerce sholl not include the trade in spirituo\is liquors, in fire-arms, swoids, bayonets, &c., gunpowder, or other warlike stores. The High Contracting Parties reciprocally engaging not to permit the above-mentioned articles to be sold or trans- ferred, in any manner whatever, to the natives of the country." The meaoing of these stipulations is clear. The perpetual right of navigation in territorial Wfiters and rivers was to apply only to the strip of coast between latitude 54° 40', and another point which may be taken roughly as in latitude 69° 30'. The reciprocal permission to visit territorial ^mm 8 waters in places not already occupied for a term of years was to apply to all other parts of the north-west coast of America and the islands adjacent thereto belonging to either of the lligh Contracting Parties. The Russians, however, objected to these pro- visions, as will be seen from the following extract from a despatch of Sir G. Bagot, dated the 12tli August, 1824. :— " Tlie differences between this ' Contre-Projet ' and the ' Projet ' which I had given in are, in many respects, unimportant, consisting either in unnecessary changes in the expressions, or in the order of the Articles, or in otht-r minor points, none of which, as I have reason to think, would liave been tenaciously adhered to, and of wiiich some might have been safely admitted. But there are three points upon which the differences appear to bo almost, if not altogether, irreconcilable. " These points are : " 1. As to the opening for ever to the commerce of British subjects of the port of Novo-Archangelsk. " 2. As to tlio liberty to be granted to British su! j'ects to navigate and trade /or erer along the coast of the LsHrc ■which it is proposed to cede to Russia, from the I'lutland Channel to the 60th degree of north latitude, and the islands adjacent. "3. As to the liberty to be given reciprocally to each Power to visit, for a term of years, the other parts of tliu north-west coasts of America. " As to the first of these points, the Russian Plenipo- tentiaries declare that, however disposed they might, and probably should be, to renew this libei'ty to His Majesty's subjects ot the expiration of ten years, they can, under no circumstances, consent to divest themselves for ever of a discretionary power in this respect, by grantinj,' f.ucli a privilege in perpetuity. " Upon tliis point I reminded the Plenipotentiaries tli.it the freedom of the port of Novo-Archangclsk was origin ill!/ oflered to Great Britain by themselves, unsolicited i\iul unsuggested by me, in the first ' Contre- Projet ' which tl;e'y gave to me in our former coiifiTeuces ; that the sanii^ ttW'.v had been repeated by Count Nesselrodo in his despiit',;!i U> Count Lievcn of the 5th April lust, and tliat upon nciil-.ui' occasion hail it been accompanied by any restriction ns lo any period of linie. It is admitted to me tluit no poiiod of time was specified upon tho.se occasions, I)ut that it wai never intended to declare tlia( the freedom should Im perpetuid, and that they co\ild never bo induced to ^'r.nit it upon such terms. "As to the second point: The Russian Plenipotellt:;llil.'^ declare that they are ready to grant to His Mnji-ly'.-i subjects for ten years, but for no longer period, the libeiiy to navigate and trade along the coast of lb(! I'Lu^n: proposed to be ceded to liussiii, from the Portland Climnel to the 60th degree of north latitude, imd tho isIaiitU mmmm^mw iM iPiWPI9^!fP|™ppi^Hf!WP!«S!WW»ip^p^ ndjaccut ; and tliat they are ready to grant firr ever tho rigiit of ingr(:s»> and eijress into and fttim whatever rivers may Uow from the Amerioon continent aud fall into the Pacitic Ocean within the ubove-described liiiire, but that they can, under no circumstances, and by no supposed correspondent advantages, be induced to grant to any Power the privilege to navigate and trade in perpetuity within a country the full sovereignty of which was to belong to Russia; that such perpetual concession was lepugnnnt to all national feeling, and was inconsistent with tli9 very idea of sovereignty. " A3 regards the third point, tho Russian Plenipoten- tiaries declared that the coasts of North America extending from the 60th degree of north latitude to Uehrin?' Straits, the liberty to visit which, under certain conditions, is stipulated in the ' Projet ' by Gr^ t Britain, in return for a similar liberty to be given, under the same con()iti>>us, to Russian subjects to visit the North American coasts '>>elonging to His Majesty, are, and have always been, the absolute and undisputed territory of His Imperial Majesty, and that it is not the intention of His Imperial Majesty to grant to any Power whatever for any period of time tlio liberty which is required. "TIr'so are the thret' tu'incipal points upon which I was yesterday distinctly givuii to understand that the Russian Goveniiuent would consider it their duty to insist, and, coiisetinently, that, unless my instructions should enable ine to modify tlio ' Projet ' so far as regarded thi'm, the ncgotiiiLions luust bo considered as nt an end." Sir C. Bagot at the same time forwarded a " Coutre-Projet," offered by the Bussian Fleni. potcntiaries, of which the seven first Articles were as follows : — "ARTICLE r. *' I^ ligne de demarcation entre les possessions des deux Hautes Parties Contractantes sur la cote iiord-ouest de rAnidi'iilue et les iles adjacentes, sera tracije ainsi qu'il suit: " A partir Jes deux points qui forment I'extr^mitiS miSridinnale de I'lle dito du Prince de Galles, laqucUe nppnrtiendra tout cntiire it la Rnssie, points situs's sous le pnrallcle du 54° 40' de latitude nord, et entre les 131° et 1;!.'!° de longitude ouest (m^ridien de Greenwich) la ligne de la frontik'e entre les possessions Russes et les posses- sions Uritanniques remontera au nord par la passe, dite le Portlaiul Channel, jnsqu'au point oAcette passe se termine dans riuta aujeta de Sa Migeatd Britannique jouiront k perpetuitd de la libra navigation dea fleuvea, soit qu'ils habitent I'intdrieur du continent, soit qu'ila veulent y arrivcr de I'Oc^an Pacifique au moyen de cea m€mes fleuvea. "5. Que le port dc Sitka ou Novo-Archangelak aera ouvert, pendant dix ens, an commerce dtranger, et qu'ii I'expiration de ce terme cette franchiae sera renouvelde Buivan^ les convenances de la Kuasie. "ARTICLE IV. " A I'avenir il ne pourra 6tre tonui aucun ^tablisse- ment par les sujets de Sa Majesty Britannique dans lea limites des popEesaious Kusses designees aux Articles I et II et de mSme il n'en pourra 6tre formd aucun par les aujeta de Sa Majestd I'Empereur de Toutea les Ruaaies hors dea ditea limitea. "ARTICLE V. "Lea Kautcs Puissances Contractantea atipulent en outre que leura sujets respectifs navigueront librement aur toute I'dtendue de I'Ocdan Pacifique, tant an nord qu'au Bud, aaits entrave quelconque, et qu'ils jouiiont du droit de [=81], mrimmmm mimm'^m^mmmifr'< «im • »•(■ "ijinyf' !»■,»!■'"■ I • I "II l.'«."',"Wi|V'f|^''l"n'«,lM"V|'^-".f^ ,• ■■"} ■ n-|J-)i.P'»-«e^'.T pfiche en haute mer, maia qne ce droit ne pourra jamaia ttro exercd 4u'& la diiitance de 2 lioues marinea dea cAtea ou posasBtiona, aoit Ituasea, aoit Dritanniquea. "ARTICLE VI. " Sa Majeatd VEmpereur do Toiitea lea Rusaies, vonlant mfime donner une preuve particuliire de apa dgarda pour lea intdrtts dea aujets de Sa Mnjeatd Britannique et rendre plua utile le aiiccis dea ontropriaea, qui auraiont pour idaultat de ddcouvrir uu paaaage au nord du continent Aindricain, consent & ce que la liberty de navigation mentionnde en I'Article prdcddent s'dtende aous les nifimea conditions, au Detroit de Bebring et & la mer aitude an nord de ce dutroit. " ARTICLE VIL " Lea vaiaseanx Rusaea et Dritanniquea navignant but rOc^an Pocifique et la mer ci-desaus indiqnde.qui aernient foTcda par lea temp6t : ou par quelque avarie, de ae rdfugier dana lea porta reapectifa des Hnutos I'artiea Contractantes, pourront s'y rodoubor, a'y pourvoir de tons lea objets qui leur aeront ndcesaaires et ae remettro eu mer librement, sans payer d'autrea droita que ceax dc port et de fanaux, leaquela aeront fixds pour eux du mfime montant que pour lea navirea nationanx. " En pareilles occaeiona lea patrona dea b&timena, aoit Ruaaea, aoit Britanniquea, aeront tenua de ae conformer aux Lola, Ordonnancea, et Torifs on viguour daua le port oil ila auront abordd." This " Centre- Frojet " it will be seen gave the right of navigating the rivers in perpetuity on the strip of coast between 61° 40' and 64° 30', but gave the right of visiting the territorial vrateiB for ten years only as far north as 69° 30'. At this point the negotiations were broken off, and were not resumed til' the end of 1824, when Mr. Stratford Canning ^as sent to St. Feters< burgh as British Pleni; the Convention. Mr. George Canning, . tiona to Mr. S. Canning, 1824, wrote aa follows :• tentiary for concluding his despatch of instruc- vted the 8th December, " Perhapa the aimpleat o ; ^rae after all will be to aubsti- tute, for all that part of the ' Frojet ' and ' Contre- Frojet* which relatea to maritime righta and to naviga- tion, the first two Articlea of the Convention already con- cluded by the Court of St Peteraburgh with the United Statea of America, in the order in which they atond in that Convention. " Buaaia cannot mean to give to the United Statea of America what ahe withholda from ua; nor to withhold from oa anything that ahe faaa consented to give to the United States. mmmmmm mwf I "Th« uniformity of Btipnlations in pari mrlerid 'ivea deaniom and force to both armr.gpmenta, and will citab- liih that footing of equality Iwtween the Aovcral Con- tracting [Parties which it ii most desirable should exibi between three Powera whose interests come so nearly io contact with each other in a part uf the globe in which no other Power is concerned. "This, thorofore, is what I am to instruct you to propose at once to the Russian Minister as cutting siiort an other- wise inconvenient discussion. " This expedient will dispose of Articlo [ of the ' Pro- jet ' and of Articles V and VI of the ' C'ontro-Projet.' " The next Articles ralate to the territorial demarcation, and npoa them I have only to make the following observ*- tions : " The Kussian Plenipotentiaries propose to withdraw entirely the limit of the li*iirt on the eoast which they were themselves the first to propose, viz., the summit of the mountains which run parallel to the coast, and which appear, acco^ling to the Map, to follow all its sinuosities, and to substitute generally that which we only suggested at a corrective of their first proposition. " We cannot agree to this change. It is quite obvious that the boundary of mountains, where they exist, is the most natural and eflbctual boundary. The inconvenience against which we wished to guard was that which you know and can thoroughly explain to the Russian Plenipo- tentiaries to have existeermission of the Governor or Commander ; and that, reciprocally, the subjects of Russia shall not resort, with- out permission, to any establishment of the United States upon the north-west coast. •' ARTICLE III. " It is, moreover, agreed that hereafter there shall not Ite formed by the citizens of the United States, or under the authority of the said States, any establishment upon the north-west coast of America, nor in any of the islands adjacent, to the north of 64° 40' of north latitude ; and that, in the same manner, there shall be none formed by Russian subjects, or under the authority of Russia, touth of the same parallel "ABTICLS IV. " It is, nevertheless, understood that, during a term of ten years, counting from the signature of the present Convention, the ships of both Powers, or which belong to their citizens or subjects respectively, may reciprocally frequent, without any hindrance whatever, the interior seas, gulfs, harbours, and creeks upon the coast mentioned in the preceding Article, for the purpose of fishing and trading with the natives of the country." The negotiation proceeded on this hasis, and in the Treaty concluded between Great Britain and Russia on the 16th February, 1825, the first seven Articles are as follows : — "ARTICLE I. "It is agreed that the respective subjects of the High Contracting Parties shall not be troubled or molested in any part of the ocean, commonly called the Pacific Ocean, either in navigating the same or fishing therein, or in landing at such parts of the coast as shall not have been already occupied, in order to trade with the natives, under the restrictions and conditions specified in the fol- lowing Articles. " ARTICLE IL "In order to prevent the right of navigating an.d fishing exercised upon the ocean by the subjects of the High Contracting Parties from becoming the pretext for an illicit commerce, it is agreed that the subjects of His Britannic Majesty shall not land at any place where there may be a Russian establishment without the permission of the Governor or Commandant ; and, on the other hand, that Russian subjects shall not land without permission at any British establishment on the north-west coast "ARTICLE IlL "The line of demarcation between the possessions of the High Contracting Parties upon the coast of the continent and the islands of America to the north-west shall be drawn in the manner following : " Commencing from the southernmost part of the island called Prince of Wales' Island, which point lies in the parallel of 54° 40' north latitude, and between the 1,31st and the 133rd degree of west longitude (meridian of Greenwich), the said line shall ascend to the north along the channel called Portland Channel, as far as the point of the continent where it strikes the 66th degree of north latitude; from this last-mentioned point, the line of demarcation shall follow the summit of the mountains situated parallel to the coast, as far as the point of inter- section of tho 14l8t degree of west longitude (of the same meridian) ; and, finally, from the said point of intersection, and tho said meridian-line of the 141st degree, in its pro- longation as far as the Frozen Ocean, shall form tho limit [881] D (PPPpiiWWIP ^iPBIP 10 between the Russian and British possessions on the conti nent of America to the north-west ^mmmmmm>m^^^mmmmmmmmmmm "ARTICLE IV. " With reference to the line of demarcation laid down in the pccceding Article, it is understood : " Igt. That the island called Prince of Wales' Island shall belong wholly to Russia. "2nd. That wherever the summit of the mountains which extend in a direction parallel to the coast, from the 56th degree of north latitude to the point of intersection of the 14l3t degree of west longitude, shall prove to be at the distance of more than 10 marine leagues from the ocean, the limit between the British possessions and the line of coast which is to belong to Russia, as above mentioned, shall be formed by a line parallel to the windings of the coast, and which shall never exceed the distance of 10 marine leagues therefrom. " ARTICLE V. " Tt is, moreover, agreed that no establishment shall be f( rmed by either of the two parties within the limits assigiied by the two preceding Articles to the possessions of the other; consequently British subjects shall not form any establishment either upon the coast or upon the border of the continent comprised within the limits of the Russian possessions, as designated in the two preceding Articles ; and, in like manner, no establishment shall be formed by Russian subjects beyond the said limits, "ARTICLE VI. "It is understood that the subjects of His Britannic Majesty, from whatever quarter tliey may arrive, whether from the ocean or from the interior of the continent, shall for ever enjoy the right of navigating freely, and without any hindrance whatever, all the tiverj and streams which, in their course towards the Pacific Ocean, may cross the line of demarcation upon the line of coast described in Article III of the present Convention. "ARTICLE VII. "It is also understood that, for the space of ten years from the signature of the present Convention, the vessels of the two Powers, or those belonging to their respective subjects, shall mutually be at liberty to frequent, without any hindrance whatever, all the inland seas, the gulfs, havens, and creeks on the coast mentioned in Article III, for the purposes of fishing and of trading with the natives." It is to be remarked that the words " line of coast," mentioned in Article YI, are rendered in the French text, " la lisiire de la o6te indiqute," whereas in Article VII the French rersion hat " la oAte mentionnte." 11 The wording of Article VII was in fact taken textually from tho Treaty between Russia and the United States of the 5th April, 1824, with the exception of the substitution of the words " mentioned in Article III," for " mentioned in the preceding Article." Article III of the United States' Treaty, how- ever, differed from that of the British Treaty in that it mentioned only " the north-west coast of America and the islands adjacent to the north of 54° 40' of north latitude ;" whereas the British Treaty, after speaking of the "coast of the continent and the islands of America to the north-west," goes on to describe a line of demar- cation a portion of which is to "follow the summit of the mountains parallel to the coast." The obvious conclusion, however, from the history of the negotiations is that the permanent privileges given in Article VI were meant only to apply to the restricted strip of coast thus particularly described, and that the temporary and reciprocal privileges secured by Article VII were to apply to the whole coast of the possession! of each Power. Mr. Blaine, however, in his note to Sir J. Fauncefote of the 30th June, 1890, after stating that Article IV of the United States' Treaty relates solely to the " north-west ooaat of America," so well understood as the coast of the Pacific Ocean between the 50th and 60th degrees of north latitude, and therefore does not in the remotest degree touch Behrlag Sea or the land bordering upon it, goes on to analyze the provisions of the British Treaty. He says : — "After the analysis of the Articles in the American Treaty there is little in the English Treaty that requires explanation. The two Treaties were drafted under circumstances and fitted to conditions quite similar There were some difTorences because of Great Britain's ownership of British America. But these very differences corroborate the position of the United States. This is most plainly seen in Article VI. By that Article the subjects of Her Britannic Majesty were guaranteed the right of navigating freely the rivers emptying into the Pacific Ocean and crossing the line of demarcation upon the line qf coast described in Article III. The line of demarcation is described in Article III as following " the summit of the mountains situated parallel to the coast, as far a» the point of intersection of the Hist degree of west kngitudt." Article IV, qualifying Article III, specifics that " wherever the summit of tho mountains which extend in a direction parallel to the coast, from the I nil. mniii^^^v ^HPIP 12 66th degree of north latitude to the point of intersection of the 14l8t degree of west longitude, shall prove to be at a distance of more than 1 marine leagues from the ocean, the limit between the British possessions and the line of coast which is to belong to Russia, as above mentioned, ahall be formed by a line parallel to the windings of the coast, and shall never exceed the distance of 10 marine leagues therefrom. " By both these Articles the line of demarcation ceases to have any parallel relation to the coast when it reaches the point of intersection of the 141st degree of west longitude. From that point the I'llst degree of west longitude, as far as it extends continuously on land northward, is taken as the boundary between the teiritories of the two Powers. It is thus evident that British subjects were guaranteed the right of navigating only such rivers as crossed the line of demarcation while it followed the line of coast. They were limited, therefore, to the rivers that emptied into the Pacific Ocean between 54° 40' and 60° north latitude, the latter being the point on the coast opposite the point where the line of demarcation diverges. Mount St. Elios. " By this Agreement Great Britain was excluded from all rivers emptying into the Behring Sea, including the Great Yukon and its affluent the Porcupine, which rise, and for a long distanre flow, in British America. So complete was the exclusion from Behring Sea that Great Britain surrendered in this case u doctrine which she had aided in impressing upon the Congress of Vienna for European rivers. She did not demand access to the sea from a river whose source was in her territory. She consented, by signing the Treaty of 1825, to such total exclusion from the Behring Sea as to forego following her own river to its mouth in thut sea. " It shows a curious association of political events that in the Wellington Treaty of 1871 the United States con- ceded to Great Britain the privilege of navigating the Yukon jnd its branch the Porcupine to the Behring Sea in exchange for certain privileges conceded to the United States on tlie St. Lawrence. The request of Great Britain for tlie privilege of navigating the Yukon and the Porcupine is a suggestive confession that it was withheld from her by Kussia in ths Treaty of 1825, withheld because the rivers flowed to the Behring Sea. "The Vllih Article is practically a repetition of the IVth Article in the Treaty between Russia and the United Slate.?, and the privilege of fishing and trading with the natives is limited to the coast mentioned in Article III, identically the same line of coast which they were at liberty to pass through to reach British America or to reach the coast from British America. They are excluded from goin ; north of the prescribed point on the coast near Mount St. Elias, and are therefore kept out of Behring Sea. " It is to be noted that the negotiators of this Treaty in defining the boundary between the Russian and British possessions cease to obrerve particularity exactly at the point on tha coaat where it is intersected by the 6Uth '"'"?P!l9iP!PPw'*'!!W^^ ,'IJ'W^J^ '.. 13 puallel. From that point the boundary is designated by the almott indefinite prolongation northward of tlio 14l8t degree of longitude west. It is plain, therefore, that this Treaty, like the Knsso-American Treaty, limited the ' north-weat coast ' to that part of the coast between the SOth and 60th parallels of north latitude, as fully set forth by Mr. Middleton in the Protocols preceding the Treaty between the United States and Russia. The negotiators never touched one foot of the boundary of the Behring Sea. whether on continent or < stand, and never even made a reference to it. Its nearest point in Bristol Bay was 1,000 miles distant from the field of negotiation between the Powers." Lord Salisbury, in his despatch to Sir J. Pauncefote of the 2Dd August, 1890, replied to this argument as follows : — "With regard to the construction which Mr. Blaine puts upon the Treaty between thd United States and Russia of the 17th April, 1824, 1 will only say that it is, as far as I am aware, an entirely novel one, that there is no trace of its having been known to the various publicists who have given an account of the controverey in treatises on internal ional law, and that it is contrary, as I shall show, to that which the British negotiators placed on the Treaty when they adopted the 1st and Ilnd Articles for insertion in the British Treaty of the 2Sth February, 1825. I must further dissent from his interpretation of Article VII of the latter Treaty. That Article gives to the vessels of the two Powers ' liberty to frequent all the inland seas, gulfs, havens, and creeks on the coast mentioned in Article III, for the purpose of fishing and of trading with the natives.' The expression ' coast men- tioned in Article III ' can only refer to the first words of the Article : ' The line of demarcation between the pos- sessions of the High Contracting Parties upon the coast of the continent and the islands of America to the north-west shall be drawn,' &c. Tliat is to say, it included all the possessions of the two Powers on the north-west coast of America. For there would have been no sense whatever in stipulating that iSussian vessels should have freedom of access to the small portion of coast which, by a later part of the Article, is to belong to Russia. And as bearing on vuis point it will be noticed that Article VI, which has a more restricted bearing, speaks only of 'the subjects of His Britannic Majesty,' and of ' the line of cocM described in Article III.'" Mr. Blaine's letter to Sir J. Pauncefote of the l7th December, 1890, contains the following rejoinder : — " The VI th Article of Russia's Treaty with Great Britain is as follows : " ' It is understood that the subjects of His Britannic Mi^jesty, from whatever quarter they may arrive, whether [881] B u from the ocean or from the interior of the continent, shall for ever eiyoy the right of navigating freely, and without any hindrance whatever, all the rivers and streams which, in their course toward the Pacific Ocean, may cross the line of demarcation upon the line of coast described in Article III of the present Convention.' "The meaning of this Article is not obscnre. The subjects of Great Britain, whether arriving from the interior of the continent or from the ocean, shall enjoy the right of navigating freely all the rivers and streams which, in their course to the Pacific Ocean, may cross the line of demurcation upon the line of coast described in Article III. As is plainly apparent, the coast referred to in Article III is the coast south of the point of junction already described. Nothing is clearer than the reason for this provision. A strip of land, at no point wider than 10 maiine leagues, running along the Pacific Ocean from 64° 40' to 60° (320 miles by geographical line, by the windings of the coast three times that distance), wrb assigned to Bussia by the Ilird Article. Directly to the east of this strip of land — or, as might be said, behind it — lay the British possessions. To shut out the inhabitants of the British possessions from the sea by this ilrip of land wOuId have been not only unreasonable, but intolerable to Great Britain. Russia promptly conceded the privilege, and gave to Great Britain the right of navigating all rivers crossing that strip of land from 54° 40' to the point of intersection with the 14l8t degree of longitude. Without this concession the Treaty could not have been made. I do not understand that Lord Salisbury dissents from this obvious construction of the Vlth Article, for in his despatch he says that the Article has a 'restricted bearing,' and refers only to ' the line of coast described in Article III ' (the Holies are his own), and the only line of coast dflscribed in Article III is tiie coast from 54° 40' to C0°. There is no desciiption of the coast above that point stretching along the Bchring Sea from latitude 60° to the Straits of Behring. " The Vllth Article of the Anglo-Russian Treaty, whose provisions have led to the ])rincipal contention between the United States and Great Britain, is as follows :— " ' It is also understood that for the space of ten years from the signature of the present Convention the vessels of the two Powers, or those belonging to their respective subjects, shall mutually be at liberty to frequent, without any hindrance whatever, all tlie inland seas, the gulfs, havens, and ci eeks on the coast mentioned in Article III, for tlie purtMsc'S of fishing and cf trading with the natives.' " In the judgment of the President the meaniug of this Article is edtogether plain and clew. It'ptovides that for the space of ten years the Teasels of the two Ptmera shoold mutually be at liberty to freqsent all the inland seas, fto., ' on the eoast mmtioiud «» ArUda III, for ths pwfom of fUking ornd trading ioith th» fMfttwi.' Following Mt the IS lipe of my argument and the language of the Article, I have already maintained that this privilege could only refer to the coast from 54° 40' to the point of intersection with the 14l8t degree of west longitude ; that, therefore, British subjects wore not granted the right of frequenting the Behring Sea. " Denying this construction. Lord Salisbury says : — " ' I must further disseni from Mr. Blaine's interpretation of Article VII of the latter Treaty (British). That Aj-ticle gives to the vessels of tlie two Powers " liberty to fireqnent all the inland seas, gulfs, havens, and creeks on the coast mentioned in Article III, for the purpose of fishing and of trading with the natives." The expression " coast mentioned in Article III " can only refer to the first wcnls of the Article, " the lino of demarcation between the possessions of the High Contracting Parties upon the coast of the continent and the islands of America to the north-west shall be drawn," &c., that is to say, it included all the possessions of the two Powers on the north-west coast of America. For there would have been no sense whatever in stipulating that Itu.''.8ian vessels should have freedom of access to the small portion of const which, by a later part of the Article, is to belong to Russia. And, as bearing on this point, it will he noticed that Article VI which has a more restricted bearing, speaks only of " the subjects of His Britannic Majesty," and of "the line of coast described in Article III." ' " " It is curious to note the embarrassing intricacies of his Lordship's language and the erroneous assumption upon whiclx his argument is bused. He admits that the privilegptj granted in the Vlth Article to the subjects of C.'sat Itritain are limited to 'the coast described in Article III of the Treaty.' But when he reaches the Vllth Article, where the privileges granted are limited to 'the coast mentioned in Article III of the Treaty,' his liOitlship maintains that the two rc:t'eroL'ces do not mean the same const at all. The coast described in Article III and llie coast mentiomd in Article 111 are, therefore, in his Lordship's judgment, entirely ditrerent. The 'coast described in Article III' is limited, he admits, by the intersection of the boundnry-line with the 141st degree of longitude, but the ' coast mentioned in Article III ' stretclies to the Straits of Behring. " The llird Article is, indeed, a very plnin one, and its meaning cannot be obscured. Observe that tlio 'line of demnrcatiou ' is botw.ien tlie possessions of both parties on the coast o( tlie continent. Gvent Britain linil no posses- sions 'lu the coast-line above tlie \Ki\nt of junction with the 14lst degree, nor had she any Settlemjnls above 60' nortli latitude. South of 60° nortli latitude wns tlie only l)liice when? Gieak Britain had possessions on the coast- line. Nortli of that point Iier territory had no connection whatove. ttith the coast eitiier of tlie Pacific Ocean or the llehring Son. It is tlius evident that the only coast rel'erred to in Article III was this strip of land south of (iO or u9' 30'. [881] P wmiiitfmifmmmmm'f^^^ mpm ** w^^wwii I J unil I '! H"!5W!l^!!nwpwwflW»"j»,i«i I iifminimiii ' mj- i # 16 " The preamble closes by saying that the line of demar- cAtion between the posi^essions on tlie coast ' shall be drawn in the manner following,' viz., from Prinae of Wales' Island, in 54° 40', along Portland Channel and the snmmit of the mountains parallel to the coast as far as thdr intersection with the 141«< degree of longitude. After having described this line of Jemarcatiou Ijetween the possessions of both parties on tlie coast, the remaining sentence of the Article shows that, ' finally, from the sSld point of intersection, the said meridian-lino .... shall form the liniit between the Russian and British posses- sions on the eontinent of .im. Hea." South of the point of intersection the Article ■ i ' f" i line of demarcation between possessions on the ■ Tth of that point of intersection the Article design. . mer>dian-line as the limit be'tween possessions on the continent. The ai'gument of Lord Salisbury appears to this Government not only to contradict the obvious meaning of the Vllth and Ilird Articles, b>it to destroy their logical connection with the other Articles. In fact, Loi-d Salisbury's attempt to make two coasts out of tlie one coast rot'crreiJ to in the Ilird Article is not only out of harniony with the plain provisions of the Anglo-Russian Treaty, but is incon- sistent with the preceding part of h'j own argument." The discussion was not pursued further, but Mr. lilaine in his last ars;uinent does not quote correctly the terms of the two Articles. The difference is not between the expressions " coast described " and " coast mentioned," but between " the line of coast described " (" la lisi^re de la c6te indiquee ") and " the coast mentioned " (" la c6te mentionntSe "). Now the word " lisi^re " in French means properly a strip on the outside, and is thoroughly applicable to the line of Russian coast between 54° 40' and 59° 30'. As rej^ards the navigation of any rivers crossing the boundary-line to the north of that point, it is to be observed that the line is situated at a distance of some 600 miles from tlie coast of Bchring Sea, and that nothing was then known of the Yukon, the only river falling into that sea which has navigable waters in Canadian territory. Thn Treaties with Russia of 1848 and 1859 both contain stipulations that "in regard to commerce and navigation in the Russian posses- sions on iho north-west coast of America, the Convontio9 concluded at St. Petersburgh on the 16th (28th) February, 1825, opntinues in force." Ml. Sumner, in his speech in favour of the Treaty of 1867 for the cession of Ahuka to the United States, took the broad view of the interpretation to be placed on the Articles, and 'V. 17 it is only for the purpose of the present ail- ment that Mr. Blaine has sought to restrict the concessions made to the United States and Great Britain. The following is the , material portion of Mr. Sumner's speech, which will be found in vol. i of the Appendix to the British Case, p. 61 :— * Then) are questions not unworthy of attention, which arise under the Treaty between Russia and Great Britain^ fixing the easteru limits of these possessions, and conceding certain privileges to the latter Power. By this Treaty, signed at St. Petersburgh on the 28th February, 1825, after fixing the boundaries between the Bussian and British possessions, it provided that ' for the space] of ten years tho vessels of the two Powers, or those belonging to their respective subjects, shall mutually be at liberty to frequent, without any hindrance whatever, all the inland seas, gulfs, havens, and creeks on the coast for the purpose of fishing and of trading with the natives ;" and also that • for the space of ten years the port of Sitka or Novo- Aichangelsk shall be open to the commerce and veiuels of • British subjects." — ■ (Hertslet's " Commercial Treaties,' vol. ii, p. 365.) " In the same Treaty it is also provided that ' tho subjects of His Britannic Majesty, from whatever quarter they may arrive, whether from the ocean or from the interior of the continent, shall for ever enjoy the right of navigating freely and without any hindrance whatever] all the rivers and streams which, in their course toward the Pacific Ocean, may cross the line of demarcation.' — {Ibid.) " Afterwards a Treaty of Commerce and Navigation between Russia and Great Britain was signed at St Peters- burgh on tlie lltli January, 1843, subject to bo terminated on notice from either party at the expiration of ten years, in which it is provided that ' in regard to commerce and navigation in the Russian possessions on the north-west coast of America the Convention of the 28th February, 1826, continues in force.' — {Ibid., vol vi, p. 767.) vt. " Then ensued the Crimean war between Russia and Great Britain, effacing or suspending Treaties. Afterwards another Treaty of Commerce and Navigation was signed at St Peteraburgh on the 12th January, 1859, subject to be terminated on uotice from either party at the expiration of ten years, which repeats the last provision. — (/iiV/., vol X, p. 1063.) " Thus we have tliree diflerent stipulations on the part of Russia : one opening seas, gulfs, and havens on the Russian coast to British subjects for fishing and trading with the natives ; the second making Sitka a free port to British subjects ; and the third making British rivers which flow through the Russian possessions for ever free to Britisli navigation." T. U. 8. " Foreign Office, November 24, 1892. ■^^ip^^PW^WWf" « ! W^ilflUMff^i "UlIJi I- I .ii,",»W!!l,|^iJ«^i, ■^^"Hifpr '^ j^. ^Bk . T^"^ i ' ''''••'' •'t'- wii'f~\^^'^ ■ '''"," ^^WT?T7^'v^7^-; '-"''' ''T^^"-«--r*J4-f^'^>'''^^ ■iilliiii -,.;.,!>p| Chronological Notes on the Progress of Trade ' and Discovery in the Northern Part of the North Pacific, with special reference to Behring Sea and the American Coast. 1728 to 18S0. [N.B. These notes are largely, but not exclu- sively, based on Bancroft's " History of Alaska" and the "History of the North-West Coast," by the same author. Those relating to the early Bussian expeditions are, howeTer, almost entirely based on the "History of Alaska."] THOUGH vague reports of even earlier mari- time discoveries on the Pacific coast of Asia by Russians exist, the first important voyage of which records are found is that of Behring in 1728 and 1729. This expedit >n had been planned by Peter the Great shortly before his death, but irab actually dispatched by the Empress Gatherine. The leader, Behring, was a Dane, enlisted in the service of Russia, and the instructions furnished for the guidance of the expedition had special reference to the sotting at rest of the possible connection of the Continent of Asia with that of America. The result of this expedition was to outline, rather vaguely, the extreme eastern coast of Asia, and practically to prove the termination of this continent in that direction. Behring's second expedition, after difficulties and long delays, sailed from Okhotsk in 1740, but in this year got no further than Kamtchatka. In 1741 a new start was made in the two little vessels which had been built and christened the "St. Peter" and "St. Paul," the former under the command of Behring himself, the latter under that of Chirikof. The two vessels became [672J B ||UI l,ilJ,,,:lJl|i_.^U|!jpi| "■'W'ilWIWIiSWIj •frmitw"!- i,j^ fim"! iii.iii iiiiii iiifi I WM TS '..*iW8**''j^P»-'^ ■«^^«a«mp<«iiBnVH mmmmm 2 separated, but, briefly stated, the royago resulted in the discovery of the American coast by both captains. Ghirikof sighted this coast or its off-lying islands between latitudes 56° 41' and 57° IS', but his landing party was massacred, and after great hardships he returned to the port of departure in Avacha Bay (Fetropaulowski) in the same autumn. On the return voyage he saw sevoral of the Aleutian Islands. Bebring, sailing independently, reached Kyak Island, not far from the entrance to what afterwards became known as Prince William Pound. He landed on the island and saw the adjacent mainland to the north, but hastened to return. Like Ghirikof, he saw several of the Aleutian Islands, and was eventually cast away on what is now known as Bebring loland, 90 or 100 miles from the Kamtchatkrr^ coast, for which he was heading. Here the crew wintered, and Bebring himself, with others, died, but in the following summer thu remnant of the crew, in a newly-oonstruoted oraft, managed to reach Avacha Bay. It is difficult to identify the particular islands of the Aleutian chain which were sighted by .^hring and Ghirikof, and both navigators seem to ^mve supposed that these islands fringed the sou hern border of an extensive projection of the A.merioan continent, or formed parts of such a pi^jection. Unsatisfactory as these voyages undoubtedly Bancroft, ai .,^,^ were from a geographical point of view, it was P* "' upon their results that Russia chiefly based her subsequent pretensions to the ownership of the north-western part of North America. The voyagers brought back various valuable furs, and chief amongst these the skins of the sea- otter. It was rjc long before adventurous htmters and traders xollowed the lead thus given. In 1743 it is believed that Bassof visited Bebring Island, returning in the following year to Kamt- chatka. Three subsequent voyages appear to Ibid., ppi 8f, 100. have been made by the same adventurer — the last in 1749. While Bassof was still absent on his second voyage, Lebedef sailed in 1746. He appears to have visited Agatu and Attn, of the Aleutian chain, and after various bloody encounters with the natives, to have mode his way back to Eamtohatka in 1747. In 1746, allured by the accounts of Bassof s ■kHM mtt Bineraft, AUika. p. 174. succesQ, two more vessels sailed, under the auspices of several Siberian merchants, and, after wintering on the Commander Islands, returned to Kar^tchatka in the following year. It is imnecessary to follow the fur-trading voyages of succeeding adventurers in detail. Many parties set out from the Kamtchatkan coast for the newly-discovered lands, in small and badly>equipped vessels, and obtained more or less satisfactory returns in skins. Tim sole object of these expeditions was furs, and though some increased knowledge of the Aleutian Islands resulted from them, it was of a crude and unsatis- factory kind, and violence and bloodshed every- where marked the progress of the traders. Gradually the progress of discovery crept east- ward, and, in 1763, Glotof reached Kadiak Island, where again conflicts with the natives onourred. In 1 764-68, Synd, a Lieutenant of the Russian navy, made an expedition along the coast to Behring Strait, but with unsatisfactory geographical results. In 1766, under the autho- rity of a special Ukase, Erenitzin embarked from Okhotsk with several small vessels, meeting vnth. disaster, but, in 1768, with two vessels, of which Levashef commanded one, he again sailed. They wintered on the Aleutian Islands (Krenitzin on Unimak, and Levashef on TJnalaska), and after the usual number of conflicts with the natives, ' retired to Eamtchatka in 1769. Meanwhile, other small mercantile expeditions embarked in the search for furs, some of them being successful, but of which the records are very scant, and the actual additions to geogra- phical knowledge insignificant. The traders often wintered on islands of the Aleutian chain, but established no permanent stations there. Of this period on to about 1779, Bancroft writes : — " From this time to the visit of Captain Cook, siuglo traders and small Companies continued the traffic with the islands in much the same manner as befoi'e, though a general tendency of consoUdution was perceptible." Meanwhile, the extension of Russian influence to the eastward from Asia -was not unnoticed by Spain, and in 1774, Perez was dispatched^ UTider official instructions from the Viceroy of Mexico, to the north. Perez, however, extended his voyage only to the southern part of what is now known aa Alaska. In 1776, however, Hecata, sent by the same ^mrrmm' authority, explored the coast of America north- ward as far as the 57tb or 58th degree of latitude, taking possession in the name of Spain. In 1778, Captain Cook reached the American coast of the North Pacific, with two well-equipped vessels. He had been dispatched by the English Oovemment, with instructions from the Admi- ralty to make a thorough search for nny navi- gably passage from the Pacific to the North Atlantic, as far as latitude 65° north, and further if possible. His instructions added : — " You are also, with the consent of the natives, to take possession, in the name of the King of Great Britain, of convenient situations in such countries as you may dis- cover, that have not already heen discovered or visited by any European Power, but if you find the countries so discovered ore uninhabited, you are to take possession of them for His Majesty, by setting up proper marks and inscriptions as first discoverers and posiressors." In pursuance of his instructions, Cook, fallin j in with the coast near latitude 44°, sailed north- ward, and, after spending some time at NooSka* on what is now known as Vancouver Isbnd, continued to the north, where he explored and named, particularly, the region of Prince William's Sound, and Cook's River, or Inlet, taking possession of the coasts there At Cook's Inlet he found traces of Rnssiar trade at this time, but no Russians. Proceeding to Unalaska, one of the Aleutian Islands, he again heard of the Russians, but did not at this time meet with them. Thence he sailed eastward to Bristol Bay, Banooft, AImIei, landing and taking possession near the mouth '"''■ ' of the Kuskoquim River, and thereafter ex- plored and fixed the position of the American coast northward as ; far as Icy Cape, beyond Behring Strait. Turned back at length by the Arctic ice, he spent some time on his way south in mapping Norton Sound, eventually returning to Unalaska. Hero, on this occasion, he found Bussian traders preparing to spend the winter- in this, their favourite resort for that purpose. If it be assumed that at this time Unalaska was 8ub-permanently occupied for Russia by these traders, it is evident that it was at the same time their furthest eastern point of control. Their trading voyages had, it is true, extendel much further, but only in a desultory way. The entire eastern coast of what is now known ?S!^»j but passed the winter on Behring Island. In the the following year he visited Unalaska and reached Eadiak. Preparations for permanent occupation were begun, and buildings were erected at a place named Three Saints Bay. The natives were hostile, but the Riissians managed to hold their own. The seasons of 1786 and 1786 were spent in exploring and trading on the coasts of the island and ai^acent mainland, where several outposts were established. In 1786, Shelikof himself returned to Siberia for the purpose of endeavouring to obtain exclusive rights of trade for the Company which he represented. Shelikof is represented as urging his request on the plea that — " the advantages which rightfully belong to the subjects ibid., p. SS9. of Bnssia alone are converted to the benefit of uthei nations who have no claim upon the country and no right to the products of its waters," In 1786, Captain Hanna, in the " Sea Otter," ii stated to have been the first to engage in the __^ Sauer*! Mcoant ofBillingt* EipaditMB, London, 1803, p^ 379, 981. ttade between China and the north-west coast of America by sea, to the possibilities of which attention had been drawn by Captain Cook. He made a second voyage in the following year, but his trading operations appear to hare been oon> fined to the northern coasts of Vancouver Island. Other commercial adventurers on the same quest were practically contemporaneous with Hanna, and the year 1786 is an important one in connection with the whole region. Thus, the " Captain Cook " and " Experiment," two vessels from Bombay, visited and traded at Nootka and Prince William Sound. An English vessel, the " Lark," Captain Peters, from Bengal vi& Malacca and Canton, after trading at Petropaulowski, in Eamtohatka, sailed for Copper Island with the supposed purpose, as alleged, of obtaining a cargo of copper there. We happen to hear of this vessel incidentally, as she was wrecked on Behring Island, and of her crew of seventy but two men were saved. Also, in the same year, Fortlock and Dixon and Meares arrived upon the American coast, and both expeditions traded and explored far to the north- ward. These expeditions are specially important aa their results were published in England in 1789 and 1790 respectively, while the voyages of other contemporaneous traders were not recorded. Portlook and Dixon, who had sailed from London in 1786, in the " King George " and "Queen Charlotte," first visited Cook's Inlet, where they found a party of Bussians from Unalaska encamped, with their boats drawn up, but without any fixed establishment. Trade was carried on with the natives here, and subse- quently at various points along what is now the Alaskan coast, to the eastward and southward. YariouB harbours were also surveyed. In the following year Fortlock and Dixon, returned to the vicinity of Cook's Inlet and Prince William Sound, where they found Meares, who had spent the previous winter there. The ships then cruized eastward and southward, stopping at Port Malgrave, Norfolk Sound, and many other places, and eventually reaching the Queen Charlotte Islands and other parts of what is now the coast of British Columbia. Very substantial additions were made to the geography of the coast by these voyagers. ,„...„,_.,,.,, jM , „ „«,„,,„,.„ .jj., ,,,„, jjjj,^i|iiyipp|[|||pju||,yi.j3,i,ii_pii^j^^ _^ ■ ■ ' ■ I '■''"'v^ifiimKiiijmvwfif'^'^m'*!^^^ T— — ^ ■TTTTr 8 Meai'cs, sailing from Bengal in the " Nootka," early in the year, reached the Islands of Atka and Amlia of the Aleutian chain, staying two days at the latter and holding communication with Bussians and natives there. On the way eastward others of the Aleutian Islands were seen, and Meares was piloted into a harbour on IJnalaska by a Russian who came off to the ship. He describes the Russian establishment as consisting of undorgroimd huts similar to those of the natives, and their mode of life as miserable. He was further informed that the traders were relieved and returned to Siberia after eight years of residence. Leaving Una- laska he coasted eastward to Cook's Inlet and Prince William Sound, where, as above stated, he passed the following winter. Bussians were again met with near Cook's Biver and Eadiak Island. Meares' later voyage in 1788 and 1789 was directed to the coast south of what is now Alaska, upon which coast, in connection with the Nootka controversy, he played a prominent part. Also, in 1786, La F^rouse, then engaged in his voyage round the world, under instructions from the Ctovemment of France to visit such ports of the northern coast of America as had not been examined by Cook, and to investigate and report on various nmtters, including the fur trade, first made the land near Mount St. Elias. Thence he sailed eastward and southward, calling at and examining various places in that direction, along the whole of what is now comprised in the Alaskan coast there. At Stua Bay he obtained in trade 1,000 sea-otter skins. The Bussian Fribyloff, in the same year, dis- covered the islands in Behring Sea now known by his name. In 1788, the vessel "Trekh Sviatileli," in connection with Shelikof's projects, explored Prince WiUiam Sound, which, as we have already seen, was not new ground. Takutat Bay, where Dixon had been before, was also examined, and Stua Bay, already known to La F^rouse under fhe name of "^'ort des Ffanfais," was "dis- oovered." Possession was taken for Bussia at Tarious points along the coast. "Boused by the reports of La P^rouse and others con- Banenrfl, Alaika, ceming the spread of Bussian Settlements in the far p. 970. "T^". north, and the influx of English nnd other trading veasela, the Spanish Qovemment in 1787 ordered the Viceroy of Mexico to dispatch at once an expedition to verify these accounts and examine the north-western coast fur placer that might be desirable of occupation in anticipation of foreign designs." Bsneroft, Alaika, In consequence, in 1788, the " Frincessa " pp. 971,878. and "San Cdrlos," under Martinez and Haro, sailed. They proceeded direct to Prince Wiiliam Sound, where no Russians were seen. Haro, however, discoyered the Russian colony at Three Saints or Eadiak Island, and held amicable relations with the Russians there. Delcrof, in charge, endeavoured to impress the Spaniard with the belief that the Russian Government was firmly established on the coast as far south as latitude 52°, though, as a matter of fact, the little colony on Kadiak was at the moment the easternmost permanently occupied place. He further even hinted at a prospective establishment at Nootka, on Vancouver Island, which probably, in effect, led to the temporary Spanish occupation of that place. The voyagers next proceeded to Unalaska, of which the J' took possession for Spain, but after- wards discovered the Russian post, where they remained for some time, and were again hospit- ably entertained. Upon the conflict of interests at this time upon this part of the Alaskan coast, and the rival claims to territory there, Bancroft makes the following remarks :^ AUiks, p. 967. " ^^ events of 1787-88 mu:>'. have been puzzling to the natives of Prince William Sound. Englishmen under the English flag, Englishmen under the Portuguese flag, Spaniards, and Bussians were cruizing about, often within a few miles of each other, taking possession, for one nation or the other, of all the land in sight. The 'Princessa' from Mexico appears to have left Xuchek two days before the Russians arrived there ; the ' Prince of Wales,' Captain Hutchins, must have been at anchor in Spring Comer Cove about the same time, and shortly after, the ' Iphigenia,' Captain Douglas, entered the same cove, while Portlock left traces near by two months later. Douglas touched the southern part of Alaska also in the following year, and sought to acquire fame by renaming Dixon Entrance after himself." In 1787, a Russian scientific exploring ex- pedition, of which great things were expected, had sailed from Okhotsk, going eastward along the Asiatic coast. This was under the command [672] D XOTiVHwipmaRPnMaOTiiaBBapipaapviipiiM immm 10 of Billings, an Englishman in the Bussian. service, who had formerly served under Cook. In 1790, a second departure was made, this time from Fetropaulowski. Touching at some of the Aleutian Islands, Eadiak was eventually reached, and in the autumn the return voyage to Fetro- jMiulowski was made. In the following year the expedition again visited Unalaska, sailed north to St. Lawrence Island and the Asiatic coast (where Billings himself left to proceed overland to Russia), returned under Sarychef to Unalaska, wintered there, and in 1792 regained Petro- paulowski. The results of the entire expedition were, however, disappointing. Bancroft writes : — " The geographical results may be set down as next to Alukt, p. 397. nothing, with the exception of the thorongh surveys of Captain's Bay in Illiulik Harbour on Unalaska Island. Every other part of the work had already been done by Cook. • • • • • " The principal benefit derivet from this costly under- taking was the ventilation of abuses practised by unscru- pulous traders on helpless natives. The authorities in Siberia and St. Petersburg became at last convinced that an end must be put to the barbarous rule of the ' promy- shleniki.' The cheapest and easiest way to accomplish this was to grant control of the whole busimss with ' American coasts and islands to one strong Company that might be held responsible to the CSovernment for its conduct." Thus, in the reports brought back by the members of this expedition may be traced the beginning of the future grant of a monopoly. In 1788, vessels from the United States first S«e " Hutory appeared as traders on the north-west coast of com?' p. IM. America. Two vessels, under Kendrick and Gray respectively, arrived, while the Englishmen Meares and Douglas were also trading on the coast. They are mentioned in Bancroft's " His- tory of the North-West Coast," and, though it is not known (except in the case of Douglas' vessel, the " Iphigenia ") that they extended their voyages to what is now recognized as the Alaskan coast, there was at the time no definition separating thij from other parts of the coast. The presenie of these vesseln is thus of interest in connec'ion with the genera' question, though it is not meant to affirm that in t. eir case, or in those of other vessels quoted in iu'. oquent years from the records embodied iu tto< " History of the North-West Co.-'ft," tint the vessels so 11 Nortb-Weit Co. St, pp. 304-213. Alaska, p. 37S. Ibid., p. 885 Ibid., p. 365. Ibid., p. 274. Ibid,, p. 975. North-Wtit Coait, pp. 350-337. Aluka, p. 844. enumerated actually in all instaiiees visited that part of the northern coast laid claim to in 1799 or 1821 by Russia. Id 1789, twelve vessels at least are known to have been trading on the north-west coast. The well-known Nootka seizures by the Spanish occurred in this year. Iq 1Y90, Tidalgo sailed from Nootka, then occupied by Spain, for the purpose of completing the examination of parts of the northern coast which had not been visited by Martinez. He examined Prince William Sound and Cook's Inlet, and called at the Bussian Settlement at Eadiak. In the same year, we are informed that Baranoff, then in charge at Kadiak, found the trading-vessel " Phcenix," Captain Moore, froic the East Indies, in Prince William Sound. At this time, Sweden and Russia being at war, a Swedish cruizer was dispatched to the North Pacific. She visited the Aleutian Islands, but finding there no Qovemment establishments to attack, but only traders living in "abject misery," her Commander not only refrained from disturbing them, but gave some supplies to Pribyloff. In 1791, Malaspina, sailing from Spain, under orders from his Qovemment, on a scientific exploring expeilition, of which one of the objects was to search for a communication from the North Pacific to the Atlantic, visited several places on what is now the Alaskan coast, in- cluding Prince William Sound. Marchand, in the " Solide," from France, on a voyage of trade and circumnavigat'on, was also on the same coast in this year. He examined several places in South-Eastern Alaska, and found the natives to be fully supplied with European goods. Douglas, in the " Iphigenia," also visited Cook's Inlet in thi.s year. Besides these above named; at least eight trading-vessels are known to have been on the coast, of which seven were Americans. In 1792, Cramano, setting out from Nootka, explored Fort Bucarelli, in South-Eastern Alaska, and it is reported that in this year fully twenty-eight vessels were upon the ooasf., at least half of them being engaged in the fur trade. Vancouver (vol. iii, p. 498) gives a list of twenty- one vessels for the same year, divided as follows : — From England 6, from East Indies 2, from 12 Ohina 3, from United States 7, from Pottugal 2, an^ from France 1. On the Asiatic coast, the " Halcyon," Captain Barclay, visited Fetropaulowski for purposes of trade — " But the stupid port authorities would not allow the AUtka, p. 396. Captain to dispose of any of his goods." A French vessel, " La Flavia," arriving at the ibid., p. ase. same place soon after with recommendatory letters from St. Petersburg, was allowed to spend the winter disposing of her cargo, which consisted chiefly of brandy. In 1793, Vancouver, who had been dispatched by the English Government with two vessels, the " Discovery " and " Chatham," for the purpose of finally deciding the existence or otherwise of a communication between the Pacific and Atlantic by the exploration of all romainin/? inlets on the north-west coast, was occupied in the pursuance of this mission in what now con- stitutes South-Eastem Alaska. In the previous year he had explored and surveyed the compli- cated waters of what is now the British Columbian coast. After wintering in the south, he returned to complete his work in 1794 He first surveyed Cook's Inlet to its head, visiting a Bussian post under Zaikof on this inlet. Prince William Sound, Kadiak, and the coast extending to Yakutat Bay were then in turn carefully laid down, and his surveys finally connected with those which he had in the preceding year carried up from the southward. Vancouver found, at this time, the furthest East Russian trading station to be situated at Port Etches, Hinchinbrook Island, in the entrance to Prince William Sound, and this had only been established in the preceding summer. He ascertained, however, that roving expeditions were sent by the Russians much further to the east and south-east along the coast. He "clearly understood that the Russian Govommeat had Vaneouvcr, little to do witli these Settlements; that they were solely '*''• '"' P" ^^'* under the direction and support of independent mercantile Companies. . • . Not the least attention whatever is paid to the cultivation of the land, or to any other object but that of collecting furs, which is principally done by the Indians." Near Yakutat Bay he fell in with the North-Wnt " Jackall," an English trading- vessel, which was ^"*' ''' ^^''' 18 then upon the coast for the third consecutive season, and further to the south-eastward he met with the " Arthur," Captain Barber, from Bengal. These were, of coune, but chance meetings, and from these or other such notices of explorers we are unable to arrive at complete information respecting the number of vessels then engaged in trade in these regions. Almost nothing, can be ascertained as to the trading-vessels occupied on the coast generally in this and the following years ; what little is known is derived chiefly from Vancouver's journals. Vancouver in effect sup- plemented and completed the surveys of the coast of North- Western America already made by Cook. The results of his painstaking and detailed work had the utmost value, and for many years thereafter constituted the sole authori- tative data for the delineation of the coast from Cook's Inlet eastward and southward on the Maps of all nations. His surveys arc ouly at the present day being gradually superseded by more exact work, and his nomenclature has been practically adopted for nearly all places on the coast. Acting on the facts of Russian settle- ment, which led him to believe that the "American Continent and adjacent islands as far to the eastward as the meridian of Kaye's Island belonged exclusively to the Bussian Empire," but having in view also the further extent of the trading enterprises of the Russians, he took possession for Great Britain to a point only as far north as Cross Sound, about latitude 68°. The results of Vancouver's work were fully published in England in 1798, and thus much of the coast which had been examined in earlier years, though in a more or less desultory manner, by the Spaniards, lost the traces of their work which would otherwise have been afforded in the nomenclature of places. Spain, like Russia, guarded too well the secrets of her explorations, the extent of which only became known, in many instances, long afterwards, and then by special research among the buried archives of the State. In 1791, Purtof was sent by BarauolT to effect an establishment at Yakutat Bay, to the east- ward of any then occupied Russian post. Here he found himself running a race for occupation with the men of the rival Ledebef Company. Trouble with the natives at Yakutat was only averted by the presence of Vancouver's vussel. The natives were already found in possesisi '< of [072J E u many guns and plenty of ammunition, showing that European trading-vessels had been there, and at this very time the " Jackall" arrived, and, after Vancouver's departure, Captain Brown assisted Fnrtof against the natives. The names of four trading-vessels on the North-West north-west coast, including the "Jackall," are Cotit, p. 897. all that have been found for this year. 1796 and 1796. Efforts appear to have been chiefly directed by Baranoff (then in charge for the Shelikof Company) to the establishment of the new colony, for which convict settlers had been sent out. In the latter year. Shields, an Englishman in Baranoff's service, was sent in the "Olga " (which be had built at Eadiak), in com- pany with a fleet of canoes, to hunt and trade for furs in Norfolk Sound. 1795. A trader named the " Phcenix." from Ibid., p. S04. Bengal, is noted as having been net, pp. SIS' 817. The names of five vessels trading on the north- west coast are known. Ibid D.S18 S19 1804. Lisianski, of Erusenstem's expedition, arrived at Eadiak in the "Neva," and being apprised of BaranofTs intention of recapturing iiiViipqiiipv^l^ wmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm^imm^ 16 North-Weit CoMt, p. 390. Sitka, sailed again foi that place, and, in October, Sitka was reoooupied and relmilt on a new site. The names of four vessels trading on the north- west coast can bo found in this year. During 1805, Lisianski rorisited Sitka, or New Aluk*, p. 4«S. Archangel, as it was then called. A Treaty was made with the Indians, and the " Neva " sailed with a valuable cargo of furs for China. In this year we hear of two American vessels at New Aichangel, one named the " Juno." The names of six vessels, including the "Juno," are known as trading on the north>west coast. 1806. The Bussian Ambassador Besenoff, who had sailed with Krusenstern in the " Nadeshda," visited the Fribyloff Islands on the Company's brig " Maria." Then he endeavoured to stop the wasteful slaughter of fur-seals which had hitherto been in progress. Writing from Unalaska on his return, he says : — " These islands would be an inexhaustible source of .\litka, p. 446. wealth were it not for the Bostonians, who undermine our trade with China in furs, of which they obtain large numbers on our American coasts I take the liberty, as a faithful servant of your Imperial Miy'eaty, of declaring my opinon that it is very neceusary to take a stronger hold of this country. It is certain that we shall leave it empty- handed, since from fifteen to twenty ships come here annually from Boston to tini'.a" Later in the year Besenoff visited New Archangel. He writes : — " The Kolosh appear to be subdued, but for how long ? n,y.| «, 451, They have been armed by the Bostonians with the best guns and pistols, and have even falconets. All along the Sound they have erected forts. The fierceness and treachery once exhibited by the natives have taught us the greatest caution." The •' Juno " was again at this place in 1806, ibii, p. 4S4. and was purchased, together with her cargo, by Baranoif. Captain O'Cain arrived in the ibid., pp. 478, 479. " Eclipse," and was intrusted with a cargo of furs for Japan, but the venture proved a failure, and the vessel was lost on the way back. The names of four traders only on the north- North-Wmt west coast are known for this year. ^^^ ff- "*• 1807. The " Juno " was dispatched by Besenoff, Aluka,p.481. who had spent the winter at New Archangel, to the Califomian coast for provisions for the support of the colony. The English ship, " Myrtle," Captain Barber, having arrived at 17 North-WMl CoMt, pp. 138, n4. A\uU, pp. 479, 480. Mortb-Wmt Coiit, pp. S34, 81S. Aluka, p. 467. New Archangel, was purchased hy Baranoff, together with her cargo. Six north-west coast traders are known hy name for this year. 1808. The American vessel " Mercury," Cap- tain Ayres, obtained at Eadiak twenty-five bidarkas, and hunten for hunting and trading to the southward, on an arrangement similar to that already made with Captain O'Cain. Four American traders are known to have been on tlio north-west coast in this and the following year. 1809. A conspiracy was formed omong some of the Russian employes at Sitka or New Ar- changel, to kill Baranoff, but was frustrated. 1810. The Russian sloop of war, "Diana" visited Sitka, where the Commander was enter- tained by Baranoff, "together with his officers and the Commanders of several American vessels then in port." Shortly afterwards the American vessels " Enterprise " and " O'Cain " also arrived, and a considerable portion of the cargo of the former was puroha«ed by Baranoff. The "Enterprise" was then dispatched to Canton with furs. Golovin, the Commander of the " Diana," writes: — Ibid., p. 470. " An Americftn sailor, who was teaching English to the boys at Kadiak, without understanding Russian, a Prussian skipper of one of the Company's vessels, and a relative of Baranoff, who had picked up a few hundred English words, composed, previous to our arrival, the Diplomatic Corps of the BuBsian-American Company." North.Wmt Cout, p. 325. Ibid., p. 899. In 1810 and 1811, four vessels were engaged in hunting sea-otter under Russian contracts in this and in the following year. 1811. The " Enterprise " returned from China to Sitka, and was again dispatched to Canton. The Ross Colony, intended chiefly to provide agricultural products for use on the northern coast, was founded in California. After a struggling existence, in which seal and sea-otter hunting was combined with farming, this en- deavour was eventually abandoned in 1841. Besides the four vessels above mentioned, five traders were seen on the southern part of the Alaskan coast, and others are known to have been engaged in trading and hunting in this year. [672] F "■IP'WfSPT 18 North-West Coast, p. 3t9. Alaika, p. Ml. 1812. The American sliip " Beaver " arrived at Sitka with a confidential agent of Astor on board. He disposed of his cargo to Baranoff, but was sent to the Pribyloff Islands for the fur-seal skins in which payment was made. B: tween 1809 and this year, Baranoff made Alaska, p. 460. six additional contracts with vessels from the United States for hunting parties to the south- ward. He supplied Aleut himters, and received a proportion of the skins obtained, chiefly sea- otter skins. During the ,'ears 1812 to 1814 inclusive, the war between England and the United States practically stopped the trading on the north-west coast, which was at this time almost entirely in the hands of Americans. 181'Ji. Captain Bennett, an American, sold two vessels and their cargoes to Baranoff, and was dispatched to the Pribyloff Islands for fur-seal skins in payment. He was afterwards wrecked, with his cargo, on the Sandwich Islands. In this year Lazaref, with two ships sent by the Ibid., pp. 604, aflC. Russian Government, reached Sitka. He quarrelled with Baranoff, and eventually left abruptly ou his rctui-n to Russia. 1815. In this year Ave hear of the " Isabel " being at Sitka. Dr. Shafler, formerly with Lazaref, sailed in her as a passenger, with a mission to the Sandwich Islands. 181G. An expedition sailing from Ej?onstadt in the " Ruric," Captain Kotzebue, in the pre- ceding year, reached Petropaulowski, and there- after touched at St, Ijawrence Island and explored Kotzebue Sound, to the north of Behring Strait. Kotzebue visited the Califoruiau coast and the Sandwich Islands during the winter. Two Ameri'jau vessels are kno' /a to have visited the Russian establishments in this year. 1817. A second, but abortive, attempt at northern exploration was iiiade by Kotzebue, who ou this occasion only reached St. Lawrence Island. Au expedition, under Hagemeister, dispatched Al»»k», p. 610. by the Russian Government in two vessels, reached Sitka. 1818. Hagenieistor, having been instructed ibid., pp. 81 2-JSi 6 to that cft'ect, superseded Baranoff. In the same year the Russian sloop of war "Kamchatka" arrived at Sitka, under command of Golovnin. Roiiuefeuil, a Preuch ii.ival officer, arrived at Ibid., pp. itt, SIS. Sitka in a tradiug-vcssel di8i)atched by f> Bar- Nortb-Wen Coart, p. saS. 19 North-Weit Cooit, p. 338. Alulu, pp 326, 337, Atatkt, p. 538. deaux merchant, ano" named the "Bordelais." Ho obtained Aleut hutters, and proceeded to the Prince of Wales' Archipelago, but there came disastrously into collision with the natives, and returned to Sitka, and thereafter sailed for San Francisco. Various attempts at exploration were also made by the Russians at about this time, but without great results. Roquefeuil found two trading-vessels, one American and the other British, in Alaskan waters in this year. 1819. Hagemeister left Russian America for Kronstodt on the " Kutusof." At this time it is said that — " the Ami I'icaiis absorted most of the trade, bartering fire- arma and nun witli tlie Kolosli in return for skins, of whicli the v obtained about 8,000 a-year, while the Russians tried in vain to compete with them." Ibid., p. 531. North-W£Bt Cout, p. 340. Th'j period had now arrived at which the tweyity years' Charter of the Russian-American Company was about to expire, and, aware of the i.ict that a renewal of the Charter would bo askoi for, the Russian Government instructed Golovnin to inquire as to tlio nature of its operations. His report was not favourable. He writes : — " Throe things are wanting in the organization of the Company's colonies : a clearer definition of the various officers, a distinction of rank, and a regula]- uniform, so that foreigners visiting these parts may see something indi- cating the existence of forts aud troops belonging to tho Russian sceptre — something resembling a regular garrison. At present they can come to no other ccmclusion than that these stations are but temporary fortifications erected by- hunters as a defence against savages." 1820. In this year, and in tlie previous year, tho names of four ti-ading-vcssels operating on the north-west coast are known, but the records are possibly imperfect. mmmmmmm mmmmmfmmm "■!iPfiP" •■^■^•■■■■■■H ^ cc E Printed Jor thevaeo/Ae Foreign Office. September 1 873. CONFIDENTIAL. UNITED STATES. C0KEE8P0NDENCB BIESPXOTIKO /d EXTENT OF MARITIIE HJfilSBICTION AS CLAIMED At VARIOUS TIMES BY THE UNITED STATES. 119A TO 1848. LIST OF PAPERa No. 1, Mr, Jefferson to M. Ternaot .. .. ,. .. One Indosure. 2, Mr. Hammond to Lord Orenville . . . . . , Seven Inclosnres. 3, M. Genet to Mr. Jefferson . . . , . , ' 4. Mr. Hammond to Lord OrenvUlo . . . . . . 5. Mr. Jefferson to M, Genet . , . . . . 6. Mr. Hammond to Lord Grenville Two Indosores. 7. Treaty of Amity, Commerce and Navigation between His Britannic the United States of America, sigu^ at London 8. Mr. Madison to Messrs. Monroe and Pinkney . . 9. Lord Holland and Lord Aackland to Lord Howick . . 10. Lord Holland and Lord Auckland to Lord Howick . . 11. The King's Advocate to Lord Howick .. 1?. Messrs. Momroe and Pinkney to Lord Holland and Lord Anokland 18. Lord Holland and Lord Anddand to Lord Howick. , One Inclosure. 14. Messrs. Monroe and Pinkney to Mr. Madison . . . . One Indosnre. 15. Viacoimt Palmerston to Mr. Grampton , . 16. Mr. Grampton to Visconnt Palmerston . . . , One Incloenre. 17. Mr. Grampton \o Visooont Palmerston . . One Inclosnre. 18. Mr. Addington to the Secretaiy to the Admiralty . . ,^ May May 16, 17, .. (No. 16) Majesty and .'.' (No. 8) May 27, June 10, November 8, July 22, November 19, May 17, November 14, November 14, Novemberl7, November20, November 20, January 3, 1807 17 Page 179a 1 8 9 9 1794 10 11 1806 11 12 18 14 16 16 (N0.18J April April 14, 80, ,. (No, . . (No. 106) August 28, . . October 6, 1848 18 19 19 20 UNITED STATES. Extent of Maritime Jurisdiction as claimed at various times by the United States. (Extract.) HAVIl No. 1. Mr, Jefferson to M. Temant. Philadelphia, May 15, 1793. ING received several raemorlals from the British Minister on subjects arising out of the present war, I take the liberty of inclosing them to you, and shall add au explanation of the determinations of the Government thereon. These will serve to vindicate the principles on which it is meant to proceed, and which are to be applied with impartiality to the proceedings of both parties. They will form, therefore, as far as they go, a rule of action for them and for us. The capture of the British ship " Grange," by the French frigate I'Embuscade," within the Delaware, has been the subject of a former letter to you. On full and mature consideration, the Government deems the capture to have been unquestionably within its jurisdiction ; and that, according to the rules of neutrality, and the protection it owes to all persons while within its limits, it is bound to see that the crew be liberated, and the vessel and cargo restored to their former owners. The Attorney-General of the United States has made a statement of the grounds of this determination, a copy of which I have the honour to inclose yoa I am, in consequence, charged by the President of the United States to express to you his expectation, and, at the same time, his confidence, that you will be pleased to take immediate and effectual measures for having the ship " Grange '*' and her cargo restored to the British owners, and the persons taken on board her set at liberW. I am persuaded. Sir, you will be sensible, on mature consideration, that, in forming these determinations, the GSovemment of the United States has listened to nothing but the dictates of immutable justice ; they consider the rigorous exercise of that virtue, as the surest means of preserving perfect harmony between the United States and the Powers at war. (Signed) TH. JEFFERSON. Inclosure in No. 1. Report. THE Attorney-General of the United States haa the honour of submitting to the Secretary of State his opinion concerning the Seizure of the Ship "Gi-ange." The essential facta are — That the River Delaware takes its riue within the limits of the Uniteil otates ; [557] That, in the whole of its descent to the Altantio Ocean, it is oovered on eaoh side by the territory of the United States ; Tliat, from tide water, to the distance of about sixty miles from the Atlantic Ocean, it is called the River Delaware ; That, at this distance from the sea, it widens and assumes the name of the Bay of Delaware, which it retains to the mouth ; That its mouth is formed by the capes Henlopen and May ; the former belonnncr to the State of Delaware, in property ana jurisdiction, the latter to the State m New Jersey ; That the Delaware does not lead from the sea to the dominions of any foreign nation ; That, from the establishment of the British provinces on the banks of the Delaware to the American llevolution, it was deemed the peculiar navigation of the British empire ; That, by the Treaty of Paris, on the 3rd day of September, 1783, his Britannic Majesty relinquished, with the privity of France, me sovereignty of those provinces, as well as of the other provinces and colonies ; And that the Grange was arrested in the Delaware, within the capes, before she had reached the sea, after her departure from the port of Philadelphi& It is a principle, firm in reason, supported by the civilians, and tacitly approved in the document transmitted by the French Minister, that, to attack an enemy in a neutral territory, is absolutely unlawful Hence the inquiry is reduced to this simple form, whether the place of seizui'e was in the territory of the United States ? From a question originating under the foregoing circumstances, is obviously and properly excluded every consideration of a dominion over the sea. The solidity of our neutral right does not depend, in this case, on any of the various distances clauned on that element by different nations possessing the neighbouring shore ; but if it did, the field would probably be found more extenHive.. and more favourable to our demand, than is supposed by the document above referred to. For the necessary or natural laW of nations, unchanged as it is, in this instance, by any compact or other obligation of the United States, will, perhaps, when combined with the Treaty of Paris in 1783, justify tra in attaching to our coasts an extent into the sea beyond the reach of cannon shot. In like manner is excluded every consideration, how far the spot of seizure wna capable of being defended by the United States. For, although it will not be concedied that this could not be done, yet will it rather appear, that the mutual rights of thft States of New Jersey and Delaware, up to the middle of the river, sttpersede the necessity of such an investigation. No ; the comer stone of our claim .is, that the United States are proprietors of the lands on both sides of the Delaware, from its heaid to its entrance into the sea. The high ocean, in general, it is true, is unsusceptible of becoming property. It h a gift of nature, manifestly destined for the use of all mankind ; incxnaustible in its benefits ; not admitting metes and bounds. But rivers may be appropriated, becatifife the reverse is their situation. Were they open to all the world, they would prove the inlets of perpetual disturbance and discord ; vifould soon be rendered barren by the number of those who would share in their products ; and moreover may be defined. " A river, considered merely as such, is the property of the people through AVhdSe lands it flows, or of him under Avhose jurisdiction that people is." — Grot. b. 2, c. 2, s. 12. " Rivers might be held in property ; though neither where they rise, nor where they discharge themselves, be within our territory, but they join to both, or the s^a. tt is sufficient for us that the larger part of water, that is, the sides, is shut up in oiAr banks, and that the river, in respect of our land, is itself small and insignificant." — Grot. b. 2, c. 3, s. 7 ; and Barbeyrac, in his note, subjoins that neither of those is necessary. " Rivers may be 'he property of whole States." — Puff. b. 3, c. 3, s. 4. " To render a thi ig capable of being appropriated, it is not strictly necessary that we should enclose it, ( t be able to enolose it, within artificial bounds, or such us are diflcrent from its own , ubstanco ; it is sufficient, if the compass and extent of it can be any way determined. And therefore Grotius hath riven himself a needless trouble, when, to prove rivers capable of property, he u'.eth this argument, that, although they are bourded by the land at neither end, but united to the other rivers or the sea, yet it is enough that the greater part of them, that is their sides, are enclosed." — Puff b, 4, c. o, s. 3. " When a nation takes possession of a country in order to settle there, it possesses everything included in it, as lands, lakes, rivers," &c. — ^Vattel, b. 1, c. 22, s. 266. 3 To this list might be added Bynkerehoek and Selden. But tlie dissertation of the former, de dominio maris, oaimot be quoted with advantage in detachment ; and the ivuthority of the latter, on this head, may, in the judifment of some, partake too much of affection for the hypothesis of nuire claumim. As Selden, however, smks in influence on tiiis question, so must Orotiua rise, who contended for the mare liberum; and liis accurate commentator, Rutherforth, confirms his principles in the following passage : — " A nation, by settling ujion any tract of land, which at the time of such settlement had no other owner, acquires, in resnect of all other nations, an exclusive right of full or absolute pronerty, not only in the land, but in the waters likewise that are included within the land, such as rivers, pools, creeks, or bays. The absolute property of a nation, in what it has thus seized upon, is its right of territory."— 2 Ruth. b. 2, c. 9, s G. Congress, too, have acted on these ideas, when, in their collection laws, they ascribe to a State the rivers wholly within that State. It would seem, however, that the spot of seizure is attempted to be withdrawn from the protection of these respectable authorities, as being in the Bay of Delaware, instead of the River Delaware. Who can seriously doubt the identity of the River and Bay of Delaware ? How often are different portions of the same stream denominated differently ? Thifl is some- tiroes accidental ; sometimes for no other purpose than to assist the intercr)urse between man and man, by easy distinctions of space. Are not this river and this bay fed by the springs from the land, and the same tides from the ocean ? Are not both doubly flanked l)y the territory of the United States ? Have any local laws, at any time, provided variable arrangements for the river and the bay ? Has not the jurisdiction of the con- tiguous States been exercised equally on both ? But suppose that the river vaa dried up, and the bay alone remained, Grotius con- tinues the ailment of the 7th section, of the 3rd chapter, of the 2nd book above cited, in the following words :— " By this instance it seems to appear that the property and dominion of the sea might belong to him, who is in possession of the lands on both sides ; though it be open above, as a gulf, or above and below as a strait ; provided it is not so great a part of the sea that, when compared with the lands on botn sides, it cannot be supposed to be some part of them. And now, what is thus lawful to one king or people may be also lawful to two or three, if they have a mind to take possession of a sea, thus enclosed within their lands ; for it is in this manner that a river which separates two nations has first been possessed by both, and then divided. " The gulfs and channels, or arms of the sea, are, according to the regular course) supposed to belong to the people with whose lands they are encompassed' — Putf. b. 4, c. 5, s. 8. Valin, in b. 5, tit 1, p. 685, of his oommentary on the marine ordonnance of France, virtually acknowledges that particular seas may be appropriated. After reviewing the contest between Grotius and Selden, he says, " S'il (Selden) s'en fdi done tenu m, ou plut6t, s'il eiit distingu6 I'ocean des mere particidi&res, et ro6me dans I'ocean, I'^tendue de mer, qui doit dtre cens^e appartenir aux Souverains des cdtes, qui en sont baignSes, sa victoire eAt ^t^ complette." These remarks may be enforced by asking, what nation can be injufre4 ^ its rights by the Delaware being appropriated to the United States ? And to what degree may not the United States be injured, on the contrary ground ? It communicates with no foreign dominion ; no foreign nation has ever before exacted a communliiity of right in it, as if it were a main sea ; under the former and present Governments, the exclusive jurisdiction has been asserted ; by the very first collection law of the United States, passed in 1789, the county of Cape May, which includes Cape May itself, and all the waters thereof, theretofore within the jurisdiction of the State of New Jersey, are com- prehended in the district of Bridgetown ; the whole of the State of Delaware, reaching to Cape Henlopen, is made one district. Nay, unless these positions can be maintained, the bay of Chesapeake, which in the same law is so fully assumed to be within the United States, and which for the length of the Virginia territory, is subject to tlie process of several counties to any extent, will become a rendezvous to all the world, without any possible control from the United States. Nor will the evil stop here. It will require but another short link in the process of reasoning to disappropr.'ate the mouths of some of our most important rivers. If, as Vattel inclines to think in the 294th section of his first book, the Romans were free to appropriate the Mediterranean, merely because they secured hy one single stroke the immense range of their coast, how much stronger must the vindication of the United States be, should they adopt [557] B ^, ^f^^-< IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) r // / ^ <*\<^ £/ A^ s ^ I I.I 11.25 U£|21 150 ^ 1^ ■ 2.2 «* iM 12.0 Lt K IIMa m 1.4 <% ? 71 0^ y /^ Sciences CorfXDralion 23 WEST MAIN STtllT WEBSTIR.N.Y. 14SM (716)S73-4S03 T &5" « mmmm maxims for prohibiting foreigners from gaining, without permiiMion, aoceas into the heart of their country. ITiis inquuy might be enlarged by a minute disoussion, of the praottoe of foreign nations in such ciroiunstances. But I pass it by, because the United States, in; the commencement of their career, ought not to be precipitate in declaring their i^probation of any usages (the procise fiusts concerning which we may not thoroiwhly understand), until those usaees shall have grown into principles, and are incorpoiated^bto the Law of Nations, and because no usage has ever been accepted whi«»i shakes the foregoing prihciplca , -o a The conclusion then is, that the " Orange " has been seixed on noutnJ ground. , If this be admitted, the duty arising from the illegal act is restitution. (Signed) EDMUND RANDOLPH. No. 2. Mr. Hammond to Lord OrenviUe. <^^),, „,, ,, . , , PhilmMphia, May 17, 1799. ON the 9th of last month, the iVench frigate the "Embuscade" arrived ft«a Kochefort at Charleston. After having landed Mr. QenAt at that pkoe, the frigate proceeded on a cruize to the northward Liverpool. Vhe " Embuaoaae " is now at Chester, in the Delaware, about fifteen miles from heuce, atad is expAoted here eveiy hour with her prizes. Thb " Embuscade " n pierced for thirty-six guns, but mounts thirty-two only. , She is commanded by a Captain Bompart, and carries 250 men. ^colurive of this vessel a filot was lUwut a week ago put on board of another I^ndi armed ship, but of what force . have not yet been aUe to ascertain. It is also currently reported here that a tliiid Frmoh arme>' Tessel is now hoveri^ upon these coasts. Asthec^ptur^ tiie Law of Nations, The disauncms consMuent upon this demancT « ill most probably detain the " Embuscade ' here for some days at least As the captain's instructions from the French Executive Council are to cruise alontr the American coasts, there can, I think, exist littie doubt that she will continue in the pursuit of that object fur some time longer, previous to either her return to France or to her proceeding to the West Indies. I have^ Ac. (Signed) GEO. HAMMOND. I c^ptur^ made in the iMilaware are unquestionably illegal, 'being contrary to Nations, I shall, as soon as the .prises arrive here, demand their riastoration. Indosure 2 in No. 2. Mr. Hamnumd to Mr. Jefferaon. PhiladeljAia, May 2, 1793. THE Undersiffued, His Britannic Mfueaty's Minister Plenipoteutiary to the United States of America, has the honour of submittmgto the Secretuy of State the following partioukrs rektive to the capture, in the Bay of DeUware, of the British ship " Grange,^ commanded by Edward Hutchinson, and bound from this port to Liverpool. On Thanday, the 25th of April last, at 11 o'clock ajn., as tiie ship "Orange," having a Delaware pilot on board, was lyine at anchor near Uie buc^ of the Brown, in the Bay of Dekware, a frigate appeared oflTthe Gapes, under Britid> colours, which she contimted to dispky until she approached within half a mile of the "Grange," at which time thev were struck, the colours of France hoisted in their place, and themj^te proved to be the IVench frigate "Embuscade," Bompart commander. On the "Grange's" showiiw the colours M her nation, the frigate fired a Aat over her, m a signal to surrenoer, wUoh Ca]>tam Hutohinaon immediately obeyed. The captain of the frigate then sent his boat, witJi thirty or forty men, who took possession of tiie " Grange" as a priae to the French RepuUio, and sent the crew prisoners gun ship waa on the coast, and had taken a {Mlot, intending for Philadelphia ; that this information seemed to deter the «<%ptMn for some time bam endeavouring to get out to sea, but he at length concluded to proceed to the anchorage withb Cape Henlopen, (tnd await there for a fidr wind to carry him clear off the coast ; that at about five o'clock in tiie monung of the 25th dajr of the same month, bdng at andior in about thirteen fothom water, within about a niile to the westward of tiie buoy of the Brown, with the lighthouse on Oaoe Henlopen in view, at the distance of about twelve miles, and bearing south b;^ east half east maa thence, and Gape May bearing to tiie aouthward of east, A lan» slup hove in suht, standing up the bay, under £ngli£ colours ; that when she got within about two mOeS of the <* Orange," which continued at anchor as aforesaid, the said huge ship hauled down her colours, and continued her course up the bay, until she amved within hail of the " Grange," and then hoisted French colours ; that upon this Captam Hutchinson hoisted English colours, and immediately thereupon a ball discharged from aud laive ship passed over the « Orange ;" that the " Orange's " colours were lien struck, and about .thirty people coming on bmnl her in boats from the large ship, declued her to be a prize to the frigate " Embuacade'" and took possessi^rd Hutchinson master, bound to liveipool, dec&res that having agreed for the passage of bLnuclf and wife in the said ship, they embarked at Chester tiie 19th ultim j, and g^uallv dropped down the river to Beedy Island, where being for some time wind-teund, tnev heard that a French frigate was on the coast, and had taken a Delaware pilot on board intending for I^iladel- phm ; that this inteUigmoe appeared to deter Captain Hutdunson fix>m attempting to Sit out to sea so soon as he otherwise might have done ; but that he at lenj^ oon- uded to proceed to the anchorage within Cape Henlopen, and then wtdt for a fair wind to cany bun dear off the coast. That beinjf here at anchor within about a mile of the buoy of the Brown with the lighthouse of Cmjc Henlopen, and Cape May in view, at about 10 o'clock am. of the 2Sth ultimo a large ship bora down upon them, and when at the distance of about a quarter of a mile hoisted a French ens^. That upon Cktptain Batdtinson's displaying an English one, a ball was dischaigeo from the Kgate iiddch passed over their heads. That the " Grange's " colours were then struck, and a number of men coming on board informed them that she was prize to th "Embusoade," a French frigate of forty guns. That the "GrangeV' crew, all but tha steward, wero soon after sent on board the frigate, and the captain followed with the officers of the frimte ht the evening. That the oabinpassensers, four in number, wera treated with avffity. and allowed to remain in the " Cfranjje,"'^ where they occupied the cabm unmolested tall 28th, when by special permission obtamed from the captain of the frigate, they were permitted to leave the vessel and take their stores on shore with them. The deponent frirther saith, that no alteration was made in the letters on the stem of the " Grange," not did he discover that Captain Hutchinson had provided any ftlse papers whereby to impose her on strangers as an American vessel ,^„, i~i~ J i—r (Signed) GEORGE DILLWYN. r657] 'm tndosoro 6 in Na 2. Mr, Bwitnond to Mr. Jefferson. PhUaddphia, i^a^j 8, 1793, THE Underaigned, Uia Britanq}p ICiyestT's Minister Plenipotentuu^ to ^e United States of America, requests p'jrmissioQ to teaail to the attrition of the SeQretai>jr of State the memorial which was presented to hion on the 2nd instant relative to the cuitura of the British ship " Orange " by ihe FreiMjfci frigate tb^ " Embuscade." The falgeol of that memorial being merely a question of fito^ iSe Undersigned entertuned liopes |hat <^ confirmation or oontradiotion of the testwtony he adduced misht have bcwn so earily procured as to have enabled the Executive Qovemment of the United States befoife this time to have formed some determination v^foa it But having been disappointtd in these hopes, he ventures to indulge the expeotiition that the dewy may Qot oe of nudi longer duration, and that he may reomve an earhr answer on a matter in wbii^ he cannot but conceive the two countries deeply inteiestedL Indeed he trusts that tbis renewi^ of his solicitation cannot be regarded as too importunate when it is cons^red thai a British ship has been a week in the harbour oC Philadelphia in a state of arrest and detention under a capture which he presumes to b* illegal, and in uonsequeqoe of v^iii^ a number of His Majesty's subjects remain in a condHifpn of rigorous and unjust confinfr- ment. The Undersigned is fiurther impelled to desire m speedy an answer $g may b^ convenient, by the consideration of his great anxiety to tiaiiBniit to the Eing^ Qoverii> ment in England the final resolution of we Executive G^ovenuoent of the United States on this important point, on the decision of which is to rest the d,enee of fUture security and protection which vessels belonging to the subjects of the King iub Master, and of the other Powers now eno^ed in war with France, may expect to receive in the ports and harbours of the Unitea State& I hav^ &0. (Signed) . GEO. HAMMOND. Indosure 7 in No. 2. Mr. Jefferson to Mr. Hammond. (Extract.) Philadelphia, MayU, 1793. YOUB several memorials of the 8th instant have been laid before the President, as had been that of the 2nd, aa soon as received. They have been oonudered, with all the attention and the impartiality which a firm determination could inspire, to do what is equal and right between all the belligerent Powers. The capture of the British ship " Grange " by the French fngate " FEmbufwade " has on enquiry been found to have taken {dace within the Bay of Delaware and jurisdii>- tion of the United States, as stated in your memorial of the 2nd instant, the Government is therefore taking measures for the liberation of the crew and restitution of the ship and cargo. No. 3. M. Oenet to Mr, Jefferson. (Translation.) Pluladdpkia, May 27, 1793, the Znd i/ear of the (Extract^ ^ Jtepublio of France. THE last point which remabs to be spoken o( Sir, is the capture of the K"g ^« h ship " Grange " by the " Embuscade " frigate. The learned condusions of the Attomey-Oeneral of the United States, and the deliberations of the American Government, mve been on this subject the rule of my conduct I have caused the prize to be jnven up ; and, although of considerable valu^ mv brave brethren, the seamen of the " &nbuscade," have readily concurred in a measure which I represented to them as a proper mean to convince the American Government of our deference and of our fnendahip. (Signed) GENET. No. 4. Mr. Ilrfmmond to Lord OrmviUe. (No.l5.) (Extract) Philadelphia, June 10, 1793. I HAVE now the aatisfiictioa o* infonning your Lordship that the ship " Orange " of Liverpool, which, as I mentioned in my last, had been captured within the Bay of Delaware by the French frigate the " Embuscade," has been restored to the agent fur the owners raiding in this city. The restitution was delayed for some days under different friroloos raetenoes by Mr. Qenet and the commander of the fr^te, but thev were at length under the neoessity of complyiiu; with the repeated requisitions of this GoTemmeni. I recommended to the agent and master of the "Orange," immediately after the recovery of the vessel, to endeavour to obtun by process of law some compen- sation for the damages resulting from the detention (and the confinement of the crew) of the ship. Mr recommendauons were, however, ineffectual, as in consequence of some menaces which nad been thrown out by the saUors of the frigate, they did not deem it conustent with attention to their personal safety to pursue the proper legal measures for the purpose. No. 6. ' Mr, Jefferson to M. Genet. Sir, Oermantown, Xovemier 8, 1793. I HAVE now to acknowledge and answer your letter of September 13, wherein you desire that we may define the extent of the line of territorial protection on the coasts of the United States, observing tiut Governments and Jurisconsults have different views on this subject It IS certain that, heretofore, they have been much divided in opinion as to the distance from their sea coasts to which they might reasonably claim b. right of prohibiting the commitment of hostilities. The greatest distance, to which any respectable assent among nations has been at any time given, has been the extent of the human sight, estimated at apwoids of twenty miles, and the smallest distance, I believe, claimed by any nation whatever, is the utmost range of a oannon ball, usually stated at one sea- league. SovoB intermediate distances mive also been insisted on, and that of three sea*leagues has some authority in its fitvour. The character of our coast, remarkable in considerable parts of it for aoiaitting no vessels of size to pass near the shores, would entitle us, in reason, to as brosJ a margin of protected navigatioi. as any nation whatever. Not propoains; however, at this time, and without a respectful and friendly communica- tion with the Fowets interested in this navigation, to fix on the distance to which we may ultimately insist on the tight of protection, the President giv08 instructions to the Officers, acting under his autiiority, to consider those heretofore given' them as restrained for the present to the distance of one sea-league, or three geographical miles from the sea shores. This distance can admit of no opposition, as it is recognised by Treaties between some of the powers with whom we are connected in commerce and navigation, and is as little or less than is claimed by anv of them on their own coasts. Furtiier occasions will b« taken to enter into explanations with them, as to the ulterior extent to which we may reasonably carry our jurisdiction. For that of the riven and bavs of tiie United States, the laws of the several States are understood to have made provision, and they are, moreover, as being landlocked, within the body of the United States. Examining, by this role, the case of the British brig " Fanny," taken on the 8th of May last, it appears from the evidience that the ca^ure was made four or five miles from the land, and consequently without the line provisionally adopted by the President, as before-moitioned. I have, *c. (Sig- >d) TH. JEFFERSON. 10 No. 6. Mr. Hammond to Lord OrermUe. (Extract.) PkUtuMphia, July 22, 1794. THE Jetter of Mr. Jtffenon (Inolonin 1) ectsbUdna proyiaionally tiie dktanoe froc> the sea shora rtf the United SUtet, in whioh their tomtorial protieotion shall be exercised, at one aea-leagu«. Though ihia ia the moat contraoted of the different diatanoes ivhioh Mr. Jefferaon oitea, yet as its operation viU apply ec[uaUy to all the belligerent powera, I thought it proper in my anawer 2 to aoquieaiw m the regulation witl^ut any comment, ^ (Signed) GEO. HAMMOND. Incloeure 1 in No. 6. Mr. Jefferaon to Mr. Hammond, Sir, Oermantown, November 8, 1798. THE President of the Unitfld States, thinking that before it shall be finally decided to what distance from our sea shores the teiritoriu protection of the United States shall bo exercised, it will be proper to enter into friendly conferences and explanations with the powers chiefly interested in the navioation of the seas on our coasts, and relying that convenient occasions may be taken for uieae hereafter, finds it necessary in the mean time to fix provisionally on some distance ibr the present government of these questions. You are sensible that veiy different opiniona and cuima have been heretofore advanced on tliis aubjeot. The greatest distance to which any respiJctaUe assent among nations has been at any time given, has been the extent of the human sight, estimated at upwards of twenty mUes, and the anudlest distance, I believe, daimra by any nation whatever is the utmost range of a cannon ball, usually stated at one sea league. Some intermediate distancea have alao been insisted on, and that of three sea leagues has some authority in its &vour. The character of our coast, remarkable in considerable parts of it for admitting no veaaeb of axe to paas near the ahorea, would entitle ua in reaaon to as broad a margin or protected navigation aa any nation whatever. Beaerying, however, the ultimate extent of this for fature deliberation, the Freaident gives instructions to the officers acting nndeir lua authority to oonmder those heretmore given thein aa restrained for tiie present to the distance of one sea league or three geographical milea from the aea shores. This distance can admit of no op) todfioa, at it is recognized by treaties between some of the Powers with whom we ar^ connected in commerce and navigation, and ia as little or lees than is daimed b> any of them on their own coasts. For the jurisdiction of the rivers and bajrs of the Unived States, the laws of the several States are understood to have made provision ; and they are moreover^ as being land looked, within the body of the United otatea Examining by this rule the case of the British brig " Fauny," takm on the 8th ci May last, it appeara from the evidence that the capture waa made four or five miles from the land, and consequently without the line provisionally adopted by the President as before mentioned. I have, ke. (Signed) TK JEFFERSON. IndoBure 2 in No. 6. Mr. Hammond to Mr. Jefferson. Sir, Latisdoivn, November 22, 1793. I HAVE the honour of acknowledging the receipt of your letter of the Sth instant relative to the distance from the sea shore in which the territorial protection of iba United States shall be exercised. I shall be at all times ready to enter into any friendly conferences and explanations 11 tipon tibk ittl^eot, uid in the mean. time it becomes mj duty to aoquieaoe in any regolatione whioh the GoTernment of the United States may judge proper to establian wUh r^gaid to the extent of its own juriad'"^'"". I liave, tee. (Signed) GEO. HAMMOND. Na7. Ssetro^Jirom Artide XXV. tf the TreaH/ of Amity, Commeree and Kamgatum between Hie Britannie M^99 beyond the ranos of a^ cannon shot» or three miles (^ts usual interpretation) mu^ irPStitedil be oon^^red as ft oonc^on, and only justified by the peculiar oiroumstancea of the oai^'^ IH^ . adfuitted that, the range of a cannon «hot» or tiiree miles,. was the usual eiitent of maritime juriadiotioi^ but urged the, polioy of our conoedbg a greater distance, and«on< duded with e^qneering their anxiety to know the extent of^eatipi^ationa in thiwr Sivovu whicli our Qoveriuneiit was prepftred to accede to. Indeied, upon otlwr jpoUtt as well as this, we b^ leave to vtf» the neoesnty of acceleratui^ the negodation ; tM as most of tiie material questions have beto discussed at graat length bebwitlen ua,'.we -aie anxious to be in.,pQsaesq^ of your Lordship's instructions, to be enabled to state oi^ most of them (eepedally the Artide of juriaoiction i^ that delating .to ^ d^nnutoMa trade between the enemies' colonies and Europe) the views and &iai''detenn&ktion of His M^esty's (Government. We have, kc wmmm 18 No. 10. ,,',..•.(, ' £ofdBMmdtMJMt^A^iMtndk>£^ My Lord, Holland Htme, November 14, 1806. iKdaddatiiM^ oTthAMUBet otxm pbl^ flMlMltbli: wti b^'le4t« iblaj hetim you the fbttsiHntf obM^ttkwl on Uie aatara of the otten^n of jurijdiotion auggeated 1^ the American Cummiaaionera, on the n*l Tii)ue of auch a oonoeaaion compared with' that whihh ChMy MMItt to M',to)MA> It. aa «rdl IM ^tMboiiA whUh in ifii^ reach the oouctry till th^paaidoiM of tfa^ pio^liave io a grMt roeaaiire subsided. iniou^ daima of aq esdiouion in jurisdiction beyond the common shot, or the three milea have been asMnrted and lOainwned in piurtiailar instenoes br most maritime poweta, and eapedally by ocirselves and ^e SpimiaKls, we meet 'with few iiostanbes of a reooanition of Bi^ dnnla in treatiea, probaibty 'owing to tite unreasonable ext«ii to vhi^ the leepeetiTe .honour of nations h»4 b«en pledged to support them. The aoqui- eseence in the right of fidMiries at a oondderable distance from the coast, aometimes at twenty leagues, and the anbmiaaiim to revenue laws, such as our hovering acts, &c, might indeed be signed with some jdauubility aa a proof of the exception allowed by nationa to the general limitation of maritime ;t«otioQ of a league to our enemies and to our oeserten b. tne American Senrice, and a fear has ako been expressed by a very intelligent sea Officer, that the dMoulty of asoertainmg the distanoe would add to the frequency of the disputes. But without dwelling on the uncertainty of the criterion at present resorted to for ascertaining the distance, vis., the depth of the water, a reference to the oases whidi have occurred during this snd the late war would unply prove that as far as the practice of our oruizenls concaved, the ftresent limits of jurisdiction are no security against mistake, or .at least agninst itigation. We might, on the other hand, derive some little advantage from the claim it wot ' justify of an extended jurisdiction and consequent protection of revenue and oommerae on th« coasts of our colonial possession& But the chief benefit we could expect to derive from it is tbn conviction in the American public of our oonoiliatoiy dispodtion towards them, tm object which the knguage and conduct of Mr. Monroe and Mr. Finkney have jpersuaded us that they and the American Government have as much at heart as any ot those which were the immediate causes of their nussion. They are anxious to remove the oauaes which I I to the misunderstanding between the two countries ; but it is obvious that they are mo anxious to prevent the oonseaueuces of that misunderstanding, The ferment occasioned by it is considered by them as tne chief obstacle to the adtiption of a system more friendly to Great Britain, and iu ur^png the extension of jurisdiction they evidently consider tjie effect on the public mind m America more than the intrinsic value of the aoquiaition. We have, Ac (Signed) VASSALL HOLLAND. AUCKLAND. No. 11. The KiTi^a Advocate to Lord Howick ^ My Lord, Lincoln'e Inn Fidda, November 17, 1806. I HAVE had the honour to receive vour Lordship's private letter of yestenWa date, incloung two letters from Lord Holland and Lord Auckland, in relati recognition or acqui«<»ence of other mtiona. PosmUjr the concession might h-vo been origmally imnted in consideration of the Englidi keeping those seas free fror mt«^ Be that as it may, and whether this privilege would now be admitted or miuutained, fstill l. ing a special privUege fouuded upon usage it is obvious that it gives no claim to tuioilar privilcttes not so sanctioned on the ^art of other Statec or that this exoeptimi sliOiJd become the general rule, contrary to {niudple and unsupported by usagu. On these cmuriderations I am i? opinion tliat no right exists in the United States for demandbg the extension of their territory at tea bejrond cannon shot or one league from the shore. And if it is to bo c(mceded, it must be in oonraderation of oorresponifing conoeaaions and radprocal advantages. J^ 7*^ *** proper, therefore, to suggest what may be the inconveniences to be appre- hended from th0 oonoeasion, in order to estimate the extent of the reciprocal demand to be fbunded on it. !•, The inoonyenienoB of extending any rule bvjrond its reason; which rendeitt it indefinite and arbitrary. If the right ot territory is to extend to two leagues, may not a demand be set up to extend it to twenty or 200 1 2. The incoiivenienee of the precedent by which other nations wiB be induced to apply fer nmilar concessions. The extension of tenitoiy in ftvour of the United States may poaaiUy not be attended with oonsiderabl'>i practical e^ets, but if the rule became general, it might veiy materially aflbot the interests of this conntiy in the exeidse of its maritime rk^ta^ when applied to the coasts of Europe, by protectmg the oommeroe of the enemy to uie extent, in immy instances, of entirely defeating tfie power of capture. 8. The undue advantage which give to the enemy, not only extending their means of rafbge, but by enabling them to capture British vessels or feitish goods on board neutral and even American veeseb, in situations which Biitish cruizera cannot capture the property of the enemy, nor even thdr cnrasera which may be there preying upon tlie commerce dTHis Ifigesty's snlgeots, for I do not understand that ower nations have granted this extension to the jurisdiction of the United States ; so that, while to Great Britain the jurisdiction is to extend to two leagues, to other nstioBs the distanoe of cannot shot Will oontinue to be the rule. This last inconvenience might in its degree be considerably obviated by restricting tlie extended territorial right to American ships only, so that the vessels of the enemy, and of all other countries, should be still liable to be visited and captured as usual at the distance of three miles from the shore. " ^ This restriction to the jncesraon would also tend to remove much of the iucon- venienoe objected to it in some of the otb;r respeots. These, my Lord, are the oheervaiiors which occur to me upon the subject, and which (as desired) I furnish without delay. Trusting that your Lordship will overlook tha hasty and imperfect manner in 'tfhjoh tbey may m expressed, (Signed) J. NICHOLL i/i'l'iUI r«s7i E ■^"^■wfipp^ ■*9P'Pn wmmmmmm 19 No. 12. Measrs. Monroe and Pinknei/ to Lord HoUand and Lord AwhUtnd, Novpinber 20, 1806. THE Undenugned, CummiasionerB Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of America, had the honour at their last conference to state to Lord HoUand and Lord Auckland their anxious wish that the conventional arrangements which the Under* signed expect with confidence from the just and amicable dispomtion of His Mt^esty's Government should not be longer post^ned. In recapitulating to their Lordships, in a morrprecise form, the very urgent considerations by' wnich that wish has been prompted, the Undersigned persuade themselves that thar Lordships will see only another proof of their unfeigned desire that the basis upon which they trust it inll lie practicable to place the relations of the two countries may, for the happiness of both, derive strength and permanency from reciprocal good will, as well as from mutual interest. The Undersigned venture to believe that in the dischaige of the important trust confided to them by their Grovemment, they have not forsotten what was due cither to personal attention and accommodation, or to the acknowledged delicacy and dijBlicidty of some of the topics of discussion. At the present stage of the negotiation, however, they are not aware that any reasons exist on either side for farther dday ; and they feel assured that their Lordships will not fail to give to :>ae inducements to despatch their full efiect Exclusive of the evident tendency of protracted discussions to excite uneasy sensations in both countries, the consequences of which may not be completely removed bv that which, if seasonably applied, had been stifficient to prevent them ; exclusive of iuo value which in a general view, a friendly promptitude would necessarily Impart, in the entimation of the Government and people of the United States, to an adjustment of their differences with Great Britain ; the Undersigned have had the honour to sugeest for their Lordships' consideration the following motive to an early condusion of ^eir labours. It is too obviously iir>portant to require to be enlarged upon, that the result of the mission of the Undersignea should be communicated to their Government during the approaching annual session of the Congress, in season to be acted upon at that session. The Senate of the United States must in their executive character, pronounce upon that result as the constitutional advisers of the President, and, if the Treaty should be ratified, the Congress may, and probably will, be oalled upon in its legislative character, to assist in executing it. The annual Session commences on the first Monday in the next months and must terminate, with the functions of the present House of Representatives, on the 3rd of MaroL But if the Treaty should not oe made within the next three or four weeks, it is scarcely possible that it should reach the United States sooner than the middle or last of February, when the Session will be on the point of dosing. The Undersigned are so entimy convinced of the force of this single consideration, that they deem it unnecessary to insist upon other topics of great wei^t tending to the same condusion. They might otherwise recall to their Lordships' attention the anxiety with which the issue of this negotiation cannot but be expected here, as well as in America, the various interests which it involves, and the feelings, individual and national, which it ought to tranquillize. The UnderRigned, &o. (Signed) JAS. MONROE. WM. PINKNEY. No. 13. Lord HoUand and Lord Auckland to Lord Howick. My Lord, Foreign Office, November 20, 1806. AFTER many and faVL discussions, the American Commissioners have given us to understand that they cannot accept the project marked A, and would prefer (whatever the resulting inconvenience may be) to have no Artide or explanation whatever ; and they expressed a disposition to admit aq Artide to the following effect : — 1. A redtal of special droumstance^ loadity, remoteness, snelvi'-.^ shores, tec 2. In consideration thereof that British vessels shall not stop, search, or molest the 17 vaaeh or the Umted States or of other nations within two marine leagues from the Bhore of the said States ; but that the said stipulation shaU not take e^t in respect to the ships of any nation whwh shaU not have agreed equaUy to adopt the limit afJresaid. in which case the hmit shall be one marine leagaa ^ " ^ ' 3. And the vessels of Great Britain shallbe protected within the said limit. We have, &o. (Signed) VASSALL HOLLAND. AUCKLAND. Indosure in No. 13. (A.) . . AND tl»t an violations of maritime and territorial jurisdiction may be prevented It M agreed tlwt toe armed vessels belonging to the United Kingdom of Gr4t Britain and Ireland, shall be restrained from seizing, searching, stopping, or otherwise interrupting or molesting vessels, to whomsoever belonging, within the harboun. nf the United States or within <»nnon shot of the shore of the said State, or within the distance of one marine league of the said shore. Aiid the United Stat^ on their part, agree that they wiU not permit the vessels or goods belonging to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, to be captured or mole^ by any Power at War with the United Kingdom within the harbours of the United States, or within the aforesaid distance from then- shores. No. 14. Measrs. Monne and Pinkney to Mr. McuHuon. (Extrart.) . ,. , , London, January 3. 1807. . lUliJtUth Article establishes the maritime jurisdiction (^ the United States to the distance of five marine miles from their coast, in &vour of their own vessels and thtf unarmed vessek of all other Powers who may acknowledge the same limit. l^iB Government contended that three marine miles was the gr^test extent to which the pretension could be carried by the Law of Nations, and resisted, at the instance of the! Admiralty Mid the law officers of the Crown, in Dootors'Commons, the conoessionwhich wa« supposed to be made by this aiTangement with great earnestness. The Ministrv seemed toviewour daim m the light of an innovation of dangerous tendency, whose admission, espe- cially at the present time, might be deemed an act unworthy cf the Government. The outrages lately committed on our const, which made some provision cf ihe kind neuessary as a lueM lesson to the commanders of their squadrons, and a repwation for the insults offered to our Government, ucreased the difficulty of obtaining any a^mmodation whatever. The British Commissioners .lid not faU to represent thfit trfiibh is contained in this Article as a strong proof of a conciliating disposition in their Government towards the Government and people of the United States. The limit estaUidied was not so extenave as that which we had contended for, and expected to have obtaihed ; we persuade ourselyes, however, that the great object which was contemplatied by aiiy arrangement of the sulyeot, will result from that which has been made. The Article in the Treaty, in oninexion with the oauses whi«A produced it, forms an interesting occurrence in the hi^oTy of our ooautnr, which cannot fell to produce the most salutary consequences. " It js fr J to presusne. tjiat the sentiment of respect which Great Britain has shown by this meaiure for t! e United States, will be felt and observed in future by her squadrons in their Qonduot on our ooest, and ttt our hays and harbours. It is equally fair to presume that the cSiunple of consideration which it afibrds in their favour by a nation so vastly prepondenuit at sea, will be followed by other Powers. [567] E 2 ■iipmp mmmummmimm 18 Inolosure in No. 14. Article XII of Treatvof Amity, Commerce, and Navigation, bettpeen Ber Brttam^ Majesty and the United States ofAmervau AND whereas it is expedient to make special proTisions respecting the maritime jurisdiction of the High Contracting Parties on the coast of their respective possessions in North America on account of peculiar circumstances faelongin|; to those coasts, it is agreed that in all cases where one of the said High Contracting Pktrties shall be engaced in war and the other shall be at peace, the belligerent Powwsbdl not stop, except for the purpose hereafter mentioned, the vessels of the neutral Power, or the unarmed vessels of other nations, within five marine miles from the shore belonging to the said neutral Power on the American seas. FiXiVkded that the said stipidation shall not take effect in favour of the ships of any nation or nations which shall not have agreed to inspect the limits aforesaid as the line of maritime jurisdiction of the said neutral State. And it is farther stipulated, that if either of the High Contiiicting Parties shall be at war with any nation or nations which shall not have agreed to respect the said spedal limit cr line of maritime jurisdiction herein agreed upon, such Contracting Party shall have tiie right to slop or search any vessel beyond the limit of a cannon shot, or three marine miles from the said coast of the neutral Power, for the purpose of ascertaining the nation to which such vessel shall belong ; and with inspect to the ships and property of ti»e nation or nations not having agreed to respect the aforesaid Ime of jurisdiotton, the belligerent Power shall exercise the same rights as if this Article did not exist, and theuveral provisions stipulated by this Article shall have full force and effect only during the con- tinuance of the present Treaty. ^ No. 16. Viacowit Palmerston to Mr. Orampton. (No. 18.) ""' I OBSERVE in the.Vti» Article of the Tr^tj A^h^f^tS^^^^ and Mexico, which was signed on the 2nd of Februanr last, thitt the boandarr Itne between the two Repwbhos w defined as commencing in "the Gulph of Mexico tlow leagues fi-om land, opposite the mouth of the Rio GraiSe." ^ the lenor of this Article appears to invdve an assumption of juriadiotioii on the part of the United States and of Mexico over tiie sea beyond the oanal limit of «» manne league (or three geographical miles) which is acknowledged by intematicnat knr and practice as the extent of territorial jurisdictkm over the sea that wasfaas tiie eoMto ot »»te8, 1 have to instruct you to draw the attention of the Unttad States' OovttnBMnt to this naattOT, and to state in writing that, in order U prevent fiiton miaunderBtMidraaL Her M^estys Government think it right to deckure that they cannot aoavieMeintiS* extent of mantime juriadwtion assumed by the United Stetea and by Hatico in tha Article m question. ' ^^ You will say that this step is the more neoessanr on the nut of Bic Maimitr't Government, because the Gulph of Mexico is a great thofoughfikr«^maritim& cnunwU and IS not hke a bay or creek which can by its natun be susceptible of beiiw subiMted to exclusive dominion. "-~-s -i^jw.^. I have instructed Her M^esty-s Cbargi d'Aflhires in Mexido to addiw m ■^t^T declarauon to the Mexican Government. I am. See. (Signed) PALMIHS10N. 19 No. 16. Mr. Crampton to Viseount PaJmenUm. — {Receiwd May 17.) So. 64.) J Lord, Wadiii^on, AprQ 30, 1848. I HAVE the honour to acknon-lodge the receipt of your Lordship's despatch Na 18 of iiie 1 4th instant, and I have the honour to inclose herewith a copy of the note whidi, in obedience to the instructions contained in that despatch, I have addressed vo the United States' Qovemment, stating that Her Mtyest^^s Qovemment think it right to dedare that they cannot acquiesce in the extent of maritime jurisdiction assumed by the tlnited States and Mexico in the fifth Article of the Treaty betveen those Powers which was signed on the 2nd of February last, by which the boundary line between the two republics is defined as commencing " in the Gulph of Mexico, three leagues from land, opposite the mouth of the Bio Grande." I have, &C. (Signed) JOHN F. CRAMPTON. Indosure in No. 16. Mr. CrampUm to Mr. Buchanan. Sir, Wcuiiington, April 30, 1848. I HAVE been instructed by Her Majesty's Government to call the attention of the United States to that part of the Vth Article of the Treaty of Peace between the United States and Mexioo, signed on the 2nd February, by which the boundary line between the two Bepublics is defined as commencing in " the Gu^ph of Mexico, three leagues from hmd, opposite the mouth of tiia Rio Grande." As the tenor of this Article appears to Her Majesty's Government to iavolve an assumption of jurisdiction on the part of the United States and Mexioo, over the sea, beyond the usual limit of one marine league (or three ge<»raphical miles) which is acknow- ledged bv international law and practice as the extent of territorial jurisdiction over the sea which washes the coasts of States, I have been directed to state to the United States' Government that in order to prevent future misunderstandmg. Her Majesty's Govern- ment think it right to declare that they cannot acquiesce in the extent of maritime juiisdiotion assumed by the United States and by Mexico In the Article in question. I am fbrther instructed to remark that this step is the more necessary on the part of Her Mi\{esty's Government, because the Gulph of Mexioo is a great thorough&re of maritime oommeroe, and is not like a bay or creek, which can by nature be susceptible of beinffsubjeoted to exclusive dominion. £[er Miyeaty's Charge d'Affidres in Mexico has been instructed to address a similar dodaratioD to the Mexican Government. I have, &c. (Signed) JOHN F. CRAMPTON. No. 17. Mr. Crampton to Vi$eount PakneraUm. — {Roeeivtd Septmbw 15.) (No. 105.) My Loid, WatMngton, August 28. 1848. WFFH reference to my despatch No. 54 of the 30th of April last, in which I had the honour to inform your Lordship that I had, in obedirace to the instructions con- tamed in your Lordship's desr \toh No. 18 of the 14th of the same month, addressed a note, d which a copy was m.-'osed, to the United States' Government, stating that Her M^esty's Government thought it right to declare that they cannot acquiesce in the extent of maritime jurisdiction assumed by the United States and Mexico in the fifth Article of the Treaty between those Powers signed on the 2nd of February last, by which ihe boundary line between the two republics is defined as commencing " in the Quiph of Mexico, three leagues from land, opposite the mouth of the Rio Grande." wmp«i 20 I have now the hononr of indodiu; ^^rewith the reply \rfaioh has been nuule to my oommunkation by the United States' Secretary of State, statinff tliat the stipulation in the Treaty can only a&ot the rights of Mexico and the United Statei^ and that the Oovemment of the United States never intended by the stipulation to question the lights of Great Britain or any other Power under the Ijkw of Nations. I have thought it tight to forward a copy of Mr. Buchanan's reply note to Her Migeaty's Cbaxgi d'Affikires to Mezioa I have, Aa, (Signed) JOHN F. CRAMPTON. InoIoBote in Na 17. Mr. Bu^nan to Mr. Crampton. Department of State, WojihiiigUm, Sir, Augutt 19, 1848. I HATE had the honour to receive your note of the 30th April last, objecting, on behalf of the British Government, to the clause in the fifth Article of tne late TreatT between Mexico and the United States, by which it is dedued that iiia boundary line between lihe two republios shall commence in the Gul|^ of Mexico, three leagues from land, instead of^ one league from land, which you observe "is acknowledged by international law and practice as the extent of territorial jurisdiction over the sea that washes tlie coast of States." In answer, I have to state that the stipulation in the Treaty can only afieot the rights of Mexico and the United States. If for their mutual convenienee it has been deemed proper to enteir'into such an arrangement, third parties can liave no just cause of complaint. The Government of tiie Unit«l States never intended by this sttpolation to question the rights which Great Britain or any other Power may posBess under the Law of Nations. I avail, Ac. (Signed) JAMES BUCHANAN. No. 18. Mr.AddiagUm to the Secretary to the Admiralty. Sir, Foreign Office, October 6, lUi. I AM directed^ by Viscount Palmeraton to transmit to you, for the inlbrmaticm of the Ijords CommisBioners of the Admiralty, copies of an instruction whidi Lord Pahnet- (tt»n has addressed to Mr. Crampton, Her M^estv's Charg6 d'Afliiiies at Washington, and of a despatch which his Loroship has received from Mr. Crampton in reply,* relative to that part of the Yth Artiole of the Treaty concluded between the United States abd Mexico on the 2nd of Februaiy last, which apparently involves an assumption of juris- diction on the part of the United States and of Mexico, over the sea beyond the usnal limit of three miks from the shore. I am, &c. (Signed) H. U. ADDINGTON. m^M . 16, Md 17. >^r t. . Jf CONFIDENTIAL. JiEHRING SEA ARBITRATION. A History of the Treaty of Arbitration and "Modus Vivendi" iJritish Caov. Ap|iendix, vol. iii '• United Stales Ko. 2 (18901," p. 512. Treaty of Arhitration, A DESPATCH from the Marquis of Salisbury t«) Sir .T. Paunopfotc, dated 2nd August, 185)0, begins thus : — '■ I Imvc leceivod iiiul lai'l belorc tliu Qiii'oii ydiir tlcsimtoli (if tlii> 1st tiltinio, forwnidiii,^ a copy of a lioto lioiii ^fr. Blniiif, in wliicli lie luaincuiiiM tliiit the I'liiti'd Stiilcs Imvo (Icrivi'il lioiii ltiis«i!i ri^'lits of jmisdictioii over till' wtiti'i-.s of IVIiiiii;^ Sea tu II (listuiice of lOd miles from till' counts tiaiisfeiTctl to tlieiii iiinlur tlie Treaty of tlie 3iitli :^laicli, 1807." The question then supposed by the British Government to be in dispute is succinctly stated in the above words. Lord Salisbury proceeds to argue it at some length, concluding as follows : — Ibid., fp. 510, 820. " ' I'iivo to ii'i|iiust that yuu will comimmicato n copy of tliin ili'.spatcli, ami of its iiiclosmcs, to Mr. Blaine. Yiai will stale that lior >[aje»ty's ( Joveriiinent hiivo uoilesiie whiitever to iofii.se lo the I'niteil State? any juri.sdielioii in r>eliiin;i Sea which was coneeileil by Oreal ]tritain to linssia, and which piol>er!y aeciues to the present img- sessois of Ala.skii in viitne of Trentie.s or the law ct nalioii.s ; and that if the I'nitecl Stales' (joverninent, after 4 e.vamiiiatioii of the evitlence and arfjninent.s which 1 linve produced, .still differ from them as to the legality of the re-'eiil caplnres in that sen, they are reiuly to agree that the queation, with the issues that depend njion it, should lie rel'erivd to impartial arhitnitioii. Yon will in that en.s»' he anthori/.ed to consider, in concert with Mr. Blaine, the method of jnixiedure to lie followed." BritUh Cue, AppendU, vol. iii. ■< United Stales No. I (1891)," p. 37. On the 17tb December, 1800, Mr. Blaine re> plied. He begins a long discussion of the case with the often-quoted passage in which be says that legal and diplomatic questions often turn on [k61j B BT-! " "TW*"-!"^'- ' •!Pf|«P/IWV*«|»,* llliUli^|llJWI|llH|p«^P|!PPPM«l^n|l|^p|||p||PPP^ nil iiiiliiiiitfiittiiii^ ' .■'■ ■■'1^,'*;---'5--^.--*-.'r'l-' ''''"'^1",' ^ " "*" ■ - '■ ■ ' - ■ . '- ■ • liiiiiiiiililiiiiiil^^ ■Maii ' •■Jr.; ^J..,jpP|||P|^MMiiPiiiip||^^ 2 Britiih Cue, AppendiXi vol iiU '• United States No. 1 (1891)," a single point ; nnd that, ia the prosent instance, that point is whether the phrase " Pacific Ocean," as used in the 'IVeaties of 1824 and 1826, includes Behring Sea. Towards the end of liis letter he quotes the coufludini!; paragraph (above set out) of Lord Salisbury's li'tter ; and proceeds : — " 111 his nniiunl Messuge, si-iit to Cohkicss on the 1st of tliu prosiMit iiioiitli, thn I'lesideiit, sixjiiking in relation to the licliring Sea (iucstion, snid : — " ' The oH'er to submit the iiueHtion to ai'bitvalion, as pp. 65, 86. ]iro|Hise(l bv H(!r Majesty's (!ovem»ient, has not l)eon iicce]>t«il, for tlie reason tliat the form of snbmission ]ito- ]io.'9cil ia not thonglit to Ije calcnlnteit to iissnre a conchision satisfactory to eitlier jiarty.' " The second oft't of LonI Salisbnry to arbitrate nmonnts .oiiuply to a submission of the (luestion whether any oonntry has a ri<;)it to extend its jurisdietioii more than one marine Ica<{ne from the shore f N'o (juc disputes that, as a rule; hut the i|tiestion is wliether there may not be exceptions wlio.se enforcement does not interfere with those highways of commerce wliich the necessities and nsage of the world liave marked out. Great Britain, when .she desired un exceptirm, did not slop to consiiler or regard tlie inconvenience to whicli the commereinl world niiffhl be subjected. Her exception placed an obstacle in the highway between continents. The I'nited Stiites, in pro- tectinjT the .seal fisheries, will not interfere with a sinf^lo sail of commerce on any sen of the };h)be. " It will mean .sonmtlihi'; tangible, in the I'risident's opinion, if (ireat liritain will consent to arbitrate the real questions which have been nndci' di^oussiou lietween the two Governments for the last four \ears. 1 shall endea- vour to state what, in the judgment of the I'nisident, those issues are : — " 1. What exclu.sivejuri.sdiction in the sea now known as the Hehving Sea, and what exclusive rights in the seal fisheries therein, did Itussia assert and exercise prior and up to time of the cession of Alaska to the I'nited .States ? " 2. How far were these claims of jurisdiction as to the seal fisheries recognized and conceded by (ireat liritain ? " 3. Was the Iwdy of water now known as the liehring Sea included in the phrase ' Pacific Ocean,' as used in the Treaty of 182."( lietween Great Kritain and Itussia ; and what rights (if any) in the Hehring Sea were given or conce«lcd to Great Kritain by the said Treaty ? " 4. Did not hll the rights of Russia as to jinisilictiou, and as to the seal fisheries in IttOu'ing .Seaeast of the water Lioundary, in the Treaty between the I'nited States and Itussia of the 3Uth March, 1 8(i7, pass unimpaired to the United States under that Treaty f " 5. What are now the righb* of the United States as to the fur-seal flsheries in the waters of the Behring >Sea outside of the ordinary territorial limits, whether such rights grow out of the cession by Russia of any special rights or juris- diction held by her in such fisheries or in the wetars of 8 Jttihring Sea, or uiit of tliu owiiL'i'8)ii|> of the lii°ecilin^ islnnds nnd the habits of the Heals in ri'sortinK thither mid rcuriii); their young thereon and goin^ out from the iHlands for foon. and over what waters it shonM extend y " Britiali Cacc, Appendix, vol. iii. " Unittd Statci No. 1 (1892)," pp. 89, 00. On the 21st February, 1891, Lord Salisbury writes to Sir J. I'auncefotc accepting questions 1, 2, and 4. lie deals with questions 3 and 5 as follows : — "The tliini <|uestian is e.spresseil in the following terms: ' Was the body of water now known as the Behring Sea included in the phrase " Pacific Ocean," as used in tlm Treaty of 182.5 lietween (jreat Britain and Uussia ; and what rights (if any) in the Behring Sea were given or conceded to C.reat Brit«in by the said Tivaty I' " Her Majesty's Government would liavu no objection to referring to arbitration the first part of that ipiestion, if it should Ik- tliought desirable to do no ; but they would givo that consent with the reservation that they do not ailmit tliat tlie ilecision of it can conclude the larger ipiestitma which the .Arbitrator would lune to determine. To tho latter part of Xo. :l it would be tlieir duty to take exception : — " ' What rights, if any. in the Behring Sea were given or conceded to (treat Britain by the said Treaty ?' "(ireat Britain has never suggested that any rights were given to her or concetied to lier liy the said Treaty. All that was tlone was to recognize her natural right of freo navigation and fishing in that as in all other ])art8 of tho Pacific Ocean. Itussia did not give those rights to (treat Britain, because they were never hoi's to give away. "The fifth proposed question ntns as follows (ipmting it). "The first clause, 'What are now the rights of tliD Vnited States as to the fur-seal fisheries in the wat^trs ot* the Behring Hen mit«i8tiiiii wliicli woulil lie vmy jiroin-rly lufentNl to thu ilflcisiim of Hii Arliitnitor, lint the Hiibsuiiuciit clniiiie, which usaiiinoH thiit such ri^hlx co'.iM hiivo ){rowii out of the n\viier!ilii|i of tlio Im^viliiih' ixhuiilH, uikI tlio huliits of tliu suiiU iit reHOi'tiiiK tliuri'to, involvus iiii ii88\iiii])tioii lut tu the iMv.tc'i'iplioiis of iiitei'uiitiiiiml hiw at tlio pre.seiit tiiiio ' tn whicli Hit MiiJcsi^'h (idViMiiiiu'iit iivu not |iru|mrcil to nci'Bili'. Thu sixtli i|iicsiiiiii, wliicli ilciils with the insiics that will arise in t-nm: the rimtroveisy .sJiiaiM bo ileuideil in favour of Oreiil llrltaiii. wonlil iierha|»< more fitly form the substance of a se[iarate refcifnce. Her Slaji'Nty'H Ciovernmont have no (ibjectioM to refer the (jeneral f|Uestion of n close time to arbitration, or to ascertain by that nieauN how far the enaetnieni of Huch a proviHion is necessary lor thi' |irefier\atiiin of the seal siiecies ; but any hueh rcfurunce ou^ht not tti nmlain words appearing to iittribute special ami nbnornml rightx in the mnlter to the 1'nited States." The letter then concludes : — " Tliere is laie omission in these i^uestions which I have Drltiih Cue no doubt the (iovernment of the I'lvsident will be vitry Appendix, toI. iii, jjlad to repair; and that is the reference to the Arbitrator .• • /ia92\'' «if the rioration ov destruction; and, if so, (.'() what months or parts of months should be included in such season, and over what waters it should extend ? "The President does not object to the additional (|uestion re8)H3cting alleged damages to English ships ])roi)ose(l by Ix)id Salisbury, if tuie condition can be added, namely, that after the issues of the arbitration are joined, if the I'nitcd States shall prevail, all the seals taken by Canadian vessels duriug the periinl shall be ]uiid for at the onlinary price for which skins are sold. This seems to the President to be the complement of Ixnil Salisbury's pro- ]iosition, aud he doubts not that it will secure his Lotd> shii)'s assent." British Cai«, Appendix, vol. iii, " United SiXea No. 3(1892)." pp. 4. S. * Origiwl Six Quulioiis sugguteil bi/ Mr. Blaine in his iwte of Deeemher 17, 1890. " 1. What exclusive jurisdieticn in the sea now- known as the Behring's >Sea, an I what exclusive rights in the seal fisheries the " 4. Did not all the rights of Bnssia as to juris- diction, and as to the seal fisheries in Behring Sea oast of the water boundary, in the Treaty between the United States and Kussia of the 30th Marcli, 18i>.', pass unimiMuretl to the United States under that Treaty ? 1261] The letter has the following inclosure : — " Questions as altered and nov) proposed by Mr. Blaine. " 1. The same. " 2. The same. ".i. Was the body of water now known as the Behring Sea included in the phi-ase 'Pacific Ocean,' as used in the Treaty of 1825 between Great Britain and Kussia; aud what rights (il" any) in the Behring Sea were held aiul exclmively exercised by Russia after said Treaty I " 4. The same. ^^PPPS mmmmim mmmm If 1 ^^H!P|*<* mmm tmmmf mmm " 5. Wlmt arc now the rijjlits of the United States as to the t'lir-seal fisheries in the waters of the lichi'ing's Sea outside of tlie ordinary tem- torial limits, whether sueli rii^hts grow out of tlie cession hy I'ussia of any special righta or jurisdiction held hy her in such fisheries or in the waters of ISehring's Sea, or out of the ownership of the hreedinjj-islands and the hahits of the seals in resorting thither and rearing their young thereon and going out from the islands for food, or out of any other fact or incident con- nected with the relation of those seal fisheries to the tcrritoiial possessions of the United States ? " 6. If the determination of the foiegoing ques- tions shall leave the siibject in such a position that the concurrence of Oreat Britain is necessary in prescribing liegidations for the killing of the fur-seal in any pare of tlio waters of liehring Sea, then it shall be further determined : — " (1.) How far, if at all, outside the ordinary territorial limits, it is necessary that the United States should exercise an exclusive Jurisiliction in order to jirotect tlie seal for the time living upon the islands of the United States and feeding therefrom ? " (2.) Wliether a closed season (tluring which the killing of seals in the waters of Hehring Sea outside the ordinary territorial limits shall be pro- hibited) is necessary to save the S'^ial-fishing industry, so valuable and im])ortant to mankind, from deterioration or destruction f And, if so, " (3.) What months, or parts of months, should l)e included in such season, and over wliat waters it should extend ?" " 5. Has the United States any right, and, if so, what riglU, of jmtectian or property in the/ur-seals frequemtiny the islawls of the United Staten in Behring Sea vihen such scatu are fmiml outuide the ordinary 3-Mile limit ? " C. The same. "(For Additional Mr. Blaine's note.) Article as to damageH, Hee It Pursuant to telegraphic instructions from Lord United States' Salisbury, Sir J. Pauncefotc gave the following ^"*f^ p.''305."'' note to the United St.atp.s' Government : — " Mcmtiravil 11,11,. " The Undersigned has been instructed by the Miirt^uis of S.ilisbury to inform the United States' (iovernment that Her Majesty's I Iovernment are prepared to assent to the first live questions pro)iosed to be submitted to arbi- tration in the noti; of the Honourable James G. Blaine to the Undersigned, dated the 1 -itli April last. " Her Majesty's Government cam. >t give their assent to the sixth question formulated in that 'oto. Jii lieu thereof tliey jiropose the ajipointnient of a (Jummissioii, to consist of four experts, of whom two shall be iioiiiiiiated liy each Government, and a (.'hairman, who sliall be nominated by the Arbitrators, The Commission shall examine and report on the question which follows : — " ' For the puqiose of preserving the fur-seal race in Hehring Sea from extermination, what international arrangements (if any) are necessary between (ireat Britain and the United States and Uussia or any other Power ?' " As regards the ipiestion of compensation, Her Majesty's Government propose *.lie following Article : — " ' It shall be competent to the Arbitrators to awaixl such compensation as in their judgment shall be equitable to the subjects and citizens of either Power who shall be shown to have been damnified in the pursuit uf the industry of scaling by the action of the other Power. (Signed) " Joijan Faunvktotk. " Wuihingtmi. Jim 'i, 1891." "^^^mpipipil mmmm British Cne, Appendix, vol. iii. " United SUtes No. 3 (1892)," p. 51. On the 25th June, 1891, Mr. Wharton wrote to Sir J. Pauncc'fote proposing; as the sixth question what now forms Article VII of the Treaty. Then, after discussing the question of damages, ho concludes : — " I mil (lireclod by the I'lpsidciit to propose the, follow- 7tli iiml final clauso in tliu biisis of arbitration : — "'7. It sliiiU hi: conipeieiit to the ArbilMtors to award such compensation as in their judj,'nient shall seem ciiiiitable to the subjects or citizens of CJreat liritiun whose vessels may have been seized by the Inileil Stales in the I')ehring Sea, if siicli seizures shall be fomid by the Arbitrators to liavo been unwarninted, and it sliall also be competent to tho Arnitrators to award to the fnited .States such compensa- tion as in their judgment shall seem C(|uitable for any injuries resulting to the I'nited States or to the lessees from the (lovernment of tlie jirivilege of taking seals on the Priliyloil' Islands, liy reason of killing seals in tho Behring Sea by pei'suns acting under the protection of tho nrilisli flag outside of the ordiuiTv territorial limits and since the 1st day of .lanuiuy, 18Sli, if such killing sliall be found to have been an infraction of the rights of the United States.' " It being understood that au arrangement for a Joint Commission is to lie niiide eontemporaueously with tha conclusion of the terms of arbitration, I :im diiected by the President to propose the following separate Agree- ment : — " ' J-laoh GovcriHuent sliall appoint two Commissioner': to investigate conjointly with llie ('ommi.ssioners of tho other (iovernment all thi' f'aets having relation to seal lifo in liehring Sea, and the measures necessary for its jiroper protection mid pi'eservation. "'The f(au' Conimi.ssioners .sliall, so far as they may bo able to agree, make a joint b'eport to each of the two Governments, and they shall also report, either jointly or severallj', to each (iovernnient on any points upon which they may be unable to agree.- " ' The lieports shall not be made |Miblic until they shall be .submitted to the .\ibitialois, or il shall apjiear that tho contingency of their Ijeing used by the Arbitrators cannot arise.' " Ibid., p. 69. '^n tJie 13t^^ J%> 1*^''^' Sir J. raiinccfoto wrote to Mr. Wharton pro))osing the following clause as to damages : — "7. Either Government may submit to tlu' Arbilmtors any claim for compensation which it may ilesire to ]ii-efer against the other Government in respect to any losses or injuries in relation to the fur-seal fishery in liehring Se;i, for which such other (iovernment may be legally liable. " The Arbitrators shall decide on the legality of eveiy such claim, and, if it shall be establi,shed, they may awaril such compenaation as in tlioir judgment shall seem iHluitable." ^p«ilpl"llil mmm wmmmmmmm l;tt; m I 4 ^ m^mmmi^^'iimmfm '''WPWi^PP«''^W«^liPiP!lflPl^fl|p!^^ On the 23rd July, 1891, Mr. Wharton replies, British Cue, • i 1 1i « 11 • 1 Appmdix, vol. uu proposing instead the following clause ; — ~ "The Government of Grcnt Britain having presented the ulaims of its suljjects fur compensation for the seizure of tlieir vessels by the United States in Hehring Sea, and the Government of the United States having prosentcd on its own behalf, as well as of the lessees of the privilege of taking seals on tlie I'libyloff Islands, claims for compensa- tion liy reason of tlie killing of seals in the IJehring Sea )iy jiersons acting uiiuur tlie protectign of the British flag, the Arbitrators shall consider and decide upon such claims ill accordance with justice and eijuity and the respective rights of the High Contracting Parties, and it shall be c-ompcteut for the Aibitrators to award such compensation as in their judgment shall seem eiiuitable." United Sutei No. 3 (1892)," p. 73. On the 2Gth August, 1891, Sir J. Pauncefote Ibid., p. 79. wrote a private letter to Mr. Wharton, proposing the following clause as to damages in substitution for that which Mr. Wharton had proposed on the 23rd July :— " Clause 7. Kither of the two Governments may submit to the Arbitrators any (juestion of fact which it may wish to put before them in reference to the claims for com- pensation which it believes itself or its nationals to ]H)s.sess against the other. "The (inestion whether or not, and to what extent, these facts as determined by the Arbitratoi's, and taken in counectiiui with their decision upon the other (|uestion8 submitted to them, render s\ich claims valid, according to the principles of international law, shall be a matter oi' .subsei|nont negotiation, and may, if the two Powers agi-ee, be retened, in whole or in part, to the Arbitrators." On the 7th September, 1891, Mr. Wharton replied in a private letter containing the following passage : — " Th{ ]>ro]Niwil : — "His I/irdship suggests tliat tlie six .Articles cf tlie Arbitration Agreement already iiecepteil by both (ioveru- lueiits sliould lie signed now, ami also an Article providing for tlie reference to the Arbitrators of any (juestion of fact whieh either Government may desire to submit to them regarding the claims for compensation to which it con- sidei-s itself to be entitled. The application of inter- national law to thc^e facts wcndd be left as a matter for further negotiation after they shall linve \wan ascertained, and might be subsei|uently referred to the Arbitrotors, in whole or in [lart, if the two Governineuts should agree to do SI I. " The above projiosa! presents so logical and pmctical au issue out of the difficulty that I cannot but think that it will conimenointc><1 by Her Mojesty's ( ioverninent. Two .Vniericans shall Ik; appointed by the United States' tJovernmcnt. The other three shall be appointed by foreign (iovernnients. He has no objection to selection by France, Holland, Sweden, .Switzerland, Mexico, or Brazil. "He thought Paris woulil not be objected to as place of sitting, but he eoiilil not pleilgo himself, as he had omitted to consult the President. 'dopiesof the Articles of the Arbitration Agreement and the Joint ('oniinission Article, iis agreed on Ui eorre- .spondence, are being piepiired for signature." Then follows a correspondence set out consecu- tively in vol. i of the Appendix to the United States' Case, at pp. 839 to 345, in which Mr. Blaine agrees with Lord Salisbury that the necessity of any Regulations at all is a question for the Arbitrators. Lord Salisbury also reserves, but without Mr. Blaine's assent, the right of asking the Arbitratore to make the concurrence of other nations a condition of the Regulations coming into force. On the 1 8th December, 1801, Sir J. Pauncefote ibid., p. 134. wrote to the Marquis of Salisbury as follows : — " With reference to my immediately preceding despatch of toHlay, 1 have the honour to inclose herewith the text of the seven Articles of the Behring Sea Arbitration Agi-eement and of the .Joint ( 'ommission .Article, as signed by Mr. Blaine and myself." On the 21st January, 1892, Sir J. Pauncefote Ibid., p. ist. accepted Mr. Blaine's proposal that the foreign Arbitrators should be chasen by France, Italy, and Sweden. m 11 United Stales' Caie, Appendix, vol. i, p. 393, British Cisa, Appendix, vol. iii, '• Vaixti 8Utes No, 3 (1894)," 1>. 143. Unitnl Sutes' Case, Appendix, vol. i, p, 384. British Case, Appendix, vol. iii. " Uniled Sutes No 3 (1892),- p. I.'SI. Ibid., p. 8. On the 2n(l February, 1892, Mv. Blaino handed Sir J. Pauneofoto a draft of titc Arbitration Agreement. Ifor Majesty's Government appa- rently suggested some auiendmcntH, but these seem to have caused no dilBculty, as on tiio 27th February Mr. Bltiine wrote to Sir J. Fauncc- fote making an appointment for signature on the 2()th, which appointment Mas duly kept. Ratifications were exchanged in London on tho 7th May, 18!)2, "Moduli Vivendi" o/1891. After some slight preliminary negotiations, Mr. Blaine wrote to Sir J. Pauncefote on tho 4th May, 1891 , proposing the following arrange- ment : — "Tlie-tiovfrniiieiit of tlit I'liited Htiites limits tlie iiiiiiibor of seals to Iw killed ou tlie islnmU for pui'po$:ea just ilfisciil)eil to 7,.'>00. "The (Jovemmeiit of tlio I'liiled Stuioa su'Hi'U't-'t-'S that liu scala shall Ik' killed in the open wnters of Ituhriug Sea liy any pci'soii on any vessel sniliu;,' under the Anievicaii AtH!, or hy any .Vnierican citizen .snilini; under any other flftg. " Tlie Oovernniont of Great Hritain ijiiarnn'.ees that no seals shall he killed in the open waters of Behring .Sea by any person on any vessel 8ailin<; under the Ihitish iln},', and that no Kritish sidjjeut shall engine in killing sealq for the time nHrecil upon on any vessel eailing under any other Hag. "These iiroliiliitions shall continue until the Isl day of May, I8i>:i, within which time the Arhitnitora shall render tinnl award or awards to Imlli (lovcriiment.s." On the 3r(l .lune, 18i)l, Her ilajesty's Govern- ment made the following couiitor-proposnl : — Ibid.| p. 19. " I'lii/iusal (//' Ifrr .Utijrul y ^ (lOirnimml /uru Jlodus Vi\i'udi ill tlic Beliriiii/ .S((/ ihiriiuj llir /irfuciif Finhri) Sfdsim. " The (ioverninents of (ireat liritain aid of the I'niled States shall prohibit, until 5Iay 1892, t'le killing of seak in Hehriiig Sea or any islands thereof, anl will, to the best of tlieir power and ability, iii.'ire that the subjects and citizeits of the two nations respectively, and the Vessels flying their respective Hays, shall oliserve that j^ndii- bitiou. " '1. During the period alwive speciHed the Inittd States' Ooverninent shall have the right to kill 7,.jOO seals. " ;>. Consuls may, at any time, be appointed to Ihu islands in the IJehring Sea, and the United States' Govern- ment will grant an e-xefjuntur to any such Consul. ^"■—^^^^^•■PWPWBUPpi ^^^mm wm ,^M,,iw;!.TOiaiMi.JW«>3ifl)l>iV»)_ii(!«i..^J^^ 12 "4. Unless the assent of Kussia be obtained to this Convention it sliall not come into operation, (Signed) "Julian Paincefote. " Washiwjtun, Jane 3, 1891." Mr. Wharton replied on the following day : — " Dejmrtmeiif of Stale, Wnahinijtoii, "Sir. ",/««.! 4, 1891. " 1 am directed by the President to say, in reply to your Britisli Ca»e, note of the 3rd instant, conveying to the Ciovernment of ,■^Pf*°fi*5J'!'; '"' the United States tlie response of Her Majesty's Govern- No. 3 (1892)," nient to the proposal of ilr. Hliiine for a modus rivmuli, P- 20. relating to tlie si;al tislicrics in Beliring Sea during i\w juesent season : — "Ji'irst. Iri ]ilace of the first and second subdivisions €>f the Agreenrent as submitted by you, the Presiition by the cilizens of the I'nited States, and the vessels flying its Hag. "These clianges are suggested in order that the ww/i's vicewU may clearly have' tlie same temtorial extent with the pending proposals for arbitration ; that the stipulation for a prohibition of seal-killing upon the islands of the United States may rest upon its own order, and that the obligation of the respective (iovernnieiits to give piompt and vigonuis effect to the .Vgreonieut nia ■ be moic dearly iipparent. " .Secondly. The pertinency of the suggestion contained in the third subilivision of Lord Salisbury's projiosal is not Iipparent to the President. The Statutes of the I'nited .States explicitly iirobibit the landing of any vessels at tlie .Seal Island;;, ,iiid the residence thereon of any pcraon, unless s|)eoiHcally authorized by the Secretary of the Treasury. It is, therefore, obvious that no t'onsulai' funetiiius could be discharged upon the is.'ands by any Itepresciitiitive of Her Majesty's Goverii'uent. The Presi- ilent iiv,'urds this Fjiw, as declaring an exception as to the residiiice iif Consuls, within the meaning of Article IV of the Convention of Commerce and Navigaticni of the 22nd Deoembcr, 1810, between Her Majesty's (iovernment "i^W^^IW^ifiJlil'' ■' 18 and the United States. If the proixisal is intended to relate to the Ishinds of St. I'nnl and St. George, and has for its object access for sncli Agents of the Cloverninent of Her ifajesty as may bu appointeil to investigate facts that may Ixj involved in tlie pending proposals for arlntmtiou, or in tlie lienring before tlie Aviiitrators, I am directed by the President to say that, in the event of an agreement folf arbitration of the (piesiions in dispute between Great Britain and tlic United States, he wonld l)e willing to extend reasonable facilities to Great Britain for the inves- tigation at th(? islands of any facts involved in the con- trovei'sy. "Thiiclly. Till! fourth clause of the proposal of Her Majesty's (invcrnnient, limiting the taking effect of the modus Vivendi upon the assent of itussia, presents what seems to the President an in8U]icra1ilc ditlicu'ity, as an adherence to that suggestion by Her Majesty's Govern- ment will, in his opinion, prevent ilie conclusion of any Agreement, and will inevitably cause such a delay as to thwart the purposes which he nuist suppuso both Govern- ments have had in view. Ho is surpiisi'd that this result did not suggest itself to Lord Salisbuiy, and does not doubt that it will be apparent to liim on a re-c.\aniination, I am also directed to remind you that the contention between lIio United States and Grwit llrilain has been limited to that part of IJehring Sea eastward of the line of di.'iiiarcnliou clcscrilied in our Convention with Russia, to which reference has already been made, and that Russia has never asserted any rights in those waters affecting the subject-matter of this contention, and ciiriuot, therefore, he a necjs-iary party to these negotiati ,iiy,, if they are not now improperly expanded, rndcrthe Statutes of the I.'nited •States, the President is autliorizod to jiroliibit scaling in the Hehiing Sea within tlie limits dcsrribed in our Con- vention with Russia, ami to rcstrii't the kiliiug nf seals on the islands of the rnited States; but no authority ia conferred •.■.(ion him to jniihibit or make penal the taking of seals in the waters nf Behring Sea we-ndence, or by the Presitlent, that an agreement for a modtix lirendi could lie broach'r than the subject of ennlenlion stated in the eones]Miiiilenre of the respective Governments. " Negotiations for an arbitration have been proceeding hetwecMi the I'niled .States and Great Britain, and if these Powers are coiniieteni to settle by this friendly method their nwpectivo lights and relations in the disputed waters upon a permanent basis, it would .seem to Ibllow that no questioncouldnri.se as to their competency to deal dii'ectly with the subject for a single season. If (ireat llrilain now insi.sts ujion impossible conditions, viz., that the eiaiclusioii of lliu modiii tiixndi is lo be delayed until, and made contingent upon, the assent of Russia to stop the killing of seals on its own islands and in its own waters, and upon the exercise by tliv I'resident of powers not conferred by law, this would be, in his opinion, a practical withdrawal [2'U] B ^>^.,:.l.y^^al^V■^.^^^,„^J^;p ll ■P^ ^mffmmmimmw wmigiimiifi^mm^ KBmHBI mmm wmnm!^ PW wmmmm^^Hfimmii 14 liy tiraat Britain from the negotiations for a modm rivendi. This he would very much reifl-et, nixl he coufitlently hopes thnt a recousideratinu will enable Lori SaHsbnry to waive the sugrfestion of Ihissia's iiriilicipation in the Agreement, and the inclusion of other waters than those to wliich tlie contention between the I'nited States and (Jreat Tiritnin relates. " In case the terms of the mmlii^ vimuli are a^'reed iil)on, the President suggests that a proN'ision lieretofove considered in another connection in tlie general correspon- denoo, by winch tlie naval or other duly eommissioued oftiii 1 I . f either purty may aimst any olfending \i'ssel and turn I ' !ie nearest port of the nation whose flag it ■ carries, i Judicial proceedings as tlie law ])rovides» should be ii!' lorated hero, the nioi-e effectually to carry out the stipulations of tiie resixictlve CJovcriniieuts to prohibit their citizens and vessels from taking seals in the .»tpecified waters of Behriug's Sea. "Having, with a view to an exigency wliicli lie has seveial times caused to be explained to you, pidm]itly responded to tlie suggestions of ycnir note of yesterday, the I'resident ilirects me to say that he will be pleased to have from \joTi\ Salisbury a prompt res|Hnise tn tlie.se suggestions. " I am further directed by the President to say that your note of the same date referring to the conditions of the pro]K)sed arbitration, and stating the objection of Ixird Salisbury to some points in the proposal nf Mr. Ulaiuo, will liave the early attention of the I'rcsideul. " I hove, &c. (.Signed) MVILLl.AM K WIIAI.'TOX, "Actiny Sevivtary." On tho (ith .Iiine, 18»1, Sir .1. raunceiotc replied, inclosing the following Mcnioninduni : — " A[c III 01 II lid inn. "Her Majesty '.s tlovcniment accejit tho louiiosal of the Uritiih Cue President that (he niiiiln.i i-ircinli. if agreed upon, ■•ilmuld Appendix, toI. iii« provide that tlie naval or nthcr duly cdinniissioncil oHii of cither jjarty may arrest niiy olfcniliiig vessel and turn it p. 26. over at tho nearest jiort of the nation wlu>se flag it carries, for such Judicial proceedings as the law provides. " Uy accepting this proposal. Her Majesty's ttovcrnment give to the cruizers o( the fnited States tiie jxiwer of supervising the conduct of llritish subjei'ts in olwerving the proposed Agi-eenient at sea. This is u concession which, in ].Kjrd Salisbury's opinion, entitles Her Maji'sty's (iovernment to ask from the I'nited States tlie <'oiTe- sfionding piiwer ipf supervising the proceedings nf I'nited States' ciiizeiis mi the Seal Islanils. It is on tho lldelity with which the condition of not killing more Ihun 7,600 seals is observeil that the equality of the ]>ro{H)sed Agree- ment depends. "Her Majesty's ISovertinient, therefoiv, regaiil it as indispeiUMble that they shouM have the right of satisfying ' United SUtea No. 3 (1892)," 'mwfp^l^m^m mm^mmK 15 themselves that this coiulitiou is fully observed by eitizGiia of the Vnitcd .States, If there be an objection on the part of the I'nited States' Goveniinent to issuini,' an exequatur to a permanent Consul on the Seal Islands, I/ml Salisbury suggests that they can under the Statute specially authorize tlie residence thereon of a Ifritish A;i;ent d:n-ing the present season. "His liordship will not insist nn tlie condition titab Kussia shall Ik- a jiarty to the Agreement, but he nnisi earnestly press the I'nited States' Government to extend the prohibition to their citizens and vessels over the entira nix-a of Behring Sea. In that case Her Majesty's Govern- ment, on their part, will similarly extend the prohibition to Britinh subjects and vessels. " Lord Salisbury points out that, if seal-hunting 1)0 pro- hibited on one side of a i)urely imaginary line drawn ii» the open ocean, while it is iwrraitted on the other side of the line, it will Ih> imjiossible in nuiny case^ to pix>vo unlawful sealing, or to infer it from the iH)ssession of skins or fi.shing tackle. In conclusion. Lord Salisbury states t!;at Her Majesty's Government consider it a matter of great importance that the two (lovernments should agree • III the terms of arbitration at the same time as on a mmliis nreniii. The saspension of sealing is not a measure which they could repeat another year." British Caie, Appendix, vol. iii. " United States No. 3 (1892)," p. 27. Mr. Wliarton replied on the same day, proposing the following Agreement : — " For the jiurpose of avoiding irritating difl'erences, ami with :v view to promote' a friendly .settlement of the Hue.stions pending between the Government of (rreat Britain on the one side, and the I'liited States of America on the other, tnuching the rights of the respective nations in the Bchring Sea, the following .\greement is made, which shall Imvi' no ellect to limit or prejudice tha rights or claims of cither I'ower excejit us therein expres.sly stipulated and fur the time therein limited : — " ]. The Government i>f Great Britain will prohibit until May ISitL' the killing of seals in all that part of the Itehring Sea lying cast, eiustwardly, or sdiith-caslwanlly of the line described in Article I of the Convention Imtween the I'nited Slates and liu.ssia of the :iOth March, IH67,and will jiromptly take such steps as are best I'alculated etl'ectively to insure the observance of this prohibition !iy the subjects and citizens of Great Britniii, and all vessels flying its flag. "2. The (loverniueut of the I'nited States will prohibit until May IMO'i the killing of seals in that part of Bchring Sea above descril)ed,and on the shores and islands thereof, the proi)erty of the I'nited States (except that 7,-'iOO seals anil no more may lie taken or the islands), and the Government of the I'nited States will promptly take such steps as are best calcidat-i) effectively to assni-e the observance of this inhibition by the citizens nf iho Tinted States, and the vesfels flying its flag. "3. All vessels or persons viiilatin; the laws of their ^ir --nnri -wri i uninig i ir i ii ■ m mi,iy, i \, \ -um[vm ifmmmmimmmmmw'fiigm ^WHWPl«?PiPPPIWipiiPiP IPSPf^S!5PiWW"!SW^WW«P 16 i-L'Sjiective Cioveviimcuts in tin's regard outside the ordinary tcrritoiiul limits may lie seized and detained by the naval or oilier didy conimissioiied utticers of either of the High Ciintrncting Partii-.s, l)ut they shall he handed over as soon (IS iirncticahle tn the nuthoritius of the nation to which they res)peetivcly lielung for trial and for the imposition of the penalties iiiid Ic irfeitiiros provided liy law. "4. In order to tiipilitatc such projier iuijuirius as Her Ulttjesty's (iovcrnniont may desire to make with a view to the presentation of the Case of that (iovemment before Arbitmtors, and in the expectation that an agree- ment for iirhitration may idtimttely !«■ reached, it is iigreed that a suitalilc jierson or persons to be designated by (ireat Britain will be permitted at any time, upon tip|>lieation, to visit or to remain ujion the Seal Islands during the jiresent sealing season, for that ])uriiose." On the Srd .lime, 1891, Sir J. raimcefotc answered, inclosing the following draft Agree- nient : — " For the imrpose of avoiding irritating diti'erenccs, and British t!ase, with a view t■ •*• iohibit seal-killing for the same period in the same jiart of Behring Sea, and on the shores and islands thereof the property of the United States (in excess of 7,r)(lO to be taken on the islands as food pkins, and not for tax and shipment), and will i)roniptly use best efforts to insure observance of ]irohibition by United States' citizens and vessels. " 3. Kvery offending vessel or person may lie seized and detained by the naval or other ihdy commissioned oHicers of either of the High Conli-acting Parties, but they shall ')e handed over as soon as pii>cticHble to the authorities of tlie nation to whii'h they respectively belong, who shall alone hive juri.sdictiun to try the offence and impose the penalties for the same. The witnesses and the proofs neces.sary to establish llie offence shall also be sent with them. " 4. In order to facilitate such proper inquiries as Her Majesty's (iovemment may desire to make, with the view to the jiresentation of the Case of that Government before Arbitrators, and in expectation that an agreement for arbitration may lie arrived at, it is agreed that siiitnlile jiersons, designated by Great Britain, will lie permitted at any time, upon application, to visit, or to remain upon, tbe 11 Senl Islands during the present sealing season for that pai^ pose. " 5. A Commission of four experts, two nominated by each Government, and a Chairman nominated by the . Arbitratoni, if appointed, and if not by the aforentid Commissioners, shall examine nnd report on the following question : — "What international arrangements, if any, between Great Britain, United States, and Russia, or any other Power, are necessary for the purpose of preserving the fur- seal race in the Northern Pacific from extermination ? "6. The Government of the United States will join with that of Her Majesty in requesting Ilussia to forbid her subjects from sealing to the east of the lifle indicated in Article 1 of tlie present Agreement until the Ist May, 1892." On the 9th June, 1891, Mr. Wharton wrote proposing the modus vivendi actually adopted. In his letter he said : — Britiih Case, Appendix, vol. iii. «' United Stalen No. 3 (It's;-)," p. 32. " As to the third clause of your proposition, I am directed to say that the contention between the United States and Great Britain has relation solely to the respec- tive rights of the two Governments in the waters of Bebring Sea outside of the ordinary territorial limits, and the stipulations for the co-operation of the two Govern- ments during this season have, of course, the same natural limitation. " This is recognized in Articles 1 and 2 of your pro- posal, for you will observe that the obligation assumed by Her Majesty's Govrnraent is to prohibit seal-killing in a certain part of 1 bring Sea, whereas the obligation assumed in the second Article by the Government of the United States is to prohibit seal-killing in the same part of Bebring Sea, and the shores and islands thereof the property of the United States. " The killing, therefore, of seals on the islands, or within tht territorial waters of the United States, falls only within the prohibition of this Government. His Lordship will also see that it is altogether beyond the power of the Pre- sident to stipulate that an offence committed in the undis- puted territory of the United States against its laws shall be triable only in the Courts of another nation. The extension of this clause to the territory and territorial waters of the United States, therefore, involves an insuper- able legal difficulty on our part, and a concession which no independent Government could bo expected to make. The mutual police which is to be stipulated for could not in the nature of things apply to the territorial water* within the undisputed and exclusive jurisdiction of either." The following is the Agre«.)mcnt :- 1^1 I iii|iiijip<9pnp[M««ipn)npp;!P!fp^ WffPP mim^mm'^'''^^ 18 m^^^^mmi^mmim ' Agrum*nt bttwt&n tht Gootrnintnt of Her Britannic Briliuli Cue; Uajtity and tht Oovernment of tht U:\ited States for a ,^{','Jfi"g,j''g,*°^ Modus Vivendi in relatiun to the Par-ttal Fithiriu in No. 3 (1892),"* Behring Sea. P- 89. " For the purpose of avoi<.liiig irritating differences, and with a view to promote tlie friendly settlement of the questions pending between th-j two Governments touching their respective rights in Behring Sea, and for the preservation of the seal species, the following Auioemcnt is made without prejudice to the rights or claims of either TW»r^v ; — " 1. Her Majesty's Government will prohibit, until May next, seal-killing in that part of Itchring Sea lying east- ward of the line of demarcation described in Article I of the Treaty of 18(i7 between the United States and Russia, and will promptly use its beat cflbrts to insure the observance of tliis prohibition by British subjects and "2. The United States' Government- will proliibit seal- killing for the same period iu tiie same part of Behring Se^, and on the shores and islands thereof the property of' the United States (in excess of 7,500 to be taken on the islands for the subsistence and care of the natives), and will promptly iisc its best efforts to insure the observance of this prohibition by United States' citizens and vessels. " 3. Every vessel or person offending against this prohi- bition in the said ^ .iters of Behring Sea outside of the ordinary territorial limits of the United States may be seized and detained by the naval or other duly com- missioned otBcers uf either of the High Contracting. Parties, but they shall be banded over as soon as practi- cable to the authorities of the nation to which they respectively belong, who shall alone have jurisdiction to try the offence and impose the penalties for the same. The witnesses and proofs necessary to establish the offence shall also be sent with them. " 4 In order to facilitate such proper inquiries as Her Majesty's Government may desire to make, with a view to the presentation of the Case of that Government before Arbitrators, and in e.xjiectation that an Agreement. (ot arbitjtition may tie arrived at, it is agreed that suitable persons designated by Great Britain will be per- mitted at any time, upon application, to visit or to remain upon the Seal Islands during the pi'esent sealing season for that purpose. ' "Signed and sealed in duplicate at Washington, this ICth .day of June, 1891, on behalf of their respective Governments, by Sir Julian Pauncefote, G.C.M.Q., K.C.B., Her Britannic Majesty's Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary, and William F. Wharton, Acting Secretary ot State of the United States (Signed) " Julian Pauncbfotb. i-i " William F. WuABTOMj' - 10 Driliili Ciife, Apopiul'i, vol. iii. ' Uiiili'tl Stnlp« No. 3 (1892V p. 153. " Modus VivetuU" of 18»2. On the 24th February, 1892, Mr. Blaine wrote tho follow iiiff letter to Sir J. Pauncefoto : — " Department o/ Sliite, IVaihinffton, " Sir, Febnmrij 24, 1892. " I ftin in receipt of your nolo of tlic lOtli. Yon therein inform mo timt Lord Salislmry cniinot exprc-ss any opinion on till' sulpjuc't of tlic moiluK vireuili until lie knuwH whbt we ilesiro to propoBn. " I iitn <;liiil III Iicar timt Lnnl SiliHliiiry conteniplHtos a modus, for it is oliviDUb lliiil it is nnposHilile to concrudu tlie arbitration witliin tin; timt,' F«nip ^nnf«pppi!Pipii9i|H«piin«i«ili«iP^^ m ippipPipffPipiHMi iiwi^pyap '.'.'. ,' ' ." ''< lt.Ji,J»LiJ,lliJW«5.pM!njl.4.l|Sii'WSiPiWiMi|i W!.^ so Majesty's (.ioveiniiieiil liuve reuuived nu infiiriiuition to Hhow that sii drastic a remedy is nefcasjiry for two con- secutive Bvusoiis. ()ii tlio contrary, the British Oornmis- sionen on the Belmng Sea Joint Coinniission have informed Her Majesty's Governiueut that, so far as pelagic sealing is concurnod, there is no duiiger of any serious diminution of the fur-seal species as u consequence of this year's hunting. "Nevertheless, Lord Suhshury would not object, as a temporary measure of precaution for this season, to the prohibition of all killing at sea vtrithin a zo.io extending to cot more than 30 nautical miles aroiind the Pribylolf Islands, such prohibition being conditional on the restrin- tioo of the number of seals to be killeil for any purpose on the islands to a maximum of SO,00U. " liOrd Salisbury, refemng to t!iu passage in your note in which you compare tlie case to an arbitration about timber-land from which the trees are being removed by one of the parties, ob pfxisilc. His l/irdship suggests that the case is more lii:e one of f oitnition inspecting the title to a meadow. While thr arbitration is in progress, he adds, we cut the grass, an.' quite rightly, for the grass will lie reproduced next year, and no will the si-als." It) anothiT letter to 5Ir. Blaine, dated the 7th March, 1892, Sir J. Pp.nncefote said :— " I/)rd Suli.sbury's pro,Kisal of a 30-iiiile nidius around United StaMt' the r'ribyloff Nlands ?ithiii which no sealinL' should tje ^*''.' Appendix, ,.„■■,■ , . vol i, p. 8S6. •llowed 18 a judicious teiii|"iraiy iiieiwure of precaution pending the c.iiul.lishment of peiiiiaiieiit Itugulntions for the fishery as a who!e. It i.s a .somewhat larger proposal than that whii^h you originally made to me on the 16th March, 1891, and wl ich was for a similar radius of 25 miles only. "The reason why you subsequently abandoned that 'radius' propo.sal is stated in your note to me of the 4th May, 1891. That reason was not that such a radius would be ineffectual, but that ' it nii^dit ixissibly provoke eonflict in the Iteliring Sia.' " A letter from Mr. Wharton to Sir .1. Fatincefoto dated the 8th March, 1891, contains tho following "The United States claims an exclusive right to take BrItUh Csm, seals in a portion of the Behring Sea, while Her Majesty's .. lyif^.j suij, Qovemment claims a common right to pursue and take No. :< (189i)," the reals in those waters outside a 3-mile limit. This V- 'S'- serious and protracted controversy, it has now been happily agreed, shall be iiuhmitted to the deU.rminatSon of a Tribunal of Arbitration, and the Treaty only awaits the action of the American Senate. Tlio judgment nf the ArbitratioD Tribunal cannot, however, he reached and. slatsd in time to wmtrol the mndurt of th* r(iii}ieUite T<"HiiP|IW^ «HP^-i iiiiiiw«t^«^^ipip^^ipnnfiinpn* 21 Kritiah Case, Apptndii, vol. iii. " linileil State« No. 2 (1893)," |>. 163. Governments, and of their citizens during the sealing season of 1892 ; and the urgent question now is. What does good faith, to say nothing of international comity, require of the parties to the arbitration ? If the conten- tion of this Government is sustained by the Arbitrators, then any killing of seals by the Canadian sealers during this season in these waters is an injury to this Govern- ment in its jurisdiction and pro)x!rty. The injury is not measured by the skins taken, but affects the permanent value of our property. • • • • "The President cannot agree, now that the terms of arbitration have been settled, tliat the restrictions imposed shall be less than those which both Governments deemed to be appropriate wlien it was still uncerwin whether au early adjustment ol' the cuiitroversy was attainable. He therefore hopes tliat Her Majesty's Government will con- sent to renew the arrangement of Inst year with the promptness whicli the exigency demands, and to agree to enforce it by refusing all clearances to sealiug-veasels for the prohibitejJii if^^^r/^mfmrn^rm "SffflliPfW m^^^^^^^^w^mji niiti ,,'i,mMi% J^WJUf U'i'V^'.'t'm^PPP?!^ "fT IPHMIVipP!ii"""ii*""i""^9^fP*""<^^ii 22 property which is the subject of nn agreed arbitration shall not be subject to spoliation pending the arbitration, he expresses the hope that Lonl Salisbury ^rill give a prompt and friendly assent to renew the modiia. " The President will hear with regret that Her Majesty's Government continues to assert a right to deal with this subject precisely as if no provision had been made tor a settlement of the dispute ; and, in tliat event, this Govern- ment, as has already been pointed out, will be compelled to deal with the subject upon the same basis, and to use every means in its power to protect from destruction or serious injury property and jurisdictional rights which it has long claimed and enjoyed." Sir J. Pauncefote's answer, dated the 26th March, 1892, contained the following passage: — " Her Majesty's Government think that the prohibition United States' of sealing, if it stands alone, will bo unjust to British ^^^'i p''368'"' sealers if the decision of the Arbitrators should be adverse to the United States. They are, however, willing, when the Treaty has been ratified, to agree to an arrangement similar to that of last year, if the United States' Govern- ment will consent that the Arbitrators should, in the event of a decision adverse to the United States, assess the damages which the prohibit- on of sealing shall have inflicted on Britisli sealers during the pendency of the arbitration; and, in the event of a decision adverse to to Great Britain, that they should assess the damages which the limitation of a slaughter shall, during the pendency of the arbitration, have inflicted on the United States or its lessees." This vas acted on. /^ 1 ^. il-.!v MeinoraiiiTlinii on the Argument of the United States in its relation to Inter- national Law. Tin:]!E is, I think, very little to bo addfcl la the way of general principles to those upon wl.icli, from what dropped from Si)- C. Paissell in the course of conversation, 1 gather that he and Sir R. Webster rely. If in the circiunstances I write at all, it is on the off-chance that while applying them I may happen to say something that has not already presented itself in exactly the same light. The American Argument may, perhaps, be resumed in the following propositions :- — 1. That international law derives its authority and its doctrini'-s directly from natural law, in such sense that the latter is capable, in new cases not within the scope of accepted inter- national rules, of supplying the grounds of an authoritative judgment. 2. That according to natural law, and upou the analogies of municipal law, fur-seals, living under the conditions of their actual existence, are susceptible of being made, and are, iu fact, subjects of property. 3. That a State is permitted, under its general rights of self-defence, to protect such property when in the high seas. No one of tliese propositions appears to ine to admit of justiiieation. Tlie only difficulties in dealing with them which present themselves arise from the r<>m()tencss of the American claims froni anything with which irternational law lias hitherto bad to do, and ii-om the lengthin(>ss of the statement which world have to be made iu cn'der to show that in the passages quoted from various autliovs the writers had nothing in their mind which would justily the particular application which is made of their [371] B words. I can only, of course, touch cursorily upon the various matters involved. 1. It is not the case that " natural law "—or, in other words, so much of morals as is applicahle to the relations of States — is universally agreed to be a direct and immediate source of international law, or of pi'actical rules between States where internatioual law is wanting. I cannot charge my memory with any inter- national controversy Avhich has been decided on that oasis; and, except Pufendorf, I can re- member no writer of authority who deduces international law immediately from natural law. Jurists and statesmen alike have been content to found their concrete doctrine upon axiomata media — upon the recognized principles of the law itself. Grotius even, almost the originator of the law as he was, and to a great extent, there- fore, obliged to rest upon abstract principles of morals, was careful to separate the law of nations from natural law, and to point out that the former acquires its force by the will of nations and reposes on their agreement. (Book I, ch. 1, §§ xiii and xiv.) In opposition to Pufendorf, - Bynkershoek antl Wolff, than whom no writers had greater authority before the time of Vattel, expressly reject natural law. Among more recent authors, Heffter says that international law is founded on necessity and the material needs of States, and is corrected in its develop- ment by morals. Calvo "reconnalt que I'id^e g6n4rale de justice peut modifier au bien et au profit commun les relations des fitats, toutefois " he "s'attache par pr^f^rencc aux principes dtSfinis par les Trait^s, aux regies qui se d^- duisent naturellement et logiquement des con- ventions partieuli^res en des divers cas resolus dans la pratique, enfin a la jurisprudence con- sac ree." It is true that a very large number of writers base their systems on natural law ; but it will be found that in practice, like Vattel, they ixdmit that it has to undergo modifications in accordance with the existing nature of the re- lations between States before it can be applied. It has been used to test the relative value of conflicting usages or tendencies of doctrine ; it has been employed to give formal expression to a growing custom ; it has been cited to support fresh abstract theories placed before the Avorld for acceptance; but no attempt has hitherto Ijeen made to impose it upoa States as a direct source of duty, ol)cdicncc to wliicb is implied in the obligation under which all civilized States lio to obey international law. Modern international law has long passed the point at which this would have been possible; it is now, and long has been, a body of deriva- tive principles and concrete rules, formed by the action and reaction on each other of custom, of moral feeling, and of convenience. It is only capable of modification either by the slow growth of fresh custom, under the influence of its other factors — morals and convenience — or by express agreement among the nations. In matters involving new principles, or largo exten- sion of principle, or fresh practices, no way exists of quickly changing the concrete rules of existing law other than the universal agreement of civilized States ; and to nothing else than those rules is ol)edience due. [Although the United States, almost alone of civilized countries, has not subscribed the Declaration of Paris, it would be interesting to know v hether she would admit herself to be precluded in law from using privateers in the event of war.] I have not been able to refresh my memory by reference to most of the books cited in the American Argument, but I feel confident that in ma.iy cases the written doctrine or view, taken as a wliolo, does not correspond with the impression produced by the extract, or by the portion of the Ai'gu'nent to which the reference is appended. I -nay take this opportunity of saying that the authorities cited in the Argument are of a curiously miscellaneous nature. Several arc very second rate. Some are such that it is almost an insult to the Tribunal to quote them. Not knowing, for example, anything about Felice, Plocque, and La Tour, I have made inquiries. Of the first I can learn nothing whatever. As to the second, I hear that the work cited wns a student's " thf-se " for the " Doctorat " — absolutely Avithout value. La Tour's book was offered to to the Institut in the hope of being " couronnc " — no very great honour — it was not good enough, and he was awarded a compassionate prize in money. It is also ^^•holly valueless. Testa ir absolutely without authority — very poorly Jjne. In other cases, such as that of Masse (p. '2G of the Argument, note), a book may be good in its own province^ but uqeJess from the: speculative; point of view. The references to Ijooks need both to be tested and sifted. 2. Discarding natural law, tlie next question is, Does international law support the contention of the United States, either directly or through the anah)gies of mnniciiial law ? Assuming for a moment that fur-seals (!an be a subject of projjerty, there can be no question that the Argument of the United States gives a wholly illegitimate extension to the right of self- protection as imdorstood in international law, and for the purpose of doing so mixes up a variety of rights of action on the part of States whicli are justified by very various reasons. These must be eliminated before tlio true pro- portions of the riglits of self-protection, in the sense of State action or jurisdiction outside the territory of the State in time of peace, can be clearly seen. Practices bearing on neutrals, which are exercised by belligerents, may first be put aside as destitute of any real analogy with the protection of fur-seals on the high seas. Essentially, belligerent rights rest on that genuine emergency of danger which is the true basis of all exceptional self-preservati^ acts, and upon the consent which, in consideration of that danger, is given by neutral States. Although the result of a war would not in very many cases be seriously affecited by ports being open, or by the entry of contraband, there are of course other eases in which the absence of blockade or free access of contraband would — as in the case of the American Civil War — in all probability change its issue. A neutral country cannot take upon itself todecide in which instances one or other state of things would exist. It consents, therefore, that the belligerents shall act freely ; and the more so that as it is bound to show equal friendliness to ))oth sides, it cannot countenance the rendering, on the part of its subjects, of what may in effect be assistance in the war. It may be noted that, historically looked at, the present privileges of belligerents are the atrophied remnants of usages of another and more violent description, which could in no way be considered as simply protection. The right, for example, of passage through a foreign State for purposes of (Xc^ cx. inrasion, with all th»oncrou8 attendant incidents ■: to neutral subjects, used formerly to be fully conceded. The present rights of belligerents aro those which remain after customs whicli wcro inconsistent with the independence or essential convenience of neutral States have been cut away. Piracy, again, must bo excluded. I am unable to remember any Avriter who plants jurisdiction over i)iratcs on the ground of solf-protoction, Tlic universal and sudiciont mode of accounting for it is tliat the pirate is a noxious animal, Avhom everybody, by ijcneral consent ol' nations, is at liberty to repress. The consent is (here, and forms tlie ground of established doctrine; it is impossible to go b(;l;ind it, and to put forward ottriltu ground of law what might become so if consent were absent. The case of Bevenuc Laws is equally remote. It also is founded on consent. No civilized State wishes to encourage offences against the laws of another State. It willingly allows a foreign State to take reasonable measures of prevention within a moderate distance outside its territorial waters. But it does not follow that action of this kind would in all eases meet with assent. It certainly would not, in ordinary cii-cumstances, be permitted at a considerable distance from land ; and in no case could it be maintained as of right against an objecting nation. In the case of Church v. Ilubbart, relied upon in tb.e American Argument, Chief Justice Marshall expressly said, " If this right be extended too far, it will be resisted ;" in other words, he acknowledged thai it is a privilege exercised by concession, and depending for its continued existence on the moderation with which it is used. The pursuit of vessels issuing from territorial waters after the.v — or some of the persons on board — have connnltted offences within them, is of course again different. There is again consent to the adoi)tion of moderate measures to punish an offence committed within the territory ; but it is a condition that the pursuit shall be immediate The right is not an absolute oiu?, to be exercised at the will of the State ; it is a limited and con- cessionary one. Whcii. eases of these sorts are all excluded, the residuum will be found to consist in those in which tbero has been a real or supposed, or at least an alleged, emergency in jjoiut of time, and genuine danger, if not to the existence of the [371] C state, at least to its territory and tUo lives of its sulijoets. So much is this the Civso that almost all writers overlook the rare instances in wliich the right of self-protection can l)o exercised in time of ])eaco, and coullne Iheir attention in tlioir remarks in relation to the exercise oi tiiat right to ineasurcs taken in view of war. Tim tru(! rule of self-protective acttion in ])lace8 hoyonil the territory of u State in time of ])('ace was stated l.y Mr. Webster with perfect correct- ness in essence, tliongh with unnecessary Rigour \J j of language, in a des])atch addressed to the British Government on the subject of the case of the " Caroline." " It will ho," he said, " for Her Alajesty's Government to show upon what state of facts and what rnhjs of international law the destruction of the ' Caroline ' is to he defended. It will be for that Government to show a necessity of self-defence, instant, over- - whelming, leaving no device of means and no CAaw^*^^ instant for deliberation." Is'o one denies the right of a State in such circumstances as these to act without reference to whether what it does falls within the limits of a practice which has received the consent of nations ; but to attempt to bring the protection of fur-seals under the same head with It is simply Idle. In no circumstances less exceptional am I aware of any action on the high seas which Is at once permissible and incapable of being referred truthfully and properly to some other head than that of self-protection. If It he alleged that where consent is given It Is giveii because the right to self-protection Is recognized, the answer Is obvious. The abstract right Is recognized, but the right to act when- ever a State considers itself to have sufficient cause is not recognized ; except In circumstances of pressing emergency, due occasion and due limits must be regulated beforehand by positive consent, or by the implied consent of continued sufferance. It is not for the State acting, but for the body of civilized States, to determine when individual action may be allowed outside territorial limits. 3. As regards the question whether fur-seals are capable of becoming subjects of property, the American Argument procee'son the assump- tion that the analogies of what It contends to be municipal law can be used, because natural law can he directly applied to the solution of new difflc'iiUios in intpriialionnl law, nnd Iwfniis) in thisi'osiicct miniicipiil law is morolynn expri-Hsiou of, 01" a logical (U'diictioii from, natural law. If what I have already said is well foinulcd, tiie ina[)])licability of natural law to the direct solution of international questions carries with it the failure of analogies deriv(>d f roni a municipal liiw vliieh is based on natural law. Hefore tlio analogies can bo applied, it must be shown that international laAv lias taken up into itself as acknowledged principles, forming part of its own body, the principles from which the municipal law is an inevitable, or at least the most reasonable, deduction. There can be no question that international law has not taken up into itself any principles connected with the reduction into possession and ownership of unowned things which aro susceptible of ownership, near enough to those embodied in niiiaicipal law aireeting animals naturally wild, to render the application of analogy possible. The law of territorial occupation is that which 2 / approached most nearly to the municipal law in question ; but it is not near, and it has grown on a line of its own out of the peculiar circum- stances under which occupation Avas efl'ected in the earlier days of discovery. This, being itself within international law, can of course bo used by way of analogy or illustration. And so far as it can be used it is unfavourable to the con- tention of the United States. Tor, while their contention would enlai'ge the range of permitted action with regard to unowned things, and would tend to diminish the amount of personal contact and control necessary to establish and preserve ownership, the recent development of the law of occupation proves that the present tcndet.cy of the body of States is to enact that there shall be more thorough and more continuous control than has hitherto been demanded ou the part of nations claiming to occupy and to reduce to possession unowned teriitory. It is unnecessary to point out the contrast between the loose and occasional connection between a State and its occupied territory which was allowed by universal consent when North America was occupied (take, e.g., the Mississippi Valley and Oregon cases),* OONFIDEN'I'IAL. n Notes as to when and how the United States first attempedto exercise authority in Behring Sea outside of the ordinary j-mile Limit. WHEN the British Government in 1887 desired information iis to the Begul?tions respecting fur- sealing, Mr. Bayard informed Sir L. West that— " the remoteness of the Rcene of r.he fur-seal tislieries, and the special poeuliarities of that industry, liave unavoidably delayed the Treasury ollicials m framing appropriate Regulations, and issuing orders to the United States' vessels to police the Alaskan waters for the jirotection of the fur-seals from indiscriminate slaughter and consequent speedy extenninatioiL" He also observed — " The question of instructions to GovemtDent vessels in regard to preventing the indiscriminate killing of fur-senls is now being considered, and I will inform you at the earliest day possible what has been decided, so that British and other vessels visiting the waters in question can govern t'.erasclves accordingly." No Eegulatioi 3 touching the "policing" of Alaskan waters for the protection of fur-seals were evc^r so furnished. In the British Case it was stated — British Csw, " The instruction given from time to time to Com- P- "9. manders of the lievenue Service, or of ships of war of the United Stutes cruizing in ISehring .'^ea, and guarding the interests of the Alitska Commercial Company upon the islands leased to the Company, do not even suggest the intention of that Government to assort a claim so vehe- mently disputed when advanced by Russia. "On the contrary, while vessels from Pirili-ih Columbia and elsewhere were trading and fishing generally in the Behring Sea, and while vessels — chietly those of the United States — were actually raiding the rookeries, the instructions relatni" lo ihc lislu'rics given to Revenue Marine vessels by tlii' I'liited Slates llovorninent until [281] B 1886 were coufined, as lias been shown, to tlie immediate protccttoQ of the seal islauds." And attain — "That diirinj^ tliat jioriod, notwitlistiindin^' the presence British Gate, of soal-huiifin',' oratt in l!eliiin^' Sea, tlie United States' ?• '''''• authorities confined tlie exercise of jurisdiction to the land and waters incUided witliin tlie ordinary territorial limits. ' In the United States' Case it was on the other hand asserted : — "Since tlie year 1867 the Treasury Department has United States' every year, with a single exception, sent one or more Case, p. 81. revenue-cutters to I'elnin;.; Sea for the jiurpose of guarding the interests of the United States' contract there, including the protection of fur-seals, against the infraction of the law relating to them." A notice was served under the terms of the See British Treaty of Arbitration calling for the production Co.mter.Case, •' ° ' Appendix, vol. i, of the instruction given to the United States' p. 59. revenue cutters or cruizers sent to Kehring Sea annually since the year 1867 referred to in the above para|,'raph of the United States' Case. Tlie reply of the Agent for the United States Britiih Counter- appears in the Appendix to the Pritish Counter- ^'"''' ""'• '• P* **' Case. Touching the demand he observes ; — "The Uudersigned herewith furnishes copies of the instructions tlierein ref'en-ed to, notwithstanding he is clearly of opinion that they have been neither specified nor alluded to in the Case of the United States. The documents in which these instructions are contained include other matters as well, which, being irrelevant to the present inquiry and somewhat voluminous, have been omitted. Should, however, the Ijritisli Agent find that he lia^ been prejudiced liy any such omission, the latter will, ujion demand, be su|iplied in every case." From the following references it will be seea : — 1. That from 1807 to 1881 the instructions to United States' revenue vessels in Behring Sea did not iu words apply to waters outside of ordinary territorial limits. 2. That not until 1881 wore the Revised Statutes of the United States interpreted by the United States' Treasury Popartment as apjilictible to the walers in Hchring Sea outside oP tlie a-mile limit. 3. Tliat uulil 1886 the instructions ., ore not 3 Act of Congress, 1868. British Case, p. 103. applied in fact, to foreign vessels outside of ordi- nary tcD-itorial limits, nor were foreign vessels specifically referred to in tbe instructions. d. Tliat in 1886 foreign vessels were for the first time seized when outside of the S-mile limit in Behring Sea. 5. That in 1887 the distinction between United States' vessels and others first appears in the in- structions (now produced), and United States' laws wore applied to foreign vessels. 6. That in 1888, though the instructions (now produced) were of the same general tenour as those of 188(5 and 1887, foreign vessels were not interfered with when outside of the 3-mile limit. 7. That the master of one of the United States' revenue vessels testified that his instruc- tions in 183S distinguished between United States' and foreign vessels. 8. That the instructions in which such a distinction was drawn have not been produced, though a demand was made under the Treaty for all of these instructions. By Act of Congress passed on the 27th July, 1808, the killing of seals was prohibited — " williin tliu limits of said Territory or in the waters thereof." Inslructions lo revenue veaseU, 1869, British Counter- Case, Appendix, Tol. i, p. 64. Treatury letter of February 6, 1869. "Instructions to enforce thi.t Act on »S''. l^cul Island. "Tliis proliibitioii is designed cliiefly to apply to killing for trade. You are cspi'cially to prevent that, but you will not puiii.sh Aleuts living on the i.sland should they occasionally kill such small luiiiibers as may bo absolutely necessary for their sustenance and clothing ou the island, not to be carried away." Act of Congress, 1870. British Case, p. 104. Ibid., pp. 107, 108. Mr. Ituutwell to Mr. Hielpt, 1872. The Act of Congress of the 1st July, 1870, prohibits the Jiilliug of fur-seals on islands or in waters adjacctt thereto. Mr. Boutwell, writing to Mr. Phelps on the 19th April, 1872, expresses tlie opinion that the United States has no authority to interfere with sealing-vessels wlien 3 marine miles from the shore. Secretary of the Treasury to Captain (ieo. W. Kailey, April 90, 1877. British Counter- Case, Appendix, Ttl. i, p. 68. " To cruize i!i ttu! waters of Alaska and among the Seal Islands for the proteetion of the soa-otler liunting-grouiid'* and the seal li.sliiiiies, as well as the revenue from customs," &c. [2S1J B 2 " liiifoi-rinc; to Departmuut lutler of tliis ilfiti;, Jirectiiig yo\i to pi'OL'ci'il with the rcvumio-stoiinicr ' Corwii',' under your ijouuimuil, to Alaska, nu siiuciiil duty iu cuuuectioii willi tliL' .su;d lishorifs, ynu iiiu liui'eby clotlieil with full |iowt!rs to LMifuicc the liiw coutaiued iu the provisidus of Suction ll)5G of lliu L'uitud States' lliivisod Statutes," &c. " Trmsuri/ Dqmrtmmt, Office of the Secretary, "Sir, jras!,l,i:/tnn, JIC, April 21, 1881. " JJeforriug to l)c]iartniiMit letter of this date, directing you to proceed with the reveuuo-steanier ' tJorwiu,' under your connnand, to AUvska, on .special duty in connection with the .seal li.^lnMios, you are licroby clothed with full pow{^rs to cuforce the law (roulniu'.'d iu the iirovisious of Section H)j() of the riiiti;d States' ]!evised Statutes, uud directed to s(!ize .ill vessels ami arri'st and turn over to the proper authorities any or all p(U'son3 whom you niaydeUict vicjlaliu'? the law ri'ferreil to, after due notice shall have been j;iven. Herewith is trausiuitte 1, for your iuforiua- tion and gnidanee, a copy of Department letter of the ll'th ultimo, addressed to Mr. 1 1. A. d'Ancona, of San Francisco, iiiteriiretin;.; the law regulating the killing of fur-bearing auiur.ds in the Territory of Alaska. " You will also seize any fire-arms, ammunition, and di.stilled spirits attempted to be introduced into the country without proper permit, under the provisions of Section I'.)").") of the Revised Statutes, and the Proclama- tion of the rresideiil dated the 4lh February, 1870. " A copy of said I'roclaination is inclosed. " Very respectfully, (Si;.^ued) " William Win'hom, "Secrctari/. " Captain C. L. Ifooper, " Commanding I'evenue-steamer ' Corwin, " San Frauoisco, California." Secretary of tho Treasury to Captain C. 1^. Hooper. May 15, 1880. British Counter. Case, Appendix, vol. i, p. tjtf. Iiistrui'tiuns, I8H1. Interprrtarioii >>f the Statuies. British Coiinter- Cuse, Appeiidis, Tol. i, p. 7U The letter to Mr. 1). A. d'Ancona referred to ia the above is as follows : — "TrfuMiry Drpartmrnt, Oflire of the Serrctarj/, •• Sir, 1V,tsM)ij/on, D.C, March 12, 1881. "Your letter of the lytli ultimo, reipiestiug certain United Stales' information in regard (o the meaning iiluced by this ^°,'*: APP*"''"' Department ujion the law regulating the killing of fur- hearing animals in the Territory of Alaska was duly received. The law prolabits the killing of any fur-bearing animals, except as otherwise tiierein i)rovided, within the limits of Alaska Territory, or in the waters thereof, and also prohibits tho killing of any fur-seals on the Lslauds of St. Paul and St. Cieorge, or in the waters adjacent thereto, except during certain months. " You iiuiuiro in regard to the interpretation of the terms 'waters thereof and 'waters adjacent thereto,' as used in the law, and how far the jurisdiction of the United States is to he understood iis extending. " Presuming your inquin- to relate more especially to the waters of Western Aliiskii, yon are informed tlint the Trcnty with Russia of the .".0th March, 1870, by which the Turrilory of Alaska wa.s ceded to the Tnited State.'", defines the boundary of the territory so ceded. Thi.? Treaty is found on ]>]>. G71 to 073 of tlie volume of Treaties of the Revised Statutes. It will he seen therefrom tliat the limit of the cession extends from a line starting from the Arctic Ocean, and running through Bering Strait to the north of St. Lawrence Islands. The line runs thence in a south-westerly direction, so as to pass midway hetweet the Island of Attn and CojipcM- Island, of the Kromanboski couplet or group, in the North Parilic Ocean, to meridian of 193 degrees of west longitude. All the waters within that boundary to the western end of the Aleutian Archipelago and chain of i.slands are considered as comprised within the waters of Alaska Territory. " All the penalties proscribed by law against the killing of fur-bearing animals would therefore attach against any violation of law within the limits befoie described. ■' Very respectfully, (Signed; " II. F. Fhenxh, " Acting Secretary. " Mr. D. A. Ancona, " No. 717, O'Farrell Street, " 8an Krancisco, Cal." Seizures, IS-Jti. Instructions )ti87. British Counter- Case, Appi'iidin, vol. ii p. 73. In August 1886 Captain Abbey, commanding United States' revenue-steamer " Corwin," under instructions similar to those of 1881, arrested the " Tliomton," " Carolcna," and " Omvard." These vessels were subsequently released by order of the Secretary of 8tate for the United States, Mr. Bayard. On the 10th May, 1887, the usual instructions were given, with the addition of this clause not contained in previous instructions :— " Yon will use the force at your command to the end that no persons attached to or coimectod with any vessels of the United States violate this law, and will strictly enforce the penalties provided for such violation." It was also stated in the letter of the 10th May, 1887 :— IbM. " You will be diligent in enforcing the laws against the importation of into.iicating lii|noi'8 and brcech-loatling rifles and ammunition into the Territory of Alaska, your atten- tion being directed to the Kxecutive Order of the 4lh May, 18H7, a eoiiv of whirh is inclosed." Bii'inh Case, A copy of this Order of the Mil ilay, 18S7, has Aprfndix. vol. i.i, ,,^^ ,3,,^,,^ supplied, tliou-h the British vessel "Grace" was seizt'.i umK'r it. 'mm Whilb on the 19th May, 1887, the following telegram appears : — " Treasury Department, Offlce nf the Seerctaiy. Washiwjton, May 18, 188'. "First paragraph of your instructions relates to all jQri'.ith Counter- vessels tound within the limits of Alaska Territory or in Case, Apppr.dii, the waters thereof, engaged iu violating the provisions of ' Section 1956, Revised Statutes. The specific mention of American vessels has reference to violation of Section 1961, Revised Statutes, and applies to them wherever found violating the law. (Signed) "HUGH S. THOMPSON. " Acting Secrttary" This telegram apparently was sent to Captain Healy, and also a copy to Captain Shepard. Further seizures were made in 1887. The instructions are produced for the year 1888. They are similar to those of 1887. Captain Shepard, however, gave the following testimony before the Congressional Committee of 1889 : — " Cajitain Shcpani's Tedimony. " Mr. Ditnn. — There is no di.scriminativig between an oOlh Cong., American and a British vessel. One would have been "^'"^ Sess., H. R. . . . , , , , , 3883, p. 240. seized under precisely the same circumstances as the other ? — A. The hiw makes a little distinction between an American and a British vessel in regard to tlie killing of female seals and seals under 1 year uf age. " Mr. Dinfjley. — Tlie law makes a distinction or the Treasury Department : whicli ? — The Witness. I under- stand the construction tlie Treasury Department puts on the law is that they 'an prohibit the killing of female seals or seals untlijr 1 year old by an American vessel any- where, but tlicy could not enforce that regulation on a foreign vessel. " Mr. Dtum. — You understand the Treasury Department puts that construction upon the law. Is there a different construction embodied in the orders given officers of revenue-vessels ? — A. Yes, Sir ; they prohibit the killing of female seals, and seals less than 1 year old, by American vessels anywhere. " Mr. Diiiijhy. — If I uudeistand you correctly, British vessels were allowed to do certain things that American vessels were not allowed to do i " Mr. Dunn. — He states tlie Treasury Department places H con.struction upon the Statute which does discriminate between an American and British vessel." No arrests were made in 1888, though the instructions were, as stated, the same as those of 1880-87. It would appear that the complete instructions for 1888 have been witliheld. "^ Memorandiim by M. E. Clnnct. (TVanslntion.) 1. Legal Posiieon of Animals. 1. IN legal language animals are said to be all living things other than man. 2. By French law animals are divided into three classes : — (i.) V/ikl Animals (feru). — These live in a state of natural freedom {in laxitate naturali), or having come under the control of man, arc only kept there by force ; those, in a word, which are not fitted by nature and habits to be either the servants or companions of man. Such are game both furred and feathered, quadrupeds living in a state of freedom, savage animals, fish, Crustacea, molluscs, &c. The words " wild animals " include rabbits, birds, and birds of passage, particularly storks. Trib. Corr. (Colmar, 12 Avril, 1870 (Klinger), Neyremand, p. 212), the lark, wood-cock, snipe, fig-pecker, redwing white-tail, ortolan, bustard, stock-dove, and wood- pigeon. (Instruction du Ministre de I'lntdrieur du 28 AoAt et du 30 Janvier, 1874.) In addition to birds of passage, water-fowl, even birds living close to man in his dwelling- place or his gardens, having taken up their abode there, arc held to be wild animals, the raven (Cassation, 5 Nov., 1812, T). 13. 1. 31.), the crow (Cassation, 13 Nov., 1815, D. Hep. V" Chasse No. 21), and other small birds (Cassa- tion Ch. ruunies [Peyroux], 25 Mars, 18JG, D. 46. 1. 95.; Cassation, 21 Sept., 1817 [Girma] D. 47. 4. 70), even the sparrow. (ii.) Domestic Animals (Mansueta). — These are those which man has succeeded in mastering or taming, which he has subjected to his will, which live with him, breed under his protection, [386] B aud remain subjected to Ins immediate and con- tinuous control. Under this generic name are included : — (a.) Cattle. — Ilomed-cattle, bulls, oxen, cows, small cattle, rams, wethers, ewes, pigs, and goats. (;8.) The equine species, namely, horses, don- keys, and mules. (y.) 7<7or/f6- and Herds.— Boiica of domestic animals brought up and fed together by man's care, namely, oxen, cows, sheep, pigs, and goats. (8.) Poultry. — Farm-yard fowls, chickens, cocks, cnpons, turkeys, geese, and ducks. (e.) Wool-hearing /iHuna/s.— Rams, sheep, and lambs. The Court of Cassation has also defined "domestic animals": It being understood in law that under the general denomination of domestic animals. Article 454 of the Penal Code includes living things which live, grow up, feed, and breed under the roof of man by his care. (Cassation, 11 Mars, 1861. Lichi^re. Sirey, 1861, 1. 1011.) (iii.) Half-liimcd Animals (Mansuefacta) form an intermediate class. There are animals who, without having entirely lost their natural free- dom, have become accustomed to return without compulsion to the i)ropcrty of the man where tlioy have to some extent made their liome (pigeons, rabbits, fisli, and bees). Dcmolombc X, No. 176. This last class is only admitted by a small number of authorities. It also possesses but little importance, for these animals are regarded by law in the light of domestic animals when they arc on the property of man, and as wild finimals when they have left it. Animals are regarded as property. * By their nature they belong to the categoi-y of personal property. The law always gives the character of real estate " by dcstiuulion " to certain animals connected with the cultivation of the soil; to doves in a dovecot, to rabbits in a warren, to fish in a pond, to l)ce-hives, that is, during the time the said animals remain on the estate. (Civil Code, Art. 524.) » Civil Code, Article 528. Mov.ihl.; cl.jccts u.j lliosi,' which rau he transported from one place to another wlielhcr they tnavc of tlair own accord, such as animals, or whether they cannot chaiii;o their position except by th.- iigen.y of an external force, iiuch as inanimate things. Animals can bo the object of various civil contracts, such as sale, hire, the eonstituticu of usufruct, &c. TI. Rights which Man can aoqiiuic ovkh Animals. 1. Domfintic Animal''. Man enjoys over the domestic animals of which he is the owner, a similar right to that which devolves on him with regard to otlicr objects forming his property, and this right is defnied as follows by Article 541. of the Civil Code: " Property is the right of enjoying and disposing of goods in the fullest sense, provided that they do not make use of it contrary (o tlie law or to regulations." The rights of the proprietor of a domestic animal do not cease when the animal momentarily escapes from his custody and goes on to private or public land. Unless from necessity, it is forbidden to kill a domestic animal even although it is found in a place of wliieh its master is not the owner. Artii Ics 452, 453, and to t of the Pcial Code providi for this event. But, in return, the owner of a domestic animal is responsible for the action of his animals, even when they have escaped from his kec|)ing. He must make good the damage which they have caused to property or persons. ^Vrticlo 1.385, Code Civil, " The owner of an animal, or he who makes use of it, is responsible wliil-' using it for the damage which the animal has caused, whether the animal be under his control, or whether it has strayed or escaped." The mere want of supervision over a domestic animal, and the fact of leaving it to itself, con- stitutes a penal bi'eaeli of the law which is pro- vided for, and punished by Articles 3 and 12 of heading 2 of the Law of the 28th September, Gth October, 1791 , for the penalty and seizure of stray animals, beyond the reparation which can be exacted. Certain animals which have strayed on to tlio laud of other persons, may, under the new law of the Rural Code of April -l, 1889 (Article 4), be killisd by the neighbours. " The man whoso fowls pass over the property of a neighbour, aud there cause damage, is bound to make good the damage. He who has suffered the damage may even kill the fowls, but only on the spot at the moment when the damage is being done, and he has no power to appropriate them." Even an animal that is included in the category of domestic animals, can be acquired by occupa- tion in favour of the person who first takes possession vf it, provided that it docs not belong to any one. It was so decided by tlie Magistrate of Fontaincblcau on the 2Gth April, 1871, in the case of a stray horse from the Prussian army. (Special Report of the decisions of Magistrates, 1871.) 2. Wild Animals. A wild animal living in a state of natural freedom belongs to no one. It is res nullius. The method of acquii-ing a right of property over it is by taking possession. (Aubry et Rau., Droit Civil, T. 2, para. 201.) It will be useful to recall in a few words ^hat is meant by res nullius in rrench law, and the methods of acquisition which these things admit of. Things res nullius ere — (rt.) Things which can never be the private property of any one ; such as air, light, the liigh sea, running water in a state of continuous motion. (b.) Things which do not actually belong to any one, but which by their nature become the object of a personal appropriation by taking possession. Such arc vild animals, fish of the sea or of running waters, coral, plants, and grasses on the shore, &c. (Demolombo, ix. No. 'IGl.) (r.) As regards the products of the sea, such as amber, coral, blubber fishes (certain whales), and the like, a distinction must be made. If the things are taken from the bottom of the sea, or caught upon the waves, they are the property of the first taker {vide diiferLnt (.-ascs, Decrees, 91 h January, 1852, 1th July, 1853, lOtli Novem- ber, ISo'J, and lOih May, 1802) ; If, on the other hand, they are simply found on the sands, a third part only belongs to the finder, and the other two-thirds to Ui" Stale. (Ordinarici- 1 "81, Book 1, Tit. ix, Art. 2!) ; Book 6, Tit. vii, ■ Civ. Art. 539 and 7i;J ) Every one has an equal right to gather the riches which the sea contains, for these riches tliemselves, up to the time of heing taken possession of by the individual, are common to all. (Busson, Dcs Rtablissoraents de Pcclie, p. 17.) Occupafion, that is to say, taking possession of wild animals, is effected by means of hunting or fishing. Iluntiny. — Hunting, says in eJTect the Court of Cassaliou, includes the whole series of opera- tions which begin with the search for a wild animal for tlie pur])oso of ultimately efTecting its capture. (Cassation, 29lh June, 1889, S. 89. 1. d47.) Hunting being the means of capturhig and appro])riatiug to oneself wild animals, it follows that hunting is only tlie exercise of a natural right. Nevertheless, tliis natural right has been for a long time appropriate 1 in France by the feudal law to the profit ft tlu^ Sovereign; it was con- sidered as a Royal right. The Nobles had alone the power to hunt, but they did not exercise it, even on their own lands, except by Royal licence.* After the French Revolution things were put right again. Tlic Law of tlio 3rd Novembei-, 1789, thus enacted, in Article 3, " the exclusive right of liunting and of free warrens are equally abolished ; and every owner of land has, on his possessions only, the riglit to destroy or cause to be destroyed, every kind of game, provided he conforms to the Police Laws which may l/C made in relation to the publie safety." • I{-fcr 10 text of Royal Onlinant'c of Louis XIV of IGCa, of which Articles 14 niii 2S aro as fjllows ; — "Artido H. We permit all Lords, (.lentlemen, and Xohles to hunt in noble fashion (' iiohlenicnt ') wiili dojs and bin!:! m ih.cii- iorestt, thicki'ls, warrens, aiiil plains provided that they k, parishes, villages, liamlets, peasants, and yeonn'i, of wli lever condition and quality thev may be, not possessing fiefs, I.ordsh'ps, and ' haute justice ' from huntinjf in any place, cundilion, or manner, or any furred or feathereil game whi.tcver, nuiler pcn,\!iy of 100/. tine for the first lime, I'.uM,' for the second, ai,d fur the liiird to be liable to tl.ae h^nrs in the pillory of ihcir jdact of rcfideiioo on market day, and banislied, for lhrc<' years fron, tlie jiirisdiclii.n of the 'iua!tri-e,' inilcss for sonu' cause ihj ,li: l.;(vi can remit or diminish the penalty to ' prohibition.' " [385] C 6 Suhscquently, the Police Law of the cliaso of the Rrd May, ISM, established the same principle in paragraph 2 of Article 1 :— "No one shall have the right to hunt on the property of another without the consent of the proprietor or of his assigns." The right of hunting is thus a branch, an accessory of property. But it must not bo con- founded with right over the game. The right of the chase only allows the proprietor to legally possess himself of wild animals found on his Innd. It does not confer upon him ipso facto a right of property over those animals. That which is the accessory of property is not the animals which dwell there, but only the opportunity of tuldng them. The animals them- selves always retain their quality of res nullius. In order that the ))roprietor of the soil may acquire them, he is obliged even himself to resort to taking possession. So that if an individual, without the consent of the owner, kills a wild animal on the jjroperty of another, he commits an offence provided for by Article 2 of the Law of (he 3rd May, 181 1- ; he is liable (o damages, to confiscation, but he is, in principle, the owner of the game which he has made his own by capture. M. Dcmolombe, in commenting on the general provisions of Liv. Ill of the Civil Code as to the different methods in Avliich a man acquires property brings out in clear relief the theory we have just cxj)lained. " Does the hunter who kills a head of game become the owner of it? This is our subject. The answer is simple : the property in the animal killed in hunting lies in the hunter in virtue of (ho riii'ht of possession. " This rule is perfectly clear when the animal has Ijeeu killed by the liunter on his own land or i;n the hnd of another with the jiormission of the proprietor. " But ought this rule to be applied in the case where tlie hunter has killed or taken the game on the land of another without the permission of the proprietor, or in spite of his prohibition? "This is a vei'y old questioii, and Cnjas has maintained the negative (Observation 1, cap. 2). Bu; th(! contrary solution has always been gone- rally insisted upon, and it is thnt which follows from the Boman laws (' Cfjmj). Inst. par. 12 de per div. Vinnius hoc loco '). "Pothicr, in our ancient law, likowisc maiu- tiiincd it ('(Ic la rropriet^ ' Xo. 21), Jind it is. witliout any douLf, Hio best iuicordin,';- to our present law. " The prohibition by tlic proprietor a^'aini-t any person hunting on his land does not really change the nature of the game, r.luch is none the less always a thing nidlius ; ' prohibitio isla,' as Vinnius well says, ' eonditionem animalis mutarc non potest (loc. sup.).' The owner of the laud cannot bring an action to recover the game since he has never been the owner of it ; all he can do is to sue for damages. "The Law of the 3rd May, IStt, contains nothing contrary to this principle (see Article 11, No. 2). It is only in the case of hunting during the prohibifcd time that this law deprives the hunter of the game which ]w has killed or taken ; and further, it is not in ord'>r to restore it to the proprietor of the land on which it has been killed by a third person, for, as we have seen, the law gives it, on the contrary, to charitable Socictie':." Domolombe, T. xiii, No. 23. Same opinion : Toullier, T. ii, Xo. 7. Proiulhon, "Du Dcmiaine Triv^," T. i, Xo. y&G. Dui-anton, T. iv, Nos. 270 and 283. Demante, T. iii, Xo. 11 bis in. Auliry and Rau, T. ii, p. 230. Another author of repute in hunting matters says in forcible lannuage : — "Game at large, wliich is not coulined in an inclosed area from which it cannot escape, belongs to no one, no move (o the proprietor of tlu- land on which it is harbouring, lying, or perchuig, or through which it is passing, than to any one else. It becomes the properly ol' the first who takes possession of it, even on yromul wbei.' he has not tlte right of cIkssc or pursuit. This is a constant principle applied \\it!\oul dispute from Hie tim.e rif (he Eonians to our omi days. It results from the very nature of the tliiufi. Xatural law and reason ;ilone would tench it were it not overjnvhere ^vritton and acknowledged. "A right, in fact, is nttt intelligible except so far as it is possible to exorcise it. The exereisis of the :'^i of prop(«rty consists in the us(< of the thing which is Mibject to if. The proprietor .;F a Held U.SLS it when he cultivates it, when he ivaps it, or oven when he walks over it. 'I'o ute a hare 8 which is lying there, he must begin by taking it, or at least by having it in his possession in such a mannui' as to be its master and to prevent it froKi escaping. Up till that time it belongs to no one, is its own master, and often -will only lose its liberty with its life, to the profit of Avho- evcr kills it for the purpose of appropriating it by taking possession." " Droit du Cliasseur," by P. Villequeii, Doyen de la Facultc do Droit do Dijon, and formerly Lieutenant do Louveferie. 2nd edition, 18S1., Xo. 21. Wild animals can pass from the categoi-y of res nuUius and become the object of private pro- perty, but then it is on the condition that they arc kept and confined in an inclosed place, where tli^y remain subject to the action of the pro- prietor. Tlie Cour de Cassation has thus decided with regard to rabbits : — " Considering that rabbits like all other game are by theu- nature wild animals which belong to no one; that they only become private property when they arc inclosed or at least settled in a place specially intended for this reproduction or preservation." (Cassation C'riiu. 13 Aug. 1810, (Desmares) Sirey, 1810, 1. 732). Tlu; property which is established in wild animals liy possession, rests so clearly on the fact of etfcctive possession that it is lost witli that possession when the animals 1)y escaping from us have regained their natural liljerty, and have thus returned to the " negative domain " of the human race ; thus difi'ering from inanimate things and domestic animals in which we retain the property even when they are lost. Pothier, " Do la Proprit'te, No. .57. Demolomljo, T. xiii. No. I'G. By the application of this principle, this loss of property in the wild rnimal wliich has escaped would also result even if it bad liecu the subject of partial domestication. Thus it was decided witli regard to a sq.iirrcl captm'cd and appro- priated, that after it had left its master it could become the property of the first possessor : — " Considering that the squirrel is by its nature a -wild animal, which o.ily becomes private property, when it is, if not confined, at least 9 located in a place intended for its maintenanco and prescrvatiou, and remains in the possession of its proprietor, and that it preserves that eharaetor only, during that time \vlu>n it is dctHiiied, that liaving iel't that place on ri'^aiiiing its liberty, it ceases to belong to any one and can become, iu case of a new act of taking posses- sion, the property of the lirst possessor." Tril). dc raix dc I'oissy, 10 Juillet 1885. Referred to the " Moniteur des Juges do I'aix," 1885, p. 510, hy ^l. Carrd, .Inge de Pnix of the First Arrondissemeiit of Paris, vho entirely approved this decision. Fiahing. — Fish of the sea and rnnning rivers arc also, as we have said, Avlld animals, and conse- quently, r« nuUiua. The capture of fish is effected by means of a series of operations whicli has received the name of "fishing" ("lapeehe"). Fishing is a mode of taking fish to the profit of those who practice it, in virtue of tlieir own right or with the permission of tlie person to whom the right of fishing belongs ; the fish which they take is acquired by them by virtue of taking possession. A distinction is made between sea fishing, whicli is carried on in salt -water, and river fish- ing, which is carried on in fresh water. Sea Fishiny. — Every person can fish in the sea without permission. Ordonuauce sur la Marine, of IGSl. Liv. V, Tit. i. Art. 2. Pothier " Dc la Propriety," No. 51. It is in this sense that, as one is accustomed to say, sea fishing is free ; for in other respects it is subject to l}ye-Lfiws and Police Rules, which, in the general interest — in order to prevent th(! ilestruction of the spawn and to encourage the reproduction of different kinds of fish — determine the times, seasons, and liours during «hicli lish- ing is forbidden, the method, the maclunes and instruments prohibited, and the size of the nets wliich may be used. Ordonn. of 1G81. Liv. v. Declarations du Hoi des 23 Avrii, 2 Sep- tembre, (>t 21 Deeembre 1720, IS :\Iars 1727. Ordonn. du 13 Mai 1818. These Rules are not binding in the open sea except on the nationals, whom alone the national [386] D N^ IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) /q /^J:^ 1.0 I.I 11.25 Ui|2£ |U ISO ■^" M^B lii 1^ |2.2 I- u U 11.6 ^ 4r ^ni-PMMPRMipiiPPii«w^lPiP«ipi^^ __l^^ liiililiii^^ ■BWPI^ff^ fPPW iiWii"^^«wp!i5PB|Pfi! PPP "What are now the rij^ta of the United States aa to the fur-seal fisheries] in the vateis of Behring Sea outside the ordinary territorial limits ; whether such rights grow out of the cession by Bussia of any special rights or juris* diction held by her in such fisheries or in the waters of Behring Sea, or oiU oftht mimmkip of the breeding islands and Vie habits of the secJs i» resorting thither and rearing their young thsrton and going out from M< islands for food, or out of any other fact or incident connected with the reia- tion of these seal fisheries to the territorial possessions of the United States V It is further stated in a later part of this despatch that the GoTemment of the United States — " Do not lack abundant authority, according to the ablest exponents of international law, for holding a small section of the Behring Sea for the protection of the fur-seals. Controlling a comparatively restricted area of water for that one specific purpose is by no means the equivalent of declaring the sea, or any part thereof, mare ckuuvm." What this "small section" of Behring Sea means is more folly explained in a foregoing portion of the despatch, as follows : — "The President will ask the Oovemment of Great Britain to agree to the distance of 20 marine leagues> within which no ship shall hover around the islands of St Paul and St. Geoi^e firom the 16th May to the IStb October in each year. This vnQ prove an effective mode of preserving the seal fisheries xot the use of the civilized world. .... The United States desires only such control over a limited extent of the waters in the Behring Sea for a part of each year as will be sufficient to insure the pro- tection of the fur-seal fisheries." In the question as now propounded for decision by arbitration, there appears, however, to be an underlying claim to some exceptional if not absolute right of property in the fur-seals, in- dividually or collectively, which cannot be admitted. It is scarcely conceivable that any Qovemment would endeavour to maintain such a proposition of ownership in the fiir-seal as has been advanced for instance by Mr. Elliott, but the mere fact that such a claim has been stated renders it necessary to guard against any misconoeption in this regard. Mr. Elliott, in a foot-note to p. 167 of his Census Heport, 1881, writes as follows :~r " The fur-seals of Alaska, collectively and individually, are the property of the general Government, and for their iiiiiii npiliipnpnif^"Pfli|ii^ wmmmmm 8 "Huper*! Higtiiira," April 1891. apecial and sole protection the extra legislation of July 1870 was designedly enacted. Every fur-seal playing in the waters of Behring Sea around about the Pribyloff Islands, no matter if found eo doing 100 miles [away from those rookeries, belongs there, has been begotten and bom thereon, and is the animal that the explicit shield of the law protects; no. legal sophism or quibble can cloud the whole truth of my statemsnt. Construe the law other- wise, then a marine licence of hunting beyond 1 marine league (3 miles) from the shores of the Pribylofr Islands would soon raise up such a multitudinpus fleet that its cruizing could not fail, in a few short years, in so harassing and irritating the breeding-seals as to cause tbeir with- drawal from the Alaslcan rookeries, and probable retreat to those of Russia, a source of undoubted Muscovite delight and emolument, and of corresponding shame and loss tons." Another and later, but again unofficial, exponent of the theory of "property" in fur- Beats is found in the Honourable Mr. E. J. Fhclps, who, in an article on the general subject con- tributed to a popular magazine, seems inclined to take ground similar to that adopted by Mr. Elliott, though less definitely. Speaking of right on the high seas, he says : — " It never authorizes injury to the property or just rights of others, which ore as sacred al sea as on shore. This colony of seals, making their home on American soil, and unable to exist without a home upon some soil, belong to the proprietors of the soil, and are a part of their property, and do not lose this quality by passing from one part of the territory to another in a regular and periodical migration necessary to their life, even though in making it they pass temporarily through water that is moro than 3 miles from land." Other passages which may be cited from. Mr. Phelps' article to the same eSEect are : — " The simple question presented is whether the United States has a right to protect its property and the business of its people from the wanton and barbarous destruction by foreigners which it has made criminal by Act of Congress. • • • • " These animals, as has been pointed out, are a large and valuable property, an established and proper source of public and private revenue and of usefid industry." Still further, in reviewing briefly the general aspects of the question in his opening remarks, he writes : — " The Alaskan fur-seal fishery is the most important in the world. It was a material element in the value of that Miiiiiiii (UM»llipjp. ' ■ " .' 'T'l^Fmmif^ff^^gifm^mmmf^ig^if^^ If lilMiiiiiiiiiiMiiii "(,■ ■■ .T"'«^- l_ mmifmi' wnm nqpiPflHiPl m piovince when purchased bjr the United States from Susaia, at a heavy cost, and one of the principal induce- ments upon which the purchase was made." The context of the first-quoted passages show that the theory of property is based, in so far as it is propounded by Mr. Phelps, on fundamentally erroneous conceptions of the habits and migra- tions of the fur-seals. It is stated, for instance, that the seal — " Is not a denizen of the sea alone, atUl le»» a ' vmnderer of the sea.' .... It has a fixed habitation on the Alaskan shore, from which it never long departs. .... It is the habit of this colony of seak to cross through the S'3a during breeding time co the Pribyloff Islands. . ... In makiruf the passage th^ seals necessarily cross a portion of Behring Sea which is more than 3 miles outside of either shore. .... It has been the custom for several years past for certain Canadian vessels fitted out for the purpose to intercept the seals on this passage while outside the .3-mile line, and to shoot them in the water." From all which it would appear to be believed that the fur-seal spends most of its time ashore on the breeding islands, and that it leaves terri- torial waters somewhere, at the breeding season, merely to cross a certain extent of open sea. These and other points -^hich seem to be assumed in this particular contention are more fully dealt with later. The point raised in the last citation from Ifr. Phelps' article appears, however, to be new, and may be disposed of at once. So far from the existence of the fur-seal liaving been a prin- cipal inducement for the purchase of Alaska by the United States, it is actually the fact that there is a singular and well-nigh complete absence of allusion to that animal in all the pleas urged at the time in favour of this purchase. Mr. Elliott is particularly definite on this point. In his Report published in connection -with the Tenth Census of the United States (pp. 68, 69), he writes : — "Stbanoe Ionobance or thxib VAtiUK IN 1867. — Con- sidering that this Beturn [that obtained from seal-skins] is the only one made by the Oovemment of Alaska since its transfer, and that it was never taken into account at first by the most ardent advocates of the purchase of Snssian America, it is in itself highly creditable and interesting ; to Senator Sumner the friends of the acquisi- tion of this territory in 1867 delegated the task of making the principal argument in itd faronr. Ereiything that MiiiMi Miiiiiliiililiil _^gglg_ WM written in strange tongues was caieftilly translated for the choice bits of mention which could bo found of Alaska's valne. Hence his speech on the subject possesses this interest; it is the embodiment of ereiything that could be scraped together having the faintest shadow of authenticity, by all the eager Mends of the purchase, which gave the least idea of any valuable natural resources in Alaska ; therefore, when in summing all this up, he makes no reference whatever to the seal islands, or to the fur-seal itsell, the extraordinary ignorance at home and abroad relative to the Pribyloff Islands can be well appreciated." The passage cited previously from Elliott has, however, at least the merit of formulating a definite claim with reference to property in seals. But it is submitted that merely to state such a claim in plain terms is to show its untenable character, for the assumption is made that the United States can, by its individual action, and imder cover of a domestic law, control the rights of other Powers upon the high seas. The claim, it is true, is in this instance made only in respect to seals; but any such principle once acknow- ledged might, on very similar grounds, be extended to other fisheries, and more particularly to the taking of salmon or other fishes at sea, the natural breeding-places of which are found in rivers, nnd thus within recognized territorial limits. Apart from the ordinary limits of marine jurisdiction attaching to coast-lines, or to some exceptional claim to areal jurisdiction over some tract of sea, however limited or bounded, there is absolutely no precedent for the assumption of the right to property in a free-swimming animal, the course of which is uncontrolled, and not con* ■ reliable by man. The only known analogous cases in which a right of property in seals has been defined or declared is found in the Newfoundland Act, entitled " An Act to regulate the Taking of, and right of Property in, Seals " (52 Vict., cap. 23). Even here the enactment applies only to vessels going from or returning to Newfoundland ports. The clause referred to is as follows : — '" I. In any action or proceeding for the recovery of, or in relation to, the property in seals or seal pelts, killed by persons engaged in or prosecuting the seal fishery in steam-vessels going from, or coming to, the ports in this Colony, it shall be held that no property, or right of property, shall have accrued except in seals killed, sculped, panned, or bulked, by and in the actual charge of the [676J C liiiiliiiiiMiiiiiliii^ iii ■if^i' '•■.>iNw^liiiiJlpipiji|j|Pumi^^^«Pfi|p^|H|p|M if \ir Hi. \n I: iMl iiMMMfiiliiiii iiil iiiliiittta liMiiiHMii diii ""wropi "mmm^Wmlllm^ oUimanU, or •ome penon or panoni for them worUng, ot engaged in oarrjring away luch aeaU or aeal pelta. ' I is In effect, therefore, thia Regulation merely put* into precise terms, conformably to the nature of the operations in the region to which it applies, the general principles preriously referred to. On the other hand, and still referring to seals, it can be shown that the United States has more than onoe distinctly asserted the fyir-seal fishery to be part of the ocean fishery, even claiming that, unless under exceptional circumstances, it should be free not alone without, but also within, theS •mile limit. The United States' Gtovemment on no occasion since the acquisition of the Pribyloff Islands in 1867 has attempted to enforce such a principle by legislation or otherwise either on behalf of itself or of its lessees of the islands. The law for the protection of the seal islands has never been enforced either against vessels of the United States or other countries outside of Behring Sea ; therefore a large part of the year they are found all over the waters of the North Pacific. From the official correspondence, it has been made clear that the suggestion embodied in this question is an aft&r-thought. Mr. Elliott's contention in respect to "pro- perty" in fur-seals ftirther appears to depend essentially on the supposition thai all fu]^8eals found in the North Pacific are " begotten and 1x n " on the Pribyloff Islands belonging to the U 'ted States, and though not equally cisarly s ' uioed by Mr. Blaine, the contention of the I ted States' Government to the same effiect aj. >ars also to rest on this or very similar pt lines. a opposition to such chum, it may be said (' that such premises are unsound, and (2) that, even if sound, the conclusions are unwarranted, either in law or on grounds ot equity oi precedent. (1.) The Pribyloff Islands, upon which all the breecUng rookeries belonging to the United States are situated, are not the only similar breeding rookeries in the North Pacific. Those of the Commander or Komandorski Islands (Behring and Copper Islands) were discovered some years earlier by the Russians, and have ever since been WW^m^ PfffPPniPiiPiPPfPPipr^ pwwpppwpip inqamted by large numbers of breeding seals, and have yielded iu>|.'>rtant annual returns of seal-skins. Robben Isbnd, near Sagbalien Island, in the Okotsk Soa, has likewise been, ever since its discovery, occupied as a breeding rookery, and largo numbers of skins hare been obtained firom it, notwithstanding the injurious effects produced by raids upon its shores, which hare been chiefly attributable to citizens of the United States. Considerable breeding rookeries like* wise existed on several of the Kurilo Islands within the territorial jurisdiction of Japan and Russia, and some of these still surzive, though in much diminished form, consequent on tho effect of raids and illegal and impolitic destruo- tion on the shores of theso islands themselves. It is moreover certain that the fur-seal formerly lesorted for breeding purposes to several places situated on the coast of British Columbia, and it is highly probable, if not absolutely certain, that a considerable number of young seals is still annually brought forth on various outlying parts of this coast. Leaving aside, however, all doubtful or rela- tively unimportant cases of existing breeding places, we have the indubitable fact that a large proportion of* the whole number of fur-seds frequenting the North Pacific are 'brought forth on the Commander Islands, still belonging to Russia. Thus, to establish even a colourable claim to " property " in any particular seals taken at sea, or to seals thus taken in any defined area, it becomes necessary to prove that such seals have been brought forth on certain specified islands within tho territorial jurisdiction of the United States. No mere assertion on this point can be accepted. The onus of proof devolves naturally on those making such a claim, and from tho very nature of the circumstances such proof is, it is submitted, impossible. Any exception to a so general claim, however small, must be considered as sufficient technically to invalidate it, and even if in any particular year it should by some means be found practicable to substantiate the conten- tion involved, that all seals met mth in the eastern port of the Pacific — say, east of the 180th meridian— had been bom on the Pribyloff Islands, the circumstances of another season, whether those connected with wind or weather, or those resulting from the migratory movements of the . . .;'M«P'''^'UL'.;,-JIJ.:J.J.Ui^lM||pp^^ .»*«»?»fc}ha«*wftw»irfi-»itti '.Km .','» i,..u. ii.i^m^^ii^jmifnij,!.. 8 food-fishes of the seal, might in the following year change the conditions and the ownership of the seals in any given tract of sea. The opinions already published by those who have given the greatest amount of attention to the habits of the fur-seal of the North Pacific are suiBcient to show that there is a general agree- ment in respect to -the pritnd facie probability of interchange and migration of seals between the principal breeding places. It is now generally admitted that the same seals do not return uecessarily or even usually to the same breeding ground year after year. Mr. Elliott quotes an experiment made by the Russians, in which 100 young males were marked at one locality on St. Paul Island. Next year some of the seals so marked were included in the catch from " every part of the island." In 1870, again, a similar experiment was made on the same island, and, respecting the 100 seals then marked, it is said : — " Of this number, in the summer of 1872, when I was Cnuoi Bapott, there, the natives found in their driving of 75,0110 seals from the different hauliug-grounds of St Paul up to the village killing - grounds, two on Novastoshna rookery 10 miles north of Lukannon [the point at which the seals liad been marked] and two or three from English Bay and Tolstoi rookeries, 6 miles west by water j one or two were taken on St. George Island, 36 miles to the south-east, and not one from Lukannon was found among those that wore diiven up from these." p. 81. The same, or a very similar, experiment is u Monograph of referred to by Captain Bryant. i^nlt^" iuT In the Congressional Eopoi't on the fur-seal p. 40r fisheries of Alaska, Dr. H. i. Mclntyre likewise states that — " The seals arc found indiscriminately on tlie two soth Cong., 3nd islands, that is, seals bom on St George are ff)und on *^""> H. K., 3883, St Paul, and vice vend." ^' Apart from such definite experiments, and over wider areas where, so far, such experiments have not been possible, information as to changes in the resort of seals as between one and another of the various breeding islands in the North Pacific must depend largely upon the opinions of those who have had occasion to study the habits of the seal, and upon the ^neral facts which •ach persons have noted. Such interchange of seals between the Torious iiHi Miiililil ^^mii ^^m 1PI«f|'*i,' ^f^m^^^mmmm^fm^as W«ipiB5l"»PfffPpi!W»"WW!rai 9 breeding places may be supposed to ocow in two ways : first, in correspondence with natural and casual events, such as winds, currents, and the pursuit of food-fishes ; second, in consequence of the disturbance of the breeding places by naan. On the latter point, Scammon, in his well-known work (p. 152), sums up the result of his observa- tions as follows : — " We may add, likewise, from our own observation, and as the expressed opinion of several experienced sealing masters, that their [the seals] natural migrations extend over a great expanse of ocean, and if they are unduly disturbed in their favourite haunts for several succebsive years, they are quite sure to seek some distant and unknown place where they can congregate unmolested by maa" A further reference, with the same meaning, is found in the passage quoted from Elliott's Heport on the previous page. Mr. Elliott, in another part of the same Report (p. 69), after asking a question as to the possible accessions of seals to the Commander from the Pribyloff Islands, replies to his own question as follows : — " Certainly, if the ground on either Behring or Copper Island, in the Commander group, is as well suited for the wants of the breeding fur-seal as is that exhibited by the Pribyloff Islands, then I say, confidently, that we may at any time note a diminution here, and find a corresponding augmentation there; for I have clearly shown in my chapter on the habits of these animals, that they are not 80 particularly attached to the respective places of their birth, but that they rather land with an instinctive appreciation of the fitness of that ground as a whole." The same writer, in his " Report on the Condi- tion of Affairs in Alaska," 1875 (p. 265 et seq.), under the heading " Thoughts upon Possible Movements of the Fur-seals in the Future," treats the subject at some length, reaching very similar conclusions, and adding : — " It is not unlikely that some season may occur when an immense number of the fur-aeals which have lived during the last four or five years on the Pribyloff Islands dbould be deflected from their usual feeding range by the shifting of schools of fish, &c., so as to bring them around quite close to the Asiatic seal grounds in the spring, and the scent from these rookeries would .ict as a powerful stimulant for them to Ituid there, whore con- ditions for their breeding may be aa favourable as desired by them." [e#3] D 'T«l^!i"P^''^^^"'^^^'''W!PiiP(llPPPI"PP*"*""""^^ mMiiiiii mmmmm. iiiiiiiiii p^niiPfiiiMiipp lippipiiiil wmm ^^^1 10 In a Report on an ir< estigation on the Alaska Commercial Company by a Committee of Con- grass, dated 1876, Mr. J. F. Miller, President of the Company, says that the seals upon the Pribyloflf Islands— " ^laintain just about the natural increase very regu- larly ; they do not seem to migrate." But in reply to a further question as to whether they were not supposed at a former period to hare been driven from the Pribyloif Islands to the Commander Islands, adds : — " They no doubt were at one time. Some of them went 44th Cone., lit over there, and where the others went we do not know, §*l*" ^J^» because they do increase upon the Bussian islands ; so ^^ > P< ■ history shows." In a Congressional Report on the "Far-seui Fisheries of Alaska," dated 1889, Mr. S. M. Buynitzky gives the following evidence : — " Q. What, in your judgment, from your experience of 50th Cong., 2nd that business in these islands, would be the effect of 5**'"' -«?«' t, , , . , . . , Report 8883, p. 16. openmg up the business, that is, removing the restnctions so that everybody could go in there and kill fur-seals ?— A. The probable effect would be to drive the seals from these islands to the Russian group. " Q. That is, driving them from the American islands over to the Russian islands ? — A. That is the most pro- bable effect. That was conceded at the time by all who studied the question. Secretary Boutwell knew that very well." In the same Report (pp. 77, 78) Mr. 0. A. Williams makes the following statements, which, though now known not to be entirely correct in so far as they appear to relate to the origination of rookeries on the Commander Islands, are worthy of quotation :— " It was supposed at that time [early in the Russian r(igime] that the commencement of seal-life on the Islands of Behring and Copper probably took place by reason of the indiscriminate killing on those islands [Pribyloff], diverting the seal from their usual haunts, and making them seek some other localities. " Q. Was there a large number of seals which left the Pribyloff group and went over to the Russian isUnds ? — A. You could hardly expect them to go in a body. There had hardly been sealing or seal-life to any extent on the Commander Islands or Copper and Behring. It had not attracted the attention of the Russians, but after the indiscriminate killing on the Islands of St Pavl and St Qeorge, it was noticed that seal-life inereaMd rapidly [^^^ 11 on the other islands, and the supposition is a natural ona that they were diverted from the islands on which they had heretofore been undisturbed, and sought other places." Though it is further claimed in the above-oited «xtract from Mr. Elliott's Report that tho seals are not only bom, but are also necessarily " begotten " on the PribylofE Islands, and though it is, perhaps, not of importance from the point oi" view of property where the seals are begotten, there is abundance of evidence to shoAV that this statement is unfounded. (2.) If, however, it be for the moment assumed, and for the sake of argument, that all fur-seals met with in the eastern part of the North Pacific — say, as before, to the cast of longitude 180°— are not only begotten, but born and reared on the Fribyloff Islands, which islands are the property of the United States. — This circumstance does not establish any valid claim in law to a, right of "protection," and far less to one of " property " in animals, feriy.ii|l|liiM|pipia!i^^^^^^^ lilpilllpplffpii mm^ iMmti ■ ■ W!W*^" . 1,1 |"fl U> (i>i>p«^ipmipppppiip||||||p||ppp|^ mmmmm^mmmmi^mm ■i »^^"(wPWTffP^i|«WW .im4"i!H!.- u adult females at least 10 lbs. or 12 lbs., aad the rapidly-growing pups and jroung bachelors not mucb, if any, less. He adds : — " Therefore, tliis great body of 4,000,000 or 5,000,000 Oniui Report, hearty active animals which we know on the seal islands P* ^• mu.°t consume an enormous amount of such food every year. They cannot average less than 10 lbs. of fish each per diem, which gives the consumption, as exhibited by their appetite, of^ over 6,000,000 tons of flA every year. . . . " If the seals can get double the quantity which I credit them with above, startling as it Reems, still I firmly believe that they eat it every year. An adequate realization by ichthyologists and fishermen as to what havoc the fur-seal hosts are annually making among the cod, herring, and salmon of the north-west coast and Alaska, would dis- concert and astonish them." If further support of the general statement that the fur-seal in its demands for food must very notably affect the number of food-fishes, it may be supplied by the following remarks bear- ing on the strictly comparable effects of the voracity of the common or "hair-seal" on the fisheries of Denmark, and the eiforts made to remedy this source of loss to these fisheries : — •' Owing to rewards now granted by the Fishing Society Eztimet, " Nautical of Denmark, amounting to 3 kroners for each seal killed Magaiine," ▼o'-'i't according to the Copenhagen correspondent of our contem- iggg^ ' porary, 'Industries,' the extermination of seals is now being energetically pursued in Danish waters. It appears that in those localities where the fishery industry has been pursued with least success the seals most abound. A seal is seldom seen in the neighbourhood of Middlefart in the Little Belt, as the fishermen in that neighbourhood are very active in fishing and seal-hunting. "jiu contraire, on the small Island of Hosselo, north of Ztialand, one man sent in the heads of no less than 120 seals, while another man sent in 40 within the last ten months. During this period 810 seals have been killed." It must further be remembered in connection with this branch of the subject that, whether bred upon the Fribyloff or Commander or other islands, the actual time spent ashore by the seals on such breeding places, or in their immediate Tioinity, is but a small part of the year, and that, even including the aggregate period during which the Reals of all classes collect in the region of these breeding places, this represents less than half the cycle of the annual migration. '"'"^TIKP'P" ■^PPBP ■■^■i 16 An additional argument ia tho interests of those claiming some exceptional monopoly in the benefits accruing from the taking of fur-seals upon their breeding places is supposed to have been foimd in insisting on the interests of the so-called "natives" of the Pribyloff Islands, which it is maintained must be taken into account. As a matter of fact, however, the Pribyloff Islands were uninhabited when dis- covered by the Russians, and a certain number of Aleuts were taken there solely for the purpose of obtaining the necessary labour for killing seals and curing tho skins, in tho interests of the Government or its lessees. The interests of these natives have at no time been allowed to conflict with those of the chartered beneficiaries of the breeding islands, and at the present time the official figures of the Eleventh Census of the United States show that these people, composed partly of the descendants of those originally deported thither by the old Russian Companies, and in part of more recent importations from the Aleutian Islands, number scarcely more than 300 in all. These inhabitants of tho PribylofE Islands have, in the course of events, become as a rule either half or three-quarters European in blood, but unfortunately without attaining a comparable advancement in knowledge or improvement in their mode of life. Still further, it must be noted that the i-cgu- lations now imposed prevent the people of the same race, and often the close relatives of the tuhiibitants of the Pribyloff Islands, but who still remain in the Aleutian Islands, from killing the fur-seal, even for food, though such killing must be regarded as among their primitive rights. The Indians of the coast of British Columbia have likewise been accustomed from time im- memorial to hunt the fur-seal for food and skins. The development of what is now known as "pelagic sealing" has already, by affording remunerative employment to many of them, materially aided in their advancement, and the money gained by these people actually constitutes a large part of the entire support of most of the Indians inhabiting the west coast of Vancouver Island, numbering several thousands. The number of Indian hunters of British Columbia alone, at the present time engaged in pelagic sealing, it &bout 400, and it is estimated that the amount of money gained by those men annually [676] E iiiii,>i.i.wui^»^uniHu.ii.iu, jj^uiufcp«miP!?^!ipipiipn|iPlliPI^^ ■*f: wmmmiim 16 mm is probably about 40,000 dollars. This does not include the gains made by independent Indian hunters off the British Columbian coast 'who pursue the fur-seal in their own canoes &om these shores, and which cannot be placed at less than 30,000 dollars annually. lu so far as native and primitiTe vested interests in the fur-seal fishery go, therefore, not only are those of the Indians of the British Columbian coast, together with those of the Makah Indians of the adjacent State of Wash- •'jnr*^rin, and that of the autochthonous Aleuts of J a of the same name, the more direct and leg ie, but quantitatively valued they are much the more important. Yet any claim to exclusive property in seals derived from the possession of the PribylofE Islands, or bom any other circumstances, implies an arbitrary denial of the title of these native peoples to their prescriptive right in hunting this animal. The known facts regarding the extraordinary profits lerived by the lessees of the Pribyloff Islands for twenty years or more, together with the large sums accruing to the United States' Ck>vernmeut in the shape of rent and taxes on the skins taken by the lessees, go far toward establishing an assumption against the strictly philanthropic motives which are at the present time prominently advanced. A singular contrast is found to the mode of procedure by the United States respecting seal- ing in the Pacific, in that adopted by the same Power in the case of the mackerel fisheries of the Atlantic. Here, although the use of the engine known as the purse seine threatens the very existence of these fisheries, the Govern- ment has only endeavoured indirectly to control its owu citizens in such use, by enacting that no fish taken before a given date may be landed at its ports. If the action taken in Behring Sea is justifiable, surely it would be equally justifi- able, and on like grounds, to seize vessels found in possession of purse seines anywhere within the mackerel fishing area of the Atlantic. It would be sufficient to affirm that the use of such engines was contra boms mores, and that action was taken in behalf of the human race. The Greenland seal-fishery was prosecuted chiefly from Dundee and Peterhead in Great Britain, and from Norway. In 1B74 the Swedish Government suggested to 17 Great Britain that some international arrange- ment might probably be attempted with a view of imposing restrictive regulations to remedy evils attending the practices of sealers and par- ticularly the killing of female seals found resting upon the ice with newborn young, in conse- quence of which great numbers of young seals perished. Parties interested in sealing, both in Great Britain and Norway, were at once consulted, and an Act (" Seal Fishery Act, 1875 ") was passed empowering Her Majesty the Queen by Order in Gouncil to fix a close season within an area between 67° and 75" north latitude and 5° east and 17° west of Greenwich. B«presentations were then made by Great Britain to foreign countries which might be interested, with a view of insuring reciprocal legislation on their part. In 1876 the Governments chiefly interested, Norway, Gtermany, Holland, and Sweden, ex- pressed a willingness to provide the necessary legislation. From other Governments Great Britain re- ceived favourable replies, but from that of the United States the answer was as follows, and no other action was taken by that country : — " Department of State, Washington, " Sir, " October 1, 1875. "Reforring to your note of the 19th August and ita accompaniments in relation to an Act of Parliament pro- viding for the establishment of a close time tor seal-fishing in the waters adjacent to the eastern cpast of Greenland, I have to thank you for the infonnation, and have the honour to inform you that, after consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, it is the opinion of the Treasury, as well as of this Department, that the questions suggested in your note should bo submitted to the attention of Congress.* " I have, &c. (Signed) "Hamilton Fish. " The Right Honourable "Sir E. Thornton, K.C.B." An Order in Council, in 1876, was passed in Great Britain, so far as British subjects were concerned, but was revoked on ascertaining that no action could be taken in Norway in that year. In November of the same year, a now Order in Gouncil was, howevt., passed. * Then is nothing to ihow that tliii wu ever done. ilib liHHIiPHinii wmmm m Wmm^ 18 By Morcli 1877 the QoTernments of Norway, Sweden, Germany, and Holland had all taken similar legislative action to that of Oreat Britain. In 1879 Bussia issued similar restnotions on her own subjects. ^mmw /(. BEARING SEA ARBITRATION, QUESTION 3 or CASE. I. Authorities and Citations as to the phiaae Pacific Ocean. II. Notes bearing specially on the terms North-west Coast of America and North-wtst Coast. m. Memorandum on the Maps referred to in the Correspondence respecting the TTkase of 1821. rV. List of Maps cited by Mr. Blaine, December 17, 1890. V. Notes on various Maps examined in connection with the usage of the phrase Pacific Ocean. [667] B mmmm BEHRING SEA ARBITRATION. QUESTIOK 3. — Was the body of water now known as the Behring Sea included in the phrase " Pacific Ocean," as used in the Treaty of 1825 between Oreat Britain and Russia; and what rights, if any, in the Behring Sea were held and exclusively exercised by Russia after said Treaty 9 Mr. BUine to 8ir Jnlian Pnunoifot*, Dcceir' r 17, 1890. IT has been claimed on the part of the United States that (1) in the negotiations of 1824-26, Behring Sea was understood by the three Signa- tory Powers concerned to be " a separate body of water, and was not included in the phrase ' Pacific Ocean ;' " and that (2) by long prescrip- tion the words " North-west Coast " mean the coast of the Pacific Ocean between 60° north latitude and 54° ^ only. This latter assumption is necessary if the former be maintained, because of the numerous references to freedom of navigation and trade on the North-west Coast which occur in the dis- cussion of the subject previous to the Conventions of 1824 and 1826 between Russia and the United States and Russia and Great Britain respectively. It has been seen that the whole controversy, which was ended by the Treaty, arose out of the Ukase of 1821. That document claimed not only the territorial right of sovereignty from Behring Straits to 61° north latitude, but the right to exclude foreign vessels from approaching the coasts and islands within 100 Italian miles. In absence of a specified exception, the with- drawal should be held commensurate with the pretension. It was protested against in toto, on the ground that the const was almost entirely unoccupied, and that maiitime jurisdiction, even where it was occupied, should not extend beyond 3 miles. The coast of Behring Sea was, moreover, less occupied than the coast outside. Moreover, the chief trading ports of the Russian Company were situated on the coast to the south of w'^ssppsiw '^l"R^'^ed to advanco such a claim in respect to the northern pan of tivc Pacific Ocean, could not be theoretically justified, l/.'der Article I of the Convention of 1824, between Jln.isia ani the United * (i.<.) By the cxlentiou of teriitorial juiUdiction to 3 leagues, an originally pioposed in the couriie of the nego- tlations between Great Ilritain and Ku'sia. """■"■""iiiipp mmiimmmmmmmimilWIlM -WP! [8 States, which is still in force, American citizens have a right to fish in all parts of the Pacific Ocean. But under Article IV of the same Convention, the ten years period nientioncd in that Article having expired, wo have power to forbid American vessels to visit inland acna, gulfs, harbours, and bays for the purposes of fishing and trading with the natives. That is the limit of our rights, and we have no power to prevent American ships from taking whales in the open sea." See also reply of the Russian Government to Governor-General of Eastern Siberia, 1840 : — " We have no right to exclude foreign ships from that part of the great ocean which separates the eastern shore of Siberia from the north-western shore of Americo," &o. ; and the instructions which were finally issued to the Russian cruizers on the 9th December, 1863. That the Government of the United States accepted an identical meaning of the phrase *' Pacific Ocean," and of the extent of the abandon- ment of claims made by Russia, as embodied In the Convention of 1824, is perhaps most clearly shown by the subjoined extracts from the works of Robert Grccnhow, Translator and Librarian to the United States* Department of State. Greenhow's works (well known in connection with the discussion of the "Oregon question") afford a detailed and conclusive means of ascer- taining the views officially held by the United States' Government on the meaning of Pacific Ocean, Eehring Sea, north-west coast, and the extent of abandonment of claims made by Russia in Ukase of 1821, by the Convention of 1824. A "Memoir" was prepared on the official request of L. P. Linn, Chairman of Select Committee on the Territory of Oregon, by order of John Forsyth, Secretary of State. It includes a Map entitled " The North-west Coast of North America and adjacent Territories," which extends £rom below Acapulco in Mexico to above the Kuskoquim River mouth in Behring Sea, and embraces also the greater part of the Aleutian chain. Greenhow's " History " was officially presented to the Government of Great Britain by the Government of the United States in July 1845, in connection with the Oregon discussion and in pursuance of an Act of Congress, p. 141, Robert GKenhow, Tranilator and Librarian to the United Sutes' DepartmeDt of Sute. " Memoir Bittorioil and Political of the North-vett Coaat of North America and the adjacent Torritoriea, illiutrated by a Uap and a aeographical view of these countries, by Robert Greenhnv, Translator and Librarian to the Department of sute." Senate, 26th Cong., 1st Session (174), 1840. The same Kemoir, separately printed, apparently in identical form, and with the same Map and pagination, Wiley and Putnam, New York, 1840. "The Geography of Oregon and CalUiiimia and the other Territories on the North-west Cout of North America." New York, 1845. "The Histoi7 of Oregon and CJalifomia and the other Terri- tories on the North-west Coast of North America, by Robert Oreenhow, Translator and Librarian to the Depart- ment of State of the United States; anthor of a Memoir Historical and Political on the north-west coaat of North America, pablished In 1840 by diiwtion of the Senate of the United Statee." New York, 1845. This la a second edition, and in the prehce it ia explained that its issoe was rendered necessary to sapply 1,500 copies of the work which bad been ordered for the General Oarem- ment. The same work. First edition, London, 1844. Both editions contain Haps, which appear to bo identical, but difleient from the Maps accompanyine the "Memoir," though including nearly the same limits with them. IPHP 9 The following is tho correspondence accom- panying this presentation : — " ilr. Buchanan to Mr. Pakenham. " DtjMrtmetU of Slate, Weuhington, "Sir, •• July 12, 1645. " In pursuance of an Act of Congress approved on the 20th February, 1845, I have tho honour to transmit to you herewith, for prcRoatation to the Government of Great Britain, one copy of tho ' History of Oregon, California, aiiJ the other territories on the North-west Coast of America,' by Kobcrt Greonhow, Esq., Translator and Librarian of the Department of State. " I avail, &c. (Signed) "James Bucbakan." "Mr. Pakenham to the Earl of Aberdeen. — {Received "August 16.) " My Lord, " Washington, July 29, 1845, " I have the honour herewith to transmit a copy of a note which J have received from tlie Secretary of State of the United States, accompanied by a copy of Mr. Green- how's work on Oregon and California, which, in pursuance of an Act of Congress, is presented to Her Majesty's Government. " Although Mr. Greenhow's book is already in your Lordship's possession, I think it right, in consequence of the official character with which it is presented, to forward to your Lordship the inclosed volume, being the identical one which has been sent to mo by Jlr. Buchanan. " I have not failed to acknowledge the receipt of Mr. Buchanan's note in suitable terms. " I have, c&c. (Signed) " R. PAKENnAM." Touching the meaning of the terms North-west Coast and Pacific Ocean, and the meaning attached to tho relinquishment of Russian claims hy the Convention of 1824, in tho first part of the "Memoir," under the heading "Geogmphy of the Western Section of North America," tho following passage occurs : — "The north-west coast* is the expression usually em- ployed in the United States at the present time to distinguish the vast portion of tho American continent which extends north of tho 40th parallel of latitude from tho Pacific to the great dividing ridgo of llie liockj/ Mountains, together with the contiguous islands in that ocean. The southern part of this territoiy, which is drained almost entirely by the Eiver Columbia, is commonly * N.B. — The italics in this and aubsequcnt quotations are those emploved by the author himielf. [667] D ■mnpaam mmm 10 called Oregon, from the supposition (no doubt erroneoui) that such was the name applied to its principal stream by the aborigines. For the more northern parts of the continent many appellations, which will hereafter be mentioned, have been assigned by navigators and fur- traders of various nations. The territory bordering upon the I'acific southward, from the 40th parallel to the extremity of the peninsula which stretches in that direction as far as the Tropic of Cancer, is called California, a name of uncertain derivation, formerly applied by the Spaniards to the whole western section of Kortb America, as that of Florida was employed by them to designate the i-egions bordering upon the Atlantic. The north-west coast and the west coast of California together form the ■west coast of North America; as it has been found impossible to separate the history of these two portions, 80 it will be necessary to include them both in this geographical view "• (pp. 3-4). The relations of Behring Sea to the Pacific Ocean are dpaned as follows in the "Memoir": — " The port of the Pacific north of the Aleutian Islands which bathes those shores is commonly distinguished as the Sea of Kamtchatka, and sometimes as Behring Sea, in honour of the Russian navigator of that name who first explored it " (pp. 4^5). Again, in the "Geography of Oregon and California," as follows : — " Cape Prince of Wales, the westernmost point of America, is the eastern pillar of Behring Strait, a passage only 50 miles in width, separatin;; that continent from Asia, and forming the only direct communication between the Pacific and Arctic Oceans. » « * • "The part of the Pacific called the Sea of Kamtchatla, or Behring's Sea, north of the Aleutian chain, likewise oout.iins several islands," &c. (p. 4). * Eipltnktory aote bj the author— " In the following pages the term coait will be ascd, Bometlmea ai Bignlfyiag only the aeaahon, and aometimea aa embracing the whole territory, extending tharefrom to the eonrcca of the river; care baa l>een, howoTer, taken to prevent mIrappreheDalon, wliere the context doea not aulSciently indicate the true eenae. In order to avoid repatitiani, the noTlh-weil coati wlU bo undentood to be th« norlh.wtit matt ijf North America ; all lalUuda will b« taken aa north laliludta, and all longilnin aa icetlfrom Greenteieh, uiileaa otherwiae eiproaaed." • • • • • "The northern extremity of the west uoaat of America is Capt Princt of Wala, in latitude 06° 52', which la alao the weetem- mott apot ia the whole continent; it it situated on the caatcrn aide of Betring'i Sirail, a channel 51 milea in width, connecting the Poelte with the Arctic or 'y or North Prozcn) Ocean, on the western sido of which strait, oppoii.i lape Prince of Walca, ia Emt C-i/n; the enatem eitramity of Aaia. I'rond Beering'a Strait tbc shorts of tho two contiDonla rcede If h other. The north coatI of America hM been traced f^om ' 'apa riiB< j of Walea nirtb-eaatwaid to Cape Barrow," &c. (f>p. 8-4). u In the " History of Oregon and CalitovQia," the Sea of Kamtchatka, or Behring Sea, is again referred to as a part of the Pacific Ocean. In respect of the undcrstauding by the United States of the entire relinquishment of the claims advanced hy the Ukase of 1821 in the Eussian and United States' Convention of 1824, the following is found on a later page of the volume last referred to : — " This Convention does not appear to otfer any grounds for dispute ns to the construction of its stipulations, but is, on the contrary, clear, and equally favourable to both nations. The rights of both parties to navigate every part of the Pacific, ami to trade with the natives of any places on the coasts of that sea not already occupied, are first acknowledged," &c. (p. 342). Itpport on (he Seal tslaniiii of Alaska, Wiisliingtoii, 1884. It is thus clear, as the result of the laborious investigations undertaken by Greenhow on behalf of the United States' Government, and fully accepted by that Government as official : — 1. That Behring Sea M'as a part of the Pacific. 2. That the north-west coast was understood to extend to Behring Strait. 3. That Russia relinquished her asserted claims over •' every part of the North Pacific." The following arc further instances, from among very many which might be quoted, showing that in official documents of tho Governments specially interested, the pliraso " Pacific Ocean " has continued to bo employed as inclusive of Bchriug Sea : — Pilot Charts, by Lieutenant Mauray, issued by tho United States' IIydrograt)hic Office in 1850. Sheets 2 .nd 3, Series (A). T)\o name North Pacific includes Behring Sea. In an " Hydrographio Atlas of tho Russian Possessions in the Pacific," by Captain Teljonkow, St. Petersburg, published in 1852, he includes the water of Behring Sea, though ho docs not distinguish the waters of this sen. from those of the Pacific. The I-egislature of the Territory of Wasliiugton, in 1806, referred to " fishing banks known to navigators to exist along (ho Pacific coast from tho Cortes bank to Behring Strait." Mr. U. W. Elliott, who was engaged as Spooial Treasury Agent in tho study of tbo snal islands of Alaska for the United States' Goveruaieiit, as late as tlie year 1880, in his official Report on 12 the seal islands of Alaska, remarked, concerning tlie seals : — " Their range iii tfie Xorth Vacijk is virtually confined to four islands in Behring Sea, viz., St. Paul and St. George, of the true Pribyloff group, and Behring and Copper, of the Commander Islands." (The Halxca are not in the original.) Again, lie says : — " In the North Atlantic no suitable territory for their reception exists, or ever did exist ; and really nothing in the Nortli Taciflc beyond what we have designated in Behrini; Sea." He also describes the rookeries in Bebring Sea as " Nortli Pacific rookeries." And also : — " Geographically, as well as in regard to natural history, Behi rag Island is one of the most curious islands in the Twrilurn ■part of lite Pacific. Oecan^' (The italics are not in the original.) Writing to Mr. Hoffman in 1882 the 8th (20th) May, M. do Giers said : — " Referring to the exchange of communications which United States' has taken place between us on the subject of a Notice ^'^'J "'"|^ published by our Consul nt Yokohama relating to fishing, Fisheries, 1887, hunting, and to trade in the Russian n-attrs of the Pacific, PP- HO, III. and in reply to tlie note which you addressed to me, dated the 15th (27lh) JIai'ch, I am now in a position to give you the following iiifonn.ation: — " A Notice of tlio tenour of that annexed to your note of the 15th March was, in fact, published by our Consul at Yokohama, and our Consid-General at San Francisco is also authorized to publish it. " Tide measure refers only to proliibitcd industries and to the trade in contraband ; tlie restrictions which it established extend strictly to the territorial waters of Russia only. It was required by the numerous abuses proved in late years, and whiclt fell with oil their weight on the population of our sea-shore and of our islands, whose means of support is by fishing and lumting. These abuses inflicted also a marked injury on the interests of the Company in which the Imperial Oocernment had conceded tlis monopoly offvshiny and hunting {exportation), in islands called the ' Commodore' and the 'Seals.' " Beyond this new Regulation, of which the cssontial point is the obligation imposed upon captains of vessels who desire to fish and to hunt in tie Russian waters of the Paeifu: to provide themselves at Vladivostock with the permission or licence of the Governor-General of Oriental Siberia, the right of fishing, hunting, and of trade by foreigners in our tonitorial waters is regulated by ; ' .j'< ', j>iiv^4i«p||ywpf,W,i..,i ■)*i»iii|j|iu«.;iiiiA!(|^jiw.i|jf,|||pj4|iiji iwww?^!!pw»SfH5!p5ippil^^Bpjpp 14 Aliaska Peniimla. In Behricg Sea, along the ooaat of Komtchatka, there ia good light whaling" (p. 17). Chapter 6 is headed, "The Development of the Iforth Pacific and Arctic Whale Fishery," 'with, us a suhordinate title, " The North Pacific and Pacific-Arctic Fishery " (p. 78). Again, on various recent Charts issued by the United States' Hydrographio Office, the usage of Pacific or North Pacific Ocean as including Sehring Sea occurs, including the latest and most perfect editions now in actual use. Thus:— No. 009. Published March 1883 at tho Hydro- graphic Office, Washington, D. C. : — "Pacific Ocean. Behring Sea, Plover Bay, from a survey by Lieutenant Mazimov, Imperial Eussian Navy, 1876." (Plover Bay is situated on the Asiatic coast, near the entrance to Behring Strait.) No. 910. Published October 1882 at the Hydrographic Office, Washington, D. C. : — " North Pacific Ocean. Anadir Bay, Behring Sea. From a Chart by Engineer Bulkley, of New Yoik, inl866,"&c. (Anadir Bay is situated between latitudes 64° and 65° on the Asiatic side of Beliring Sea.) Similar evidence is afforded by the title-page of the work issued by the same Hydrographic Office in 1869, as follows :— " Directory of Behring Sea and the coast of Alaska Arranged from the Directory of the Pacific Ocean." The British Admiralty Chart of Behring Sea, corrected up to November 1889, but originpJly compiled in 1884 (No. 2460), is likewise entitled as follows : — " North-west Pacific. Kamchatka to Eadiak Island, including Behring Sea and Strait." m. Historical Note on the circumstances under which Behring Sea has come to be so named. Without entering into any great detail respecting the numerous voyages nf discovery in this region, which in the first instances were principally due to Russian efforts from the Asiatic coast, it is comparatively easy to place on record the salient featui-es of this branch of the subject; and to trace its progress, more particularly by means of the Maps published n^ mi^i^^^mm^^ ^^Wl. 15 from time to time in illustration of the results of the various explorers. The first published Map in which that part of the Asiatic coast, including Eamtchatko, and extending to and beyond Behring Straits, was represented, was that in illustration of Behring's first Toyage, in 1737, in D'Auville's Atlas. It is reproduced by Mr. W. H. Dall, in the " National Geographic Magazine," Washington, 1890. At this time, neither the Commander Islands nor the Aleutian Islands were known, but the ocean to the cast of the Asiatic coast is named Partie de la Mer Dormante, the name, as engraved on the Map, extending from a point to the west of the extremity of the Peninsula of Kamtchatka, in a north-easterly direction to about the position which St. Matthew Island is now known to occupy, or to the centre of Behring Sea. After Behring's second expedition, in wluch the Commander himself miserably perished, but in the course of which the American coast was reached, and the Commander and Aleutian Islands in part discovered, we find a Map published by Miiller, the historian and geographer of the expedition. This is entitled, in the English translation of Miiller's work, published in London in 1761, " A Map of the Discoveries made by the Russians on the North-west Coast of America," published by the Eoyal Academy of Sciences at St. Petersburg, and republished in London by Thomas Jefiferys. In this Map, the islands now known as the Aleutian Islands and the Commander Islands are indicated very inaccurately, and the greater part of what is now known as Behring Sea is occupied by a great conjectural promontory of the American continent, leaving a comparatively narrow and sinuous body of water or strait running in a direction proximately parallel to the Asiatic coast, and separating the tAvo con- tinents. The sofithcm portion of this is named on the Map Sea of Kamtchatka, the northern., Sea of Anadir, in equivalent characters. Behring Strait, as now known, appears without name, while the wider ocean to the south is named Great South Sea or Pacific Ocean. A reproduction on a smaller scale of the same Map appears in tlic "Loudon Magazine" for 1764.. This is entitled, "A new Map of the North-east Coast of Asia and North-west Coast ■"""•""■•" ■■ " ""■•^"mfmii'fW^^^ ^^^^immmm'mmmmmmmmm ivii-Vll iliPIW.l lilliilii iJ I pip. I lliVWi^liipii^Ti 16 of America, with the late Russian Discoveries." It repeats the nomenclature and all the errors of the origiunl Map, but employs the term Grrat South Sea only, the addition " or Faciflo Ocean" being omitted. After the date of the publication of Cook's third voyage, in 1781, what is now known as Behriug Sea began to appear on Maps in some- thing like its true form and proportions, and in the Map accompanying the olBcial record of his voyages, of the date mentioned, we find that sea without special distinctive name, and simply regarded as a part of the Pacific Oceai ; though the names Olutorski Sea, Beaver Sea, and Oulf of Anadir are engraved in parts of it close to the Siberian shores, and Shoal Water and Bristol Bay appear as local names of equivalent rank on the opposite American coast. From this date onward the usage became very varied. Many Maps continued to appear, till 1840 or later, upon which no name of a dis* tinctive kind was given to Behring Sea, while upon others it became customary to extend the originally local name Sea of Kamtchalka to the whole of this body of water. Doubtless because of the ambiguity attaching to this particular name, from its originally strictly local use, at later dates it began to be customary to employ Behring's name for the sea now so called ; till at the present time that name may be said to have entirely superseded the older one, and to have passed into common UoO. Following on this change, the name Sea of Kamtchatka was changed to Gulf of Kamtchalka, and relegated to its original place on the shore of the peninsula of the same name; while the names Olutorski and Anadir likewise became confined to the respective gulfs on the Siberian coast. For the most modem usage in this respect, see United States' Hydrographic Office Chart No. 68, 1890, and British Admiralty Chart No. 2460, 1889. It is very noteworthy, however, in studying any series of Maps chronologically arranged, that up to the middle of the present century Behring Sea is frequently without any general name, while the adjoining Sea of Okhotsk is in almost every instance clearly designated. Had the curcumstances with respect to the nomenclature of Behring Sea been different, and had that body of water been consistently sup> ""mm 17 plied with a distinctive name on all Maps, it would, however, by no means necessarily foil m that this was intended to show that it >vas not a part of the Pacific Ocean. An ocean may, and in all cases actually docs, include numerous seas and gulfs as subordinate divisions. The mere fact that the name of the Nortli Pacific Ocean, or equivalent name in use at different periods, is not usually engraved partly upon the area of Beliring Sea in the Maps, affords no valid argu- ment for such separation. The name of this ocean is generally found to bo engraved, in large characters, upon its widest and most open part somewhere to the south of the 50th parallel, and between that parallel and the Equator. This usage follows as a result of the actual form of the ocean, and the necessity of giving due piominenco to its name. Maps specially referred to by Mr. Blaine in his Letter of December 17, 1890. EtrlyMaparaferred The United States' Government has in tliis to by Unitad Stetci controversy attached importance to the very OMemb«rl7,l890, early employment of some distinctive name for Behring Sea, and reference has been made to several of the older Maps. It is, however, submitted that even in restrict- ing the argument to Maps, the important question is that relating to the Maps and Charts of the years immediately antecedent to 1824i and 1825, in which the Conventions dealing with the Ukase of 1821 were concluded. To such Maps the negotiators doubtless re- ferred. Reverting, however, to the earlier Maps specially instanced by the United States' Govern- ment, it will be found that even these do not bear out the assertions based by Mr. Blaine upon them. A Map showing Cook's voya^i s, and published in 1784, is first referred to as showing the " Sea of Kamtchatka" in "absolute contradistiuction to the Great South Sea or Pacific Ocean." This is doubtless the Map included in the list attached to the despatch, and said to have been published by William Faden in 1784, a Map which has so far eluded our search. Turning, however, to the Maps in the oflScially [667] F 18 published account of Cook's third voyage, of the same date, botli those in the quarto and octayo editions, and those also in French and German translations of somewhat later date, it is found that Behring Sea appears absolutely and markedly without any distinctive name. The Map published in the " London Magazine " in 1761, which is next referred to, is a reduction of MuUer's Map, which is also particularly cited. The circumstances under which the names Sea of Kamtchatka and Sea of Anadir appear on these Maps have been noted on a previous page, and arc such as to show that these names, nor either one of them, can be justly referred to as applying to the area of Behring Sea as now known. In further endeavouring to maintain his position as to the essential separateness of Behring Sea from the Pacific Ocean, as under- stood by geographers of the time, Mr. Blaine adds an enumeration of a number of Maps as " Inclosure B " to his letter above referred to. This list of 106 Maps, though apparently Maps catalogued in formidable from its very length, is found to j^j,' Bkine to Sir extend from the year 1743 to the year 1829, Julian Pauncefote, both inclusive, and consists solely of those Maps upon which a special designation of some kind is supposed to be found for Behring Sea. As already stated, this proves nothing with regard to the relation of Behring Sea to the Pacific as a whole ; while it is further observable that, in compiling the list, many Maps of very doubtful or imperfect character have been heterogencously brought together. Tlius, in respect to Cook's explorations, but a single obscure Map is cited, while the official and original Maps are ignored, as has "already been explained. Again, from Thompson's large Atlas of date 1817 but a single Map is cited, and this without such reference as can enable it to be identified ; while, as a matter of fact, in this Atlas, Behring Sea appears upon three Maps as the Sea of Kamtchatka. On three other Maps this name is evidently confined to the waters immediately adjacent to the peninsula of the samO name, am' on two, tlic greater part of Behring Sea is included without any name. Under date 1819, a Map by Burnoy is quoted as showing the name Sea of Kamlchatka applied 19 to Behring Sea, but the only Map by that autlior tnd of that date which we have been able to find is a " Cliart of the Nortli Coast of Asia and of tho Sea to tlie North of Beliring Strait," in which the greater part of Beliring Sea is included, but without name, tliough the northern portion of the Sea of Okhotsk, also included, is prominently named. Still, again, under 1825, a Map in Butlar's Atlas (doubtless No. 10) is quoted as showing the name Sea of Kamlchalka, while tho first Map in that Atlas upon which Behring Sea appears without name (though the Sea of Okhotsk and other similar seas arc named), is ignored. This particular criticism applies, however, to but a small portion of the entire list, since tho whole of the Maps in the list have not hsen examined. Mc'CuUoch's "OeognphictI Dietioutrr," Tol. Ui, Ingliib work. BItcklo'i " Imperial OuittMr," vol. II, BogUih work. Citations from various Authorities bearing on the Geographical use of the terms " Pacific Ocean," "Behring Sea," $:c. Fortunately, hotvcver, from a geojjraphical point of view, wc are not required to rel}', for tho settlement of such matters, on Maps alone, as to do so would leave many similar points in doubt in all parts of the globe. In the particular instance of the Pacific or North Pacific anu Behring Sea it has been found easy to show, by reference to the strict verbal definitions of geographers in various standard works of refer- ence and in oflicial publications, that Behring Sea was and is understood to form an integral part of the Pacific Ocean. Tho following aro definitions found in the gazetteers, dictionaries, and geographers of tho world, both of the present and old dates, touching tho Pacific Ocean, Behring Sea, Kamt- chatka, &c. : — * " Pacific Ocean. — Stretclics northwaiil tlirough 133 degrees of latitude to Behring vStraits, wliieli sepni-iite it from the Arotie Oeean. " "Boreal or Norlli, exteiuliug I'roui Behring Strait or tho Arctic Circle to tho Tropic of Cancer. ... In tho north the Pacific gradually contract.^ in width ; tho continents of America and Asia .stretching out and aiiproxiniating, so a.s to leave the coini)aratively narrow channel of Behring Strait .as the only communication • First twelve references shnuM be verified. ■■■■■ Ijctween the racific nnd Arctic Oceans. BeliVden the Btrait on tlic ncrtli, the Aleutian Islands on the south, ard the rcumrkable jjeninsulas of Alaska on the cast and Kamchatka on the west, one of the largest and best defined brnnch(.s of the Pacific is the Sea of l^ehring." "Extiiiula from the Arctic to the Antarctic Circle, througli 127 degrt'cs of latitude." " . . . . It narrows especially towards the north, where it cowmunioatea with the Arctic Ocean by Behring Strait." " E.'ctends from the Arctic to the Antarctic Circle, th.-ough 12C degrees of latitude." ". . . . It narrows especially towards the north, where it communicates with the Arctic Ocean by Behring Strait." " Behring Island, the most westerly of the Aleutian group in the North I'acific, in 55" 22' north latitude, 160" east longitude. It is rocky and desolate, and is only remarkable as being the place where the navigator, Behring, was wrecked and died in 1741. Population, 2,500." " Behring Strait, the narrow sea between the north-cast part of Asia and the north-west part of North America, connecting Die North rucifio with the Arctic Ocean." " Behring Strait, wluch connects the Pacific with the Arctic. . . ." " Behring Island is situated in the North Pacific. . . ." "Kamchatka, a peninsula projecting from the north- eastern part of Asia into the Pacific Ocean, i.e., into Behring Sea." " E::lcnt. — The Pacific Ocean, formerly called the South Sea, and sometimes still so named by the French and Germans (la 5Icr Sud ; Sudsee, Australocean), with whom, however, la Iter (rOct'an) Pacifique, and Grosser Ocean, or Stilles llcer, aiii the more usual designations, is bounded on the north by Behring Strait and the coasts of Itussia and Alaska ; on the east by the west coasts of North and South America ; on the south the imaginary line of the Antarctic Circle divides it from the Antarctic Ocean, vphile its westerly boundary is the east coast of Australia, the Malay Archipchigo sepai-ating it from the Indian Ocean and the eastern coasts of the Chinese Empire. Some modern geographers place the southern limit of the Atlantic, I'acitic, and Indian Oceans at the 40th parallel, and name the body of water which surrounds the earth between that latitude and the Antarctic Circle the Southern Ocean. " Although differing from the At' untie in its general form, being more ueaily land-locked to the north, the Pacific Ocaan re;erables it, iu being open to the south, foiming, in fact, a great projection northwards nf that vast Southern Ocean of which the Atlantic is another arm. " The P:;ci(ic is the largest expanse of water in the world, covering mare than a quarter of its stip' ticies, and ojniprising full;; one-half of its water snrfnce ■' U exti'\ids through 1 3 .i degrees of latitude — in other worifl, it measures 0,000 i.iiles from iiorth to south, From llupcr'a " DniTetal OiMttNr," Amerloan work Alao Johiutoii'a " Dictloauy of Geography," EoglUb work. Johnstoa'i "G«Baral Ouettoer,'' Engliih work. "EneyclopndU Britannic V ninth edition, New York, 1878. Tol. lit, p. EOg. Tlio " angUtli Bncjolopiedia." " Encjclopatdl* Britannic*," ninth edition, Sdinburgb, 1886, TOL XTUi, p. 111. Johniton'a " Oietionar; of Geognpbj." 'Imperial Gazetteer," vol. i; Harper'a " Unirenal Guet- teer;" and Murray'B "Gaietteer of the World." Scotch work. Oirea same deacription. 21 :lUb work. ork, 1878. rgh, 1885, " WoiMilcr'a Dietioiurr." Htlbom, John, "Naval GantUei." ITM, BrookM, R., "Oaneral Oa»tt««r," 1S03. UonteAora "Commarelal DioUontrjr, 1303.' "Geographial DicUonarjr," London, 1804. CruUwtll, 0., " New Unlronal GaietUer," 1808. ■al Giuet- ' Scotch Hangnail, R., "Compendium of Oeognphy," 1816. OallotU, }. G. A., "GeographliohM WiirUrbuoh," Peath, i8ia. "Edinbnrgh Oaiictteer," edition 1822, rol. i, p. 482. "General Gazottcor," London, 1828. " New London Unlreiaal Oazetleor," \B2H. " Dtctionnaire Gtognphlque ITnirenel," 1828. Saltz, Ur. J. C., " OcognpbUihes Sutiatlaobea Hand- wijrterbuch," Pc h, 1822, llallwrtladt, 188U. "Penny National Lii iry Geography and Oaieltear," 1880. Arrowamitb, "Grammnr of Modem Geography," 18;t2. east to west its breadth varies from about 40 miles at Bebring Strait, where Asia and America come within sight of each other, to 8,500 miles from California and China, on the Tropic of Cancer, and to more than 10,000 miles on tlie Etiuator, between Quito nnd the Moluccas, ■where the ocean is the widest. The area bos been variously estimated at from 50.030,000 to 100,000,000 square miles ; but defining its boundaries as above, Keith Johnston, from coreful measurement, estimated it, ■\.ith probably a near approach to the truth, at 67,810,000 square miles." " licrinr/ b'ea. — That part of North Pacific Ocean between Aleutian Islands and Dehring Strait. "Is that portion of the North Pacific Ocean lying between the Aleutian Islands and Bebring Strait. " Kamschatka Sea is a large branch of the Oriental or North Pacific Ocean." " Beering's Straits, which is the passage from the North Pacific Ocean to the Arctic Sea." "Beering's Island. An island in the Pacific Ocean. [Behring's Island is in Behring's Sea.] . " Kamschatka. Bounded easi, and south by Pacific." " Kamtschatka. Bounded on the north by the country of the Koriacs, on the east and south by the North Pacific Ocean, and on the west by the Sea of Okotsk." " Beering's Island. In the North Pacific Ocean." "Beering's Island. An igland in the North Pacific Ocean. " Kamtchatka. Eivpr, which nms into the North Pacific Ocean. "Kamtchatka. Peninsula, bounded on the east and south by the North Pacific Ocean." " Islands in the Eastern or Great Pacific Ocean : Bhering's Isle." " Stilles Mecr. Vom 5 nordl. Br. an bis zur Befings- strasse autwarta atcts heftige Sturnie." [Behring's Strait is at the northern extremity of Boliring's Sea.] " Behring's Island. An i.sland in the North Pacific Ocean." " Beering's Island. In the North Pacific Ocean." "Bcoriiig's Island. In the Pacific." "Mer Pacifiquo. II s'(?tend du nord au sud depuis le Corclo rolairc Aroliqvie, c'e.st-iVdire, depuis le Detroit dc Bchring, qui Ic fait communiquer a I'Ocdan Glacial Austral." " ,Stilk\x Mecr. Vom 30 sudlicbcr Droite bis ziim 5 nordlicher Breito verdient es durcb seine Heiterkoit unrt Stillo den namen des Stillcn Meers ; von da an bis zi.r Beringsstrasso ist cs hcftigen StUrmen uiiterwofcn." "Beering's Island. In the North Pacific Ocean." " Bhc'ring''8 Strait connects tlie Frozen Ocean witl the Pacific. ■' Tlie Aniidir flows into the Pacific Ooofin. "l"he principal gulfs of Asiatic Russia are: the Gulf of Anadir, near Bhering's Strait ; the Sea of Penjinn, and the Gulf of Okhotsk, between Kamtchatka and the mainland of Russia — all three in the Pacific Ocean." [607] G " L'Ocdan Pacifique BoTi5al s'^teud depuis lo Ddtroit de Behi'ing jusqu'au tropiquede Cancur." " Lo Udtroit do Behring, A commonccr par ce dijtroit, le Grand Ocdau (ou Ocdan Pacifiquo) forme la limite orieutule de I'Asie." "Behring (ddtroit cdlibre). II joint rOcdan Glacial Arctiiiue au Grand Oodan." " The Pacific Ocean, Its boundary-line is pretty well detenuined by the adjacent continents, whicli approach one another towards the north, [and at Behring's Strait, whicli separates them, are only about 36 miles apart. This strait may be considered as closing the Pacific on the north." " Behring (Detroit de), h I'extrdmittS nord-est do I'Asie, edporo Continent de I'Aindrique et I'Gcdan Glacial Arctique de rOciSan Pacifique. " Behring (Mer de). Partie do I'Ocdan Pacifiqua" " Behring (DiStroit de). Canal de i'ocdan . . . unissant les eaux de I'OciSan Pacifique i celles do I'Dcdan Arctique." " Behring Sea, or Sea of Kamtchatlta, is that part of the North Pacific Ocean between the Aleutian Islands, in lati- tude 55° north, and Behring Strait, in latitude C6° north, by which latter it communicates with the Arctic Ocean." " Pacific Ocean. Between longitude 70° west imd 110° east, that is, for a space of over 180°, it covers the greater part of the earth's surface, from Behring Straits to the Polar Circle, that separates it from the Antarctic Ocean." " Behring (Detroit do). Canal du Grand Ocdan unissant les eaux de I'Ocdan Pacifique i celles do I'Ocdan Glacial Arctique." Beliring Sea, sometimes called the Sea of Eamtchatka, is that portion of the North Pacific Ocean lying between the Aleutian Islands and Behring's Strait." " Behring's Island. An island in the North Pacific Ocean." " Behring's Strait, which connects the Pacific with the Arctic Ocean, is formed by the approach of the continents of America and Asia." "Pacific Ocean. Its extreme southern limit is the Antarctic Circle, from which it stretches northward through 1.32° of latitude to Behring's Strait, wliich separates it from the Arctic Ocean." " Behring (Ddtroit de). Canal ou bras de mer uni.ssant k's eaiix do I'Ocdan Glacial Arctique b, celles de I'Ocdan Pacifiqu \" " Bohi ing's Strait. The narrow sea between the north- east pai ; of Asia and the north-west part of North America, connecting the North Pacific with the Arctic Ooeaa" " Behring Sea, or Sea of Kamchatka, is that part of the North Pacific Ocean between the Aleutian Islands in latitude 55° north and Beliring Strait in latitude 66° north, by which latter it communicates with the Arctic Ocean." "Behring, or Bhering. A strait, sea, island, and bay, Nortli Pacific Ocean." ■■'Bering's Meer. Der nordostlichste Toil des Stillen Ocean's." "Pr(«U d« la Giognphl* CaiTtitMll*," Mr MilU-BniB, Tol. U, p. 181, MlUon IgU. Ditto, TOl. rill, p. 4. Ungloii, "DiotioBiuIn de 0 m /A IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 I.I 11.25 ^ii£ y£ ■a lU |2.2 ■UUW U 1^ Photograpbic Sciences Coiporation ^ 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. U580 (716)872-4503 vV s ""SP^PPIBPPBPWWWBW^'S'WWfp mumK ■iflW^ilRWWWiWipipflliiipSipj!^^ -■wWp!fWS?W«,^v^«PPl?S^^ T Vr ' " '•'."JV ■ "'!(?ri?^|»;j'(!n?? : rT^y7iff«Ri l'^^ 24 "It is. however, [certainly] a different question how [what] tlio Treaty Powers thought on this point in 1 824. Up to the year 1845 thoro was great [much] caprice and divergence in the division and appellation of the great seas. However, the wording of the Treaty of 1824 shows that one was already acquainted with the division of Buache (1752), for he was the first one to introduce the name Great Ocean. In this division Behring's Sea belonged to the 'Mer Septentrionale du Qtand Ocdoa' Forster, the celehrated companion of Cook, also is beyond doubt in this regai-d (see [his] collected writings, vol. iv, p. 9./). " It must be noted that in Fleurien's time (year eight of the first French Republic) the two ice seas (Arctic and Antarctic) were not yet separated [were not yet looked upon as separated] from the other three oceans. When lleurien introduced this separation, he took the Polar Circles as boundaries, and to this the British Commission of 1845 also acceded, as is well known. Consequently, here also Behring's Sea appears as part of the Pacific Ocean. " Hoping that these remarks will be sufficient for you, I remain, &c. (Signed) " Peof. Dr Alex. Sotan, "Editor of PeterTHann'i Communieations. "Mr. Robert Eayuer, " Salem, Massachussetts." In reply to a request sent by Dr. George M. Dawson to Professor Supan for a copy of the above letter, as originally written in German, that gentleman has been so kind as to write further, as follows : — " (Translation.) " Jm'iis Perthes Oeographieal Institute, " Most honovrod Sir, " Gotha, July 15, 1892. " Unfortunately I do not possess a copy of my letter to Mr. Bayner, but the translation appears to me to be on the whole correct. Rayner asked me what was my opinion on the question from a geographical point of view, and my reply falls under two heads : — " 1. The present geographers collectively, so far as I know, consider Behring Sea as part of the Pacific Ocean, and from whatever point of view the question iS con- sidered, the conclusion always arrived at is that Behring Sea is an annex of the Pacific. " 2. This view, moreover, also generally prevailed as early M 1824, as the two earliest attempts at classification agree in it. What view was held by the Oov«mm«ntt of the day is, however, questionable, as there are enough instances to show that Governments trouble themselves but^ little with scienee " With the highest consideration, I remain, &o. " Aux. SOPAN." / iMiMliiiliiii gmygi g|V,«^"WS?!^W!^^7-T.^«f|"^,^HW-".i* II. In the foregoing pages the subject of the relation understood to exist between the Faciflo and Behring Sea has been particularly in view, but it has nevertheless been impossible to entirely separate certain allusions bearing on the extent of the north*west coast, us particularly important, among which may be noted Mr. Greenhow's definition. Some notes are, however, given below en the subject of the north-west coast as separately considered. The contention held by Mr. Blaine, for the United States, on this particular point, is ex- plained by him as follows : — "The dispute prominently inToIves the meaning of the phrase 'north-west coast/ or 'north-west coast of America.' • • • ' • "The contention of this Government is that by long presoription the ' north-west coast ' means the coast of the Pacific Ocean, sonth of the Alaskan Peninsula, or south of the 60th parallel of north latitude ; or, to define it still more accumte'j". the coast, from the northern border of the Spanish possessions, ceded to the United States in 1819, to the point where the Spanish claims met the claims of Russia, viz., from 42° to 60° north latitude. The Russian authorities for a long time assumed that 59° 30* was the exact point of latitude, but subsequent adjustments fixed it at 60°. The phrase 'north-west coast,' or 'north-west coast of America' has been well known and widely recognized in popular usage in England and America from the date of the first trading to that coast, about 1784. So absolute has been this prescription that the distinguished historian, Hubert Howe Bancroft, has written an accurate history of the north-west coast, which at different times, during a period of seventy-five yean, was the scene of important contests between at least four Great Powers. To render the understanding explicit, Mr. Bancroft has illustrated the north-west coast by a carefWy prepared Map. The Map will be found to incJnJft precisely the area which has been steadily main- tained by this Government in the pending discussion. "The phrase 'north-west coast of America' ha^ not infrequently been used simply as the synonym of the ' ncoth-west coast,' but it has also been used in another sense as including the American ooajt of the Russian possessions as for northward as the Straits of Behring. Confusion has sometimes arisen in the use of the phrase ' north-west coast of America,' but the true meaning can always be determined by reference to the context" [667) H W-k m m iii ^■7'F^-'"-T~*'T»:' r;--"^-rY^f^P^TS5!ip5!^PI|ip^!»p ^^^iMiiiilli liiiiiiiii^ Kf S!i'ir^^i(!^r^4«l|pij^flj;j|jt;j| dfr?^^' Tl ■?w?" .'■^"j^ ^iyvffS ■-\''mi^^^ji^'!^m''W!^w^^ 96 It can, howerer, be diowii by actual raferonoe to published Maps and dooumenti (^put from the negotiationa leading up to the conblnsion of the GonventionB of 1824 and 1826, alieady cited) : (1) That North-we$t Coatt of Ameriea and North' west Cooit are practically identical expreaaions, "America" being in the latter oaae underatood, and the abbreviated form being merely arrived at by the eliaion of that word. (2.) That the full meaning of the term, in either form, included the vestem coaat of North America firom an in* definite point to the southward, northward, and definitely as far as Behriug Strait. (8.) That in one or other form it has ncTertheless been laxly employed in an indefinite way as a general name for various different parts of the west coast of North America. The term North^eat Coait, or, more fully, North' North-weit Coatt of North Ameriewesterly — facing coast of North America, which forms the eastern and north-eastern coast-line of the North Pacific. This term, however, appears in the title of some very early Maps, such as that by]; itf filler, dated 1761, which is entitled, " A Map of the Discoveries made by the Russians on the North* west Ooast of America; that accompanying the original edition of Gook's third voyage, dated 1784, and entitled, "Chart of the North-west Coast of America and the North-east Coast of Asia ;" and that in Vancouver's voyage (1798), named " A Chart showing part of the Coast of North-west America." The last-named Map, however, affords a clue to the meaning of the term, and shows that, in these instances, we should read in Aill " Coast of the North-western part of the North American continent," and, converseley, " Coast of the north- eastern part of the continent of Asia." This is particularly obvious, when it is remembered that, espenially in the case of the first of the Maps "ibove referred to, the explorations set down were conducted from Russia, by way of Oldiotsk, in the sea of the same name, and that, consequently, if direction from the point of departure had been considered, what is named the north-east coast of Asia would have in reality been the north-wttt eotut of that continent i-vwtCosit. f^mm'Wf^^^m^m^^^m^^l^W^ 27 It is veiy probable that a special and some- what different meaning came to be connected irith the North-weit Coast of America at a later date, \rhen it was regarded and spoken of by inhabitants of the United States, situated in a south-easterly bearing from all this part of the North American coast; but, in admitting this, it is also evident that the north-west coast, as thus secondarily applied, must hare included the whole coast lying north-westerly from the point of observation, or trending from any given point of departure on the west coast of the continent in a general north-westerly direction. It has, however, been maintained that, at some still later date, the term north-west coast came to bear a quite definite signification as referring to a certain particular part of the western coast of North America. In this case such usage may be expected to be found recorded on the Maps at some particular epoch, and thereafter to have been continued with precision. The term is seldom found as a goopraphical one defined verbally (see, however, Greenhow, supra dt.), and thus it is to Maps that we may turn with the hope of finding it with this particular meaning. As the result of the examination of a large series of Maps, relating particularly to the dates near to that of the Ukase of 1821 and the Conventions of 1824 and 1825, it is, however, disappointbg to observe that this term is seldom met with, and then only in a very lax and general meaning. Mailer's Map of 1761, republished by Jeffreys in London, has already been referred to. The description " North-west Coast of America " here occurs in the title only, while the coast delineated extends to what is now known as Behring Strait. A Map published in the " London Magazine" in 1764, also refers to "North-west Coast of America" in its title, but as it is merely a reduced copy of Miiller's Map, does not throw any further light on the subject. Coming down to the date of Cook's third voyage in 1784, we again find a corresponding title, viz., "Chart of the North-west Coast of America and North-east Coast of Asia." This Chart is drawn so as to include the coast from the vicinity of the point where it was first reached by Cook (about latitude 44°) to Icy Capo, ■i-^f ■•^f'im^a If nfl ^llf^lf/l^pn I :fr^^^^t^^^v^^*W^m^if^'W ^^15 |||^,PfP|PfM>'l.»WI!fPP»!W!S!R'^ Mtt^tppi|f^^i||PP«i^PPip|PPI to the north of Behring Strait, and in the Arctic Ocean. The same romNrki apply to the corre- •ponding Map in the French edition of Cook's Voyage, dated 1785. In 1798, VanoouTcr's Voyage contains "A Chart showing part of the coast of North-west America," and tliis includes the coast-line con- tinuously from latitude 80° to a point a little west of Kadiok Island. A few years later, in 1802, we find Charts 1 to 8 published in connection with the voyage of the "Sutil" and " Mexicana," in Madrid, entitled, "La Costa Nord-ouest de America." These continuously include from about latitude 17° northward and westward to Uualaska Island in the Aleutian claim. Another Chart, also published in 1803, by the Quartermastor-General's Department, Russia, ■hows (in Russian characters) the legend " part of the north-west coast of America " mnning on the continental land from a point nenr the coast •nd to the north of Behring Strait, continuously to a point between the 68rd and 64th degrees of latitude. In Rossi's Atlas, published in Milan in 18'« j on Map 6, the name Cotta nord-oue$t actually appears engmred on the face of the Map, and runs from a point a little to the west of the head of Cook's Inlet on the continental land south* ward to about the 60th parallel, while on another Hap in the same Atlas (No. 80) the words Parte dtlla Costa Nord-oueit dtW America are shown ex- tending along the land firom the longitude of Kadiak southward to latitude 89°, or much further than in the first instance, notwithstanding the rastriotion of the title. In " Roquefeuil's Voyages," published in Paris in 1828, a Map occurs, entitled "Carte de la C6te Nord-ouest d'Am^rique," and this iiicludes an extent of coast from Utitude 84° 30' north- mrd and westward to the mainbnd coast west of Kadiak Island. Some years later, in 1844, on the elaborate Map accompanying M. Duflot de Morfas' work, pabUahcd in Paris in 1844, " Cdte Nord-ouest de I'Am^iique," is engraved running to seaward of tiiat pert of the coast whicb extends from lati- tade 60° to the entrance of the Strait of Fnca. The above are all of the Maps included in the Uat, elsewhere given, upon or in connection with irhioh the term Korth^ett Coait or Nvrth-wert PP.yf»iPWP**-M " ,1 ll^#P*i4»>%',>Wp|M|ippi|l,MM. 'I;H 1,1 " HI. I m^rmiwy—^TVr' Coatt of America, or iU eqaivolentt, baa been found. None of the works publbbed in the United States at about the dates speofally referred to bare been found to include it. Mr. Blaine, in his despatch of the 17th December, 1800, specially refers to a Map "published by the Geographical Institute at Weimar" in 1808, as showing the Nird Wut Kxute, which is said to include " the coast from the Columbia Hirer (40°) to Cape Elizabeth (60^)." It has so far been impossible to consult this Map, but tbc> description given of it may doubtless be assu .' 1 as correct. It will be noted that the usu.!;(. hnro found does not pre- cisely agree with that on any of the above-cited Maps, thou"') most utarly to tliat of Duflot de Morfos. In Burney's " Chmnologioal History of North- eastern Yoyag oF Uiscovory," London, 1819, -hapter 19 is entitled "Captain Cook on the North-west Coast Oj" America." Thut title is continued as a side-note to the pn^ following oa feir as to p. 229, or from the point at krhioh Cook first sighted the land in latitude 4A^ to Unalaska. After this point " west coast " is substituted for " north-west coast," showing very dearly where the author, who was a member of Cook's expedition, supposed the north*west coast to end. (Compare Chreenhow's definition of north-west coast, ante.) Coming down, however, to much later times, numerous instances might be quoted showing that the term was not restricted to the limits contended for by Mr. Blaine, and that it has generally been used with the utmost laxity, even by those likely to be best informed on the sub- ject. Witness the following : — " North-west Coast of America, United States' Coast Survey, Benjamin Peirce, Superintendent, 1868," sheets 1 to 3. These include the coast oontinuotisi^ from the vicinity of the Strait of Fnca (sheet x) to some distance west of Kadiak and Seven Islands (sheet S), ending to the west- ward between the 157th and 158th meridians, and showing the eastern part of Bristol Bay. Thus, in the United States' "Alaska Pacific Coast Pilot," Part 1, 1883, which was edited by Mr. W. H. Dall (a gentleman whose fiuniliariiy [667] I I ^''T^'-'^'""^''''''???'''''^'''^^ itiiii ■->.'irfeV*y3iiii.( -J . -jj. ■9SP ^mmfm^fif^m ^W^BSS^jjppPH" •fjwij. vKi.n'ijn, .,y -^Ji.4Hij|iii ?5w5Ts^l!?PP^li 80 irith all historioal and geogisphioal pointi eon- neoted with the weat coast is well known), on p. 287, under "List of Oharts issued by the United Stat. ' Coast and Gtoodetio Surrey- Sailing Charts — North^ett Coast of America," is found catalogued "No. 4, Chirikoff Island to Nunivak." This particular Chart is entered as "in preparation," but its title carries the term *' north-west coast " up to or beyond latitude 60° within fiehring Sea. In Mr. Blaine's despatch of the 17th December, 1890, particular importance is, however, attached to a small and rather poorly engraved Map which appears in Mr. H. H. Bancroft's works, vol. xzvii (1884), which is the first of two voliunes entitled « History of the North-west Coast." This Map is entitled " Map of the North-west Coast," and is actually reproduced in fac-simiJe in the despatch. This Map appears to be regarded as an argument conclusive in itself, and it is said of it, " The Map will be found to include pre- cisely the area which has been steadily maintained by this Government in the pending discussion." * If Mr. Blaine had written " precisely that pait of the west coast of America," he would have been more accurate, for of this coast the Map in question actually includes from about latitude 40°, in the vicinity of Cape Mendicino, to the vicinity of that part of the coast where latitude 60° reaches the Pacific. The area of the Map is, however, a very different matter, as it stretches eastward so as to include Hudson Bay and Strait, Davis E>trait, and the St. Lawrence Biver nearly to its mouth : in fact, almost the entire northern width of the North American Continent. We are fortunately, however, not obliged to criticize this point alone by the exigencies which determined the lines upon which this particular Map was cut off by the draftsman — for it is evidently by its con- struction a reproduction of .some part of a more inclusive Map of ilie continent. * Mr. Blsine doei not appear to have noticed one eurioui cireumstanra oonneoted with lhl> " carefully prepared Map." In the northern part of the Map, each tenth degree of latitude ia indieatcd, including IV, SKf, and 50°, and, on the west eoaat, (he 40th parallel ia alao ihown by a line correctly placed, to the nonth of Cape Mendicino. It ia, however, indicated In the margin a( latitude " 49." On the opposite or ea>tern lide of the Map the line of latitude actually ihown is Utilude 41, und it ii corrtbtly to named. Tbia pecullnr miilalie oecun both on the original and on the reprodnetion ^^^^^^^WW^'^r^WW^^'^^^^^^''^ 81 The text of the work to which it is an appendage exphuns the limits which the historian had placed himself under, and, at the same time, very clearly shows that he did not suppose the title of his work alone would render its scope clear to his readers. On the second page of the first volume, and in explaining the scope of his work, Mr. Bancroft writes : " The term north-west coast, as defined for the purposes of this history, includes the territory known in later times as Oregon, Wash- ington, and British Columbia;" thus rendering it obvious that for convenience ho embraced under that term certain parts of the west coast which subsequently shaped themselves into three distinct territorial divisions. Aa he had already treated of the history of California (vol. ), this was excluded, and as he proposed to treat separately of Alaska (vol. xxxiii), this, also, was eliminated. As a matter of fact, however, he found it convenient to include in his Map a greater extent of the west coast than that above defined, to the north and soutb, as wo have already seen he did not scruple to do to the east. His Map actually includes a consideriibic part both of the coast and the interior of Alaska in one direction, and of what is now the State of California in the other. Notes on Maps examined, on which the term " North- west Coast of America " or its equivalent expres- sions are met with. N.B. — ^These notes include all the Maps upon which the term has been found among those contained in the general note on Maps elsewhere printed. "Voyage* from Asia to America, for completing tlio Discoveries of the North-west Coast of America." S. MUlIer. English edition. London, 1761. This contains " A Map of the Discoveries made by the Russians on the North-west Coast of America." PuHiahed by the Eoyal Academy of Sciences at il\ Fetersburgh, and republished in London by Thos. JefTerys. . This very early Map (though geographically very imper- fect), and the title of the work in which it is coutniued, show the sense of probably the original use of the term "north-west coast," which there extends northward to Behring Straits. m^'^^'^^^^^'^^^^r^Wm^ ill iHiiiiiiiiiii '''i"---«iSppppf''."i*S''«."'""''K'V.^|i^^ f^fW^V^^T" ^ijjppjjii,,, ..J,,, ., ■?^!:'!»]^j|||ji|p(iii '^ppspiiifpppipiiiipp 82 "A new Map of the North-east Coast of Asia and North-west Coast of America, with the late Rnasiaa Discoveries." In the " London Magazine," 17*^4. This is practically a reduction of the last, and has a similar bearing on the question of the north-west coast "Cook's Third Voyage." Original 4to. edition. London, 1784. This contains a Chart entitled, "Chart of the N.W. Coast of America and the N.E. Coast of Asia," &c., which ineludoa the American coast from the point near which Cook first reached it, about 44° latitude, continuing to the termination of his explorations at Icy Cape, on the Arctic Ocean, to the north of Bebring Strait "Troisiimo Voyage de Cook." Paris, 1785. Contains " Carte de la Cdte N.O. de I'Amdrique et de la Cdte N.E. de I'Asie." The name "North-west Coast" is not engr^jcved on the land of the Map, but the Map extends for the whole length of Cook's exploration, or to Icy Cape, in the Arctic Ocean. " A Voyage of Discovery to the North Pacific Ocean, 8k." Vancouver. London, 1798. Contains " A Chart showing paifcof the Coast of North- vest America." This Chart iucludes the coast continuously from latitude 30° to beyond Kadiak Island. (According to title this does not include the lohoU north-west coast.) "Map published by the Quartermaster - General's Department Hussia, 1802." This shows, in Russian characters running on the main- land, "Part of the North-west Coast of America," ext tending from a point near the coast, and to the north of Behring Strait, continuously to a point between the 53rd ' and 64th degrees of latitude. " Atlaa para el Viage de las Ooletas ' Sutil ' y ' Mexi- cana.'" Madrid, 1802. Charts 1 to 3, contained in this work, entitled "La Costa N.O. de America," include continuously from lati- tude 17° northward, and westward to Unaloska. Bumey. "A Chronological History of North-eastern Voyages of Discovery." London, 1819. Chapter 19 is entitled "Captain Cook on the North- west Coast of America." This title is continued as a side- note to the pages throughout the chapter as far as p. 229, or from the point at which Cook first sighted the American coast in latitude 44^°, to Unalaska, after which vxit coa*t is substituted for north-wett eoatt. Bun..;- was himseU a member of Cook's expedition, and the use here made <>f the term shows clearly how he understood it to apply. RossL "Atlas." Milan, 1820. Map 6. The World, in ^itmispheres. On this Map " Costa Nord-ouest" appears, the letters of this title extending from a little west of the head oS ■iMiHHaMMiMiMiiiHiiiiiilJiii ,i,«p|iiL|i!«4l'|ip!»,flJUpptf%««A|i!^ 8» Cook's Inlet along the land southward to the 60th parallel Map 39. "Carte della Parte della Costa Nord-onest dell'America." (Chiefly to show Vancouver's recent surveys.) On the Map the words " Parte della Costa Nord-ouest dell'America '' extends along the land from the longitude of Kadiak southward to latitude 39". The part of the coast actually included in the Map extends from latitude 30° northward and westward con- tinuously to a point beyond Kadiak Island. "Journal d'un Voyage autour du Monde, 1816-19." RoquefeuiL Paris, 1823. Contains " Carte de la C&te Nord-ouest d'Amdrique." This Map, relating specially to the north-west coast, includes the coast continuously from latitude 34° 30' to Kadiak Island and the adjacent mainland coast to the west of that island. "Carte de la Cdte de I'Am^rique, par M. Dufiot de Morfas." 1844. On this Map " C6te Nord-ouest de I'Amdrique " is en- graved, running to seaward of that part of the coast from about 60° to the Strait of Fuca. " North-west Coast of America. United States' Coast Survey. Benjamin Peirce, Superintendent 1868," Sheets 1 to ?. These include the coast continuously from the vicinity of the Strait of Fuca (sheet 1) to some distance west of Kadiak and Seven Islands (sheet 3), ending to the westward between the 167th and 158th meridians, and showing the eastern part of Bristol Bay. In the "United States' Pacific Coast Pilot." Alaska, Part I. 1883. Page 237. " last of Charts issued by the United States' Coast and Gteodetic Survey," &c. Under the title of " Sailing Charts, North-west Coast of America," is found " No. 4. Chirikoff Island to Nunivak." This particular Chart is entered as " in preparation," but its title carries the term "north-west coast" up to or beyond latitude 60°, toitkin Behring Sea. [667] -'— -— ''-■■"!''»~"''"w"?'"T^«^""''"^'"^"P^"""T"T»»'!'w^w»iM^5Fi!«iPiW'?'''^!piW''^^ ^^|(|pppp,(y.ip .J.'U ■j,,'W""i.Mp I, I, ""1 ii»pni .j,?n*)ii|||p^i>w» I ' ' ;ii^^55py,^}i5,iBB) ^"^^fmm^'W^w^^ > .'"jr's^w •■'■"' w^~~-," ■1^ ;. J fDii I ii^i J |i i.|ipMi^im M III. ikffmorandutn on (A« Maps icAt'cA are re/erred to m ffte " Corregpondmet respecting the Rustian Vkate of 1821." {Confidential Foreign Office Print, June 1892.) {Note. — It is not considered advisable to pro* duce the whole of this correspondence at the present time, as parts of it refer to the question of land boundary of Russian and British territory, which question is reserred for further considera- tion.) It has been endeavoured to look up all the Maps alluded to in the course of the corre- spondence, and which may, therefore, be supposed to have been those referred to by the negotiators, with the following results : — (a.) Page 6 of print. Map inclosed by Sir 0. Bagot in despatch from St. Petersburg dated the 17th November, 1821. Sir 0. Bagot writes :— " I have the honour to tranamit to your Lordship, under separate cover, an English translation of the Ukase, and I at the same time inclose a Map of the north-west coast of America and the Aleutian and Kurile Islands, which has been published in the Qoartermaster-General's Depart- ment here, and upon which I have marked all the principal Russian Settlements." Of this Map, dated 1802, the original copy exists in the Poreign Office. For particulars respecting it, see notes on Maps generally, and notes on north-west coast. {b.) Page 41. Sir C. Bagot to Mr. O. Canning, writes from St. Petersburg, under date the 19th August, 1823, referring particularly to the position of Sitka : — " Sitka is not laid down very precisely in the Map published in 1802 by the Quartermaster-Cteneral's Depart- ment here, or laid down at all in that of Arrowsmith, which has been furnished to me from the Foreign Office." The first Map is that above noted in para. (a). The second must either h^ve been Arrow- smith's Map of America, 1822, or Arrowsmith's Chart of the Pacific Ocean. The latter is a large Map in nine sheets, which ran through various editions from 1798 to 1844. On the edition of 1832 (in British Museum Library), the years 85 antecedent in which corrected odltiona were published are noted, and one of these years is 1822. This particular edition has not been found, but for all purposes connuctcd with the present discussion, the editions of 1810 and 1832 (both in British Museum) are identical. Behring Sea appears without name on both this and the Map of North America, and " north- west coast " is not found on jither. (c.) Pag') 43. Sir C. BagottoMr. G. Canning, writes firora St. Petersburg, under date the 17th October, 1828. He refers to a proposed line of boundary on the American Continent, and speaks, in this connection, of the " head of Lynn Canal, as it is laid down in Arrowsmith's last Map." The Map spoken of is evidently the same with that noted in para. (c). (d.) Page 48. In a Memomndum on the Bussian and English boundary on ihe north- west coast of America, dated the 13th January, 1824, it is said:— "Mr. Canniug will percoivo by the inclosed EuSBian Chart (copied from Vancouver's survey) that the Bussian Settlement of Sitka is on a small island so named in the mouth of Norfolk Sound," &c The reference is here entirely to the position of Sitka. The original Map transmitted with the Memorandum cannot be found in the Foreign Office. It may have been the Bussian Map of 1802, but this is doubtful. (e.) Page 49. Admiralty to Foreign Office, 14th January, 1824. Sir John Barrow writes : — " I think the inclosed sketch (which may be considered as correct with respect to latitudes and longitudes) may be of service to Sir Charles Bagot in the negotiations." The MS. sketch referred to has been obtained from the Embassy at St. Petersburgh. It shows a small part of the north-west coast, and the position of Sitka and some proje ~'g'* land lines. (/.) Mr. G. Canning, writing ,o Sir C. Bagot under dafe of the 16th January, 1824, again refers to the position of Sitka, stating that the Russian Map of 1802 (incorrectly printed 1822) showed it to be situated on a small island, and not on the mainland, as a Map inclosed by Sir G. Bagot had shown it to be. ""BplRpB" JWl!!lWi|!4|l!!p.p l.,|. I . >-'.■• ■•'W,»m*m p.»||p-,t-iP^|||ppSl|.JMW.!lflllli 1,1^ "ilUpWW!l»ipiJl||,J4ipp,piii 86 , I^M^ipipiPlppppi'^lfpRppilp The first Map is evidently again that referred to in paragraph (a); the second has not been found, and is not so described that it can be recognized. (jf.) Page . In a letter from Mr. Pelly, Governor of the Hudson's Bay Company, to Mr. G. Canning, under date of the 16th January, 1824, a doubt is expressed as to whether Mr. Faden's Map (to which Mr. Canning appears to have referred in conversation as being the most authentic) could safely be relied on in i-espect to the question of boundary. This Map is "t described, and has not been identified as yet. It might be looked for in the Royal Geographical Society's Map-room under North America, or America, or Pacific Ocean. From the above it would appear that the two Maps principally referred to in the course of the negotiations, so far as indicated by the correspon- dence, w6re the Russian Map of 1802 end " Arrowstnith's Map," the latter being either that of the Pacific Ocean or that of America. These two Maps, English and Russian respectively, Are, in fact, the only ones mentioned in connection with the general questions raised by the Ukase of 1821. 'tmm^^m^m^m mmmmmm 87 IV. lA$t of Maps cited by Mr. Blaine, and forming " Inelosure B " to his Letter of December 17, 1890. LiCT of Maps, \nth Designation of Waters now known as the Behring Sea, with Date and Place of Publication. [In thatt Mipi the watera Math of Bohring Sea are Tarioualy designated aa tha Par'Tio Ocean, Oc^an Pociftque, BtOlat Meer) tha Great Ocean, Grande Mer, Groiie Ocean; the Great South Sea, Oroasc Sud See, Mer du Sud. And tbn are again forther dirided, and the nortlicrn pjrt designated as North Pacific Ocean, Partio du Nori de la Mer du Bod, Partia du Nord de la Grande Mei, Grand Ocean Boreal, Nordliacher Tlieil dca Groasen Sud Meers, Nordliacher Hull dea Stillen Meers, Nurdlische Stille Mcera, &c. In all the Maps, however, the Pacific Ocean, under one of these Tarions titles. Is designated separate from the aea.] Nabo of Mapi, &o. Name of Sea. Place of PublicatioD, Date. Aocnrate Charto tod Nord Amerika, from the best aoorcea Map made under direction of Mikhoel Gvusdof, Surveyor of the Shostakof Expedition in 1730 Uappemondo, by Lowitx . . . . Geographical Atlas of the Raiiian Empire, Alex- ander Voitchinine Carte do Title de leso, corrtHrted to date, by Philippe Buache, Academy of Scienocs, and Geographer to tho King MOUer'a Map of the DiacoTcries by tho Raisians OB the North-West Coast of America, pi-ejiared for the Imperial Academy of Sciences IXAuTiiles Map o "" the Western Hemisphere BCki of H^isp..^re Septentrional by Court Redfem, published by the Royal Academy of Sciences Hap poblisbed in the " London Magoiinc '* Hm by S. Bellin, Enf^nccr of the Royel Aca wmy Nouvelle Carte dos D^ourertos par Us Vais- ■MUX Rutses aux C6tes inconnnes do I'Am^. riquo Soptentrionale ; Miiller Jeffery's American Atlas, printed by R. Sayera and .T. Hennett Road Ma)} Imm Paris to Tobolsken . . Bowie's At' ts; Mn)i of the World .. .. Map (»f fcl'i Cutern part of the Russian Territory, by J. Tr..5oott Hap ' f tJie New V rthom Archtpnl^o. in J. Ton Staehlin i-'torck9bui*g'8 Account of tho Northern An!)iipoIaf,o, lately discovered by the Russians In the Seas of Kaintschotki and Anadir Samuel Danu'i Map of North America Chart of Russian DiscoTcries, from the Map Snblishcd by the Imperial Academy of St. 'etersiiui^h (Rohct Sayur, print-seller), pub. lished as th>( Act dJ• [667] Sea of Anadir . . • . Kamtschatakiscfaea Meer . . Mare Andincnm . . Komtschntka or Beaver Sea Mer de Kamtschatka Sea of Kamtschatka Sea of Anadir . . Mer Dormantn . . Sea of Kamtschatka Mer do Kamtschatka and Mer d' Anadir Sea of Kamtsehatka and Sea of Anadir Sea of Kamtschatka . . Sea of Anadir . . Mara Kamtschatkiensae . , Sea of Kamtschatka and Sea of Anadir Sea of Anadir . . Sea of Kamtschatka St. Petershurgh Berlin St. Petersboigh Paris . , St. Petershurgh Paris Berlin London ■* Amsterdam London . , Paria London St. Petersbuigh London • . Unknown, 1743 1746 1748 KamtsohatUnsbc Meer .< Kamtaohatka or Bearer Sea Sea of Kamlackatk* ., Kamtacbatka Sea •• Sea of Kamtacbatka • • K[ iitachatkliKhe oder Blbei Meer S5 tha Act direata Maans' Vo;>gea; Chart of North- Wait Coaat ,1 *• * * f, • • • • 17W of America Chart of the World, exhibiting all the new Dia- ,, ti • * „ •• •• 1790 coverioa to the preaent time, with the tracka of jrear 1700, carefully collected firam the belt Charts, Mapa, To;agea, «cc., extant, by A. Airowimitb, Geographer, aa tha Act dirccta Chart of the Great Ocean, or South Sea, con- *, „ • ■ Pari 17»1 formable to the accotmt of the voyage of discovery of the French frigatea " La Boas- sole" and " I,' Astrolabe "; La Peroosa Karte dc3 Nordens von Amerika; G. Forater ,. Kamtichatka Sea Berlin .. 1791 Greenough's Map in Wiikinaon'a Atlas Sea of Kamt«!hatka London .. ' ,. 1791 Map of the North-Eastorn part of Siberia, the Kamtschatka Sea St. Petersbuigh 1791 Frozen Sea, the Eastern Ocean, and North- western Coasts of America, indicating BiU- ings' expedition Arrowsmith's Map of the World Sea of Kamlachatka London 99 •• 1794 Charte von Amerika, F. L. Guliefeld .. KamlachatUsches Hear ,, Numberg .. 1796 Atlas of Mathow Carey ; Map of the World from the best anthorities, and Map of Russian Sea of Kamtschatka 1796 Empire in Europe and Asia ' Chart of North America, by J. Wilkea, "aa Act „ » •• London .. 1796 directs" Halbkugel dcr Grde Kamtschatka Sea Nonmberg ■ • 1797 Chart von Nord Amerika, by F. L. Gulaefeld .. KamtochatUschoa Mcer .. Nurabeic *. .. 1797 C. F. Dclmarche's Atlas | Mappemonde, by Sea of Kamtschatka Pari! 1797 Robert da Vangondy, including new Dis- coveries of Captain Cook La F^rouse's Chart of the Great Ocean, or „ ,* • • London •• 1798 South Sea, conformably to the Discoveries of the French frigates " La Bouasole " and *' L' Astrolabe," published in conformity with the Decree of the French National Assembly, 1791, translated and printed by J. Johnson W. Heather's Marine Atlas „ „ •• ,t *• • • 1799 Greenough's Atlas i Map by Vibrecht, entitled Mer de Kamtschatka • , Edinbargb 1800 •■ Carle de la Cite Nord-Ouest de I'Am^rique Scptoutrionale," and showing the Discoveries of the Russiana and Portlock and Dickson Wilkinson's General Atlas; a new Mcrcator'a Sea of Kamtschatka London . , 180O Chart drawn from the latest discoveriea Map of the World ; Graberg Bacino di Behring Geneva .. •• 1802 Map Magazine, composed according to the latest Beaver Sea or Sea of St. Petorabnrgh 1802 observations of foreign Navigators, corrected Kamtschatka to 1802 Map of Mccr von KamtachatVa, with the Routes Meer von Kamtschatka ., Weimar ., 1803 of Captain Jos. Billings and Mart. Bauer, drawn by Fred. Gotze, to accompany Report of Billings' Ruasian Official Visit to Alentia and Alaska Atlas dos Ganzen Erdkreises, by Christian Gott- „ *, •• ,, •• .1 1803 lieb Rcichard Arrowsmith's General Atlaa . . Sea of Kamtschatka London .. .• 1804 Map of Savriiia SarytacbelTs Journey in the „ ,, •• Leipsic .. .. 180S North-Eaat Sea Jcdediali Alorse's Map of North America „ ,, •• Boston .. 1806 Robert Wilkinson's General Atlaa; new Mer- „ ,, •• London •• .. 1807 cator's C:liart Atlas of the Russian Empire, adopted by the Kamtschatka or Beaver St. Petersburgh 1807 General Direction of Schools Sea Genetal Map of the Travels of Captain Golovnin Kamtschatka Sea .. „ ,* •• 1807-9 Map in Carey's Atlas Soa of Kamtschatka London . . 1808 Lit'utcnant Roberta' Cliart, improved to date . , ,, „ *• „ • • • • 1808 Happemonde in Atlas of Malte-Brun . . Bussin de Behring Pari 1809 Dunn's Atlas . . . • Sea of Kamtschatka London .. ,• 1810 Karte des Groiien Oceans, usually the South Kamtscbatkisohcs Meer .. Hamburg .. ., 1810 Sea ; Sotxmann Chart von Amerika ; Streits , , Sea of Kamtachatka Weimar , . 1810 Arrowumith's Map of North America . . „ ,, London , . . , 1811 Map of the Worid in Pinkerton'a Atlas ,, ,, •• „ •• •■ 1812 Map by Lapie " Carte d' Amdriquc, ridig^ d'aprea celle d' Arrow- Baasin du Nord ., Paria 1812 Bassin de Behring ,, »• •* 1813 smith, en quatre planches et soumisc auz Ob- servations Astrononiiques deM.de Humboldt;" by Champion Map of Oceania, or tha Fifth I'art of llio World, Basiin du Nord. , , , „ •• ., 18U including a portion of America and the Coa«(s ofAsia, bytl. Bru« Neetu's General .\tlas ; Samuel and George Sea of Kamtschatka London , . , . 1814 Neelo *Chart von Amerika ; Geographic Institute , , Meer von Kamtachatka .. Weimar .. 1814 Map of the World, by Von Krusenstern .. St. retcraburgh 1816 • This Chart also Jesignates the coast from Columbia River (40°) to Cape Kliiabeth (80°) aa tha " Nord-Weat Xuata." 39 Nunc of Mtp, &c. Name of Sea. Place of Pablioation. Date Encjrproptjrpe de TAm^rique Septentrionile. by Brn« Hmith'i Otnenl AtlM BaaainduNord FMl 18I» Sea of Kamtachatka London ., .. 1815 Item Grand Atlu UnUenel, edited by Chei Deanj) *» ,* •■ II •• .. 181S Baaaln du Nord . . Paria 1816 Atlaa KUnuntaire, by Lspio ct Poinon .. Baaaln dn Nord on de Behring Her de Behring ou Baaain da Nord Sea of Kamtachatka II •• •• 1816 Am^riquo Septenlrioule at M^ridiaiula; Lapie ti 1. •• 1817 Han In Thompaon'a Atlaa ,. Edinburgh.. 1817 Fielding Laoaa* Atba ■ ■ fi • * Baltimore.. 1817 Kcicbard and Von Haller'i Gorman Atlaa f* 1* • ■ Weimar . . . . 1818 Map in QrMnongh'a Atlaa ,. ** - i» •• Edinburgh. . , . 1818 John Pinkerton'a Modem Atlaa Philadelphia 1818 Map engrated by Kirkwood and Bona , . It »» • • Edinburgh. . 1819 Chart of the Ruiaian and EngUah DiacoTeriei II II •■ London . . 1819 in the North Padlic Ocean, by Captain Jamea Barney, F.R.8. Carte 6fo .'; des Cdfes de L'Am6riqu« et de L'Anie." (From discoveries by French frigates " Boussolle " and " Astrolabe." No date. Probably about 1798 or before, as Vancouver's surveys not included. From "Atlas du Voyage." La PtSrouso. No. 15.) Behring Sea not named on this lai'gc-scale Chart. Behring Strait named Del. dc Behrimj. North Pacific named Orand Ocean Septentrional. Map showing "The Russian Kmpire" in view of tho Bussian Empire. Took. London, 1800, 3 vols., 8vo. Whole of Behi'ing Sea included, but without separate name; on the contrary, tho North Pacific is named as a whole Eatlem Ocean, the first word lying to tho north, the second to the south, of the Aleutian Islands. (Easttm Ocean is used in tho same general sense in the text.) 3»a of Okhotsk distinctly named. Behriitg'a Straits, " Map published by the Quartermaster-Qeneral's Depart- ment" Russia, 1802. This is really a ( lort showing the Asiatic and Americaa coasts and the whole of Behring Sea. The copy in Foreign Office is the indentical one sent by Sir C. Bagot, 17th November, 1821, in his despatch of that date, and with his MS. notes upon it. Behring Sea is named, in large letters running from west to east, Beaver Sea. KamUchalka Sea, in smaller letters, runs parallel to coast of peninsula of same name, and inside the Com- mander Islands. North Pacific is named Southern Ocean or Still Sec Behring Strait is so named. " Chart of the Strait l.etween Asia and America with the Coast of the Tschutski." Drawn by A. Arrowsmith. This Map appears in an account of a geographical and astronomical expedition to the northern part of Russia (expedition of Billings tor the Russian Government), by Sauer. London, 1802. This is practically a Chart of Behring Sea, but that sea is not separately named in any way. Sea of Ochottk appears prominently. Sea of Anadyr in bay of that name. " General Map T)f North and South Ap^ericu." A. Arrowsmith. London, 1804. All eastern part of Behring Sea included as far west as Behring Island, but without name. North Pacijie Ocean. 69815 (15). " Map of America." A. Arrowsmith. Behring Sea without nama Sherin^s Strait. North Pacific Ocean. 1804. "S'^SWip'ipSSPWiSHIPflPPPPBf'iW^^ ■WPPiP i^^Pipipiip»Biiijjpiji.a!)iw|if!i,,f|^w^ _' -^ I • ".•'^'■WCPTl^jnRy!"!'! 44 "^ General and Classieal Atlas." By E. Pattison. S. 8S(6). 1804. Map 3. The World. Bather small Map in hemispheres. Ko namen on Behriug Sea, Okot.sk Sea, Japan Sea, &c., though Hudson's Darj, Baffin's Bay, China Sea, &c., shown. North Pacific Ocean appears alone. Map o. Asia. Western part of Behring Sea shown, but without name, though Sea of Okotsh, &o., named. Pacific Ocean. Map 7. North America. Eastern part of Behring Sea shown, but without name North Pacific Ocean. "Voyages along the North-east Coast of Siberia, and Arctic, and Pacific Oceans during Eight Vears," &c. (Billings' Expedition.) By Captain Sarychef. St. Petera- burg, 1802. [Title in llusaian.] Boliring Sea without any general name. Sea of Kamtschatka, 4c., appear preci.sely as in the next Map, which is a Gorman edition of iJie same. " Chorte des Nordostliohen Theils von Sibiiicn, des Eismeers, des Ostoceans und der Nordwestlichen Kuste von America." Entworfen von Sariitschew. From Sarychef's account of Billings' voyages. German translation. Leipzig, 1805. Behring Sea without any general name. Das Meer von Xamtchatka appears in the western part of thb sea, to north of Commander and the western Aleutian Islands, but is distinctly intended to apply only there. Lettering used in this case same with that of Dot Ochotskische Mcer. Berings Sirasse. Osl-Ocean oder das Slillc Meer. "Reduced Chart of Pacific Ocean by Arrowsmith." 980 (u). Additions to 1809. One sheet. This is a reduction of 980 (12), but evidently from an earlier edition than that elsewhere quoted, extending equally far north, and likewise sliowing Behring Sea vithout name. " Smith's New Oemrrd Atlas." London, 1809. 8, os (7), Map 1. Western Hemisphere. Behring Sea named Sta of Kamtschatka. Serines Sir. North Pacific Ocean. Map 3. The World. Mercator's Projection. Same as last. Map 28. Kussian Empire. Behring Sea named Sea of Xamtchatka. Map 31. Asia. Greater part of Behring Sea shown, and portion of America, but without nomo on sea. Bering Str. North Pacific Ocean. Port of latter name runs over into Behring Sea. Map 41. America. Behring Sea named Sea of Kamtchatka. Map 42. North America. Greater part of Behring Sea included in detail, but without name. Bherinjft St. North Pacific Ocean. il^'t'S^i^*! "^ifswWf'Er^ '^'-'^''^spfwas^ / 5r«-^wps«^-^V 45 »M (13). K. 116. ««, 9. & 14fl (sa). 97« (A). 8. T. W. (4). 8.1(1). S.76. ft 144 (I)' " ArrowimUh's CImH of the Pacific Ocean." Tliis is a large and important Map in nine sheets, specially devoted to the Pacific Ocean. Originally published 1798. This edition with corrections to 1810. The northern edge of the Map runs about latitude 62° north, and it includes the greater part of Behring Sea, but shows it as a large blank unnamed space. Bristol Say alone is rather prominently named. By contrast, the Sea of Ochot»k, Sea of Japan, and other inclosed seas are named. " Karte de Grossen Ocean." Soltzmann. Perthes. Behring Sea named Ramachatkischea ifeer. 1810. " OstelPa New General Atlas." London, 1810. Map 1. The World. Behring Sea without name, though Sea of Okhotsk, &c., all clearly named. Shtring's Strait. North Pacifie. Map 19. Asia. Includes all the western part of Behring Sea, but without name. Pae^ Oteem. Map 24. North America. Includes all eastern part of Behring Sea, but without name. Bherin^s Strait, I.'eific Ocean. "Chartof the World." Mercator's Projection. Showing Captain Cook's discoveries. Date assigned in catalogues, 1811. (From Guthrie's « Atlas.") Behiing Sea named Sea of Kamtschatka. Bhering's Straits. North Pacific Ocean. " Hydrographical (Mart of the World." A. Arrowsmith. 1811. Behring Sea named Sea of Kamtchatka. Strings Strait. North Pacific Ocean. "New Atlas." Fielding Lucas. Baltimore. Assigned date in catalogue, 1812. Map 2. Western Hemisphere. Behring Sea named Xdmlschatka Sea. North Pacific Ocean. Map 3. The World. Mercator's Projection. Behring Sea shown, but without name. Beerin^s Sir. North Pacific Ocean, , Map 29. North America. Behring Sea named Sea of Kamtschatka. Sehring'a Sir. Pacific Ocean. " Ooldmith's Atlas." London, 1813. Map 1. The World. Stereographio Projection. Behring Sea not named, though Sea of Okhotsk, Sea of Japan, &o., named. NoHh Pacific Ocean. Map 2. World on Mercator's Projection. Names same as above. Map 4. Asia. Same us above. " New Elementary Atlas." Caiy. London, 1813. Map 1. The World. Sea of Kamtschatka placed in western part of Behring Sea adjacent to the peninsula of same name. No general name for Behring Sea. North Pae\fio Oetan. [667] N ■WWSPiPffPWPPllWiipilIi^ BPi"«(iPfiPPiPPiP^»'WPWii^ ^g_g|g mmm^imm AlJ||»iJiWii|fiP!!PPPPWI^iiiW"i^«|«^'- 'ii,"' '"■•'fR,''"»U'!»' J*,t;ijiHu,b ^^'■^''"''Iff^^SfiPIPW!^^ 46 \^ I u R m Map 2. The Woild. Same as above. 3fap 19. Asia. Sea of KamttcKatka, the name being placed quite oloae to the land of the peninsula. Map 26. North Amorioa. Whole eastern part of Behring Sea shown, but without name. " New Ifap of America." Smith. London, 1814. <9SI0(M). Behring Sea called iSiia (/£im«cAa 1816. Map 2. Western Hemisphere. Behring Sea without name. Behring Strait named CooVa Stra. North Pacific named Das NdriUiche Still* Weltmetr. Map 26. Asia. Behring Sea named hero Kamttohat- haschtea Meer. Cook, od. Bshrin^s Stratse. ;■*' .«w«?'p^ptiJM^f|PJjl'|!|itW»^ 47 Map 29. America. Fart of Behriiig Sea shown, but withont names, 8.110^5. "ThampKm'B New General Atlas." EdinburRb, 1817. Folio. Map 1. Hydrognipbical Chart of the World, Mercatoi'* Ptqjection. Sta of Kamitkatka engraved parallel to the peninsnla. and near it No general names for Behring Sea. Behring Str. North Paeifie Ocean. Map 2. Northern Hemisphere, Polar Projection. Behring Sea named Sea of Kamtehatka. N. Pacific named Orand Nortlum Ocean. Map 5. Western Hemisphere. Sea of Kamtehatka, but evidently applied to western part only of Behring Sea. 8. of Anadir also appears, though in smaller letters, in north-western part of Behring Sea. Map 6. Northern Hemisphere, projected on plane of horiaon of London. Behring Sea named Sea of Kamteehatka, Bhering Str. Map 35. Asia. Whole of Behring Sea shown. Sea of Eamtsehatka engraved between Bkerin^s I. and {he peninsula, and evidently confined to western part of Behring Sea. Manifestly equivalent in rank to Sea of Anadir, which is engraved in gulf of that name further north. North Paeijie Ocean, Map 36. Bussian Empire. Sea of Kamtehatka on western part of Behring Sea, which alone included. Ehvrvtt^i Strait. Pacific Ocean. Map 52. America. Greater part of Behring Sea shown, but without name. Bhtfiin^s St. North Pacific Ocean. Map 53. North America. About half of Behring Sea ' shown, but without name. Shering's Straits. North Paeifie Ocean. Map 74 Chart of northern passage between Asia and America. Behring Sea named Sea of Kamtehatka as a whole. Bering's Strait. Northern Part of Pacific Ocean. 69810 (86), " Charts von America." F. W. Strsit. Niirnberg, 1817. Behring Sea named Meer von Kamtehatka. Pacific Ocean named Der Stille Ocean. 468S0(SI). "Bussian War Topographical Dep6t Map." General Map of Asia. St Petersburg. 1817. Behring Sea so named, in same style of lettering as Okhotsk Sea, &c. Pacific Ocean so named. 69810 (56). " Charte von America." Streit F. Campe, Nttmberg; 1817. Behring Sea named Meer von Kamtehatka. Behring Strait named Behring oder Cooks Strasse. Pacific named Ber Still Ocean. ':^\< .:''r' y 'i' -^j^^iXSffi'^™'' '';'~''9'^^'-'-W'''''y^ to 11 :"V. V ■ ?f^^!fW5»'^'S?^«Ppwsi^'TWW7™'^1P5)P TVW". i,v,,Mjliyijj '^f^^^fW^ p '■'J;'!?*') ^ 48 " Map of Countries round the North Pole.' A. Arrow- 983 (80). xmith. London, 1818. Behring Sea named Sea of Kamschatha. North Pacific Ocean. " Map of North Polar Eegions." II. M. Leake. 1818. 883 western side included. " Chart of the North Coast of Asia, and of the Sea to the north of Bering's Strait" In Bumey's " Chronological History of North-Eastern Voyages of Discovery." Loudon, 1819. Greater part of Behring Sea included, but without name, though the northern part of the Sea of Odiottk, which alone included, is prominently named. " BraMt/jft Universal Atlas." London, 1819. Map 1. The Globe. Behring Sea without name. Behrincfs Str. Pacifie Ocean. Map 3. Asia. Shows the whole of Behring Sea, but without name, in manifest contrast to Sea of Ochotde, &c. Shering's Sir. Pacific Ocean. Map 5. North America. Includes greater part of Behring's Sea, but without name. Shering's Strait. « Carte deL'Asie." Brad. Paris, 1820. Behring Sea named Mer de Beliring, Behring Strait named Det, de Behring. Pacific named &rand Ocean. "Boin Atlas." Milan, 1820. Map 6. World in Hemispheres. Behring Sea named Badne del Nord. Behring Strait named i&r. di Bering. North Pacific named Orandc Oeeano BoreaJe. Map 7. The World. Mercator's Projection. Behring Sea appears without name. Behring Strait named Stretto di Bhering. Pacific named Mare Paeijico. Map 25. Abia. Behring Sea appears without distinctive name. 47. d^Anadir and Baya di Bristol occupying most of available area for name. Map 31. Grande Oeeano. Sehring Sea appears without name. Man dOchoUk, & 39 (38). 46870 (49). 1396, i. 4. p ■■ -■' 40 F. 0« No. 16. 8. too (IS). 69110 (16). 8.146(4). 8. 18S (67). 6. 49 (8). fto., named, and Baia di JBrittol in letters of same siie and style with these. Map 34. L' America Settentrionale. Shows the whole o( Behriog Sea, bat without namo. Behring Strait named Slrelto di Bhering. North Pacific named Oetano SortaU, (Notable that on this rather large Map Behring Sea has no namei though Sea of Ohottk, though only partially ineluded, is named in prominent characters.) This Map bears below border, " Incisero I'anno 1821." "Chart of Boerings Straits on Mercator'a Projection, August 1816." In Ectzebne, " Voyage of Discovery into the South Sea," Sas. English Translation. London, 1821. This Chart bears on margin date of production, 1821. Large part of Behring Sea shown, but without dis- tinctive name. " Map of America." By A Arrowsmith, Bydrographer to His Majesty. London, 1822. (Additions to 1823.) Oreater part of Behring Sea included, but without name. Bufrvn/^t Strait. North Paeifie:- "Anuiriean Atias." Carey and Son. Philadelphia, 1823. Map 3. Eastern part of Behring Sea shown, but with- out name. Str. o/Bhtring. Paeifie Ocean, " America." Jt. Wilkinson. London, 1824 Behring Sea named Sea of Kamiehatka, " Welteharte in Mereator's Projeetion." Von Christian Gottleib Iteichard. Nuremberg, 1825. Behring Sea named Meer von KamticKatha. BAringe Straue. Jfordlieher Oroiter Ocean. " Butler's Atlas." London, 182S. Map 1. The World, in Hemispheres. Behriog Sea shown without name, though Sea cf Oduttk, Sec, named. ^iering's Strait. North, 1 icaJu: Ocean. Map 16. Asia. Behring Sea named Sea of Kdmtgehatka. "A New General Atlas." A. Finley. Philadelphia, 1825. Map 1. Western Hemisphere. Behring Sea named Sea of Kamtachatka. Bheri'ii^s Straits. North Pacific Ocean. Map 3. The World. Mereator's Projection. Behring Sea shown without nama Bhering'B Straite. North Pacific Ocean. (Sea of Ochottk, Safin's Bay, &c., all named.) Map 4. North America. Behring Sea included in part, but without name. Map 61. Asia. Qieater part of Behring Sea included, but without name. [667] O 'T^-^'^' • i '■■ ' 'fWKi w ",:^ . ; ,. mw^ vi ■ij^'i'M I,*!. J, I lyi-i^, , ii '.jin!^.i-'^ii'"' i"M "■*' JJ," i''im^'p>mv,mtfn'' ^ww^^^r^ ■^ '• Smith's OenmU Atlas." London, 1826. &156(tl> Map 1. The World, in Hemiapheres. Behring Sea named Sea of Kamtsehatka. Bherin^s St. North P ■'n* W^'w^ ■v,;- .f fs-^. ^ >*i- W'. "V '^r-'i^- ^ ^V^'^ rS,™. • *^ys^p*v, 61 Behnug Strait named Behring Stratte. Pacific named JDai Qroise Wdtmeer. "Atlas Unxvtrtd de Oiographie." Lapie. Fans, 1829. No. 16. A Map of the World on Mercator's Projection. Separately dated on engraving, 1832. Behring Sea ia marked Mer de BMng in letters same size and style as those employed for Bale de Baffin, and larger than those used for Mer d^Okhotsk, M. de Sag- halien, etc. The Pacific is named Grand Ocean Equinoxud, this name running along the Equator. No. 17. Map of the World in Hemispheres. Separately dated on engraving, 1831. Behring Sea named as above, but the North Pacific named Oraiid (Man Borial. (The spelling of Bering on these Maps, and the names used for the Pacific, seem to show that they, or previous editions of the same, were not employed by the nego- tiators.) 8.76(!!S). "An Aflat of Modem Geography." A. Arrowsmith. 1830. Map 1. Behring Sea shown without name. North Faeific. Map 28. Similar to last. 8. 9S(11). " A Comparative Atlas." By A Arrowsmith. London, 1830. Map 27. Western Hemisphere. The whole of Behring Sea shown, but without name. Beerings Strait. North Pacifie Ocean. Map 28. North America. Greater part of Behring Sea shown, but without name. Beering's Str. North Pacific Ocean. 09810 (M). "America." Prof. J. M. F. Schmidt. Berlin, 1830. Behring Sea named Meer von Kamtsehalka. North Pacific named JHe Nord See. " Chi'T . showing the Track of HM.S. 'Blossom' in Narra- tive . > u Voyage to the Pacific and Beering's Strait, 18r--28.' London, 1831. Behring Sea shown, but without name. Beerings Strait. North Pacific Ocean. S. T. W. (4). " Hydrographioal Chart of the World." A. Arrowsmith. London. Now editioa 1832. Bohring Sea named i8^ of Kamtchatka. Bering's Strait. Nurrh i'aeific Uctaa. 980(19). " Arrowsmith' s Chart of the Pacific Ocean." Another edition, corrected to 1832, and with note below title, staling that corrections made in 1810, 1814, 1817, 1818, 1822, 1826, and 1832. In the 1832 edition the size and general outlines ore as before, and Pjhring Sea is still without nan'R Other inclosed seas •'amod as before. (It may be supposed that the negotiators for Treaty of . i.uiij»i5!w,^ » I iiiniw;fMH)i»'(.iifJn,fijjiwiiiu'iiwi "III . niiuim^i^^pjigiJMi ,m'iwHW'vmf^;f^fff;m^ Wlm^miwww^ PI.I !. I.-IWI !iW|lUI»^*Wlip3>"4Vl?'^yiV'»8>^yil)l^,;',^^ '•!• *'!».» IKl'lWHl' >*mm 02 \ 1825 were supplied with corrected copy to 18i^2, and it ia ,i!:.'"i;mWwSB^'^ ••M«p of Earope byTmij," toI. ii, S. 906 J TOl. ir, p. 3M4. Con- dentltl Hemonndam Ko. S863. KoBtiiadum No. 33(3. 3%« Gm// of Arta. This gulf was formerly in the exclusive jurisdic- tion of Turkey, and was then held by tliat Power as a mare claumm, the entrance to the gnlf being less than a mile across, and both sides of it then being in the possession of the Sultan. On the 2l8t July, 1833, an arrangement was concluded between Great Britain, France, Russia, and Turkey recpecting the continental limits of Greece, by which it was agreed that the boundary- line between the Greek and Turkish possessions should run through the Gulf of Arta. Both sides of the Strait leading to the gulf were, however, confirmed to the Porte, on the under- standing that the Ottoman authorities should not oppose any obstacle to the passage of Greek vessels ; the words u^ed being, in the French version, " bfttimens* Grecs." Oaring the Russian war, in 18.54, the Turkish authorities closed the Gulf of Arta against arrivals from Greece, and the British and French cruizers (those Powers being then in alliance with Turkey) were instructed to stop all Greek vessels entering the gulf, and to seize all such as they might find in its waters laden with supplies, or carrying men for the insurgents in Epirus ; although orders were given to them, at the same time, not to impede the lawful conveyance of Greek subjects. In 1867, also, during the dispute between Turkey and Greece respecting brigandage and the incursion of Turkish troops over the frontier into Greek territory, the Turkish Minister at Athens informed the Greek Government that it would not be allowed to send a vessel of war into the Gulf of Arta. The Greek Government maintaineu that it had a Treaty right to send vessels of war, as well as merchant-vessels, into the gulf ; but the Porte maintained tiiat the gulf was a mare clausum. The Greek Government threatened to try the question ; but on being told that if they did so it would be opposed by force, they desisted. HS. Mtmorandiini, Septembor U5i, AualiUi, Tol. 441). The Bay of Cattaro. In 1850, and again in 1852, discussions took place between the Turkish and Austrian Govern- * The word " bitiment " ordinRrily signifies a iner<:liant-f cstel u opposed to "vaisseau," wlilcli denotes a ship of war. Tliu word " navirc " is generally couridered to include both cate- Kories. [83J R a v'-r^ ."Wjp",'" ments with regard to the right of the former to opea to general trade the ports of KIek and Sutorina. These ports are situated at the extremity of two tongues of land belonging to the Turkish province of Herzegovina, and jutting out into bays which border it. The bay in which KIek is situated communicates with the Adriatic by the Channel of Stagno, and thit in which Sutorina is placed by the Bocca di Cattaro. The narrow entrances to both these bays were held by Austria. The discussions originated in the Porte deciding to occupy and make use of these strips of land, and attempting to land troops on their territory from a Turkish frigate which entered the Gulf of Cattaro for that purpose. Austria protested against this proceeding, on the ground that, when the tongues of land of which KIek and Sutorina consisted were ceded by Ragusa to Turkey at the time that that Republic placed itself under the protection of the Porte, Venice retained its dominion over the sea, and. that Austria, succeeding to the Venetian rights, kept ships of war in front of those places, the entrances to which were within range of Austrian batteries, and should be considered as a mare clausum, over which, it was said, Austria had a command even more complete than that of other countries over the Dardanelles, the Sound, or tiie Elbe at Stade. The question in dispute was referred to the Queen's Advocate, who pointed out the differences of opinion which had at all times arisen with respect to the right of navigating territorial waters, whose communications were interrupted by the territories of other and different States; but lie gave it as his opinion that, primA facie, the Austrian. view was maintainable. The Gut of Ciinso. 'l"he colonists of Nova Scotia on several occasions nicsiorialized the Prince Regent against the Treaty between this country and the United States of 1818, and in x Memorial to Her Majesty in 1837, they complained of the mode of fishing adapted by the .Americans. They urged that the 3-mile limit closed the Gut of Canso against American vessels, and they prayed that such means might be adopted by the Imperial Government as would protect their tishcries against the encroachments of American fishermen. The Queen's Advocate, to whom the question f-w ^TW^5!^W77wr';^:^^!p!V5F5Pi¥^^;r.T57^ » -fT^s^ ^'iV-'ifJHW4W^|B(^?«F5'?'IS'?!'Sr'^*'*" Law OIBcen, Mir-h 10, 1838. Ibid , Aagult SO, 1841. Memorandam, Ur. Green, Amoiicar. Viaheriea, July 186<. was in the first instance referred, was of opinion that the terms of tlie Convention did not deprive the citizens of America of the right of passing through the Straits of Canso for the purpose of taking fish, in common with British subjects, in the Gulf of St. Lawrence; hut, in 1841, in conse- quence of the attempts made by the Colonial Government to enforce the rights of Great Britain with regard t) tiie fisheries, Mr. Stevenson, the American Minister in London, complained of tlio measures wliicli liad been adopted, more particularly as related to the exclusion of the United States' fisliermen from the Bays of Fundy and Chaleuni, and from passing through the Gut or Strait of Canso. The several questions raised by the American North Minister, as well as by the Colonial Government, were referred to the Law Officers of the Crown, who reported, with reference to the Gut of Canso, that, in their opinion, the Americans had no right, by Treaty or otherwise, to navigate that passage.* Penian Tratttei, Sto, p. 131. The Caspian Sea. Although Persia, as well as Russia, occupies a. largo ciient of ten-itory on the sliores of the Caspian, Persiun merchant-vessels are alone per- mitted to naviga.'e that sea on the same fooling as Russian merclian ^vessels. None but Russian vessels of war are allowed on the Caspian ; and t!ie establishment of Companies for tho navi^ratioa of that sea is piohibitcd except to Russian subjects, and foreigners are not allowed to have shares in such Companies. The Gulf of Finland. Flniud wu conquerui b; Raaeu in Ortolan says that befc'ire the cession of the ITlSj lettored to Sweden in 1721; -n /• t- i j ^ t. • ^i • i i ,. c^ i ceded ta Russia in 1808. Ortoito, ri'Dvince ot tinland to Russia, the right of Sweden '' ' to the gulf was not contested. The Zuiderze'e. Ortolnn also says that M. de Martens, in his " Precis du Droit des Gens Moderne," asserts that Holland has an exclusive right in the Zuiderzee. * The Britiih Government h.we also claimed the right to e elude belligerent veaseU from falsing throagli the Strait belWMD the Island of Hong Kong I'nu the opposite territory of Kowloon. (Law Officer*, October IC and November 2a, 1874.) •I'JipvWf The Bristol and 8t. Oeorge'a Channels. Phillimore, in his International Law, says the Phuuo.ot.,,oI,^,^«o^. : exclusive right of the British Crown to the Bristol Channel, to the channel between Great Britain and Ireland, and to the channel between Scotland and Ireland, is uncontested. E. HERTSLET. Foreign Office, December 25, 1892. '",'!,»!"IW^' ?p*ps*w*«pp|8|pppippwr^'«p'''^ Sf^PBfW"""*" '" ■'■' !"*W /K A'o/^ o« Me General Objects of Trade and Mercantile Enterprise on the North- West Coast of America, and the Changes undergone by them. " Hilton of Alaika.''p. 331; TflE Sea-Otteh, the Fur-Seai, and 'Whaung. THE tett'Otter was, in the first instance, and continued for many years to be, the principal object of all the Eussian expeditions to the region of Behring Sea. The history of the dis- covery and appropriation of territory was in effect that of the extension of sea-otter breeding and trading, and the safeguarding of these interests. Bancroft writes : — " We have seen how the Cossacks were enticed from the Caspian and Black Seas, drawn over the Ural Mountains, and lured onward in their century-march through Siberia to Eamtchatka, and all for the skin of the little sable. And when they reached the Pacific they were ready as ever to brove new dangers on the treacherous northern waters, for the coveted Siberian quadruped was here sup- planted by the still more valuable amphibious otter." "Hiitoryofthe North-VVeit Cout," vol. i, pp. 343, 345. Again, in another place, the same author sums up the result of his investigations on this subject as follows : — " The fur of this amphibious animal, the most precious of all peltries, was the attraction that brought to these shores all the adventurous navigators whose exploits have been briefly recorded in the preceding chapters. A few did not engage directly in the fur trade, but all such, with the possible exception of Captain Cook, came because of the operations of the fur-seeker?. " There were other valuable furs in the country besides that of the sea-otter, which were profitably exported in connection with the latter, but there were none wliich of themselves would in the early years have brought the world's adventurous traders on their long and perilous voyages to the coast. The fur-seal, however, was taken in laige [671] B ■'■r^-i «' '".'•" "• r","""'-'''"'-' ■'' I .iqpfliil ^■i^i^^^i^^p^*^*"^^"»*www ^^9m^^fW^ a numbers, and in later years yielded greater profits, on ac- count of its greater abundance, than the sea-otter." The market for these skins was in tlie begin- ning found by tbo Russians in their own country, but before many years China also became a favourite market, the centre of the trade beinq at first in Irkutsk, and afterwards at Eiatcha. In 1785, and after Cook's third voyage, which is regarded as having opened the trade between the American coast and China by sea, this trade sprang into existence, and was for some years almost exclusively enjoyed by English vessels. Hanna, Fortlock and Dixon, Meares, and many others visited the coast in connection with this particular trade. At a later date, and nearly contemporaneous with the first years of the present century (beginning about 1788), vessels from the eastern part of the CTnited States began to engage in this trade, and eventually succeeded in securing the greater part of it, and continued their operations till the increasing scarcity of the sea-otter itself naturally brought them to a close, or reduced the trade to very small dimensions. This great diminution in the volume of the " Histon of the trade in sea-otters occurred about the year 1846, q^. T. ^ ; according to Sturgis and Greenhow, who are pp. 375-377. quoted by Bancroft, and thereafter, and as a direct consequence of the scarcity of the sea- otter, the commerce of the entire coast became practically monopolized by two great Corpora- tions, the Kussian-American and Hudson's Bay Companies. That more details are not actually on record as ibid., p. 361 («ee to the places visited, and the scope of the trading ^'j'"]^"""*'"!;). voyages of the numerous vessels engaged in such trade when it was at its best, is largely accounted for by the fact that the adventurers generally concealed such details, with the object of reaping further individual benefit from their respective discoveries. Meanwhile, and with the increasing rarity of the sea-otter, the trade in fur-seal skins became relatively more important. It cannot, however, be regarded as having originated at this time, for its pros jcution had been continuous, to a varying cxten*., from the date of Bohriiig's voyage in 174il, and a much larger nu.. ')cr of skins were obtained in years subsequct v> 1780, in which year the Pribylo;! Islai ds ban oeen discovered. This particular tvfidc, hi^-vevor, fell very largely 3 into the hands of the Russians, who had estab- lished posts of one kind or another upon the principal hrnding islands of the seal, and at other points of vantage on the northern coast j. The conditions just outlined had almost arrived about the years 1842 and 1315, when a new industry extended to the area of Behring Sea, that of whaling. A new and numerous fleet was created for the prosecution of this industry, in which Eussia had no part, or at best a very small one. The whalers, moreover, scon began everywhere to compete in the trade for furs. The Governor of Russian America complained, but in vain, for already the claims which had been advanced to a monopoly of the region by his Government had been abandoned. When, in 182'1', the Representative of Russia, by direction of his Goveniment, whieii Iiid been importuned by those interested in the Fur Company, approacl'cd Ifr. Adams to endeavour to repudiate or modify part of the Convention between Russia and the United States, in so far as this related to the northern part of the North Pacific where Russian posts wore actually estab- lished, Mr. Adams would not consent to any such modification. The Convention had not at this time been ratified, but tho Russian objections were withdraA^Ti or allowed to fall into abeyance, and the ratification followed. Mr. Adams confined himself to assuring tho Russian Minister in the following terms ; — " Our nurchants %voulil not j^o to trouUe tlio Eussinns on tho coast of Siberia, or north of tlio oTth tlegreo of latitude [that heiiig approximalcly tho IntituJo of SitVn, or Sew Archangel], and it v;.s wisest not to put such fancies ill tlicir heads." ■' Histon of Alnfka/iin, 583, 984. This " assurance " proved, however, illusory, and showed not only a want of recognition of the extent to M'hich vessels of the ITnitcd States, as well as those of Great Britain, Iu\d already carried on trade in previous years, but was shortly afterwards contradicted by further facts of the same kind. From similar complaints which continued to reach tlie Russian Govcrnmoufc after ISID, it appears that the wlialers which at tliis time began to enter Beliring Sea did not confine tlioir operations to the sea alcne, but even — "lauded on the Aleutian lalandi and other portions of tho coiLSt for the puqiose of hyini^-out blabber," 4, employing for that purpose the scanty supplies of (Ii-lft-Avood wliifli served the natives for fuel. They were further accused of — "carrying ofl' the supplies of dried fish leserved for hunting ptirtiea, and bartering liquor, arms, and powder with the natives tor furs." Speaking of the reduction in the quantity of the furs shipped hy the Russian Company during its third term of twenty years, Bancroft says:— "This was caused nminly by the encroachments of "History of foreign traders, and especially of American whaling- ■*''""i' P- o°2. vessels, whoso masters often touched at varioii? points in the Eus.sian possessions during their voyage, and paid much higher prices for furs than those fixed 1)y the Company's tariff." In speaking of the inducements to trade and commerce generally on the north-vcest coast of America as early as 1790, Mearcs alludes at some length to the prospective value of whaling : — " But the most valuable branch of commerce which is " Voyage to the offered spontaneously by the north-west American coast, North-Wett Coast is the whale fishery, which may be carried on to any 1 788-89"' extent, ps those fish, both of the black and spennacuti STo.edilion, kind, aro imiversally almndant in these seas, witii other 007''° ' "' marine animals wliicli yield an oil of a very superior quality." Whaling in the North Pacific, however, Clark, " FiBhorin actually remained undeveloped till a date very '"au^Uij ° of the mtich later. It may he said to have been United Statei," initiated in 1820, when whalers first visited that ''° ' "' ^' part of the North Pacific lying off the coast of Japan, where sp(>rm whales were then found to abound. The "Japan ground" included the region from the coast of Japan south-east to Bonin Islands, across to 165° west longitude. In 1835 the first vessel visited what subsc- Ibid, p. 17. quently came to bo called the " Kadiak ground," situated near the island of that name, and defined as " extending from latitude 50° to G0° north, and longitude 130° to 160° west." Ilere the right whale was the object of pursuit. The further progress of whaling in the North Pacific is summed up by Clark as follows : — ' Pacific- Arctic Grounds. — The fleet of whaling- vessels Ibid , p. 19. cruizing north of 60° north latitude in the waters between the Asiatic and American coasts, is called t!ie North JPaciiic fleet. It bos been the most important branch of Cltr^oFiiheriei and Firiung Induitries of the United BMm," vol. ii, p. 19. the American right-whaling fleet since 1836, when the famous Kadiak ground, lying between 50° and 60" degrees north, was discovered. Here was taken only the right- whale, but in 1843 the fleet pushed further north, and began capturing bow-heads on the Eamtchatka const " In 1848 a whaling-ve.Mel entered the Arctic in pursuit of these large animals, and meet with good success. "In 1839 there were only two vessels in the North Pacific fleet From that date to 1880 tlie total number of voyages made to these grounds by American vessels was was 4,300, and the total catch of whale-oil (including oil of the right-whale, bow-head, and walrus) was 3,994,397 barrels, or 60 per cent of the total production of whale-oil by the American fleet in all oceans during the some period. ' " The North Pacific right and bow-head whale fishery has always been peculiarly an American enterprise, very few foreign vessels liaving participated in it. The princi- pal grounds were discovered by American vessels between the years 1835 and 1848. The most important whaling- grounds for the bow-head in this region are the Okhotsk Sea and the Arctic Ocean." It may be recalled here that it was in 1842 that Etholen, in charge of Bussian America at the time, first complained of the operations of whalers to the north of the Aleutian Islands. Beferring to this period, Ivan Petroff, Special Agent for the United States' 10th Census, in Alaska, in his Beport on the population, indus- tries, and resources of Alaska, writes as follows : — Ibid., p. 30t. " Under tlie terms of the Treaty with England and America, no vessel of either of these two nations was allowed to hunt or fish within 3 marine leagues [sic] of the shore, but as there was no armed Government craft in the Colonies, the provisions of the Treaty were totally dis- regarded by the whalers." Ibid., p. 20. " The North Pacific whale fishery was at its height in 1846, when 292 ships cruized in the region north of the 50th parallel, between the Asiatic and American shores. In 1868 there were but 68 vessels m the fleet, of which number 41 were in tlie Arctic Ocean, 8 in the Okhotsk Sea, and 19 on the Kadiak ground. In the season of 1880 the fleet was reduced to 19 vessels, all of which cruized in the Arctic, and coptured a total of 265 whales." Without entering into further details with respect to whaling, it suffices to know that notwithstanding the natural jealousy of the Bussian Company, and the inroads which the whalers made even on their fur trade, wlialing was never interfered with by their Government. If any reservation had been made or understood with regard to furs in the [6711 ' ^ ','^' *^-v™- wmmnKF^ wmm 6 Conventions of 1824 and 1826, this surely would hare been the occasion to strictly draw the line of right, but no such attempt was made. Whaling was in fact but an incident in the free use of the North Pacific, including Behring Sea, and maritime enterprise for a time took that form, because this pursuit was the most profitable one. Whatever special claims Bussia originally set up to this part of the North Pacific were in the first place in the interests of the trade in sea-otters. Whaling was next com- plained of by the Company controlling the territory, but unsuccessfully. The fur-seal was never a primary object in these earlier conflicts of interest, for the simple reason that the skins of this animal were then of comparatively small value. No other method of taking these skina was known but that of landing on the breeding places and there slaughtering the seals, a pro* oeeding which, on the admission of any terri- torial claims whatever by Russia in the region, was manifestly illegal. APPENDIX. Pamphlet. 1830. London. Printed by F. Shoberl, jttn., Long Acre. " On the Ambitious Projects of Kussia in regard to North-west America." By an Englishman. English pamphlet 1830-63. (F.O. Library, 4167.) Sea-otters. "Allured by the beautiful furs of these new-found regions, they repeated their excursions from year to year, and though many of them perished with their vessels, or wevo surprised and murdered by the savages, yet such was the profit obtained, chiefly from the skins of tha sea- otters, that increasing numbers were ready to embark in the perilous pursuit" (p. 12). " The coasts of Kamtsohatka formerly abounded in sea- otters, but the unrestricted destruction of these animals soon diminished their numbers to such a degree that the Company were obliged to go further in quest of them ; for this reason they pushed on beyond the Aleutian Islands to the Island of Kadiac, situated near the American coast, and there fixed their principal establishment " (p. 13). " The sea-otters taken by the Company's servants at this Settlement were at first a source of great profit, but those animals are becoming more and more scarce " (p. 15). iUA,!P.Pl^i*|J|,W*!n explained that'f urs did not become an article of common use in England till twenty years ago. 5. In regard to North Atlantic experiences, I learned generally that the Regulations set up for the Newfoundland fisheries have yielded excellent results, especially because the close time has both a beginning and an ending. Seals are as plentiful as ever. 6. Off the coast of Labrador the sealing is carried on when the seals come out on the ice to breed at a certain date in the spring, after which they go travelling to feed right up to Davis Straits and Spitzbergen, perhaps 1,500 miles away. The females are served within a month after pupping. The pups suckle for about ten or twelve 4ays,,and after that their mothers hurry them into the water for fear of the hunters, and their growth being phenomenally rapid — "you can see them growijig ' — they at once begiu to live on what they catch. Captain Davison and others were absolutely " sure " that they do not suckle longer than this. There is no killing at sea whatever. The skin with the blubber jacket is taken to St. John's, Newfoundland, where the blubber is tried down by heating, and the oil shipped with the salted skins to England, where the latter are dressed. The refuse salt, full of oil, &c., is in great request for farmers. 7. In regard to the Greenland fishery, chiefly around the Jan Mayen Islands, all were agreed that the International Regulations were set up when too much damage had already been done by excessive and indiscriminate slauglitor, and in addition that a chief cause of damage now is the fact that, owing to the opposition of the Norwegians, no close was fixed for the fishing season. The consequence is that the fls'.iCiy is now practically worthless, and comraevcial extermination has si-.pervened. Norwegians and others continued hunting and shooting the old seals at sea. Early in the year, when the seals are fat, they float after being shot. You can mum. lecare them &ven after firing from the ship, as there is plenty of time to lower a boat ; but later on in the season, when they have lost their fat, probably not one in three that is killed is secured. The seals obtained at sea are usually females, and about 2 years old, as these " lie " best. 8. With regard to Dundee sealers, the usual practice is to go to the sealing-grounds early (in March and April), and then discharge the seals at St. John's, Newfoundland, and then go up whalitag in Davis Straits, &c. 9. In regard to the Regulations, there is no need whatever for any police, because it has been found in experience that all watch each other jealously, and that with such numerous crews no mfraction of the Regulations can long remain unknown, 10. " White coats " (pups) first became of value when. Mr. Tussaud (a nephew of Mme. Tussaud) invented a process, by means of plaster of Paris, of keeping the hair in position while the skin was removed and india-rubber substituted, thus making an artificial fur. But this process has now been abandoned. 11. In reference to the Antarctic, I found that, in consequence of the disturbance of whaling in the North Atlantic, chiefly owing to the more general use of steam, which scares all the " right whales," it was determined this year to dispatch four whalers to follow in the track of Sir James Ross' third voyage, with the especial object of discovering whether black whales were to bo found in any numbers, and whether they pro- duced sufficient whalebone (whalebone having gone up in price from about 400/, per ton fifteen years ago to 2,700/. in 1892). In Dundee it is sold chiefly to wholesale drapers. 12. These four vessels are to rendezvous at the Falkland Islands, and then proceed toM-ards Endcrliy Land, while a Norwegian vessel, the "Jason," is to hunt down the coast of Graham's Land. They expect to be away eight months, return] 1 1 Lj in June or July 1893. Two ii.cdical men acc(j)npan; llie exix-dition, uul will uidko a variety of seientiiic ohsi-rvations 13. All very willingly promised nw to collect actual specimens of animals, and especially to look out for fur-seal, and if they find frequented rookeries, they intend to take jj'isscssicn of the territory, with the view to establisliing a brrodinij. ground, and making permanent profits by excluding others and preventing indiscriminate slaughter. | 14. They all agreed that the use of steamers scares whales. More than one of the captains described that on a calm day, the very day for whaling, he has been among the whales with every prospect of great success, and got his boats out. But some whaler spies this from his crow's- nest, and comes steaming down, when the whales at once disappear " as if my magic," owing to the thuds of the engine. The same effect has been noticei as the Norwegian steam-sealers pass to and fro over the whaling-grounds in Davis Straits. At one time all the captains agreed never to use steam while on the " grounds," except for some urgent necessity. But individuals were always discovering reasons of urgent necessity, and so the mutual understanding came to be abandoned. Peterhead. 16. At Peterhead I went over the vessels and stores, and learned a great deal from Captain David Gray (the most successful of the sealing captains) and Captains Salmon and Murray. 16. Captain Gray gave me full information on many points. He said tbat the chief value of a seal was its blubber and hide, but that an additional incentive had been added when furs came into general M'car twenty or twenty-five years ago for ladies' dress. Thus, twelve years ago, the skins of the " white coats " — the grey pups — came to have a value of from 3s. to 7s. for making up into a fur known as "Greenland seal." Ho saw some at "Whiteley's, and was told by the attendant they were " Eoyal fur." The Royal Artillery busbies are made of it. Some years ago a Mr. Tussaud took the hair off tlio })elt and fixed it to india-rubber ; but there was an unpleasant odour, and so it never succeeded commercially. The skins are much used as hides, for furniture and saddles. Females arc preferred, because the males are so much torn and lacerated by pcrpoliial iiglitiiig. 17. In rc;,'ard to the seals themselves, the bulls are about ilie same size as the females, but with difi'creiit sliapod beads. '1 be females get out on to the ice lirsf.niKl drive off the males until they have bad tluir ])U])s, usually al)out the 20tb to 22nd March. They suckle up till abet the 10th April, aid would suckle for fifteen to eighteen days, I ut the hunters come along, and the pups are hurried into the water, where they manage to feed themselves within three Avceks of birth. Has seen miles of black pups on edge of ice. After suckling, they are " as fat as pigs, and full of cream," on which they live till they become quite thin, and then they take to the water. All coition takes place in the water. " Never seen hut one case on the ico ; have scon thousands in the water." After hearing pups and serving, the mature females and males lie about on the ice for six weeks without eating — from the 25th April to the end of May. " Tha female begins like a fat woman, and gradually gets to look like an eel." Both sexes get ve:y thin. At last they go away for all tlie summer 1,000 to 1,500 miles — all the way up to Spitzbergen and Franz Joseph Land and up Davis Straits. He has found seals in Franz Joseph Laud Avith Labrador slugs in their skins. When a nursing mother comes along all the pups go to her, but she bites and scratches at them, and will jnly allow her own to suckle. In regard to getting seals A\ben they are on the ice and get scared, they crowd along the edge, and you will only get two out of three shot, because they dive and sink. Has seen any number of dead seals floating about. Never shoot at sea, because tiiey would sink. 18. In regard to the industry, it began in 1787 from Peterhead. In 1806 there were fifty- two vessels, taking 104,000 seals. Thirty years ago (18G0) there were twenty-eight to thirty sail of from 100 to 300 tons. Captain Gray showed a carefully kept list of all vessels, with their catches, &c., sailing each year from Peterhead. Used to get an average of 5 to 20 whales, and from 1,000 to 15,000 seals, on a lucky voyage. l?efore the Ecgulalions were first instituted they were getting 180 tons of oil per ship, but they regularly killed lots of mothers in pup or nursing, and the pups were left to die. There ought to have been a day fixed for closing the fishery. 19. As for police, no one did wrong, because every one would peach. Has seen all the vessels waiting along the ice till 12 o'clock, and then all l)egiu with a great rush. 20. Steamei's have seared ivhales effectually; they never seem to get used to them ; uhen [751J C e steamers have gone south, then the whales are out again to sea. 21. Captain Salmon, another successful Peter- head sealing captain, told me much, especially in a long private conversation. Geneially, his statements were to the following effect : — The breeding males and females arrive about the same date at the ice, and copulation takes place very soon after the pups are bom. Thinks it probable that after ten or twelve days pups are done with suckling ; they are then full of milk and fat, and go off and crowd together on edge of ice for many days. They live on their own fat, and gradually get thin, and from the 10th to the 20th April they begin to take to the water and to feed themselves. 22. The shooting in the water is easy at the beginning of the season, because they are fat and do not sink. They are often shot then in the water; it depends on the particular season whether they are shot on the ice or in the water most ; but even on ice two wounded seals got away for every one that is taken. They dive and you do not see them again. Has " picked up a good few dead ones" in early part of season which had been shot by others and floated up because fat. Has seen some floating dead because " blown out." Early in the season nearly all that are killed are females. Later in the season they are males. 23. As to summer migration, he has seen lots of seals from Nev^'ioundland up in Cumberland Gulf and the fiords in Davis Strait — the water alive with them, but they will not let man get near them. Some sort of small white fish entices them up there. 24i. Natives in Cumberland Gulf have curious method of taking seals. Has often been out with thorn himself and seen it. The seal while ice is forming makes in the ice a cavity with shelf for new-born young, and hole for exit into the sea below about 1 foot below surface of sea, making a small breathing-hole in ice above. The natives take a dog who scents the breathing holes, and shows whether seal there or not. Native approaches suddenly and jumps on ice, breaking through into cavity, the broken ice blocking the exit hole below. Often the old seals lipvc not time to escape, and the pups are always captured. 25. Captain Murray gave much interesting inforraation from his experiences. Ir regard to seals, in shooting <^hein on the ice, you cannot get much nearer than 50 or 60 yards, unless, like the natives, you crawl up clothed in a skin to within 10 yards. All depends on the first shot you fire, as at the shot all the seals look up, and if the one aimed at drops dead, others lie down again ; but if he is only wounded he is o|f and dives, and so do all the others. Has seen seals on ico up to July, and even August, but after May they get wilder and wilder, and you cannot get near them. In shooting seals on the ice you do not get on the average more than one in three hit. 26. The hooded seal and floe rats do not eat while they are on the ice in June and July, Has never seen any dung on the ice occupied by them. The harp seal certamly eat, especially at night. In May and June has seen whole ice space one mass of dung, like cow-dung, with white shrimps, their favourite food, and fish remains, all over the floe. Has seen lots of dead seal floating ; gets them sometimes. Birds tear them and cat them floating, and so do sharks. 27. Steam takes whalers and sealers up so early and certainly that they can destroy all mothers and pups ; best if no steam allowed. GEORGE BADEN-POWELL. September 1892. ■■ w a r 1 t t a ' rf^-'TtntJftm^ X.~A> J. Veniaminoff: " Notes on the Islands of the District of Unalaska." St. Petersburgh, 1840. Part II, pp. 340-382. THE fuT'Seals are a species of amphibious animals, very like the ordinary seals. The ordinary fur-seals (not the big males) are a little bigger than the large kind of seals. Their hair is silvery grey in colour, sofl., and has an undergrowth of down. The fur-seals are only found on the PribylofiF Islands, and especially on the Island of St. Paul. The fur-seals may be considered domestic animals,* because, however much they may be disturbed by the sealers, they invariably return in spring to their breeding- places. And it may be stated as an absolute fact tliat, except from special and extraordinary causes, the fur-seals never give up the places they frequent, and, like the sea-otters, never go to other places. This is proved by their having returned to their old haunts every year for more than fifty years. The fur-seals may, therefore, be considered one of the surest and most important sources of revenue in this part of the world, provided that proper regulations are enforced in the exercise of the industry. The fur-seals are becoming more and more valuable, for they are already considered one of the rarities o! the world. Fur-seals used to be found in California and in South Shetland, but therg are now none in the former country, and there will soon be none in the latter, so that there will be none anywhere except in our part of the world. Common sense therefore demands that we should do all in our power to prevent the extinction of the fur-seal species, while deriving all the profit we can from the industry.! The seal-hunters divide the fur-seah into five classes. The first are the sekatsh, the second the half-sekatsh, the third the bachelors, thpi fourth the coios, and the fifth the ordinary so-called koliki, or grey fur-seals. The sekatsh is the full-grown male, not less than 5 years old, who already possesses several females, lie is more than three times the size of the female. His hair is dark grey, and longer from his head to half-way down his body than on the oth H' parts ot" the latter. The sekatsh, being the strongest of all the fur-seals, is the guardian and protector of the herd against enemies, on whoso approacli he gives a signal to the rest by a peculiar cry, and tries to k 'ep the seals together and in order. The hnlf-sektttsh is a m. lo A or 5 years old ; his hair is a little ligliter than that of the sekatsh, and his ma i is also long. He, too, is a full-grown male, l)ut young and without females, becaus , not bei:ig so stnmg as the sekatsh, he cannot resist him and have females. The bachelors ("kliolost iki") are the 2- and 3-ycar old males. Tlie last year's males are also counted as bach lors, and arc known as young bachelors (" kholostiatshki"). The bachelors have no mane, nd their hair is light grey, especially in spring. The cows (" matki ") are i c females capable of bearing young. Their hair is almost * \]\ kindn of damestio. animab ri<'{iiire t> l>i> lookei nrtcr and > ar^d for before (hey caa be made use of; in the rate of fiir-seali, honerer, i' is nece-s:iry not >3ven lo come in light of f bom uu'.il the time arrives for talcing them. f I liavR lind much better opportunitiei for collecting infotmation abont the fiir-seab than about other «Dimal9, nnd 1 therefore devcte more spacn lo them tlian to the others. [796] B w identical ia colour with that of th(! sokatsh, but is sometimes of a pfroyor, sometimes of a redder shade. The cows are two and a half times the size of the ordinary kotiici. The koliki, or grey fur-seals, are the l-m')nth-old males and females born ia spring ; it is almost exclusively from this class that the skins for commerce are taken. Their fur is better than that of any of the other classes. The fur of young sea-liood is often very like that of the kotiki in colour, but the sea-lions have no dowu at all, and their hair is coarser and shorter. The fur-seals do not always remain on the Pribyloff Islands ; they arrive for tho summer from the south, generally during tho prevalence of south or south-west winds ; as already stated, they generally juiss through tho Unalaska Straits, both in coming and going. No one knows as yet where they come from, or where they go to for the winter. Perhaps this will Ions: remain a mystery. The sekatsh always arrive first, braving all obstacles ; they land even if the rookeries are covered with ice and snow, &c. Some time beween the 18th and 23rd April the firet sekatsh may be seen on the shore, each on the spot which he occupied the year before.* After them come the half-sckatsb and i)achclors ; these do not always go to the places they occupied the year before. The bachelors, having rested after their journey, go into the sea in search of food, and lie down in other places. They constantly change from one place to another in the course of the summer ; but when they come on shore they always lie apart from the sekatsh, and further from the shore than these ; the reason for this is that the sekatsh, from jealousy, will not allow them to come near the herd. From the 26th May (or, very rarely, from the 2l8t May) the cows begin to arrive. They do not come on shore at once, or without carefully choosing a place for landing. The cows continue to arrive, or rather to appear off the shore, until the 20th June. Probably they all approach the islands together, but only those of them land which are about to have young. It is known for certain that the cows will not come on land, even to their own breeding-places, if for any reason there are no sekatsh there. As soon as the cows approach the shore the sekatsh call them to them with a peculiar roar. The cows give the preference to places where they have been before, and to the most active sekatsh. When the cow comes out of the sea the sekatsh greets her with caresses. It has been ascertained, by noting particular marks on the bodies of certain fur- seals, that the animals always return to the same rookery. As additional evidence of this fact it may be stated (1) that the hair of the fur-seals frequenting tho Island of St. Paul differs (of course only to an experienced eye) from that of the fur-seals of the Island of St. George, and that the fur-seals always return to the place where they were born ; (2) that, even at the time when they were most numerous, the fur-seals never took possession of the small islands close to their rookeries, although these islands would, to all appearance, have been more convenient for them than their rookeries. Every sekatsh tries to get possession of as many cows as possible, and, to attain this end, adopts various expedients ; the sekatsh call out to the cows, try to frighten them, drag them about holding their manes in their teeth, take away cows from each other, and sometimes even have recourse to stratagem, stealing the cubs, and thus forcing their mothers to follow them. The number of cows belonging to a single sekatsh now varies from 10 to 150 according to tho activity of the sekatsh and the attraction he possesses for the cows. In former times one sekatsh would sometimes have a herd of from 500 to 700 cows. Some sekatsh have no cows at all, and these do not remain lying on the shore for such long periods as the others. When the sekatsh arrive at the islands they are extremely fat, and, until the amival of the cows, they are nearly always asleep, and their voices are never heard. From the time of tho arrival of the cows until they have impregnated them all, the sekatsh never leave the shore except it may be to meet a newly-arrived cow, and apparently they never sleep, fo .• if they did their cows would disperse. The fj;uard they keep over the cows is so strict that they will not allow them to move a yard from them until the time comes for them to have young ; as soon as a cow has had a pup she is allowed to go into tho sea to get food, and while she is away the sekatsh keeps careful watch over her pup, to see that it does not join other herds. During the whole period that the sekatsh are on shore with the cows they eat nothing whatever, nor do they drink. Sometimes on hot days they will drink sea- irater, but not to quench thirst, because, as has often been observed, they bring it Tbit has been verified by obserTing particular sekaUb, which bad iome apeeial mark on Ibeir bodies. up again in white foam within an hour or loss. It is no wonder that, after such a period of watching and fasting, the sckatsh are extremely weak and thin. The fur-seals never stop screaming day and night. Their cry, especially that of the pu^s, is very like the hleating of a sheep. It has been noticed that they scream louder in bad weather. The fur-seal rookeries ore always on stony shores sloping gently to the sea. The cows begin to have pups about the 30th May, and go on all through Juno. Some have been known to have young so late as the 10th July. The cows generally have only one pup at a time. When a cow has two, she generally dies. No assistance is given to a cow when giving birth to a pup, nor is she interfered with in any way. It is believed that foxes sometimes carry off new-bom pups, because seal-skins ar» often found in their dens ; however, these may be the skins of pups which were bom dead, or which have died soon after birth. Cows sometimes give birth to dead pups, and sometimes pups arc crushed by the sckatsh in their pureuit of the cows. Some cows have no pups, but nothing certain is known on this point. There are few such cows in ordinary years. Of late years, one season, that of 1832, has been remarkable for the number of cows which were without pups ; this circumstance is believed to havo been due to the fact that the ice of the year before remained unusually long round the shores of St. Paul's Island, and prevented the cows from landing ; consequently, many cows had pups on the ice, and, not arriving on shore in time, were not impregnated. There are thrce very important points in connection with the cows which still require to be cleared up, viz. : — 1. At what age do the cows first have young ? 2. Do they have young every year ? 3. How often in the course of their lives do they have young ? All that can bo said on these points will be said below. The sekatsh docs not impregnate the cow immediately after she has had young ; ho lets her alone and allows iier complete liberty to go into the sea for several days, in all probability until she is completely purged. Before coition the fur-seals, like other animals, indulge in caresses, which continue for some time. The actual copulation generally lasts about twelve minutes. When a cow has been impregnated the sckatsh ceases to watch her or her pups. Although tlic sekatsh is very much larger than the cow, no instance is known of a cow having been crushed by a sekatsh during copulation. But it happens pretty frequently that bachelor sea-lions havo connection with fur-seal cows (always against the will of the cows), and in that case the latter are often crushed by the weight of the sea-lions ; if the cow survives, she gives birth to a mongrel, having the head, paws, and hair of a sea-lion, and the down of a fur-seal. A fur-seal sekatsh will sometimes have connection with as many as twenty-five cows in the space of twenty- four hours. A sekatsh does not have connection twice with the same cow ; but the half- sekatsh and young sekatsh violate some of the impregnated cows, and it is probable that it is these cows that give birth to twins. The male fur-seals are extremely jealous and fierce at this period, which is the time when fights most frequently take place between them. The pups take no nourishment except their mothers' milk from the day of their birth until they leave the islands ; they never take the milk in the water, but always on shore. A mouth after their birth, and no earlier, they begin to go to the water's edge and to paddle amongst the stones. Having thus gradually got accustomed to the water, they havo become good swimmers by the month of August, and are able to go out a long distance from the rookeries ; they then begin to leave their mothers, sometimes for a wholn day, and swim about in the sea or lie in some warm sheltered place, only returning home for milk ; the mothers go in search oi them if they do not return home by the evening. In some years, in the month of September, the young fur-seals form otbors (as they are called in the Pribyloll Islands), i.e., they collect in large numbers at certain places and lie about keeping no watch, so that it is easy to capture the whole herd. These otbors are very advantageous to the sealers, but interfere seriously with tlio pro])agation of the species. The idea of some people that the fur-seal cows teach their pups how to swim, and in so doing hold them in their teeth, &c., is quite erroneous. It is only the sea-otters that do this. But it is a well-known fact that, before the fur-seals leave the islands, the cows teach their pups how to escape from an enemy. To practise this, they raise i&ho alarms. For instance, while the mothers are lying on the shore with their puiM, no enemy being in sight, they ^vill suddenly cry out ana make for the sea. Those of the pups wlio understand follow their mothers, while those who do not understand only cry out and remain on shore. The mothers come back to those lattoi- and repeat the manoeuvre. The fur-seal pups are black at their birth ; this makes them look, from a distance, very like little puppies. About the middle of August they begin to turn grey (the ordmary colour). This change in the colour of the young fur-seals does not arise from their liair turning from black to grey, but, as in the case of nearly all animals, the original hair gradually falls out, beginning from the forepaws, and makes way for the new silvery hair. At this period (while they are casting their hair) they keep scratching themselves. The length of the time required for the change to be accom- plished varies ; some years it takes place earlier, some years later. It sometimes happens that large numbers of fur-seals leave the islands without having changed their hair. The young fur-seals, until they begin to learn to swim, lie in groups near their mothers. The sokatsh have never been known to bite them. The young seals of the previous year, i.e„ the males and females which have not been killed during the previous season, are no larger than the young 4-month-old Benls ; they can only be distinguished by their greater activity and sagacity, and by their flgure, which is more slender and graceful. Till the month of September tbey always lie in the herd with their mothers, and often leave the shore to look for food. At this age the young fur-seals are wonderfully playful ; they never stop playing all the time they are on shore. They turn somersaults, bite each other, drag each other into the water, splash about, &c. ; sometimes a young seal will scramble with great difficulty on to an outlying stone merely for the purpose of dragging from it a sleeping companion, and falling into the water with him. The killing of the seals begins about the 28th September ; a time is chosen, if possible, when wind and weather are iUvourable. The best weather for the purpose is when, after two or three wet days, fine clear weather sets in, or, at least, the rain stops. At such times the fur-seals lie quietly on the shore and rest, because during the wet weather they are coustantly going into the sea, and cannot long remain lying on the shore. The wind most favourable to the operations is that which does not carry the scent 01 the sealers to the fur-seals. Having chosen a time when wind and weather are favourable (any hour of the day will do), all the inhabitants, of both sexes and all ages, having armed themselves witli dregalki, i.e., short sticks thick enough to kill a seal witli, form a chain, and proceeding along the shore where the seals are lying, drive them all inland. After driving them a short distance, they stop them, and begin to sort out the cows and sekatsh (these latter arc very rarely found amongst the seals driven in) from the young seals ; the old cows, which have already had experience of a battue, make off of their own accord the moment they see a chance of getting to the sea ; the young cows have to be driven to the sea by force. Sometimes it is found to be impossible to drive a cow away from the place where her ])ups are ; in such a case she has to be driven with the rest to the place of slaughter. When the slaughter of the seals begins some of these cows try to protect their pufs, and lie over them for a long time, so that force has to be used to drive them to the sea. It is said that tears are sometimes seen in the eyes of these cows. After the cows and sekatsh have been separated from the rest of the herd, the latter is divided uo into small groups, which are slowly driven to the place of slaughter, which is sometimes as much as 10 versts distant. It is very difficult for the fur-seals to go so far. Th ?y cannot cover this distance in one day, because they are so built that they can only jump. For this reason they are often stopped and made to rest. The moment they R<^op they fall asleep from fatigue. The young fur-seals get along more easily in cold damp weather than in dry clear weather. When the fur-seals have been driven to the place of slaughter, they are allowed to rest for an. hour or more, because if they arc killed while heated their flesh has a peculiar tast«' and is no good for salting ; after the rest the sealers begin to kill them with the dreialki. The little pups, bom during the year, are all killed without distinction, fe.nales as well as males ; but of the animals born the year before only the males are kill ^d, according to the lloy:ulatii)ns now in force, while the females are, if possible, driven back to the sea. Even children are able to drive the fur-seal t to the place of slaughter, and to kill I them, Buoh is their meekness, helpleanness, and submisaiTeness. The sealers say that not every man finds it easy to raise his liand to kill these innocent creatnreti, whose only crime is to possess a fur. Circumstances sometimes make it impossible to skin the dead fur-seals for four dtKTS or more. It is found that the skins begin to rot sooner if taken off the seals and left in a raw state than if left on them. The skins are taVen off and cleaned by men. One man can deal with 50 to 200 skins a-day. Th'iy are then handed to women, who stretch them on wooden frames, two on each frame, the fur on the inside. They are then dried in a drying* room heated with stones. The banshtahik, or overseer of the drying-room, must be a person of great experience and skill, otherwise the skins may be burnt or singed. When prepared the skins are tied up in bundles of fifty, and in due course dispatched to their destination. A portion of the flesh is prepared to serve as food for the inhabitants of the other Settlements, but the greater part is himg up on labaza, or screens, for use in winter. The entrails and the rest of the flesh are heaped up to be used for fuel.* After the battues, which arc sometimes organized as many as three times in the same place, the cows wander about the shore for some days calling for their young with pitiful cries. After the first battue the fur-seals lie very near the water, and are very watchful. Sonic of the sleeping cows which have been awakened by the sealers driving the herd from the shore have been known to tremble all over, probably with fear, and then die. The sekatsh finish what they have to do about the middle of July, and then leave the herd and lie in solitary places, where they either sleep or go into the sea in search of food. Tlie fur-seals begin to leave the islands not earlier than the 3rd October, and choose favourable winds for starting. North-westerly and northerly winds are the most favourable for the seals' departure, as these winds are with them. Before starting the big fur-seals are more on shore than in tlie sea, while the little ones ar^ more in the sea than on sliore. After the first battue the big seals, i.e., the femaUis and bachelors, often collect in largo numbers on rooky headlands as if to take counsel. The little seals which have escaped from the battue generally return to the places where they were born. By the beginning of November hardly a single fur-seal is to be seen in the neighbourhood of the islands, with the exception of a few sekatsh. These latter sometimes stay till the end of November, and even till December. It has been noticed that although they sometimes come on shore, it is only for a very short time. No fur-seals have ever been seen in January or February. One sekatsh was, however, once seen in February, and one in March 1832 on St. Paul's Island. They came on shore for a short time and then disappeared. Since then, so far as is known, no seals have ever been seen during those months. We must now consider the question : Where do the fur-seals go for the winter ? Before the Seal Islands were discovered, hunters living on Unalaska noticed that the fur-seals, returning in autumn from the north, spent some time in tlie northern bays of Unalaska, Akuman, and Akun, where the Aleuts hunted them; but as soon as winter approached the fur-seals went south through the straits between Unalaska and Unimak, and especially tiirough the Unimak Straits. After the discovery of the PribylofE Islands, and when fur-seals had begun to be taken there, these animals were seen less and less frequently in the bays of Unalnska, and at last, about 1815, not a single fur-seal was to be seen in the ivhole district of Unalaska, and at the same time it became impossible to observe the periods at wliicli they went north and south, and the straits through which they went. We must not conclude that the fur-seals have ceased to migrate because they are no longer seen, and because sekatsh have been observed in November and Deccjnber ; such sekatsh were seen now and then at the time when the migrations could still bo observed, and when the fur-seals still visited Unalaska. Where, then, do the fur-seals go for the winter, and where do they remain from November to April ? There are none of them round the islands of the district of Unalaska, or ai\y\vheie on our American coast. Do they go to California ? But, according to M. KlilebalkofT and M. Shelikoff (Head of the Ross, and afterwards of the Sitka establishment), the Californian fur-seals are quite different from the fur-seals taken on the Pribyloff * The cDtraiU, fleth.- aod bonn kept in t heap rot during the winter, and torn into something not unlike peat. [798] IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) A ^ .5.^ 1.0 1.1 ■50 ■^" HM Ui lii |2.2 Sf 144 ■■ US u 11.25 III 1.4 <^ n /A PlioSographic Sciences Corporation 23 VtfiST MAIN STRUT WfBSTER.N.Y. MStO (716)172-4303 JK >j^ ^>^ ^ •^ 4v :V ^ ■F"l" wmmmmm wmm ■f^i«iipipp>"i«ipMippii||f>«p 6 Islands, and, moreoTcr, there have been no fur-seala in Oalifornia for the last fire yean. To Now Shetland P But, in order to go there, they would hare to swim mom than 7,600 miles each way, and the journey would have to be performed in fire months or less, i.e., the^ would have to oorcr not less than 200 yersts in every twenty- four hours without resting. This is evidently impossible. If we are to suppose that the fur-seals leave the Pribyloff Islands only on account of the approach of winter, and pass the winter in the sea, why do they chiefly pass through (or why used they to pass through) the Straits of Unimak, when their shortest way south through the Aleutian chain would be by the Tshetyriokhsopotshny and other straits P We will now consider the measures to be taken to increase the number of fur- seals, or at least to prevent the extinction of the specie**. From the time of the discovery of the Pribyloff Ibiands till 1806, i.e , till General Beaanoff came to America, no account was kept of the number of f ur-sek»is killed, and no control whatever was exercised in the matter, owing to the fact that there were a number of Companies engaged in the industry, and therefore many masters, each of whom tried to take as many seals as possible. But llesanoff, seeins that this state of things must inevitably lead to the cxtmotion of the species, garo orders for the killing of seals to cease ; consequently no fur-seals were killed in 1806 and 1807 on the Fribvloff Islands, aAd all the persons employed in the industry were taken to Unalaska. The killing was to commence again in 1808, but, owing to certain circumstances, it was resumed on the Island of St. George only ; on St. Paul's Island so seals were killed that year or the following year, and even the year after that only half the usual number of seals were taken on that island.* After these close years, t.e., on St. George's Island from 1808, and on St. Paul's Island from 1810, until 182^ the killing went on uncontrolled on both islands ; so little thought was taken for the fiiture that even the sekatsh were killed for their furs, while the cows perished by hundreds in the haUue$ and on the way frcm the rookeries to the place of ■laugbter. It was onlv in 1822 that Muravieff (Chief Manager^ gave orders for some of the young seals to be spared every year for the increase of the species. But the overseer of the Pribyloff Islands, instead of sparing 60,000 or 40,000 of them as Muravieff wished, spared only 8,000 or 10,000 in the course of four years. Chistiakoff, who ■uoceedea Muravielt as Chief Manager of the Colonies, thinking that the number of fur-seals must have increased in consequence of the measure adopted by Muravieff, and being assured by the Overseer of the Pribyloff Islands that the number of seals on St. Paul's Island haJ at least doubled during these four years, gave orders for 40,000 to be killed each year. In 1828 the new Overseer of the Pribyloff IsUnds, although he did his best to kill as many seals as possible (t.e., to exterminate the species), only succeeded in taking 28,000. As it was evident that under this system the number of fur-seals was rapidly diminishing, orders wera given that great care should bo taken in separating the full- grown and young females from the seals to be slaughtered, and that, evon of the seals which it was permitted to kill, as many as possible should bo spared. In spite of those precautions, however, the number of seals remained stationary, instead of increasing. At last, in 1884, the Board of Management of the Company, convinced by the powerful arguments of Baron Wrangell, decided to sacrifice immediate profits, and to issue a new order, in accordance with which on?.y 4,000, instead of 12,000, fur-seals are now taken on St. Paul's Island. No seals were taken on St. Geoi^a's Island in 1826 and 1827. and since then great care is taken, and groat economy practised, in the purauit of the fur-ncal industry. It appears, then, that it was not till 1806, that is, not till after the union of the Companies, that any attention was paid to the preservation of the fur-seal species. It also appean that all half measures are useless, or at least that they only to. a certain extent help to preserve the species, and that only the measure last adopted ia, under present circumstances, reallj offeotive. And if the system now adopted by the Company remains in force for fifteen yean, {.e., till 1840, we can say wi(A certainty that tho fur-seals will be three times as numerous as they now are, and that* iriih good management, they will long continue to yield large profits. On the other * Probably tbii ii tlia chief rtiaan why the niimbcr «f Mali It now io much gntter on St. Pial'* Iilanii Ihu 00 Vt. Gtofge'*, on which littor iiland thon wort, btfort tht doto ynn, almoit •• miiit' itati at on St. Paul't. Thoro OM fcw no doubt thut tht pnttrration of the fur-taal tpacitt it In grtat part due to Brianof t wito mtaturwi bat for bit tctioa tht Company night Iobb tgo bar* baao dtpriTod sltogethtr of thtto Taluatet* wilwall, alrtady «» mra ud looa to be much rarar ctUl. Mrii MJi,ipi;iiiM,i|.i|jiilP(i,i^].ll l^<'H«V<' Land, if the Company prefer immediate profits, the fur*8eals will reiy soon become extinct. This is provea by Table No. 2 annexed to this volume. Nearly all thr old navigators are of opinion that to establish close years, i.e., not to kill any fur>seals for several years, does not have the effect of increasing their numbers, but entails the permanent loss of the animals. In support of tliis argpiment they state that after the close years there are always fewer fur-seals than there ought to be, e.g., on the Island of St. Gaorge there were taken in the first year, after the two «lose years, only 4,778, instead of 10,000 or 8,000, the take in the year preceding tho close years bavmg been 6,600. This argument, however much force there may appear to be in it, is quite fallacious, firstly, because it is impossible that any species of animal can become extinct if left to itself, and, secondly, because very many here have been of opinion, and have considered it to be an undoubted fact, that the fur-seal cows begin to bear young in their third year, i.e., after the expiration of two years from their birth. As none of the dose periods known here lasted for more than three years, there was no time to aee a real increase. As a matter of fact, if we carefully consider all the results of the close times, we shall see that the fur-seal cows do not begin to bear young until the Jffth year from their birth. This is proved by tlie following considerations : — (a.) On St. Oeorge's Island, after the first close ^ri(^, the number of seals had diminished by one-fifth in 1828, and continued to diminish in the same proportion in each of the three following years ; in the fifth year after the close period there was no diminution ; in the sixth year there were one-twelfth more seals than in the preceding year ; and in the seventh year one-seventh more seals than the year before.* This shows that the females bom in 1828 did not begin to bear young until the fifth year ; and if we consider the fact that the greatest increase took phice after six years, it is evidoL that not every female bears young (^-en in the fifth year after her birth. (6.) It is well known that the male fur-seal cannot be a sckatsh before he is 6, or at least 6 years old. How then can the females bear young before they are 4 years old ? (c.) If the male fur-seal cannot be a sekatsh before he is at least 6 years old, then, if we accept Buffon's saying, that " an animal may live seven times the period necessary for it to attain maturity," the fur-seal sekatsh may live not less than thirfy years, and the female not less than twenty-eight years.f If we accept Buffon's dictum, and infer from it that " an animal attaius maturity (and is therefore able to propagate its species) only after it has completed the seventh part of its life," it follows that a fur-seal cow cannot bear young till she is -1 years old. ' There can therefore bo no doubt that the fur-seal cows begin to bear young only in theur fifth year, i.e., only after they are 4 years old, and not in their tliird or fourth year. It may, indeed, be admitted that some females bear young in their fourth year ; but that is the exception, not the rule. In order to convince ourselves that the cows cannot bear young in their third year, we have only to look at the 2-year-old female and oompare her with the sekatsh and the cows ; we shall then see that it is impossible. Do ihefur-aeal cowm bear young every year ? How many timet in their life do they bear ?oung 1 These questions are very diifioult to answer, because no observation is possible, t is thought, however, that, while the cows are still young, they bear every year, and, as they grow older, onl^ every other year ; consequently, they may, under ordinary circunutances, produce in the whole course of their life from ten to fifteen pups, or even more. This opinion is founded on the fact that an excessive number of cows without pups has never been observed in any year except 1832 ; am' it cannot bo maintainod that the cows which are not about to become mothers do not come to the PribylotF Islands at all, because such cows axe seen there every year. But however great the number of cows without pups may be, the opinion of the old navigators, founded on observation, is that wo cannot go wrong if we estimate that not more than one-fifth of all the cows are without pups. However, to avoid going wrong myself, or leading others into error, I have put the number at one-third, in my calculations of tho increase of the fur-seals. • Sn Table No. 1. t ThU vUw it ronBrmtd l-y th« obmrvitiont of tho old nkTicttara, and cfpccially of Shngathnikaf, ono of the best Cnolei, who, on arririag at St. Ptul'ili land in 1817, noticed a certain tekatth (remarliablc fnr Iti haM head) which at that line already had a large herd of cowi, all of whieh the actiTe old tekatfh |iou«wd. Frnm thif it Kcms evident that thii male had lu'Come a lekatfh more than Are yeari before, and that he wae, at the tiini> of Hhayaihcikoff'i arrival, not lets than 10 yean old. Tliit tekatth continued to cone to St. I'aul't Iilend e«eiy Ttar for the ueit fifteen yean, i.e., till 188?, and alwayi eilabliihed himtelf on tho nine tpnt ; an J i'. vat tn\f durinf the lait few yeara that the number ol hit cowi began to diminiih. Kmm ^iWi?^!^^^^»w»^^^ Then ii one other question of great importance in connection with the estimating of the inoieaae of the fur-seals, via., " Of the young fitr-etaU horn m any om year, what fropotiim are maht f " and " /• seals taken on the Pribyloff Islands from 1817 to 1888 (see the end of the volume).| This Table justifies the following conclusions : — 1. There is not a single normal year in which the number of fur-seals taken is equal to the number of those killed in the preceding year ; but less are taken every year. 2. The decrease in the number taken is not uniform ; sometimes one-sixteenth less •re taken, sometimes one-tenth less, sometimes one-fifth, and sometimes even one- aeventh less ; but on an average one-eighth less. 8. Therefore, if the killing is continued in the ordinary manner, the whole fur- aeal species may become extinct in fifteen years. 4. The decrease is generally less when in the preceding years the number of bachelors has been greater (i.e., when the young sealH have not all been killed) ; the decrease is greater when the number oC bachelors has been less. 6. The number of bachelors is the true criterion of the number of fur-seals, t.e., if the number of bachelors increases, the number of young cows increases also, and vice vertd. 6. The bachelors do not separate from the herd or collect in distinct herds tUl the third year from their birth, as appears from the numbers spared on the Islands of St. Paul and St. George (1822, 1828, and 1824, and 1835. 1836, and 1837, and 1826 and 1827). 7. The decrease in the number of fur-seals on the Island of St. George, after two dose years (1826 and 1827), cantinued for two years longer, and idways in the proportion of Dne-fifth. 8. In the fifth year after the first close period the decrease may be said to have ceased ; in the sixth year there was already an increase of one-twelfth, and in the seventh year there was an increase of one-etventh uh compared with the lowest figure ; during tho three following yeais the number of fur-seals was stationary. 0. If there had been no close period on St. George's Island in 1826 and 1827, then, if we estimate the decrease at only one-eighth (sik; paragraph 2), there would not have been a single fur-seal on St. George's Island in 1840 and 1812, This is shown by the following Table : — Number Number Number Number Ye«r. of Ymr. of Year. of Year. of S«tk. SvaU. Souk. Seali. 182S S,500 1820 2,468 1833 1,160 1H37 700 1836 4,400 18S0 2,160 1834 1,190 1838 680 1S37 S,S20 1831 1,890 1885 1,040 1839 500 1838 3,816 1833 1,554 1836 850 1940 400 During the last years the decrease must be estimated at more than one-fifth, because the smaller the herd the fewer will be the sekatsh, who are the defenders of pp«p ^ •^r^ fbe baid, aad therafore the tooner will the " kawtki " (kOIer-wlialM) be able to exter* mfaute them.* 10. Consequently, a period of two eloM yean prolonged the exittenoe of the f^* •eal ipeoiee for more than ten years, and the Company was fully compensated for the loss it suffered during the oIom period (about 8,600 seals) ; for if the Company had not established a dose period in 1820 and 1827, it would certainly not have obtained more than 84^000 seals from 1820 to 1888, *.«., during twelve years, but having estab- lished a close period for only two years, it obtained 31,676 seals in ten years, and, moreover, would be able to obtain over 16,000 more without any close ^leriod. 11. If, then, on St. George's Islauvl, by sparing sooh a small numder of fiur-seals (about 8,600) for such a short period, i.e., tot two years, such a great advantage has been obtained, how much neater will be the benefit to be derived from the last measure introduced by the Ciuet Manager of the Company on the Island of St. Paul, where seals have bisen spared for four years, and more than 80,000 fur-seals are now left to propagate the species, I append a lable showmg the number of fur-seals which will be produced in fifteen years from 7,060 seals spared on St. Paul's Island in 1836 (see Table No. 2 at the end of this volume). This Table is interesting, even if no conclusions are drawn from it. In 1886, by order of the Chief Manager, a close period was established, or rather a certain number of fur-seals were spared on the Island of St. Paid, after 12,700 fur- seals had been taken in 1834, the preceding year. If the close period had not been established, about 12,200 seals would, under ordinary circumstances, have been taken on the whole island in 1836, estimating the decrease at only one-twenty-fifth ; but instead of 12,200, onlv 4,062 were killed ; consequently, in 1886, 8,148 young seals, male and female together, were left to propagate the species. In drawing up the Table of the increase of the fur-seals, however, I have allowed for an average decrease, 1.0., a decrease of one-eighth ; according to this calculation, the number of young seids spared is at least 7,060. Of these 7,060 young siads, I reckon 3,600 as females, t.«., I allow for rather more females than males. Of the new cows born after the establishment of the close period, I estimate that one-half have pups in the first year in which it is possible for them to bear young, and that two-thirds have pups in the subsequent years. The females, after twelve yars from the time they first bear vouur, i.e., when they aro 18 years old, must decrease in numbers from natural caus^, and when they are 22 years old they cease bearing. Of the young seals bom in the fifth year after the establishment of the close period, and in subsequent years, I estimate uiat one-half aro females, and the number thus obtained is inserted in the Table, while the males or bachelors aro included in the totals. It appears from Table No. 2 that — 1. In 1860 none of the old cows {i.e., cows which wero capable of bearing young in 1835) will bo living (estimating their decrease at one-eighth each year). 2. During the first four years after the 7,000 young seals have been spared, i.e., until the new cows begin to bear young, the number of young fur-seals will generally diminish. 3. After six years the number of young seals will be equal to the number spared, i,e., about 7,000. The number will not be doubled till after twelve years have elapsed, and it will be trebled after fourteen years ; fifteen years after the establishment of the close period we shall have in the first year 21,000, in the second 28,000, in the third 82,000, in the fourth 36,000, in the fifth 41,000; that is 160,000 in the H jrars. . After that, if economy is practised, i.e., if one-fifth of the seals aro spared, it ivill be iiossible to obtain 32,000 annually for ever, or at least for a very long time. 4. In addition, it will be possible to obtain in the course of the fifteen years following the estiiblishment of the close period from 60,000 to 70,000 bachelors, which, together with the 160,000 young seals, make up 230,000. * The Ovcnctr of the Itland of St. George himself law lome ** katatki "f (kilter-whiles) tear sereral icaU to pkeei In a Tcry short time near the shore of the island. t [In another part of the book Veniaminoff says that tlie " kasatka " (killer-whale) is one of the twelve kinds ' " ' 1 is called by the nitlTes "agllook.''—TRAN*iATon.] «r irhnles known In Aleutian waters, and i [7961 D mimimmm^/mmmiim 10 S. If no young aeala vera apaTOd the whole ftir-seal species would become extinct in fifteen Tears, and during that period, whaterer effori* wen made, not more than. 60,000 seals altogether could possibly be obtained. I have to obserre that the estimates in the Table with regard to the increase of the fur-seals ara most moderate, and that in estimatiiig the decrease of cows the average decrease has been taken. Moreover, only 4,860 young seak were killed on St. Paul's Island in 1886 and 1887, instead of 7,000 ; accordingly, in two years 1,500 cows were spared on that isiand, which are not taken into account in the Table, and from which a large number of sc»ls may be obtain 3d. In order to show that the principles on which my estimate of the increase of tax' seals on St. Baul's Island is based are sound, I annex a similar Table with regard to the numbers obtained from the f ur>seals spared on St. George's Island in 1826 and 1827. This Table is drawn up on the same principle as Table No. 2, and dearly shows the correctness of my estimates. (See Table No. 8.) wmmm ^■^iiPPWBifpppp 11 I [796] i : : 1 i 1! 1 5 i H 1 i S» s 1 i 1 * 1 1 Jl I ] i 1' 1 i I i i 1' i t 53 1 i 1- 3 i H 1 i IB 1 2 i P4 II % i H \ i H 1 1 i 1 i s ! i 1' 8' 1 i 1 s : i 8- 1 s 1 1 i 1 8 5" s i 1 • • 1 I s 3 : : *4 1 i J" ! i i P 1 1 i S 3 ! s i r i i i 1 s i |2 ! 1 i is 1 1 i |S i 1 i SI 1 ^ i §1 5 1 1 u 1 t a* i 11 n • 1 »-*-» i IS 1 i 1 1 s i n R R 5 A* 8- • A s i 5 2 s 1 1 1 i 1 s 1 ^ s Ok ^ ^ ••4 ^ r 1 1 1- J 1 1^ s 1 1 i i i 3 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 - ca n * •A • •« - • • s s ^ ] • s j; I II W "I 11 ' I f! I I 11 I I iiiiiii HpjWJtfi!*"' 18 if Si ■I if If -I It li II ■91 §3 i § s I § I 8 I I J I I s s I s I 3 I 3 •8 S 1 s n 1*1 s ^4 1 i M 3 i 1 i 1 ^^ •M S S i «M CO thank their masters for this kind of accidental or tempoianr abundance, but they have to thank the commercial spirit and enterprise of the Americans, that is, of those very traders whom the protector! of the Company wished to exclude altogether from the north-western coast of America. It was with this object in view that our Consul-General made a representation to the American Oovem- nient ; he was, however, informed, in reply, that that Government had not the power to prevent its citizens from trading freely in any part of the world, but that, if they carried on a forbidden traffic, contrary to the laws of any nation, that nation must itself exercise a control over them." "Materials for the History of the Russian Settlements on the Shores of the Eastern Ocean." St. Fcteisburgh, 1861. Fart III. K. Khliebnikoff's Notes on America, p 4. "Banmiotr decided to establish his chief office here.* He had abeadv informed the Board of Directors that, if this place inte chosen, the profits of the Compamr would amount to millions of roubles. He argued that for more than ten years from six to ten &glish and American ships had visited the port each year, and that from 2,000 to 3,000 skins had b^n obtained by each of them annually from various places. Allowing for an average of 2,000 skins, the six ships exported 12,000 every year. Even if thie fij^ure were rmluced to 10,000, the number of skins exported during the ten yean would be 100,000. If these ha4 been sold at Kamtchatka at 30 piastres or 45 roubles each, they would have produced 4,600,000' rouUes. If 1,500,000 roubles' worth of merchandize had been given in exchange for these skins, the net profit obtained daring the ten years would have been 3,000,000 roubles." " Mention has been made above of the trade carried on with American and English captains at Kadiak After the occupation of Sitka in 1805, many foreign ships visited that place. In the absence of merchandize and provisions, Bezanoff bought from Mr. Wolflf the ship 'Juno' with her entire cargo. " Trade was carried on with the Americans at Sitka to the extent of 1,170,000 roubles, including the amount expended on the purchase ot the ' Juno,' ' Myrtle ' (' Kadiak '), ' Lady' (' Ilmen "), ' Ataelpia ' (' Behring '), and ' Amethyst.' The Americans received in payment 4,884 sea-otter skins of different kinds, 3,846 otters' tails, 9,694 beaver ('bobr rietshni') skins, 362,730 fur-seal skins, 864 beaver ('vuidra') skins, and 235 fox skins. 94,587 1 piastres were remitted to the Board of DirectMS. Baranoff always reckoned the piastre as equid to 2 roubles, but when the rate of exchange fell in Bussia the Company suffered considerable loss." • U., *i Mlki. i,.ii,.. uniiiiiiliyi.J -•■f*''Wf/?)*'IW*(fW|>l'!P*.'M,«/tJW!,JU,fS^^ JW»«JP""' IW^^IIPIiiPii^^^P^^iiPiipiWW PUPiPiPfPIP r^T'^^TTvvFV7Wf;w ^ \ r t. J. yeniaminoff: "Notes on the Islands of the District of Unalaska.' St. Petersburgh, 1840. Part II, pp. 340-382. THE fitr-seaU are a species of amphibious animals, retj like the ordinary seals. The ordinary far-seals (not the big males) are a little bigger than the large kiad of seals. Their hair is silvery grey in colour, soft, and has an undergrowth of down. The fur-seals are only found on the Pribylofif Islands, and especially on the Island ung and without females, because, not being so strong as the sekatui, he cannot resist him and have females. The bachelors (" kholostiaki ") are the 2- and 8-year old males. The last year's males are also counted as bachelors, and are known as young bachelors (" kholostiatshki ") . 33ie bachelors have no mane, and their hair is light grey, especially in sprin|;. The cows (" matki ") are the females capable of bearing young. Their hair i« almost * All kindi of doBMitte tnlnwli requiM to be looked after tnd ctrtd for befen iher cu be asde ate of; in the «ue of Air-Mkli, howeTcr, it ii nceeMnry not even to come in light of them aalil tM time anirec for teking them. t I hive hid much better opportunltiei for eolleetiM iiifetnitlon about the mr>ieib than aboot other eaimiil*, and I therefore devote more ipao* to them than to the ethen, [796] B iMiiiiiii ^m^fmmmfif^^ IJI llllll. JL |ll...j||ppp^^|^pfp^ 2 ' identical in colour with that of Mih sokatsh, but is sometimes of a fcreyer, sometimes of a redder shade. Tlie cows are two and alialf times the size of the ordinary kotiki. The kotiki, or grey fur-seals, are the 4>mnnth>old males and females born ia spring ; it is almost exclusively from this class tliat the skins for oommeroe are taken. Tlieir fur is better than that of any of the other classes. The fur of young sea-lions is often very like that of the kotiki in colour, but the sea-lions hare no down at all, and their hair is coarser nud sliorter. The fur-seals do not always remain on the Pribyloff Islands ; they arrive for tho summer from the south, generally during the prevalence of south or south-west winds ; as already stated, they generally pass tliruugb the Unalaska Straits, both in coming and going. No one knows as yet where they come f^om, or where they go to for the winter. Perhaps this will lono: remain a mystery. The sekatsh always arrive first, braving all obstacles; they land even if the rookeries are covered with ice and snow, &c. Some time beween the 18th and 23rd April the first sekatsh may be seen on the shore, each on the spot winch he occupied tlie year before.* After them come the Inlf-sokatsh and bachelors; these do not always go to the places they occupied the year before. The bachelors, having rested after their journey, go into the sea in search of food, and lie down in other places. Tbey constantly change from one place to another in the course of the summer ; but when they oome on shore they always lie apart from the sekatsh, and farther from the shore than these ; the reason for this is that the sekatsh, from jealousy, will not allow them to come near the herd. From the 26th May (or, very rarely, from the 21st May) the cows begin to arrive. They do not come on shore at once, or without carefully choosing a place for landing. The cows continue to arrive, or rather to appear oS the shore, until the 20th June. Probably they all approach the islands together, but only those of them land which are about to have young. It is known for uertein that the cows will not come on land, even to their own breeding-places, if for any reason there are ao sekatsh there. As soon as the cows approach the shore tho sekatsh call them to them with a peculiar roar. The cows give the preference to places where they have been before, and to the most active sekatsh. When the cow comes out of the sea the sekatsh greets her with caresses. It has been ascertained, h} noting particular marks on the bodies of certain fur- seals, that the animals always return to the same rookery. As additional evidence of this fact it may be stated (1) that the hair of the fur-seals frequenting the Island of St. Paul differs (of course only to an experienced eye) from that of the fur-seals of the Island of St. George, and that the fur-seals always return to the place where they were bom ; (2) that, even at the time when they were most numerous, the fur-seals never took possession of the small islands close to their rookeries, although these islands wduld, to all appearance, have been more convenient for them than their rookeries. Every sekatsh tries to get possession of as many cows as possible, and, to attain this end, adopts various expedients ; the sekatsh call out to the cows, try to frighten them, drag them about holding their manes in their teeth, take away cows from each other, and sometimes even have recourse to stratagem, stealing the cubs, and thus forcing their mothers to follow them. 'uie number of cows belonging to a single sekatsh now varies from 10 to 160 according to the activity of the sekatsh and the attraction he possesses for the cows. In former times one sekatsh would sometimes have a herd of from 600 to 700 cows. Some sekatsh have no cows at all, and these do not remain lying on the shore for such long periods as the others. When the sekatsh arrive at the islands they are extremely fat, and, until the arrrhral of the cows, they are nearly always asleep, and their voices are never heai-d. From the time of the arrival of the cows until they have impregnated them all, the sekatsh never leave tbe shore except it may be to meet a newly-arrived cow, and apparently they never sleep, for if they did their cows would disperse. The guard tiiey keep over the cuws is so strict that they will not allow them to move a yard from them until tL time comes for them to have young ; as soon as a cow has had a pup she is allowed to go into the sea to get food, and while she is away the sekatsh keeps careful watch over her pup, to see that it does not join other herds. During tho whole period that the sekatsh are on shore with the cows they eat nothing whatever, nor do they drink. Sometimes on hot days they will drink sea- water, out not to quench thirst, because, as has often been observed, they bring it * Thi( hti bMa Tcrifitd by obMrriDg pactieutu lekttih, wUeh bid lom* ipccial nark on Ibtir bodln. , ^'^'r''*T!??;^''wa?wwi^T?«»'wfP^i*^^ i^p again in white foam within an hour or less. It is no wonder that, after such a period of watching and fasting, the sekatsh are extiemely weak and thin. The fur«8uals neyer stop screaming day and niffht. Their cry, especially that of fhe pu^ is very like the hleating of a sheep. It nas been noticed that they scream louder in bad weather. The fur-seal rookeries are always on stony shoriis sloping gently to the sea. The cows begin to have pups about the 80th May, and go on all through June. Some have been known to have young so late as the 10th July. The cows generally have only one pup at a time. When a cow has two, she generally dies. No assistanxw M {pven to a cow when giving birth to a pup, nor is she interferel with in any way. It is believed that foxes sometimes carry off new-bom pups, because seal-skins are often found in their dens ; however, these may be the skins of pups wliich were bom dead, or which have died soon after birth. Cows sometimes give birth to dead pups, and sometimes pups are crushed by the sekatsh in their pursuit of the cows. Some cows have no pups, but nothing certain is known on this point. There aro few such cows in ordinary years. Of late years, one season, t}uit of 1832, has been remarkable for the number of cows which were without pups ; this circumstance is believed to have been duo to the fact that the ice of the year before remained unusually long round the shores of St. Paul's Island, and prevented the cows from landing ; JU consequently, many cows had pups on the ice, and, not arriving on shore in time, were ' not impregnated. There are three veiy important points in connection with the cows which still require to be cleared up, viz. : — 1. At what ago do the cows first have young ? 2. Do they have young every yeai; ? 3. How often in the course of their lives do they have young P All that can be said on these points will be said below. The sekatsh docs not impregnate the cow immediately after she has had young ; he lets her alone and allows her complete liberty to go into the sea for several days, in all probability until she is completely purged. Before coition the fur-seals, like other animals, indulge in caresses, which continue for some time. The actual copulation generally lasts about twelve minutes. When a cow has been impregnated the sekatsh ceases to watch her or her pups. Although tlie sekatsh is very much larger than the cow, no instance is known of a cow having been crushed by a sekatsh during copulation. But it happens preti.y frequently thi^t bachelor sea-lions have connection with fur-seal cows (always against the will of the cous), and in that case the latter are often crushed by the weight of the sea-lions ; if the cow survives, she gives birth to a mongrel, having the head, pawi^ and hair of a sea-lion, and the down of a fur-seal. A fur-seal sekatsh will sometimes have connection with as many as twenty-five cows in the space of twenty-four hours. A sekatsh does not have connection twice with the same cow ; but the half- sekatsh and .'oung sekatsh violate some of the impregnated cows, and it is probable that it is these cows tliat give birth to twins. The male fur-seals are extremely jealous and fierce at this period, wliich is the time when fights mobt frequently take place between them. The pups take no nourishment except their mothers' milk from the day of their birth imtil wey leave the islands ; they never take the milk in the water, but always on shore. A month after their birth, and no earlier, they begin to go to the water's edge and to paddle amongst the stones. Having thus gradually got accustomed to the water, they have become good swimmers by the month of August, and are able to go out a long distance from the rookeries ; they then begin to leave their mothers, sometimes for a whole day, and swim about in the sea or lie in some warm sheltered place, only returning home for milk ; the mothers go in search of them if they do not ntum home by the evening. In some years, in the month of September, the young fur-seals form otbora (as they aro called in tJie Pribyloff Islands), t.«., they collect in large numbers at certain places and lie about keeping no watch; so that it is easy to capture the whole herd. ■ These oibors are very advantageous to the sealers, but interfere. seriously with the propagation of the species. 'the idea of some ^ple that the fur-seal cows teach their pu^s how to swim, and in so doin^ hold them in their teeth, &o., is quite erroneous. It is only the sea-otten that do tus. But it is a well-known fact that, before the fur*8eak leave the isbnds, the cowB teach their pups how to escape from an enemy. To practise this, they raise ^WT'W^'W^ false alarma. For instance, while the mothen an Ijinff on the shora with their pupa, no enemy being in sight, the; will suddenly cry out and make for the sea. Those of the pups who understand follow their mothers, while those who do not nnderstand only cry out and remain on shore. The mothers oome hack to these latter and repeat the manoeuvre. The ftir^seal pups aro black at their birth ; this makes them look, from a distance, ver^ like little pupmes. About the middle of Ausust they begin to turn grey (the ordinary colour). This change in the colour of the young fur-seals does not arise from their hair turning from black to grey, but, as in the ease of nearly all animals, the original hair gradually falls out, beginning from the forepaws, and makes way for the new tUverytudr. At this period (whilo they are casting their hair) they keep sciatehing themselves. The length of the time required for the change to be accqm- Jlished varies ; some years it takes place earlier, some jeani later. It sometimes appens that large numbers of fur-seals leave the hdands without having changed thrir hair. The young fur-seals, until they begin to learn to swim, lie in groups near their mothers. The sekatsh have never been known to bite them. lue young seals of the previous year, i.e„ the males and females which have not been k'lled during the previous season, are no larger than the young 4-month-old seals ; they can only be distinguished by their greater activity and sagacity, and by their figure, which is more slender and graceful. Till the month of September they always lie in the herd with their mothers, and often leave the shore to look for food. At this age the young fur-seals are wonderfully playful ; they never stop playing all the time they are on shore. They turn somersaults, bite each other, drag each other into the water, splash about, &c. ; sometimes a young seal will scramble with great difBculty on to an outlying stone merely for the purpose of dragging from it a sleeping oompanion, and falling into the water with him. The killing of the seals begins about the 28th September ; a time is chosen, if possible, when wind and weather are favourable. Tlie best weather for the purpose is when, after two or three wet days, fine clear weather sets in, or, at least, the rain stopa. At such times the fur-seals lie quietly on the shore and rest, because during the W0t weather they are constantly going into the sea, and cannot long remain lying on the sliote. The wind most favourable to the operations is that wmch does not carry the S w a ut of the sealers to the fur-seals. Having chosen a time when wind and weather are favourable (any hour of the day will do), all the inhabitants, of both sexes and all ages, having armed themselves with dregalid, i.e,, short sticks thick enough to kill a seal with, form a chain, and proceeding along the shore where the seals are lying, drive them all inland. After driving them a short distance, they stop them, and begin to sort out the cows and sekatsh (these latter are very rarely found amongst the seals driven in) from the young seals ; the old cows, which have already had experience of a battue, make off of their own accord the moment they see a chance of getting to the sea ; the youni cows have to be driven to the sea by force. Sometimes it is found to be impossible to drive a cow away from the place where her pups are ; in such a case she has to be driven with the rest to the place of slaughter. When the slaughter of the seals begins some of these cows try to protect their pups, and lie over them for a long time, so that force has to be used to drive them to the sea. It is said that tears are sometimes seen in the ^es of these cows. After the cows and sekatoh have been separated from the rest of the herd, the hitter is divided up into snudl groups, which are slowly driven to the 'ftaoo of slaughf^ which is sometimes as much as 10 versts distant. It is very diJQScult for the fnr»saii]s to go so far. They cannot cover this distance in one day, because they are so bt^ that they can only jump. For this reason they are often stopped and made to rest. The moment they stop they fall asleep from fatigue. The young fur-setds get aton^ more easily in cold damp weather than in dry clear weather. When the fur-seals have been driven to the place of slaughter, they are allqwed to rest for an hour or more, because if they are Killed while heated their flesh has a peculiar taste and is no good for salting ; after the rest the sealers begin to kill mem with the dregalki. The little pups, born during the year, are all killed wi^out distinction, females as well as males ; but of the animals bom the year before onoly the males are killed, according to the Regulations now in force, while the f^oaales are, if possible, driven back to the sea. Even children are able to drive the fur-seal » to the place of alaughter, and to UU ihem, nioh ia fheir meekiiMS, hdplenneM, and BobmiMiTenew. The lealen lay that not every man flndi it easy to laise hia hand to kill these innocent creatures, whose only orime is to possess a nir. Oiroomatanees sometimes make it impossible to sldn the dead fur-seals for four dars or more. It is found that the skins begin to rot sooner if taken off tho seals and left in a raw state than if left on them. The skins are taken off and cleaned by men. One man can deal with 50 to 200 skins a-day. They are then handed to women, who stretch them on wooden frames, two on each frame, the fiir on the inside. They are then dried in a drying- loom heated with stones. The batuhtthik, or overseer of the drying-room, must be a person of great experience and skill, otherwise the skins may be burnt or singed. When prepared the skins are tied up in bundles of fifty, and in due course dispattmed to their destination. A portion of the flesh is prepared to serve as food for the inhabitants of the other Settlements, but the g^reater part is hung up on labaza, or ■oreens, for use in winter. The entrails and the rest of the flesh are heaped up to be used for fuel.* After the battues, which are sometimes organized as many as three times in the ■ame place, the cows wander about the shore for some days calling for their young with pitiful cries. After the first battue the fur-seals lie very near the water, and are verr watchful. Some of the sleeping cows vrhich have been awakened by the sealers driving the herd from the shore have been known to tremble all over, probably with fear, and then die. The sekatsh ftnish what they have to do about the middle of July, and then leave the herd and lie in solitary places, where they either sleep or go into the sea in search of food. The fur-seals begin to leave the islands not earlier than the 3rd October, and choose favourable winds for starting. North-westerly and northerly winds are the most faiiouroble for the seals' departure, as these winds are with them. Before starting the big fur-seals are more on shore than in the sea, while the little ones are more in the sea than on shore. After the first baltue the big seals, i.e., the females •nd baohelom, often collect in large numbers on rocky headlands as if to take counsel. The little seals which have eacapisd from the battue generally return to the places where thev were bom. By the beginning of November hardly a single fur-seal is to be seen in the neighbourhood of the Lilands, with the exception of a few sekatsh. These latter aometimes stay till the '^nd of November, and even till December. It has been noticed that although they sometimes come on shore, it is only for a very short time. Ho fur-seals have ever been seen in January or February. One sekatsh was, however, once seen in February, and one in March 1832 on St, Paul's Island. They came on shore for a short time and then disappeared. Since then, so far as is known, no seals have ever been seen during those months. We must now consider the question : Where do the fur-teals go for the winter ? Before tho Seal Islands were discovered, hunters living on Unalaska noticed that tho fiir-seals, returning in autumn from the north, spent some time in the northern bays of Unalaska, Akuman, and Akun, where the Aleuts hunted them ; but as soon as winter approached the fur-seals went south through the straits between Unalaska and Unimak, and especially through the Unimak Straits. After the discovery of the Pribyloff Islands, and when fur-seals had begun to bo taken there, these animals were seen less and less frequently in the bays of Unalnska, and at last, about 1816, not a single fur-seal was to be seen in the whole district ot' Unalaska, and at the same time it became impossible to observe the periods at which they went north and south, and the straits through which they went. We must not conclude that the fur-seals have ceased to migrate because they are no longer seen, and because sekatsh have been observed in November and December ; such sekatsh were seen now and then at the time when the migrations could still be observed, and when the fur-seals still visited Unalaska. Where, then, do the fur-ecals go for the winter, and where do they remain from November to April P There are none of them round the islands of the district of Unalaska, or anywhere ou our American coast. Do thev go to California ? But, according to M. Khlebalkoff and M. Shelikoff (Head of the Boss, and afterwards of the Bitka establishment), the Oalifomian fur-seals are quite different flrom the fur-seals taken on the Fribyloff * The ratnili, fletb, ud bonn kept ■like peal. L796] ■ hMp rot during the wiattr, ud tarn into >onictlimg not ^m mvmmim 6 Islands, and, moreover, there haye been no fur-neoli in Oalifomia for the last fire {ears. To Now Shetland P But, in order to go there, thej would have to swim more ban 7,600 miles each way, and tho journey would have to be performed in flva months or less, t.e., they woiUd hare to cover not less than 200 versts in every twenty- four hours without resting. This is evidently impossible. If we are to suppose that the fur-seals leave the Fribyloff Islands oniy on account of the approach of winter, and pass the winter in the sea, why do they chiefly pass through (or why used they to pass through) the Straits of Unimak, when their shortest way south through the Aleutian chain would be by the Tshetyriokhsopotshny and other straits P We will now consider the measures to oe taken to increase the number of faro seals, or at least to prevent the extinction of the species. From the time of the discovery of the Pribyloff Islands till 1806, i.e., tiU General Bezanoff came to America, no account was kept of the number of fur-seals killed, and no control whatever was exercised in the matter, owlriif to the fact that there were a number of Companies engaged in the industry, and tt.w.w5*-'-tw.hr;^ Then it one other qneetion of gnat {mporttince in connection with the ettimating of the inonsM of the fur.seali, Tis., " Of tie young fwr-$nl$ totii tn any om ytar, what froportwn mre hui/m P " and " /f the proportion iff mo/e* to ftmoUt alwajfi the lame f " If we conaider the numher of haolielor aSiala which accumulated during the olcae yean 1822. 1823, and 1824^ on Bt. Faul't laland, and 1826 and 1827 on St. Qeorge'a Island, we find Uiat the numhen of the baohelon vary oonaidenbly { for instance, on the Island of Bt. Paul, in tluee yean, 11,000 fur-seals wen spand, and in the three foUowing yean 7,000 baohelon wen taJcen, t.«., almost two-thirds of the number of those spared ; while, on the other hand, on St. George's Island, after 8,500 fur-seals had been spared in two years, less than 8,000 wero taken, t.e., a little mon than a third of the number spared. How are we to account for this inequality P Is the number of baohelon or males bom sometimes greater and sometimes less ? Or are then vean in which the number of females which do not bear young is very great P Probably both these questions must be answered in the affirmative. I have, therefore, como to the conclusion — and my opinion agrees with that of the aealen — that half of the seals bom in any given year are males and half females. In proof of many of the above statements in regard to the fur-seals, I append Table No. 1, which shows the number of Air-seals taken on the Pribyloff Islands from 1817 to 1838 (bco the end of the volume).| Titis Tablr justifies the following conclusions : — 1. There is not a single normal year in wliioh the number of fur-seals token is equal to the number of those killed in the precedin- year; but less on taken every year. 2. The decrease in the number taken is notuni m ; sometimes one-sixteenth less are token, sometimes ono-tenth less, sometimes onu-lifth, and sometimes even one- ■eventh less ; but on an average one~eighth less. 8. Therefore, if the killing is continued in the ordinary manner, the whole fur- ■eal species may become extinct in fifteen yean. 4. The decrease is generally less when in the preceding yean the number of bachelors has been greater (i.e., when the young seals liave not all been killed) ; the decrease is greater when the number o( bachelon has been less. 6. The number of bachelors is the true criterion of the number of fur-seals, i.e., if the number of bachelon increases, the number of young cows increases also, and vice verad. 6. The bachelon do not separate from the herd or collect in distinct herds till the third year from their birth, as appearm from the numben spared on the Islands of Bt. Paul and tit. George (1822, 1828, and 1824, and 1885. 1836, and 1887, and 1826 and 1827). 7. The decrease in the number of fur-seals on the Island of St. George, after two close yean (1826 and 1827), continued for two yean longer, and always in the proportion of one-fifth. 8. In the fifth year after the first olo?e period the decrease may be said to have ceased ; in the sixth year there was already an increase of one- twelfth, and in the seventh year there was an increase of one-stvtnth as compared with the lowest, figure ; during tho three following years the number of fur-seals was stationary. 0. If there had been no close period on St. George's Island in 1826 and 1827, then, if we estimate the decrease at only one-eighth (see paragraph 2), thei<) would not tiave been a single fur-seal on St. George's Island in 1810 and 1812. Thi.: is shown ^y tho following Table :— tl li .1 1 n I 1 f Number Number Kun.ber Number Year. of Ycnr. of Year. of Year. of Seal*. Seal>. Seuk. Se,il». I82i5 6,S00 1829 2,468 1833 1,160 1S87 700 1820 4,400 1880 ' 2,160 1834 1,100 1888 880 1827 3,820 1831 1,890 1885 1,040 1839 800 1828 3,816 1832 1,S64 1886 8S0 1840 400 During the lost yean the decrease must be estimated at more than one-fifth, because the smaller the herd the fewer will be the sekatsh, who are the defendera of the herd, end therefon the woner will the " kaaatki " (kUleiwwhalee) be able to asteiw miaate them.* 10. Couequently, a period of two oloae yean prolonged the eziitenoo of the ftir- ■eal nwoiee for more than ten yean, and the Company waa ivH/ oompenaated for the low it sufTered during the close period (about 8,600 teals) ; for if lae Company had not eatabliahed a eloae period in 1»26 and 1827, it wotdd oertunly not have obtained .nore than 24»000 Mala from 1826 to 1888, i.e., during twelve yean, but baring eatab- liahed a oloee period for only two yean, it obtained 81,676 aeala in ten yean, and, moreover, would be able to obtain over 16,000 more without an^ oloae period. 11. If, then, on St. Oe<>rge'a Island, by sparing such a amall numoer of Air^seals (about 8,600) for auch a short period, i.e., for two yean, such a great advantage baa been obtained, how much greater will be the benefit to be derived from the laat meeaure introduced by the Chief Manager of the Company on the laland of St. Paul, where aeala have been spared for four yean, and more thaa 80,000 fur-seala are now left to propagate the species. I append a Table showing the number of fur-seals which will be produced in fifteen yean from 7,060 seals spared on St. Paul's Island in 1886 (see Table No. 2 at the end of thia volume). Thia Table is interesting, even if no oonoluaiona are drawn from it. In 1886, by order of the Chief Manager, a close period waa established, or rather a certain number of fur-seals were spared on the Island of St. Paul, after 12,700 fur- seals had been taken in 1834, the preceding year. If the do^ period had not been established, about 12,200 seals would, imder ordinary circumstances, have been taken on the whole island in 1836, estimating the decrease at only one«twenty-fifth ; but instead of 12,200, onlv 4,062 were killed ; consequently, in 1886, 8,148 young seals, male and female together, were left to propagate the species. In drawing up the l^ble of the increase of the fur-seals, however, I have allowed for an average decrease, i.e., a decrease of one-eighth ; according to this calculation, the number of young seals spared is at least 7,060. Of these 7,060 young sods, I reckon 3,600 as females, i.e., I allow for rather more females than males. Of the new cows bom after the establishment of the close period, I estimate that one-half have pups in the fint year in which it is possible for them to bear young, and that two-thirds have pups in the subsequent yean. The females, after twelve yean from the time they first bear young, t.e., when they are 18 yean old, must decrease in numben from natural causes, and when they are 22 yean old they cease bearing. Of the young seals bom in the fifth year after the establishment of the close period, and in aubaequent yean, I estimate that one-half are females, and the number thus obtained is inserted in the Table, while the males or baohelon are included in the totals. It appean from Table No. 2 that — 1. In 1860 none of the old cows (t.«., cows which were capable of bearing young in 1836) will be living (estimating their decrease at one-eighth each year). 2. During the first four yearo after the 7,060 youug seals have been spared, t.;., until the new cows begin to bear young, the number of young fur-seals will generally diminish. 3. After six yean the number of young seals will be equal to the number spared, i.e., about 7,000. The nmiber will not be doubled till after twelve yean have ebpsed, and it will be trebled after fourteen yean ; fifteen yean after the establishment of the close period we shall have in the first year 24,000, in the second 28,000, in the third 32,000, in the fourth 36,000, in the fifth 41,000 ; that is 160,000 in the five yean. After that, if economy is practised, i.e., if one-fifth of the seals are spred, it will be possible to obtain 32,000 annually for ever, or at least for a very long time. 4. In addition, it will be possible to obtain in the course of the fifteen yean following the establishment of the close period from 60,000 to 70,000 banhelon, which, together with the 160,000 young seals, make up 230,000. * The OTcnecr of the Iiland of St. George himself aaw some " kaulki "f (killer'whales) (ear sercral aeaU to p i »e«» in a very short time near the shore of the island. t [In aaother part of the book Veniaminoff says that the " kasatka " (killer-whale) is one of the twelve kinds of whales known in Aleutian waten, and is called by the natives " agliook.— Tbamslator.] [7961 D W^"!^ IP 6. If no young seals were spared the whole fur-seal species would become extinct in fifteen years, and durins that period, whatever efforts were made, not more than 60,000 sefus altogether could possibly be obtained. I have to observe that the estimates in the Table with regard to the increase of the fur-seals are most moderate, and that in estim iting the decrease of cows tko average decrease has been taken. Moreover, only 4,860 young seals were killed on St. Paul's Island in 1836 and 1837, instead of 7,900 ; aocordingly, in two years 1,600 cows were spared on that island, which are not taken into account in the Table, and from which a large number of seals may be obtained. In order to show that the principles on which my estimate of the increase of tm- seals on St. Paul's Island is based are soimd, I annex a similar Table with regard to the numbers obtained from the fur-seals spared on St. George's Island in 1826 and 1827. This Table is drawn up on the same principle as Table No. 2, and dearly showa the correctness of my estimates. (See Table No. 8.) w!ww?wwfiiir'^WT^ .ljii,lj(ipilMii|,.fii,iili|»iiyiilJi,iill 11 as I [796] a> 1 • • • 1 1^1 1 i ; 1 t i i 1 S ^ i R § 04 1 ^ i 1 i 1 • <-• f i 04 2 \ «' i i S OD M «" J , s s s 2 3 " § 1 " ^ i § S «; i-t 3 S S s ^ OD i i i 4D >c •4 ■• ^ : 11 1 I ^ ■* 1 * a H a § % s H i. ©• i I 1 g 1 FN •> R S § 1 s N- ef *rf 9 ^ - ^ i CO S ^ pN ea M CO OD c^: ^ ^ ^ VN tf» .^^ o 1 i s ■A o *^ O M « "* *n a i lA 00 gj ". •^ ^ 00* •M tfi tn tn s s s a. "^ s s a o c^ "* rt 2 CM S! a ^ •M s 00 g 00 00 CO" " 00 oo 00 « s r*f s :. r II ^ p ^f K 13 !!i i i s l§ 11 ^§ S2 n H.| H 25 S| ss S % i 1 " 2 » s s 8 SS? 8K D^S gs o o gs 5S -i 9& ? a g iSl ^A «« «Q ■* --<: n ej •^ ^ " S s 3 e o e •no iSK PN A «« O 3 •M r« e ^ eft O tftoft •ft e A ^ o tli ss s » eg r» r« M«© «o» -s S OD O e CO ^ o 1 i •ft o .ftO iftN f-«0» (S« e o — r» o ■« eft O (O 3 s s i s 00 r« 5S rt>A 4ft O S2 85 3S 2S »-• ^ -s S « ■^ CJ s s 1 •^ S' o^ 9i tSOD SS SS S2 1 1 $ S s 00 •* r» * "-. «r. -o. «- "- •^ . s s 00 .ft s ift e 1-4 5 SS ss ss eo :?!? Si e g 1 a r« s m s» 1 fN a s 1 2 3 s g „ •ft CM Si §s 1 » s 00 1 ^ S 2 f* .§ J *• V o i-t o» s o 00 Ift e s 28 •ft 91 Ift s ss «i K a 1 liR 31 (0 1 1 *^ pj a M ef e e' o '^ 3 i 1 1-4 00 s s OD 1 si •ft 0( Si obo •ft OD C4 Kl § 1 o S A 1 i 00 m 1 1 i s Set •ft rf> •ft o si 1 1 1 1 1 S A e s OD 1 eS i 1 FN 1 ei •ft o «3 1 1 1 l| 1 1 1 1 1 f4 i 1 1 s Ift s 1 ss § «M •« ^a 3S r* IN •ft" s 1 1 1 § 1 2 i 1 s 9k i e to 1§ J 1 1 o is 1 1 1 ■A QD 3 s m o s CO e a s a 1 ss a 1 S s s o» 3 -• ^ ■" ^ ^1 *^«o s ^ ". ^ V of o OD 1 s 1 s 1 1 II 3S- 1 J 1 •■ oo" rl S •a QD 1 g 1 1 ss § 1 1 i 1 e d n R 1 ■ CO 00 « . 00 « t* l-H , • • • g J >< 1 b e 1 § in 00 <«■ I ■a 8 O ■3 S eo I f: I ■a s ■3 I I 11 '-■"W '#■. :tU mim , •'^■' Off^ t 5 T' A'SLATION ?m' V^NTAMIWi?. p. S'^T) of Russian Taxt. "Do th3 f9TOl3s I jar 9v ^ry yaar; and ho'-' oft ^n in their lives do they tosr'" •To set+lo ♦h'jsi qi.nstions is V3r; diific"l+, for V is imposs iT)l-i to rrvrka ;ny oV-sirva'f ions on thi wiV-iTC*, b'lt it is fhotvrhf that 'ha fainales in +heir ^jarly ygars V.ep.r an- nually, and as tbey f^at older evory othar yaar; 'hns +he" rrny !:j!V3 u'ld^r ordi'^^fry oiroiims^ ano3S f-'^m t 'jn to fiftisn pups in -myself in+o i^rnr in my is tih- (>h- TKANSLATIOM Fm.'\ VRMTA'INOP. •> p. 371 of RTi8 8ian Text. ?'9arly all th^ old ^ . «,i JUV-"" 'T'SW'TW?!?''^^'^???'""?"^^!^*^'^""??'*? 1 ■■Ml iLi ^i^t .J L,wi. ji ^ .1 , .,_ Ill] II I J ^H^P^^' ' . ? *f l^'-.-^^tf ll'W!!ii*!.llff"|'?wp!Pfpr^';! JMi^ I II II "ji 1 1 ^pwwwwp(Pipppi^^^^HP"BP" 4 3. That penniaion shall be refused to Dobell to send two vessels to Cronstadt with tea and other Chinese goods, this being not in accordance with the views of the Oovenunent, and it shall be explained to him that it was and is only expected from him that be should supply information as to the prices at which Chinese goods may be obtained at Manilla, and what productions of Eastern Siberiit could be profitably sold there, so that advantage coidd be derived from this information when all the commercial operations of the American Company are taken into general consideration. Having communicated also to you this Imperial Order, the Board of Management of the Company adds this explanation :— That the Contract with Figott, i^hich has nut been confirmed, is the same that was concluded on the 18th June, 1819, for ten years by Mr. Kickord, Commander of Kamchatka, and the Court Councillor Dobell, in the name of the Government, on the one side, and the aforesaid Englishman Pigott on the other, for himself and his partners, masters of the American commercial vessels " Davis,*' " Ebetsa," and " Mika," for whaling and extracting blubber from these, as also from other marine animals, along the coasts of Kamchatka and the whole of Eastern Siberia, in harboun, bays, and on islands, for their sole profit, without payment of duty, and, moreover, with the use of the' Russian flag ; as also for fishing and exporting fiuh from Kamchatka under a payment of SO copecks per pond of the fish caught and salted by them. But this Contract, as it would appear and must be supposed, has been recognized by the Government as an injurious one, it affording no ad"an! ge" *o the inhabitants of- Kamchatka and Okhotsk ; and, moreover, the Kamchadals, who ofter. suf.^ ' h-.r i scarcity of fish, arising from an insufficiency of salt and fine days for drying th: ftfii, mij;' - '.apa be depvived of 30,0G0 pouds of fish, which the foreigners would catch annually and ct . %f\- Having now elucidated the matter of the justly repudiated design o' t'uc ounning and intr^ning foreigners with whom Dobell apparently was in accord and intimacy through old friendship, and who on the strength of the permission to capture whales and boil down blubber, even from marine animals, would have lei loose many ships with every kind of rifiAraff on board, and they would not so much have frequented t.ie harbours and bays of Eastern Siberia as cur Kuril and Aleut Islands, solely for the. capture of sea-otters and seals, by which they would have iiiined the Busso-American Company, the Board of Management communicates to you its ideas. The Government having already perceived that the whole object of these designs tended to the evident loss of the Company, and having forbidden foreigners not only to settle but even to tradr- at Kamchatka and Okhotsk where there are authorities, and where supervision can be exercised, you then, likewise, as Commander of the Colonies, taking your stand on this decision of the august patron, can strictly prohibit foreigners who come to you from trading with the Indiana, and in case of their not observing this you should boldly arrest the insoleni marauders, their ships, and crews, when they have carried on a trade injurious to the Company iu places or in islands occnpied by it, or when especially they have bartered arms, gunpowder, and lead with tbe Indians. They should even not be allowed any access to your ports when you are not forced by want to purchase anything that may be absolutely necessary from them for the Company. In a «pra, you can assume in the fullest sense the tone of a Government ofiBcial in charge of all the places occupiua by tlie Company, and this tone would be well suited for dealing with the insolent traffickers, .'o hn'^ (rj to give yonr orders also to your subordinate officers as to the manner in which they ar'' ic deal with foreigners arriving, especially to the Commanders of our fvessels dispatched to varioi-; pink i), ,jid who may anywhere discover foreign ships engaged in a smuggling trada And as th' ccrn . iu.'tAt.io3 of the Minister was accompanied by a copy of a despatch of the present Gorimor-Gi 3r>. ri 'It .liin, which contained many truths and considerations in favour of the Company, the Board ■■.' '/I Jioge ment forwards you a copy of the same for your guidance in deliberating over *^he interest of vxt Company. (Signed) (Signed) (No. 266.) April 23, 1820. Zelenin, Chit/ of Chancery. MUTAMSO r • 1, Chairman ) BENEDICT KRAMER llKreetor». ANDREW SEVEKIN ) P.S. — We inform you that the Government has decided to send this summer two vessels round the world, one to winter at Kamchatka, and the other with you at Sitkha, after they have expelled the foreign intruders. (Signed) M [ * ]. No. 4. (No. 225.) Gracious Sir, Matvei Ivanovitcb, WE received with much pleasure your li"c».i> of the 2(Uh ar.d 28th July from Okhotsk, but with ''Al graater pleasure did we read your just I'ear .niu^ on mp-n - it .M 3cta in the interests of the Company ; for this we sincerely thank you, wishing yov. '^ happy ani^ii at > our journey's end, a sojourn there in good health, and that we should alwa}is see in I'ou an cfhcient ^■^rvant of the Company. The remarks made by you to Mr, Ricko;d, we imagine, Wi9||p|P|^.ii. 1^ ,, luii- jMynipiwJ II. iiiftliJluiliM^uipil y M^a^pvamipi^pH offices of Unalashka, and by the Superintendents on the Seal Islands, who were to be informed of the same. Now that it has been decided to send out from here to the Colonies r^^ularly each year one vessel with all kinds of supplies necessary for men, ships, &c., and as so far back as the years 1816 and 1819 the ships "Kutuzoff' and "Borodino" were sent out with somewhat important cargoes, and as this year, in accordance with the above decision, the " KutuzoiT" will again be dispatched, there is no necessity for any bartering with foreigners ; moreover, by will of the Supreme Government, all those foreigners are to be expelled from Okhotsk and Kamchatka who came there for trade, and they are not to be admitted in future ; there must be no thought of trade with the foreigners who arrive, and who, under the guise of selling some unnecessary articles of luxury, receive in exchange fur goods, which are valuable for trade at Canton. The said office is therefore ordered, under the strictest responsibility, not to have the smallest barter dealings with foreigners in furs. Everything that is required shall ba demanded from the Novo- Archangelsk, or Okhotsk Offices. (Signed) ZELI^NOFF. Please send off the originals. August 3, 1820. No. 6. Under Hit Imperial Majed^s patronage, the Riusian-Ameriean 6 mpany. From the Chief Board of Management to the Chief AdvUnistraior of the Biutian-American Colonies, Captain- LieutenaiU of th^ Fleet and Knight, Matvei IvanovUch Afummeff. (No. 175.) M. YANOVSKY, iu his Report of the 25th February, 1820, tiib No. 41, describing his inspec- tion of the produce on Paul and George Islands, observes, among other matters, that every year only young male bachelor seals are killed, only brood females, and old and medium-aged males being left for breeding purposes ; only the older generation of animals therefore remains, and of the bachelors those that are not killed in autumn are taken in the following spring. In consequence of this, the seal hunting must naturally fall ufP every year, and with time will be altogether destroyed, as experience goes to show. To prevent this it would be more advantageous to discontinue seal hunting even for one year, and at the same time orders should be given that not more than 40,000 seals on Paul Island t^ i 10,000 on '^•iorge Island should be killed annually. He thinks that, under such an arrangement, the seals would never decrease in number. The Board of the Company, although it considers this observation to be just, wishes primarily that this measure should be adopted only when the seals would cease to flock at those two small islands on the north and southward of the rocky ledge which it is proposed to open up. On Paul and George in one of every three years only the first flock of seals mi<;ht be spared, and even then in turn ; for instance, if on one of the islands grace be given to the first arrivals, the hunting should be carried on on the second, and then when the seals are spared on the second, they should be killed on the first during the whole three periods of flocking. The numbers to be killed on both the islands to be as specified above. ' By this arraugement the men would not be left idle, as they would be able to proceed for rendering assistance to the island on which all the three flocks are being hunted. When the three small northern islands will be opened up and their yield of seals appeara promising, then, in Mr. Yanovski's opinion, you should not fail to instruct the men employed on Paul and Gleoi^ Islands to hunt the seals feriodically every five years, and every second year to take on Paul Island 40,000, and on Cktorae sland 10,000 seals. After the lapse of five years seal hunting should be suspended for one year in order that they might increase in numbers, the northern islets being then utilized. At the end of the year the seal hunting rnuld be recommenced on the scale aliove mentioned The adoption of this certain method of preserving the seal fishery woi'li^ result in a permanent and sure source of profit to the Company, and would serve to maintain the price of the furs in the market. At the same time, it must be most "trictly forbidden to spoil the skins of the animals by excessive drying in bath-houses, when such drying is inevitable during unfavourable weather. When the skins are dried in this manner the Inspectors on those islands must be strictly enjoiued to observe that the heat of the baths should bo moderate, and they are to be held responsible for the spoiled skins which will not be worth carriage, the Company having formerly been a loser to the extent of 1,000,000 roubles through this. The skins now brought to Russia are pretty well prepared ; it consequently remains to be desired that this will always be the case. The Bcmrd will be pleased to moeive from you any remarks on the subject of the amelioration of this branch of production which you may be prepared to ofler after visiting the islands. But if you will not be able to proceed to them soon, then send instructions by first opportunity that the directions of the Board be carried into eflisct immediately on receipt of your otders. (Signed) (Signed) (No. 175.) March 16, 1821. Zeuanoff, Chief t(f thaneery. MUTAM DUBINOW. BENEDICT KRAMERS. ANDREW SEVERIN. Nar. Under UU Imperial Majtit^t prcteOUm, the Svman-Anuriean Oimpamf. From the Chief Board of Management to the Chief Adminietrator of the Rutnan-Amerieun Colonia, Captain-LveutenatU of the Fleet and Knigkt, Matvei Ivanomteh Muravieff. _ THE Board of Management of the CJompany has received the ordained Kegnktions relative to the limits of navigation and order of maritime relations along the coasts of Eastern Siberia, North-western America, the Aleut, Kuril, and other islands, confirmed by His Imperial Majesty the Emperor, and already forwarded to the Ruling Senate for general publicatioa For your information and observance a printed copy of the same is hereunto annexed. This Ordinance (or Regulation) will be translated into the English and French dialects, and if the Board receive the translations it will forward the same to you, even by Government vessels. (Signed) BEIfEDICT KRAMERS, Direeior. ANDREW SEVERIN, DireOor, (Signed) Zkuanoff, Chief of Chancery. (Na 510.) September 7, 1821. No. 8. The Svteian-Amerieon Company, under Hie Imperial Majtxty'e protution. From the Chief Board of Administration to the Chief Adminietrator cf the Bustian-Amtrican Colonies, CaptainrlAevUnaiU and Knight, Matvei Ivanoviteh Muravieff. THE illustrious Count Dmitri Alexandrovitch Uurieff, Minister of Finances, on the 18th of the current month informed the Board of Management of the Company that His Imperial Majesty was pleased, on the 13th day of the current month, to confirm at Porkhov the schemes submitted by the illustrious Count conferring anew on the Company for twenty years privileges and Statutes, single copies of which he forwarded, seeing that tliese Deci'ees prove to the Company all the solicitude of the Govern- ment for making that institution of still greater utility ; and he therefore proposes that the Company should, on its part, adopt all the measures lying within its power for punctually carrying out all the directions prescribed in them, especially by immediately issuing to you, as Administrator of its Colonies, necessair instructions. The Board of Management having received these Decrees also from the Ruling Senate in copies printed for promulgation, -now forward to you herewith ten such copies In these Decrees, especially in the Regulations, the Government has set forth all the duties the execution of which devolve on you and through you on the Board of Management itself. And as the Board supposes, without recapitulating the matters set forth in those Decrees, especially in the rules laid down in sections 35, 39, 41, 43, 44, 46, 47, 48, 49, 51, 52, 53, 55, 56, 67, 68, 59, 60, 62, 64, 67, 68, 69, and 70, that you will, of your own accord, adopt as an absolu* rule the accomplishment of the will of the Government, it, therefore, on this occasion confines ittsexf to the expression of the wish that you will, by gratifying the Government, sectnc thereby for yourself its respect, and thus provide the Board with opportunity for constantly bringing to its notice your meritorious proceedugs. Please supply with the accompanying copies the Novo-Archangelsk, Kadiok, Oiinalashka, Ross OfBces, and the oranches on the northern wal islands, giving them detailed instructions, in accordance witJi local circumstances, with which they are bound to conform themselves in time and manner. It is requisite that they should receive detailed instructions, in order that in carrying them out they should not act diversely and in perplexity to the embarrassment of yourself and the Company. The Board sincerely congratulates you, as its coadjutor, on this manifestation of Sovereign favour towards the Company. Future letters to you in reference to the foregoing subject will not fail to contain explanations on points which may be thought of, and which it may be considered necessary to mention. Time is wanting to do thia now. (Signed) BENEDICT KRAMERS, IMrector. ANDREW SEVERIN, Director. (Signed) Zklunoff, Chief of Chancery. Defer this, as I must make arrangements and prepare a Report with oinervatious. (No. 532.) Slumber 20, 1821. "rg-^'--'/"'!'- j^'-r^ffiw**;,'"','!']' '"• \^m ■ ■ 'fiPffST" TP ■"'••■■■'^r^llj^HV^Jf^mW'-V^^I-'.'- :■•'■' 'II- "--?,"■■'"" No. 9. (Received at Tctiirokoff, October 2, 1822.) TKt Riuso-Amtrican Uompnny, Chief Board of Management, to the Chirf AdminiMtrator of the Human- Ameriean Coloniei, Captain-Litutenani and Knight, Maivei Ivanoriteh Mwrameff. (Reply to No. 36 of 1821.) (No. 155.) February 28, 1822. IN your despatch of the 2l3t January, 1821, No. 36, you ask whether an entire cargo, without remainder (meaning fur goods) should be dispatched, as you did in that year, having sent by the "Borodino " 60,000 seals. Hie Board of the Company informs you that you should abstain for some time from sending only seals, as those brought by the " Borodino " are stiU lying unsold, a portion of them being at Moscow and in Siberia. The seals have not been sold because there was no demand for them, and in general the trade in furs is very sluggish, in view of Turco-Qreek afTurs ; notwitlistanding this, however, do not fail to send high-priced furs from Okhotsk to Cronstadt You also ask whether you did well to send the Japanese brass guns ; in this you acted very right, as you do not require them in the Colonies, and formerly it was contemplated that they should be transported hither from Okhotsh through the Colonies. (Signed) MIKHAILO PRUDANOFF. BENEDICT KRAMERS. ANDREW 8EVERIN. (Signed) Zelianoff, ChUf of Chancery. No. 10. (Received on board the frigate " Kreiser" on September 3, 1823.) Russo- Ameriean Company, Chief Board of Management, to the Chirf Administrator of the Jlustian- American Colonies, Captain-Lieutenant and Knight, Matvn Ivanoriteh Muravieff. (Respecting the pretensions of the United States.) (No. 481. Secret) .Wy 31, 1822. FROM the accompanying copies of a Ministerial communication, and a reply to the same by the Chief Board of Management of the Company, you will perceive that England and the United States are opposed to the i^vil^s and Marine Regulations issued in favour of the Company ; against the first, in so far as they regani the determicstiou by the Government of the 61st de^e as the line of demarcation, and in respect of the second, the prohibiting of foreign vessels to navigate nearer than 100 miles from our Colonies. In regard to such pretensions, His Imperial Majesty was pleased to charge the Russian Minister in the United States to come to an agreement with those States within limits which would by mutual consent be adopted for the aversion of further dispute. In the event that you should have occasion to converse on these subjects with foreigners, you can express yourself in the spirit of the communications above mentioned. At the same time, be it known to you, in regard to the same matters, that His Imperial Majesty was pleased to order, through the Chief of the Naval Staff, that the commanding officer of the " Kreiser," now being dispatched to yuu, should not proceed too strictly in the interpretation of the 100 miles, consequently, should he even within a closer distance observe a foreign vessel, be is to act in regard to her as prescribed in the Naval Regulations. (Signed) BENEDICT KRAMER ANDREW SEVERIN. (Signed) Zeuanoff, Chief of Chancery. Inclosure in No. 10. (Copy.) (Received July 18, 1822.) Ministry of Finance, Divinon 2, Desk 3, to the Chief Board of Management -qf tlu Jtusiian-Amtriean Company. (Respecting the supply of information in reference to measures for the protection of the porsaits of the Russian-American Company.) (Secret.) TKE Acting Min'oter tor 'Poreign Affairs has informed me that on the communication by out Government to the I/ondon and Washington Cabinets of the Rules Imperially confirmed on the 4th September, 1821, respecting the limits of navigation and order of maritime relations along the coasts of Eastern Siberia, North-M'estern America, and the Aleut, Kuril, and other idands, representa- tions were made ou the part of the English and North American Govemmenta against what tney term an extension of our territoriea, as also against the Rules prohibiting foreign vessels to approach the above-mentioned places within a distance of 100 Italian miles. Oi. the report of these representations to the Emperor, His Imperial Majesty, being desiious by every measure possible, of preserving the best underatnndiug in relations with foreign Powers, and having specially in viow the avoidance of acts of violence between Uussian ond American vessels, apprehending that some unpleasant incidenta may arise therefrom, was graciously pleased to order the adoption in maritime respects of measures which would be in accordance with this intention when dispatching this year two ships to the north-west coast of America, and at the same time to do the following : — 1. To appoint Baron Tail von Seroskerken in the place of M. Poletika, in the capacity of Russian Imperial Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary to the North American States, and imme- diately to dispatch him to Washington for the pui-pose of coming to an agreement with that Govern- ment respecting the measures which should bo adopted by general consent for the avoidance of further dispute relative to the extent of our respective territories on the north-western coast of America, for terminating all complaints which have hitherto Ijeeu made by our American Company against the proceedings of some subjects of the United States, and for avoiduig in this manner the necessity of strictly enforcing the Rules of the 4th September, 1821, which we shall in any other case be forced to do. 2. In order to facilitate the mission witli which M. Tuil has been charged, and to secure its success, the llusso-American Company shall submit to me, as promptly as possible, an exposition of measures which we could demand from the Government of tlie United States of America, and which would prevent injury to the sources favourable to the trade of this Company, and preclude the native inhabitants of those places from disturbing our establishments by means of illicit trade. The operation of these measures must be such as to relieve us of any further necessity of prohibiting the navigation by foreign vessels within the lUstance fixed by the Rules of the 4th September, 1821, and they might be limited to a surveillance of the expanse of water subjct by general usage to the jurisdiction of every Power possessing a maritime coast, and to the introduction on the coast itself of such a precautionary system as would be recognized most convenient ~it the defence of our possessions against every attack, and for the restriction of trade in prohibited gooods. In communicating to me this sovereign will, the Acting Minister for Foreign Affairs thinks it necessary that the exposition above referred should be accompanied by a clear indication of the places in which the Russian-American Company has hitlierto enjoyed the right of hunting, and fishing and trading, and likewise of the degree which migb.t be determined as the final limit of our possessions without giving cause for representations ond demands similar to those which have now been made. The Acting Minister for Foreign Afl'airs adds that when by Charter granted to the Russian- American Company in 1799 this frontier was determined under 55° of north latitude, and it was pei-mitted to establish tew Settlements even further; so long as they did not infringe on the possessions of other Powers, no Government made any remonstrances against these two points, but that it would, on the other hand, appear that two English Companies, the North-Western and Hudson's Bay, established a long time ago commercial posts* on the north-western coast of the continent of America, commencing from the 54th degree of north latitude, and even, if other information be correct, on a parallel with 56°. For these reasons the Privy Councillor Count Nesselrode considers that it would be of utility if the Russian-American Company would communicate nil the information it may posses.s respecting the existence of these posts and the time of their establishment, as he finds that such information is indispensable for precluding pretensions on the part of England when we shall proceed to determine with the United Stotes the limits of our mutual possessions. In fulfilling the above-mentioned sovereign order, and placing all the.se circumstances before the Chief Board of Management of the Russo-American Co-- ' •. v, I propose that it should forward to me as soon as possible all the above-mentioned infornia'^- >vH,h the requisite details, so that clear propositions could be drawn from them for framing tlit : t su actions which will be sent to Baron Tuil for defending our limits against irregular demands and injurious attempts on the part of foreigners, and for protecting the interests of the Russian-American Company, in accordance with the intentions which served as a guide for the gi'ant of the privileges Irapeiially accorded, as also for the Rales confirmed on the 4th September, 1821. The original is signed by— COUNT DE GURIEFF, Minister of Finimce-s. .T. DRUJININ, Director. Correct. (Signed) Chief of Chancery. No. 11. (Copy.) Ministry of Finances, Department of Manufactures and Internal Trade, Section 2, Desk 2, to the Chief Board of Management of the Russian-American Cotnpany. (Reply to No. 73.) (No. 92.) ' April 2, 1824. I HAVE been in communication with tlie Acting Minister for Foreign Affairs on the subject of the representation of tli(3 Board of Management, dated the llth February of the present year. [833] * LiUnUjr, office*,— TBuaLAiOE. D '\ ^•m '\ '^ 13 No. 13. (Copy.) -Ministry of Fiimnces, Chancery, Section 1, Desk 5, to the Chief Board of Management of tlie Ritssian- American Company. (Transmitting copies communicated by the Acting Minister for Foreign AQairs.) (No. 1874.) September 4, 1824. I DULY communicated, in original, to the Acting Minister for Foreign Affairs, the Memorandum of the 12th June of the present year, presented to me by the Directors of the Company, and containing observations on the possi) le consequences that may result from the confirmation of the Convention concluded on the 5th April of this year between our Court and the North American Republic. Having noT/ been infoimed by him that the Protocol of the Special Committee on this subject, which, by Imperial order, examined this matter, met with the full and entire approval of His Imperial Majesty, I consider it necessary to communicate to the chief Board of Management of the liussian-Americau Company, for their information, copies of the above despatch addressed by Count Nasselrode to me, aud of its accompanying Protocol of the Committee of the 21st July of the present year; as also a copy of n draft despatch to me, drawn up by the illustrious Count, which was also read before the above-mentioned Committee, but remained unsigned after the final decision had been come to. , l'"rom these documents the Board of Management will observe that for the prevention of all misunderstandings in the execution of the Convention above referred to, and in accordance with the reconmiendations of the Committee, necessary instructions have already been sent to Baron Tuil, our Minister at WasIiLii^ton, to the efiect that the north-west coast of America, over an e-xtent of wliich, according to the terms of the Convention, subjects of the North American States may freely trade and flah, extends from 64° 40' north to Yakutat Bay (Behring's Bay). The original is signed by — KANKRIN, lAeutenant-Gcneral and Minister of Finances. and by— J. DRUJININ, Directw. Correct (Signed) Rylevbff, Chief of Chancery. No. 14. (Copy.) Copy of the despatch of ihx Acting Minister of Foreign Affairs, Count Ncsselrodc, to ilm Minister of Financu, on Aur/iuit 18, 1824. 1 THINK it my duty to inform your Excellency that tho Emjieroi- deigned to give his fiJl and complete approval to the opinion of tlie majority of the nuimbers of the Committee appointed by His Majesty to investigate the observations m.ide by the Russian-American Company regarding the Convention of the 5th (17th) April of the current year, an opinion in whith youi Excellency also agreed. In consoiiuenee of this, while forwarding herewith a copy oC the Protocol of the Resolution.s of the Committee, I have the honour to inform you, my dear Sir, thai, onlers in strict conformity witli the conclusions contained in this Protocol have already been sent to tlie Ambassador, Baron Tuil. I did not fail to annex thereto tlio draft despatch written by me to your Excellency, by the Enipevor's com? luud, regarding the complaints of the Iv\;.ssian-Anieric:in Company. I flatter riyseif that the inclosed document, when you counnunicate to the Company the decisions of the Emperor, will enable yoi. to prove to them that the Government has never lost sight of their true interests. Compared with the original and found correct. (Signed) J. Druohinin. Correct. (Signed) "Rrusxwv, Chief of the Clumeery. Inclosure in No. 14. (Copy.) Translation of the Protocol of the Conference of July 25. COUNT NESSELRODE opened the Conference by our exposition of the condition of the matter intrusted by the Emperor to the examination of the assembled Committee. Ho brought to the recollectioti of the Committee the Articles of the Agreement concluded with the Minister of the United States respecting the north-western coast of America, aud the representations made against this instrament by the Russian-American Company in two Memomndums communicated }>y the Ministei of Finances to the Minister for Foreign Affairs. He lastly communicated the draft of ^ 18 a despatch which ho intended to transmit to Iiia Excellency Lieutenant-General Kankrin, which embodies the replies of the Mi.iister for Foreign Affnira to tlie representations alwve mentionei This draft, having been submitted to the Emperor, gained his approval ; but Jlis Imperial Majesty charged the members of the Committee to examine it once again. After the perusal of this document (annexed to the present Protocol, together with the two Memorandums of the Russian-American Company), a discussion arose. The members directed careful attention to the causes pf appreliension put forward by the said Company, as also to the reasons in favour of the Agreomcfit concluded with the Plenipotentiary of the Cabinet of Washington ; they like- wise took into consideration the means considered convenient by the Imperial Ministry for the prevention of all intei-pretations. By a majority of votes the members of the Committee agreed to the following Resolutions : — 1. That the Agrenment of the fith (17th) April confirms rights of Russia hitherto subject to doubt; that in virtue of such Agreement these rights are recognized by a Government which might with great advantage dispute them and great facility injure them; that by it the undisputed possessions of Russia are henceforth extended beyond the limits which tlie Russian-American Company could, on the strength of its primitive Statutes, lay claim to and enjoy its privileges of trade. 2. That inasmuch as by this Agreement is immediately prohibited the sale of arms, warlike stores, and spirituous drinks to tlie natives of the north-western coast, the American Company in this manner acquires that security which it always so much prized, but which it could not hitherto obtaii-. 3. That this latter stipulation is all the more important, seeing that the prohibition in question, being promulgated by Rusnia alone, would either have drawn forth inimical proceedings and very disagreeable complications, or would not have attained its object, owing to the absence of means necessary for enforcing obedience and prohibiting trade. 4. That the Agreement of the 5th (17tli) April contains in itself other no less important fUBi-antees, namely, thai (he Americans will not establish settlements on the north-west coast above 4° 40'. By this stipulation nil Settlements* are established on a solid foundation. 5. That it is equally not less advantageous for Russia to be guaranteed by a mutual and friendly Agreement to the effect that alter the expiration of ton years the citizens of the United Stntes will completely cease peuotrnting into the waters of the north-wostem coast to 54° 40' for fishing there and trading with the native inhabitants, us, on the one side, it cannot be supposed that the States would voluntarily have made iuch a concession without .some compensation, and, on the other, they will fidfil, at • -e expiration of a cirlaiu time, all the wishes expressed to the Imperial Ministry. 6. With regard t'j the inlluence which the Agreement concluded on the 5th April could exercise on the trade of Russia or with China, it must' be observed that the capital engaged on both sides in this trade amounts to 30,000,000 dollars, and that the Russian-American Company participates in it duly to the extent of 800,000 dollars, or about as much ; even if it did send to Kiakhta a larger quantity of fure of otters and seals, it would not be able to dispose of them, and would inflict serious injuiy in other articles of export by glutting with its goods a market which is already very limited by the nature of its barter trade, and, consequently, the Agreement of the 5th (17th) April cannot in any respect cause injury to the trade of Russia with China 7. That as the autliority of Russia over the coasts of Siberia and the Aleut Islands has long since Leon recognized by all the Powers, there was no need for mentioning the coasts and islands in the alove-meutioned Agiecment, wliich relates only to disputed territory on the north-west coast of Aaierica and the islands appertaining thereto; tliat even supposing tlie contrary, Russia having established fixed Settlements both on the coasts of Siberia and on the Aleut ridge of islands, American citizens coulil not, consequently, on the strength of Article 2 of the Agreement of the 5tli (17th) April, either land at those seaboard places, or capture animals aud take fish, without the permission of our Commandants or Ooveinoi's ; moreover, the Siberian coasts and .\leut Islands are not washed by the South Sea, of which alone mci;'i 's made in the l.st Article of the AgrecmeuD, but by the Northern Ocean and the Seas ol Kiimchntk, and Okhotsk, wliich on all known land Maps and descriptions of the world do not form a portin" f the South Sea. 8. It shoald not be lost f' ;.ii. of that the Agi-eemont of the 5th (I7tli) April terminates all disputes which arose from the Ordinal a of the 4tli (IGth) Soptemticr, 1821, an Ordinance issued at the formal and roiHiated recjuest of the Ihtssian-American Company ; tliat these lisputes became very giiive, and will of course be renewed if Russia will not ratify the Agiceiiient, and that in that case it will be impossible to foresee either their end or results. These cogent reasons induce the majority of the members of the Committee to place on record the following conclusions : that the Aginjcment of the 6tli (17tli) April should be latilied, and in oiuer to avoid all incorrect interpretation of the instrument that General Baron do Tuiil .should, in any case, be instructed to make the declaration, mention of which is made in the draft do.'spatch read by Count Nes.selrode. The Minister of Finances, and the Actual Councillor of State, Diujiiiin, while agreeing to the necessity of ratifying the Afjrcemeut of the 5tli (17th) April, explain and h.unl in a separate opinion, to the effect that Baron de Tuill bo directed on the exchange of ratilioatiou.s of this Agreement, to demand that the right of free fishing aud pursuit of animals, confirmed by Article 17 of the Agreement above referred to, should be exercised only from 54° 40' to the altitude of (!ioss Sound. The majority of the members of the Committee could not fail to remark, on the one hand, that us the Russian-American Company lios established many Settlements at that ?.liitude, Article 2 ol the Agreement of the 5th (17tli) April affords in this respect the desired sneurity • ihiii, even if the Company had merely appioiiriatod the hunting and fishing in those parts, it would in such ease be , ftnd it is allowatt aucceufullj to cstablii'i new ones * Hitbarto caUbliBliad l)jr llio RuMiui-Auiciican Caiii[iany uuiler Uic S7 uniltr liutudei titnttcd fnrther to the «outh. |833J E ,1)J— ^ T^^5ras!rs*?S!(^=;s?'f'^^ '.'^J^y^T Vfii* 14 dottUM whether American citizens would incnr the necessary expenditure for the navigation of such northern ktitudes in which they could enjoy privileges only during ten years, expose themselves to dangerous rivrdry, and, moreover, frequent those waters for hunting and fishing where they have already long ago 1>een forestalled by the Company, and in consequence of which they would have but little hope to compensate themselves for their damages and losses. But, on the other hand, in view of the opinions expressed by the Minister of Finances and the Actual State Councillor Drujinin that the restrictions would terminate all Complaints of the American Company, the majority of members of the Committee considered it necessary to investigate the nature of these restriction:) in order to convince themselves how far they could bo supported without detriment to the rights and interests arising out of the Agreement of the 5th (17th) ApriL As the proposed limitations have reference to two main points lying under different parallel lines, viz. : — 1. To Yakutht Bay (Behring's Bay), under parallel 59" 30'. 2. To Cross Sound Bay or Gulf, under parallel 57°. The American Company is desirous that the subjects of the United States should not fish or hunt in those two bays. Accordingly the majority ol members of the Committee are of opinion : — In regard to the first of these points (Behring's Bay), it is situated in such a latitude in which the rights of Bussia have never formed a subject of dispute, and tliis important circumstance allowed it to he included in the general Declaration respecting the Aleut Islands and other northern localities. In regard to the seconil (Cross Sound), it is sit".fW«?F- ■ ';f5^i'i!'i*^«»^||MJilWi«l^"*#Mf:?, *yWrWrWm'f'-''''''¥wf'r^' ' .■.■.■irYv;"'" ■it-, v„ i^waii^ mmmmm 16 No. 18. Copy of Comnv/niwiiim of Dtpartnunt of Traift and Mawifaeturtt to 'he Chief Board of Managemtnl of tht Sasiian-Amtrican Company, dated Jwie 19, 1866, aub No. 4471. (To No. 320.) THE Council o( State, linving oxuminod the Beport Biibniittecl by me respecting the revision o tlie Statutes of the Russian-Auiorican Coupany and the organization uf tlie Russian-American Colonies, Imperially contirmed on the 14th of tne present month, established the following opinion. When Irawing up new Statutes for the Russian-American Company and the Colonial Itcgulatiuns, the followiu;:; chief coses should be adopted : — 1. The term of duration of the privileges, Regulations, and duties of the Company to bo fixed to the Ist January, 1882, 2. The Company to bo allowed to issue, as hitherto, tokens with a forced currency rej lii;ing in tho Colonies metallic coins for internal transactions of trade, on condition that tho Company shall bind itself to establish at several points of the Colonics a permanent exchange of such tokens for metallic currency or bank-notes ; at the same time, the condition.^ of such conversion, as also the places where the same shall take place, must bo determined in the new Statutes of the Company, 3. Tho Company to remain intrusted with the charao of maintaining in the Colonies the churches and clergy, schools and hospitals, provisioning all its officials and servants, the establishment in places distant from ports opened for trade of storehouses for supplying the natives with provisions and other necessary articles of consumption ; with tho support at its cost of the garrison at Novo-Archangelsk ; the Company is also to be charged with enforcin;.; on its chiefs of offices, superintcndentti, anj other I>ersoiiS in its service in the Colonies the fulfilment of administrative duties in the region. 4 When framing new Statutes, it will be necessary to take into consideration what personal ofHcial privileges, existing under the old Statutes, need be maintained in favour of those oii^iloyed by the Company, and whether it is desirable to make some difference between persons in tlit virvico of the Company at St. Petersburgh and those so serving in the Colonies? at the same tim< the C'^r.^umy should bo released from the discharge of the political part of the duties which at present i'< .er within the rangd of its functions. o. The Company to consist under special Imperial patronage, and short annual Reports of i*a operations to l)o submitted to His Imperial Majesty through the proper Ministry. 6. The Company to retain tho right of flying on board its vessels the flag fipecially established ; of retaining the imiform hitherto worn by those employed in its naval service, and of uaiii.^ ii .seal bearing the arms of the State ; the Company also is to enjoy all its present advantages in the iimtbcr of the engagement in Russia and Siberia of all persons in its service ; the term of duration of their passports and the payment of taxes on their account. When drawing up the new Statutes, the period of time shall be specified beyond which hired persons cannot be retained in the Colonies for debts owing to tlie Company, or in the course of which these persons sholl be repatriated on tiie demand of Govern- ment institutions and personages. Furthermore, the Company shall not be absolved from military billets, and from the obligation of taking out annually a trade licence of the first guild, as also the established permits for all its offices, depOts, and warehouses in Russia and Siberia, except those at the port of Aynn. 7. The Statutes must define the conditions of the transfer to the Government after the Company shall have ceased to exist, of the buildings and works of public utility erected by it ; which of them shall pass to the Government without i-emuneration, and which with pecuniary compensation ; the method of determining the latter nmst also be defined. 8. Permission shall be granted to import by means of '■'ussian and foreign vessels ♦very description uf goods and articles, excepting strong drinks, powder, and arras, for various pursuit^, at the port of Novo-Archangelsk, at the Islands of Sitkha and St. Paul, on that of Kadiak, and afterwards ot other ploces which will be found convenient for the same. 9. As regards the importation of strong drinks and their sale in the Colonies, and the supply of powder and arms to the natives, special Rules shall lie drawn up, which, without restiiction to the inhabitants, would prevent abuses with all tlioir evil consequences. 10. The Aleuts, and in general all the dependent natives in the Colonies, are to be freed from compulsory labour on behalf of tho RuBsian-Amcricau Company ; they may settle any inplaces considered by them as most convenient, and freely absent themselves from their places of abode, observing only the Police Regulations which the chief Colonial Administration will establish. 11. All colonial inhabitants permanently settled in the region are divided into natives and colonial residents ; among the latter class are included Creols and so-called colonial citizens, as aico emigrants who may come to the Colony. The natives at the some time shall be allowed to govern themselves by means of their elected " Toyons," and tho colonial it«idents through chosen Elders. The Chief Administrator of the Colonies confirms the appointment of the "Toyons " and Elders; he also dismisses them from their posts and demands the election of new. 12. The term of compulsory service to be rendered to tho Russian-American Company by Creols who have been educated at its cost in the Colonies or beyond their limits, shall be confined to five . years. 13. Russian subjects, as also foreigners who have sworn allegiance to Russia, shall be permitted to settle in all parts of the colonial territory not actually occupied by the establishments of the Company or by real colonial inhabitants ; these settle''S are to be allotted free land for habitations, farm-buildings, and cultivation. 19 14. Henoefonrunl, nnd until the annrtioii of thu Qovernment bo obtained, the colonial inhabitants nra not to be made to i>ay any direct taxes, either in favour of the Crown or of the Russian- American Company. 16. Every imrsuit, cxc<']>t that inconncclion with peltry, slinll bo exorcised f reoly by all the inhabi- tuiits of the Culuny anil l> ill l!u8.-«ian uulgucU wilhimt distinction and limitation. In regard to the ati<;ii and of tiii(liii|{ in I'uih within tlie following limits only : on the Alaska Peninsula, reckoning it* iiortliem limit u line from Cupc Douglas, in Kciini Rav, to the top of Lake Imanina ; on all the iHlniids lying idun^' tlic coast of this peninsula, namely, the Aleut, Commander, and Kuril Islands, nlsprovcd by the Board, and thoy sanction the respitt! you propose to give to the Commander and George Islands. Generally, for the preservolion of this valuable si^ecies, the Chief Boartl requests you to adopt the constant rule that the annual capture of seals should take jilace in such immbera n.s not only to p'^eservc them in their Itirs, but that they sliouW even alway.s multiply, i.e., thnt the number of aniiual birthn should be greaior than timt of the animiilsi killed. For not lowering price.i at present, the last quantity of 1(1,000 seal-.skina sent to Russia is quite sufficient, (Signed) VRANGEL ^ A. 8EVERTN („•,.„#„... J. PROKOFIEFFf''^"^''""*- H. KYSOFF ) (Signed) B.\iiA.NOKF, Acting Cldef of Chancery. [883] ^'■'•■^"(^■^iWH»i'."l(J|^U^' I < "•'~^-i'5»J»:TT^y7!'WW^'55;^fBSW?5«l!»!RT'SPf9^ V 22 (Received October 7.) (Acted on Ka 678.) (No. 510.) The Bitman-Anurican Company, Chitf Board of Management, to Captain, of tht 2nd rank, Alexandtr Ilach Rulakov, Acting (fovenior-in-ehi^ of the Eiu»ian-Ameri4Mn CoUnuet. (Bespecting the seal fishery.) (No. 522.) Am-a 22, 1853. OBSERVING from the despatches received ft'om the predecessors of your High Honour that the seals in thu Colonies are inci'easing considerably, and foreseeing a somewhat lai:ge sale for them, the Chief Board of Management charges you with adopting the necessary meamres, until further instructions, ofTecting the captui'e of seals on all the islands frequented by them in such practicable ouautities as not to exhaust the lairs. The Eules respecting the preservation of the breeding females should be observed as formerly. Of the captured seals it is necessary to send yearly 6,000 to Kiakhta by way of Ayan, 10,000 to Shanghai, and the remainder, as many as there be, to St Petcrsburgh, by the vessels that proceed round the world. The Chief Board begs you to discontinue the hitherto practiced salting of the skins, inasmuch as it does not conduce to their profitable sale. (Signed) (Signed) A. TiMKOVSKY, Chief of Chancery. POLITKOVSKY, Chairman. A. ETOLIN ■) N. KYSOFF yjHemhers. E. wranqelJ No. 24. (Incoming registiy, September 12, 1854, No. 439.) The Muasian-AmeruMn Company, Chief Board of Management, to Captain, of the IH ranJe, and Knight, Stephen VaMievidi VoevocUkd, Ooverncr-in-chief of the B^wnan-Ameriean Colonies. (Reply to No. 318 : Respecting seals.) (No. 442.) April 24, 1854. captain RUDAKOFF, of the 2nd rank, in a despatch dated the 30th Mar, 1853, gub No 318, wlule reporting to the Chief Boai-d of Management the increase of seals on St. Paul Island, and the measures he has in consequence adopted for their capture, asks to be informed by the Board what quantity and what kinds of seals are to be killed in future. In reply, the Chief Board of Management humbly requests your High Honuur to have seals killed chiefly of the bachijlor species, the older the better, seeing that purchasers more readily take large skins. Moreover, small seals are to be killeil only in quantities necessary for satisfying the require- ments for fat. But as at the present time th3 sale of seals has considerably decreased, they must be taken in such numbers as not to injure their multiplication until a greater demand for them arises, and this forms a constant subject of solicitude on the part of the Boara. (Signed) K. KIlVTTi.LT), Acting Chairriian. A. ETOLIN 1 ., , R WRANGEL/^*^**^*- (Signed) Timkovsky, Chief of Chancery. No. 25. (Entry No. 32, March 1865.) Russian- American Company, Chief Board of Management, to Prince Maksutoff, Captain of the 2nd rank. Acting Chief Administrator of the Colonies. (No. 1004.) November 8, 1864. AT present the sale of seals e.\tends lo 43,000 skins, viz., at New York from 20,000 to 21,000, at St. Petersburg from 15,000 to 16,000, and at Irkutsk from 5,000 to 6,000 £..- B, ZAVOINOFF J ■'«""<^»- (Signed) A. TiiiKr^SKY, Chief uf Chanccrij. No. 26. (Incoming Register, 1857, No. 328.) Russian' American Company, Chief Board of Manacjement, to Stephan Vassilieviich Voevodsky, Chief Administrator of the American Colonies, Jtcar- Admiral, and Knight. (No. 635.) Jiiiie 5, 1857. IN reply to tlio despatch of your Excellency of the 9th March, tail No. 14, respecting the trans- mission of the produce of furs to New York and Shanghai, the Cliief Board of Management has tho honour to inform you that at present the yearly demand for seals iu Russia extends to 15,000 dry skins, of which 5,000 are for conveyance to Kiakhta, while only 2,C0O skins of river beaver are demanded for Kiakhta; tho remaining quantity of seals, approximately about 12,000 and more, princi- pally salted, which are bettor prized there, you e.re intrusted with dispatching to New York, consigned to Me8.srs. Lobach and Scheppeler, in the autumn, immediately on tho arrival of the ships from the Sections, and without subjecting them to any pvocess of curing at Novo-Archangelsk, but leaving them in the state in which they ai'e received from the Sections, and iu the same packing. With regard to river beavers, the Chief Board of Management, although it has received informa- tion that the price of river beavers has now d'.-opped in the New York salcb to 2 r. 7l' e. fur eieh skin, and although the prices in other places are equally unprofitable, tho Chief Boanl of Managemeirt requests that you will of necessity send the nlwve-mentionod beavers (with tho exception of 2,000 requisite for Kiakhta) to New York. The ulr.eiior aiTangementa respecting these lieaver.j will be com- municated to you by the Board later. Tho Board would, after tlilb, request you not to send any other furs to New York, save, perhaps, those ot Arctic foxes, wluch realize hordly anything at Kiakhta. No furs siliould be sent to Shan^'hai without special instructions. At the same tune the Chief Board of Management also asks you to give strict injunctions to tlie canoe men to abstain, so far as possible, fpjm killing small grey seals, and in no case to send them out of the Colonies, because they very much hinder the profitable sale of seal? in Russia and in foreign markets, only big seal-skins being chiefly demanded and sold at a good price. (Signed) (Signed) A. TiMKOVSKY, Aaing OUif of Chaneery. B. POLIKOVSKY, Chairman. B. KLEPFELDT ) A. ETOLIN yAfemhrs. E tebenkoffJ :rr«OTfw{«|iv»J.;f«?TO4i!pf,i|i«^!iH5«,-li»i!»!w^^ 1 '" 1 < B i*v" ^ ^.^*?i^|t^;^;fti^* n <' T''"^^T*'^"'B""W* mii^mKmitfimm'miirm 24 No. 27. To the Ch^f Board "m \.\ "'f ^mm'it^i;rm!iii^nmi^!gfimFmmmmmmi'''m 25 With renrd to the question asked by the Chief Board of Management as to what number of iieab oould annually be obtained in the Colonies without injury to the preservation of the species and exhaustion of the haunts, I have tite honour to state that, as it would appear from the Reports of Uie Ifanagen of the Pribyloft' Islands where the chief haunts of the seals occur, luid oven on the Oonunander Islands, the animals have increased in all the haunts to such an extent that the places they occupy prove crowded, and from the same Boports it is also evident that about 70,000 seals could be killed at all these places, including also vrroy seals; but for this, it is necessaiy to increase the number of hunters and to provide a sutficieni uantity of wood on the Pribylotf Islands for drving the skins. It can positively be said that by killing to 70,000 seals tlie haunts will not be impoverishml for u long time. No. 29. To the Chief Board of Managtmettt. / \ (Respecting the quantity of furs exported from the Sections of the Colonies in 1859.) May 13, 1860. I HAVE the honour to submit herewith a Return of fur produce exported lost year from the sections of the Colonies, from which the Board will observe that 892 more sea-otters were secured, as compared with 1859. Since the year 1844 there has not been such a large spoil, and this increase has taken place only in the Kadiak Section at Unolashka and Urup. As regard.? the number of sea-otters taken the Kadiak Office reports that the Gugaches living at Oonstantinovsky Redoubt were allowed, with : e sanction of my predecessor, to hunt apart from the expedition dispatohed by the office, and in ptiices only known to them. On their arrival .it Kadiak with a considerable quantity of sea-otter skins, it appeared that in tlie summer of 1859 they had hunted in places which had been respited, and whither a hunting party was to have been dispatched from Kadiak in the course of the present year. After this occurrence I do not, to my regret, expect hunting rt alts as favourable as those obtained by Rear-Admiral Voevodski during the last year of nis administmtii ' of the Colonies. The quantity of river beavers taken was 760 more than in lMo8. The yearly vacillation in the numbers of these captures depends entirely on local climatic causes, more or less favourable to the efforts of the native huntsmea This increase, compared with the quantity secured last j'ear, was obtained at Mikhailovsk and Kolmakoff Redoubts. Castor oil was obtained from 470 pairs more than in 1858. 11,160 fewer seal-skins were obtained, as compared with 1858. The cause of this decrease is attributed by the Manager of St. Paul Island to the late spring, the breeding females having to make their way through ice to their haunts arrived there no longer pregnant I Irnve now dispatohed Lieutenant Wermann to St. Paul Island for carrying out various works and suppressing disorders which have taken place there in consequence of the relaxation of discipline among the workmen. The number of foxes token was 1,143 more than in 1858 ; the number of Arctic foxes taken was 1,174 more than in 1858 ; the number of lynxes taken was 178 less than in 1858 ; and the number of sables token was 219 more tlian in 1858. According to the Report of the Manager sea-otters are increasing at the day, i.e., Copper Island, and I have repeated my strict injunctions not to disturb them until the decrease of these animals at Atkha Island shadl necessitate a respite there. Only 1 poud 36 lbs. of sea-cows tusks was obtained. The Manager of Unga Island has reported to me that in Moller Bay, on the north side of Alaska peninsula, 500 pouds of sea-cows tusks were obtained in the course of 1856 and 1857, and that this quantity is there on store. On the visit paid to Moller Bay in 1858 no stock of sea-cows tusks was found, their lairs having been destroyed and everything burnt It is not known who stole these tusks, but white biscuits, some provisions, and thirteen whale-boat oars wera found, and marks of boots would show that whalers had visited the place. All this I have the honour to report to the Chief Board of Management No. 30. To the Chief Board of Managemmt. (Respecting the preparation 'and drying of seal-skins.) July 16, 1863. HAVING received the contents of the despnteh of the Board, dated the 31st January of this year, mh No. Ill, for unfailing observance, 1 have the honour to submit to the notice of the Board the following calculations respecting the coat of prepariug dried and salted seal-skins : — |888] H " '■'"' ■'" ""I ■' ■'» l"MI|U },liiIiN«i,pBl»i"Ji«!i lj,J)l«^lll|«p^p^p^5i™pWii!^BPWJ^^ ^— ^PPp r. ■I ,HJ|||ipp4i|ii]i||l!l r. 26 Required for dried seal-skins :— For ererj 1,000 ikini, 2i fathom! of waad, which per ikin rapnMnto .. i. •• Tor binding a bale of 100 skins, 12 arsfains of soa lion [skin straps, and reckoaiog that the medinm sise of a lea-Uon sidn, which oosts 40 copecks on the spot, is 16 srshins long, the cost ofthe strap for each seat-akin will be ,, ,. ,, •• .■ Ri. cop. 2 8S Total Or To this must be added payment to the Alents for each bachelor seal killed.. Total ,. ., ,. ,. .. The stretchers are always mode at Sitkha, and sent to the islands ; their cost is not taken into cou- aideration owing to its insignificance. For a salted seal-skin we require ; — ._ A barrel containing on an average 73 skins costs 5 roubles, and 47 lbs, of iron hoopi for that amount 6 rs. 80 cop., or in all 11 rs. 80 cop., which for each skin amounts to , . . . Using 3i lbs. of salt to each skin for preliminary salting on the islands, and 8 pouds of salt per barrel when the skins are salted at NoTo-Acbangelsk, each barrel containing 73 akins, and 4 *4 lbs. of salt for each skin, which will come to 7 pouds 9 lbs. of salt in all, coating. , For binding each fikin, 1 ^ lolotniks of yam .. .. .. .. ,f .. Repair of coopers' tools, approximately .. •• .. .. ,. •• Total ., ,. ,, .. ,, ,. ,, Towhichmuat be sdded, to Aleuts for erery bttcbelor seal-skin a« ,. ., ,, Total .. .. ,. .. ., .. Rs. cop. IS '# 1 73 With regard to the labour of hunters in preparing either kind of skins, I have the honour to report to the Chief Board of Management : — Dried seal-skins are prepared as follows : — The skin, after s'.,paration from the flesh an;' removal of the fat from it, is placed on a stretcher, on which it remains until it is completely dry ; then, after removal from the stretcher, it is folded lengthways in two, placed in a bale containing from 50 to 100 skins, accoiding to their size, and, lastly, the bale itself is bound with sea-lion straps. The selting of Fdal -skins, according to Mollison's plan, a description of which accompanied the Board's despatpli of t-he S;5th January, 1860, sub No. 81, is done in the following manner: — After the skin l.Vi been taken off the animal it is s'^rinkled with salt, and placed in a tank together with others . then when the hunters have spare time .;he skins are taken out of the tanks, and tlie inner side of eac h skin is covered with a thick layer of salt, on which a similar skin is placed on its inner side ; the f.dges of these skins are then folded on one of the exterior sides, so that the salt should not drop out ; thoy are then rolled up (the fur side outwai'ds), and tightly bound with dry yam. After this the rolls are tied together in bundles containing from five to ten rolls. Heavy as the labour of the hunters is in carrying salt on their shoulders from tlie beach to the store-house, and then in removing the heavy skins from the magazines to the beach for loading them into the boats and delivery on board ship, it must be acknowledged that the preparation of these skins, as above described, imder the prevalence of constant rains and fogs on the Fribylofl' Islands, presents still greater hardships. It may be positively said that out of 25,000 diied skins yearly prepared, only one-tifth part of them are successfully dried in the air. Tlie remainder are dried in carth-hnt kilns heated by means of a wood fire, and in native habitations already confined in space and mephitic in atmosphere. For these reasons, and in view of the difficulty of supplying the islands with food fuel in quantities sufficient for drying the seal-skins, their salting by Mollison's method presents aU the greater advantage. I No. 31. To MUovidoff, Manager of the Itland of 1^. Paxil. May 1, 1864 THY Reports sent last ymr by the steamer "Constantino" and the barque " Wnce Men- chikoff " have been received, and in reply to thee I instruct thee to do tho following : — To No. 29. Thou wert ordertd last year to satisfy the demand of the Manager of the Unalaslika Section under i\ special circumstance, and the Manager of St. George's Island is ordered to supply henceforwai'd Unalaslika with domestic stores ; your duty consists in providiiig Sitkha and Mikhailovsky Bedoubt with such ctores. To Nos. 30 and 31. Owng to absence of accommodation on board the brig " Sholekoff," I was not uble to allow Iraii'a He'iiann to pay a visit this "'ei " to Paul Island, and for the same ruason I could not .send thee a bull (md cow. Tn No. 82. In my (n'd'!r of last year, mh '■■ AQ, I flyed the number of sealnskius which thou wast » cou- report etcher, folded lastly, ed the 27 to obtain yearly. Tliis order is rescinded, sicb No. 249, as are also all former orders relative to tlio capture of seals, according to the iastructions of the Chief Board of Management of the Company. I direct thee to obtain henceforward yearly up to 70,000 seal-skins, of which 25,000 are to be prepared in a dry form ; the remaining 45,000 are to be salted according to the new method known to thee. The 70,000 skins specified for preparation thou must secure only if thou sliouldst not observe ii diminution of seals : otherwise, report to uje immediately with a view of dimini.?hing the quantity, so as to preserve the seals for following years. As thou hast received these instructions late, and consequently wilt not liavu time to prepare tbo whole quantity of seal-skins now demanded, please endeavour to obtain and salt not less than 10,000 skins during the timt it will take the .ship to proceed from Paul to Mikhailovsk Itedoubt and back, and to load the skins oi i ■ »d on hor second visit to PauL During last yeiu ' lion sent only 14,000 dry skins, whereas 20,000 were orderetl to be provided. In future, endeavour to fuifil the orders given. To No. 34. Send a written recommendation for the remuneration of zealous servants to my successor, who will probably visit thy island this year. To No. 36. I thank thee for thy efiforts in the matter of vaccination of the inhabitants, and request thee not to let it drop in future. To thy request that thy son should be received as full boarder of the Company into the General Colonial School, I inform thee that this school is not yet fully organized for the reception of boarders, and, therefore, I advise thee to place thy son in the house of one of thy sisters, who now receives a pension. Thy son, when living in Sitkha, can attend the school like all free pupils — not scholars of the Company. The brig " Shelekoff " carries your yearly provisions of stores ; receive them, and ship by her all thy skins and furs, and also send thy report by her. In addition to this vessel, the steamer " Constan- tino " will touch at thy place on her return voyage from Nushagak ; slie will bring thee about 2,500 pouds of salt and probably some timber. By the same vessel I have dispatched the Riujsian skipper Arkhimandritoff for the inspection of the island in thy charge ; I consequently order thee to fulfil all his demands. L-'~iS a tank [8, and ced on le salt ' yam. to the them skins, esents I, only ■> kilna tic in ntitiex Teatcr )64. Men- nshka iipply wsky )8 not id not I wast ""^»'?H''T'^"^"'^?!'Tn!!Hi|!(iP'HPi^l^W^'i'''i!^!IF « t y CONFIDENTIAL. Protection and Preservation of other Seal Herds. « United Statei' Case, |). 87. BEFORE dealing with these enactments, the attention of the Tribunal is directed to the inconvenience, of which the treatment of this subject affords an instance, arising from the course adopted by the United States' Govern- ment in framing its Case. Articles VI (5) and VII of the Treaty of Arbitration raise two separate and distinct questions. The 5th question of Article VI refers to the claim of the United States to a right of protection or property in the fur-seals when outside the 3-mile limit, and the preamble of this Article requires that a distinct decision is to be given on this point. In the event of the questions of Article VI being decided adversely to the claims of the United States, it is providad by Article VII that the Arbitrators shall then determine what con- current Regulations outside the jurisdictional limits of the respective Governments ai-e necessary. In the preparation of the United States' Case no attempt is made to separate the argument upon these two heads, but a mass of evidence is indiscriminately offered as bearing upon the " habits, preservation, and value of the Alaskan seal herd, and to the property of the United States therein." The Governmenl of Her Britannic Majesty propose, in strict compliance with the Treaty, to deal separately with cacli separate question, and it protests against the additional labour imposed upon the Tribunal and upon the British Agent by the departure of the United States' Agent from the plain directions of the Treaty. The enactments of other nations for the preservation of various animals appear to be quoted in ihe United States' Case for the double purpose of showing the recognition of special [863] B rights of property in the animals, or of :aiaritime jurisdiction, and of serving as precedents or illustrations of protective measures for the guidance of the Tribunal. No indication is given as to the ohject for which any particular quotation is made. It is therefore nocessary first to treat the quotations as arguments in support of the claim of a right of protection or property in the f ur-sciils, and afterwards to return to the consideration of the same matters when the question of Regula- tions io under discussion. It is pniposed, therefore, to discuss the various enactments as arguments under Article VI (5), and to postpone to the proper time any considera- tion of them with reference to Article VII. In considering tlic effect of tlie legislation of other nations, it is necessary to keep in mind the well-known Rule of international law, that the laws of a nation affect none but its own subjects, and those of other nations whose persons or property may he within its territorial jurisdic- tion. Xo nations ha^c more consistently affirmed this Rule than Great Britain and the United States. Two distinguished American juri.sts may be quoted upon this point. Mr, Sedgwick writes : — "As> a general i)ro]msilioii, ihe rule is ^'ood tliat no Sc,l«wick, "Iiitcr- iialion is bound to rosiiuct the laws of nnotlier nation, jirfitation and except as to poi-sons or laoperty within the limits dl' llic '^Ppn'^at'O'' o> „, . . , , , ,. , , ,. .Statutory and Court latter. This is the generul rule of our law, and this, loo, Law," New York, is the language of the great civilians. ' Cotist• 4.]" ]SIr. Justice Story states the same jiroposition as one of the — " maxims or axioms which consticulo the basis upon which Story, " Comrncn- all reasonings nu the subject must necessarily rest, and ^"1?. °"'''f , .... ,.,.,■.„, t^onflict of Lawi, Without the exjjress or tacit admission ol which il will bo gn, edition, !>¥ found ini possible to arrive nt any principles to (lovovn the Higelow, Boston, conduct of rations, or to re''ulnte the due adnanistrution ' *' ' '"' . . ,. „ Ibid., p. ai. of justice. The writer proceeds to quo'.o the passagts from ibid., p. 22. 3 Rodenburg, Voet, an 1 Boullenois, already cited by Mr. Sedgwick. The rule of English law is no less clear. Sir P. B. Maxwell, in a work which is the standard authority on the interpretation of 2n(l edition, London, Statutes, writes :— 1883, chap, vi. Maiwell on the " Interpretation of Stalutei," p. 168. " Another <;eneral prt'sumption is that the Lcgislattiro liocs noi iiilend to exceed its jurisdiction. " Primarily, tlie legislatih Act of Parliament, and it is not, I think, to bi^ presumed that the British Parliament could intend to jegislate as to the ights and liabilities of foreigners." The " Zollvercin," Swabey's Reports, p. 97. Falkliunl Islimds. It Is hero proposed to consider the effect and operation of the various enactments quoted in the United States' Case in the light of the legal principles asserted above. The first quotation is from the IJeereo of the Falkland Islands Government in 1881. Ciiptain Uudinj^ton, a navigator and seal hunter, is quoted as an authority for the state- ment "under oath" that this Ordinance is enforced outside the H-mile limit. Ib'ul., Appenilii 11, Ca])tain IJudington, however, only swears as to United States' Caiu, p. 221. p. 593. British Report, p. 193. what WHS his understanding of the Decree, and as to the enforcement of this law against foreigners outside the ordinary limit of juris- diction he offers no evidence. The Ordinance enacts (sect. 1) as follows : — " No person .sliall kill or caplwvp, or attempl to kill fir captiirt', any .seal inthin the limits of this Colon)/ anil Hi ilepcnrleMies in the dose season." Report of British The evidence collected at p. 15G of t)ie British Cornmis.ioner», Commissioners' Report shows that sealing at the Falkland Islands is almost entirely carried on upon land : — " It lias not lieen the practiic to shoot the seals in the water. " Pursuit iiL the hij^h m'Hs is not e.irrieil on to any extent. " There is no veyiiliir migration." Kew Zealand. United Stales' Case, p. 222. Ibid., Appendix I, p. 43G. United States' Case, p. 223. One Imperial and three Colonial Statutes of New Zealand are quoted in the United States' Case. The extent of jurisdiction exercised by this legislation is defined by " The British Act of 1863." By section 2 of this Act the Colony of New Zealand is defined as comprising — "(ill territiiHcs, islands, ami lountrva li/iii;/ luticciii the lG2nil degree oi' east longitude and the 17l!rd degree of vest longitude, and between the 3:)rd and .">3rd parallels of south latiliide." In the United States' Case, however, this Act is described as defining the — " boundaries as coincident with parallels 33° and 53 south latitude and 102" east and 173" west longitude " — and the subsequent legislation of the Colony is then discussed upon the assumption that this very free paraphrase is the actual language of the British Legislature. [863T C ^%. ^, .«^>;^< IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) | _M_ 11.25 m 1^ us U2 122 U 11.6 (^ V2 7. '/ /A Photographic Sciences Qjiporation 33 WtST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, NY. 145M (716)S7a-4S03 i The Act is printed in full in the United StateB* Unit«d SuW , . .■,■,■, ^. i ^1 • • ■ J. C»"< Appendix I, Appendix, and it will be seen that this mismter- p. 436. prctntion of its meaning is the only foundation for the whole argument which is based on New Zealand legislation. Such expressions as "the whole Colony or 'b'"!'. 2!I2. only particular parts thereof," " waters or places ibid-, p- saa. specified," in Regulations, " within the jiurisdic- tion of the Government of the Colony," are all controlled and limited by the definition of the area of the Colony in the Act of 1863, quoted above. Special attention, however, is invited to the reference to the Act of 1884, which, by section 5, '^'*- ., , Ibid., AppendK I, empowers the Governor in Council to make, p. 439. alter, and revoke Regulations which shall have force and effect only in waters or places specified therein. It is alleged that — " almost nnlituited authority i'' thus conferred upon the United Sutes' Executive to (establish c-lose .sensons, ami to make Regula- tions respttting the jmrehnse or sale of fish, including seals, and jjunishmcnt for violation of the law and onlers. The definition in tin; Act of the tenn ' waters ' inilitates that il iipplies to the entire aiea of the Colony, of which tlie so\uh-east<'rn corner is over 700 miles froni the coast of Kcw Zealand, althoiigh 11 few smaller islands inter- vene." Cue, p. 333. Tliis is illustrated by a coloured Map, upon ibid., Appendii I, which arc traced imaginary boundaries of the •" Colony, which are asserted to be designated in the Act of 1863. The definition of "waters," upon which the argument rests, is in itself sufficient to prove the error : — " ' Waters,' acconling to the definition, means any salt. Ibid., p. 488. fresh, or brackish watera in the Colony, or on the axists or hiti/i /hereof; includes artificial waters, but does not inehide waU'rs the property of any jirivate iwrson." If " waters in the Colony " included the ocean to a distance of 700 miles from the shore, it would have been unnecessary and absurd to proceed to mention "waters on the coasts or bays " of the Colony. The quotation in the United States' Case from ibid., p. 924. the " Handbook of the Fisheries of New Zealand " (p. 2B1) does not accurately represent the original. The Handbook states that — "sealin)» should not lie thrown open without restrictioiitf. Scnls ure a piopeily the Sialc should jnilously i,'Uftrd." The context, bowcvcr, shows that tlic writer refers only to restrictions upon scaling on hind. Sntherfe^'^ ^ealiug in New Zealand as .lescribed in the pp. 233-244. irandbook is carried on only upon land, and therefore no i-eferonce is made to pdiigio scalincr. Cape of Good Hopt'. L'uited Stales' Case, p. 224. Ibid., Appindii |, p. 676. It if, stated in the United States' Case that — " i» thu Colony ol' ihu Cupu ol' (looil Hojm; sunliuj,' is prohibited at tlie rookeries and in the waters adjacent thereto, except under stringent Itcgulations." The evidence olTercd in support of this consists of the following statements : — W. C. B. Stamp— "I am told, although I know nothing about it, that IJegulations of some kind have been made in the Colony of the Cajie of Good Hope." G. Comer. The rookeries — Ibid.) p. 5. " arc in the possession or control of ii Company, as T Wiis then informed, vhich has the exclusive right to take .sealH there. We did not ilarc' In go to those rookeries, because sealing was piuhibited, and we would not have lieen allowed to take them in t'l.j waters adjacent thereto." Keport uf Driiiah Commiisioners, p. 194. The only Tlcgulation in force 'n this Colony in the Government Notice which is printed in the Appendix to the British Commissioners' lleport. By this Notice all persons are prohibited — '■ from disturbing tlie seals on tlie said island" [in Mossel r.ay], "and am warned from trespassing there." The Government Agent states that there is — Ibid., p. 133. " practically no jiursuit of the auimah in the water on tliese coast-! The sy.stem nf killing the seals is Ihu same throughout all the colonial islands, namely, with ' clubs,' by men landing in boats." It is clear, therefore, that no argimient can bo derived from the legislation of this Colony. Unii.d Stales' Tuming from the fur-seal to the other varieties Case, p. 223. ^j. ^pj^j^,^ j^ jg aUpg^i jq i^q United States' Case that the latter — " have thrown about thoin upon the high seas the guardian- ship of liritisli Statutes. . . . '. Canadian Statutes proliibit all persons, without prescribing any marine limit "— from disturbing or injuring ^he fisheries. 8 lau Mnvcii Seal i'iahory. The only Canailiau Statute referred to is tbo United Sutn' risberios Act of 1880, which undoubledly affects J*JJjApP«"'i'« •• Canadian subjects upon the high seas and all persons within the territorial waters of Canada, but asserts no further jurisdiction as ;o persons or locality. The laws of Newfoundland quoted in the Newfoundlnud. I'nitcd States' Case are municipal Regiilations — ~~~ only, and make no assertion of maritime juris* cme, p, ass.' diction l)oyond the 3-milc limit. It may further be rcniarkod that the conditions of the fishery and tho iiahits of the hair seal differ widely from liio.sc which are found in tbo fur*scal fishery. No comment is necessary upon the inter- national liegulations in force in the ocean fishery known as the Jan Mayen Seal Fishery, but a full account of the nature and origin of these Regulations will be found in the British Commissioners' lleport, pp. 198-203. The Russians laws quoted in the United ytatcs' Case, p. 228, appear to be merely muni- cipal Regulations, which do not affect foreigners {j„j^j fj^^^„• beyond tho usually reccgnized limit of territorial '-'"«'. p- 2S8. watei-s. The rule of international law already referred to has been ado])ted into the municipal law of Russia, for Article XXI of the Code of CaT^.^ApSdix. Prize Law of 1869 limits tho jurisdictional waters vol. ii, Pmt II, of Russia to 3 miles from the shore. Tbo laws of Uruguay which regulate tlie ritiHuay. taking of seals upon the Lobas Islands are u„itej siaici strictly confined to the ordinary territorial juris- diction, and have no application to pelagic scaling lieyond tliat limit. Seals arc taken — •ionera' Iteport, "oh the islaiKlt!, and the Statu does not iiermit vc.ssi'Ih uI' p. IC9. nuy kind to nnchor oil' nny of tliu snid islands, and their coasts, iu the lio])e of restoring tlicir almost exter- minated rookeries." Cape Horn. Chile. Tbo fact of the extermination seems to be i^y^ Appendix ir, clear, for Mr. G. Comer, of East Uaddam, P- «96. Coi necticut, asserts that he caught d,000 seals in three years (1879-82), and— "practically cleared the rookeries out." The mischief, however, appears to hare been entirely done by sealers landiog od the rookeries. Mr. Comer states that— Uiitcd StktM* " if there Imil been strict Regulations enforced, nllowing us CaM« Appendix U, p. S98, to luch individual their full rights ; they ouglit, in ndditinn, to protect these soiirces of wealth ugainst the avariuo of those wlio inuigine they ctti\ best make most gain by a Hudden njipropriation, ii^noring all ideas of ]^rnuiuent maintenance of the industry, and thereby consummating the destruction of the industry, whether for themselves or for the genend public. ... In the Civil Code (in section 1 of Article Cll) it is enacted : — " ' Sea fisheries are free to all, but flshcries in terri- torial waters are reserved exclusively for C'hileang and domiciled foreigners.' "'Thus, in set terms and clearly, it is declared that foreigiHTs not domiciled in Chile are only forbidden tisherics inside territorial waters. Without doubt it is notorioH.s that for many years past in the territorial waters of the I'rovince of Miigellanes, and of the adjacent islands, tlie industry of taking fur-seals on a wholesale and bar- barous plan has been in.stituted by foreigners not domiciled in Chile, and, what is worse, in vessels flying their own national flags and not the Hag of Chile.' i> •' Chapter 6. — ProHsions of the ' Codiijo Civil ' Fisheries (pp. 324, 325). as to " Ix.'t us see whether the products of the fisheries are oajiablo of legal appropriation. " The Code recognizes, in respect of the sea, a legal •listinction, by which is clearly shown which of these products belong to the use and enjoyment of the citizens of some one nation, by common custom and consent, and which to the use and free enjoyment of the whole human race. " Property in what is taken by Chilean citizens on the high seas is guaranteed by the law of nations, as is set out in Article 585 of the Civil Code: — " ' Things which [^in their nature are common property, us the product of the high seas, are not subject t^ any dominion, and no nation, corporation, or individual has any 11 right to iiii,iioiifiliz(. tliciu, Tliu ii^c nr i.Mijdyuiint of tlu'iii in (lutorininuil amnun tlio citizi'iit cif imy mn imtion by ihu txVH of timt iintinn, Imt U'twoDii ilifli'iTiil iiatiniM liy iiti'rnntidiiul luw.' " Tlif CimIi) stntCB, ill Artiilo ."I'.t.t :— " ' Till! uiyact'iil Hfii, to 11 ilistiimc of I iimriiiu li'iigm-, iiiwuiiiiod iroiii low-wiitiT iimrk, is tin,' turiitoriul sen, niiil under tln' imtiniuil doiiiiiiioii ; but pulicu ailiuiuistiiilioii lor tlio piiiiiosfs of tin; SCI luity of Ihr. Statu xv tlio rariyiii^ out of liscal Iti'yulntious oxtunds to a tlistaiicc of 4 -luniii) I'iague.H, nioiviurud in tlio same iiianiK r.' i> 6\ "Tliu (.'ciilii, in Aiticli! fiOi!, lion : — with appropi i.l- " ' Tho meiins by which ' imuioii is atiiuiivd in iliings which belong to nobudy, : tho acqiiisition of whicli ia not proliibiti.'d by thr hiws of C'hil ■. or liy iuturnatiunal hiw,' declares ' tliit hunting' ni.l fishing aro nielliodrt of aciiuiHition by which one . lairM dominion over wild animalij.' " The Code, in Article 608, detliiivs : — '"Anininls arc tcrnicil wild or savafin which live in their nature five and indcixMident of man.' " In the same Article th(! Code deliiies, incidentally, the kinda of animals in which fishing establishes a legiti- mate piopriotnry. All those kinds which live in water ant by their very nature! wild, so that whoever ealches tlieni becomes their owner, always provided that he is not aclinn contrary to the nationil or the international laws. "Article 611 enjoins that: — "'Sea flshiiig is frt^e, but in tin- teiritoriul Seas tliu right of tishing is enjoyed only by Chilean citizens or domiciled foreigners,' " Chapter 8.-0/ Fisheries in the High Seas (pp. 309, :170). "Thus we see that the use and enjoyment of the high seas is free ; no one can assert dominiun over them, and no one has any right to ap]iiopiiate them, and llie nation which claims to exclude any othtir nation from such user does an inj-.ry to that nation, and, conseiiuently, to a I other nation The declared opinion of thesj eminent authorities Iwuls us once more to allirni tho principle that on the higl. seas fishing is free for all animals not being actually pursued, and that no nation can monopolize tho fisherii h of the deep sea nor the fishery of liny special species of animals.' " Cape Horn United Sutes' Cue, p 339 The Argentine laws which refer to seal fishing at Capo Horn are not quoted, but Mr. G. Comer states that — 4n I .i> 12 • since 1882 or 1883, we have not been allowed to take United gtaUB] ie-ils at that point [Staten I* 1], or in the waters near Cw^Appendix 11, tllPI-C." He further states that— "the seals inhabiting these shores do not migrate, but always remain on or neai- the land, only goixig a short ■ distance in search of food, and at all seasons and in every month of the year seals can be fotmd on shore." These laws would then seem to be coufined to the ordinary jurisdictional limits. & & II